The Leaked Supreme Court Abortion Decision

I don’t have much time now to write about the recent news of the leaked Supreme Bureaucrats decision to possibly overturn Roe v. Wade. But I will say that that was a bad decision, in which 9 robed fascists draw an arbitrary line, in which prior to a certain stage of the unborn baby’s development it is okay to kill the baby, and after that certain stage of development it is not okay to kill the baby. Based on nothing. But. Politics.

It seems to me that the leak was intentionally timed as a distraction and a psy-op to divert attention away from this week’s release of Dinesh D’Souza’s “2000 Mules,” which presents evidence regarding how the 2020 presidential election was stolen. This current abortion distraction is like the 2020 BLM riots and the 2020 Covid scamdemic which got a lot of attention to distract the sheeple from that year’s campaign.

Grandstanding Ignorant Senators Grilled Another Future Supreme Bureaucrat: Ketanji Brown Jackson

The new Supreme Court nominee Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson has been grilled by the Senate Judiciary Committee and mainly by Republicans, and here are some of my comments on that. And if readers don’t like my making fun of ignorant senators, sorry about that.

First of all, the “Supreme” Court shouldn’t even exist and issues and conflicts should be resolved at the state level, at the very least.

The sheeple are pathetically dependent on this group of 9 bureaucrats to decide their fate, which is ridiculous. The 9 robed fascists rubber-stamp the police state, the war on drugs, the national security state, the CIA, FBI, NSA, and all the evil institutions of government. They are no good.

We have something called the 10th Amendment, which protects the right of the people to ignore “Supreme” Court decisions, in my view.

So anyway, I’m going to write this based on my memory of what I heard on the radio that several “news” outlets and talk show personalities have repeated several times. I didn’t exactly take notes.

To begin, Sen. Marsha Blackburn (a.k.a. “Marsha, Marsha, Marsha!”) asked Judge Jackson to define “woman,” to which Jackson replied that she couldn’t define “woman” because she’s “not a biologist.”

Oh, Marsha, Marsha, Marsha!

What a stupid question. I’m assuming Sen. Blackburn is referring to the LGBT stuff. Perhaps she should ask if the judge thinks there are more than two genders. You either do or you don’t, Judge.

Maybe Sen. Blackburn is referring to the transgenderism craze going on these days. Recently a male college competitive swimmer who was not very good in competing against other males decided to “identify” as a female and allowed by idiots to compete along with females and against females, so he can cheat and win the competitions (and possibly receive financial rewards).

Perhaps Sen. Blackburn should have asked the judge if she thinks that male athletes should be allowed to compete in women’s teams?

Sen. Ted Cruz grilled and roasted Judge Jackson on cases in which she gave convicted child porn viewers overly light sentences. A little too zealous in his questioning, Sen. Cruz (R-McDonald’s, Dunkin’ Donuts, etc.) sounded like a Perry Mason wannabe, and even went over his allotted time while the chairman was yelling at him and cutting him off.

Sen. Jock Hawkey quoted Judge Jackson’s expressing sympathy toward the convicted child porn perv in court, but I didn’t hear her being quoted as having expressed sympathy toward child victims of molestation and abuse. Did she do that?

And by the way, regarding that bill in Florida that Gov. Ron DeSantis will sign into law banning the discussion of sexual issues in schools in kindergarten through 3rd grade, it’s not a “Don’t Say Gay” bill. All it says is that discussions of sexual matters are NOT APPROPRIATE for little kids up to age 8.

I know, there are a lot of “liberal” people who are brainwashed to believe that such matters are appropriate to discuss with little kids, but NO, they are NOT, you morons.

What is it with the people on the left pushing sexuality onto little kids? See the American Dream Blog with this article from a few years ago: 21 Signs That U.S. Public Schools Have Become Training Centers for Sexual Deviancy.

Our society has been allowing the sexualization of childhood which messes up the kids emotionally. See my post on the cult of the State and the sexualization of everything.

Hmm, I wonder if Senators Ted Scruz, Jock Howley, or Marsha, Marsha, Marsha have ever gone after the CPS child sex trafficking racket, or are they too aware of what happened to Nancy Schaefer?

Or how about going after their beloved FBI or CIA goons looking at child porn? See: The Federalist on CIA employees sexually molesting very young children but not prosecuting them, and the Boston Globe reporting on the hundreds of federal and military employees viewing child porn in which “only a handful resulted in prosecutions.”

Speaking of the child porn cases, many people including these senators and conservative talk radio personalities can’t seem to distinguish between people possessing child porn, in print or on a computer, versus actual child abusers.

So, it’s really the people who are actually exploiting the children to make the images who are the criminals. I think that anyone who actually harms a child or acts invasively against any child is a real criminal and should be thrown in jail, possibly for life.

I searched the Internet and wasn’t able to determine if Judge Jackson sentenced any people who actually, directly abused a child. So I have a feeling that Senators Ted Scruz, Jock Hawkey, and Tom Polyester concentrated on “child porn” cases to appeal to their “Moral Majority” base. Has Jackson given light sentences to actual child abusers?

Now, on the senators’ questioning of Jackson in her work as a public defender, Sen. Limpy Graham was frothing over her defending Gitmo detainees. Sen. Graham (R-Warmonger) displayed his ignorance of the rights of the accused. He believes apparently that the accused have no rights. He believes that a “war” changes things and if there’s a “war,” we all lose our right to due process. He also reiterated his support of indefinite detention. (See my article on the senators who love the government but hate America on this “War on Terrorism” thing and due process.)

But Graham like many others just doesn’t seem to understand that everyone has a right to due process, the right of the accused to require that the accuser present evidence against the accused, and that there be an actual public trial which provides the accused the opportunity to present his own evidence and witness testimony or to refute the prosecutors’ case.

That is because anyone can accuse anyone else of anything. Doesn’t Graham see that?

Has the indefinite detention and solitary confinement of January 6th “suspects” without evidence or charges not convinced Graham otherwise? Apparently not. Sadly, he’s still a fascist through and through.

“But those are just Trump supporters, conservatives, MAGA hat wearers and deplorables. In contrast, the Gitmo detainees are TERRORISTS! That’s different!”

Well, no, actually they are not “terrorists,” because they are accused terrorists. Just as the January 6th detainees are accused … “insurrectionists,” or whatever it is the Democrat-FBI goons are making up about them.

As I wrote here,

According to these numbers, the number of Gitmo prisoners since 2002 is 779, the number of those released is 670. They were released because there was no evidence against them, because they were innocent. But here are some more interesting numbers: The percentage of Gitmo prisoners captured by U.S. troops: 5%, and the percentage of prisoners who were paid bounties by CIA and coalition forces: 86%. Our government paid Afghan villagers and others to hand people over to our military and CIA, without charges, without suspicion. No wonder most who were taken to Gitmo were innocent, weren’t involved in any terrorism or criminality. They were tortured by criminals at Gitmo for no good reason, however. But the neanderthals who are fed propaganda day after day by the government and its media lapdogs believe that the detainees at Gitmo are “terrorists.”

So as I said, everyone who is accused of something has a right to due process, regardless of the government propaganda against them.

