Judge thumbs her nose at the clear language of the Nevada Constitution

Here we go again.

A Clark County judge has ruled that government employees may also serve in the state Legislature, even though the Nevada Constitution clearly states in the Separation of Powers Clause: “The powers of the Government of the State of Nevada shall be divided into three separate departments,—the Legislative,—the Executive and the Judicial; and no persons charged with the exercise of powers properly belonging to one of these departments shall exercise any functions, appertaining to either of the others, except in the cases expressly directed or permitted in this constitution.”

The morning paper notes, “The ruling also points out that the Nevada Legislature has the power to block this kind of employment situation but has declined to do so.” Perhaps, that is because the Constitution has already prohibited it.

The judge made a distinction between a mere public employee and one who exercises executive power, though the Constitution clearly states “any functions.” She also found a difference between state government workers and local government workers, even though Nevada is a Dillon Rule state, meaning the state limits the power of local governments to those expressly granted by the Legislature. Local governments are basically subsidiaries of the state. Employees of local governments essentially are serving in the executive branch of state government, and should be barred from serving as a lawmaker under the Constitution.

The Nevada Policy Research Institute, the conservative think tank that filed the lawsuit seeking to enforce the Separation of Powers Clause, plans to take the case to the Nevada Supreme Court, which dithered on this topic in the past.

In a 1967 case, the Nevada Supreme Court flatly stated, “The division of powers is probably the most important single principle of government declaring and guaranteeing the liberties of the people.”

That opinion quotes liberally from a series of articles by Arthur Vanderbilt, former chief justice of the Supreme Court of New Jersey:

“Individual freedom and the progress of civilization are attainable, but only if each of the three branches of government conforms to the constitutional principles of the separation of powers. This they will do only if the people so will. The problem in the first instance thus becomes one of popular education in the fundamental principles of free government. Among these principles there is none more significant today than the doctrine of the separation of powers.”

It also quotes Montesquieu:

“Were the power of judging joined with the legislative, the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary control, for the judge would be the legislator: Were it joined to the executive power the judge might behave with all the violence of an oppressor.”

The court further quotes the Latin maxim “expressio unius est exclusio alterius,” which means the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another, and noted that it had ruled in an earlier case:

“It is true that the constitution does not expressly inhibit the power which the legislature has assumed to exercise, but an express inhibition is not necessary. The affirmation of a distinct policy upon any specific point in a state constitution implies the negation of any power in the legislature to establish a different policy. `Every positive direction contains an implication against anything contrary to it which would frustrate or disappoint the purpose of that provision. The frame of the government, the grant of legislative power itself, the organization of the executive authority, the erection of the principal courts of justice, create implied limitations upon the law-making authority as strong as though a negative was expressed in each instance.’”

In 2004 then-Secretary of State Dean Heller asked the Supreme Court to remedy the ongoing skirting of the Constitution. Heller asked the court to find that service in the Legislature by unidentified executive branch employees violates the concept of separation of powers and to direct the Legislature to enforce the Separation of Powers Clause.

But the court ruled that doing so would violate — wait for it — the Separation of Powers Clause, because the Constitution also states that the Senate and Assembly are to determine the qualifications of their members, thus the judicial branch telling the legislative branch who its members may be violates the Separation of Powers Clause. Got it?

The court did allow that “declaratory relief could be sought by someone with a ‘legally protectible interest,’ such as a person seeking the executive branch position held by the legislator.”

Since then, the NPRI has filed lawsuits on behalf of people seeking the executive branch jobs of lawmakers, but to no avail.

The Nevada Separation of Powers Clause has been flouted for decades, as an assortment of bureaucrats have successfully won seats in the Legislature, including local prosecutors who enforce the laws they write.

The principle was embodied in the founding documents of this country.

James Madison wrote in Federalist Paper No. 47, “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”

Thomas Jefferson wrote in “Notes on the State of Virginia” in 1784: “All the powers of government, legislative, executive, and judiciary, result to the legislative body. The concentrating these in the same hands is precisely the definition of despotic government. … An elective despotism was not the government we fought for; but one which should not only be founded on free principles, but in which the powers of government should be so divided and balanced among several bodies of magistracy, as that no one could transcend their legal limits, without being effectually checked and restrained by the others.”

Let’s hope the state Supreme Court this time comes down on the side of the clear language of the Constitution and principles it embraces. To find otherwise is a farce and a canard.

