Mediaboss Marketing

Its hard to imagine a clearer violation of journalistic ethics than pretending to hold beliefs you dont, asking Supreme Court justices if they agree, and surreptitiously recording their answers at a no-media dinner. The novelty of the stunt, however, shouldnt distract us from the real takeaway, which is precisely that the recordings yielded nothing we didnt already know.

The key conclusions are that Justice Samuel Alito is a religious man; his wife Martha-Ann likes political flags; and Chief Justice John Roberts is genuinely committed to the (somewhat unrealistic) idea that only elected officials not judges should make moral decisions.

The recording was obtained by liberal documentarian Lauren Windsor at the annual dinner of the Supreme Court Historical Society, itself a rather misunderstood event. As someone whos been to the dinner (I was the speaker one year after writing a book on Supreme Court history) let me try to set the scene.

The dinner is a reasonably accessible way for a non-billionaire to hobnob with the justices: Anyone who buys a $500 ticket can attend, which is how Windsor got in. That might sound like a lot of money, but its much less than many non-rich people pay to go to sporting events or Taylor Swift concerts.

Yet the dinner feels elite. The dress code is black tie. The cause supporting the societys work on the history of the court is worthy, but niche. And the dinner, which is supposed to be off the record, takes place in the great hall of the Supreme Court building, all marble and very grand.

The key point is that, at the dinner, the justices are comfortably at home (its their office, after all). They are also, to a degree, the effective hosts of the event. They seem relaxed and friendly, and they get to be real people. Or at least, they used to now they will have to know they can be recorded by their guests.

Windsor got Justice Alito to say that in contemporary America, there can be a way of living together peacefully, but its difficult because there are differences on fundamental things that really cant be compromised. Um, yes? That statement seems incontrovertibly true.

The false-flag journalist then insisted that people who believe in God must keep fighting to return our country to a place of godliness. Alito agreed. Although godliness here is left vague, its hard to imagine a genuinely God-fearing person answering otherwise.

As for Mrs. Alito, she of the scores of flags flown at two homes, the most the provocateur could get was that she had been considering flying a Sacred Heart of Jesus flag to respond to a Pride flag in her neighborhood during June but that her husband had asked her Oh please, dont put up a flag. The exchange appeared to confirm Alitos letter to two senators in which he essentially said that his wife likes flying flags and all he can do is ask her not to.

As for Roberts, the chief responded to Windsors prompts by giving his patented mini-lecture about how justices are just lawyers who shouldnt take moral right and wrong into account. He also firmly rejected the suggestion that the US is a Christian nation and that the justices should be guided by that idea.

Its hard to see how a court could make decisions about racial equality or abortion rights or gun control without taking some kind of moral stand. Justices Thurgood Marshall and Ruth Bader Ginsburg were great, morally driven advocates for equality who carried their moral values into their Supreme Court service. Even Justice Neil Gorsuch, a non-moral textualist by his own account, is clearly morally motivated in Indian law cases by the profound injustices done to the tribes over centuries. That seems praiseworthy, at least to me.

Justices are human beings, not machines. We should allow them to be humans, even at social events. And we should grow out of the fantasy of justices as perfectly impartial automatons free of human fallibility.

Noah Feldman is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. A professor of law at Harvard University, he is author, most recently, of To Be a Jew Today: A New Guide to God, Israel, and the Jewish People.

View original post here:
Column: Secret audio of Alito isn't the smoking gun liberals think - The Virginian-Pilot

Premier Jeremy Rockliff has done nothing to ease very serious concerns about Tasmania's future as the gateway to the Antarctic, placing thousands of jobs and hundreds-of-millions dollars' worth of economic opportunity at risk.

A letter from the Federal Government to the Premier has revealed that government business TasPorts is "determined to stand in the way" of critical infrastructure at Macquarie Wharf, by not only failing to progress the upgrades needed to berth the new icebreaker, but also attempting to increase charges to the Antarctic Division by more than 14 times what is currently paid.

