novatownhall blog

Where you are held accountable for your convictions and record

Browsing Posts in Judiciary

Let’s see. 2 illegal aliens that should not be in the country, are dumber than a box of rocks and can’t read or write in their own language, much less the country they invaded, have been charged with raping a 14 year old girl. The attorney for the 18 year old illegal is saying today his client is innocent because it was “consensual” rape…..I mean sex. The attorney for the 17 year old illegal is stating that the girl brought it on herself because……because what? The school system liberals are saying that there is nothing to see here and that the UVA fake rape has gotten more coverage than this one ever will. All in all, sanctuary cities/towns are on the rise and Bill Bumblebutt in NYC is telling all school systems to not allow ICE agents on school grounds. WOW!

Trump is in collusion with the Russians still and that will never change, regardless what Clapper, Comey or others state. Yet documents are coming to light that the O’Bummer administration is being seen as spying on Americans, inclusive of the Trump administration, possibly inadvertently, but outing people that have come up in these “findings”. Everyone agrees that these outings are illegal, highly or otherwise. Why is Comey still in his position? Why hasn’t all top level secret holders (they have narrowed it down to a dozen people or so) been put to an immediate polygraph session to determine the culprit or group doing these things? Will more documents be destroyed to protect the guilty? Would I like to see O’Bummer admin personnel in prison?

Paul Ryan and a “select” group of the GOP in the house came up with a shitty healthcare bill in the house. They didn’t invite or allow true conservatives to be involved in the process (sound familiar? Think Obamacare) and came up with a bill that is basically called Obamacare Lite. Sure, they need to do step 2 and 3 later. You believe that, right? Rather than go through all the stuff this bill will do to hurt Americans even further and keep us under government control for healthcare, why not just repeal it as they have tried to do for the last 7 years? They now have the vote AND the signature as they stated they needed (the House, Senate and WH for those of you who have a brick for a brain) plus they have old plans that they made up to replace Obamacare for years. Repeal means that the old system would still be good to sometime in 2018 and that is plenty of time to do this thing right. Thought: bring back the old system since there was nothing wrong with it in the first place and those 20 or 30 million people without healthcare? I understand that the figure to cover those people would be around the 250 million dollar mark to insure them. Let’s see, 250 million or one trillion. Hard choice, right? How about we stop giving grants for shrimp on treadmills. That should just about pay for the damn thing. This ain’t rocket science, only power politics. Drain the frigging swamp.

Gorsuch is going through a daily marathon grilling and he has yet to state “what difference, at this point, does it make”, which happens when you are getting hemorrhoids from sitting through one bout of grilling for 11 hours. He has an impeccable record as everyone has stated. Dems commit themselves to stupid, irrelevant questions because they have nothing pertinent to ask. Now that lying scumbag degenerate Schumer is talking about doing a filibuster on this nomination to the SCOTUS. Why? Because they are liberals and liberals can show no reason for their existence. I concur. What was that thing they did long ago? Inquisition or something?

We are coming up on state elections and have a great chance to get Virginia back to the land of reality. Liberals are doing nothing but shooting themselves in the foot at every breath they take. It would be great to take our state back from the racist baby killers called Democrats. States are doing some crazy things and I don’t want my state to do anything more crazy then has already happened with the current dirtbags at the helm. What happens nationally affects what happens locally. At least conservatives have the guts to stand up to their own (their own being CINO or Conservatives In Name Only). I believe it is time to appoint a special commission to root out the reasons and make VERY public why the Dems are insistent on destroying America and subjecting Its citizens to cruel and unusual punishment.

That’s the news.

McDonnell is freed. I know that pisses off a whole bunch of people but it was a unanimous decision (which means the libs on the bench were peeking under the blindfold). I mean, this case was so far out of bounds and overbearing that para-legals could have argued this and won. Bottom line is that there was no quid pro quo here like the Dems do.