81 comments on “Judge thumbs her nose at the clear language of the Nevada Constitution

  1. Bill says:

    I will probably have more to say later, but the decision is flawed and the Court should have found that such service was Constitutionally prohibited.
    A Southern Nevada Judge decided this case? It might be interesting to find out the number of Legislators that have employment with an Executive Branch of State Government? It might be interesting to find out how many and where they are from. A number of years ago, I had occasion to research that question and at that time there were quite a few but I cannot recall the precise number.

  2. The R-J story names the current double-dippers. A couple of years ago a judge threw out a DUI conviction because the prosecutor was a legislator.

  3. Bruce Feher says:

    Where do these judges get off doing what ever they want? If they can get away with this, who needs any other elected officials?

  4. Anonymous says:

    I imagine this really chapped your hide eh Thomas?

    First full newly created blast from you in a while that’s for sure. Keep the blood pumping.

    Naturally I disagree though because no individual member of the legislature ever exercises the functions of an entire branch of government, that they are not a member of alone and that is all the Nevada Constitution prohibits after all.

    Not only that this provision of the Nevada Constitution is in conflict in my opinion anyway with the First Amendment to the US Constitution which protects a persons right to assemble, petition, and speak without government interference.

    If Nevada’s Constitution prohibits people from working more than one job, including one as a legislator, at the same time it is interfering with the rights of those people from speaking, assembling, and petitioning.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Just as an aside, does anyone else see anything wrong with the proportion of this guy’s head?


  6. Free to petition, not free to write your own pay raise.

  7. NYPete says:

    So, you are saying that a public school kindergarten teacher should not serve in the state legislature because it would result in “despotic government”?

  8. Thomas Mitchell says:


  9. NYPete says:


  10. NY Pete,

    Would it be okay for the legislature to consist entirely of CCSD employees? Your choice is between a rule that allows that or one that prohibits it. The Framers chose to implement a rule that prohibited it, even if that meant barring the lowly kindergarten teacher. That cost is much smaller than the harm caused by allowing for the possibility that executive branch employees would overtake the legislature entirely, which is what those arguing against our interpretation would allow for.

  11. NYPete says:

    The “framers”?? You mean ‘ole Ben Franklin and John Adams, et al.? We are talking about the Nevada Constitution here, not the US Constitution. I have no idea who “framed” the Nevada Constitution (nor do you,) but they are not exactly held in special reverence. In contrast, the US Constitution doesn’t have anything like the language of the Nevada Constitution. Perhaps the real “framers” were not as worried as Mr. Mitchell seems to be about the despotic implications of school crossing guards running for the state legislature.
    As for your parade of horribles hypothetical, I don’t think that a Clark County resident would be eligible to run for office in Esmeralda or Pershing, and even if they were, I tend to doubt that they would be very successful. In any case, perhaps we should, you know, let the people decide. (I know that is a distasteful concept to the modern conservative movement, but so be it.)

  12. Athos says:

    petey, a little decorum, eh? Your vitriol serves no one. Our Constitution was written in the summer of 1864, and telegraphed to the US Capitol prior to the re-election of A. Lincoln. Thus we became a state Oct. 31, 1864. It was actually voted on by the people of Nevada! But I digress….

    The objections raised by Robert and Tom are valid points, given human nature. Look how our very own federal legislature got around voting themselves a raise! (hint: check out our 27th Amendment)

    I believe this should pertain to government union, especially given the ever expanding bureaucratic leviathan!

    To me, this just reinforces that premise that power corrupts. Anyone that would work both branches of government has no principles. And if you can’t have people do what is right (like follow the clear language of the State Constitution) without force of law, then these are not virtuous people.

    But we already know that, don’t we? And they throw it in our face and say “whatcha donna do about it, homey?” ……. because we can’t even get a fair accounting of the 1.8million votes mailed out in the last election, can we?

  13. Athos says:

    Oh, and anny….I can’t let this slip by without a provocative comment…. you said,”the First Amendment to the US Constitution which protects a persons right to assemble, petition, and speak without government interference.” does that apply to a cake maker wanting to not use his God given talent to do something he doesn’t support?

    Or how about the landlord that wishes to rent the other half of their duplex, to someone they want (and exclude someone they don’t want?)

    Or what about a white heterosexual male wanting to use the Black Cultural Centers at the school he pays to attend? Are the Blacks protected to “assemble” without the white boy?

    Are Boy Scouts allowed to “assemble” without girls?

