8 thoughts on “News/Politics 11-23-18

  1. I think it’s adorable that Roberts pretends none of this is actually the case. 🙂


    “Chief Justice John Roberts has rebuked President Trump for referring to “Obama judges.” Trump had responded to a ruling by district court judge Jon Tigar barring enforcement of his revisions to federal asylum rules by saying “this was an Obama judge.”

    The Chief Justice rejected Trump’s characterization. He said:

    We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges. What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them. That independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for.

    I like and respect Chief Justice Roberts, but I disagree with him. I believe we have too many federal judges who are doing their level best to assist the left in resisting President Trump. And while I would never refer to a judge as an Obama judge, it’s more than fair to refer to one as an Obama-appointed judge. This may well have been what Trump meant.

    The questions of whether it matters who appointed a federal judge and whether such judges view litigants, including President Trump, with equal regard in any meaningful sense are empirical ones. If one can predict with a high degree of accuracy how a judge will rule in a highly controversial case, or in a case challenging a Trump edict the left doesn’t like, just by knowing which president appointed that judge, then Roberts’ defense of the federal judiciary fails.

    I don’t know of any study of this question, though it probably has been examined. However, as Trump himself noted when he referred to Judge Tigar as an Obama judge, litigants flock to the Ninth Circuit when they want to challenge his policies.

    Why? Because it’s loaded with liberal judges appointed by Democrats. The leftists who take on the president in court believe they will receive favorable rulings from these judges, and they have been right about this virtually without fail. If the case advances to the Supreme Court, where liberal judges are in the minority, Trump is even-money or better to prevail.”

    Grassley agrees.


  2. More on why he’s wrong here….


    “The rebuke to President Trump issued by Chief Justice John Roberts over criticism of an “Obama judge” was wrong in two different ways. The New York Times gleefully reported on the scolding from the head of the federal judiciary:

    “We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges,” he said in a statement. “What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them. That independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for.”

    The chief justice is just about as believable insisting that politics doesn’t affect the judiciary as Iran’s President Ahmadinejad was when he told a Columbia University audience that there are no gays in Iran. Groucho Marx articulated the dilemma with the immortal line, “Who are you going to believe? Me or your lying eyes?”

    Or, as Mark Levin posted on Facebook:

    It appears John Roberts doesn’t live in the real world. A few decades ago he understood that there are, in fact, too many progressive judges and justices who legislate from the bench. Indeed, when it came to Obamacare, Roberts himself led the court’s leftists in rewriting the Constitution and imposing that damnable law on all of us. We don’t need any lectures from him. Indeed, he should be admonishing his own branch of government for its outrageous activism rather than playing to the media by attacking the president. Classless.

    Roberts has remained silent as a series of outrageous decisions from federal district judges has substituted a single judge’s decision on what the POTUS should do for the authority granted to the chief executive by the Constitution.”


  3. Huh.


    ““I can understand why the president and other people here are concerned about what is going on.””

    “The Department of Homeland Security estimated that 500 criminals have integrated themselves into the caravan. Gutierrez couldn’t confirm that number, but he agreed with the concerns shared by the administration:

    “I think that those numbers, precisely, were, I don’t know exactly where those numbers are coming from but I do know we have strong cooperation with the United States to identify people that have criminal records that are coming into our region, and that just makes sense, and that’s an example of the good cooperation that Mexico and the United States have,” he added.

    “I don’t know where that number of 500 – I’m skeptical about it,” Gutierrez said. “I mean, we share the opinion that there are people that have criminal backgrounds in that group and yes, the numbers I cannot comment because the numbers are, I just don’t think there’s enough clarify about what those numbers come from.”

    Gutierrez disagrees with Trump description of the caravan as an invasion, but he said that he understands “why the president and other people here are concerned about what is going on.””


  4. Huh again.


    “German Think Tank: Trump Winning in Trade War with China

    The U.S. trade deficit with China drops by 17 percent: EconPol Europe”

    “Contrary to the mainstream media reporting, President Donald Trump may be winning the trade war with China, according to a leading European think tank.

    The tariffs placed by the Trump administration could narrow the U.S. trade deficit with China by 17 percent, a recent paper published by Munich-based EocnPol Europe projects.

    “The US import tariffs will increase the prices of the affected Chinese products in the United States and decrease the profit margin of Chinese exporters,” the fifteen page report says. “This might force some Chinese firms to stop exporting to the US, or even force them completely out of the market.”

