Jan 6. Supreme Court case addendum

O.K. I have read a bit about how some of the judges asked questions in regards to this case. And I also did a deeper dive into the actual law.

First up the part of the law that is shown most in news report from the Sarbannes Oxley actually was a reform to part of an existing set of laws about tampering with evidence and witnesses in official proceedings. Which I read in full. And it clearly states that government proceedings are included. And it seemed to me that not only the reform (part c) but some of the previous law(part) should apply to the people who on Jan 6 attempted to stop or delay the certifying into the record of the presidential election results from the states by the vice president. It did not need to be successful to be a criminal. But there was a delay. Hence it was partially successful. And they were there also in an attempt to intimidate Mike Pence to not certify also a crime under this set of laws.

So, looking back on the questions of some of the justices I was quite confused that some seemed to be leaning towards finding a way to say that the actions on the 6th did not fall under this. Such as how broad is the law, Would pulling a fire alarm qualify and if so isn’t a 20 year sentence too long? Of course the second part of that is totally disingenuous since it is not an automatic sentence of 20 years it up to 20 years. And so far no one charged under these laws has received close to 20 years.

And then there was the whole you have to read the whole thing and connect them to see how they make a group. But they seemed at that time to be only reading the reformed part. Not the whole law. And saying it had to include a crime dealing with tampering with evidence and paperwork. But if you actually look deeper like did and find that that part of the act is a reform to a bigger law about tampering with witness and officials proceedings in general then this argument seems pointless.

And the pulling of the firearm and the asking about protesters at a meeting or a sit-in. Well those have always been handled differently at different times. Some have been left to protest. Others have been arrested for disturbing the peace. If the Supreme Court feels that they can’t trust local authorities to figure out when it is appropriate to apply certain laws then do we have a functioning society at all? I do fear that we don’t have a logically functioning Supreme Court right now.

Taking Aim at the Babies

The most heinous talking point some Republicans try and push in the abortion fight is that Democrats support infanticide. Abortions so late in pregnancy that the baby is born alive then killed. At first what can one say.

If it was born alive does it even qualify as an abortion and belong in this debate at all. Shouldn’t it just be a murder.

But then of course me being me my mind got rolling. And I got researching to see if my thoughts were backed up with some facts.

And it turns out it is the republicans in congress and in state houses that have attempted and sometimes succeeded in infanticide and other murder by denial from afar. Because they have time after time voted and sometimes succeeded in ending coverage for low income individuals/families of medicaid, aca insurance and CHIP. All these programs have reduced mortality rates of mothers to be during pregnancy and childbirth and infants and children. When Republicans vote to end them or reduce access to them they are pretty much saying they don’t care that it will mean women and infants and children will die do to inability to afford access to health care. They also have tried to cut in half WIC. Nutrition for pregnant mothers.

Is it really more important to give e a tax break to a millionaire or a billionaire or multinational businesses who already barely pay any taxes. Who won’t die if they don’t get the tax cut.

They say every life matters. But they vote like they don’t give a damn.

Just a Quick Trump Legal Thought

This one is about his case coming up in NY for paying off the porn star to keep quiet before the 2016 election. AS usual he is claiming it is all a big nothing burger that Biden is behind to keep him from beating his in the election.

But the problem here is that when his ex Lawyer Michael Cohen was convicted of the same crime and was sent to jail during Trumps presidency he didn’t save his long time lawyer from this travesty of justice with a pardon did he. No he left him in jail. Aren’t pardons there to right the wrongs of criminal justice and if Trump now says this whole she bang is just a witch hunt it would have to have been one then too. Which means he left his ex long time lawyer in jail to rot because he was mad at him even though supposedly Trump says no crime was committed. Not very Jesus or Christian of him.

So don’t believe Trump when he says the legal system in America is broken. He just means he can’t bend it to his 3will as much as he is used to.

After all he is still suing people. Mostly losing those cases before they even get to court. But I think in the past that was part of his m.o. but now he is going against bigger richer opponents so it’s not working out in his favor like it used to.