    Look how far down the hole we’ve fallen, Alice!

  14. NYPete says:

    OK, I think I get it. The Administrative Secretary of the Elko County Roads Department cannot serve in the state legislature because there would be a conflict of interest if they had to vote on a measure that might lead to higher salaries for people who work for Roads Departments. Or that might benefit them in general.
    Now I understand the logic. That is why a rancher cannot serve in the Nevada legislature — she might have to vote on measures that would have a positive impact on ranching. And a real estate agent obviously can’t be in the legislature, because so much of what government does has an effect on real estate activity. And obviously a teacher in a private school is no more permitted to be in the legislature than the public school kindergartner teacher, because she might have to vote on state support for private schools.
    Now it all makes sense.

  15. Anonymous says:

    Athos I think you misunderstand and misuse the word provocative in that post; try retarded instead and you’re much closer to saying what it is that you’re saying.

  16. Athos says:

    Gee, anny, how grandiose of you! Why don’t you explain to the class what you mean by “retarded”? (Why does every comment from you translate to “shut up and obey”? Very tyrannical, anny old boy!)

    petey, when has ANY government entity been benevolent, thru out the millennium? Why would anyone EVER want to give their rulers MORE POWER? (You don’t work for the government, do you? If so, shouldn’t you disclose that pertinent fact?)

  17. NYPete says:

    1. Nope, I don’t work for the government. I work for a large corporation.
    2. I’m sorry that you don’t think that the administrations of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt were benevolent. (Not to mention Winston Churchill, Margaret Thatcher, Konrad Adenauer, et al.) I happen to disagree with you.

  18. Athos says:

    Soooooo, you mention 3 out of 46 presidents as “benevolent” and that quiets your conscience to continue to give power to our elected leaders? And not one leader in over a hundred years! At least you’re a little more recent with the British, but then again, they’ve been a nation for over a 1000 years.

    We could compare notes about just how “benevolent” your 3 presidents were (not that I’m disagreeing but the South didn’t look at Lincoln as “benevolent”, nor did the moonshiners from western Pennsylvania love and revere Washington.

    History is replete with despotic kings, and benevolent dictators are few and far between, agreed?

  19. NYPete says:

    I think a lot of our presidents were good (“benevolent”), but I chose wanted to pick out the few that most effectively illustrated the lunacy of what you were saying.

    I certainly disagree with you that Washington and Lincoln were “benevolent dictators.”

    And I think the American government, on the whole, has been one of the best in history, and has helped make this one of the richest, freest nations on earth. However, you have the right to disagree and to trash our Constitution and our system of democratic government.

  20. Read “The Real Lincoln” by Thomas J. DiLorenzo.

  21. Anonymous says:

    Writing for The Daily Beast, Rich Lowry described DiLorenzo’s technique in this book as the following: “His scholarship, such as it is, consists of rummaging through the record for anything he can find to damn Lincoln, stripping it of any nuance or context, and piling on pejorative adjectives. In DiLorenzo, the Lincoln-haters have found a champion with the judiciousness and the temperament they deserve.”[26]

    Reviewing for The Independent Review, a think tank associated with DiLorenzo, Richard M. Gamble called the book a “travesty of historical method and documentation”. He said the book was plagued by a “labyrinth of [historical and grammatical] errors”, and concluded that DiLorenzo has “earned the … ridicule of his critics.”[27] In his review for the Claremont Institute, Ken Masugi writes that “DiLorenzo adopts as his own the fundamental mistake of leftist multi-culturalist historians: confusing the issue of race with the much more fundamental one, which was slavery.” He noted that in Illinois “the anti-slavery forces actually joined with racists to keep their state free of slavery, and also free of blacks.” Masugi called DiLorenzo’s work “shabby” and stated that DiLorenzo’s treatment of Lincoln was “feckless” and that the book is “truly awful”.[28][29] In 2002, DiLorenzo debated Claremont Institute fellow professor Harry V. Jaffa on the merits of Abraham Lincoln’s statesmanship before and during the Civil War.[30]


  22. NYPete says:

    I hadn’t expected that Thomas Mitchell would approvingly cite a neo-Confederate secessionist like Thomas DiLorenzo, but perhaps I should have.

  23. Anonymous says:

    When it comes to being benevolent or not I figure most presidents fit within the definition of having a desire to do good for people; whether they actually do good for people or not is another question.