The other case of importance is what they are calling the “abortion case”. Texas tried to use state’s right to ensure a woman’s health. The baby killers saw it has a form of inhibiting killing a baby. Now murder is an illegal act in all 57 states…except when it is called abortion, which somehow became a Constitutional right. Suicide is also an illegal act in most all of the 57 states…..except when it is called abortion, where you can have a chicken farmer run the baby killing vacuum cleaner. If you were a REAL doctor, why wouldn’t you have admitting privileges at a hospital? Why wouldn’t you want a baby killing factory to have the best patient care as with other doctor’s offices that do any type of procedure. Yes, this is a procedure and not like getting your hair cut or your nails done. But from my point of view, if the pro choicers don’t care about the mother, why should I? If they want to take the chance of suicide, why bother stopping them? You can guarantee that if there are complications and the mother ends up dead, she won’t be able to kill any more of her babies and that won’t be a bad thing. I have grown to have a callous attitude toward stupidity anymore and if the stupid people want to kill themselves, I say let them and decrease the surplus population of stupid.

Is Donald Trump the perfect candidate? No. But he is the best option we will have in November. If either Sec. Clinton or Sen. Sanders wins in November, they would appoint progs to the Supreme Court. Justice Ginsburg is 83, and will probably retire within the next few years. Justice Kennedy is 79, and Justice Breyer is 77. The next president may have the opportunity to appoint four Supremes.

We cannot allow a President Clinton or a President Sanders to make those appointments.

Article II, Section 2 is clear enough:

[The President] shall have Power…, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint… Judges of the supreme Court….

Simple. The question is, will he take the advise of the Senate before he nominates someone.

According to David Savage, Supreme Court correspondent with the Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribute, Reagan presented a dozen candidates to the Senate Judiciary Committee. One of those candidates was Robert Bork. Sen. Biden, then the Chairman of that committee, told Reagan that Bork was not acceptable. Reagan nominated him anyway, and his nomination was rejected. Reagan then nominated Kennedy, whom Biden said was acceptable, and he was approved 97-0.

The role of the Senate is also clear. There is no requirement for the Senate to confirm an objectionable nominee.

So, 0bama has to make a choice. He can nominate a left-wing lunatic with no respect for the Constitution whatsoever (yes, I’m being redundant), and try to brow-beat enough RINO’s into confirming him/her. If he fails, the next president will choose the next member of the Supremes. Or, he can nominate someone who is not a left-wing lunatic and who does respect the Constitution, embarrass any Republicans who refuse to give him a vote, and possibly get to appoint the next Associate Justice.

The text of the law is clear

SEC. 1401. REFUNDABLE TAX CREDIT PROVIDING PREMIUM ASSISTANCE FOR COVERAGE UNDER A QUALIFIED HEALTH PLAN.

……………

(8)(2) PREMIUM ASSISTANCE AMOUNT.—The prem-
ium assistance amount determined under this sub-
section with respect to any coverage month is the
amount equal to the lesser of—

(A) the monthly premiums for such month
for 1 or more qualified health plans offered in
the individual market within a State which
cover the taxpayer, the taxpayer’s spouse, or any
dependent (as defined in section 152) of the tax-
payer and which were enrolled in through an
Exchange established by the State under 1311 of
the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,

or
(B) the excess (if any) of—
(i) the adjusted monthly premium for
such month for the applicable second lowest
cost silver plan with respect to the taxpayer,
over
(ii) an amount equal to 1/12 of the
product of the applicable percentage and the
taxpayer’s household income for the taxable
year.

It looks, at first glance, that part A does not obtain, since there is no such exchange, and so there is only part B.  However, lower down, part B is clarified:

(8)(3)(B) APPLICABLE SECOND LOWEST COST
SILVER PLAN.—The applicable second lowest cost
silver plan with respect to any applicable tax-
payer is the second lowest cost silver plan of the
individual market in the rating area in which
the taxpayer resides which—
(i) is offered through the same Ex-
change through which the qualified health
plans taken into account under paragraph
8 (2)(A) were offered….