But now conservatives et al. are learning that the hard way (but not Sen. Limpy Graham, apparently.) Trump supporters, conservatives, MAGA believers, flag-wavers, are being accused of “domestic terrorism,” for attending a Trump rally and wandering around the Capitol in a daze, or speaking up at a school committee meeting.

(See my post on the honest, well-meaning FBI. We should not be surprised that they are going after Trump supporters, conservatives, MAGA true believers, and parents speaking up at a school committee meeting.)

And Graham was triggered by Judge Jackson, while she was a Gitmo detainee defender, having apparently referred to George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld as “war criminals.” Although, she referred to the torture of her clients as being in the category of war crimes.

But the truth is, of course Bush is a war criminal. He started wars of aggression against Afghanistan and Iraq, neither of which were involved in 9/11 or had attacked or threatened Americans. Many propagandized and bamboozled sheeple believe otherwise, obviously.

The Nuremberg Tribunal after World War II determined that starting a war of aggression is in and of itself a war crime.

A lot of people in America believe the post-9/11 propaganda and fear-mongering, just as many people have believed the more recent Covid propaganda and fear-mongering. So, when those of us who value the truth about the crimes of our government actually do tell the truth about it, the propagandized sheeple don’t like that. But whatever.

And I wonder what any of the senators who are outraged at Judge Jackson’s defending accused terrorists might think of the U.S. soldiers who shot, dropped bombs on and murdered innocents over there in Iraq, or who went door to door to seize firearms from families in direct violation of their right to keep and bear arms. (“Why, they are heroes, of course they are!”)

Such senators probably wouldn’t like it if a foreign military invaded U.S. cities and towns and bombed homes and businesses, schools and churches and shot and murdered innocent Americans and stole their means of self-defense. (Oh wait, that’s right. American militarists and the State-worshiping sheeple are moral relativists who reject the Golden Rule, oh, well.)

I’m sure that Limpy Graham, Ted Scruz, Tom Polyester and Jock Howley would rather hear the government’s lies and propaganda about 9/11 than know the truth about it.

To conclude, as we saw most recently, the “Supreme” Court are useless. Even the liberals rubber-stamp the CIA-torture national security state and the domestic police state, while the “conservatives” rubber-stamp socialized medicine. They really, really suck.

We need to have a free society, and the “Supreme” Bureaucrats are not a part of that.

Supreme Court Once Again Rubber-Stamps the Police State

March 5, 2022

The Supreme Bureaucrats have once again rubber-stamped the CIA’s crimes and reinforced the High Swamp’s continuing contempt for the Constitution they all swore to uphold. Jacob Hornberger summarizes the case of a Gitmo detainee who was tortured by CIA torturers and later was found to not have any involvement in terrorism or 9/11 but the U.S. “national security” apparatchiks have kept him at Gitmo anyway.

i don’t expect the talk radio crowd to disagree with the outcome of this case.

But once again the “liberals” on the Court also rubber-stamped the national security state and whatever crimes it commits, in the name of … “national security.”

The outgoing “liberal” Justice Stephen Breyer joined the 7-2 majority who believe that the CIA has a right to its secrets, in this case keeping secret the location of a “black site” in which they can take anyone out there to torture with impunity, and without charges let alone someone who has actually been convicted of any crime. “Liberal” Justice (sic) Elena Kagan agreed with Breyer on that point.

With “liberals” like these, who needs fascist tyrants?

However, Justice Neil Gorsuch opposed the secrecy, joining Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Gorsuch wrote that disclosure of the “black sites” would not cause any further harm to “national security.” The two wrote that U.S. gov wanted to prevent “further embarrassment for past misdeeds.”

No doubt the conservatives and talk radio crowd will see Gorsuch as a “traitor to conservatives” or to “national security,” or some such nonsense.

As I wrote here in what I think is a pretty good summary of the torture issue, we know that torture doesn’t work. It doesn’t produce confessions or helpful information. Torture causes the victim to tell the torturer whatever the victim thinks the torturer wants to hear, to get him to stop torturing! It also causes the victim to give false confessions, or falsely implicate others, anything to stop the torture, obviously.

So, the “national security” conservatives out there believe in this due process-free indefinite detention and torture of “terrorists” who haven’t been convicted or even charged with terrorism crimes. Many of today’s conservatives believe the Gitmo victims are “terrorists” because the government says so. (But when it comes to being a January 6th detainee… that’s different. That’s when they care about due process, etc., etc.)

And also, as I wrote in that post, most of the Gitmo detainees were totally innocent and uninvolved in terrorism (and many of them were apprehended at random based on financial incentives given to villagers by U.S. military and CIA), and that is why U.S. government had to let them go.

I think that the people who defend torture are really just those who like the idea of torturing someone, for the sake of torturing someone.

The State of Politics in 2022

I hear that Joe Biden will give a “State of the Union” tonight. Jeepers, I hope he doesn’t put himself to sleep with his own boring crap tonight. But here are some thoughts I have on the political scene in 2022.

Some people are suggesting that Donald Trump will definitely be running for reelection in 2024. I guess that means the FBI, CIA and DOJ will have to get some more fake dossiers and get their MSNBC and CNN propagandists ready for their counter-measures, no?

And what good will another Trump term do? He didn’t follow through on his promise to “Drain the Swamp,” as I mentioned recently. He surrounded himself with Swamp creatures, such as Jeff Sessions and Bill disBarr, and Mattis, McMaster, and Priebus.

And Trump appointed Swamp creatures to the Supreme Court, including Amy Crony Barrett, who in a lower court ruling sided with Illinois Gov. Pritzker in his fascist lockdowns. So she’s clueless on due process and liberty in general.

And Trump appointed Brett Kavanaugh, who had already proven to not understand the protected rights of the Bill of Rights, in his defending drunk driving roadblocks, the war on drugs, Gitmo and treasonous NSA spying on Americans. Kavanaugh had said the Fourth Amendment allows for government’s to have “special needs” in certain circumstances, yeah it really says that. The Fourth Amendment lists exceptions, it sure does. The Fourth Amendment says something about “exigent circumstances.”

Nope. the Fourth Amendment says none of those things. He’s either just a police statist, an ignoramus, or he’s just FOS. (Or all of the above.)

And Trump is terrible with the war on drugs — he wants to militarize it, rather than end it — and the anti-immigration stuff, arg.

Only Trump’s tax cuts were good, although not totally. He signed on to temporary individual tax cuts, and he refused to cut spending in any meaningful way. Oh, well.

I’m sure the GOP will renominate Trump if he wants the nomination.

Some people like the governor of Florida, DeSantis. However, while DeSantis’s order that the government schools not be allowed to mandate masks or vaccines was good, the order also included private schools as well as private businesses. So that’s not good as he shows his opposition to private property rights. Booo.

And speaking of the Supreme Swamp, Biden has appointed Ketanji Brown Jackson to replace the retiring Justice (sic) Stephen Breyer. In looking at Ketanji Brown Jackson’s record, she seems to be typical “leftist progressive,” so things will not change there at the Supreme Bureaucrats.

However, even so-called “liberals” are not reliable, as we saw for example in 2012 in the 8-1 decision when the High Swamp voted to approve of police goons breaking into a home because they smelled marijuana. Ooooh, marijuana. So, the “liberals” except for Ruth Buzzi Ginzburg voted for that fascist police state crap, right along with the conservatives.

