Claims And Issues

OPINION BILLIONAIRES

"Opinion billionaires."  Filthy rich people who send automobiles into outer space and oligarchs that give presents to judges who do not report them as the gifts they are.  I like that phrase, "opinion billionaires."  It describes them.

These are people who are so out of touch with the way we live that they might as well come from a different country.  Effectively, they do come from a different country.  Why in the world should we pay attention to them when they tell us what we should think, how we should live, or what we should vote for?  They know so little about us.

Rebecca Solnit put it this way recently:  "Being a billionaire tends to isolate you from the rest of humanity, and too often places you in an echo chamber of your own making; it's arguably a disqualification for participating in the affairs of ordinary people."

I hadn't quite thought of these people in those terms.  They know so little about us and everything about themselves.  There may not be much to "argue" about this as a disqualification for participating in the affairs of ordinary people.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2023 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.   

U.S. SENATE RULES ARE UNDEMOCRATIC. AND THEY ARE UNSAFE.

The rules of the United States Senate are anti-democratic.  And unsafe.

    One senator can stop military officers from being promoted, even to the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  Even when that one senator has never served in the military, like Tommy Tuberville.

    One senator can also endanger the national security by putting a block on the appointment of diplomats from the United States to any other country.  That senator -- Rand Paul -- was never a diplomat, any more than Tuberville was ever a soldier, sailor, marine, or airman but he too is allowed to endanger the security of the United States because of the rules of the United States Senate.

    If the current Majority Leader of the United States Senate does not have the votes to change this rule, he should at least denounce this rule and call a vote to make it public even if he loses.

    If the current Leader cannot even call a vote, he should step aside and let someone else do the work.  Senator Chuck Schumer, leave the job to someone else if you can't do it.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2023 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

STAND BY OUR FBI AGENTS (AND OUR JUDGES) TODAY.

Here's a blowback to the noise attacking the FBI and Federal Judges after the search warrant was executed at Mar-A-Lago:   Senators and Representatives go and have your picture taken with FBI Agents to show your support.  To show that you have their backs.

You probably will have a tougher time doing this with judges, so as for judges, say supportive things.  Things like it is madness and evil to threaten federal judges, any judges.  Any time, for anything, anywhere.

You say there are no Members of Congress in Washington, D.C., they are all on August Recess right now?  They can still get the media attention they so clearly crave.  Then have them go to their local FBI Office and stand in the doorway and have their picture taken with FBI Agents to show that they have the back of FBI Agents.

You say that very few Republicans who hold office in Washington, D.C. will stand with FBI Agents right now?  Liz Cheney might; Adam Kinzinger might, others might as well.  Then tell Democrats to stand with FBI Agents and have their pictures taken showing that they support our FBI Agents right now.

Do something positive.  Make a contribution to our country.  Do good.  Now that's what I call pushback against the madness and the evil.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2022 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

"SPEAK NO EVIL" MEANS RECONCILIATION vs. MURDER ON FIFTH AVENUE.

Chuck Schumer told me something last night.  Actually, it's what he did not say that educated me.  Speaking of one of America's most vocal politicians, that is saying something about Chuck Schumer, that he did not speak.

Last night on cable TV Schumer declined to answer about the search warrant on The Grievance Boy's Florida residence while TGB was back in New York City.  That was understandable, under the circumstances.

But then Schumer was asked a different question right after that one.  He was asked about threats made by Kevin McCarthy against the Attorney General of the United States, and the Senator declined to answer.

That was his instinct, Speak No Evil.  (I have no doubt that when instinct has passed, Senator Schumer will have something to say, but that will not change his instinctive reaction, the reaction he has when he is caught without time to reflect, so to speak.)

Compromise led to reconciliation only a couple of days ago.  A bill passed the Senate this weekend because Senator Schumer and President Biden lined up all 50 senators who call themselves "Democrats" to vote for it.   Compromise meant not saying anything bad about anyone whose vote you wanted.

They won't vote for your bill if they are  offended by what you say.  Even if what you say is the truth.  Perhaps especially if what you say is the truth.  So Speak No Evil is the order of the day or there will be no compromise, no reconciliation.

This was Chuck Schumer's instinct.  Speak No Evil.  I do not mean to single out Senator Schumer.  Speak No Evil is also President Biden's default, and it was President Obama's instinct too.  Speak No Evil.  You can't compromise if you Speak The Truth. 

Speak No Evil led to reconciliation.  Speak No Evil also leads to insurrection.  As we have seen, an instinct that Speaks No Evil encourages Evil to Speak and to take action.  There are limits on speaking no evil, you know.  If you don't see the limits, it's Murder on Fifth Avenue if your instinct is to watch and say nothing.

