Editorial Article by Jim Lantern, Lantern Timeglass Journal, Wednesday morning 13 July 2016 + see “Continued” later same date and “Update” following day.
Regarding Trump, I agree with Ginsburg
CNN article, 13 July 2016, excerpts…
- Washington (CNN) – Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s well-known candor was on display in her chambers late Monday, when she declined to retreat from her earlier criticism of Donald Trump and even elaborated on it.
- “He is a faker,” she said of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, going point by point, as if presenting a legal brief. “He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego. … How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns? The press seems to be very gentle with him on that.”
I believe the U.S. Constitution, First Amendment, Freedom of Speech, does and should apply to all U.S. citizens including Supreme Court Justices. They should not remain silent on any kind of issues including political issues during campaigns – especially considering how important Election 2016 is.
If a Conservative Justice had spoken against Hillary Clinton in the same way, then that Justice would be getting praise from other Conservatives, Republicans, and Trump. At this time, I’m not aware of any response yet from Hillary Clinton, other Democrats and Liberals, regarding Ginsburg’s remarks about Trump.
This isn’t about being Conservative or Liberal, Democrat or Republican. This is about honesty, the truth.
As an unaffiliated Independent voter, who averages out to be Centrist in such a way as to be similar to Libertarians, I do not automatically agree or disagree with Liberals and Democrats. Likewise, I do not automatically agree or disagree with Conservatives and Republicans. I look at an issue and based on available information I try to make an informed decision about the issue for my resulting position.
Based on my own observations and conclusions, I agree with the assessment that Trump is a “faker” as stated by Justice Ruth Ginsburg. I consider it to be a known fact, not just a personal opinion, that Trump “says whatever comes into his head at the moment.” At first, I believed that to be an indication of honesty, but I now believe it is the result of Trump having his head so far up his rear end that his head is hanging out of his mouth. In other words, he runs his mouth without considering or knowing the facts – he does not make informed decisions but instead goes with his gut – whatever he feels is right at any moment. “He has no consistency about him.” That’s true – a fact that he has been flip-flopping on most issues.
I started out supporting Trump because I believed it a good idea to put a businessman in the White House instead of a typical politician. Trump is not that businessman. He has transformed himself into something worse than just a typical politician.
I have always believed Hillary Clinton as President would be bad for our country. I now believe Trump as President would be worse for our country than Clinton would, but that does not make me want to vote for Clinton. If they were the only two presidential candidates, then I’d not vote at all – to never again be forced to vote for the lesser of two evils. So by process of elimination my remaining choice is Libertarian presidential candidate Gary Johnson with VP running mate William Weld.
*** CONTINUED ***
After reading the Comment by Jnana Hodson – “Appreciate your take here. Trump, we should add, is surprisingly thin-skinned when it comes to criticism, even though he seems to scorch others with his. Sound like he’s faking something?” – I’ve decided to reply by adding more here to this posting.
First, an Update: A Clinton press person reported Clinton’s reaction – more to Trump’s demand Ginsburg resign than to Ginsburg’s remarks about Trump. Of course Hillary does not agree with Trump. No doubt she agrees with Ginsburg because she has already made similar remarks about Trump.
“Sound like he’s faking something?” [Hodson asked]. I believe Ginsburg’s meaning when using the term “faker” has to do with a businessman pretending to be a politician, but I could be wrong about that. For meaning she might soon expand on that. I’d apply use of that term “faker” to Trump’s claim he is a Conservative and a Republican. On paper, so to speak, perhaps. For real? No. Some Conservatives and Republicans have expressed great concern about that. Fact is, Trump’s history – having been a Democrat as a Liberal, an unaffiliated Independent, and with the Reform Party as a Centrist. I did not and do not count those against him because I’ve been down those same roads. I counted those in his favor for having a wider range of experience and likely to appeal to a wider range of voters.
However. About the same time Republicans began to realize Trump is serious and in it to win it, they also looked at some other past history of greater concern. Trump’s past relationship with the Clinton’s – having given money to them, inviting them to his third wedding, and having stated in the past that Hillary would make an excellent President. This justifiably raises the the question a few did ask: “Is Trump a Trojan Horse?” Did he make a deal with Clinton to seek GOP nomination to get inside in order to destroy the Republican Party and assure a Clinton victory? Perhaps. I now believe that’s possible. I suspect the attacks on each other between Clinton and Trump are all an act. Part serious and part for fun and humor, I compare Senator Clinton to Senator Palpatine – who became the Emperor, and Trump to Darth Vader – sent to destroy the rebel alliance. From Star Wars I, Yoda: “Always two there are, no more, no less. A master and an apprentice.” Apprentice? Well, Trump has some experience with that subject!
Now for “apprentice” the interest is on who Trump will select for his VP running mate. I’ve always believed current or former Governors of states make the best Presidents. Mike Pence is kind of an unknown. Chris Christie has been out there, well known, and when this started he was my first choice for President. So of course I’d at least want him to be VP. Of the three now being considered – Mike Pence, Chris Christie, and Newt Gingrich – only Christie has not been critical of Trump. Gingrich would be good to help hold Trump down to a more realistic level, but the problem is I doubt Trump would accept his advice. Trump wants a “Yes, Sir!” VP, and Christie might be willing even if it goes against his basic personality. Trump is likely to announce his VP on Friday July 15 if not sooner.
Now, I’m going to stick my neck way out there by making a bizarre prediction for the future. At this point in time I don’t know what could derail Clinton, and I am predicting she will win. However, I’m also predicting an alternate history – the bizarre prediction. Something will derail Clinton. [A disclaimer before I write more here: This is in no way a threat against Clinton or Trump.] I predict for the alternate history Trump will pick Christie to be his VP. [We’ll know soon enough if that necessary part of my alternate history prediction will come true.] Trump will be elected President, and he will take office Inauguration Day Friday 20 January 2017. Now the bizarre part of my alternate history prediction. By year’s end, 2017, Chris Christi will be President. For how it happens, I have no prediction, no clue, no idea, other than legal presidential line of succession – Vice President becomes President, “upon the incapacity, death, resignation, or removal from office (by impeachment and subsequent conviction) of a sitting president or a president-elect.” However, I do have a gut feeling that it might be a “natural disaster” of some kind that will somehow derail the President and make the Vice President the new President.
*** UPDATE ***
9:50am CT Thursday 14 July 2016
Ginsburg has apologized. More so for the position that Supreme Court Justices should remain silent on political candidates, and therefore she should not have criticized Trump. She has not apologized to Trump or for the remarks. I don’t agree that the Justices should remain silent on anything about Election 2016. If there should be an exception to their Code, then Election 2016 should be it. I want to know what they believe. No one should ever apologize for telling the truth, and Ginsburg told the truth about Trump – more than just a personal opinion – remarking on known facts and common sense. Further, as a strong believer in the First Amendment – Freedom of Speech, I believe no one should be required to remain silent – especially regarding Election 2016 – candidates and issues. The only exception is that no one should in any way threaten to harm or kill any candidates or other participants. Such talk is of course not protected by Freedom of Speech. Read the LA Times Editorial about this subject. Also, the NBC article.
Also an update on my “alternate history” prediction for 2017. Even if Trump does not pick Christi, and even if Trump does not win – if Clinton wins, then I still predict some kind of event such as possibly a natural disaster, which will result in the elected President being unable to complete the first year of the term, further resulting in the Vice President becoming President. Atlantic Hurricane Season 2017 begins on Thursday June 1 and ends on Thursday November 30. It could be a hurricane as deadly as Katrina, but on about the same path as Sandy.