Courts have too much power

I would defend my homeland to anyone who thinks their country is better than mine, but there are times when I just don’t understand the gap between “freedom” and my right to “life, liberty and happiness.”

I abhor when ignorant right-wing assholes tell me I hate America because of my political viewpoints and patriotism. I respect the three branches of government and would never let anyone saw down the whole tree. Anyone attempting to overthrow the United States government would surely be batshit crazy for trying.

I am confused when a teenager who sold a marijuana joint in high school gets ten years in jail, but the bottom feeder Trump cultists get just a few years for participating in an insurrection. I am as pissed off today as Donald Trump was yesterday. Trump, as I have said more than a hundred times, Is an idiot, and he is fully responsible for all his various legal problems.

Robert Landsberry

In my hometown of Pittsburgh, there used to be a guy who walked the downtown streets, come rain or shine, with a large sandwich board complaining about the US Post Office not delivering his mail. His name was Robert Landsberry, and I marveled at his persistence while recognizing he was nuts. That was one of the first conspiracy theories I was confronted with almost every day. Later, others walked the streets with signs of Bible quotations. Well, that was before the internet.

There are many nutjobs in the world right now, and if these kooks ever had a chance to test their theories in court, the judges and prosecutors would be on “our side.” By the way, Robert Landsberry no longer walks the Steel City streets. He died. You see, a final judgement awaits us all, even Donald Trump.

This brings me to a news story that appeared today: Stormy Daniels ordered to pay Trump team another $120,000 in legal fees. The backstory has to do with her filing and losing a defamation suit against Donald Trump. According to CNN, “Daniels had sued Trump in 2018 after he called an allegation by Daniels that an unknown man threatened her in a parking lot to keep quiet about her alleged affair with Trump a ‘total con job’ in a tweet.” Judge S. James Otero dismissed the lawsuit in 2018 saying that Trump’s statement was protected by the First Amendment. He said that the tweet in question constitutes “rhetorical hyperbole normally associated with politics and public discourse in the United States,” then added, “The First Amendment protects this type of rhetorical statement.” Okay.

Ms. Daniels appealed and lost again, meaning she had to pay his legal fees once again, bringing her total payments to Trump’s lawyers up to almost $700,000. In simple terms, she got $130,000 to shut up, didn’t shut up, and now is out over half a million bucks. Good thing she has never stopped working and has several recent films.

Let’s now focus on the term, rhetorical hyperbole,” which is the use of exaggerated language to make or emphasize a point. Note the subhead to this piece is, “Courts have too much power.” Is that my true opinion or just a hyperbole sprayed out online without any regard to its possible ramifications?

Let’s say I am sued and the plaintiff attorneys submit a copy of this post to the judge as evidence of my disrespect for the court. I would have absolutely no power to stop them because I have published this for all to see. Rhetoric is an interesting construct. On the first level, it’s simply a way to convey something, but in his book Conflict of Beliefs, Jacob Mbua Ngeve says it’s an expression “in terms intended to persuade or impress.” Now, taking the leap to a third nuance, teacher Michael Chittenden defines rhetoric as “something asked in order to produce an effect or to make a statement rather than to elicit information.” If the statement produces threats, violence or harm to another person, then one must look at the result rather than the intent.

I am sure Trump was not intending to hurt this woman, who made the decision to enter a hotel room, have unprotected sex with Donald Trump, and then bargain through Michael Cohen, the Donald’s fixer, to get money in exchange for her silence. We should all be glad she came forward and told her story, but her words against Trump are not “rhetorical hyperbole” because she accused the former President of an alleged sexual encounter and bribe. She even went so far to describe Mr. Trump’s male organ, which I am sure was just hyperbolic revenge. Judging by her description of the act and his member I have to believe that Trump was embarrassed.

Justice Alito

When one unelected Supreme Court Justice, Samuel Alito, decided that a fifty-year-old decision — Roe vs. Wade — was wrongly decided back then, he wrote a foggy and oxymoronic decision to take away women’s rights. I say oxymoronic because he claimed that Roe vs. Wade had, and continued to, divide this nation. His hyperbole didn’t convince anyone it was good to eliminate the important women’s right; it proved only that women had fewer rights than men. Let me add a bit of my own rhetorical hyperbole. Imagine a law that said that men were no longer allowed to get vasectomies. Would that be tolerated by the men who control us?

As far as I am concerned, the Supreme Court is too powerful, but we all must obey them. Their rulings, after all, are the final answer to major disputes in the land. Should we not obey their laws, we could be arrested and put in jail. It’s a fact that Donald Trump paid money to the pornographic film star, the Playboy bunny and the doorman to keep them from ruining his chance to be president. Michael Cohen went to jail for his role in the maneuverings so why didn’t Trump? Oh yeah, US presidents cannot be arrested. Make sense… or does it?

Let’s ponder that. Say President Joe Biden decided to make some money for the US Treasury by selling Florida to Cuba. The deal was so good it erased all American debt the moment the check cleared. Of course, that would be a crime and the Department of Justice would have to tear up that UNLAWFUL policy memo from Robert Bork, who was the solicitor general of the United States from 1973 until 1977. It said a sitting president cannot be indicted or arrested. You see, that “policy” is not a law, it’s simply one person’s opinion. If the Supreme Court was faced with making a decision on Bork’s statement they probably would fall back to a pillar of our democracy, “No one is above the law.”

Donald Trump is not royalty, he’s just a rich man suffering from narcissistic personality disorder. If his lawyers were wise, they would claim insanity for all of Trump’s impending cases, but then Congress would be faced with the need to vote for disqualification. If Trump is unfit to be tried in a court of law then he certainly isn’t fit to be president ever again.

This is a political blog and, according to Judge S. James Otero, my “rhetorical hyperbole” is protected speech. Donald Trump, Ron DeSantis, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Ted Cruz, Matt Gaetz and the rest of the right-wing whores are out to destroy America to gratify their egos and personal needs for power, most likely byproducts of having bad parents. Too much? Well, I could have talked about their collective smelly perinea, but I’m just a Democrat, not a pervert.


Tattoo Detective: Our Last Hope for the Future

Imagine being able to time travel into the unknown. TATTOO DETECTIVE: Our Last Hope for the Future is a science fiction novel examining the world after all the guardrails of normal society have been dissolved.

The story follows two American tattoo detectives who are sent on a mission that changes them and their world. This dystopic look at the United States and the flaw in humankind is not a Pollyanna prognostication, it’s fundamentally close to our current reality and could be predictive of where we are headed. The opening chapter says it best, “…we could have done something, but we fell madly in love with technology, weapons and wealth.”  For purchase or dowload, go here. Check out our author page on Amazon.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *