Hey, first of all - what an amazing article to bring tothe attention of the community - thanks for this!
Secondly, this article is not what it seems like. It's a Lion in the costume of a funny dragon, and I will explain why. But additionally, this is an example of Fake News that is very subtle in its intentions, and is intended to trigger other Fake News articles by others to slowly flesh out the real intention.
A funny dragon attracts a wide audience, because everyone knows its not dangerous but it raises curiousity. But when the funny dragon throws away its costume, what you find inside is a Lion, that can be used to perform the real attack.
Whats the Funny dragon here? The title "Clarence Thomas Is the new Chief Justice". It will rightfully attract the curiosity of a lot of people both from the left and the right, and even from those who dont follow fake news.
We think perhaps something happened to John Roberts (as we all have been hoping and expecting) but is that what this article says?
The answer is NO. This article has nothing to do with John Roberts being replaced as the Chief Justice. Infact, its very clear that Thomas is NOT the Chief Justice.
Then what is it saying? What is the Lion underneath the Dragon costume ?
"That the SCOTUS is becoming too dangerous. If we dont do something to curtail it and get rid of Thomas, not only will it push extreme conservative agenda, it will completely overturn the Roe vs Wade. DO SOMETHING!!"
What is the real argument here? That John Roberts is more and more becoming part of the minority. That conservatives are the majority, but more importantly, Thomas being the longest serving Justice of majority gets to ... oh the horror .... assign himself to write the Majority opinion, "and OMG, he is going to write such brilliant and well thought out opinion that it will be very hard for us to run interferences."
Yeah, the recent high profile case where he to to write the Majority was to do with staying an execution for an inmate who was just yanking the procedures in the last minute in an attempt to stall his execution. The guy who brutally attacked a dad who was just assembling Christmas gifts for his kids, with a sword and a knife and was convicted and his death sentence finalized in 1999. He was given an option to use Nitrous Oxide instead of Lethal injection, and rejected it, but at the last minute started all kinds of appeals to be granted that option (which would have required the State to post pone the execution). The question before the SCOTUS was purely procedural and Thomas eloquantly outlined it.
How did they characterise this:
... allowing virtually all forms of executions, no matter how painful.
So, what exactly is the costume of the funny dragon here? A video of a recent case in which - literally - Thomas asks a couple of questions to the State's counsel. That all. They assert that he "almost never asks a question" and then go on to show him asking the questions, and then write a whole article about how he is the Chief Justice.
What is it that these people are really really afraid of?
THIS:
In the fall, the court will hear a challenge to Mississippi's new abortion law, which would ban almost all abortions after the 15th week of a woman's pregnancy.
This is what they want to rile up everyone against Thomas, because their baby part factory is going to be shutdown.
Almost forgot:
Could this explain the abortion win for Texas recently?
No, the abortion win is because of the conservative majority which seems to be finally coming to the forefront. But the Texas win explains this article.
I felt like I just attended a really great college lecture about how to critically think with respect to persuasive discourse, and I learned a lot from you. Thank you for your post.
Q taught us how to use critical thinking and how to find hidden agendas. I just hope we will never forget all that he taught after the Awakening happens.
Without this article, I would never have learnt so much about the way Thomas works and how much they are scared of him. The best part about the Majority Opinion in that he added this, and explained the original murder. Shows that Thomas, even as a SCOTUS Justice, still focuses on the human element in the case, which is what we want our judicial system to go back.
The dissent omitted any discussion of the murder that warranted petitioner’s sentence of death and the extensive procedural protections afforded to him before his last-minute, dilatory filings.
And to show how much they hate him and are scared of him:
In an appearance at a New York synagogue, I once heard Scalia give a memorable quip when he was asked about the difference between his approach and Thomas's. "I'm an originalist," Scalia said, "but I'm not a nut."
How depraved are these people, spreading fake stories about a Justice they killed and who cannot defend against this, and saying that Scalia called Clarence a nut ?
