Former federal judge Luttig peddles paranoid left-wing fearmongering
Former Federal Appellate Judge Michael Luttig has been one of the most consistent anti-Trump personalities on the left-wing media. He has been peddling the alarmist end-of-democracy BS for years – and he is still at it even though that narrative has failed big time.
Judging from his most recent appearance on MSNBC, his hyperbolic fearmongering is more extreme than ever. He led off by implying that Chief Justice John Roberts declared that the rule-of-law is being endangered by President Trump. That is a completely misleading interpretation of what Roberts said. It is a classic – and in this case, an abusive- use of a statement out of context.
Luttig went on to say that in his first day in office, Trump “declared war on the judiciary, the Constitution and the rule of law”. His opinion does not make it true. It is hyperbole to the point of deceit.
He added that “Every day since then until this day, the President himself, his Vice President, his top White House aides, and his Cabinet have been threatening the judiciary”. Wow! Talk about a sweeping accusation. Luttig forgot to mention the First Lady, First Son Barron Trump, and the White House chef. Is it paranoia or mendacious political hyperbole?
Luttig sees the arrest of Wisconsin Judge Hannah Dugan as evidence of a Trump assault on the judiciary. He conceded that Dugan ushered defendant Eduardo Flores Ruiz out through a private doorway in order to avoid arrest by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents — who were on the scene to take the defendant into custody for future deportation. Flores Ruiz was just the kind of criminal illegal alien that Trump promised to deport. (And what is it with these Democrat Trump-haters who align with the bad hombres?) ICE agents had to chase Flores Ruiz and arrest him outside the courthouse as he tried to flee — putting both agents and the public at greater risk than being handed over inside the more secure courthouse.
But that is not how Luttig saw it. He said that Dugan’s actions were only to maintain “the decorum of the court.” Let’s ponder that head-scratcher. According to Luttig, Dugan abruptly suspended Flores Ruiz‘s trial for battery only because he was about to be taken into custody by ICE. SHE then conceives and executes a failed plan for Flores Ruiz to avoid ICE agents. Various security tapes tell the story convincingly. Yet, Luttig tries to sell all that as merely maintaining “the decorum of the court.” It seems to me that it was Dugan who was disrupting the court’s decorum while interfering with law enforcement by aiding in the attempted escape of a wanted criminal.
Dugan and her lawyers are hoping that they can empanel a prejudicial jury that will not hold the judge accountable. That is a very high probability in view of the jury pool in that particular community. That does not mitigate the judge’s obvious actions or the stupid interpretations being peddled by Luttig.
The former judge also said that Trump does not believe that the United States Supreme Court can rule on issues of presidential powers. He cited Marbury v. Madison as the case that established the power of the Supreme Court to review legislation and presidential actions to determine their constitutionality. (At least Luttig is up on history). Luttig plays mind reader to declare what Trump believes. More importantly, there is no evidence to support Luttig’s contention.
Trump and administration officials have frequently affirmed an understanding of judicial review – and have indicated they would obey orders from the high Court – and so far, Trump has not violated any orders of the Supreme Court. Luttig’s claim borders on a boldface lie – and I leave it to you to decide which side of the border on which he resides.
Trump’s argument has been over the authority of lower federal courts to impinge on presidential powers. That issue is currently meandering through the courts. It is significant that no court has held Trump in contempt – and if that were to happen in one of the lower courts, the action would still be appealed to the Supreme Court. Luttig is calling the game in the first inning – declaring his team won even though his team is not even ahead on the scoreboard.
Luttig said that “the federal judiciary has responded in kind by essentially striking down, at least preliminarily if not ultimately, every single signature initiative of this President during his first 100 days in office.” That is an exaggeration (a lie) of monumental proportions. Of Trump’s more than 200 Executive Orders, only a handful are even being challenged in courts – although the handful have each been subjected to multiple lawsuits.
The highlighted portion above is where Luttig becomes a word weasel. As I have previously written, the injunctions and opinions of the lower courts are NOT final decisions on the merits of the issues. That will not be determined until the Supreme Court hands down its decisions. And since we can be sure that, as a federal judge, Luttig knows that. We can also be sure that he is intentionally misinforming the public based on his own visceral hatred for Trump — which has been seen over many appearances on left-wing media.
Now, if you do not think that is bad enough, consider where Luttig went next.
He noted that the U.S. Marshals are responsible for the safety of federal judges and that they are under the authority of the Department of Justice, which is headed by Attorney General Pam Bondi — a Trump appointee. Luttig engages in ominous and ludicrous intimation that Trump puts federal judges in physical danger FROM the U.S. Marshals commissioned to guard them. Talk about impugning the integrity of a lot of hardworking, honest law enforcement officials. WOW!!! Luttig went on to say that “If I were a sitting judge today, I literally would not accept the Marshal Service protection from this administration”.
He added, “Why would any judge believe that he or she would be protected by the Marshal Service?” Luttig appears to see the U.S. Marshals as some sort of Gestapo ready to injure or kill federal judges at the bidding of Trump. On that note, I rest my case. For all his central casting judicial demeanor — and his past service as a federal judge — Luttig is nothing but a paranoid political lunatic peddling pulp fiction.
So, there ‘tis.
In March, when Donnie 2 Dolls voiced his desire to impeach judges unfriendly to his illegal acts, Roberts said: “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose.” Seems pretty plain, Trump says yes, Roberts shoots back: NO.
In his Georgetown speech he did allude to the rule of law being endangered, that our young do not understand the rule of law or value. And he also highlighted it’s OK to be against decisions but admonished that ad hominem attacks do more harm than good. Hear that, Joe?
He did not tie it to Trump, although Trump ought to hear the message as he pushes against the rule of law, habeas corpus, and the Constitution. Trump knows the outcome of that, and trust me, if the worm turns, it turns hard. Ask Bush jr. Ask Biden. Ask Hillary.
I agree with the author, had to turn off MSNBC at that point, even the closed captioning was upsetting. I find both whining and preaching tiresome. Stephanie Ruhl is like listening to fingernails on the chalkboard in that way even if she does have a handle on finance.
There’s plenty of factual support for Trump’s trampling of the rule of law. No need to pretend Roberts is coming at him with extended correlations easily pushed back upon since little foundation and a lot of stretch. That is not helpful to efforts to show Trump for what he is, how he’s doing it, illegalities, and most important —- doing things Americans don’t do (or do and apologize with reparations later, aka WWII Japanese Americans). And considering he’s doing it in plain sight, trying to make a mountain from a molehill by stretching what was said and putting thoughts that were not plainly stated by Roberts is too easy to shoot down diminishing what’s going on right in front of our faces.
The (former) judge is stupid. We do not have a demcoracy so how can anyone destroy it. We are a Republican form of governmet. Read the Constitution.