THE ILLUSION OF AN INVESTIGATION

 

                                                        BY BILL JUNEAU

                              The commotion and fallout from the overruling of Roe v Wade is continuing, but for the "egregious leaking" of the draft opinion, the cap is still off the bottle. 

                               Who was the leaker?  A clerk to one of the justices; a typist; a runner or a janitor?  Was it the angry sentiment of one of the two very liberal woman justices?  Chief Justice John Roberts has assured citizens that the offender will be identified and sanctioned as appropriate under the law. 

                               After almost 50 years and 63 million abortions for any or no reasons, the constitutional protections for abortions have been canceled by the Supreme Court.  The  question of who can now abort her fetus is in the purview of each of the 50 states as determined by elected representatives.   

                                A  firestorm of discord and protests came about last May 2 when a draft opinion in the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization was leaked to the media, and it foretold that Roe v. Wade was on the chopping block and very likely would be overruled by the high court's strong conservative majority. Seven weeks later, the final opinion in the case was handed down and it mirrored the draft opinion removing abortions from being a medical procedure based upon a woman's right to choose, and protected by the U.S. Constitution. 

                                  On May 3, the day after the horrendous leaking of the draft opinion authored by Justice Samuel Alito,  Chief Justice John Roberts condemned the betrayal of trust and said it was the first time that had ever happened in the court's 250 years.   "I have directed the Marshal of the Court to launch an investigation into the source of the leak," the chief justice said in a statement. 

                           The individual responsible for the leaking will be found and identified and dealt with, using whatever sanctions are available under the law, it was asserted. Roberts emphasized that court workers "have an exemplary and important tradition of respecting the confidentiality of the judicial process and the leak was a singular and egregious breach of that trust."  

                                According to Mark Sherman of the Associated  Press, there has been only incredible silence from the court on the investigation.  Many questions have been emailed to the court, he said, but the answer from the court has been "no comment."  To every and all questions, the court remains silent.

                                It raises the question of whether the investigation has been set aside permanently--maybe the court has too many other more important matters to contend with? Investigations call for serious strategy and manpower, even possible lie detector exams, and perhaps the high court does not have the resources or expertise to conduct such an inquiry. 

                                There are nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court and each has four clerks and there  are typists and runners and a cleaning crew.  Six of the justices are considered conservative and all subsequently voted to overrule the Roe v. Wade case.  Three other justices are considered to be very liberal and they dissented to the majority opinion. Some 70 persons might have had access to the drafts, the associated press reporter has speculated.

                                 My guess as a lawyer,  who is acquainted with the rules of the Supreme Court and the trust given to those around those hallowed halls, is that the culprit who breached the trust is known to the Chief Justice and very likely to the other justices and the clerks. I suspect that there was a confession or an admission.  The clerks and typists have known all along who it was that most likely slipped the text of the Alito draft opinion to the Politico newsman.  

                                   For whatever reason, further stories of the leaked document and the "leaker" may just disappear like a strong wind.  The associated press newsman has recounted in an article that back in 1973,  Chief Justice Warren Burger was infuriated by the leak of the  Roe v. Wade decision  a few hours ahead of its scheduled announcement.  Burger threatened to subject employees to lie detector tests, but the leaker quickly came forward and explained that its release had been an accident. 

                                   Of course, the leaking of the Alito draft opinion was no accident. It could be that that  someone may well be getting a pass.  

                                  Clarence Thomas, one of the nine justices on the supreme court,  said that the breach of trust has irrevocably harmed the court.  "When you lose that trust, especially in the institution that I am in, it changes the institution fundamentally.  You begin to look over your shoulder. It's kind of like an infidelity that you can explain, but you can't undo."

                          

                                                   XXX         

                      

                                        

                          

                                  

                                   

                                 

DID BIDEN OKAY THE SEARCH OF TRUMP'S HOME?

 

                                                  BY BILL JUNEAU  

                                     Does anyone actually believe that Attorney General Merrick Garland signed off on the political search of the private Florida home of Donald Trump without getting a go-ahead nod from President Biden?  

                                    It seems unlikely that this latest in a long string of unsuccessful attempts by Democrats to discredit Trump could have been carried out without the President's knowledge. Though Biden is dim and slow in his acuity, he is president, and it is unthinkable that an  action of this magnitude could be launched without him even being aware of it, much less in charge. 