    The only president who wouldn’t fit this definition in my eyes was Trump. The man never intended to do good for people but only for himself.

  24. Athos says:

    “However, you have the right to disagree and to trash our Constitution and our system of democratic government.” I had no idea you are such a stand-up comedian, petey! Your satire is sublime…..I’m a little surprised you didn’t use Obama and Biden for your examples of “benevolent”, but I’m sure you had your reasons.

    And then there’s anny who lives in bizarro world! Trump is the only one that didn’t take a dime in salary and his net worth went down while he was in office! And it’s THIS blogger’s opinion that the only reason he ran for office was because he wanted to ….. what for it….. what was it again???……oh yeah…..

    Make America Great Again

    I believe Prez Zero looked at us as “citizens of the world”. How noble! How grand!

    No thank you. I prefer being an American.

    How ’bout you fellas??

  25. Athos says:

    Oh, and as to Lincoln……He preserved the Union. But he had to use dictatorial methods, didn’t he? Not arguing with how things came out, but the South was Constitutionally permitted to leave the Union. But Lincoln called it a rebellion, didn’t he? And what is so troublesome about the writ of habeas corpus that Presidents feel the need to suspend it? It’s a shame no one ever asked Lincoln or Roosevelt. Maybe somebody should ask Bush? (It’s time to end the Patriot Act, yes?)

    And then there’s that little thing called the “Wars Powers Act” to curtail freedom of the press. Strange, but that doesn’t strike me as something promoting Liberty or Freedom. How ’bout that, fellas?

    And last, it is imperative to have a SMALL, narrowly defined government contract to LIMIT what our leaders can do. Maybe something 4 pages long….. Because Barry Obama’s definition of “having a desire to do good for people” may differ greatly from the average citizen’s, don’t you think? The difference is the Prez has the force of guns on his side. (Just ask those pesky moonshiners in Western Pennsylvania in Washington’s day!)…………

    Or more recently, the Branch Davidian followers of Waco, Texas…. or Bundy’s boys in Nevada…….


  26. NYPete says:

    Athos joins Thomas Mitchell on the side of the Confederacy.

  27. Those states had the right to secede. Yes, slavery was vile and evil, but Lincoln was more concerned about maintaining the Union and even said at one one he would allow slavery to preserve the Union. He also at first advocated sending freed slaves to Africa, the Caribbean or South American.

  28. Anonymous says:

    Thomas even while the agreement those states signed to become members of the country did not spell out the authority by which they could leave the union, ignore that for the moment and please explain how a state, whose lands were obtained solely through the means of the entire federal government, maybe Arkansas, could leave the country by simply saying we’re leaving and expect that the group of people “left” would just say “ok fine take what without us wouldn’t even exist for you provided (the entirety of the land along with everything else) and just leave?

    Shouldn’t the people who were responsible for “building” the state, be entitled to say first whether the state should be able to leave, and then under what conditions? Or does the state that wants to leave get to decide all on its own and take what rightfully belongs to the people they want to get away from with them?

  29. Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

  30. NYPete says:

    Athos & Thomas Mitchell: Both all in on secession & the Confederacy.

  31. Anonymous says:


    Texas what?

    And, I hoped that because the Constitution does not speak at all to the authority of a state to secede (power and authority are different and even if you assume that a state has the power it reserved under the 10th Amendment to secede that still doesn’t mean it had the authority to do so otherwise the 10th would have said “All powers and authority…” and I know what a strict constructionist you are.

    But again, getting past that issue, on what basis would a state like say Arkansas, that came into being as a result of the Louisiana Purchase, which was an act of the federal government, which used money of the federal government; i.e. of all citizens, to create that state, by what unilateral decision could that state legally and justifiably say “we’re leaving and we’re taking the land that you bought with us”?

  32. Powers not delegated to feds “by the Constitution” are reserved to the States. Period.

  33. Texas was a free nation that joined the U.S. of its own volition.

  34. Anonymous says:

    Whatever Texas was or did did not entitle it to secede and even its own enabling legislation allowed only that it could possibly be divided into four separate states but not that it become its own.


  35. Did it say it was irrevocable?

  36. Anonymous says:

    I’m not sure but I bet it didn’t say it was revocable.

  37. Athos says:

    All right, folks! Step right up and learn a little lesson about Compacts, Sovereignty, and plain English language……

    Our constitution is a compact WHICH MEANS it is entered into voluntarily (as opposed to a contract that requires certain legal framework that simply isn’t there, is it?). And because it’s a compact, you can break it. It has to be voluntarily maintained.