The Premier was asked by the Federal Government earlier this year to intervene on this critical issue, but he did nothing.

Today the Premier revealed his head was still firmly stuck in the sand, and that he would continue to let TasPorts hold our economy to ransom.

The situation is a perfect example of two major failings of this Liberal government - their failure to deliver on key infrastructure projects, and their failure to recognise that government business enterprises are key economic drivers not just cash cows, just like we've seen with Hydro.

Dean Winter MP

Labor Leader

Link:
Antarctic Jobs Threatened by Liberals' Delivery Failure - Mirage News

I started this summer as I normally do binge-watching a classic American program while chipping away at other projects. How I Met Your Mother was the sitcom of choice. Rewatching the familiar escapades of Ted Mosby and his friends at McLarens Pub, I didnt expect to confront the harsh reality of political grandstanding in todays partisan climate.

Let me explain. I am a generally Democratic voter in Virginias 5th Congressional District. Although it includes four urban/suburban areas Lynchburg, Charlottesville, Danville and the western fringes of Richmond it is a comfortably Republican stronghold that is geographically dominated by the states rural, Southside region. It has been represented by the GOP since 2011 and is recognized by experts as safe(ly) or solid(ly) red. Needless to say, Im not on the winning side of district-wide electoral contests too often.

Even so, I participate in every election. A few weeks ago, I researched the Democratic primary candidates, picked the one I liked best, and sent in my absentee ballot. But I didnt see much need to follow the Republican primary. I fully intended to vote against the incumbent Bob Good in the general, not to mention that November was still six months away.

What does any of this have to do with How I Met Your Mother? Virtually nothing. It was the ads that brought me to this point.

They were everywhere. Everywhere. There are Good/Trump signs along every highway. There are fliers in the mail almost every day. Every break in my binge-watching is punctured by some doomsday warning about the woke, liberal agenda. The messaging was consistent with previous Bob Good campaigns, but it was oddly persistent for a safe district. Going against my nature, I started paying attention to the commercial breaks.

One 30-second spot funded by the Conservative Outsider PAC appeared time and again. On its face, there was nothing special about it. It was your standard fearmongering attack piece, the red meat of GOP campaigning. Fiery, orange text warned voters about Goods challenger, state Sen. John McGuire, from Goochland County. According to the ad, McGuire rewarded lawbreakers and tried to give them our money by supporting handouts and taxpayer funded tuition for illegals. All the while, the requisite, intense voice-over threatened that liberals like him think Virginia is for illegals.

Liberals like him. Odd. Id voted in the Democratic primary, and McGuire wasnt on the list. Could he be a Republican challenger? That seemed unlikely.

Then I received a flier in the mail paid for by American Patriots PAC cautioning me that Good was Bad for Virginia. But why was Good bad? Lets assume for a minute that I didnt already know. According to the flier, he was anti-police, supported higher taxes and favored open borders. He also wanted to make you PAY MORE FOR EVERYTHING from gas to groceries! and repeatedly voted AGAINST funding that would keep our brave men and women in blue safe. No, not my Congressman Good! Not the chair of the House Freedom Caucus. Not the man who helped organize the ouster of former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

State Sen. John McGuire, R-Goochland, left, is challenging Rep. Bob Good, R-5th, in a Republican primary.

What the heck was going on?

It was only at this point that I Googled John McGuire. The first two pictures that flashed across my screen showed an unassuming man attending the Jan. 6 rally in Washington, D.C., and cheesing with Donald Trump. The next two articles I clicked on revealed that Trump not only endorsed McGuire but also sent a cease-and-desist order to Good demanding that he stop campaigning using the former presidents name. It was clear that Trump wanted McGuire not Good in Washington. McGuire would be more loyal. Other than that, however, there was very little difference between the two candidates. They would vote the same way on the issues.

