U.S. Society

Hear Ye: The Supreme Court Obviously Has To Follow An Official And strictly Enforced Ethics Code

/ Jack Marshall / 10 Comments

Ethics Alarms has taken the position that Clarence Thomas’s unreported yearly luxury frolics with conservative power-broker Harlan Crow created a sufficiently substantial appearance of impropriety for Thomas to resign. I’ll hold to that; I don’t trust Thomas’s judgment or independence at this point, and I’m not even a dedicated Thomas critic. What has insulated Thomas, and, by extension, his colleagues, from having to respond to this scandal as seriously as they should is the fact that progressives, Democrats and much of the mainstream media have been trying to manufacture reasons for getting Thomas off the Court—he’s too conservative for them, his real crime in their eyes—since they dug up an old girlfriend of Thomas’s to ambush him during his confirmation hearings. This history, including efforts to use Thomas’s conservative activist wife as way to impugn Thomas (an approach that feminist leaders would condemn if they had any integrity themselves, which, sadly, they don’t), has made the whole issue appear to be a partisan weapon designed to wrest control of the Court. It is, but it also is legitimate, non-partisan problem of substantial import to the functioning of the government.

This week, Senate Democrats held a hearing focused on Supreme Court ethics. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.and the other eight justices presented a united front, as he declined an invitation to testify, issuing a statement of their commitment to abide by “foundational ethics principles and practices.”

Well, to put it starkly, they don’t.

Continue reading →

Signature Significance: Tucker Carlson Generously Demonstrates Why He Had To Be Fired

/ Jack Marshall / 26 Comments

It was really nice of Tucker Carlson, while his former bosses were being condemned and attacked throughout the conservative news media, to go on a podcast and demonstrate exactly why any responsible news organization would be ethically obligated to show him the gate. I’m sure that wasn’t his intent, but the fact that he doesn’t even recognize the implications of his own words is an additional reason why he had to go. He’s irresponsible. He’s untrustworthy. He is a demagogue, and, I suspect, a sociopath. People like Carlson—Father Coughlin, Joe McCarthy, General Edwin Walker, Alex Jones, Robert Welch and so many more—abuse the First Amendment and are, to be blunt, destructive to the nation.

On the podcast of another Fox News exile , Carlson said,

“If you say, like, ‘What actually happened with building 7? Like that is weird, right? It doesn’t—like, what is that?’… If you were to say something like that on television, they’d flip out. They would flip out. So you’d, like, lose your job over that. It’s an attack on my country. Can I ask? I don’t really understand. Do buildings actually collapse? No, they—maybe they do. I don’t know. But, like, why can’t I ask questions about that?”

Continue reading →

Enjoying Seeing Open Borders Hypocrites Squirm, Part II

/ Jack Marshall / 5 Comments

It is rather glorious, though I can wipe the smile off my face by remembering how many doltish knee-jerks fall for the posturing of such unscrupulous politicians as Eric Adams, the mayor of NYC, and Lorie Lightfoot, the deservedly soon-to-be-unemployed mayor of Chicago. New York, Chicago, and Washington, D.C. are sanctuary cities (among others), which means that they literally invited illegal immigrants to defy U.S. laws and cross our borders. Welcoming them sent the message that major American metropolises would not assist in the enforcement of our laws, and the cynical non-performance of the Department of Homeland Security reinforced that message.

Now those cities are freaking out as the prospect of more illegals being transported to their metaphorical doorsteps and left there like abandoned babies of yore yawns before them. (Good.) The Title 42 policy, which is about to expire with the already unethically extended pandemic public health emergency, will no longer be around to discourage border-crossers, and it is estimated that 10,000 of them will arrive daily once the public health restrictions end. As usual, it will be the border towns that bear the brunt of the chaos, though those municipalities are emphatically not sanctuaries. Texas governor Greg Abbott, and probably some other governors as well, will resume his policy of busing as many of the invaders to sanctuary cities as possible, causing sanctuary city mayors to cry out indignantly about having to deal with the problem they helped create.