I am waiting for the day all these people meet their day of reckoning.
Notice the writer's use of "no matter how painful".
This is manipulative disingenuousness at its finest. One would have to have a brain made of latex rubber to stretch it enough to imagine Thomas authorizing, say, flaying, drawing and quartering, death by 1000 cuts, or breaking on the wheel as a means of execution.
Our forebears visited the most unthinkable, inhuman tortures on their fellow humans. Slowly, gradually crushing the head in a screw press until the eyeballs pop out and the skull implodes is not something healthy humans should ever see or want to see—even if it's Brennan's Neanderthal skull being squashed like a pumpkin.
In just a few centuries, moral humans have evolved beyond the capacity to endure, let alone inflict, such over-the-top barbarism on people whom we are executing for THEIR inhumanity to humankind.
We have a lot of executions that need to be performed, starting yesterday. Let's get to it and get it over with!
Disclaimer: pro-death-penalty, anti-torture advocate of mass executions (i.e., millions) for commies, traitors, pedophiles, murderers, etc.
Thomas authorizing, say, flaying, drawing and quartering, death by 1000 cuts, or breaking on the wheel as a means of execution.
I was actually expecting to see Thomas essentially saying this, when I cautiously clicked on this Opinion and read it from top to bottom.
There has to be a new standard of journalistic ethics that overs an opinion article, where the journalist proclaims something they clearly cannot justify from the piece, but more importantly they dont even believe it themselves. The second part is important because this journalist clearly does not believe Thomas is the Chief Justice, and yet, by penning it under "opinion" it becomes impossible to blame them.
There should be a journalistic ethics that encompasses this and all other aspects of journalism that is dishonest by intention.
A lot of people aren't aware that chief justices aren't promoted from within...they're appointed by virtue of who is selected to replace the former chief justice. I discovered this when Roberts was appointed, and concluded that the chief justice role is pretty much ceremonial only and has little or nothing to do with who actually wields the power in the supreme court.
The Left is going absolutely ape on social media. The SC not blocking Texas's law has them freaked out. Now many states are going to follow Texas and the Left knows it. The Texas law is likely to stay in effect for many months.
I remember back in March when the Satanic church was suing the Texas government saying their abortion restrictions was an infringement on the rights of the Satanic females who often regard abortion as religious matter. That women who follow satanism believe in child sacrifice and it's a way for them to safely "practice" their religion.
Leftists are going crazy about this. I doubt they give a shit about the "minority women" they say need those abortions so badly. And there is this:
She was shocked by the number of 12, 13, and 14-year-olds who came into the clinic for contraception or abortion referrals, and “was amazed at the number of young women who came to the clinic with multiple sex partners and STDs,” according to the DCNF report.
Young girls “are being groomed as future abortion patients because Planned Parenthood promotes a promiscuous lifestyle,” said Trevino. “We’re not discouraging them from having sex at a young age. We have monthly quotas to meet. They’re just numbers.”
As a result, “I was forced and challenged to look at my own beliefs and actions. I couldn’t continue to be indifferent,” she said in the DCNF interview.
“I started to connect the dots and realize that it all goes together,” she said.
“It was a struggle because I felt like Planned Parenthood treated women like cattle,” Trevino explained earlier this year in a Live Action video. “We talked about reducing the amount of time that we saw our … new patients.”
12-14 year olds constantly going for abortions is a big red flag of recurrent child abuse. It's not wonder the Left is so threatened by Texas shutting this down.
The Left relied on the SC to protect abortion and Roberts played a big role in this. Now they're foaming at the mouth to see Texas stand up.
Planned parenthood is literally caught on camera selling aborted baby parts and they countersued and brought legal action against the whistleblower. And won. Abortion is a business to them
Yes this. It was the day I had my awakening. I knew there was something wrong when they gave that young man with no SC experience the position of Chief Justice. Of course over the past couple years most of us know what they have on him. It's their play book. Put someone in a powerful position who has everything to loose if he doesn't do your bidding. Sound like someone else we know?