    Sovereignty is retained foremost in the individual. The individual can defer his sovereignty to the state, who in turn can defer its authority to the feds. BUT to give up your right of self-determination under duress, or force (or by deception) merely surrenders your liberty and turns you into a slave. The States (beginning with South Carolina) held a convention of its citizens and VOTED to leave the United States. (and were followed up by 10 more states)

    As to anny’s example of Arkansas……Article IV Section 3 Clause 1 spells out how a nation becomes a State in the Union. (Congress has to vote it in) But there is nothing in the Constitution about how a state goes about LEAVING the Union. Nor is there anything spelled out in the Constitution that prohibits a state FROM leaving the Union. THEREFORE, as per the 10th Amendment (as Tom was repeatedly saying!) the Feds have NO authority and the matter is referred BACK to the States to decide.
    Basic English language ( not Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum – Brandon – make up new meaning to words on the fly! But discovering new meanings for words that have been agreed on for millennium is the new leftist orthodoxy, isn’t it? Hmmmm–glad Trump got those 3 Supreme Court justices in, huh?)

    And petey, what’s the matter with you? All you can contribute is your lame attempt at spewing the words RACIST with no other argument? Anny may be wrong (or at least confused about where our liberty is derived) but he’s putting forth a decent opinionated discussion! ……..Try to keep up, will ya?

  38. NYPete says:

    I’m sure that there are many Republican members of Congress that agree with you and Mr. Mitchell that Abraham Lincoln was wrong and the Confederates were right.

  39. Anonymous says:

    Althos is the poster child for the reason children are told to go into the other room while adults are talking.

  40. Athos says:

    So the only arguments that our illustrious lefties can muster, is to call me a racist, and to shut up…..

    When you have absolutely no logical ground to stand on, yell louder and call your betters names. Because you can’t refute my argument, can you, Anny? Just reduce yourself to the juvenile taunts of hollow man.

    Sad little minds, anny and petey. Pity…..

  41. Athos says:

    Ya know, a simple “thank you for the history lesson, Athos” would have sufficed!

  42. NYPete says:

    Boy, sure looks like continued good work by Brandon on the inflation front today.

  43. Anonymous says:

    I never argue with children and when it comes to most things Thomas discusses, Athos is a child in his understanding and an angry child in his written content.

  44. Daily Caller: Core prices increased 0.3% on a monthly basis in December, after growing 0.2% in November, as overall prices rose by 6.5% year-over-year, matching investor expectations as energy and gas prices declined, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data released Thursday.

    Overall, prices declined by 0.1% on a monthly basis in December, while “core prices,” a measure that discounts food and energy prices, climbed 5.7% year-over-year, matching investor expectations, the BLS reported in its monthly Consumer Price Index (CPI).

  45. Athos says:

    Ah, anny. You don’t debate me because you have no logic (or reality) in your beliefs. When you can’t back up what you say, you actually throw a tantrum and spew excuses, don’t you?
    Bet you didn’t know the Constitution was a Compact, did you? You can be big enough to admit you’re wrong, can’t you? Or is that just the default character flaw of you lefties?

    Regardless, your failed gibberish is going the way of the dodo bird. Karl Marx was a loser, dude. Sorry to burst your bubble.

  46. Athos says:

    petey, are you for real? Who do you think caused this massive inflation spike? That’s like Brandon taking credit for a successful exit from Afghanistan.

    Oh wait…….he’s already done that, hasn’t he?

    OK. That’s like Brandon taking credit for a declining Wu Flu death count…..this year!

    I’ve always wondered why leftist wish to erase history…

    ….and now I know!

    Thanks, petey! Your G-men looked good today. Nice win! (you do follow football, right?)

  47. NYPete says:

    You know, inflation has been a post-pandemic phenomenon throughout the developed world — UK, Germany, Japan, Korea, Australia, ….
    It is so interesting to me that you think that Brandon is responsible for all of that.

  48. Athos says:

    That’s a fair enough question, petey. I’d be only too happy to give you my reasoning!

    After a massive (and looking back, quite unnecessary and overblown) spending frenzy due to the Wuhan Flu, enter Brandon and his Demo majorities and passed the following (after shutting down the keystone pipeline another oil and gas production thus driving up the price of gas and helping promote an infrastructure debacle – cause his Sec of Transportation was on “maternity leave”, remember?):

    1st up, the American “Rescue” Plan at $1.9 Trillion buckeroos!

    2) Who can ever forget Build Back Better! @ approx $750Billion

    3)money to to Ukraine (to defend THEIR border) at around $150billion?

    and finally, the “out the door screw you R congress” $1.7 Trillion budget buster!

    Listen, my Republican representatives were definitely in on a lot of this. There is NO such thing as an incorruptible politician. That’s not to say there aren’t ANY good ones out there, but DC is a swamp (literally AND figuratively) and no one is immune.

    It’s just that for this period, the dems are anti freedom, anti free speech, anti right to assemble, and anti right to worship God and pro-globalism…….at least my guys are still “clinging” to their guns and their Bibles and the hope of MAGA!

    Oh, and in case you missed my point, inflation is caused by TOO MUCH GOVERNMENT SPENDING! too many dollars chasing too few products. And all Biden has done is poor gas on the fire.

    Let’s hear what you have to say about that, petey. Too bad anny has been struck stupid by his hatred of all things Orange…because he’s unable (or unwilling) to formulate a cohesive rebuttal to the truths I’ve been putting forth….almost like he doesn’t WANT a working America “E pluribus unum” (you know, “one out of many”)

  49. Bill says:

    About the only thing that you said that I disagree with is that there is no such thing as an incorruptible politician. There are those who seek public office to serve because they have a desire to serve and to bring good governance. To be sure, many run for office for power and too often they sell little pieces of themselves tot there and or once there “go along to get along” in order to stay there. One of the things I always liked about Trump was he didn’t make money by holding office, he lost money, as the mean spirited Democrats proved by leaking his tax returns.

    In my opinion, too many of those who seek office and those who win office have no real core set of values. Our President is a proven congenital liar. Republican George Santos, who just got elected is a also a proven liar as was then Attorney General Blumenthal for claiming when he was successfully ning for Senate, claimed that he had served in Viet Nam when in fact he did not.

    Petey said that he didn’t think that Brandon faused the inflation in other countries and that is true but the reason why Brandon caused it in the United States was that he was too busy emulating the disastrous left turn into European Socialism.
    I have not been following matters on this blog lately due to other concerns but I wonder if some of our vocal critics have now come forward to condemn President Trumps potentially criminal handling of classified documents? Seems like I heard some criticism from them about that kind of thing.
    By the way, I did spend some time in Viet Nam while in the military and saw some combat but not like what it beame a few years after I left. I was there when it was was Kennedy’s build up to what Johnson and McNamara finally wrought.
    Ukraine anyone?

  50. Bill says:

    Oops, I meant President Biden’s handling of the classified documents. I must learn not to write these posts late at night and remember to proof read twice before I send. I would probably make a bad editor.

  51. No one can be their own editor.

  52. Anonymous says:

    Bill are you implying that Donald Trump’s desire was to bring good governance to this country?

    A man who single handedly bankrupted the Secret Service because he charged the agents fees to follow him around his golf course in golf carts that he rented to them?


    A man who upon being elected immediately raised the membership rates at his “home” (which rates were greedily paid by, among others, Chinese agents itching to get a crack at his “ear”?


    A man who when asked whether he considered the Saudis terrorists or friends, responded that he thought they were good guys because of all the multimillion dollar condos they purchased from him during his campaign?


    And who could forget Trump pushing Ivanka’s cheap trinkets on government websites, as an example of a man whose only real desire was for good governance?

    Also of course, the Trump family wasn’t separated from the magnanimity of Donald’s position and the cash they lived for.

    “Since her father was elected president of the United States, global sales of Ivanka Trump merchandise have surged and the company has applied for at least nine new trademarks in the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Canada and the U.S. The commercial engine of the first daughter’s brand is stronger than ever even as she builds a new political career from her West Wing office.

    Sales hit record levels in 2017, despite boycotts and several stores limiting her merchandise. U.S. imports, almost all from China, shot up an estimated 166 percent last year.”


    Forget that the man said that the constitution said he got to do whatever he wanted to do, forget that he took every opportunity to make money all because he was president, wouldn’t any American say that a president who incited an insurrection against the elected government of the country wasn’t setting an example of good governance?

    Apparently not.

  53. NYPete says:

    Athos: thanks for clarifying. So, you believe that the post-pandemic inflation that swept Japan, Australia, Korea, the US, the UK, Spain, and the rest of the Western was caused by the Build Back Better Act — which was fillibustered and never passed Congress — and the December 2022 budget, which has now been in effect for two weeks.
    Got it.