These advertisements the ad spot and the mailer revealed something frightening, yet ingenious, about the GOPs political strategy. On one hand, closing ranks and running to the right are clearly the only viable options left for GOP office seekers. Republicans in my district were not given the choice between candidates at different points on the political spectrum. Instead, they were presented with two doctrinaire conservatives trying to out-conform each other. Any divergent opinion that could be advantageously construed as liberal became radical and dangerous, an enemy to be destroyed.

What was much more jarring was the realization that all this mudslinging, all this fearmongering, all this controversy wouldnt make a bit of difference come November. It doesnt matter if Good or McGuire loses on June 18. The ideology they share has already won, at least in my district. That is the brilliance of these campaigns. Two men with stunningly similar views can shore up their base and tear each other apart by crying liberal.

In light of this, we all have to be more careful. If we dont pay attention and dont stay informed, we might just believe them and sit by while they send these liberals to Congress. Please, I ask you to explore all the candidates. We really ought to know what were actually getting.

Mar 6, 1975 Cloverleaf Mall

Nov 21, 1987 Cloverleaf Mall

Feb 4, 1973 Cloverleaf Mall

Cloverleaf Mall, Nov. 21, 1987

08-19-1972 (cutline): Chesterfield County policeman aids shoppers at Cloverleaf Mall to avoid tie-ups.

04-04-1976: Cloverleaf Mall

08-08-1972 (cutline): Theater executive Symour Hoffman in projection booth of Cloverleaf Mall Twin Cinema

08-15-1972 (cutline): Workers put finishing touches on the mall area of the Cloverleaf Mall Regional Center. The first phase of the 780,000 square foot center will open tomorrow at 9:30 am.

11-19-1972 (cutline): Sears Store in Cloverleaf Mall reflects new plush look, furs included.

Zachary Clary is a historian of American political history completing a Ph.D. at Vanderbilt University and a voter in Virginias 5th Congressional District. Contact Clary at zachary.clary@vanderbilt.edu.

Original post:
Commentary: Slinging 'liberal' in 5th District GOP primary - Richmond Times-Dispatch

The American flag as it was intended to fly is no longer the favored symbol of so-called patriots on the far right.

Old Glory is being flipped upside down across the land, most famously outside of a residence belonging to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito. Historically used as a maritime sign of distress and later to protest the Vietnam War, the upside-down flag has been co-opted by violent Jan. 6 insurrectionists who believe the false claim that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump. In fact, some rioters ripped down the U.S. flag from a flagpole outside the Capitol and replaced it with the flag bearing Trump's name.

And more recently, after his conviction in the hush-money trial, Trump supporters and right-wing politicians shared images of an inverted flag on social media.

Then there's a separate flag propped up by Christian nationalists and "Stop the Steal" adherents. Featuring a green, clip-art-like pine tree set against a white backdrop, it reads "AN APPEAL TO HEAVEN" in all caps. (I sense that some of the same critics who lambasted our new Minnesota state flag for its simple iconography have no qualms about flying the Pine Tree flag which, despite having roots going back to the Revolutionary War, could have been designed on Print Shop.)

Alito said his wife, apparently the flag enthusiast in the house, was responsible for flying the Appeal to Heaven flag outside their New Jersey beach house, just as she was blamed for waving the upside-down American flag.

With the traditional flag losing favor among this sect of Americans, I propose my own radical idea: That the rest of us proudly reclaim the red, white and blue.

Liberals sometimes are wary around those who flaunt their patriotism. In recent years, other than on July 4, seeing a stranger sport a flag design on their T-shirt or back of their truck can seem synonymous with MAGA hats, "Let's Go, Brandon" and full-throated support of the NRA. It has become shorthand for one party rather than the ideals that this nation was founded on.

But patriotism should not be equated with an unquestioning faith in country. It can mean criticism that comes from a place of love. It can mean acknowledging inherent flaws in our government while knowing darn well that an intact, functioning democracy is the best system we can have.

Patriotism means having some trust in our institutions, whether it's a representative government, scientists who developed a vaccine or journalists holding the powerful to account. But it also means working to make our country stronger, loving it into an even better future.