                                      He may not have known all details, but without a doubt he would have been strongly in favor of anything designed to emasculate Trump and keep him off the 2024 ballot.  Polls have shown that Joe Biden is held in very low esteem in this country and would be dragging behind Trump if they ever faced off again in a race for President. 

                                       As the head of the Department of Justice, and the guiding hand and superior of the FBI, Garland assembled the necessary players for the raid. Christopher Wray, Director of the FBI, was on board with his agents for the search, aware that his  resistance to the swampy plan  might cost him his job with Biden. Wray lined up a 30 member swat team for a full day of searching the Mar-a-Lago home of the 45th president who had appointed him FBI director in 2017. 

                                   After informing the White House spokesperson (with a wink in his eye) that the President did not know of the smash-and-grab search of the Trump residence, Garland  made a public statement that he alone  had given the necessary approval for the search.   He emphasized that it was his doing, and that all persons are to be treated equally under the law...and nobody is above he law.  Unsaid was his likely belief that it was his job to protect the senile Biden who made him the general.  

                                   Garland displayed an owlish-like look as he delivered a partial explanation for the warrant. Critical Republicans have described him as a "demented weasel."  Just be glad that he isn't on the Supreme Court, another senator has said. In other past controversies,  Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton and Missouri Senator Josh Hawley  have lambasted Garland and demanded that he resign. At one televised committee hearing, Cotton told Garland that he was a "disgrace" to the office. 

                                  Joe Biden and his wife, Dr. Jill, and son, Hunter and his new wife and child, were vacationing together in South Carolina--relaxing on the beach and enjoying ice cream cones. Except for the presence of the notorious Hunter, what could appear more innocent and uninvolved to the public?  

                                  After the warrant was issued by a friendly magistrate who is well known for unbraiding Trump and who cheered for his impeachments, the search went forward and the FBI spent some 12 hours on Aug. 8 combing the Florida home and offices of Trump and his wife Melania. 

                                   The FBI raiders  rummaged                         through the home and loaded their findings into some 15 boxes which they carted away.  Nothing was overlooked. They broke into a Trump safe in his office, looked in every nook and corner, and left no stone unturned. Agents even pawed through the wardrobe of Mrs. Trump looking for papers that might have been concealed by her husband in her undergarments or in the toe section of her various shoes.

                                    In the end and after tossing the house, the agents  collected miscellaneous papers, documents and photographs which were in boxes. and added them to other boxes. Based on a search receipt, some documents collected were marked top secret and confidential.  With the reputation of the FBI, who could say what already might have been in all of these boxes they played musical chairs with?

                                     President Trump said that he told the Department of Justice two months ago after receiving a subpoena for documents that it could have any or all of the documents at his home.  He said that he had "declassified all" of them while he was still President, using a presidential power vested in him. 

                                      Informed of the raid while he was in New York with Mrs. Trump, the former President said:

                                     "It is prosecutorial misconduct, the weaponization of the Justice system, and an attack by radical left wing democrats who desperately don't want me to run for president in 2024, especially based on recent polls, and who will likewise do anything to stop republicans and conservatives in the up coming  midterm elections." 

                                       My guess is that most citizens will not swallow the story that President Biden was not in the loop and did not sign off on the search of his political opponent.  Biden will be unable to point to his own past credibility for telling the truth given his many years of blatant dishonesty and alleged corruption.  

                                        In truth, Joe Biden has been an inveterate liar during his half century in government---a U.S. Senator for 36 years; a vice president for 8; and now a President and Commander in Chief for going on two years. His record as being dishonest, and a repeated plagiarist as a Senator and before that as a law student is undeniable and crystal clear. 

                                           He will say and do anything so long as he figures it is to his benefit. Biden said that he was arrested in South Africa while trying to see Nelson Mandela and that was a lie. He said he attended Syracuse Law school on a academic scholarship and that was a lie; He said that he finished law school in the upper half and that was a lie.  As to law school, he finished very near the bottom of his class and students in the school with him have been quoted as saying that "Joe Biden was the dumbest s.o.b. in the school."                                                        

                                           Republicans are geared to take control of the House of Representatives and the Senate in the elections next November, and the heir apparent for speaker of the House is California Congressman  Kevin McCarthy.    McCarthy has given notice that if and when he replaces Nancy Pelosi, there will be a wholesale draining of the woke-infested Democratic swamp and that impeachments of both Biden and Garland are Page 1 on his to-do list          

                                                     xxx

                                  

                                        .  . 