  54. NYPete says:

    I strongly agree with Thomas Mitchell that no one can be their own editor.

  55. Athos says:

    petey, you know the Build Back Better act was later passed as the falsely named “Inflation Reduction Act”, right? Or did you miss that one? And the Fed (and our lovely spend-a-holic Congress/Pres) wasn’t the ONLY one printing money…it’s called quantitative easing, and it was done in Japan, Europe and definitely here at home….
    but you know that, don’t you??

    Lesson REPEATED for petey (compliments of Milton Friedman) “inflation is ‘always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon’ — a problem of printing too much money.”

    Edit that, petey!

  56. Athos says:

    anny, quoting all those sources as reliable unbiased news about Trump and his family is poppycock. Newsweek, CNBC, CNN, and the AP, are ALL proven, unapologetic liars when it comes to the subject of Trump and family. They lied about the Russian dossier. They threw every vicious accusation about Trump they could and all it did was destroy their own credibility.

    How many glamor magazines did ANY Trump female grace in the period he was President? The “insurrection” was an overblown political invention that will soon see the light of day, and put this “darkest period in our nation’s history” fabrication to rest. But then, why should anyone expect different from Lying Joe?

    And it was Trump’s ONLY goal to bring “good governance” to this country, who was floundering from 8 years of Barry O, staring at 8 more years of Queen Hillary of the private bleach bit server, smashed government phone, Clinton Foundation shake down scheme.

    Of course, seeing how you can’t refute any of this, I’ll just rest my case while you slink away, anny……

  57. NYPete says:

    So now Athos’s position is that the post-pandemic inflationary surge of 2021-22 was due to the impact of the Inflation Reduction Act, which was not signed into law until August 16 of last year and whose spending provisions are spread over a ten-year period. Hmm ….
    He has also read something on the internet about “quantitative easing,” and is now eager to blame that as well, even though the Fed has been engaged in that project — initiated and continued through by two Republican-appointed Fed Chairs — since 2008. I guess he thinks it took a dozen years to have an effect.
    He also seems to have come across Milton Friedman’s well-known monetarist dictum, but he does not seem to realize that it has been disproved empirically. Of course, Athos has never been an empirically-minded guy.

  58. Anonymous says:

    Does this count as a glamor magazine?

  59. Athos says:

    Nice try, anny. What year was that mag? And to be perfectly truthful, I’ve never heard of “Stuff”. (great picture though, huh?)

    petey, just because the fed has been poring money into the system, along with the clowns in the ECB, as well as Japan and God only knows who else, since the 2008 bank meltdown fiasco, doesn’t mean it’s a one party problem. It really highlights how corrupt BOTH parties are (and all the bureaucrats that go along with them), doesn’t it?

    If you haven’t been following the markets for the last 15 years, I can understand why you’re confused as to inflation spiking now. Nothing to be ashamed of, petey! Not everyone can comprehend simple economics. The main reason for quantitative easing is to keep the interest rates down (you have noticed that over the past 6 years, a 30 yr mortgage rate was under 4%, right? That is thanks to the trillions of $$$$ the fed has poured into the system!) The fed is now trying to take some of those dollars out of circulation by increasing the interest rate (and not destroying the bond market) but who knows what these clowns are capable of screwing up.

    There’s a whole host of other shenanigans this money did but I don’t want to bog you down with details, at this time. Maybe you can just “google it”?

    Oh, and the Brandon plan that started it all off was the totally unnecessary and definitely not needed $1.9 Trillion “American Rescue Plan”. I thought I put that in my post……yea, I did! You must have missed that one. Try reading a little slower next time, petey;)

  60. NYPete says:

    Well, I am glad you no longer claim that the Inflation Reduction Act of August 2022 contributed to the post-pandemic inflation of 2021-22.
    Progress, I suppose

  61. Athos says:

    petey, here’s a little tip for you…..don’t ingest edibles prior to posting. You may not think so, but it shows in how you frame any debate.

  62. NYPete says:

    This is typical of you. You make the insane accusation that the August 2022 Inflation Reduction Act was partly responsible for the post-pandemic inflation surge of 2021-22. Then, when the crazyness of your accusation is pointed out, you refuse to acknowledge error, and retreat to personal insults.

