The 47th Amendment

Anything Trump does anytime is unconstitutional

The press had a lousy weekend. Reuters reported, “U.S. Supreme Court lets Trump withhold $4 billion in foreign aid.”

Similar headlines were posted by the usual suspects such as CBS, NYT and AP. The headlines were in error because a president does not need the Court’s permission to do anything because they head equal branches of government.

The idea that the court can veto a presidential action is as obnoxious as the idea that a president may veto a court decision.

Congress does have power over presidents and justices via impeachment, but both the president and the court can veto most congressional actions via an actual veto or a pocket veto by the president, and by a court striking down a congressional action as unconstitutional. But Congress can override a presidential veto. Congress can initiate an amendment to nullify a court decision.

I’m no lawyer but the concept that the only figure elected by the nation as a whole is subservient to 9 appointees from previous administrations and congresses is absurd.

The decision Reuters cited merely blocks a Biden DEI hire—Judge Amir “First Muslim Judge in the DC Circuit!” Ali— from making Trump spend the money before Wednesday when the federal budget year ends. This rendered the case a moot point.

I notice justices go out of their way to avoid making actual decisions. That’s deliciously judicious. We need fewer laws and even fewer precedents.

Because the stay on doling out foreign aid upheld Trump’s authority, the press opposed it. This is under the imaginary and unratified 47th Amendment which holds that anything Trump does at any time is unconstitutional.

The Constitution and we the people of the United States of America may have made him president and the chief of the executive branch of government but the Democrat Party and its toucans in the press refuse to accept his authority.

Consider his ability to fire political appointees. The lower courts in the basement of the the judiciary have repeatedly tried to overrule firings of high-priced officials who will not carry out his policies despite voters overwhelmingly voting for his policies.

The latest example was spun by Politico:

The Supreme Court is allowing President Donald Trump to keep a Biden-appointed member of the Federal Trade Commission out of her post for at least three more months, despite a century-old federal law aimed at limiting the president’s power to fire such officials for political reasons.

Such a law does not exist but it is a Supreme Court decision from 90 years ago by a Republican Supreme Court to get back at FDR. Democrats did not invent lawfare and let this be a lesson in boomerangs. Play it straight and nobody gets hurt.

The recent decision to sidestep precedent was 6-3 with the three blind mice on the Court saying, in a dissent written by Justice Elena “Moe” Kagan, “The majority, stay order by stay order, has handed full control of all those agencies to the President.”

No, the Constitution and the people put him in charge.

The hacks in the district courts keep trying to take control of federal policy from the man we elected to set it. We gave them lifetime terms to protect them from politics—and here they are using that protection to play politics.

Boasberg is a bully who acts like he’s above the law. Tish James and Fani Willis thought the same thing. Trump got the goods on both of them. Let’s see what he gets on Boasberg.

The press doesn’t get what is going on with this flood of court challenges. Reporters side with the intransigent bureaucracy over the will of the people. Their stories are very misleading.

The New York Times reported, “Trump Fired a U.S. Attorney Who Insisted on Following a Court Order.”

Actually, that was not why she was fired. In fact, Paragraphs 19, 20 and 21 in that very story said as much. The story began:

For 15 years, Michele Beckwith oversaw some of the toughest federal prosecutions in California. She went after transnational terrorists, sex traffickers and the Aryan brotherhood.

She became the acting U.S. attorney in Sacramento this year when her boss, a Biden appointee, stepped down in January.

But her career crumbled in July, she said, after she issued a warning to Gregory Bovino, the California face of President Trump’s immigration crackdown.

The dismissal of Ms. Beckwith appeared to be an early example of how Mr. Trump has fired top federal prosecutors who did not help carry out his political agenda.

Here’s what really happened. ICE was about to raid a Home Depot parking lot where illegal aliens go to get day jobs for under-the-table money. Bovino contacted Beckwith, first hired in 2010 when Obama was president, to give her a heads up and to make sure she had ICE’s back if people assaulted ICE.

She didn’t.

Paragraphs 19, 20 and 21 said:

A Department of Homeland Security official, who was part of the Sacramento operation and spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly, said that federal officials were offended by Ms. Beckwith’s suggestion that immigration agents were going to violate the rights of migrants.

What’s more, the official said, Mr. Bovino felt Ms. Beckwith was refusing to provide his team the legal support it needed to safely conduct the operations.

In a statement, Mr. Bovino said, “The former Acting U.S. Attorney’s email suggesting that the United States Border Patrol does not ALWAYS abide by the Constitution revealed a bias against law enforcement.”

So some liberal with a law degree tried to block ICE and lost her job. Ha Ha Ha. The 47th Amendment exists only in liberal fantasies and the Supreme Court is waking liberals up the fact that Donald Trump is president—again.

The press portrays the obstructionists as the victims when they clearly are trying to game the system.

New York magazine reported, “The Trump administration currently faces more than 300 legal challenges to its policies and has admitted—when pressed by Justice Amy Coney Barrett during Supreme Court oral arguments—that it believes it doesn’t always have to follow lower-court decisions. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has backed the Trump administration on the shadow docket 26 out of 28 times, according to a recent NBC News tally.”

No president has ever faced more than 300 court cases because no president has ever faced a lower court refusal to accept his legitimacy as president. Judges should be telling these lawfare plaintiffs that they have no standing and that the local courts, which is what district courts are, have no jurisdiction.

As for Jimmy the Ferret Comey’s indictment, don’t buy the media spin especially from Andy McCarthy.

True, Comey had a mole inside the investigation—his son-in-law who worked in the U.S. attorney’s office in eastern Virginia (EDVA) that investigated the 6-foot-8 toadstool. Those saying the evidence isn’t there are parrots for the ferret. He lawyered up quickly hiring longtime deep-stater Patrick Fitzgerald.

Comey just happened to land a Biden appointee as the judge in the case. It’s an uphill battle that at worst may bankrupt Comey.

The indictment is a good start—a tug on the plug over the drain of the swamp. Trump has a long way to go and a short time to get there.

Between Comey’s indictment and the Supreme Court upholding Trump not funding Democrat pet projects, the press had a long sad-faced weekend.

Which meant the rest of us had a terrific time.