Good morning, kids. Well, I guess the mellifluous incantations of Maxine "Love Canal" Waters (among others) continue to win friends and influence people, as Rep Matt Gaetz found himself the target of, pace everyone's favorite incest aficionado, Jew-hater and immigration fraudster Bro-fo Omar, a mostly peaceful "something that somebody did."
“This past Saturday my wife Ginger and I attended the South Walton Beaches Wine and Food Festival,” said Rep. Gaetz in a statement, explaining: “…we were enjoying catching up with new friends and old, and folks recognized me, and so we were taking pictures and having polite conversations. And as I was chatting with one gentleman, a lady threw a drink on the both of us. She was promptly arrested. I want to thank the folks at the Walton County Sheriff’s office who ensured that this did not escalate and that everyone is kept safe.”
The assailant is believed to be Selena Jo Chambers, 41 years old, who has since locked all her social media accounts.
Rep. Gaetz’s video on the incident, below, asserts that Chambers is a “resistance” writer, Joe Biden donor, and even potentially an occultist.
She wrote about the subject in a series about using “psychoanalysis, Sadeianism, occultism, mythology” and other practices for “Women’s Surrealist Survival.”
It could've been worse. Could've been urine. Or acid. Or a favorite of transexual terrorists, 7.62mm rounds. In any case, Matt Gaetz and his wife were clearly at fault here for committing the heinous act of having a pulse while American.
The liberal Texas Tribune reported:
Texas House Speaker Dade Phelan abruptly cleared the public from the chamber’s gallery Tuesday, after LGBTQ Texans and parents of transgender kids chanted in opposition of a bill that would ban transition-related care for children.Phelan ordered state police to clear the gallery just as Senate Bill 14 came to the House floor and as opponents began their chants and unrolled banners in support of trans kids. As bill opponents started filing out of the gallery, they chanted, “Trans rights are human rights.”
[So-called quote-unquote "president"] Joe Biden and Democrats have praised other disruptive protest, with the White House recently hosting the so-called “Tennessee Three” — Democrats who joined protesters in disrupting the Tennessee legislature in a protest for gun control. Two of the three were subsequently expelled from the legislature (though they were later restored to their seats). The protest occurred after a mass shooting by a transgender assailant. The White House has yet to host the victims’ families or the police officers who ended the shooting. Last week, there was another “insurrection” in Montana, also motivated by the transgender cause.
Concurrent and not completely unrelated in the grander scheme of things with this and everything else going on around us, there's a renewed assault on the integrity of the Supreme Court. That is, the integrity of the court which, thanks mostly to President Trump, is now a fairly reliable 5-4 conservative and on occasion 6-3. (i.e. they follow the actual words of that thing known as the Constitution and not "Rules for Radicals"). The 32-year high-tech lynching of Clarence Thomas (it never really ended) as filthy criminal bastard Chuck "Cuck Schemer" Schumer among others is ginning up ethics charges against him because – quelle horreur – he takes fishing trips with a very wealthy businessman and, you know, influence! But wait! There's more! Now Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch is under fire because, get this, he sold a property to the head of a major law firm. Oh the huge manatee!
Of course Ruth Bader-Meinhoff, having been the general counsel for Planned Parenthood before being confirmed to the court was completely impartial and never recused herself time and time again when abortion cases came before the court. No ethics violations there. Same with Elena Kagan when the individual mandate came before the court and her being Obama's Solicitor General prior to that was no reason to recuse herself. No siree Bob!
But of course all this pales in comparison to the actual threats of violence that have only ramped up since the heavily armed creep was caught in front of Justice Kavanaugh's home. And now, Cuck Schemer and Dick "Turdbin" Durbin – who has yet to answer for his close ties to mass shooter James Hodgkinson – are ginning up some sort of Senate inquiry that, you can bet your balls to a barn door is aiming to kick at least Thomas and if they can swing it Gorsuch off of the court for ethics violations. I have to say, I'm no fan of John Roberts, but he has effectively told the Democrats to go piss up a rope with a letter flatly refusing to appear before any kangaroo committee. Kudos as well to the three solidly Marxist hacks as well who made it unanimous.