Yet when I see a flag, which in recent years has been a symbol of conservative America, I also wonder what the flag bearer might think of me.

Four years under Trump was difficult for a lot of Americans LGBTQ+ folks, Muslims, immigrants and other marginalized communities. It was an uneasy time for Asian Americans, who were vilified by COVID-19 as Trump called it the "Chinese virus." Does a flag denote a love of Trump, and perhaps by an extension, a hostility toward Asians?

But the flag has always been special to my family.

It means something to my father, who served in the Army and lost friends in Vietnam. It held significance for my grandfather, a "Chinese laundryman" (as they were known in the 1950s) who loved to take his family to July 4th parades.

If you ever are feeling jaded about our country, I beg you to visit a naturalization ceremony, where immigrants enthusiastically wave their little American flags with pride and hope and euphoric joy.

Recently, my 11-year-old son used his birthday money to buy a new fishing backpack. It came sewn with a small patch of the American flag. It surprised me that he was drawn to this symbol.

On our way to a soccer game, he noticed a large billowing U.S. flag along the freeway and commented on how majestic it looked. To him, I suspect the flag doesn't carry the political baggage it might for me. It simply stands for a love of country, a sense of home. Isn't that what it should evoke?

Flag Day, June 14, is upon us, and July 4 is around the corner. Regular Americans be they Republicans, Democrats, moderates or independents who believe in working together and protecting democracy should reclaim the flag. Let it be a symbol of the American Dream, the promise of freedom, and justice for all.

Let's make the flag great again.

Many Americans will proudly display the stars and stripes on June 14. Keep an eye out for the weather though, because it affects if the flag should be flown.

Get opinion pieces, letters and editorials sent directly to your inbox weekly!

Follow this link:
Laura Yuen: It's time for regular Americans (liberals included) to reclaim the US flag - The Pantagraph

Rep. Nancy Mace, Republican of South Carolina, is one of Congresss oddest ducks. Shes someone who once positioned herself as a centrist before a remarkably abrupt anti-establishment flip that involved knifing former ally Kevin McCarthy. Shes known for ridiculous gaffes and stunts, like telling a prayer-breakfast crowd shed skipped sex with her fianc to make it on time, or wearing a literal scarlet letter around Capitol Hill. Her reputation as a horrible boss is legendary; her staff turnover unprecedented. Even in a town of attention hogs, her unslakable thirst for the TV cameras stands out.

Anyway, congrats to Nancy Mace on landing Trumps endorsement and sailing through her primary last night! Happy Wednesday.

Can liberals be for law and order?

In a world of terror threats, border turmoil, and ugly mobs on city streets, they need to be. We need to be.

Terror: NBC News reported last night:

Eight men from Tajikistan with potential ties to ISIS out of central Asia were arrested over the weekend in New York, Philadelphia and Los Angeles . . .

The suspects had been on the FBIs Joint Terrorism Task Force radar and were arrested by personnel with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, better known as ICE . . . .

All eight men crossed through the southern border into the U.S.

This follows on warnings from senior administration officials about an elevated terror threat. Two months ago, FBI Director Chris Wray testified to Congress that Weve seen the threat from foreign terrorists rise to a whole another level after October 7 . . . Looking back over my career in law enforcement, Id be hard pressed to think of a time where so many threats to our public safety and national security were so elevated all at once.

The border: As we see in poll after poll, immigration is near or at the top of the list of issues Americans say matter most to them. The sense that the border is out of control is so widespread that it led congressional Democrats earlier this year to agree to what once would have been unpalatable border measures, and to President Bidens executive order on the border a week ago.

Mobs in the streets: Meanwhile, weve seen demonstrations and disturbances in major cities by pro-Palestinian (sometimes pro-Hamas) mobs, most recently in New York City, outside an exhibit memorializing the victims of the October 7 massacre. Demonstrators at this event carried Hamas and Hezbollah flags. They held signs reading Long Live October 7 and the Zionists are not Jews and not humans.