Just watch.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2022 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

IT IS DIFFICULT TO REASON WITH AN AGENDA.

It has been rightly said, including here, that Justice Samuel Alito of the United States Supreme Court actually says that he doesn't care about what State Constitutions, Governors, and Courts have to say about federal elections.  As we shall no doubt see this Fall when the current majority on the Supreme Court takes up the case of Moore v. Harper, in their view and his there are only two deciding views on electing U.S. representatives and senators:  State "legislatures" and of course the federal Supreme Court on which they all sit right now.

This may not be the entire picture, singling out Justice Alito, that is.  He is prominent because Justice Clarence Thomas, who assigns the "major questions" opinions, assigns them more often than not  to Justice Alito.  The opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, for example, in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.  Removing a Constitutional right from Americans was short work not only for Alito, but for his followers too.

And that's the point.  So much has been made of the agenda pursued by the previous administration in so many attention-getting areas – making money, overthrowing the Constitution, putting children in cages are examples – that it is often overlooked that the previous administration appointed three Justices to join the Alito-Thomas majority.  I do not mean that this development has not been noticed.  Heaven only knows that the words that have been written about this development probably rival the word count of War And Peace.

No, what I mean to focus on, is the development that the newly empowered majority on the U.S. Supreme Court have an agenda and they will not be moved from it.  Only now, since Dobbs and the stripping of a Constitutional right for the first time in U.S. history, is attention being paid:  They do not listen, and neither do they hear.  They do exactly what they want to do, nothing less.  I would encourage listening to what they say about what they are going to do, except that these same people all said something different in their confirmation hearings when they were asked if they would uphold Roe v. Wade as the law of the land, remember?

"Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me."

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2022 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

"THE ENEMY WITHIN," by ROBERT F. KENNEDY.

In 1960, Robert F. Kennedy published The Enemy Within, a book about corruption.

In July 2022, reports came out that the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security knew for months that Secret Service agents had deleted text messages from the day the insurrection tried to overturn the U.S. Government, and from the day before that, namely, from January 5 and 6, 2021.  That was roughly 18 months.  To say again, the IG of Homeland Security reportedly knew that for months but did not tell Congress until recently.

Also in July 2022, it was reported publicly for the first time that the IG of Homeland Security knew for months that the Acting Director of Homeland Security and the Acting Deputy Director of Homeland Security on January 6, 2021 deleted their texts too.  That was a year-and-a-half.  To say again, the IG of Homeland Security knew that for months as well, but he just told Congress now.

There's more.  In July 2022 it was reported that the IG of Homeland Security stopped his tech experts from trying to retrieve the text messages that were deleted by the Secret Service, and maybe by the high officials at Homeland Security, too.

The Acting Director of Homeland Security on January 6, 2021 – which oversees the Secret Service – was appointed by the previous administration, the one that was trying to stay in power that day.

The Acting Deputy Director of Homeland Security on January 6, 2021 was also appointed by the previous administration, the one that was trying to stay in power that day.

The head of the Secret Service on January 6, 2021 was another person appointed by the previous administration, the one that was trying to overthrow the U.S. Government that day.  He is still in that job.

The Inspector General of Homeland Security on January 6, 2021 (and today) was appointed by, well, you guessed right if you guessed the previous administration.  He is still in office too.

That makes at least 4 appointees of the previous administration that reportedly had a hand in deleting their text messages from the day when an insurrection tried to keep these people and everyone else in the  previous administration in power:

1. The Acting Director of Homeland Security.
2. The Acting Deputy Director of Homeland Security.
3. The Head of the Secret Service, and
4. The Inspector General of Homeland Security.

So far as we know right now, only the Inspector General of Homeland Security reportedly further instructed his tech experts not to try to retrieve the supposedly lost text messages.  His tech experts had offered to retrieve the texts but were apparently told not to.

The Enemy Within.  What do you think Robert F. Kennedy would write about today?

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2022 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

"STAYED AROUND, LAYED AROUND, THIS OLD TOWN TOO LONG. SUMMER'S …

ALMOST GONE" BUT A YEAR AND A HALF LATER, THE HOLDOVERS FROM THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION ARE STILL HERE.  WHY IS THAT?

There seems to be some question whether the Secret Service  deleted texts.   

Of course they did.

This episode highlights more than that the SS deleted potentially key texts about their actions and the actions of others, on 1/6 and before.  It highlights who apparently just resigned as their head.  He was appointed by  the Grievance Boy in 2019, I believe it was,  to head the Secret Service.

Why was he still there into July 2022?  18 or 19 months he stayed in power, depending on how you count the months since January 2021.

This incident also highlights the fact that the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security is also an appointee of the Grievance Boy.  He is still there in July 2022.

Why is he still there into July 2022?

That brings to mind the U.S. Postmaster General, Mr. DeJoy.  He became U.S. Postmaster General by giving lots of money to the Grievance Boy, and he tried to dismantle the postal system in a pandemic and during a Presidential Election when many voters depended on mail-in ballots to avoid the plague.

 I understand that President Biden needed a Postal Board majority to vote to get rid of Mr. DeJoy.  Now he's got the majority.  President Biden has had a majority on the Postal Board  for months.  DeJoy is still there in July 2022.

Why into July 2022?

This is not they way I thought it would be when I voted for you, Joe Biden.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2022 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

#UVALDE #BUFFALO THE McCONNELL GANG VOTES AGAINST MAKING DOMESTIC TERRORISM ILLEGAL.

Less than 2 weeks after a White terrorist murdered 10 people in Buffalo, and within 2 days after another White supremacist gunned down 19 children and 2 of their teachers in Uvalde, Texas, the Republican organization in Washington, D.C. (can't call them a party, can we?) voted in the U.S. Senate against making domestic terrorism illegal.

The only think I can figure is that voting against domestic terrorism might have cut into a big part of the McConnell Gang's base.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2022 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

DIRECT ACTION #DEMOCRATS, LIKE @BetoORourke CHALLENGING ABBOTT AT HIS PRESS PARTY.

Direct action is a legacy concept, perhaps, and may require explanation.  It comes from the days when the Vietnam War was on and people opposed it.  Some of those people took direct action to register their opposition to the War, such as burning draft cards, pouring fake blood on draft records,  and even things like Country Joe and the Fish singing certain songs.

Yesterday Greg Abbott, current Governor of Texas, held a party for the press.  He invited the most prominent Republicans of Texas to be on the stage with him.  There for example was Rafael "Ted" Cruz, late of Cancun.

Beto O'Rourke, who is running for the Democratic nomination to oppose Mr. Abbott, interrupted Abbott's choreographed party for the press.  That was after Abbott intoned in essence that nothing could be done about the massacre at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas.  Nothing except talk about the mental health issues of people like the apparent shooter.

Beto O'Rourke interposed reality to say that "Yes, there is something to be done:  Stop selling AR-15's!"  That didn't fit into the choreography of the event, needless to say.  For that, Mr. O'Rourke was escorted out of Mr. Abbott's press party.

Direct action seems to be making something of a comeback.  And it should.  Direct action helped to stop Americans dying in Vietnam.  Direct action can help to stop Americans dying in America too.

Democrats and all people who are fed up with choreographed events that are pre-programmed for friendly venues and obedient audiences, be advised:  Choreography and pre-programming are not normal.  They are not American. 

Direct action!  From now through November and beyond.  Direct action!  Be alive and active.  Like Americans are born to be.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2022 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved. 

OR, JOE TO PROGRESSIVES: NO BBB, SO BIF.

The members of the House Progressive Caucus did not vote for the Infrastructure Act because they thought Build Back Better (BBB) would pass.

          They voted for it because President Joe Biden told the Progressives that the Build Back Better Act would not pass.

          Let me explain.  After being told for months that the two bills, the BBB and the BIF would pass together if at all, I believe that last week the House Progressive Caucus was told that the BBB would never pass the Senate because of Manuchin and Synema who for their part have never  committed to much of anything.

          If this is what happened, then Joe told the Progressives, begged them, to vote for the so-called Bipartisan Infrastructure Act a/k/ Corporate Infrastructure Act to replace the prevailing negative propaganda with a new narrative, one that says that the Democratic Party is in charge, can get things done, and so on.

          Joe told them that, or something very much like it.  Nancy told them that.  Pramila told them that.

          So the Progressive Democrats voted for the Infrastructure Act even though they do not like it.  They voted for it because their President asked them to, begged them to.

          With their votes, Joe has a win.  But he does not have the BBB.  And it bears repeating:  It is not likely now that he ever will.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

HOUSE PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS VOTED TO GIVE THEIR PRESIDENT A WIN.

 

The members of the House Progressive Caucus did not vote for the Infrastructure Act because they thought Build Back Better (BBB) will pass.

          They voted for it because President Joe Biden told the Progressives that he needed a win, any win.

          During all of the months leading up to last week's vote, the House Progressive Caucus was told that the two bills would pass together if at all.

          Joe told them that.  Nancy told them that.  Pramila told them that.

          Then last week Joe told them that the BBB would never pass the Senate because of Manuchin and Synema. And he told them then that he needed a win, any win.