Besides the landmark Dobbs decision as well as Heller and a few others that have, at least for the time being, short circuited the Left's destruction of our nation and liberties (what's left of them anyway), there is another big case that could really throw a monkey wrench directly into the machinery which for now is flying under the radar.
The Supreme Court made a tragic mistake almost 40 years ago.
In the 1984 case of Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, it ruled federal judges must defer to a regulatory agency’s interpretations of federal laws, so long as Congress has not addressed the issue in question and the agency’s view can be construed as “reasonable.”
Since then, the power of the unelected administrative state has ballooned so that it now dictates much of our economy and daily lives.
The court announced Monday it will revisit that precedent, raising hopes that this enormous federal power might be reined in.
The Constitution set up a system of separated powers in which Congress would pass the laws, the president would administer them and the courts would interpret them.
Since the New Deal, Congress has shirked its accountability by increasingly giving unelected agencies the power to make decisions of vast economic and political significance. The Chevron decision turbocharged that process. Politico says liberal activists love Chevron because in hundreds of court decisions it has been invoked to hand agency experts the power “to respond to problems that Congress might not anticipate or fully understand.” That may be expedient, but it is a dangerous trampling of our constitutional framework. The job of Congress is to pass laws that are detailed and limiting to the executive. The executive’s job is to execute laws, not write them. And there was a time when some liberals worried the Chevron doctrine encouraged unchecked executive authority. In 1986, Stephen Breyer, a future Supreme Court justice then serving on a federal appeals court, called Chevron an “abdication of judicial responsibility” because the Constitution gives judges, not agency bureaucrats, the power to interpret federal law. The Supreme Court last year took a first step in backing away from its Chevron decision. In West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, a 6 to 3 court majority ruled that from now on Congress must explicitly grant regulatory agencies the power they wield. That infuriated the activist left.
Since the spectacular collapse of President Barack Obama’s cap-and-trade scheme to rein in carbon emissions, which failed to even get a Senate floor vote in 2010, environmentalists have become experts at twisting and distorting old laws to accomplish by the back door what they could never do using legitimate constitutional approaches. From regulations aimed at climate change to the overriding of local zoning laws in New York, activists have used that approach to lobby federal agencies to implement an agenda Congress would never approve on its own. One former federal regulator, appalled at left-wing efforts to ban gas stoves, told me: “They go through federal agencies like burglars who try every door in a neighborhood in the belief one of them will be unlocked.” The court may not overturn the case in full, but the fact that at least four justices have agreed to reexamine the decision indicates Chevron deference is likely to be curbed. Justice Neil Gorsuch, whose mother ironically was involved in the original 1984 Chevron decision as President Ronald Reagan’s head of the Environmental Protection Agency, wrote in November that the court “should acknowledge forthrightly that Chevron did not undo, and could not have undone, the judicial duty to provide an independent judgment of the law’s meaning.”
Gorsuch has written elsewhere: “Maybe the time has come to face the behemoth” of the administrative state.
But, but, but Gorsuch sold his house to a law school dean!!!!
Forget "muh borshinz!!!" This case is potentially the whole enchilada. America for many decades has been effectively ruled by unelected bureaucrats, not governed by elected representatives of the people.
Beyond the bureaucratic leviathan, this case also illustrates the nightmare that resulted from Marbury v Madison. The court was never intended to have the status of an Oracle of Delphi, and yet here we are. That's why the Left insists on a "living and breathing Constitution" despite every effort to kill it, cremate it and scatter the ashes.
Whatever happens with this case, there is no way in hell the Leviathan will ever cede any power, nor will the Democrat-Left and their RINO stooges allow that to happen since this is the bullwhip with which they keep us in line. Still, one can dream.
NOTE: The opinions expressed in the links may or may not reflect my own. I include them because of their relevance to the discussion of a particular issue.
ALSO: The Morning Report is cross-posted at CutJibNewsletter.com if you want to continue the conversation all day.
Follow us on Twitter: @CutJibNews
Follow us on Instagram: @Cutjibnewsletter
TIP JAR : Your support helps keep the lights on and is truly appreciated. Note: We are on Stripe, not PayPal.