Guess Who Hate-Filled Libs Want to Replace Antonin Scalia?

/9 Comments/in , /by

Mere minutes after the terrible news of Supreme Court judge Antonin Scalia’s death broke across social media, left-wingers took to Twitter to gloat and spew:

[Warning: Graphic Language]

I never rejoice at the death of another human being. That being said for Antonin Scalia I will make a onetime exception #scalia

— Rick Otto (@RickOtto) February 13, 2016

I know its wrong to be happy about someone dying but… #Scalia Yay!

— galetyler (@galetylerLP) February 13, 2016

A few minutes after the hate wave came a stream of tweets from libs voting on their preferred replacement. Loretta Lynch? Eric Holder? Nope. The top vote-getter appears to be…Obama himself.

Shudder. They’re not kidding.

The question of whether Obama could nominate himself to the Supreme Court has been raised before and the answer appears to be “maybe.”

The more germane question is whether a GOP majority would stop him…or whomever he nominates. CR readers weigh in:

For more from the author of “Guess Who Hate-Filled Libs Want to Replace Antonin Scalia?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Hillary Anxious About Bill’s Loyalty During Election: Emails

/0 Comments/in , /by

An exasperated Hillary Clinton wondered how to keep her husband in check after a newspaper report questioned her husband’s loyalty to President Obama and suggested Bill could cost him re-election in 2012, a newly released State Department e-mail revealed.

State Department counselor and Hillary friend Cheryl Mills sent her a Washington Post story headlined, “Bill Clinton’s ego could cost Obama in November,” on June 6, 2012.

“What can be done?” Clinton replied less than two hours later.

The exchange was one of a new batch of 550 private e-mails the State Department released Saturday. Of those, 84 were labeled “confidential,” the lowest level of classification. Three others, detailing Clinton’s role in some of the most pressing foreign-policy crises of the Obama administration, were classified “secret” . . .

The three “secret” e-mails revealed Saturday dealt with the former Secretary of State’s doing damage control after a US raid killed Osama bin Laden on May 2, 2011 and an Egypt-Israeli border conflict at the Sinai Peninsula in August 2012. (Read more from “Hillary Anxious About Bill’s Loyalty During Election: Emails” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Justice Scalia’s Final Dissent

/2 Comments/in , /by

Justice Scalia’s final written dissent was in an obscure case that is only known to those in the electric power industry. But this case, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission v. Electric Power Supply Association, is the embodiment of what is wrong with the modern court system and exemplifies Scalia’s commitment to the written law.

Without getting into the weeds of the case, the Federal Power Act [16 U.S.C. § 791] authorizes the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to regulate wholesale electric power market but explicitly prohibits the FERC from regulating “any other sale” of electricity. Anything on the retail side is left to the states. In 2011, FERC promulgated a “demand response” regulation providing for monetary incentives to large electricity consumers, such as hospitals and schools, that reduce their consumption during peak usage times. This is one of the tools in the “clean energy” cartel’s arsenal to limit the use of fossil fuels.

Obviously, the case, its ramifications, and its stakeholders is an extremely complex case study. But the legal question was very simple. Does FERC have the authority to promulgate such a regulation on the consumer side when statute explicitly leaves this to the states and actually prohibits FERC from stepping outside of the wholesale market?

In an opinion eerily similar to King v. Burwell, in which Chief Justice Roberts completely rewrote Obamacare’s health care subsidy scheme in order to accommodate a lawless executive agency, Justice Kagan rewrote the Federal Power Act to do the exact opposite of its intent. Just like Obamacare was designed to only incentivized those states that establishes state exchanges, yet Roberts translated “state” into “federal,” Kagan translated “wholesale” into retail – manifestly opposite from the original intent of the statute.

At its core, the key function of the court is to apply statutes to cases and controversies, not rewrite statutes and the Constitution. As I’ve often said before, when executive agencies violate congressional laws, it is the quintessential time for the courts to step in and do their job; namely, interpret the law as written. Yet, in the FERC case, Roberts and Kennedy joined with the four liberals to overturn the D.C. Court of Appeals, which struck down the FERC rule, in an opinion written by the inimitable Janice Rogers Brown.