PRISON FOR COPS WHO TOOK DOWN GEORGE FLOYD

 

                                                      BY BILL JUNEAU   

                                 With unrelenting screams of racism, and a disregard for what is fair and right, today's woke system of justice has taken down three Minneapolis policemen for "abetting" their senior officer in the unintended murder of George Floyd, a drug addict and a hardened criminal with a long record.  

                        Two of the three policemen were rookies, and one of them had been a patrolman for just four days. 

                        Derek Chauvin, was the fourth and the senior officer at the scene of the Floyd arrest back on May 25, 2020. Chauvin was a street-smart  police veteran with 19 years on the Minneapolis force.  He has been convicted of the unintentional second degree murder and manslaughter of Floyd in a circus-like trial and has begun serving a sentence of 22 years and six months in  prison. 

                       His appeal is pending and some legal scholars are  predicting that higher courts may yet order a new trial for him based upon the prejudicial venue and judicial error which dominated his five-week trial before an unsequestered jury in Minneapolis. 

                            The three officers accused of aiding Chauvin in the second degree murder of the African American Floyd, have been found guilty of victimizing and violating his civil rights. Recently, Federal Judge Paul Magnuson sentenced Officers J. Alexander Kueng, 28, who is black, to three years in prison,  and Tou Nmn Thau, 36,  who is Hmong American, to 42 months behind bars. Thomas Lane, 38, was sentenced to 30 months. The three officers still face state charges of abetting the murder, but it is presumed that if found guilty their sentences will run concurrently with the punishments assigned for the civil rights violations. 

                             After Chauvin wrestled the muscular, six-foot, four -inch Floyd to the pavement, Lane and Kueng helped hold him down; and Tou Thau concentrated on controlling the gathering crowd. 

                              Lane, the police rookie of four days, was sentenced to jail in spite of the fact that he tried, but was unsuccessful in persuading his mentor, Officer Chauvin, to turn Floyd onto his side; and later Lane attempted to revive him using CPR. The judge noted in his sentencing remarks that he had received 145 letters of support for Tom Lane and that he "had never" received so many letters on behalf of a defendant.  He then went on to fault the Minneapolis police department for sending him and rookie Koenig  on the call that ended with George Floyd's death. 

                              Judge Magnuson's comments made little sense in light of his outrageous and undeserved sentencing of Lane, Kueng and Thau, but was heralded by Black Lives Matter and the far left media for his coming down hard on police racism and white supremacy.   

                              The woke-minded and maleable judge went on to say that Officer Lane should have jumped upon Chauvin and thrown him aside so as to free Floyd. "Mr. Lane, this is a very serious offense, in which a life was lost,"  asserted Judge Magnuson. "The fact that you did not get up and remove Mr. Chauvin when Mr. Floyd become unconscious is a violation of the law." 

                                Earl Grey, Tom Lane's attorney, said that  "Officer Lane did everything he could possibly do to help George Floyd.  He had suggested rolling Floyd onto his side so he could breathe more easily,  but was rebuffed twice by Chauvin."  At one point, Lane actually performed CPR in an effort to revive Mr. Floyd.  

                                "Any reasonable person should just be disgusted --should be infuriated  that Lane was ever charged," Grey said.  Lane's conviction and sentence to prison will be appealed to a higher court.

                                 Reviewing courts have a lot on their plates. The sins of the four policemen could well wind up for a final decision by Supreme Court justices, given the many constitutional questions and violations which defendant lawyers have raised. 

                                   During the Chauvin trial, physicians differed as to the cause of Floyd's death. The amount of fentanyl in his system, along with the fact that his main arteries were almost completely blocked was enough to cause his brain to become deprived of oxygen and blood. Chauvin had held his knee to the neck of the muscular Floyd for almost nine minutes, but that action, had there been no Fentanyl and no blocked arteries, would not have deprived the brain of needed life-sustaining elements in the opinions of some physicians. 

                                  While detained by Officer Chauvin's knee on his neck, Floyd was heard saying that "I can't breathe."   However, when police first confronted Floyd, he was gulping pills and making the same complaint that he could not breath.     

                                    Policemen Lane, Kuneg and Thau took orders from their senior officer.  Chauvin made use of a knee-on-neck technique taught all officers and recruits in the Minneapolis police academy. The technique is not uncommon in controlling addicts and other suspects, and is used by many police departments throughout the country

                           Sending these three officers to prison is a miscarriage of justice in a country which insists on justice for everyone.  Appeals by the policemen to the state and federal courts could go on for several years.  

                                                      xxx

                                                                                    

                                  

                          

                          

                               "