It is mentioned in the constitution, so yes, it is an official position. The only duty I saw attached to the office of chief justice is that of presiding over impeachment trials in the Senate. Traditionally they also swear in the new president.
Scalia was never Chief Justice. It is not passed down. It is decided by the President and the Senate. It is one of the 9 chairs, but has additional responsibilities.
The CNN article explained it better. The other two were just soundbytes that said nothing of value.
CNN's claim that Thomas is the "new Chief Justice" is just hyperbole. It would be like saying Kamala Harris is the new prez just because she is making phone calls to other country's presidents. It's just a word salad article, not anything meaningful.
They are saying basically that because Roberts is more often in the minority opinion on cases, his authority to determine who writes the court's official opinions is diminished. Thomas is "acting like a Chief Justice" because his majority views and seniority are allowing him to assign opinion writings.
It doesn't mean anything more than that. Thomas is not officially the Chief Justice. Roberts still is.
However, an article like this will be used by the leftists to try to push for adding more leftist criminals to the Supreme Court to do what they have wanted to do for years: pack the court.
Six weeks isn't enough time to even recognize when a pregnancy has occurred. Separation of church and state has been dissolved when policy is driven by moral arguments stemming from religious ideology (e.g. life begins at conception)
Oh, I don't know... maybe in the Establishment Clause?
You know, the one that explicitly states that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”
It is Catholic/Christian religious ideology that suggests that life begins at conception, and making a law that 'takes away' others' rights based on the moral views of said religion cannot be any more clear in how it comes into conflict with the establishment clause.
Pushing laws that favor one religion while disfavoring people of other moral and belief systems is, by definition, respecting said religion.
Hey, first of all - what an amazing article to bring tothe attention of the community - thanks for this!
Secondly, this article is not what it seems like. It's a Lion in the costume of a funny dragon, and I will explain why. But additionally, this is an example of Fake News that is very subtle in its intentions, and is intended to trigger other Fake News articles by others to slowly flesh out the real intention.
A funny dragon attracts a wide audience, because everyone knows its not dangerous but it raises curiousity. But when the funny dragon throws away its costume, what you find inside is a Lion, that can be used to perform the real attack.
Whats the Funny dragon here? The title "Clarence Thomas Is the new Chief Justice". It will rightfully attract the curiosity of a lot of people both from the left and the right, and even from those who dont follow fake news.
We think perhaps something happened to John Roberts (as we all have been hoping and expecting) but is that what this article says?
The answer is NO. This article has nothing to do with John Roberts being replaced as the Chief Justice. Infact, its very clear that Thomas is NOT the Chief Justice.
Then what is it saying? What is the Lion underneath the Dragon costume ?
"That the SCOTUS is becoming too dangerous. If we dont do something to curtail it and get rid of Thomas, not only will it push extreme conservative agenda, it will completely overturn the Roe vs Wade. DO SOMETHING!!"
What is the real argument here? That John Roberts is more and more becoming part of the minority. That conservatives are the majority, but more importantly, Thomas being the longest serving Justice of majority gets to ... oh the horror .... assign himself to write the Majority opinion, "and OMG, he is going to write such brilliant and well thought out opinion that it will be very hard for us to run interferences."
Yeah, the recent high profile case where he to to write the Majority was to do with staying an execution for an inmate who was just yanking the procedures in the last minute in an attempt to stall his execution. The guy who brutally attacked a dad who was just assembling Christmas gifts for his kids, with a sword and a knife and was convicted and his death sentence finalized in 1999. He was given an option to use Nitrous Oxide instead of Lethal injection, and rejected it, but at the last minute started all kinds of appeals to be granted that option (which would have required the State to post pone the execution). The question before the SCOTUS was purely procedural and Thomas eloquantly outlined it.
