The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Breaking News => Topic started by: Eupher on May 26, 2023, 06:08:32 AM
-
The Supreme Court unanimously rules against ‘home equity theft’ (https://twitchy.com/aaronw-313234/2023/05/26/the-supreme-court-unanimously-rules-against-home-equity-theft/)
Wow. SCOTUS is on a roll. Two unanimous opinions sorta back-to-back. SCOTUS took a dump on the EPA yesterday, and now this.
Okay everyone, time for a math problem.
Let’s say that a woman owes approximately $15,000 to the government for back taxes and penalties. So, the government seizes her home to pay for that and sells that home for approximately $40,000. Approximately, how much does the government owe the original homeowner?
If you said ‘nothing,’ you would apparently be the state of Minnesota.
But, crucially, you would not be any member of the Supreme Court.
Yes, Thursday was opinion day at the Supreme Court, and one of the opinions handed down was Tyler v. Hennepin County (2023) and that hypothetical is basically what was going on.
This thread was published just before oral argument (which was a month ago) and it does a good job providing background on the case:
This is Twitchy, so 9/10s of the story is stuff from Twitterland.
-
Texas House Committee Recommends Impeaching Attorney General Ken Paxton (https://townhall.com/tipsheet/saraharnold/2023/05/25/texas-house-committee-recommends-impeaching-attorney-general-ken-paxton-n2623734)
Blood in the water? First I've heard of Paxton's troubles, but then again I don't live in Texas.
A Texas House of Representatives investigative committee recommended impeachment for Republican state Attorney General Ken Paxton.
The committee unanimously voted 5-0 to adopt articles of impeachment for Paxton on Thursday, with the recommendation coming as soon as Friday.
The five-member GOP-led investigative committee met on Wednesday to discuss the allegations of wrongdoing against Paxton, who is accused of breaking several laws and misusing his power to help a political donor, including abusing the use of official information, official capacity, and retaliating.
Paxton claimed the probe against him was based on "hearsay and gossip, parroting long-disproven claims" and is fueled by "RINOs."
The chief of general litigation for Paxton's office Chris Hilton called the committee's investigation "illegal," adding that "impeachment is completely foreclosed by Texas law" in Paxton's case.
Despite being under indictment on felony security charges since 2015, Paxton was re-elected twice. The FBI is also investigating him over bribery claims from whistleblowers— former lieutenants from his office.
In addition, four of his aides sued Paxton, who claims he fired them for reporting him to federal law enforcement for allegedly taking bribes and using his power to help one of his campaign donors, Nate Paul.
The House committee launched its probe after Paxton and the whistleblowers reached a $3.3. million settlement.
If everyone in the House votes to impeach Paxton, he'd be immediately removed from his position pending the outcome of a trial on the charges in the state Senate.
On Thursday, Paxton's office declared the probe to be "false," "misleading," and "full of errors big and small."
-
Let’s say that a woman owes approximately $15,000 to the government for back taxes and penalties. So, the government seizes her home to pay for that and sells that home for approximately $40,000. Approximately, how much does the government owe the original homeowner?
If you said ‘nothing,’ 1 you would apparently be the state of Minnesota 2.
But, crucially, you would not be any member of the Supreme Court 3.
1 The facts of the case, apparently, are just that simple. Somehow it did not occur to the State of Minnesota (or the relevant county) to read the 5th Amendment, specifically the Takings Clause.
2 Hopefully, MM i either spitting mad over this or futilely lecturing DU's maddened crowd about how right this decision is.
3 The MSM are portraying this and yesterday's similarly unanimous decision as the product of a "conservative court". I wonder what syllable of unanimous MSM folk don't understand. When a USSC decision is 9-0 or 8-1, that means the ruling is so grossly obviously right that the case really should not have had to be brought before the court. Whatever led to the plaintiff being 5-10 years behind on her property taxes, being that far behind did not justify her being ripped off for ~$25K.
-
DeSantis Reveals Exactly What He'll Do to Christopher Wray if Elected (https://redstate.com/bonchie/2023/05/25/desantis-reveals-exactly-what-hell-do-to-christopher-wray-if-elected-n751279)
It's a start. Garland and the rest of SharterJoe's henchmen (yeah, that includes the women too) would be gone, but then whoever wins the nomination and then the presidency would also have to start getting rid of the professional bureaucrats -- but not to the point where the bureaucracy can't run. The housecleaning needs to go on from the appointed ghouls in DOJ, to the FBI Director, to the complete national security apparatus, especially the CIA. Clean 'em all out. And don't rehire until candidates surface. Who says you have to have 5 layers of management? Bureaucracy bloat breeds laziness, and the government - for the most part - has grown fat and happy and awash in the taxpayer's money.
Trump's biggest failure was hiring Deep State operatives who immediately set about to destroy him. DeSantis is smart enough to know that going in. If Trump wins, maybe by now he "gets it."
With Ron DeSantis officially in the 2024 race comes real questions about how he’ll handle some of the more contentious issues facing any possible Republican president. Chief among them is what he’d do to combat the administrative overreach being practiced by the bureaucracy, with the behavior of the FBI being front and center in that discussion.
For example, on Wednesday, Rep. James Comer revealed that current FBI Director Christopher Wray has ignored a subpoena for an unclassified FD-1023 form. That form allegedly provides evidence of a bribery scheme involving Joe Biden while he was vice president. Instead of cooperating with Congress, the FBI is once again acting as the president’s personal protection force.
On the front, DeSantis wasted no time and pulled no punches. When asked by Trey Gowdy on Fox News following his kickoff with Elon Musk, the Florida man said he would fire Wray on day one. That clocks in as the most definitive pledge by any candidate so far in how they’ll deal with the controversial FBI director.