Pro Choice Plan B… Spread the Field

I’ve been doing a lot of reading and thinking this week with the new case before the Supreme Court in which a group of conservative doctors want to stop the fad approval of mifepristone for abortions. Especially through the mail. It does seem that it might fail because they are to actually being harmed, so have no right to be suing. But Alito and Thomas threw them a bone in the form of a tip to try the Comstock act next time.

If this was done and actually was put back in use could it be used only for this one thing? Because it covers pretty much all of reproductive information and porn and sex toys. All three of which are huge money making industries.

Then I read an article suggesting using an earlier court precedent that says the government has no standing to make laws in regards to how a family choses to live. In theory it might work. But it has huge problems for me. Since I suspect we have since it was put in place passed many laws contradictory to it that benefit both children and wives. Like child abuse and spousal rape.

My idea plays on a quote I saw from Alito which is the basis on the pro life movement that life starts at conception but he added that everything must be done to bring about this life no matter how small a chance it has to make it. I think that was the quote. I couldn’t find it again this morning.

And it is under that theory of life should be fought for no matter how small the chance of survival is part of my new plan. The second is I have always found that pro life people focus too much on fetuses. Except for the catholics. So I think we should hold them to their word that all lives should be fought for even if the other person who has to fight along doesn’t want to and the government will have to make them. One Example a child gets cancer put the parents insurance refuses to pay for the treatment because they say it is experimental and has a very low chance of success but is the Childs only hope. Then sue them to make them pay for it under the threat of a murder charge if they don’t and the child dies. This should happen any time insurance turns someone down with a fatal diagnosis but an available treatment that could offer a possible cure no matter how low the chances. After all the Supreme Court has already said that businesses have the same standings as citizens under the constitution.

If they don’t have insurance. Then sue the doctors that offer the treatments if they wont treat them. Or the hospitals if they won’t take them into their facilities. They shouldn’t be able to claim any kind of financial way out of this if women can’t.

Show the Supreme Court and Pro lifers that if they want Fetuses to be considered little teeny tiny humans than the rights they want them to have they have to give to the rest of us. The right to impose our chance to stay alive onto other un willing people that we may both physically and financially ruin. Even cause the death of.

Oh Washington State…

Today a defeay some voters had their day in court in an attempt to Keep Trump of the primary ballot here in my home state. And I have to admit as I was at first reading the online news story I was annoyed by the ruling to keep him on. If you read my blog you know I believe he clearly is in violation of the 14th amendment. But it was the argument made by the head of the Republican Party that was so mind blowing at first. He seemed to have thrown out as a reason to keep Trump on the fact that People like Trump had falsely accuse Barak Obama of having been born outside the USA and ineligible to be president. Uhm. But he wasn’t. And Trump at the very least is giving people some of which have actually been convicted of sedition comfort and support. Even calling them hostages these days. Hostages he has said he would free if he ends up president again. So one was a total lie and one is based in facts or at least words that are coming out of the mouth of the man who they want o put on the ballot.

Their second defense was that the party gets to choose who they want to be on the ballot. Now I don’t know the rules bout what exactly the secretary of state does and doesn’t do in regards to elections in this state. So I did an internet search. And I found that yes the political parties d get to put whom/who they want on the primary ballots and I could not find anywhere where the Secretary of State has to or can certify if the candidates meet the constitutional requirements. I would assume they do. But I could not find anywhere where it is spelled out. Maybe they take for granted that the political parties would not put someone ineligible on the ballot.

So the judge ruling that it was not their place to step in and change the secretaries decision was probably correct at this point.

Now, to those voters and any other Washington state voters I did not see any rules regarding the general election. Obviously we have a top 2 primary system, which I do not like veery much. Not sure f it applies to the presidential election or not. But you might want to give it another go. Since now the Republican Party will be removed from being the official party placing him on the ballot. The secretary will have to make a clear statement if he finds him eligible to run for president in the general election.