So I’m for abolishing the so-called Supreme Court. It is insane for people to run around frantically like chickens with their heads cut off hoping that 9 robed morons are going to protect your rights or your property. Conservatives and liberals are constantly acting that way.

Anyway, will Biden finally step down and check into the nearest memory care facility, and let Kommie-la Harris take over as Puppet-in-Chief? Or will they oust Kommie-la first, replace her with Hillary who will then ascend to Top Banana and lose to Trump a 2nd time in 2024? Who knows.

I haven’t actually voted for a Republican or a Democrat since 1992, no joke. Wait, I haven’t voted since 1992, but whatever. And I don’t even know why I did that at that time, because I should have learned my lesson in 1988 when I saw what few votes Ron Paul received that was extremely discouraging at that time. But mostly at that time I learned that the “news” media were just another part of the regime.

And so the “news” media won’t cover the Libertarian Party or other third parties like their free coverage for the two gangster parties. And the two major gangster parties colluded to make it difficult for third parties or independents to get their names on ballots. My conclusion? The whole system is fixed, rigged, exclusively pro-Establishment, and that includes elections, the judicial system and the “news” media. When will people learn?

Do We Need the Supreme Swamp to Decide Whether Gov May Forcibly Inject Us with Drugs?

I’m trying to write something about Amerika’s growing authoritarianism and fascism with the Covid psy-op and the Soviet January 6th psy-op, but I’m doing everything I can to avoid writing about that stuff right now. So here are some good tweets I’ve seen on the Supreme Bureaucrats.

Here is Reason on Sonia’s idiocy.

And also, this morning I heard Glenn Beck make a good point: not just “vaccines” (the Pfizer/Moderna mRNA which isn’t a vaccine but just another pharma drug), but ANY drugs including psychiatric drugs, the gubmint will want the power to forcibly shove down our throats. Over my dead body, de Blasio, Adams, Wu, Newsom, et al. fascist scum.

It doesn’t matter how the Supremes rule on the vaccine mandate cases, because we already know what morons and statists the 9 lettered and robed imbeciles are from their past statements and decisions. The Supreme Court needs to be ended and thrown into the dustbin of history along with the entire useless U.S. government.

We will be better off with a decentralized society after we’ve seen all the evidence against central planning we need to see. See a recent article on all that by Karen Kwiatkowski. And by the way, a bill to put state independence i.e. divorce DC on the ballot in New Hampshire is moving through the state legislature as we speak.

More News and Commentary

Daniel Horowitz: Who Are Actually the Super-Spreaders?

Life Site: “Fully Vaccinated” Make Up Majority of Covid Hospitalizations in Ontario, Gov’t Data Show

Joseph Mercola: Stigmatizing the Unvaxxed and Unboosted

Jeremy Loffredo: More Kids Dying from Vaccines Than from Covid, Nurse Tells Louisiana Lawmakers

Gateway Pundit: Bill Filed In Washington Would Authorize ‘Strike Force’ To ‘Involuntarily Detain’ Unvaccinated Families – Zoom Meeting on Proposed Agenda on Jan. 21, ’22 …UPDATE: WA Releases Statement

John Whitehead and Nisha Whitehead: Despotism Is the New Normal: Looming Threats to Freedom in 2022

Ron Paul: We Need a Peaceful Revolution

José Niño: America’s Legitimacy Crisis Heats Up

Daniella Bassi: What Mayan Civilization Can Teach Us about Secession and Decentralization

Donald Boudreaux: The Only ‘Antitrust’ Policy That’s Needed is Freedom of Entry

Project Veritas: Military Documents About Gain of Function Contradict Fauci Testimony Under Oath

Thomas DiLorenzo: Stephen Breyer is Corrupt

Steve Kirsch: New Big Data Study of 145 Countries Shows Covid Vaccines Make Things Worse

Glenn Greenwald: The Histrionics and Melodrama Around 1/6 Are Laughable, but They Serve Several Key Purposes

Jacob Hornberger: Abolish NATO

And Emerald Robinson: The Mystery of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell Explained

More News and Commentary

James Bovard: More Wetlands Purgatory for American Landowners.

Thomas Knapp: Concerning SCOTUS and the Weird Texas Abortion Law

Richard Ebeling: Identity Politics and Systemic Racism Theory as the New Marxo-Nazism

Philip Kraske asks, Why Do Journalists Hate 9-11 Truthers?

And Joseph Mercola: Why the WHO Is a Corrupt, Unhealthy Organization

Instead of “Packing the Supreme Court,” Let’s UNpack the Supreme Court

OMG, Schumer, Nadler and Markey want to “pack the Supreme Court,” by adding 4 more Democrat “Justices” to the existing 9 Supreme Bureaucrats. They want to do this because they really believe that the current Court has a 6-3 “conservative” majority! Yes, they really believe that.

The reason that the Sheeplecrats want to “pack the Supreme Court” is because they are too impatient to wait for a “Justice” to retire (or die) and be replaced by one that’s more to their liking.

So they impatiently drool to ram their dictatorial mandates and tax-thefts down the throats of the people more quickly by getting a faux “Supreme” Court to rubber-stamp their agenda. And with HR 1 all future elections will belong to them, these thieves, cheaters, fraudsters, hooligans, barbarians and shysters.

And it isn’t just Democrats who are the criminals and thieves and extortionists, the Republicans are bad, too. (See Laurence Vance’s articles exposing the conservatives and Republicans‘ corruption, ignorance and hypocrisy, for example, when it comes to their proclaiming to promote “limited government,” “free markets” and “liberty.” i.e. they’re FOS just as much as the Democrats and “liberals.”)

No, rather than packing the Supreme Commissars, I say, let’s UNpack them, by just getting rid of the whole thing. They really suck, when you get right down to it.

The 9 robed goons are unreliable, unsupportive of the Constitution, incapable of defending liberty, and they are just all around nothing more than Soviet-like apparatchiks, quite frankly.

The truth is, what we have at the top of the U.S. so-called judicial system is a Supreme Swamp, because that is exactly what those “Justices” are, just another part of the Swamp in Washington.

The Supreme Court rarely comes to the side of the rights of the individual and private property against the threats and aggressions of the government and police.

For example, while some of the current “Justices” were not there 10 years ago, at that time the High Swamp high-fived the jailing and strip searching of arrestees who were abducted for non-arrestable offenses, such as walking a dog sans leash or for unpaid parking tickets.

The Republican appointees were the ones who voted to approve such criminal treatment of presumably innocent folks. Hence, “Rethuglicans.”

But “liberals” are also useless when it comes to civil liberties. Also around that time the Court rubber-stamped the government’s drug gestapo breaking into people’s home, terrorizing them and abducting them because police smelled marijuana and heard a toilet flushing, implying people were “destroying evidence,” even though such evidence was not that of an actual crime with an actual victim.

And obviously with an 8-1 decision, several of the “liberals” on the High Swamp agreed with the usual conservative authoritarian neanderthals, that the drug war police state is so important that we must allow government police to criminally and violently break into a home and terrorize and abduct innocent people for ingesting non-approved drugs. “Liberals” Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer joined the “conservative” neanderthals in this one, with Ruth Bader Ginsburg actually citing that dusty ol’ Fourth Amendment in her lone dissent.