In his characteristic clarity for explaining the written law, Scalia demolished Kagan’s opinion, noting that anything that does not regulate wholesale markets is not within the authority of FERC:

While the majority would find every sale of electric energy to be within FERC’s authority to regulate unless the transaction is demonstrably a retail sale, the statute actually excludes from FERC’s jurisdiction all sales of electric energy except those that are demonstrably sales at wholesale. So what, exactly, is a “sale of electric energy at wholesale”? We need not guess, for the Act provides a definition: “a sale of electric energy to any person for resale.” §824(d) (emphasis added). No matter how many times the majority incants and italicizes the word “wholesale,” ante, at 19–20, nothing can change the fact that the vast majority of (and likely all) demand-response participants—“[a]ggregators of multiple users of electricity, as well as large-scale individual users like factories or big-box stores,” ante,at 7—do not resell electric energy; they consume it themselves. FERC’s own definition of demand response is aimed at energy consumers, not resellers.

Scalia went on to use the majority’s own examples against their conclusion. The bottom line in this case and in every case of statutory interpretation is that one must always interpret the law as written, not as one wants it written or in a way that would make things more practical.

This is what Scalia taught us for his almost three decades on the court. And it was so eloquently on display in this dissent published on January 25, 2016. The law is the law. If you don’t like it, there is a democratic process through which one can modify it. But the court is not the place for rewriting statutes.

It’s also worth reading another dissent Scalia wrote on January 25 in Montgomery v. Louisiana. In that case, Roberts and Kennedy joined with the four leftists to retroactively apply a decision rewriting the Eighth Amendment’s cruel and unusual punishment clause, thereby paving the road for the release of a number of violent murderers who were sentenced to life without parole.

Sadly, not only do we have 4-6 justices who, at any given time, believe it is their job to rewrite the Constitution and the role of the court, but we have 4-6 justices who abdicate their core Constitutional responsibility to interpret statutes as written and not factor in political considerations or efficient market outcomes.

Scalia’s untimely death leaves a gaping hole in an already irremediably broken institution. (For more from the author of “Justice Scalia’s Final Dissent” please click HERE)

Watch a recent interview with the author below:

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Supreme Court Justice Scalia Found Dead

/2 Comments/in , , /by

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia was found dead of apparent natural causes Saturday on a luxury resort in West Texas, federal officials said.

Scalia, 79, was a guest at the Cibolo Creek Ranch, a resort in the Big Bend region south of Marfa.

According to a report, Scalia arrived at the ranch on Friday and attended a private party with about 40 people. When he did not appear for breakfast, a person associated with the ranch went to his room and found a body.

Chief U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia, of the Western Judicial District of Texas, was notified about the death from the U.S. Marshals Service. (Read more from this story HERE)

________________________

Leftists: “Breathtaking” Consequences of Scalia’s Death

IMMIGRATION: United States v. Texas concerns the legality of Obama administration immigration policies that, if allowed to take effect, will temporarily enable close to five million undocumented immigrants to remain in the county. It is also the case that presents the most opportunity for chaos if the Court evenly divides on the outcome…

ABORTION: Another case out of Texas, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, also could lead to confusion if the Court evenly divides. Whole Woman’s Health is the greatest threat to Roe v. Wade to reach the Supreme Court in a generation. If five justices back the Texas law in this case, it is unclear that there will be any meaningful limits on states’ ability to pass anti-abortion laws. . .

UNIONS: Public sector unions are saved, at least for now. After oral arguments in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, it appeared likely that an ambitious effort to defund public sector unions would gain five votes on the Supreme Court. Now this effort only has four votes. Moreover, because the plaintiffs in this case lost in the court below, a decision affirming the lower court in an evenly divided vote is effectively a victory for organized workers…

Editors note: ThinkProgress’s Ian Millhiser also discusses redistricting, affirmative action, “the fate of the Earth,” and birth control. See the full article discussing the implications of Scalia’s death HERE.

Feds Emboldened After Killing Finicum, Now Rounding Up, Jailing 2014 Nevada Protesters

/10 Comments/in , , /by

In a surprising turn of events, several of Cliven Bundy’s supporters during his 2014 faceoff with federal law enforcement may soon face criminal complaints of their own. Cliven Bundy was arrested this week on a federal complaint arising from his armed interactions with the feds at his ranch in 2014. In the complaint, the government filed six different charges against Bundy and listed four unnamed co-conspirators. The complaint also describes many others who allegedly aided and abetted Cliven Bundy but doesn’t name them.