I’m sure that answer surprised Gowdy, as he is the type that has defended Wray as a misunderstood soul. How anyone could still believe that after everything that has happened, especially since Biden took office, is beyond me, though. Wray is as obstructionist and corrupt as James Comey was. He’s just more diplomatic about it.
Under Wray’s leadership, the FBI has targeted pro-lifers, targeted Catholics, ignored and obstructed investigations into the Biden Family, made false statements about left-wing radicalism, and misused surveillance provisions (again) to illegally spy on Americans. That is not an exhaustive list, but I’d be here all day if I kept going.
It’s simply a no-brainer to fire Wray with prejudice the moment any Republican takes off, which is why it’s so perplexing that other candidates haven’t taken that stand. The closest has been Vivek Ramaswamy, who said he’d shut down the FBI. I’d like to hear how he actually plans to accomplish that, but I’d assume it would require firing Wray even if Ramaswamy hasn’t said that. As to the other third-tier candidates in Nikki Haley, Asa Hutchinson, and Tim Scott, they are obviously not the type to say anything negative about Wray.
Meanwhile, in his most recent commentary on the issue, Donald Trump took the most non-committal position possible, blaming Chris Christie for Wray’s nomination while saying “time will tell” on whether it was a mistake to put him in as FBI director. To be frank, as I documented above, time has already told the story several times over.
TRUMP: I put Chris Wray in because I wanted to have somebody in there that everybody including the other side really wanted. It may not have been the right move. Let’s see, time will tell, okay? But I wanted to have somebody in the FBI, because I’m an honorable guy, I’m an honest guy. I may have made a mistake. But I put somebody in that the other side–everybody agreed to. You know who recommended him to me? Chris Christie. Okay? He recommended him. And that’s okay. I don’t mind that. I’ve taken Chris Christie’s recommendations before. And other people wanted Christopher Wray, and people from the other side wanted Christopher Wray.
The question isn’t who recommended Wray. It’s not even who supported Wray five years ago when he was elevated to lead the FBI (with Trump obviously being chief among them). The question is what all of the 2024 candidates are willing to do about it now. Trump doesn’t want to admit he made a mistake, but that’s not an excuse to continue beating around the bush on a figure as insidious as Wray. He needs to take a position and stick to it because the stakes are too high.
Hopefully, every candidate will follow DeSantis’ lead and vow to fire Wray on day one. I’d love to know that no matter who ends up as the nominee, such a serious issue will be dealt with.
-
Corrupt Bedfellows: SPLC and FBI Working Together to Frame Catholics as Terrorists
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/robert-spencer/2023/05/25/corrupt-bedfellows-splc-and-fbi-working-together-to-frame-catholics-as-terrorists-n1698164 (https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/robert-spencer/2023/05/25/corrupt-bedfellows-splc-and-fbi-working-together-to-frame-catholics-as-terrorists-n1698164)
The Biden regime’s staggeringly corrupt FBI has spies in Catholic Churches to hunt for “domestic terrorism,” and now it has come to light that aiding it in the dirty work of framing pro-life Catholics as dangerous “extremists” is none other than the massively discredited Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which uses its immense war chest to stigmatize and demonize legitimate groups on the Right by lumping them in with the likes of the KKK and neo-Nazis. For a wealthy and unscrupulous private organization to do that is one thing, but for the feds to endorse it and partner with that organization is quite another.
That does, however, seem to be what is happening. The Daily Signal reported Sunday that the FBI “appears, at least briefly, to have joined the Southern Poverty Law Center’s attempt to demonize Roman Catholics who follow the church’s teachings on marriage and who celebrate the Latin Mass.” Such Roman Catholics are among the least likely people on the planet to endorse the Leftist establishment’s obsession with deviance and perversion, and so it’s easy to see why they have been singled out for such treatment.
One of those Catholics, Michael J. Matt, editor of a feisty traditionalist Catholic newspaper called The Remnant and producer of Remnant TV, noted that his organization, which is not remotely connected with violence or terrorism, was listed on a “leaked FBI memo.” Matt also pointed out that the FBI and SPLC were showing signs of laziness, as Matt’s organization was listed along with other Catholic groups that he pointed out were “defunct.”
As I've posted elsewhere, I am not and have never been a Catholic, blah, blah, blah. However, it is not hard to recognize that if it's observant Catholics targeted today, the next hour it'll be theologically conservative Protestants, and tomorrow or next month it could be Hindus or Sikhs or ... . Hopefully Trump or DeSantis or ?? will defeat LIEden and misleadership heads will roll out of FBI HQ and offices.
-
Portland settles ADA lawsuit, agrees to remove more homeless camps from sidewalks
https://hotair.com/john-s-2/2023/05/25/portland-settles-ada-lawsuit-agrees-to-remove-more-homeless-camps-from-sidewalks-n553573 (https://hotair.com/john-s-2/2023/05/25/portland-settles-ada-lawsuit-agrees-to-remove-more-homeless-camps-from-sidewalks-n553573)
Last September a group of disabled residents of Portland filed a lawsuit against the city. The lawsuit argued that by allowing homeless people to set up camp on the sidewalks, the city was effectively no longer compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The lawsuit featured several examples like this one:
...
Today, after months of mediation, the city of Portland settled the lawsuit and agreed that, moving forward, it will clear a lot more tent camps from the sidewalks.
How bleeping pathetic is it that it took an ADA lawsuit to intimidate the City of Portland into doing their damn job of protecting residents' legally owned homes and legally owned/operated businesses?!