Sorry, morons, the real and only legitimate ruling to that case is to rule the entire drug war unconstitutional, because the government involving itself in drugs is not authorized by the U.S. Constitution. And, does the individual own one’s own life and body or does the government own one’s life and body? Duh, Elena, Sonia, Clarence, et al.

The 9 robed Swamp Supremes are loathsome and corrupt, and are the lap dogs for the fascists in the White House and the communists in CONgress, and they are useless. Bought and paid for, or otherwise bribed to do the fascists bidding as well as being obedient State-worshiping ignoramuses, that is what these people are.

Chief “Justice” (sic) John Roberts suddenly switched his vote of ruling the ObamaCare law unconstitutional to his joining the Obama apparatchiks to approve the ObamaCare law and the individual mandate. Was Roberts threatened, or blackmailed? NSA whistleblower Russ Tice told how NSA abuses made high public officials susceptible to blackmail, and other NSA whistleblowers including Edward Snowden and William Binney backed those assertions.

They will be even worse now when they see government officials and juries deciding cases out of fear of being attacked by social activist thugs engaged in “peaceful” protests, and out of fear of their homes being burned to the ground.

And the Supreme Sheeple then approved ObamaCare a second time in 2015, and its subsidies, further empowering the criminal IRS. “The Affordable Care Act is here to stay,” said Barack Obomber, reinforced later by traitor John McCain who voted against repealing it.

The High Supreme Swamp also ruled against the Fifth Amendment in its Kelo decision to allow local governments to steal private property away from the owner and redistribute it over to other private citizens for financial profits. That was a no-brainer, but John Paul Stevens, Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, David Souter, and the only remaining one of them left now Stephen Breyer thought otherwise.

And Scalia? An “Originalist”? Heh. Scalia of course sided with the drug war police state in the aforementioned decision, is questionable on the 2nd Amendment, rejected private property rights and self-ownership in favor of collectivist moral legislating, and obediently accepted the government’s bogus war on terror to justify violating the due process rights of detainees. (And, while he wasn’t endorsing internment camps, he even pointed out that internment camps à la World War II could return again in good ol’ USS of A.)

And Amy Coney Barrett? What a disappointment, even before she crawled up to the High Slimy Bench. In a lower court decision, Barrett sided with the other two fascists in her three-judge panel of the 7th Circus approving Gov. J.B. Pritzker (D-McDonald’s) unconstitutional Covid lockdown orders and limits on gatherings.

As I pointed out in an earlier blog, constitutionalist pastor Chuck Baldwin noted that based on her previous opinions Barrett will probably rubber-stamp the COVID police state and forced vaccines, and probably the surveillance state as well.

All these Supreme Court “Justices” (sic) defend the police state, the national security state, and seem to obediently believe the government’s false flags and fabrications to justify enslaving and imprisoning the population to “protect” them from the foreign bogey man, and from their own vices.

Brett Kavanaugh. Yech. Total authoritarian apparatchik police statist swamp creature. Included in lower court rulings Kavanaugh voted in favor of CIA covering up of the JFK assassination, and other national security state interests.

I wrote in an earlier blog on Kavanaugh’s deference to the national security state regarding the bulk collection of telephony metadata. This Cato article quotes Kavanaugh’s lower court opinion from 2015:

The Fourth Amendment allows governmental searches and seizures without individualized suspicion when the Government demonstrates a sufficient “special need” – that is, a need beyond the normal need for law enforcement – that outweighs the intrusion on individual liberty

The Fourth Amendment says nothing about there being a “special need” of government law enforcement that “outweighs” the right to be secure.

Does the Fourth Amendment say regarding our right to be secure, “except for a special need of law enforcement”? Nope.

Kavanaugh writes (with my comments inserted):

In my view, that critical national security need outweighs the impact on privacy occasioned by this program. The Government’s program does not capture the content of communications [Yes it does, with phone calls and emails as well!], but rather the time and duration of calls, and the numbers called.

Besides being ignorant of the feds’ ongoing criminal intrusions against innocent people, Kavanaugh also cites “drug testing of students, roadblocks to detect drunk drivers, border checkpoints, and security screening at airports” as examples of allowable violations of the Fourth Amendment.

In a different case, while the Court’s “liberals” in the majority voted to protect the right of the people and their cell phone data to not be tracked, the neanderthal “conservatives” who love the police state say, no, we think that gestapo Amerikan police goons must be permitted to track people’s cell phone data without a warrant, without reasonable suspicion, because we really don’t support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America and its Fourth Amendment, as we swore an oath to do. (And that case included Neil Gorsuch with the other conservatards who love the police state. So much for that guy.)

So, the Government Supremacists cite “exigent circumstances” when they know the gubmint goons are violating someone’s Fourth Amendment rights but they don’t care, such as in the case of permitting police to draw blood from an unconscious motorist who had already parked his van and was walking about. So, the Supreme Swampers themselves are goons and thugs, in my view. The Supreme Thugs is really what they are.

But back to Supreme Thug Brett Kavanaugh, in at least 3 “national security” (sic) cases Kavanaugh rubber-stamped the holding of terrorism suspects without charge or actual suspicion or evidence at the Guantanamo prison. (al-Bihani v. Obama, Uthman v. Obama, and Omar v. McHugh.) He might as well be an employee of the CIA. So, what if Gubmint suspected you conservatives of “insurrection” or “domestic terrorism,” for example, you want their goons abducting you without evidence or warrants and to be imprisoned indefinitely? You want that? Duh, conservatives.

Conservatives defended Kavanaugh in his nomination battle, but they don’t realize that Kavanaugh is a staunch “social justice” defender of Title IX. As he stated before the Senate Judiciary Committee, “Title IX helped make girls’ and women’s sports equal. And I see that law’s legacy every night when I walk into my house, as my daughters are getting back from lacrosse or basketball or hockey practice.” So obviously he is clueless as to the abuses of Title IX to enable false accusations of hapless males especially in college. Duh, “conservatives.”

Speaking of “social justice” (sic), the Supreme Swamp also shows what unprincipled gutless wonders they are in their attempting to defend a baker who refused to bake a cake for a gay wedding, but for the wrong reasons, a decision based on anything but the private property rights they should be upholding but seem to have no clue as to what that actually is.

And why didn’t the Supreme Bureaucrats overturn the “Defense of Marriage Act,” or any of the states’ impositions or state referendums on protecting or forbidding gay marriage? Why do legislatures or CONgress get themselves involved with the people’s private matters? As I wrote in this article, you own your own life and have a right to form whatever contracts with others you want, as long as it’s voluntary. Marriage is none of the State’s damn business!

The gutless Supreme Apparatchiks also showed how they view freedom of the Press by declining to hear journalist James Risen’s case on protecting a confidential source. They obediently and pathologically defend the national security state no matter what. But, they merely reflect the Amerikan True Believers. Oh, well.

And on freedom of speech, the “Justices” (sic) all oppose free speech when the other Party is the one being opposed, with socialism-dreaming “liberal” Elena Kagan possibly being the worst of them.