In a special radio report, the president of Oath Keepers, Stewart Rhodes, discussed with retired Sheriff Denny Peyman and Forward Observer editor Sam Culper the likelihood that dozens of Cliven Bundy’s supporters may also be under indictment and face arrest warrants. They observed that the federal complaint against Cliven Bundy is broad enough many of those who traveled to Nevada to support Bundy in 2014 could very well be arrested on similar charges.

The Patriot Report’s Jason Van Tatenhove claims that he’s identified as many as 68 Bundy supporters who may have federal warrants out for their arrest. Supporting his theory, at least one Bundy supporter has been arrested for what appears to be very minor actions. Specifically, Blaine Cooper was arrested and is now facing a charge of “conspiracy to impede officers of the United States.” This charge is very similar to Cliven Bundy’s and others.

All this comes on the heels of the revelation this week that Cliven Bundy’s son, Ammon, has been held in a tiny cell, in virtual round-the-clock solitary confinement, since his arrest until recently. This incredibly punitive treatment by the feds against a man who has only been charged with conspiracy and poses no danger to others (or himself) is incredibly disturbing.

Perhaps more disturbing is the fact that the federal government would pursue arrests and long prison terms for people who are trying to protect their land from the feds and simply wish to restore the rule of law and the Constitution to their rightful place.

At the Recent Debate, Hillary Was Asked 1 Simple Question That DESTROYED Her Credibility [+video]

/3 Comments/in , /by

By Randy DeSoto. Democrat candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders asked one pointed question, which he believes draws a substantial distinction between his candidacy and Hillary Clinton’s.

“Let’s not insult the intelligent of the American people. People aren’t dumb,” Sanders said. “Why in God’s name does Wall Street make huge campaign contributions? I guess just for the fun of it, they want to throw money around.”

Clinton’s reply? She said she supports the Dodd-Frank law, and the belief that no bank is too big to fail.

Sanders, who has made campaign finance reform a cornerstone of his candidacy, also hit Clinton for the large corporate donations to a Super PAC backing her run. The socialist said early on he decided he did not want a Super PAC to support his candidacy.

“We don’t represent Wall Street, we don’t represent the billionaire class, so it ends up I’m the only candidate up here of the many candidates who has no Super PAC,” Sanders said. (Read more from “At the Recent Debate, Hillary Was Asked 1 Simple Question That DESTROYED Her Credibility” HERE)

______________________________________

Hillary Clinton Sharpens Focus After Democratic Debate Tussles

By Jonathan Martin and Alan Rappeport. Hillary Clinton forcefully attacked Senator Bernie Sanders before a heavily black audience Friday, highlighting his criticism of President Obama, the Affordable Care Act and for what she suggested was a single-minded focus on economic fairness at the expense of racial justice.

One day after the two squared off at a debate that emphasized issues relating to race and gender, Mrs. Clinton made clear that she intends to run in this state’s primary by effectively seeking Mr. Obama’s third term — and claiming Mr. Sanders would be a threat to the first black president’s accomplishments.

“He has called the president weak, a disappointment. He tried to get some attention to attract a candidate to actually run against the president when he was running for re-election,” Mrs. Clinton told a gymnasium full of voters near the campus of a historically black college here.

It was a reprisal of her offensive at Thursday night’s debate, but she escalated her assault further, portraying Mr. Sanders as an impediment to the health care law so associated with Mr. Obama that, she noted, it bears his name. (Read more from “Hillary Clinton Sharpens Focus After Democratic Debate Tussles” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Mark Levin Exposes the Fiction of Bernie Sanders’ Attacks on Wealth Creators

/2 Comments/in , /by

In hour two of the Mark Levin program tonight, Conservative Review Editor-in-Chief Mark Levin took Democratic candidate for President Bernie Sanders’ socialist ideology to task. Sanders rails against the “one-percent” who allegedly have stolen all their wealth from the lower classes through exploitation of workers. Levin exposes this Marxist idea as a fiction.

Listen:

Trade is not a zero-sum game. The wealthy are not rich because they steal from others but because they provide goods and services that people want. They create jobs. They improve people’s lives. And, Levin argues, Bernie Sanders would destroy all that.