How did they characterise this:
So, what exactly is the costume of the funny dragon here? A video of a recent case in which - literally - Thomas asks a couple of questions to the State's counsel. That all. They assert that he "almost never asks a question" and then go on to show him asking the questions, and then write a whole article about how he is the Chief Justice.
What is it that these people are really really afraid of?
THIS:
This is what they want to rile up everyone against Thomas, because their baby part factory is going to be shutdown.
Almost forgot:
No, the abortion win is because of the conservative majority which seems to be finally coming to the forefront. But the Texas win explains this article.
I felt like I just attended a really great college lecture about how to critically think with respect to persuasive discourse, and I learned a lot from you. Thank you for your post.
Q taught us how to use critical thinking and how to find hidden agendas. I just hope we will never forget all that he taught after the Awakening happens.
Without this article, I would never have learnt so much about the way Thomas works and how much they are scared of him. The best part about the Majority Opinion in that he added this, and explained the original murder. Shows that Thomas, even as a SCOTUS Justice, still focuses on the human element in the case, which is what we want our judicial system to go back.
And to show how much they hate him and are scared of him:
How depraved are these people, spreading fake stories about a Justice they killed and who cannot defend against this, and saying that Scalia called Clarence a nut ?
I am waiting for the day all these people meet their day of reckoning.
Nice breakdown!
Notice the writer's use of "no matter how painful".
This is manipulative disingenuousness at its finest. One would have to have a brain made of latex rubber to stretch it enough to imagine Thomas authorizing, say, flaying, drawing and quartering, death by 1000 cuts, or breaking on the wheel as a means of execution.
Our forebears visited the most unthinkable, inhuman tortures on their fellow humans. Slowly, gradually crushing the head in a screw press until the eyeballs pop out and the skull implodes is not something healthy humans should ever see or want to see—even if it's Brennan's Neanderthal skull being squashed like a pumpkin.
In just a few centuries, moral humans have evolved beyond the capacity to endure, let alone inflict, such over-the-top barbarism on people whom we are executing for THEIR inhumanity to humankind.
We have a lot of executions that need to be performed, starting yesterday. Let's get to it and get it over with!
Disclaimer: pro-death-penalty, anti-torture advocate of mass executions (i.e., millions) for commies, traitors, pedophiles, murderers, etc.
I was actually expecting to see Thomas essentially saying this, when I cautiously clicked on this Opinion and read it from top to bottom.
There has to be a new standard of journalistic ethics that overs an opinion article, where the journalist proclaims something they clearly cannot justify from the piece, but more importantly they dont even believe it themselves. The second part is important because this journalist clearly does not believe Thomas is the Chief Justice, and yet, by penning it under "opinion" it becomes impossible to blame them.
There should be a journalistic ethics that encompasses this and all other aspects of journalism that is dishonest by intention.
I dunno about you but I wouldn't mind watching Brennan's eyes pop out of his crushed skull.
I believe they call that a confirmed kill.
Don’t forget Barry & Co?
We will, if we fail to raise kids that raise kids that raise kids... and so on, that value truth and kindness over acting nice to fit in.
This should be a stickies post. Thank you and I look forward to your next class
Really nice info, thanks for this!
A lot of people aren't aware that chief justices aren't promoted from within...they're appointed by virtue of who is selected to replace the former chief justice. I discovered this when Roberts was appointed, and concluded that the chief justice role is pretty much ceremonial only and has little or nothing to do with who actually wields the power in the supreme court.
Great dissection and explanation of the article and how fake news so often works.
Biingo. Man I fuckin love this site at times like this. Critical thinking and Logic flow at it's finest right here folks...
The Left is going absolutely ape on social media. The SC not blocking Texas's law has them freaked out. Now many states are going to follow Texas and the Left knows it. The Texas law is likely to stay in effect for many months.