I’m sure the sheeple Democrats and Republicans would go running to the Supreme Nannies to get their permission on whether the people of the states can make use of the 10th Amendment to nullify federal edicts.

But, real Americans will nullify fascist orders and intrusions whether the Supreme Bureaucrats like it or not.

Tom Woods wrote a terrific book on the history of nullification in America and how it should be used currently:  Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century. Woods addresses objections to nullification on this page. (And see this, this, and this.)

I wish I could advocate “packing the Supreme Court” with libertarians and voluntaryists who believe in the non-aggression principle, private property rights, self-ownership, freedom of contract and freedom of association, but that’s not realistic.

No, the answer is to UNpack the Supreme Court and “throw the bums out,” along with the rest of the horrible central planning apparatus in criminal Washington. You bet.

Against Judge Amy Coney Barrett

In her testimony to be confirmed the next U.S. Supreme Court Justice, Judge Amy Coney Barrett said she doesn’t have an “agenda,” and will judge cases based on the “law.”

Well, there are thousands and thousands of “laws” on the books that are unjust or bad laws, and they shouldn’t exist. I want judges who come to the side of the individual, who come to the side of whoever’s life the enforcement of such bad laws is criminally violating.

And of course that applies to unlawful, unconstitutional executive orders such as orders without due process by fascist governors that businesses must shut down, people must stay inside, people may not gather in groups, or that people must wear useless, ineffective masks that cause oxygen deprivation, anxiety and other psychological issues.

So, regarding terrible, unjust “laws” and unconstitutional executive orders issued by fascist governors and mayors, Judge Barrett sided with the other two schnooks in her three-judge panel of the 7th Circus approving Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s unconstitutional lockdown orders and limits on gatherings.

Judge Barrett sides with the government diktats here and opposes liberty, freedom of assembly, and due process. She also seems to go along with the official COVID narrative, a false narrative if there ever was one.

I want Supreme Court “Justices” who side with those who aren’t buying the official COVID narrative that the mainstream media morons have been propagandizing without question, just as we need those who aren’t buying the official 9/11 narrative or any other official narrative. People who understand that government bureaucrats are inherently liars and shouldn’t be believed.

Speaking of useless, ineffective masks, a recent CDC study found that 71% of patients testing positive for COVID-19 had “always” worn the masks, and 14% of the infected wore them “often.” Does Judge Barrett know this? (Probably not. She probably relies on mainstream “news” media for “news” while the real news gets further censored by Fakebook and Twitter. But I digress.

As Chuck Baldwin noted, based on her previous opinions it looks like Judge Barrett will rubber-stamp the COVID police state and forced vaccines, and probably the surveillance state as well, i.e. obediently rubber-stamping the government against our rights and civil liberties. Because gullible Amy is a typical “good citizen” who believes what the government and its bureaucrats tell us, as repeated by the mainstream media morons.

They’re mostly the same, these statists, and their decisions can be predictable. (As I wrote in December of 2018 regarding the swamp creature AG Bill Barr, there will not be any indictments of Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Yates, McCabe, etc., at least I am not holding my breath. And it looks like I was right.)

What we really need is to abolish the “Supreme” Court, i.e. Supreme Bureaucrats, because a society dependent on the word of 9 robed apparatchiks as far as whether people may or may not live their lives freely and unmolested by bureaucrats and their armed goons is a society of “sheeple.”

But, if we must have a U.S. “Supreme” Court, we would be better off if they erred on the side of the individual, and on the side of one’s rights as recognized by the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights, and on the side of one’s justly owned property.

Instead, we have apparatchiks who err on the side of the State, and who don’t want to “second guess” the wise judgment of the police, as well as the CIA, NSA and all those other agencies that are not authorized by the U.S. Constitution to begin with.

For example, if a case is a lawsuit by an individual against the CIA for violating the rights of the individual, I want the “Supreme” Court Justice to rule that the CIA was not even authorized by the Constitution in the first place, and that it be abolished. Throw the case out! (Of course, the obedient sheeple who are indoctrinated to believe that the “national security” bureaucrats in Washington have the interests of the people at heart would go nuts if their beloved CIA or NSA were let go.)

And also, in many cases it shouldn’t matter what the details of the case are. For instance, if there is a dispute between an individual and the IRS, it doesn’t matter what specific bureaucratic laws have been disobeyed by the individual serf, or the details of the case. The Justice should recognize the criminality of an agency demanding someone’s funds or earnings in the absence of a voluntary contract, or demanding one’s private, personal information such as one’s employment or compensation matters that are none of the government’s business. If the U.S. Constitution needs to be cited, then it doesn’t even matter if the dubious 16th Amendment authorizes an income theft and an IRS. The unconstitutionality of the IRS racket and its bureaucrats can be cited by the “Justice” by bringing up the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, and the Ninth Amendment as well.

And the “War on Drugs” needs to be “overturned” as well. The “Supreme” Court upheld the government police breaking into someone’s home, terrorizing the people there and arresting and abducting them, because the police smelled marijuana and/or heard the toilet flushing. An 8-1 decision with the “liberals” (except Ruth Bader Ginsburg) joining the majority of the authoritarian neanderthals. They’re useless.

All laws and government bureaucracies intruding into the people’s private decisions regarding what they ingest are unjust laws. Who owns your body? If you own your body then you decide and control what you may or may not, or will or will not, put into your own body. Prohibition laws violate your right of self-ownership. This also applies to forced vaccine mandates as well.

But if the government owns “your” body, then of course the government decides for you and controls what you may or may not put into “your” body as well as the government may inflict whatever “medicines” including vaccines (or whatever poisons it chooses to call “medicine”) into you, involuntarily.

What kind of “Supreme” Court Justice would approve of such a society, such a life of serfdom to live? That’s not the kind of “Justice” I would want on a “Supreme” Court.

Replace Judge Amy Coney Barrett as a nominee, who says she “has no agenda,” with someone who does have an agenda, one that protects the individual from the criminal intrusions of the rulers, bureaucrats and armed police.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg Has Died

To further complicate the 2020 presidential election campaign, Supreme Bureaucrat Ruth Bader Ginsburg has finally kicked the bucket, after suffering 20 years or more of cancers and other illnesses.

Trump wants to nominate a replacement “justice,” and Democrats want Trump to wait until after the election, “after the people have voted.” But the people have voted, in 2016, and the current presidential term still has 4 months to go. So there.

Now, as far as I’m concerned, Ginsburg should not be replaced, and the remaining “justices” (sic)  should all be dismissed, forthwith. They all suck. They are all rubber-stampers for the State.

Rarely does the High Court rule in favor of the individual and individual rights, private property rights, voluntary association and voluntary contract.

There was one decision that I can think of in which Ginsburg voted the right way, an 8-1 decision and she was the lone dissent. The 8 nazis voted in favor of government police violently breaking into people’s homes, terrorizing them and arresting them because of the State’s “war on drugs,” because the police “smelled marijuana” and heard “evidence being destroyed.”

Evidence of WHAT? Someone smoking marijuana in his own home? There is no crime there. There is no victim there. Sadly, the other “liberals” on the High Court agreed with the drug nazis and disagreed with Ginsburg who cited that dusty old Fourth Amendment.