That’s definitely a problem.  Neither of the two possible pricing options to determine the subsidy exists.

Some pundits have said it comes down to ONE word, “by”, not four words, “established by the State.”  The fact is, it is FOURTEEN words: “established by the State under 1311 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”

The Federal Exchange is defined in section 1103, not 1311.

So what will the Supremes do?

Well, we know the progs on the bench will ignore the law — progs don’t care about laws.  (Well, they don’t care about laws they don’t like.  If they like a law, they’ll dig in like a tick on a hound.)  So the progs will rule to uphold the subsidies, and the conservatives will vote to uphold the law as written.

I expect the swing votes to go to the progs.  Why?  Because they have shown no integrity.  When Roberts ruled that the penalty is NOT a tax and thus the Supremes can rule on it before anyone actually pays it, then rule that it IS a tax and thus it is constitutional (the first time the Supremes have overturned a prior decision in the same decision), he has signaled to the world that he has no logical integrity, and is thus really a prog.  He will rule to uphold the subsidies and write up another steaming pile to support that ruling.

In the oral arguments of King v. Burwell, Justice Ginsburg brought up the question of “standing”:

A plaintiff “has to have a concrete stake in the question,” Ginsburg said, interjecting almost as soon as Carvin began his argument. She noted that two of the plaintiffs had served in the military, one would soon turn 65 and be eligible for Medicare, and the fourth could qualify for a hardship exemption and not be required to pay the individual-mandate penalty.

Carvin countered that the lower courts had not raised a standing issue.

“But the Court has an obligation to look into on its own,” Ginsburg said. Carvin asserted that at least one of the plaintiffs did have standing before Ginsburg allowed him to move on to the merits of the case. (National Journal)

So what I want to know is, why doesn’t every taxpayer in the country have standing in cases like this?

Oh, yes, the time is long overdue to have term limits on Congress and judges. Why would we only limit the Executive Branch without having the same constraints on the Legislative and Judicial branches? Why indeed. It appears that the need of limits is really making its case known in these modern times. You see, politics is a “scratch your back, you scratch mine” type of forum. Unfortunately, bias does not belong in any of these branches and when the party trumps the people, the system is surely broken. Case in point is the recent decision on subsidies for ObamaCare sign-ups.

It appears that two conflicting court decisions are at issue: the U.S. District Court (just below the Supreme Court) where a 2-1 decision was handed down stating that subsidies could only be given through state exchanges. By the way; this court had 4 Obama judge appointments placed after Harry Reid invoked the nuclear option in the Senate. The other court, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ( which is supposedly equal to the District Court ) held that the subsides could be granted by HealthCare.gov. What the 4th based there opinion (why would they have an opinion and not a sound ruling?) on is that Congress (read Dems ONLY) had the INTENT to make subsides available for all. Unfortunately, that is not what the law READS.

Here is my beef. We are no longer a nation ruled BY LAW. We have become a nation ruled by the intent of someone’s opinion of how they interpret the meaning of someone else’s thought. Words use to have meaning but, if you read this site enough, you will realize that Dems/liberals don’t use definitive definitions but, rather, however something should be interpreted at the time (which seems to change as constantly as wind direction). So it appears that all branches of government have been corrupted and no longer seem to function as their assigned duties prescribe. An old joke: “What do you call 10,000 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?” Answer: “A good start!” Don’t get me wrong; lawyers were a needed and noble profession once. Anymore it is a stepping stone for self glorification. It has become corrupted in too many ways and lawyers are ever mindful of side-stepping the rule of law and perverting it. This isn’t the entire profession but a good portion of it. It seems that those same lawyers become judges…..with political ideology and leanings, where law is NOW being made instead of interpreted AS WRITTEN. There is no separation of powers anymore because we no longer have checks and balances as established by the Constitution. Since lawyers won’t clean up their own house, term limits, review boards for misconduct and dismissals are our next line of defense.