Still More Mar-A-Largo Raid Ethics…

The PDF of the unsealed search warrant and attachments is available here.

  • The central ethical conflict in this mess is between the danger of criminalizing politics, a warning sign of, as conservative talk show host Mark Levin says, creeping Stalinism, and appropriate revulsion at allowing anyone, including Presidents, ex-Presidents and would-be Presidents, to be “above the law.”
  • This inevitably leads to “whataboutism” arguments, and legitimate accusations of double standards. Hillary Clinton committed acts that other, lesser mortals have been prosecuted for, despite James Comey’s typically dishonest statements to the contrary. The Clinton Foundation, which operated–cleverly, creatively and mostly carefully—as a money laundering, pay-to-play and influence peddling operation for the benefit of Clinton family members in perpetual violation of basic non-profit practices and guidelines, mysteriously wound down to nothingness once Hillary had no influence left to peddle and no prospects for regaining any. An FBI raid of Clinton Foundation offices would have almost certainly turned up some fascinating documents, but the Trump Justice Department, which was, as we know, stuffed with Clinton loyalist holdovers, never went that far in its investigation, such as it was. There is a substantial distinction between crowds chanting “Lock her up!” and serious attempts to actually lock her up.

Continue reading

NPR Says There Are “Pros And Cons” Of A Candidate For Governor Calling Someone “Motherfucker” During A Speech…

Ethics tip for NPR, courtesy of Ethics Alarms: There is no “pro.”

This was almost another Ethics Dunce for Beto O’Roarke, the “motherfucker” hurler, but he has joined the select group of perpetual ethics dunces for whom the designation is superfluous.

In case you missed it—and why wouldn’t you?—the Democratic candidate to unseat Gov. Greg Abbott was meeting with supporters and making his usual dishonest or ignorant statements about guns (with Beto it’s often hard to tell which). In the context of the Uvalde shooting, O’Roarke falsely said that the AR-15 was designed for combat—the old “weapons of war” canard, now much in favor — and took what he thought was a combat stance, causing someone in the audience to guffaw. O’Roarke, either embarrassed or being an asshole (with Beto it’s often hard to tell which) , turned on the laugher and spat out, “It may be funny to you motherfucker, but it’s not funny to me, okay?” This got him applause from the crowd, so it was a coup in the candidate’s eyes, I guess.

So now it is acceptable for candidates for high office, role models and public exemplars whose job it is to keep society civilized, peaceful and safe, to call citizens “motherfucker” in a public forum. Good to know!

Continue reading

Open Forum, Insert Ethics…

Gee, that Steven Tyler mouth is kind of scary, isn’t it?

Well, never fear: all ethical entries about ethics topics are welcome and safe.

Sunset Ethics Shadows, 8/11/2022: The “I Don’t Understand” Edition

This was the date, in 1984, that President Reagan made his factitious announcement about bombing Russia “in five minutes.” It’s one of my favorite examples of how careful leaders have to be, every second of every day, and how even those with excellent leadership skills and instincts risk disaster if they let down their guard.

It is also worth remembering that the news media did not make a big deal out of it. They liked Reagan, for the most part. If Donald Trump had done that, Nancy Pelosi would have tried to impeach him, and if Biden did it, there would be a serious effort to deploy the 25th Amendment.

The nation was healthier in 1984.

1. How can the hypocrisy of NYC Mayor Adams’ tantrum not be obvious to everyone? New York City is a “sanctuary city,” meaning that it supports illegal immigration and the swarm of US border-breaching foreigners that the Biden Administration has enabled and encouraged. The city refuses to cooperate with the enforcement of our immigration laws. The governor of Texas, Greg Abbott, has enraged Adams by busing thousands of migrants to the Big Apple, and though his city and party say the illegals are welcome in the abstract, the mayor claims the few thousand have strained the the city’s social systems. So Adams thinks this threat, issued earlier this week at a press conference, makes sense: “I already called all of my friends in Texas and told them how to cast their vote, and I am deeply contemplating taking a busload of New Yorkers to go to Texas and do some good old-fashioned door knocking because, for the good of America, we have to get him out of office.”

Yes, Adams (and D.C.’s  Mayor Muriel Bowser, also leading a sanctuary city that is suddenly horrified to have to cope with the illegal immigrants it happily is willing to inflict on the states on our Southern border, for Abbott is busing illegals there too), are perfectly proving the elite progressive hypocrisy on illegal immigration, and they seem to be unable to grasp how dishonest their protestations make them look.

