14 Comments
User's avatar
Paul Davis's avatar

Good blog Clay, but you left out the reasons why the SCOTUS isn't going to back Trump this time.

First, Roberts has already dressed them down for attacking a Federal judge.

Second, open defiance of the courts allowed by the SCOTUS is going to mean he'll defy the SCOTUS eventually, so they'd probably rather start the fight before he's further down the road.

And third, Boasberg's not some unknown liberal judge to the top nine, he's known very well to at least one of them, his college roommate was named Kavanaugh.

So there's every reason to think they'll tell Trump to bring em' back, no matter what lies he's telling. And then the fun will start.

And we should take notice of the fact that judges can send lawyers to the Bar Association for misbehavior, and a flock of Trump lawyers losing their license to practice would certainly put a chill on the lying in court. And there's no pardon from that punishment.

Expand full comment
David Yohalem's avatar

While the SCOTUS is historically protective of its rights and privileges, I'm not so hopeful as you that they won't back the Mango Mussolini this time. If Roberts' response to the attacks on a Federal Judge are as wishy-washy as reported (Agent Orange thanked him for not mentioning him by name) then the Chief Justice is as worthy of impeachment as was Toney in 1861 (he died before he could be impeached.)

Expand full comment
Paul Davis's avatar

We won't know until the fat lady sings. And we know there are seven judges on the SCOTUS, and two lickspittle lackeys, so we just have to wait and see how the others vote.

Tearing down their own power base just really isn't in their own interest though.

Expand full comment
David Yohalem's avatar

While I hope you are right and I wrong, if you're willing to bet on Kavanaugh and Gorsuch to function as constitutional arbiters, interested in justice or recognize more than the most venal forms of self-interest I know of a bridge for sale. Cheap. Several (perhaps all) sitting members of the SCOTUS perjured themselves during their nomination hearings before the Senate. Since Robert Bork's nomination, they have all been schooled in obfuscation. (But that's not quite perjury, but I still think it should be disqualifying.)

Put not your faith in Roberts! He's abased himself too often and too brazenly to start calling "balls and strikes." Coney Barrett? I'm willing to bet that, when push comes to shove, she's still a handmaid answerable to a higher authority - her husband and his Church, the one that repudiates Vatican II.

Expand full comment
Paul Davis's avatar

I have faith in them pursuing their interests, not mine, not the nations and not Trumps.

Trump thinks they will vote for him because he's "TRUMP". I doubt that very much. And their interests and his do not coincide in this, and quite a few other cases.

Expand full comment
Karyn Milos's avatar

Fucked up twenty-one ways from Sunday.

I'll take, "What is the trump administration?" for $500.

Expand full comment
Paul Davis's avatar

A big pile of what I'm cleaning out of the chicken house and putting on the garden.

Expand full comment
Karyn Milos's avatar

That, too, though my own answer was in the "Jeopardy" statement above the question. 😁

Expand full comment
David Yohalem's avatar

I (nearly) fully agree. But the last sentence ignores that Elon is not American born. Neither is Sebastian Gorka. So the enemies of a state born in the idea of the supremacy of the law is being attacked by foreign born anti-American people. Peter Thiel, their philosopher (sic) king (sic), is also a native South African: a supporter of plutocracy and destroyer of the press. These people (sic) have no moral center and no concept of governance. They should be tried, stripped of their citizenship and deported. The Stephen Millers should be tried (and convicted) for other crimes; they are our indigenous traitors. So, too, are all members of the Federalist Society.

Expand full comment
Susan D's avatar

And yet SCOTUS has allowed this farce to occur and to continue. SCOTUS will not agree with anything, unless it so pleases them. I won’t hold my breath hoping for them to do the right thing.

A LINE HAS BEEN DRAWN - WHICH SIDE WILL SCOTUS STAND ON ?

I know which side I’m on, and it’s not the evil orange side.

Expand full comment
Richard's avatar

So many lies in pursuit, or defense of illegal and/or injust actions.

Expand full comment
Jill Dennison's avatar

Good 'toon, Clay ... terrifyingly so. I really loved seeing your older work from 1991!

Expand full comment
Susan Johnson's avatar

My head is exploding with fear and anger. Exceptional toon and blog...Lying King.

Expand full comment
angie Choiniere's avatar

Good one Clay.

Expand full comment