David SimsEssays

Could a Trump Supreme Court Slow America’s Decline?

gty_trump_ginsburg_jef_160713_12x5_1600

The Jews will still be pulling the puppet strings, so the possibilities for change are very limited. Nevertheless, let us consider them.

by David Sims

DONALD TRUMP will be a president who, whatever he might be, isn’t a liberal, and he will appoint four US justices to the Supreme Court, one of them being a replacement for Antonin Scalia, one being a replacement for moderate Anthony Kennedy, and the other two being replacements for aging liberal justices Ruth Ginsberg and Stephen Breyer. Further, the average Member of Congress is somewhat conservative, there being 48 D and 51 R in the Senate and 193 D and 239 R in the House.

No wonder the leftists are bitter enough that they hope someone will assassinate the President-Elect. They lost big this time.

Of course, the Jews will still be pulling the puppet strings, so this election really hasn’t brought the United States back under the control of the American people.

The conservative Justices on the US Supreme Court, rated from best to worst by their voting records, are:

1. Clarence Thomas, 68, Black ← surprise!
2. Samuel Alito, 66, White
3. John Roberts, 61, White
4. Anthony Kennedy, 80, White

The liberal Justices on the US Supreme Court, rated from least dangerous to most dangerous, are:

5. Stephen Breyer, 78, Jew
6. Sonya Sotomayor, 62, Puerto Rican Mestizo
7. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 83, Jew
8. Elena Kagan, 56, Jew

So, in the best case scenario, President Trump will fill the vacant seat most recently held by Antonin Scalia, and the seats held by the aging Anthony Kennedy, Stephen Breyer, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg by staunch, reliable, consistent, and youthful (late 40s) conservative justices. That will form a new US Supreme Court in which the right has 7 votes and the left has only 2 votes for the foreseeable future.

(Not-so-fun fun fact: There are just as many Jews on the US Supreme Court as there are Whites, even though Whites are 64% of the US population, while Jews are only 2% of the US population. I wonder how that happened? If three Jews leave and four Whites arrive, then the racial balance on the Supreme Court will be as near to a match with US population demographics as its nine justices can possibly be.)

Since (unlike the House) the Senate is almost evenly divided between liberals and conservatives, President Trump will need to be resolute in nominating only conservatives to fill vacant Supreme Court seats. The liberals in the Senate will oppose these nominations just as resolutely, and they will try to corrupt their Republican fellows with bribes, blackmail, and so forth. But I think that Trump can prevail here, if he never compromises on the values he thinks a justice should have, simply to get a vacancy filled.

There’s a problem in the family courts that needs attention, and Trump might give it some attention as President.

Let Family Court begin!
Face it with a grin!
Mothers never lose,
And fathers never win.

That’s wrong. It is just plain wrong that women get all the rights while men have to suffer a de facto martial law to pay for women’s rights.

There are other problems with how the law currently works that are unconstitutional and need fixing.

Roe v. Wade, 1973
Engel v. Vitale, 1962
Brown v. Board of Education, 1954

…and many other decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court were made in willful violation of the 9th and 10th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. Each of those decisions of the high court presume to reserve to the federal government what was reserved to the states, or to the people, by the Constitution itself. The flimsy pretexts that the Justices of their times used to transfer, unlawfully, the rights of the states to the federal government will not stand up to an examination by future Justices who are minded to undertake the endeavor.

This has been a problem with US Justices for a long time. Even the “conservatives” on the Supreme Court have voted, more often than not, to increase the powers of the federal government at the expense of both the states and the people. An ironic exception to the rule is Clarence Thomas, who, despite being Black, is a conservative who remains true to the Founders’ ideals as he considers cases involving the powers of the federal government. Thomas might, therefore, be the very best member of the Supreme Court since the American Civil War.

Odd, that. Not what I expected when George H.W. Bush nominated him.

Anyway, Donald Trump has expressed his opinion that gun rights are matters for the states to decide, without presumptuous interference or override by Congress. And his reasoning is just as valid for the aforementioned decisions by the Supreme Court that were made in defiance of the US Constitution, as amended.