Part I of this theme, if you have forgotten, was posted here last September. That’s when the smug little enclave of Martha’s Vineyard, which sported “Illegals welcome!” signs like this…

was suddenly faced with actual people arriving. The islanders did not take it well. The towns treated the “migrants” little better than Alex Kintner-eating sharks, and quickly shipped the newly arrived border-defiers to a military base, triggering MSNBC’s progressive hacks and Hillary Clinton to claim that governors who transport illegals to welcoming shores areengaged in “human trafficking.” This was both legal and logical nonsense. Then Gavin Newsom, whose whole state is a “sanctuary,’ accused Abbott of “using kids as political pawns.” This raised raised the bar in the hypocrisy competition, for, as the EA post noted, “The Open Borders progressives have applauded the illegal use of children by border-breaching aliens, and revved up the “Think of the children!” chorus to a scream when President Trump had to separate alien children from illegally migrating parents in the same emergency enclosures Obama used…”

Continue reading →

A Bar Owner Learns That If You Are Going To Grandstand On A Principle You Better Be Ready To Accept The Consequences

/ Jack Marshall / 16 Comments

At least I hope that he’s learned that. Right now, he looks like a phony, a hypocrite, and an idiot.

First, McKinley Minniefield, the owner of Fairfax Bar and Grill in Bloomington, Indiana, a college town where the woke wun fwee, issued a ringing statement on Facebook informing patrons that those who objected to transgender performance artist Dylan Mulvaney’s embrace by Bud Light would no longer be welcome in his establishment. “We are tired of all of the hate. We are very open to debate and discussion and it’s truly a shame that we can’t have open conversations about this important political and cultural topic,” Minniefield wrote. “Unfortunately due to all of the bigotry and hatred that has surfaced around the Bud Light controversy any patron wanting to voice their concerns about the issue will be immediately asked to pay their bill and leave our establishment.”

How collegiate of him! He’s open to debate and discussion, but not if the views discussed are the “wrong” ones.

“If you are intolerant of other humans of any kind, we ask that you keep your opinions to yourself. Should you feel the need to discuss this matter in public you will be asked to leave. We will not tolerate intolerance here,” the post continued. You would think the obvious contradiction in that last bit would have tipped the bar owner off that he was on metaphorical thin ice ethically, but apparently not.

Continue reading →

Unethical Quote Of The Month: San Francisco Homeless Resident Joseph Peterson

/ Jack Marshall / 23 Comments

“I just stole to eat.”

 —Joseph Peterson, a homeless man in San Francisco, lamenting the demise of the Whole Foods in his neighborhood and attempting to draw a material distinction between the rampant theft from the store by those seeking to sell what they stole, and his own shoplifting.

And there it is! In such carefully crafted rationalizations lie the seeds of societal rot. Peterson thinks his personal shoplifting—he cops to stealing macaroni and cheese and chicken from the hot food bar at the now closed grocery store a number of times, but believes that his theft is justifiable, unlike those who wanted to sell their heist for cash. Also believing his thefts were justifiable are many of San Francisco’s elected officials. They also believe that the “bad” shoplifters in Peterson’s view are equally justified, and in fact they are. What’s the ethical difference between stealing food to eat it, and stealing food to sell and use the money for other needs? There is none. In both cases, the expense of the food stolen is borne by other city residents, who will have to pay higher prices for their food, unless the prices become so high that they resort to theft as well.

Continue reading →

It Pains Me To Say This, But It Just Might Be Time To Stop Assuming That The FBI Is Ethical, Trustworthy Or Competent…

/ Jack Marshall / 16 Comments

If you watch TV even half as much as I do, the image of the Federal Bureau of Investigation hammered into your skull weekly is that of the most dedicated, well-trained, well-run and honorable law enforcement organization on Earth. There are three hour-long dramas focusing on the FBI’s heroism; its work is also central to “Blacklist.” On the streaming platforms and on cable, special series and older FBI-centered shows are abundant: “Criminal Minds,” “Without a Trace,” “White Collar,” “Night Agent,” “The X-Files,” “Blindspot,” “Quantico,” “The Rookie,” “Shooter”…too many to list, so I won’t list them all. Movies in which FBI agents are the heroes are legion There is no agency or organization that has a more suffocating and relentless indoctrination presence in the popular culture than the FBI.