But her vote in that case certainly was not a vote in favor of private property rights, as she also voted with the majority in the Kelo vs. New London case, in which the High Court allowed for private developers to steal private property, aided and abetted by local government schnooks, on behalf of private interests and not on behalf of the “public” that the Fifth Amendment demands.

So in general, Ginsburg was awful, voting to approve government fascism in other ways, such as ObamaCare’s mandate and other horrible rulings against the rights of the people and their property. In the end, with few exceptions such as the aforementioned police-marauder drug case, Ginsburg was just another pinko commie bureaucrat. Oh, well.

Further Leftist Hysteria and More Reasons to Abolish the Supreme Court

Occasionally the Neocon Review has an informative article. This time the Review writes about a recent New York Times-published accusation about Supreme Bureaucrat Brett Kavanaugh from his much younger years.

The allegation, Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly write in a New York Times story adapted from their forthcoming anti-Kavanaugh book, is this: “We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. Ramirez’s allegation. A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student.”

It looks like Pogrebin and Kelly’s new book is a reaction to Molly Hemingway and Carrie Severino’s book, Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court. But I could be wrong.

But in the Review article, we learn that

The book isn’t released until Tuesday, but Mollie Hemingway got a copy, and she writes on Twitter: “The book notes, quietly, that the woman Max Stier named as having been supposedly victimized by Kavanaugh and friends denies any memory of the alleged event.” Omitting this fact from the New York Times story is one of the worst cases of journalistic malpractice in recent memory.

Hence the “New York Slimes.” Now, frankly I couldn’t care less whether the activists impeach Kavanaugh or smear him or libel or slander him. As a lower court judge, Kavanaugh rubber-stamped many police state abuses, and his reading of the Fourth Amendment shows that he has not read the Fourth Amendment. Kavanaugh has stated that the Fourth Amendment “allows governmental searches and seizures without individualized suspicion when the Government demonstrates a sufficient ‘special need’ – that is, a need beyond the normal need for law enforcement – that outweighs the intrusion on individual liberty…”

So, Kavanaugh sees things in the Fourth Amendment that just aren’t there, in the same way a drunk sees pink elephants. Can you see just how far government judicial bureaucrats will go to excuse and rationalize the government’s criminal violations of the right of the people to be secure in their persons, their houses, their papers, and their effects?

Kavanaugh is a judicial rubber-stamper of the surveillance state, Gitmo, the War State, and the CIA, and really a corrupt apparatchik of the bureaucracy and the national security state. Kavanaugh and the other Justices (sic) on the Supreme Parasites wholeheartedly reject the principles of liberty of America’s founders. So why do we need those bureaucrats?

As Ryan McMaken of the Mises Institute has referred to them, the Supremes are the “American version of the Soviet politburo.” But liberals and conservatives need them to aid and abet those political activists’ shoving their social agendas down our throats!

And the reason that Dr. Christine Ballsey Ford and the others were attempting to smear Kavanaugh at last year’s confirmation hearings was not because they are concerned about his statist, police-state views. Those people on the left couldn’t care less about civil liberties. Just look at all the intrusions into our civil liberties imposed on innocent people by Obama with ObamaCare, NDAA, the drug war and his being the “deporter in chief.” And look at all the intrusions each and every one of the current Democrat candidates for President wants to impose on us. Forcing all of us into a one-size-fits-all Medicare for All scheme, confiscating firearms from people who have not harmed anyone, and more tax-stealing.

No, what the people on the left are hysterical over is abortion! That’s all they care about, along with their obsessions with race and skin color and their brainwashed sexual-perversions agenda. But no, it’s abortion. They are terrified that the Supreme Soviets in Washington will overturn Roe v. Wade. Which should be overturned because it’s a BAD decision.

The activists on the left are after Kavanaugh or any other possibly anti-abortion judge is because they have been brainwashed to believe that abortion is their “Rite of Passage,” and that all those millions and millions of girls and young women MUST have an abortion i.e. kill their offspring as a Rite of Passage. Generations now of women are brainwashed with this sick anti-human social agenda.

As Dr. Bernard Nathanson, a founding member of “National Abortion Rights Action League,” or NARAL, wrote in his and his group’s psy-opping the Supreme Court in the 1970s to get them to rule favorably in Roe v. Wade,

We aroused enough sympathy to sell our program of permissive abortion by fabricating the number of illegal abortions done annually in the U.S. The actual figure was approaching 100,000 but the figure we gave to the media repeatedly was 1,000,000. Repeating the big lie often enough convinces the public. The number of women dying from illegal abortions was around 200 – 250 annually. The figure constantly fed to the media was 10,000. These false figures took root in the consciousness of Americans convincing many that we needed to crack the abortion law. Another myth we fed to the public through the media was that legalizing abortion would only mean that the abortions taking place illegally would then be done legally. In fact, of course, abortion is now being used as a primary method of birth control in the U.S. and the annual number of abortions has increased by 1500% since legalization….

I am often asked what made me change my mind. How did I change from prominent abortionist to pro-life advocate? In 1973, I became director of obstetrics of a large hospital in New York City and had to set up a perinatal research unit, just at the start of a great new technology which we now use every day to study the fetus in the womb. A favorite pro-abortion tactic is to insist that the definition of when life begins is impossible; that the question is a theological or moral or philosophical one, anything but a scientific one. Fetology makes it undeniably evident that life begins at conception and requires all the protection and safeguards that any of us enjoy.

Why, you may well ask, do some American doctors who are privy to the findings of fetology, discredit themselves by carrying out abortions? Simple arithmetic: at $300.00 a time 1.55 million abortions means an industry generating $500,000,000 annually, of which most goes into the pocket of the physician doing the abortion. It is clear that permissive abortion is purposeful destruction of what is undeniably human life. It is an impermissible act of deadly violence. One must concede that unplanned pregnancy is a wrenchingly difficult dilemma. But to look for its solution in a deliberate act of destruction is to trash the vast resourcefulness of human ingenuity, and to surrender the public weal to the classic utilitarian answer to social problems.

So, it’s all about abortion. The people on the left are obsessed with abortion and killing their offspring. They will lie and make things up, about medical statistics, about judicial nominees and government judges.

I hope that, if another Justice (sic) retires or dies in the next year or two, Trump will this time nominate Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett. In her own nomination hearings for the lower court, Judge Barrett was the target of an anti-religion grilling by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Shady Pines). Feinstein said that Judge Barrett’s decisions may be too influenced by her religious “dogma.” Barrett is a religious Catholic.

Wikipedia indicates some of Judge Barrett’s decisions have so far been pro-Second Amendment, protecting the Fourth Amendment, not protective of a police officer’s “qualified immunity,” and not favorable to Title IX (involving the  egregious violation of a male student’s right to due process in a sexual assault allegation).

I really hope that a Supreme Bureaucrat leaves the High Court so that we can get an Amy Coney Barret nomination, and watch the fireworks, see the hysterical abortion fanatics make fools of themselves just as they have been doing regarding Brett Kavanaugh. Such a nomination will drag those lefty wackos out of their respective psychiatric hospitals and give us some good entertainment, that’s for sure.

So, we are getting it from all sides of the statist coin here. The leftists with their sick agendas and political correctness fascism, and we are also getting it from the so-called conservatives with their police-state fascism as well.

