TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
Roe v. Wade and the Confusion 
of Sen. rino-Collins 
by Bill Murchison 
.
Secretary Pompeo Arrives in Japan 
To Brief Prime Minister Shinzo Abe
by sundance
{ theconservativetreehouse.com } ~ One of the strongest geopolitical alliances exists between the U.S. and Japan... President Trump and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe are not only good friends, but also work well together toward regional goals for a denuclearized Korean peninsula. Additionally, the U.S-Japan alliance is bolstered by a respectful economic partnership; and the appearance of Secretary Pompeo arriving in Japan to brief Prime Minister Abe on his discussions with the DPRK also highlights the importance of the relationship.   https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/07/07/secretary-pompeo-ar...
.
No, President Trump Is Not Purging The Military Of Immigrants
by JEFF SCHOGOL and ADAM LINEHAN
{ taskandpurpose.com } ~ The Department of Defense is strongly disputing a recent article by the Associated Press that suggests the United States Army has begun purging its ranks of non-U.S. citizens... as the Trump administration ramps up efforts to crack down on illegal immigration. The July 5 article centers on the plight of immigrant recruits attempting to enter the military through the Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest (MAVNI) program, which was launched in 2008 to attract more recruits with critical skills such as doctors, nurses, and those who speak strategically valuable languages like Chinese, Dari, Farsi, and Russian by offering them an expedited path to citizenship. Service members who’ve enlisted through the MAVNI program represent only a small percentage of immigrants in the military, the vast majority of whom joined through the same channels as their U.S.-born counterparts. Titled “US Army quietly discharging immigrant recruits,” the AP story reports that “some immigrant U.S. Army reservists and recruits who enlisted in the military with a promised path to citizenship are being abruptly discharged.” The story implies that institutionalized xenophobia might be behind the a recent spike in the number of MAVNI recruits being “booted” from the program...
.
Devin Nunes: Evidence Underlying Carter Page FISA 
Warrant Was “Fraudulent"
by sundance
{ theconservativetreehouse.com } ~ HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes appeared on Fox News with Jeanine Pirro to discuss the ongoing investigations into the DOJ, FBI and State Department.   https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/07/07/devin-nunes-evidenc...
.
100 Days of Fire 

by Tsvi Sadan
{ israeltoday.co.il } ~ For the last 100 days not a single day has passed in which fields and forests were not set ablaze by Hamas kites and balloons... During these 100 days, Israel did next to nothing to stop Hamas from burning Israel's southern Negev region. Justifying Israel's policy of containment and appeasement is possible only by trying really hard. Containment and appeasement, the legal daughters of defeatism, have accompanied Jews in exile for a very long time. In exile, where they were a defenseless, persecuted minority, containment and appeasement were entirely understandable, a necessary evil that allowed Jews to survive. This approach to conflict resolution is recited three times a day at the conclusion of the Amidah prayer – "let my soul be mute to those who curse me and let my soul be as dust before all." Two thousand years of recitation have done their job, and made this approach second nature, a habit difficult to abandon. And it is not as if we haven't tried. From the 1920s to the 1940s, the Jewish society in Israel was deeply divided between those who opposed appeasement (revisionists) and those who supported it (labor parties). Back then, those supporting appeasement feared that retaliation would endanger the small and vulnerable Jewish population in mandatory Palestine. Containment, then, was believed to be an effective way to appease the Arabs and the British, but it never really worked out that way...
.
Exalted Righteousness, Tawdry Methods Lead to Walk Away
by Clarice Feldman

{ americanthinker.com } ~ Victor Davis Hanson, writing in American Greatness, surveys how history’s bad ideas inspire the “progressives.”... He focuses on the plans for court packing, the resegregation of students in universities, the growing movements to censor speech, restaurants’ decision to refuse service to those whose views they disagree with and local governments’ nullification of laws sanctuary cities. The common themes in all these schemes are innate to progressivism. To survive and spread, exalted righteousness always excuses tawdry methods, given the supposed ignorance and gullibility of the unenlightened. Short-term expediency is well worth the goal of regaining power. Any smell from low tactics later can be perfumed away -- once power is back in the correct hands. Unfortunately for them, it seems not to be working so well this time. The growing #WalkAway movement, in which lifelong dummycrats-Democrats publicly announce they are walking away from the party, shows they supposed wrong about “the ignorance and gullibility of the unenlightened.”...
.
JW Videos of the Week
DOJ is Thumbing its Nose at Congress, Trump
.
Tom Fitton’s Video Weekly Update – July 6, 2018
.
Attorney of Strozk’s Claims are a Publicity Stunt
.
Call Your Congressman and Demand Action on scumbag/mad-Maxine Waters
http://jwatch.us/oK8geJ via @JudicialWatch
.
Mueller should testify on Capitol Hill
.
NSA deletes over 685 million phone, text records
.
.
.
Roe v. Wade and the Confusion 
of Sen. rino-Collins 

by Bill Murchison

{ townhall.com } ~ Neat! We know what the Supreme Court debate is all about -- the debate, that is to say, over who shall take retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy's seat.

The debate is about abortion.

Or so declares Sen. rino-Susan Collins, the Republican moderate from Maine, whose vote could prove essential to confirmation of whatever nominee the White House puts forward: "A candidate for this important post who would overturn Roe v. Wade would not be acceptable to me. That would indicate an activist agenda that I don't want to see a judge have. And that would indicate to me a failure to respect precedent."