PS. I was happy or at least like finally someone is pointing out more politicians are in violation of the 14th amendment when congressmen Goldman? in congress yesterday moved to censure congresswoman Stefanik for violating it. He said he was finally pushed to far when she started referring to those convicted of violence on jan 6 as hostages. which is really ironic as she was the one who was so smug when she traded the college presidents for saying all anti jewish statements were context-dependent. I wonder how the family of the Israeli hostages feel about their family being compared to those convicted of participating on January 6. I don’t think there is any context that will explain it.

Ok Moral Conservatives Lets NOT BE Blinded by Your Success or Other Things.

I see on the news that people are like the congresswoman who questioned the university presidents is 1 for 2 and the conservatives are happy to be cleaning up the universities and getting white men back in their rightful places. Oh god what ever.

Right now we need to be pointing out yes we need to have higher standards all around. And I don’t mean Christian morals. I mean just lying in general. Doing whatever it takes to get your side the win. Or as Trump probably thinks do anything to avoid being a loser at anything.

And in my last post i stated if what Dr Gay had done would get a student in trouble so it should her. And more so as the president f the university.

Now don’t start the party. Because universities aren’t the top most place that need a moral cleaning. And It seems these conservatives say they wan to go after Presidents. Then I offer up one ex and trying to be future one Donald Trump.

Look at his business fraud trial. Where pretty much openly admits to submitting faulty financial statements to banks and the government for taxes and for insurance coverage. He says they came with a disclaimer but then also claims his celebrity added the unfounded amounts. But no ordinary citizen would get away with those excuses. And he has many failed businesses using his celebrity so its value is quite hit and miss.

And he has yet to provide I court or in a public forum any verifiable proof that the 2020 election was stolen or that he actually won. He has had 4 years numerous court cases and his own social network to make good on the promise of evidence but never has. Nor has any of his fellow co-conspirators. while even today people he even hired to find it come forward to say they couldn’t find it and told him so. And yet he keeps saying that he won. Which if it were so patiently to rile up his base and to raise money I would think this man were truly delusional.

But the problem is he is running to be PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

which in my estimation is more important than even president of university. and here is what the constitution says about the Presidents job.

The President is both the head of state and head of government of the United States of America, as well as Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces.

Under Article II of the Constitution, the President is responsible for the execution and enforcement of laws created by Congress. 

The Executive Office of the President (EOP) consists of the immediate staff to the President, along with entities such as the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of the United States Trade Representative.

So, if I follow the university President rule for staying in office or even being one how can Trump meet these requirements morally or legally even. A man who falsifies financial forms to his benefit which is illegal will be at the top of the legal law enforcement chain. That seems much bigger than what Dr Gay did. Then he put together a plot to seat false electors using some false government documents. Again. Morally can he lead law enforcement of the whole country after that? And then he fed his supporters a stream of lies and still does to this day. Which lead a large group of them to storm the capitol to try and physically stop the transfer of the presidency from him. And he sat on his butt for a could couple of hours doing nothing. Can he morally be the commander of the military or head of law enforcement when those police were being beat up in his name

Where are the conservative moralists who are so concerned about our Universities and their Presidents? Why are they not protecting the country from a totally immoral ex-president/ presidential candidate?

I know I get so tired of the republicans for their one sided bs. And I know that there are some on the left who do it too. And I call it out. I was fine with a good sensor of Bill Clinton for lying under oath during his deposition. We must hold people in high positions to high standards.

I am sorry if I’m getting annoying the world has got me down and it does seem bleak. I need to listen to some nice music and do some creative stuff.

Let’s go Cherry Picking, better known as the religious rights Love Hate relationship with science.

I just read an email I received from some annoying group I did not sign up with. It was about a boy who got in trouble for wearing a shirt to middle school saying there are only two sexes or genders. I can’t remember exactly now. But they claim it was his free speech reply to the school having pride celebrations. And they were supporting his free speech and anyway science supports that there are only two genders the article/email stated. I at first did wonder are these the same free speech people who cant have books in their libraries that other kids might read peacefully by themselves about issues they believe in. But that is not about science free speech and another post.