We really need to completely abolish the Supreme Court and restore the Tenth Amendment. And we need to get some kind of movement going in which if government orders you to do something you don’t voluntarily agree to you just don’t do it, and there are no consequences, because you have not harmed anyone by not following the government’s fascist orders (including participating in “Medicare for All”), and at the same time, if the government prohibits you from doing something or owning or possessing something that is not a harm to others or is not anyone’s else’s business then you just have it anyway and there are no consequences, because your disobeying the government’s prohibition of this or that has not harmed anyone.

Get rid of the Supreme Court. It is truly one of America’s and freedom’s worst enemies.

The Supreme Bureaucrats’ Term Is Finally Over (And Don’t Come Back!)

Five fascists on the U.S. Supreme Court, a.k.a. the Supreme Bureaucrats, have decided that the government police do not need a warrant to draw blood from an unconscious person suspected of drunk driving. The arguments against the policy are based on the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Drawing blood from someone without his consent violates one’s right to be secure in one’s person, houses, papers and effects.

The “High Court” cites the “Exigent Circumstances” doctrine. However, the Fourth Amendment does not refer to any “exigent circumstances.”

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

I don’t see “exigent circumstances” written in there. In the case argued before the court, the flatfeet arrested a guy who wasn’t even driving but had already parked his van and was walking by a lake. So they were then taking him to a hospital to draw his blood there, apparently, but he passed out in the police car. They had already given him a breathalyzer, which is also unconstitutional because of its unreliability, but wasn’t that good enough for them?

Seizing someone’s blood is a much more invasive seizure. This case is just another “camel’s nose in the tent” thing. (There have been a lot of those in recent years.)

And according to James Bovard, the Supreme Bureaucrats also ruled in favor of government secrecy by allowing certain business records that pertain to government handouts to be kept secret.

In other news, the shrieking imbecilic parasites a.k.a. Democrats had their first debate last night, and their second debate is tonight. Were they asked about the Fourth Amendment? It is doubtful that these politicians know anything about or even care about the Fourth Amendment. We know they have contempt for the First Amendment, with all their fellow leftist comrades banning of speech and shouting down those with opposing points of view, their censorship and fake news. And their contempt for the Second Amendment, with their ignorant calls for even more gun control that we know merely disarms law-abiding citizens and doesn’t prevent criminals and psychopaths from getting their guns anyway, because criminals and psychopaths don’t obey the law, duh.

But this particular group is probably the worst group of very loud, screeching demagogues I’ve ever seen. Eventually, I really believe that people can be convinced to support the libertarian way of life that promotes non-aggression, voluntary contracts and decentralization. Especially with this crowd of communists and the moron Trump. People will REJECT government central planning as the way to have a society. Eventually.

Nullification, Decentralization, Separation, Divorce, Dissolve, Dismiss the Regime

Why are many of the people on the left of such an authoritarian mentality? They are so authoritarian in their worship of the federal government and its illicit powers and feared losing the power so much they disrupted the Brett Kavanaugh hearings, and engaged in so much obvious cheating during the recent mid-term elections. (Not that Republicans weren’t engaged in cheating or at least questionable behavior as well, such as in Georgia.)

During the Kavanaugh hearings, Sen. Cruella Harris began interrupting Chairman Grassfed as soon as he began the hearings, and it went downhill from there, especially with “Dr.” Ford who “Must Be Believed At All Times!” and Kavanaugh screaming how much he loves beer and telling us what a moron he is by keeping calendars going back to 1982. (Who does that?)

Meanwhile, informed people with a brain actually objected to Kavanaugh based on his terrible rulings rubber-stamping tyranny, and his being a corrupt bureaucrat. But no, the fanatics on the left are concerned about abortion. That’s what they care about. And “Free Health Care for ALL!”and all that.

The fanatics believe that the Supreme Court is the God of government, that those 9 robed bureaucrats have the absolute final say on our freedom (and our enslavement). So it’s so important that they have to interrupt hearings, harass senators who voted for Kavanaugh, and cheat in elections. What a life.

But, as Tom Woods points out in a recent article, especially in his quoting of James Madison, the federal judicial branch is the final decision-maker on constitutional conflicts only between the branches of the federal government (judicial, legislative and executive), but NOT the final decision-maker on conflicts between the federal government and the states.

As Woods has explained in the past, the states, after all, created the federal government, not the other way around. The people of the states are the “boss” of the feds, and the agents of the federal government are the states’ “employees.” Unfortunately, that has been turned around by authoritarians (especially reinforced by Lincoln) who believe that whatever the federal government says, goes. “You will report to us your earnings, where you work or whom you employ, we will take a portion of your wealth whether you like it or not, we will spy on you and know the personal details of your private life and you will not know what we are up to, we’ll just mark everything ‘classified,’ and so on…”

So that stuff that the bureaucrats in Washington have been doing, that fools like Brett Kavanaugh have been rubber-stamping out of loyalty to the Regime and its racket, is unconstitutional, illicit, and criminal. This is why the writers of the Bill of Rights included the Tenth Amendment, which reads, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

Which is not very well written, by the way. It should have explicitly stated that the people of the states shall nullify any federal government rule, law or order on them whose enforcement they conclude would be in violation of their liberty, persons or property. Otherwise, the Founders needlessly created a federal government and ratified a questionable Constitution, going against the very principles of their Declaration of Independence.

Thomas Jefferson and others endorsed that idea of nullification which many people on the left now ignorantly perceive as having to do with racism or “slavery,” even though some states engaged in nullification during the Civil War period when they nullified Fugitive Slave Laws (which Lincoln strongly endorsed and enforced, by the way).

As Woods wrote in an essay in his Liberty Classroom, “nullification was used against slavery, as when northern states did everything in their power to obstruct the enforcement of the fugitive-slave laws, with the Supreme Court of Wisconsin going so far as to declare the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 unconstitutional and void.  In Ableman v. Booth (1859), the U.S. Supreme Court scolded it for doing so.  In other words, modern anti-nullification jurisprudence has its roots in the Supreme Court’s declarations in support of the Fugitive Slave Act.  Who’s defending slavery here?”

But as I wrote in this article, we are now slaves of the federal government.

Incidentally, for those who are interested, Tom Woods wrote a terrific book on the history of nullification in America and how it should be used currently:  Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century.

Concocting a centralized, ruling federal government was a mistake made by the Revolutionaries. Besides the social fascists and authoritarians on the left, now we have a Donald Trump who claims that his job is “running the country,” which, as Richard Ebeling pointed out in this very informative new article, is a “claim to abrogate the liberty of each and every member of that society to have the freedom to run their own life as they peacefully and honestly see fit in voluntary and mutually agreed-upon association with their fellow human beings for their respective betterment as they define it.”

One of the latest examples of the absurdity of this centralized power apparatus in Washington is that the bureaucrats are going to bring criminal charges against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, because he provided the means for whistleblowers to expose the criminality of the federal bureaucrats and their goons. Whistleblowers such as Bradley Manning with the Iraq War Logs, the Afghanistan War Logs, the diplomatic cables leaks, the “Collateral Murder” video, and all the rest.