As one member of Congress put it, the callousness, dehumanization, and targeting of Jews on display at last nights protest outside the Nova Festival exhibit was atrocious antisemitismplain and simple. That was not said by a Trump supporter or a Republican. It was Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York.

Terror, immigration, and demonstrations are distinct issues. Sensible policies in each of these areas can be complicated. But in the hands of a skillful authoritarian demagogue, these problemsa border that seems out of control, a genuine terrorism threat, and mobs in the streetsform a toxic political combination.

Its a combination that those who want to defeat the authoritarian demagogue cant wish away.

How to respond to public sentiment while maintaining sound policies in these areas is challenging. But thats what good politicians have to do.

That means they have to recognize and credit those concerns of the public.

Which in turn means, to put it simply: Liberals have to be for law and order.

I know the phrase has a problematic history. And being friendly to law and order doesnt mean you cannot or should not denounce religious bigotry, seek to curb police brutality, defend the First Amendment, and criticize demagogues who exploit public concerns for their own purposes.

It also doesnt mean you cant try to emphasize, as Democrats did in the late 1960s, that youre for law and orderand for justice. I like that modification, and perhaps it can be revived today. But still, the fact remains that in the current political climate, you cannot be a majority party in the country if youre perceived as indifferent to or unfriendly to law and order.

And of course law and order properly understood are things we should be in favor of. In the Preamble to the Constitution, to insure domestic tranquility is the third purpose listed, after to form a more perfect Union and establish justice.

The perceived and conflated threats of out-of-control immigration and terrorism made Donald Trump president in 2016. They could do so again.

Trump understands this. On the campaign trail this year, hes promised to immediately restore and expand the Trump travel ban on entry from terror-plagued countries. If you hate America, if you want to abolish Israel, if you sympathize with jihadists, then we dont want you in our country!

Well be hearing much more along those lines now. Do we have an effective response?

William Kristol

Thank you for reading The Bulwark. This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

What to say about a verdict everybody expected?

Jurors needed only three hours deliberation Tuesday morning to convict Hunter Biden on three nonviolent gun felonies.

Federal law prohibits drug addicts from acquiring or owning firearms; the jury was unmoved by the defenses argument that Hunter had not considered himself an addict when he testified he wasnt one in order to buy a gun in 2018.

Like the rest of his family, Hunter has endured unspeakable tragedies, from the deaths of his mother and sister when he was just three to the death of his brother Beau in 2015.

Tragedies can ennoble people; they can also break them. Hunter was no boy scout prior to Beaus deathhed already launched into his scuzzy business dealings in China and Ukraine, and had been discharged from the Navy Reserve after testing positive for cocainebut it was that death that sent him spiraling into an uncontrollable addiction that made him a vector for more family tragedy.

In the depths of that addiction, he bought a gun, falsely attesting as he did so that he was not using illegal drugs at the time.

Many have noted that its rare, if not unprecedented, for these crimes to be charged without being connected to some further crime committed with the gun.

Even so, those laws are just. An addict is by definition someone who has lost a great deal of control over his own actions. If laws trying to keep guns out of addicts hands werent on the books already, wed want them to be.

Former federal prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, who served as one of the head lawyers on the Mueller probe into Donald Trump, summed things up well on MSNBC yesterday:

I think that what youre seeing today and what we saw in New York in connection with the Trump criminal case is jurors doing their job . . . In both situations, jurors heard the facts, they weighed credibility, and they made decisions. And it didnt matter if youre dealing with the former president of the United States . . . or youre dealing with the son of the president. These are jurors that did their duty and the rule of law held in both situations.

The verdict has raised awkward epistemic problems for MAGAworld. After all, when they arent imagining Joe Biden to be a senile old fool, theyre picturing him as a cunning mastermind bending the whole Department of Justice to his dastardly ends. If Hunter was found guilty, then, there must have been some reason why his father wanted him to be found guilty.