So here they are saying science backs them up. I’m not so sure it truly does and I will get to that further down.

But first. A lot of these people against LGBQT rights take issue with some basic science like how old the earth is. That we descend from apes or even come from out of the ocean. How about some climate change deniers? Or Covid deniers? Or the Politician who thought women could keep themselves for getting pregnant from a rape?

Back to two genders. Yes there are two chromosomes x and y that affect sexual development in humans. But we do know that in one extreme case in gestation the y chromosome can not work in an x/y baby and the male sexual organs do not develop normally leading to a condition? called hermaphroditism. Now a days it may not be seen as a condition by those with it. But it does show that the x Y chromosomes do not work simply. They like all of our genes are affected by many different things going on in our bodies and while we are gestating in our mother their bodies too. After all our dan is made up of only a t g c. Like all other animals as far as I know and yet we have so much diversity with those 4 little letters. So it seems foolish to think that x and y would one produce 2 locked in place narrow outcomes. Especially when we have people throughout history all over the world telling us other wise.

True scientist are ever learning and evolve with new information. While people who are devout in their belief in an unchanging unknowable being can’t seem to take in new information. Or there are those who claim they are devout and use this to get ahead in life while using their fellow devotees against others in ways that hurt people who are doing the same things as the users.

Example: The head of the Florida GOP and his wife who claim to be anti LGBQT but ow after the husband has been accused of rape now admit to having threesomes with the female accuser.

I know I get off track a lot. But the I read things it just makes me go why do people do these things and why do others listen to these people and not question all of this.

The New US Civics being Taught in Some Red States have a Problem.

I read an article today about the remaking of civics classes in Florida and North Dakota. It is mostly being overseen by a Religious college. And the main tenants are be proud of America, the constitution is based on Jewish/Christian morals so learn to teach the Bible. Communism and socialism are bad. Memorization is good. Learning critical thinking and thinking for ones self is bad.

So here I go being bad and thinking for myself. If the constitution and the founding of America is rooted in the bible and Christianity and people who go to church are often tithed or give money regularly to their churches, who then pay their pastors or other religious leaders and staff, but then use a lot of it to do charitable work. Charitable work being mostly to help those in need. So the church takes money from everyone then spends a good portion of it on a smaller number of people in need. They don’t distribute evenly to every parishioner equally. Or use it all to benefit the whole. Hmmm. This sounds an awful lot like socialism. And if our country was founded partly on the ideals of Christianity a socialist construct why then are we teaching that socialism is a bad thing. Communism was bad and has pretty much failed everywhere. But in Europe types of Socialism is going as strong as we are.

Our founders did not want the church and state to mix but the current right wing desperately are trying to get religion into the government at all levels. As seen in this New Civics. Except when it comes to the obvious fact that religion is a socialist system a lot of the time. In fact in the past people would say let churches handle charity not the government. But if they want to mix the two then they have to face the fact socialism is not a bad thing or religion as they push it is a bad thing. Or mixing church and state is a bad thing.

This argument does not deal with the corruption of false prophets. Who steal from believers and live large off the prayers of others.

What does Michael Oher want?

I felt bad when I read that he had been unknowingly in a conservatorship for 20 years when he thought he had been adopted. But the more I read the more complicated it gets. It seems he knew he wasn’t really able to be adopted and was in something called a conservatorship. But that neither the family nor the legal system fully explained what it was.

And putting it in place to get him to the University of Tennessee was ok. But then no one removed it? Because sadly it isn’t really an adoption it is really the removal of a persons total legal rights.

But if what Michael is most upset about is the money from the movie which it does appear the family did not get very much of the conservatorship may help. He claims he did not sign a contract he had with the studio that made the film giving away his life story for free for life. That someone forged it. Stop it. It doesn’t matter. That contract can’t stand because you were and are under conservatorship and legally unable to enter a contract. So your lawyer, and please find a great entertainment contract one, needs to nullify it. And go after the people with the big bucks if what you are after is the money. But realize this also means every single contract you have signed as an adult is in question.