As I wrote above, the criminals of the regime classify whatever they can to avoid embarrassing disclosures, evade transparency, get away with murder, and punish whistleblowers. Bradley Manning, by the way, was viciously persecuted by Obama’s regime, not Bush, with 3 years of solitary confinement pre-trial and a kangaroo trial and sentencing. (Although I think the main reason the SJW-in-Chief Barack Obama then commuted Manning’s 35-year sentence was because Manning is a “transgender.” Those are the things Obama et al. really care about.)

You see, as many people have noted now in the Obama DOJ and FBI’s surveillance abuses and how the Obama administration was so bad with civil liberties and freedom of speech and his war on the Press, we now have Cruella Harris and Pocahontas and all their moonbat followers drooling to take the apparatus of power back so THEY can once again use the spying powers against enemies and enforce their beloved police state on the people.

So, as I had written several times now, including this article from 8 years ago, the Amerikan sheeple need to let go of their dependence on the regime in Washington and we must go our separate ways.

More on the New Authoritarian “Justice,” and Sexual Assault, Civil Unrest

Donald Trump continues to make campaign appearances on behalf of Republican candidates. In a recent appearance he was declaring how great his new Supreme Bureaucrat Brett Kavanaugh is, with his supporters cheering enthusiastically. Now, those cheering supporters are either ignorant of Brett Kavanaugh’s decisions, or they agree with them, which is probably the case.

And no, Kavanaugh is not “brilliant,” he is himself ignorant (or really dumb). As I have written several times now, Kavanaugh imagines that the Fourth Amendment has things in it that just aren’t there. He wrote, “The Fourth Amendment allows governmental searches and seizures without individualized suspicion when the Government demonstrates a sufficient ‘special need’…” such as involving drugs or border checkpoints. Okay, Justice (sic), where does it say those things in the Fourth Amendment?

That Amendment states: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

I don’t see …”unless the government demonstrates a sufficient ‘special need'” or any listing of exceptions, such as “drugs.” So, like most authoritarians who just want to empower the government police to raid the homes and businesses of innocent people for specious reasons, Kavanaugh is just making things up in his rubber-stamping of the police state to satisfy his own ideological leanings. An authoritarian is someone who believes that specific rules that are set for those in power may be broken based on the whim of the enforcers.

And it’s amazing the talk radio ditto-heads who have been complaining about the Obama FBI and DOJ abusing their FISA spying authority to go after political opponents, and repeatedly citing the “Fourth Amendment,” yet having wet dreams over their newest police-statist Kavanaugh that they love so much. So please Sean Hannity (and Rand Paul, too!) shut up about the “Fourth Amendment.” These “conservatives” generally support police “stop-and-frisk” policies without suspicion of an individual, policies that Trump was recently extolling to the cheers of rabid government police chiefs from across the country.

Now, given that Kavanaugh supports such an authoritarian police state and rubber-stamps the unconstitutional Guantanamo prison that exists so the feds can sidestep the Constitution they swore an oath to support and defend, it would not surprise me if he really was the one who Christine Ford Blasey was victimized by of sexual assault. Of course, I’m not accusing him, just saying it wouldn’t surprise me, given his supporting brute force by government against innocent people, by police against presumably innocent people without suspicion, and so on.

And that’s another thing. All this about sexual assault and the idea that one teenage boy might do that to a teenage girl. If that ever does happen, I think that parents need to raise their girls to bravely go and report such violence against them to the police, at that time. And not wait years later. I know that they were drunk and the victim might not remember, and repressed memories until years later and all that. But if the victim is aware at that time, she needs to report the assailant.

Another thing parents need to do is raise their girls with knowledge of self-defense. Whether learning karate or judo, or having mace or a gun, or even poking an assailant in the eyes. Am I all wrong on this? I might be.

And speaking of self-defense, in the alternative news (that the fake news mainstream media sweeps under the rug), we are hearing about antifa thugs going into streets and harassing motorists and pedestrians, and maybe even worse than just harassing. If someone is the victim of an assault the victim needs to know how to fight back. I am very distressed hearing about these antifa thugs targeting innocent people, and hope to hear about someone fighting back, or even shooting back to protect themselves. Glenn Beck this morning played some audio of those things, and he’s saying it might be the beginning of a “civil war.” I hope not. Because if so, those people who are fighting back (against the ones who are initiating the aggression) will be the government’s victims in its arms confiscations, its police breaking into and entering private homes and stealing weapons to make innocent people defenseless. And Brett Kavanaugh will rubber-stamp all that, given his record of neanderthal authoritarianism.

Amerikan Loony-Tunes

Well, we now have another authoritarian neanderthal on the U.S. Supreme Parasites, Brett Kavanaugh, who loves the Patriot Act, Gitmo, NSA spying on innocent people, TSA groping and molesting, warrantless and thus illegal police searches, and who is a drug warrior and militarist who will do what he can to help to strengthen the police state and the criminal national security state.

The people who hate Kavanaugh actually don’t care about the police state, illegal searches and seizures, and about the use of surveillance against political opponents. Many of them are aware that their fellow travelers from the Obama administration abused such powers and they actually endorse that. Left-wing activists are NOT a friend of civil liberties.

No, what the anti-Kavanaugh screechers care most about is abortion, gender and race, and the LGBT agenda. They want the federal government to have a lot of power including rubber-stampers on the Supreme Court to impose the social activists’ ways of life onto the rest of us or impose an acceptance of their deviancy and indecency. Imposing onto others is the activists’ main agenda. By the force of law.

So the leftists are going to try to impeach Kavanaugh, based on perjury or whatever they can do, just as they will try to impeach Donald Trump if the Democrats take control of Congress. They will continue following their opponents in elevators, restaurants, malls and offices and harassing them.

Meanwhile, the Senate Judiciary Committee is seriously looking at possible perjury charges against Kavanaugh’s high school-years accuser Christine Blasey Ford.

Now, there are those who don’t believe the “conspiracy theories” about Blasey Ford’s possible involvement with the CIA. But given her years and years of extensive psychological research into mind control and hypnosis, as well as her allegedly helping people to beat a polygraph test based on such research and experience, I don’t doubt it. Or she could be a useful idiot for the CIA as well as a useful idiot for the “MeToo” movement.

The skeptical Jacob Hornberger asks, “Why in the world would the CIA want to block the appointment of someone who, based on his conservative background and ideology, could reasonably be relied upon to rubber-stamp anything and everything the CIA and the rest of the national-security establishment do?

Well, we know that the CIA in general is not rational. They have been fixated Cold Warriors who can’t let go of the “Soviet threat,” who have been involved in Gitmo torture to get false confessions from innocent and uninvolved detainees even though the outcome is that such tortured detainees then join the militant forces against the U.S. for the first time. And we know that many apparatchiks in CIA, NSA, FBI, etc. didn’t like Donald Trump’s criticizing them and their wars abroad during the campaign and they have been trying feverishly to get him out of the White House. They are very irrational parasites who will do anything to keep their grasp on government powers and the public trough. So, they would try to prevent Trump from getting more Justices (sic) on the “High” Court, just in the name of being obsessively anti-Trump, even if it goes against their agenda.

I hope the activists do impeach Brett Kavanaugh, and then they can get Ruth Buzzi Ginsburg, John “Comrade” Roberts, and all the rest of them.