I’m currently weighing whether to try to get up the Ethics Alarms Best and Worst of 2021 this year, after several years in a row of failing to find the time and energy…I am also re-watching “Clickbait” in preparation for the special Ethics Alarms Zoom discussion that, I hope, will soon be scheduled for some tome in the next 31 days. As regular readers here know, my ambitions sometimes exceed my grasp.
1. Oh look, a frivolous appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, because #MeToo, or something…The prosecutors who unethically used improperly obtained evidence to put Bill Cosby prison are now asking the United States Supreme Court to throw out the appellate court ruling earlier this year that overturned his 2018 conviction for sexual assault on due process grounds. Cosby was released in June after serving less than three years of a three-to-10-year sentence. He should not have served any time at all. A ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that Cosby’s rights had been violated when the Montgomery County District Attorney’s office pursued a criminal case against him despite a binding “non-prosecution agreement” given to him by a previous district attorney. Cosby’s rights were violated, raping scum that he is.
Notice how feminists, civil rights activists on the left, anti-Trump fanatics and others who have a monopoly on Truth and Right (or think they do) increasingly want the law to yield to “justice”? There is no valid basis for this appeal. Zip, none. The lawyers filing it should be sanctioned for unethical conduct, just as Trump lawyers who filed suits to flip-flop the 2020 election without evidence have been sanctioned.
2. Speaking of the 2020 election, the shady dealings of Joe Biden’s son, quite possibly with Joe’s knowledge and even facilitation, were, we now know, kept from the public just long enough to ensure Donald Trump’s defeat. Today, Senator Chuck Grassley took to the Senate floor to expose more smoking gun documentation. Here’s the video:
Of course, none of the news networks, except maybe Fox, will run it, and I assume the major print sources sill ignore it. The situation is not helped by the fact that Grassley is 88 and has no business being in the Senate. He’s pretty sharp for 88, which is like saying Jane Fonda is pretty hot for 83. I don’t want to see her do a sequel to “Barbarella”, and I don’t want to have to watch Grassley stumble through an important presentation.
3. Great moments in hypocrisy: We don’t need the Ethics Alarms label IIPTDXTTNMIAFB [“Imagine if President Trump did X that the news media is accepting from Biden.”]for this one, because we already know. President Biden imposed a travel ban on a group of African countries to try to stem the spread of the latest strain of the Wuhan virus, the Omicron variant. When the pandemic began spreading in the early months of 2020, Trump blocked travel from China and six other countries, including Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Sudan and Tanzania. Biden called Trump’s actions “xenophobic,” tweeting,
“We are in the midst of a crisis with the coronavirus. We need to lead the way with science – not Donald Trump’s record of hysteria, xenophobia, and fear-mongering. He is the worst possible person to lead our country through a global health emergency.”
As usual, the mainstream news media followed their party’s lead both then and now. Trump’s travel ban, the media concluded, was racist. Biden’s travel bans, now, are different. The New York Times ran a piece in 2020 titled, “The Racism at the Heart of Trump’s ‘Travel Ban.” This week, the newspaper covered Biden’s ban with, “United States will bar travelers from 8 countries.” And, of course, here’s CNN:
All we ask is for consistent, fair standards. Is that too much to expect from journalists?
“I hope the Supreme Court is listening to the people of the United States because… I think if you want to see a revolution go ahead, outlaw Roe v. Wade and see what the response is of the public, particularly young people.”
- The Supreme Court is charged with deciding what is Constitutional, and that is not a question up for polling. Amazing that a U.S. Senator advocates courts making their determinations based on fear and popular opinion, “particularly young people’s.”
- What disgraceful demagoguery! This is a direct appeal to the uneducated, the ignorant, and the violent.
- So the Democrats are threatening violence now if they don’t get their way? Yes, that’s the usual next step for totalitarians, so it should be a surprise.
- If there are riots after the SCOTUS decision, will that mean that Shaheen will be investigated for inciting it? What she said is far closer to incitement than anything Trump said on January 6.
- It’s kind of unfair, when you think about it: unborn children can’t protest, much less revolt.
5. Right into the “Facts Don’t Matter” files... Members of leftist groups at Arizona State, where Kyle Rittenhouse is a student via computer, are agitating to have him kicked out of school. Students for Socialism ASU, Students for Justice in Palestine, the Multicultural Solidarity Coalition and Mecha de ASU are telling university officials to ban Rittenhouse from classes and campus because he makes them feel “unsafe.”
“Our campus is already unsafe as is and we would like to abate this danger as much as possible,” a spokesperson said. “The goal of these demands is to let the ASU administration know that we do not feel safe knowing that a mass shooter, who has expressed violent intentions about protecting property over people, is so carelessly allowed to be admitted to the school at all.”
- Rittenhouse is not a “mass shooter.”
- Expressing “intentions” is protected by the Bill of Rights unless it amounts to a “true threat” to a particular person.
- The law gives all Americans a right to protect their property from those illegally attempting to take or destroy it. The “property over people” canard is why shoplifters are running amuck in California.
Knowing the spine deficit among college administrators, I rate the chance of Rittenhouse being allowed to stay at AU as slightly better than 50-50. [Pointer: JutGory]