Where to begin? Almost anywhere, I warrant.

Let's start with the right to abortion, a piece of Supreme Court craftsmanship from 1973. No authority, prior to the Roe decision, had believed, or asserted, that the right to terminate an unwanted pregnancy lay draped, undiscovered, in the folds of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Aha, said seven justices, speaking for the court. Here it is! We had to search, but we found it: No law can take from any woman the basic if previously undiscovered right to an abortion.

And that was that. Supposedly. Except that the country soon learned that perhaps half our fellow citizens either thought the high court was out of its mind, or else accepted that abortion might be permissible under circumstances less sweeping than laid out in Roe. A likely never-to-be-finished controversy began almost the minute the justices went to lunch.

But a Supreme Court nominee unpledged to last-ditch defense of the Supreme Court's 1973 job of judicial engineering wouldn't get Sen. rino-Collins' vote.

You don't say. I duly note that this is the nature of things when law and the divergent art of politics collide. Don't look for the logic in these occasions.

The second thing to notice here is Sen. rino-Collins' adamancy as to what she calls precedent. If the court said it -- by golly -- that's it! Dissenters, be off!

Sure would have been fun in the 1950s and '60s watching the future Sen. rino-Collins, or her intellectual avatars, attack Brown v. Board of Education -- the school desegregation case -- for its disregard of precedent. Precedent cf Plessy vs. Ferguson, 1896, and Lum v. Rice, 1927 was squarely on the side of the states' claimed right to segregate the races. In Brown, the court said dismissively, "Plessy v. Ferguson is overruled." Minds change; the world moves on. The higher truths endure; not so, in every case, the interpretations we fallible folk put on things.

I do hope Sen. rino-Collins is not downing one dry martini after another, hoping to blot out the dire prospect of a Brown-like overrule of Roe. As a piece of judicial mischief -- unanchored, that is to say, in precedent or moral reasoning, Roe deserves to fall on its face in the mud. However, I don't think that's likely to happen. Not in our own time, anyway.

Roe, by now, due to the love it inspires in feminist activists and their well-wishers -- due as well to the culture's acclimation to the idea of detaching sex and its consequences from childbirth -- enjoys enormous support. That it doesn't deserve such support is beside the point, politically speaking. Were the Supreme Court suddenly to sweep Roe down the back steps, with the household dust and dead insects, there would occur such tumult as the political process is not well fitted for. A likelier near-term prospect than reversal is gradual acceptance by the court of state laws making abortion harder and more expensive to achieve. This, while -- maybe -- the moral environment becomes friendlier to the idea that bringing new humans into the world is not the bad or oppressive thing it is often said to be.

In any case, how useful to note Sen. rino-Collins' confusion between the abiding principles of law and the politics of the moment. It is a very modern kind of confusion, making the stakes in Supreme Court confirmation hard to discern. It is enough to know the present stakes are altitudinous: far, far less about Roe v. Wade than about prospects for the survival of American freedoms.

Views: 17

Comment

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

Goodbye 2020: Clinton Ordered By Federal Judge To Submit To Questioning

(TeaParty.org) – Just when Hillary Clinton began hinting that she’s ready to run again in 2020, she has been ordered by a federal judge to submit to questioning about the use of her private email server to convey classified documents during her time as Secretary of State.

U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan made the order as part of a lawsuit from conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch.

“Court rules late today Hillary Clinton must answer more email questions — including key q’s about the setting up of her email system,” wrote Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a tweet following the ruling.

Judicial Watch 🔎 @JudicialWatch

BREAKING: Judicial Watch announced today that, following JW's court battle, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan ruled that Hillary Clinton must answer – under oath – two additional questions on her controversial email system within 30 days.

Judicial Watch: Federal Court Ordered Hillary Clinton to Answer Additional Email Questions Under...

 (Washington, DC) –Judicial Watch announced today that U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan ruled that within 30 days Hillary Clinton must answer under oath two additional questions about her...

judicialwatch.org
Tom Fitton  @TomFitton

Breaking: Court rules late today Hillary Clinton must answer more email questions -- including key q's about the setting up of her email system. Court denied our request to unseal vid depositions of Clinton aides. Great work by Michael Bekesha!

As a statement from Judicial Watch explains, the ruling is the latest development in the group’s Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, which they began to discover why former deputy chief of staff to Mrs. Clinton, Huma Abedin, was allowed to work at the State Department while also engaged in “outside employment.”

Clinton now has 30 days to answer two key questions from a list of 25 questions composed by Judicial Watch.

The questions the judge selected are:

1) “Describe the creation of the clintonemail.com system, including who decided to create the system, the date it was decided to create the system, why it was created, who set it up, and when it became operational.”

During your October 22, 2015 appearance before the U.S. House of Representatives Select Committee on Benghazi, you testified that 90 to 95 percent of your emails “were in the State’s system” and “if they wanted to see them, they would certainly have been able to do so.” Identify the basis for this statement, including all facts on which you relied in support of the statement, how and when you became aware of these facts, and, if you were made aware of these facts by or through another person, identify the person who made you aware of these facts.

This new development is huge because it means that the two critical scandals from Clinton’s time in the State Department, her private email server and the Benghazi attacks, are facing fresh scrutiny in both the legal system and the court of public opinion.

And while Clinton likely had little chance of any run in 2020, this makes it even less likely she will stand even a shred of a chance.

We’ve have got to hope and pray that at long last, this leads to the long overdue criminal charges we’ve all been waiting to see.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service