Adams’ threat to send New Yorkers to campaign against a Texas governor in Texas is also the mark of a politician who has lost touch with reality. Abbott’s perfect response: “Go ahead. Make my day.”

Reminds me of an old salsa commercial… Continue reading

The Mar-a-Largo Raid (Cont.)

This should be simple. On its face, the armed raid on Mar-a-Largo appears to be a massive political blunder and a despicable and dangerous continuation of the progressive/Democratic Party effort to criminalize politics, especially when Donald Trump is the quarry…and that’s just if the early morning grandstanding was exactly what the Justice Department claims it was. It was still an excessive (and intentionally disrespectful) use of criminal law enforcement power against a political adversary of the government employing it, and therefore carries at very least the appearance of impropriety, which Justice Department officials are bound not to engage in.

As I already mentioned, it also shatters a core democratic norm, which when Trump was President, was pronounced as a terrifying and threatening thing by the Axis of Unethical Conduct along with their academic lackeys even when the norm being breached wasn’t a norm at all. This norm, however, is important. Once a government starts targeting political opponents, can Chile be far away?

We don’t know enough to go farther than that, but if this is accurate, from the New York Post…

Trump’s attorneys, led by Evan Corcoran, had been cooperating fully with federal authorities on the return of the documents to the National Archives and Records Administration, according to sources.

…then Merrick Garland and Sgt Biden Schultz (“I know nothing! NOTHING!”) have a lot of ‘splainin’ to do.” (Is it mixing metaphors to allude to both “Hogan’s Heroes” and “I Love Lucy” in the same sentence?) Presumably, we’ll get the explanations, or some facsimile soon. We’d better. Continue reading

From The “Res Ipsa Loquitur” Files: “Fact Check: Chihuahuas Are Dogs, Not Rats.”

USA Today really did print a “fact check” of a gag social media claim that chihuahuas are not dogs but rodents. The article by agriculture and business reporter Laura Peters shows no hint of humor or irony: USA Today treats this as if there is a substantial likelihood that a significant number of its readers might be deceived by the claim that “DNA study finds chihuahuas aren’t dogs …Among other findings the analysis determined that Chihuahua is actually a type of large rodent, selectively bred for centuries to resemble a canine.”

Peters also cites Scopes as an authority, because those fools also did a fact check the last time someone posted this idiocy. “According to Snopes, the claim was just a “bit of satirical fun,” Peters informs us.

What the USA Today article actually informs us about—the headline alone is enough— is the degree to which USA Today has sunk beneath Weekly Reader and World News Daily status. Why would anyone possessing more than two  neurons firing trust anything reported by a rag with editors and reporters who think it is necessary to show that chihuahuas aren’t rats?

There is almost nothing substantive in USA Today’s print editions any more; the thin paper is mostly ads, photos, and local news snippets. With all of the important news being buried or ignored by most of the news media, the once handy Gannett paper could at least fill in some blanks–how about those Cassidy Hutchinson texts? No, what USA Today’s editors think its readers have a right to know is that dogs aren’t rats. Are the editors the morons? Peters? Or do they just think anyone who reads USA Today must be a moron?

On that, they have a point.

Ethics Dunce (And Partisan Hack): Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Daniel Goldman

Daniel Goldman earns the Ethics Alarms clip with Sir Thomas More’s scalding indictment of the character of “A Man For All Seasons” villain Richard Rich, “Why Richard, it profit a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world. . . but for Wales?”

Donald Trump, fighting a coordinated (I believe) Democratic assault from all sides in a desperate effort to neutralize him (an effort than has continued unsuccessfully for a ludicrous six years!) invoked his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination at a deposition for New York Attorney General Letitia James (D). While the ongoing January 6 kangaroo court in the House seeks to prove that Trump planned an “insurrection,” and the Justice Department raided his home ostensibly to find sufficient evidence to prosecute him for mishandling of classified documents, James is continuing her state’s long-running attempts to prove Trump engaged in illegal financial activity and/or corrupt business practices

After Trump’s non-response was reported, Goldman, who was an assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York for 10 years, tweeted,

“The Fifth Amendment ensures that people are not forced to incriminate themselves. But you don’t take the Fifth if you didn’t do anything wrong.”