We could fill a whole newsletter with the mental gymnastics the right is using to try to square this circle: Do you see the op now? senior Trump adviser Stephen Miller tweeted. Charge Hunter with a minor gun violation and NOT his conduct as an unregistered foreign agent or illicit foreign business dealings in order to protect the BIG GUY before the election. DOJ is Bidens election protection racket.

But enough about them. We talk about them plenty. Whats more striking is how the real Bidennot the Biden of MAGA fantasiaresponded. Up at the site today, Jill Lawrence takes a look back at the remarkable way Biden has handled the Hunter affair all along, standing by his son unconditionally on a personal level while refusing to taint the judicial process:

When he took office, Joe Biden retained Delawares Trump-appointed U.S. attorney, David Weiss, to finish an investigation into whether Hunter Biden falsified a gun form and evaded taxes while he was addicted to drugs. Joe Biden did not attack the justice system when a Trump-appointed judgeMaryellen Noreikaquestioned Hunters plea agreement, which ultimately fell apart. Joe Biden didnt comment or intervene when Attorney General Merrick Garlandhis own appointeeelevated Weiss to special counsel status, allowing him broader authority to investigate and bring charges.

When his son went on trial in Wilmington, again in Noreikas courtroom, Joe Biden did not attack the judge. He also said he would not pardon Hunter if he were convicted. After the guilty verdict Tuesday, the president said he was proud of the man he is today and added: As I also said last week, I will accept the outcome of this case and will continue to respect the judicial process as Hunter considers an appeal. . . .

It also takes strength and discipline for a president to let the Justice Department do its job without fear, favor, public criticism, or outright meddling.

We wont speculate on how the verdict will affect Bidens reelection chances in November, as theres plausible arguments to be made for it helping him (empathy!), hurting him (family scandal!), or having no difference whatsoever (Hunters baked in!).

But on a personal level, the Biden family isnt through this painful period yet. Hunters other trial, concerning $1.4 million in unpaid back taxes, is due to begin in September.

Andrew Egger

May CPI shows inflation cooling for second straight month: Axios

Trump-endorsed candidates win primaries in Nevada, South Dakota, and South Carolina: NBC News

Trial pulled back curtain on Biden familys dark moments: New York Times

New poll goes deep on Kamala Harriss liabilities and strengths as a potential president: Politico

Is Emmanuel Macron too toxic to win? Politico

For many observers, the most difficult part of following the Hunter Biden trial was the deep family pain it dredged up and dragged into the spotlight. While he was using, Hunter was a messa black hole of suffering for himself and the people around him. But as our friend Molly Jong-Fastherself a recovering addictwrites at MSNBC, he was also a victim of his disease:

Biden and I are not alone in being addicts. Roughly 16% of Americans (but likely more) struggle with alcohol and drug addiction. Thats about 48 million people.

Fox News' The Five co-host Jeanine Pirro reportedly complained about eight jurors who have someone in their family whos had a drug or alcohol addiction problem or someone who died from alcohol or addiction. So they picked a jury who is sympathetic. The Washington Posts Aaron Blake pointed out that 8 of 12 jurors = 66%. Thats exactly in line with the population. . . .

Addiction is a disease. People who struggle with addiction are sick, not bad. Huge swaths of the country are affected by alcohol and drug addiction that affects not just them, but their family members and people who are even tangentially connected to them the parents, grandparents and kids and brothers and sisters and acquaintances of the addict. Alcoholism and drug addiction are a disease with a long tail, a disease that ripples through our society in myriad ways. . .

For years, Republicans have used pictures of Hunter Biden strung out on crack cocaine as some kind of indictment of his father. But when I see those pictures, I see a warning.

Im sober 26 years, but I have the same illness of addiction that Hunter Biden does. Being sober doesnt make me a better person than people who are active in their addiction. It just makes me luckier than they are.

Read the whole thing.

On a lighter note, this is sure worth a watch:

Continued here:
Liberals Shouldn't Give Up On 'Law and Order' - The Bulwark