  63. Anonymous says:

    children do that

  64. Athos says:

    petey and anny, you fellas perfectly define the practice of “gaslighting”. Seems to be a tried and true leftist weapon.

    It’s a shame we’re on to you. As to my comment on edibles and your gaslight postings (because God only knows why you would ignore all of Brandon’s [and Trump’s and Obama’s and Jorge’s!] spending and not understand the argument!) what do you have against edibles, petey? Some people CAN accurately present and refute comments in a meaningful, constructive way (while partaking of a Nevada legal substance).

    Could it be you have no desire to see inflation brought under control? Is your aim to bankrupt the USA?

    But at least you can TRY to present opposing arguments. Anny just chooses to sulk in his room, because his hatred of Trump has driven him stupid. And that is not a personal insult. It’s just reality.

  65. NYPete says:

    Wow – another good economic performance from Brandon — 2.9% inflation-adjusted GDP growth in the 4th quarter of 2022. And unemployment at the lowest level in a half-century!

  66. Anonymous says:

    Thomas did you see that Tesla is hiring another 3000 employees and plans to spend another couple billion in Nevada expanding?

    Any chance you reconsidered your opinion about whether giving them the breaks that brought them here was a good idea?

  67. No. Are they going to build in California?

  68. Anonymous says:

    Not sure.

    Wouldn’t you agree that the Tesla experiment in Nevada has been pretty successful from an economic standpoint for the state though?

    And if not why not?

  69. Anonymous says:

    Even while I applaud you for acknowledging that the company has done well here in Nevada and the state has thus benefited, I’m assuming you still believe the state should not have done what it did to get them here?

    I went back and read a few of the articles you published (along with the even more amusing comments from guys like Steve and Athos) about Tesla and its prospects and the wisdom of incentivizing its factory in Nevada.

    Steve was particularly funny because he just couldn’t get past bad the car they make is and how the stock doomed as a result; people man.

  70. Athos says:

    Troll, troll, troll the blog, gently down the Thread….
    anny has a knack for stirring up the Grateful Dead!

    (turmoil didn’t rhyme, and couldn’t fit in anarchist discord!)

    Talk about your “people man” skills, anny! Can you post any pictures from your last Antifa ‘peaceful protest’? Word has it you were a big ‘hit’ in Memphis….

  71. NYPete says:

    Boy, oh boy: unemployment now down to 3.4% — the lowest in 53 years! A half-million jobs created in one month.
    Way to go, Brandon!

  72. Everybody needs two jobs to cover the cost of Bidenflation.

  73. Athos says:

    good for you, petey! Now maybe you can afford to out and get eggs and bacon for breakfast tomorrow! (of course, you’ll have to pedal your bike, cause who can afford gas now a days, right? yea Brandon!)

    BTW, what’s with the Chicon balloon? Did Brandon get his 10%for sooting it out of the sky AFTER it traversed the US?

  74. NYPete says:

    Athos believes that avian flu, which has affected the supply of eggs, is Joe Biden’s fault. I disagree.

  75. Athos says:

    Oh, petey! You’re such a rascally liar! You know I never said that, besides, Brandon couldn’t give 2 hoots about eggs or chickens or the fact that food costs are up 20% since he took office….(and I have a sneaking suspicion you know it’s because of Joey’s fiscal policy and Mayor Pete’s dereliction of transportation duties and DC’s inability to spend OUR money wisely…..they give drunken sailors a bad name!)

    Did you enjoy his big speech on TV tonight? I hope you watched it cause there were several times I couldn’t make out what he was saying…especially when he was shouting.

    Maybe you could help a fellow 4th ST8 brother out and translate the gibberish?

  76. Anonymous says:

    I believe he said

    “We ain’t playing by no Marquis of Queensberry Rules no more” and then “owning cons” and probably some “far right wing lunatic tears are the sweetest ones” and finally “snowflakes”.

    Say it loud and say it proud Biden is my president.

  77. Anonymous says:

    He may also have said that “The Constitution says I get to do whatever I want” or “First I like to grab the guns and worry abut Due Process later” and “COVID permits me to ignore the Constitution and any other regulation and stay in office for as long as I want”

    but as you said, it wasn’t easy to make out so clearly sometimes.

  78. Athos says:

    Spoken like a true Brandon Disciple!

    How ’bout a little more trolling, anny? And why are you appropriating a Black man’s sayings (James Brown), without accrediting him? Is that something that’s beneath you? I swear, liberals are the biggest racist!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s