I remember back in March when the Satanic church was suing the Texas government saying their abortion restrictions was an infringement on the rights of the Satanic females who often regard abortion as religious matter. That women who follow satanism believe in child sacrifice and it's a way for them to safely "practice" their religion.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/mar/6/satanists-sue-for-religious-right-to-ritual-aborti/
Leftists are going crazy about this. I doubt they give a shit about the "minority women" they say need those abortions so badly. And there is this:
https://newspunch.com/planned-parenthood-satanic-pedophile-ring/
12-14 year olds constantly going for abortions is a big red flag of recurrent child abuse. It's not wonder the Left is so threatened by Texas shutting this down.
The Left relied on the SC to protect abortion and Roberts played a big role in this. Now they're foaming at the mouth to see Texas stand up.
Minority women NEED abortions badly? Margaret Sanger is creaming her century dead nether zone!
*his
Planned parenthood is literally caught on camera selling aborted baby parts and they countersued and brought legal action against the whistleblower. And won. Abortion is a business to them
I guess I don't really understand what the position 'Chief Justice' entails, or how you attain that position.
U gotta go to an Eyes Wide Shut ceremony and make blood sacrifice to a satanic international cult.
Yes this. It was the day I had my awakening. I knew there was something wrong when they gave that young man with no SC experience the position of Chief Justice. Of course over the past couple years most of us know what they have on him. It's their play book. Put someone in a powerful position who has everything to loose if he doesn't do your bidding. Sound like someone else we know?
He is the leader of the supreme court. He decides what cases are brought before the court.
No, not exactly. All justices have a role in which cases are heard.
The Chief Justice:
Is it an official position? Who decides which Justice becomes chief? Do they vote on it?
It is mentioned in the constitution, so yes, it is an official position. The only duty I saw attached to the office of chief justice is that of presiding over impeachment trials in the Senate. Traditionally they also swear in the new president.
Scalia was never Chief Justice. It is not passed down. It is decided by the President and the Senate. It is one of the 9 chairs, but has additional responsibilities.
The chief justice is appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate.
Roberts is a "conservative" who started voting Leftist some time ago.
He wants out of the heat.
John Roberts obtained his 2 adopted children illegally through Jeffrey Epstein. He's also been logged onto the Lolita Express.
I hope he didn't use those children to be abused to enter the money cabal. Story is hard to find now. Been scrubbed.
https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a36019/the-true-story/
The CNN article explained it better. The other two were just soundbytes that said nothing of value.
CNN's claim that Thomas is the "new Chief Justice" is just hyperbole. It would be like saying Kamala Harris is the new prez just because she is making phone calls to other country's presidents. It's just a word salad article, not anything meaningful.
They are saying basically that because Roberts is more often in the minority opinion on cases, his authority to determine who writes the court's official opinions is diminished. Thomas is "acting like a Chief Justice" because his majority views and seniority are allowing him to assign opinion writings.
It doesn't mean anything more than that. Thomas is not officially the Chief Justice. Roberts still is.
However, an article like this will be used by the leftists to try to push for adding more leftist criminals to the Supreme Court to do what they have wanted to do for years: pack the court.
Just determines who writes the majority opinion. If CJ Roberts sides with the minority opinion, J Thomas decides who presents the majority opinion.
All of this was said by the luber himself. Fuck him.
An abortion win?
Six weeks isn't enough time to even recognize when a pregnancy has occurred. Separation of church and state has been dissolved when policy is driven by moral arguments stemming from religious ideology (e.g. life begins at conception)
Where do you find "separation of church and state" in any of our founding documents?
Oh, I don't know... maybe in the Establishment Clause?
You know, the one that explicitly states that, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion.”
It is Catholic/Christian religious ideology that suggests that life begins at conception, and making a law that 'takes away' others' rights based on the moral views of said religion cannot be any more clear in how it comes into conflict with the establishment clause.
Pushing laws that favor one religion while disfavoring people of other moral and belief systems is, by definition, respecting said religion.
Intriguing.... what is an "establishment of religion"?
Where does it say churches cant interfere with the state? It sounds one sided.
Extending that reasoning, could murder be considered a religious tenet? Theft? Etc. Honestly asking here.