These are all technicalities. After all you did go to college which would seem to mean one would not need a conservatorship. But sadly you have been under one. Maybe use it to get your fair share from the studio who signed you to a terrible contract in the first place and ate notorious for using bookkeeping practices to never have net proceeds.

Just some thoughts.

All the Pits in Hypocritical Defense of Trump and Meadows Move of Venue.

I know I use this space to dump out all the stuff that get stuck bouncing around in my head. And lately it’s a lot of stuff about politics. Or at least people who “work” in politics. And societal ails that need all to solve them.

Today it is a big dump of Trumpish fodder.

Lets start with Mr. Meadows who wants to go form Ga courts to federal courts. One would suppose in hopes of the case been tossed or a future pardon. At first blush his insistence he was just doing his job as chief of staff of the president t scheduling phone calls and such seemed plausible. If I must admit a bit frustrating. Then I actually listened to part of the call he scheduled between the president and Mr Rafensberger. Which as president he was not actually talking to him. Because the president of the united States had no standing to be calling this man to be talking Mr R about the election and the results which the fbi had concluded were fine. So obviously this was candidate Trump on the phone. So when I then heard Mr Meadows voice speak and participate in the conversation I realized he had not just scheduled the call but was an active participant in candidate Trumps call he was no longer working on behalf of the us government. And I suspect this will apply to more than just the phone call the acts in the RICO case. You can both serve the President as he is doing his job serving all US citizens and candidate Trump and accused Criminal leader of Criminal enterprise trump. So I think this should definitely stay in Georgia for these specific charges. Sorry Mr. Meadows but you were not working on behalf of the nation when you were talking on that phone call.

Now on to the more annoying reoccurrence of hypocrisy that keeps coming up in different defense. the top seems to live and breathe on this stuff now a days. whether its blind hypocrisy or religious liberty it is bathing in this stuff.

First off is – this shouldn’t be a court thing Let the Voters Decide- BS. It came up with the impeachment. Which also had the let the courts decide added on too. And this is a 2 part BS on their part. First the voters did decide and voted Trump out. But then he couldn’t accept it and started all this stuff wether to raise money at first or whatever. But the voters spoke and he couldn’t accept it and his followers and much of the GOP one along with him on it. Secondly when the voters speak say in Florida and vote in DAs or now Georgia too you seem ok with Governors just deciding they aren’t happy with the and kicking them out over the voters will. How is that letting the voters have their say? The voters of the area that voted in those Da’s wanted them but now in states run by the gop seem happy with the voters will being over run by a few select people. In fact they just put this policy in place in Georgia after over 100 years of things running just fine. So I guess we really can’t trust the voters after all.

Then there is they are only charging Trump now because he is running again. If it was a crime why did it take so long to charge him theory of things. First and foremost on this hypocrisy meter is Trump and all is supporters and now co-conspirators claimed rife election fraud and evidence and yet time after time in court case after court case in multiple states they never showed up with any evidence of wide spread fraud ever. In all this time. Oh wait. Now that he as been charged in Georgia and he is running again he has just announced he has produced some evidence to back up his claims finally? What he couldn’t do this before? Like when he was actually contesting it when it counted? But of course this is just a press conference and it doesn’t have to be factual or real at all. Like it would be in a court. The documents case is a newer case of Trumps own making so that timing is alone him for not just giving the stuff back. And the cases tied to the elections I would say is much harder since there were so many lawyers claiming privilege and now we even find that Musk and Twitter/X tried to duck out on a warrant which slowed everything down. And you know that if this case had been brought immediately after Trump left office then everyone would be shouting that it was a rush to judgment. After all they did impeach him but the GOP refused citing legal recurse and the voters. But now want the voters to take a swing again. Of course the GOP will just keep swinging until they get the result they want. Change rules the goal line whatever you need until you get the win.

Then you get your stacked Supreme Court. Lose the midterm landslide you should have slam dunked and then see that maybe the country wasn’t so behind the pro life movement Mitch Mcconel had been dreaming of. One of the leading political hypocrites going.