    The tariffs slapped on Chinese goods by President Trump could lead to a net gain of $18.4 billion for the government, the document estimates.

    The report titled “Who is Paying for the Trade War with China?” shows the changing trade dynamics between the two countries:

    [T]he greatest share of the tariff burden falls not on American consumers or firms, but on Chinese exporters. We calibrate a simple economic model and find that a 25 percentage point increase in tariffs raises US consumer prices on all affected Chinese products by only 4.5% on average, while the producer price of Chinese firms declines by 20.5%. The US government has strategically levied import duties on goods with high import elasticities, which transfers a great share of the tariff burden on to Chinese exporters. Chinese firms pay approximately 75% of the tariff burden and the tariffs decrease Chinese exports of affected goods to the United States by around 37%. This implies that the bilateral trade deficit between the US and China drops by 17%.

    German newspaper Die Welt backed up the findings published by EconPol report by citing the economic data published by the IFO economic research institute:

    “Germany’s IFO Institute sees China in a tough spot. The IFO researchers concluded in a study that the countries in the Far East will be most affected by the trade war. “Tariffs are just another form of expense which is distributed between the foreign manufacturer and the consumers at home,” economist Gabriel Felbermayr explained.

    And three fourth of the U.S. tariff on Chinese goods will be borne by the Chinese manufacturers. Americans, on the other hand, will gain considerable revenue. “The problem with protectionism is that it can actually have economic benefits for the United States,” Felbermayr said.

    These are outrageous predictions that British and German [economists] are making: around the world, even in the U.S., economists and company bosses were long convinced of the disastrous results of Trump’s tariffs. And now economists say that President’s tough trade policy and his much despised “America First” can have positive impact.

    The U.S. customs revenues are going to rise by 22,5 billion, IFO Institute estimates. An amount that can later be redistributed [over to consumers]. Economists project a net gain of $18,4 billion. They see a 37 percent drop in the exports goods impacted [by the tariff hike]. In terms of trade deficit between China and the U.S., this will amount to a reduction of 17 percent. [Translation by the author]”


  5. The little weasel is still making a plea to the gullible for this to be done publicly, but that’s only so he can use that venue as an excuse to not answer the tough and classified questions.


  6. The tariffs are causing a number of businessmen I know to move out of China– or, perhaps more correctly since it’s near impossible to get your money out of China– to move to other more-western friendly countries.

    China’s middle class is understandably asking for more money, the government is archaic and corrupt and the physical environment a nightmare.

    Manufacturing, if you’re at all concerned about the world’s carvon footprint, should be done in California where the energy is cleaner and cheaper.


  7. I shared this story with you all, including the video of Marines sprinting down the street to help, a few weeks back.


    “A massive fire struck a four-story Southeast Washington housing complex for seniors Wednesday afternoon.

    Some of the first responders were neighbors, including Marines from the Barracks Washington at 8th & I, located just down the street.

    Dramatic videos on social media show large plumes of smoke billowing from the building and even the complex’s roof collapsing. One showed Marines rushing from the barracks to help rescue seniors. They pushed wheelchairs and stretchers toward the burning building.

    “Marines rushed into the building to rescue those who needed assistance and evacuated residents to the Marine Barracks Washington Annex where they were checked and treated for any injuries and sheltered until their loved ones arrived,” said a post on the Barracks Washington Facebook page.”

    Here’s an update. 🙂


    “Two months after running into a burning building to save elderly residents at the Arthur Capper Senior Public Housing complex in Washington, D.C., U.S. Marine Corps Captain Trey Gregory is coming to their aid again – with a Thanksgiving meal.

    “These people have been through a traumatic event,” said Capt. Gregory. “It is so sad right before the holidays but I’m just honored that we get to serve them again and give them food and put a smile on their face.”

    There were plenty of smiles and hugs to go around as Gregory and several other Marines from the Washington Barracks dished out turkey, macaroni and cheese, sweet potatoes, green beans and other traditional fare for dozens of residents and their families.

    “It is an honor and a blessing to see them serving us this way, you know, because we know they care,” said D’Artois Davis who has been stuck at a hotel since the fire. “It’s the holiday and you’re used to your family coming around but there’s no place for them to come and we’ve lost so much.”

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.