It is no wonder the that public and the media are inclined to pooh-pooh or ignore entirely the massive evidence of sinister and illegal FBI activities devoted to bringing down the Trump administration, the machinations of James Comey, and the other scandals. Periodically some glimmers of the corruption and abuse of power that has infected the FBI’s culture since the long reign of its shadowy creator J. Edgar Hoover sneak into various programs: the lying FBI forensic expert whose work is exposed in the documentary “Staircase;” and the two excellent docudramas exploring the horrors of Waco and its cover-up are examples.

Clearly, the time has come to discard the presumption of virtue that has protected the FBI for generations. It is at least as inept, corrupt, politicized and incompetent as the rest of federal government, and perhaps even more so.

An episode in Boston earlier this month—barely reported by the mainstream media, of course—strongly hints at an “Emperor’s New Clothes” situation. The FBI was holding a special training exercise at the Revere Hotel in downtown Boston in coordination with the U.S. Army. Role players—that is, actors—were supposed to help create a realistic simulation for the agents who had to react to unexpected developments. Around 10 p.m. on the evening of April 6, FBI agents banged loudly on the door of the room where a Delta Air Lines pilot was staying. The surprised guest was handcuffed when he opened the door, detained and interrogated, and thrown into the shower.

Oopsie! Wrong room number.

Continue reading →

A Cautionary Legal Ethics Tale: The Paralegal’s Goof

/ Jack Marshall / 3 Comments

There are a lot of ethics lessons in a recent lawsuit out of Connecticut.

William Cote, the lawyer for the seller in a real estate transaction, had $159,000 that he was supposed to wire to the Freedom Mortgage Corp. He had received a correct payoff statement with accurate wire instructions, but before he completed the payment, his paralegal received an email from the seller—it claimed— changing the wiring information. The new statement specified wire instructions for a different bank and account, and the paralegal passed in on to Cote, who then wired the money to the designated account—which had been set up by a scamster to snatch the money away.

Cote didn’t realize the gravamen of his error until more than a month later when the seller said he received a statement from the Freedom Mortgage Corp. reflecting a balance still owed on his loan. The buyer of the property is now suing both the seller and Cote because the title to the home she purchased is still encumbered by the seller’s mortgage.

Well…

  • Lawyers are responsible for the ethical conduct of their non-lawyer employees, including basic competence. Neglecting their training is an ethics violation.
  • The invasion of technology into every aspect of the legal profession requires vigilance and ongoing education. A firm or lawyer that does not have procedures and software in place to check the validity of emails is asking for a disaster. More than that, regular trainings of staff, including legal and non-legal, on technology advances and emerging perils are crucial. As with the non-lawyer trainings, they are too often skipped or made perfunctory.
  • Cope was probably busy with other matters when his paralegal passed along the phony change to the wiring instructions. Obviously, he should have asked some crucial questions, but instead just acted on trust. Trusting one’s staff is a good thing, but when so much money is involved, it is the lawyer’s duty to make sure a non-lawyer assistant hasn’t missed anything. Meanwhile, distracted law practice is as dangerous as distracted driving.

_____________________

Source: ABA Journal

Rainy Day End-Of-Week Ethics Dry-Off, 4/28/23: Minutemen Bad, Alito Coy, Kamala Incoherent, And More

/ Jack Marshall / 24 Comments

Great: I appeal to readers to offer me a glimmer of hope in today’s Open Forum, and the result is the fewest entries in months. So that’s the way it’s going to be, is it?