Bernie Sanders wants to confiscate the wealth away from job creators and entrepreneurs in this country, but he cannot achieve his proposals under our constitutional system, Levin explained. Socialism is antithetical to the principles of the American Founding.

Conservatives must stand against it. (For more from the author of “Mark Levin Exposes the Fiction of Bernie Sanders’ Attacks on Wealth Creators” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Clinton Adjusts Pitch: I Can Be a Sanders, Just Better

/3 Comments/in , /by

Hillary Clinton wants you to know she’s a more realistic, more savvy version of Bernie Sanders.

She, too, wants to close corporate loopholes, make college and health care more affordable and get tough on Wall Street. Just as Sanders does, except she’d proceed more carefully and practically.

Same with Social Security, and income inequality. Me, too, she said. Just better.

Clinton’s challenge, though, was clear during Thursday’s debate. Sanders argues with a passion that appeals to voters disgusted with Washington inertia. Clinton reasons with fact-laced talking points and anecdotes about how things work. Sanders leans into the podium, his right index finger pointing at the viewer as he promises a radical new way of doing business. Clinton is more lawyerly, more measured, even, arguably, more presidential.

She spent much of the debate, the first since Sanders and his insurgent army crushed her in Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary, intent on providing a distinctive dash of reality. She tried to convince voters fed up with politics as usual that the difference between Sanders and her is largely one of temperament and resume. (Read more from “Clinton Adjusts Pitch: I Can Be a Sanders, Just Better” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Cops Arrest Teen for Hack and Leak of DHS, FBI Data

/1 Comment/in , /by

A 16-year-old boy living in England has been arrested in connection with the recent hack of FBI and DHS data, as well as the personal email accounts of CIA director John Brennan and homeland security chief Jeh Johnson.

Fox has confirmed that British authorities have arrested the still- unnamed teen with help from the FBI and that they are looking for possible accomplices.

The alleged hacker had told Motherboard webzine that he had swiped the names, titles and contact information for 20,000 FBI employees and 9,000 Department of Homeland Security employees. He told Motherboard this was possible through a compromised Department of Justice email.

Authorities believe this is the same hacker who compromised the private email accounts of Brennan and Johnson in October, though officials say neither man used these accounts for government use. As for the agency data, reports indicate that the pilfered information amounted to an internal phone directory. (Read more from “Cops Arrest Teen for Hack and Leak of DHS, FBI Data” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Former Top Obama Official Just Went Rogue and Dropped Bombshell About Hillary

/21 Comments/in , /by

By Randy DeSoto. President Obama’s former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) believes that Hillary Clinton should be disqualified from being president in light of her alleged gross mishandling of classified material.

Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn (Ret.) told the Daily Caller, “This is unbelievable. I don’t think anybody should be talking about her being potentially the next President of the United States.”

“I think Hillary Clinton, for the good of the country, should step down and let this FBI investigation play out,” Flynn added.

The former DIA chief expressed particular concern that highly classified Special Access Program (SAP) material, which is to be viewed on a “Need to know” basis, was transferred to her private, non-secured server. This material is deemed even more sensitive than Top Secret.

“Placement of SAP-classified information on a non-secure server was the ‘single, most dangerous security violation that can ever happen to the United States,’ said Col. James Waurishuk, former deputy director of intelligence for the U.S. Central Command,” The Daily Caller reported.

“In order for Mrs. Clinton to get Top Secret/Special Access Programs onto her private server, numerous, redundant safeguards were deliberately bypassed, probably by unauthorized personnel who were given access to these documents. It was a deliberate, intentional act. It just could not happen by accident,” Waurishuk said. (Read more from “Former Top Obama Official Just Went Rogue and Dropped Bombshell About Hillary” HERE)

________________________________

Donald Trump: I Would Beat Hillary Clinton to White House

By BBC News. Republican Donald Trump has said he would easily beat Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in a presidential contest for the White House.

The businessman with no political experience convincingly won the New Hampshire primary and has now laid out his strategy to go all the way.

Elsewhere, Republican Carly Fiorina has announced she is dropping out of the race after getting just 4% of the vote.

South Carolina is next in the state-by-state contest to be Republican pick. (Read more from “Donald Trump: I Would Beat Hillary Clinton to White House” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.