Continue reading

Just For Fun: Lyric-Writing Ethics!

I’m writing a new musical legal ethics seminar that I’ll be premiering with my brilliant musician partner Mike Messer at the end of the month. It’s going slow: the trick is to simultaneously make the song parody lyrics funny as satires of the songs and to set out substantive legal ethics problems along the way. And the lyrics have to rhyme and scan.

Writing song lyrics is one of my many pseudo-useless talents that I have never figured out how to monetize significantly, but I am still a perfectionist about it. Competent lyric writing is becoming a lost art, and there were hacks polluting the art decades ago even when the Sondheims, Simons, Berlins, Dylans and Joels roamed the plains like buffalo.

I’ve collected examples of terrible lyric-writing for decades, and my White Whale is the Most Incompetent Recorded And Widely Heard Lyrics Ever. So far, nothing has topped, or rather ducked beneath, the execrable theme song of the popular TV Western “Bat Masterson” (starring Gene Barry), which you can listen to in the YouTube clip above just as TV viewers could hear in 108 episodes from 1958 to 1961.

The lyrics are incredibly bad. Let’s examine them:

Continue reading

A Poll That Is Invaluable To Show How Useless Polls Are

The purported results of a Monmouth University survey make no sense whatsoever, which is illuminating…about why we should pay no attention to polls.  This one was supposed to show the impact of the endless January 6 Commission hearings. Apparently they have had no impact at all. 38% of adults said they believe Trump was directly responsible for the Jan. 6 riot compared to 42% who said the same in June before the hearings began. Well, anyone who believed President Trump was directly responsible for the riot is a) an idiot b) not interested in facts or evidence or c) so biased and determined to believe all anti-Trump media spin that they probably didn’t watch the hearings anyway.

That, of course, is what is so absurd about the poll. It didn’t isolate respondents who watched the hearings or paid attention to them from those who did not. This feature appeals to elude the news media. For example, the Washington Examiner writes, “Another 32% said they don’t believe Trump did anything wrong after viewing the hearings, compared to 30% the month before.” Wrong. All the poll shows are the numbers in June and in August after the prime time hearings were shown.  The numbers don’t reflect what respondents who watched the hearings thought before and after them. Continue reading

Late Ethics Warm-Up, 8/10/2022: I’m Mad As Hell…

Everything is loused up, delayed and failing today. I don’t want to talk about it…

Harvard professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, who carved out a niche by claiming that Donald Trump uniquely defied “democratic norms,” thus pointing the government toward “authoritarian” rule, had better be hiding their heads in bags now. The theme was quickly picked up by other unethical (as in partisan and biased without admitting so) academics like historian Alan Lichtman, and it became one of the more popular Big Lies weaponized by the Left-allied mainstream media, as in this Washington Post hit piece.

Ethics Alarms took the position that this was a contrived new standard  dreamed up just for Trump (and to sell books and get MSNBC gigs, of course), concocted for political warfare,and it was. Meanwhile, Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt have been notably silent as the Joe Biden Presidency has shattered one “norm” after another, most spectacularly in using the Justice Department (and Congress, as well as his party generally) to harass and attempt to neutralize a former President of the United States and past and likely future adversary at the ballot box. The raid on Mar-a-Largo was the ultimate IIPTDXTTNMIAFB (“Imagine if President Trump did X that the news media is accepting from Biden”), and one that genuinely threatens democracy, unlike, say, firing a wildly incompetent and untrustworthy FBI director. Not a peep from the “norms” police though.

Gee. What a surprise.

1. Here’s another “surprise”: when a group becomes entitled and protected, “inclusion and diversity” fly out the metaphorical window. Assistant professor of community health and director of the Health Promotion Center at York College Vincent Jones II and professor and director of gender, sexuality, and feminist studies at Middlebury College Laurie Essig write in the Boston Globe that heterosexual bachelorette partiers are ruining the all-gay scene in Provincetown, Massachusetts. The male-loving women, it seems, have found the long-time arts, galleries and gays town on the tip of Cap Cod the perfect place to party without the inconvenience of being hit on, at least not by men. The residents claim the women are “asserting their privilege” in what should be LGBTQ+ “safe spaces.” Worse still, the straight infestation consists of “mostly white women.” How dare they? Continue reading