1. Well, THIS isn’t going to make me feel any better, or you either, I hope…In Contra Costa County, California, administrators at the Mount Diablo Unified School District believe that Concord High School’s Minutemen mascot is controversial and should be replaced. You know, the Minutemen, as in the patriots who fought and died at Lexington, Concord and Bunker Hill. They are controversial now…because, why exactly? Apparently because the entire existence of the United States of America and what it stands for is offensive to those who dwell in Woke World. Concord High School, founded in the late 1960s, adopted the image and name in solidarity with its namesake in Concord, Massachusetts, where in 1775 the Minutemen had one of their finest moments about a half an hour from where I grew up in Arlington, then Menotomy, Mass. The school’s principal, Julene MacKinnon, now wants to “make sure that we have a mascot that represents everyone,” reported KNTV-TV. By what logic does a Minuteman not represent all Americans? Well, you know, he’s a man

…and that is inherently touchy. He is also white, since most Minutemen were, but that skin shade is inherently offensive on the West Coast. Plus the Minuteman is carrying a gun, and guns are evil. Can’t Julene just pretend he’s gay or bi- or trans? Can’t they just darken the logo and make him a black Minuteman?

Some parents, alumni and students have raised objections, but it is to no avail. This is how American history, values and traditions die the death of a thousand cuts.

Continue reading →

The Problem: Trump Doesn’t Believe In Democracy That Much More Than Democrats Do

/ Jack Marshall / 23 Comments

Some prominent progressives are noticing that Democrats are increasingly hostile to the core principles of democracy. Yesterday, for example, actor/activist Tim Robbins issued a tweet condemning the House Democrats who threatened reporter Matt Taibbi with prison following his congressional testimony on the so-called Twitter Files:

A serious, individual liberties-respecting, democratic values-honoring GOP candidate who hadn’t already burned every bridge he came across might have some success turning such previously knee-jerk Democratic voters around. Such a candidate is emphatically not Donald Trump.

In both his social media posts and his recent rally in New Hampshire, Trump implied that he wouldn’t participate in any pre-primary debates among other contenders for the Republican nomination. Describing the debates as giving rivals like Florida governor Ron DeSantis a chance to challenge him, he asked the crowd n Manchester,“Why would you do that?”

Gee, give me a minute; let me think. Oh! You do that because democracy requires an informed public. You do it because voters deserve an opportunity to compare their options. You do it to show respect for the process of American elections and the office Trump is seeking.

Then he said, “I do look forward to the debate with Joe.”

Idiot. Why would Biden agree to debate Trump if he didn’t have to? Trump ducking the primary debates would eliminate any traction he could gain by claiming that Joe was “ducking him.” Trump skipping the GOP candidates debates all but guarantees that Biden will refuse to subject himself to the risks of a debate format.

All of which degrades and undermines the functioning of our system. These guys don’t care, and Trump is seemingly setting himself up to run a Bull Moose-style kamikaze third party assault if the Republican Party doesn’t do his bidding and make him its candidate. Recall that the RNC announced that promising to support the GOP nominee was a prerequisite for participating in the debates. Now Trump is saying, “Debates? I don’t need no stinking debates!” It’s obvious what he’s threatening, isn’t it?

Trump is declaring himself the nominee—Napoleon crowned himself as Emperor, remember—-leaving the rest of the possible contenders with a no-win dilemma: all they can do is knock each other off while Trump coasts to the nomination, only appearing before fawning audiences of deplorables and never having to engage with his critics.

Democrats want to silence and criminalize dissent; Trump wants to block any route to challenging his power.

As divided as Americans are, it doesn’t appear that enough of them care about preserving democracy to do anything to preserve it. They only differ on the means by which they are willing to let it collapse.

Open Forum, Searching For Something Better

/ Jack Marshall / 13 Comments

What a depressing week.

I think the cap might have been right before bedtime last night, when I finally checked out what strange tangents Ann Althouse had been on lately. For some reason she had tracked down an article at Metafilter about Nate Silver’s being separated from his creation, 538, and a reader comment that said he had been guilty of “bothsideism.”

Nate is far from an Ethics Alarms favorite, as when he is not analyzing sports he uses the alleged neutrality of his statistical models to mask an obvious left-leaning bias. However, the flat assertion that he didn’t slant his analysis enough for the Leftist totalitarians out there is genuinely frightening. It also echoes the ethics rot emanating from this recent post. I’ve encountered the term “bothsideism” periodically and mentally noted its absurdity, but now I realize that a frightening proportion of the public, academics and especially journalists really do believe that thoughtfully considering multiple points of view and perspective is wrong.

As they sing in “Sweet Charity”: There’s gotta be something better than this.

Please try to find it.