          So the Progressives voted for the Infrastructure Act even though they do not like it.  They voted for it because their President asked them to, begged them to.

          Joe and Nancy and Pramila still say that the BBB will pass.  They don't really believe it.

          The House Progressive Caucus is still told that the BBB will pass.  They don't really believe it, either.

          But the House Progressive Caucus alone made Joe's Infrastructure Act law.  Without their votes, Joe would not have had a win, any win.

          With their votes, Joe has a win.  But he does not have the BBB.  And it is not likely now that he ever will.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

THEY DON'T HAVE CONTROL OF THE U.S. SENATE.

(Black Hole.  Image by NASA)

           The Democrats really don't have 50 Senators.  They have 48.

          The Democrats really don't have control of the U.S. Senate.  That does not mean the Republicans do.

          (Blue Moon Over D.C.  Image by NASA)

         

          But the reality is that the Democrats don't have control of the U.S. Senate.

          (Senator Joe Manchin.  UPI)

No-one can seriously contend at this point that the Democrats control Joe Manchin or Kyrsten Sinema.  Chuck Schumer is the only one seriously contending that he is the Majority Leader 'cause he wants the perks including the office.

          The Democrats have 48 Senators in their Party.  They do not have any realistic influence with any of the remaining 52 Senators.

          (Supermoon Eclipse Over Washington, D.C.  Image by NASA)

         And that's the reality.  To borrow a phrase that fits, "And that's the rest of the story."

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

MORE TALES FROM THE CRYPT: ORDER PROVIDES ICE DETAINEES VACCINE, ....

.... BUT DEPARTMENT CLAIMING TO BE "JUSTICE" APPEALS TO REVERSE THE ORDER.

On June 23, 2021 a respected federal judge ruled that United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had to make COVID vaccinations available within 30 days detained immigrants in ICE custody who have chronic medical conditions, or disabilities, or are age 55 or older.  Download Fraihat v. U.S. ICE Doc. 318 Order Accepting Special Master's First Report and Recco June 23 2021 (C.D. Cal. No. 5.19.cv.01546.JGB.(SHKx))

          In this order, the federal judge only accepted the Special Master's First Report and Recommendations.  The Special Master is a retired judge.  Download Fraihat v. U.S. ICE Doc. 304 Special Master's First Report and Recco May 21 2021 (C.D. Cal. No. 5.19.cv.01546.JGB.(SHKx)).

          Here is what the Special Master recommended and what the federal judge accepted in his order to require ICE to:

1. Continue its efforts to work with the Special Master and Plaintiffs’ counsel to confirm that all subclass members have had a individualized and meaningful review to determine if release is warranted and to conduct redeterminations where necessary;
   2. Track the reasons for transfers of subclass members and provide that information to the Special Master and Plaintiffs’ counsel biweekly; and
   3. Make vaccinations available to all subclass members within 30 days of the order accepting and adopting this Report and Recommendation.

          This is not exactly the stuff of an appeal that is likely to be successful.  Particularly orders entered after a Special Master's Report by a retired judge.  There is nothing onerous about this order at all.

         Think of this.  Would you appeal it?  Would you recommend that anyone appeal it?  Why would anyone appeal this order to make vaccines available during a pandemic to people who are in U.S. ICE custody?  This is a notice of appeal that simply did not have any reason behind it and every reason against it.  The decision to file a notice of appeal never needed to be made here.

          Except that the Special Master's Report and Recommendations may have been embarrassing to ICE.  It detailed ICE's behavior, which people still at ICE may not want to be made public.  One way to quash these findings is to appeal them and have the order accepting them reversed on appeal.

          Avoiding embarrassment however has never been a reason for taking an appeal.  Not a good reason anyway.  And certainly not a good reason for the federal government to take an appeal.

          Sixty-one (61) calendar days after the judge's order was entered accepting the Special Master's detailed report and recommendations, on August 23, 2021 the department of justice decided to file a notice of appeal.  Download Fraihat v. U.S. ICE Doc. 329 Notice of Appeal by U.S. ICE August 23 2021 (C.D. Cal. No. 5.19.cv.01546.JGB.(SHKx))

          That looks suspiciously like the last day of what would otherwise be a 60-day deadline to appeal.  August 23rd was a Monday, the first available working or business day that an appeal likely could have been filed.  Smells like the last minute to any lawyer who ever filed a notice of appeal in a situation like this or, for that matter, ever faced any unpleasant deadline.

          In any case, the United States appealed an order to make COVID vaccine available to immigrants in the custody of ICE during a pandemic.  And not to all immigrants during a pandemic, either, but to immigrants in the custody of ICE who are most at risk of catching and spreading COVID, immigrants in the custody of ICE who have chronic medical conditions, disabilities, or are age 55 and older.

          The Acting Assistant Attorney General, BRIAN M. BOYNTON of the doj Civil Division, has already been profiled in this space.  For example, MR. BOYNTON participated in earlier decisions to try to quash a subpoena for testimony on the former Education Secretary BETSY DeVOS.  See DOJ UNFATHOMABLE SECRECY:  WHY TRY TO SHIELD HER FROM TESTIFYING?

          This time the notice of appeal from an order to provide vaccine to immigrants at risk to COVID in ICE custody was also signed by no less than six (6) other doj attorneys.  All of the six are apparently employed in the doj Office of Immigration Litigation.

          Unlike other doj employees previously profiled here, none of the Six went to Harvard Law.  However, all of the Six shared a resume line with every other doj lawyer profiled here for past actions, such as attempting to derail the E. Jean Carroll litigation against The Former Guy:  Every one of them worked in Bill Barr's department of justice and every one of them worked during the regime of The Former Guy.

          This is clearly a pattern under MERRICK GARLAND, who holds the current title of attorney general.  See IN MERRICK GARLAND'S DEPARTMENT, PROTECTING "CAREER YOUNG ATTORNEYS" MEANS "CYA."

         

To be continued ....

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

THEY'RE NOT JUDGES, THEY'RE "REPUBLICANS." (That's One Name For Them.)

(New York Public Library Collection)

The U.S. supreme court ruled 5 to 4 that a Texas law overturning Federal law could go into effect without a fight.  The 5 did not give their names.  But we know who they are.  Three were appointed by the former regime.  They all call themselves Republicans.

(New York Public Library Collection)         
Three federal judges in Texas cancelled a hearing scheduled by another judge to hear all sides in a case.  The three federal judges did not want to hear from all sides, apparently.  They did not sign their names.  But we know who they are.  Two were appointed by the former regime.    All three call themselves Republicans. 

 (Pacific Standard)          A judge in Michigan gave some people access to Dominion Voting software.   (In a break from the apparent practice, he signed his name to the opinion he wrote.)  It is not clear how, but somehow, the Dominion Voting software ended up on the internet ready to hack. The judge in Michigan calls himself a Republican.

          There is a pattern here.  Present-day media have not written much about it, but there is a pattern here. 

          They're not judges, they're "Republicans."  (That's one name for them.)

          They're not like any Republicans I have ever known.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.

IT'S NOT THE LAWYERS SO MUCH AS RELIEF THEY REQUEST.

This article was first published yesterday, June 16, 2021, on the Claims and Bad Faith Law Blog.  It is reprinted and update here with the permission and input of the author.

Voting Booths, Flag Banners.  (Common Ground Project)

I was wondering how the plaintiffs got rulings so promptly in two cases recently, one in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals and the other in the Northern District of Texas.  In both cases, the people who brought the lawsuits -- the plaintiffs -- were challenging federal laws that benefitted other groups of people to which they did not belong; the plaintiffs wanted federal money to go to them.

          They got quick rulings on their requests.  I was wondering about that, as I say.  I do not think it was because they had better lawyers, as much as it was about the kind of relief they requested.

          The plaintiffs requested preliminary injunctions.  Requesting that kind of relief ordinarily galvanizes a judge into action.  This is in contrast to, say, trying to get a court to enforce a Congressional subpoena, which as we have seen can take years, and it is in contrast to attempting to have a judge apply either of the emoluments clauses of the United States Constitution, which as we have seen may never happen at all.

          These two cases are not the end of plaintiffs challenging federal laws and policies in Courts; they are the beginning.  If the current administration including the current justice department is going to stop losing, they are going to have to be strategic.

          First, they must consider going on the offensive and file suit, whenever the opportunity arises, to enforce the laws instead of waiting for laws to be challenged.

          They should also consider the relief they request, and how long it will take to achieve their purpose in filing suit.  Let the plaintiffs in these cases be guides if not mentors, exactly; is there an opening to file suits to request preliminary injunctive relief?

          Say requesting a preliminary injunction to stop a fraudit from using actual ballots cast in federal elections, which as I understand it is against the law during this short timeframe since the November 2020 election?

          If someone wants to be more successful in litigation, be more strategic.  Your probable adversaries will be more strategic in filing lawsuits.  To that end, expect more lawsuits to be filed in the Northern District of Texas.  Be ready, by filing first in a forum which you, not they, select.

Please read the disclaimer.  ©2021 Dennis J. Wall.  All rights reserved.