Politics 2003

2004	Back to thumbnails Next article Previous article

Kirwan Articles IMPEACH Scalia March 19, 2004 You can also view this article at America Held Hostile
	Antonin Scalia, at the moment a Supreme Court Justice - is neither sentient, nor supreme in his latest attempt to justify his obscenely close relationship with the Vice-President of the United States. All of this Scalia chose to 'explain' to the public in a 21-page document meant to excuse his personal failure to faithfully exercise the duties of his office, in an action now before the court on which he sits. But this rant of Scalia's only re-opens a much greater transgression committed by him and four others on December 12, 2000.
When confronted on his 21-page justification Scalia said: "If it is reasonable to think that a Supreme Court justice can be bought so cheap, the nation is in deeper trouble than I had imagined." Indeed! Or as a friend put it: "I truly wonder how a supposedly intelligent person of justice, can state the above, and truly believe that the outcome of this hearing will not affect the personal fortune or personal freedom of Cheney. If Scalia's I.Q. and ethics are no higher than this, he should resign immediately for the good of this nation. He should immediately recuse himself or be forcibly removed by any and all provisions for doing so." When the Supreme-Gang-of-Five voted to appoint George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to the offices of president and vice-president respectively on 12-12-2000, they opened a door to the vestibule of Hell itself. The reason that the framers of the constitution created a separations of powers act was to insure that the three branches of power remained separate – each was to act as a check upon the other two. In no instance was the Supreme Court ever to have been allowed to interfere with an election for the Presidency of the United States. This was by law, to be decided by the Congress, and specifically should not have been decided by the Supreme Court. The reason for this is obvious, especially now. Because when and if any case is brought before the same court, against those whom they have essentially appointed to their offices, then the Supreme Court cannot be expected to act without bias in hearing any case against this administration; the court itself is directly responsible for the rise of Bush & Cheney to their offices in the first place.
	The above is in direct violation of the US Constitution and is a violation of the oaths, sworn by the justices, to protect this nation from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. When the Bush campaign brought their case to the court in 2000, the court should have constitutionally declined to hear it. By not doing so they have broken the covenant between the government and the consent of the governed.
Their actions on that day permanently shattered all possibility of any semblance of impartiality, wherever and whenever this administration's officers are challenged before this Supreme Court of the United States. By inference, their transgression on that day (which should live in infamy) also makes a mockery of all the lower courts of this land. When the US Supreme Court is on-the-record as being biased - because the Bush-Cheney administration was installed by them - then all the lower courts are by association tarnished and are equally without merit. If the general public were to understand this fact, there would be a public outcry that would not stop until the Gang-of-Five were removed from this court. If the Supreme Court does not have to obey the law, neither does anyone else. Citizens have the right to expect a fair and unbiased hearing before all our courts, and that expectation has now been publicly and shamelessly stolen from each and every one of us. This is not only illegal it is unconscionable. Given the above circumstances, it is hardly surprising that Scalia is shocked that the public might think that just because he chooses to go hunting with Dick Cheney - and happens to fly there on Air Force Two - that some favoritism might actually creep into his judicial decisions. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/19/politics/19SCAL.html?th As the AP said today, "His decision cannot be appealed to the full court, because on March 1 the justices issued an order saying that Scalia alone would rule on the Sierra Club's motion." Much has been made about all the lies and the devious doings of this administration. Part of the reason for the foreboding of the public has to do with this very unethical and illegal course by which Cheney & Bush came to be in those offices at all. Many want to take back this nation, to again be able to live in an open and free society, with ALL our constitutional freedoms restored, and our international reputation in the world community on the mend, instead of being dragged along by the Pirates who now control the Congress, the White House, and the Courts. Perhaps if the public were to address this obvious stain upon the credibility of our nation - we might all begin to find our way back to something like a legal and respectable government. Now, who among the members of congress or the legal profession will begin this dangerous but necessary and cathartic process?
kirwan Back to top of page