* * *

Source: Author

For Further Reading

Previous post

Black Marks on Trump's Character

Next post

Thomas Wolfe and the End of the Old America

6 Comments

  1. Michael R
    November 22, 2016 at 12:01 am — Reply

    He “will” appoint four replacement justices? We can certainly hope so, but how can we know this with any degree of certainty? We can hope to God that, mister especially, Ruth Bader Ginsboig (age 83) dies within the next four years, but there’s certainly no guarantee of that even. And of course, if she doesn’t die, this Kikess will not step down during Trump’s term(s).

  2. Thomas Plaster
    September 2, 2017 at 2:28 pm — Reply

    Anyone notice the garb/apparel that the jewess Ginsburg is wearing in that photo. It looks eastern European traditional. She was not born or spent anytime in eastern Europe.

    That’s how many non-Whites behave. Negroes, hindus, Hispanics, orientals, jews. Even some Italian and greek heritage Americans.

    No matter they were born here, no matter where they’ve spent their lives. Their “country” is the one of their (racial) ancestors. They never have and never will be American in any sense of the word. Yes, they have a piece of paper that declares them a U.S. citizen. So what? Still doesn’t mean they are American.

    • Sethmoto101
      October 16, 2018 at 11:02 pm — Reply

      No “(racial)” for Ginsburg. As a jew, her ancestry is as European as Al Sharpton’s.

  3. JM/Iowa
    October 18, 2018 at 12:54 am — Reply

    “The Jews will still be pulling the puppet strings, so the possibilities for change are very limited. Nevertheless, let us consider them.”

    To what end shall we consider very limited change? To slow down the rate of our genocide? That’s as good a solution as choosing between the lesser of two evils at the polls. Let me make it clear that this is no choice at all, but an abdication of our responsibility this present generation bears for solving the problem.

    The present arrangements of our institutions and how they are led and staffed is corrupted beyond repair. The disregard for truth above all has destroyed it and has been replaced with lies. It cannot last except to destroy all that what is good that there is left.

    To build new institutions better than before and comprised solely of our own people chosen according to their fidelity to Aryan principles -and may I be so bold as to advocate Cosmotheism here as the bedrock of those principles. This can only be done on an organized basis; “lone wolves” and uncoordinated and short-term individual “fixes” won’t get the job done. We have a chance now to continue the work begun by Dr. Pierce and so many others in building up a new revolutionary infrastructure, let us not waste it.

    • Sethmoto101
      October 18, 2018 at 2:33 am — Reply

      Organize the infrastructure you mention through the equivalent of a Black Lives Matter protest whenever a White is killed by a non-white in a violent crime (but not where the white was voluntarily associating with the negroid as mate or drug buyer). It’s dangerous, nasty work that weeds out hobbyists, but read the comments to these incidents to see that unrest and despair among whites is growing even though it’s a small percentage of all: https://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/2018/10/his-name-is-timothy-moriconi-white-man.html?m=1 and http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/2017/11/his-name-is-alexander-wroblewski.html. Those reactions need to be channeled. A march of Whites holding up placards showing the before and after (crime scene) photos of white victims of negroid crime in Baltimore, through that ravaged city’s main thoroughfare, will draw the media’s usual anti-white sh*tstorm that such protests are exclusionary of corresponding ‘black victimization’. The media will censor the most violent reactions from negroids made against the marchers, while Whites will be prosecuted for gun-related felonies if they try to defend themselves in Maryland – to the media’s glee. But that in turn further stokes a long overdue, broad-based white-lash against the whole jewish-authored egalitarian-front on race, whose rotten structure is due to be kicked-in by the usually placid White careerists who are content as long as they think they and their families are safe. Every placard should have http://www.natvan.com printed on it. Nazi and similar regalia need not apply; it becomes the story to the ((media)). Repeating the chant “White lives matter” sounds trite, but it’s not creative writing class. Crime scene photos are available through the Freedom of Information Act only if victims’ families pre-agree to their usage in writing.

      • JM/Iowa
        October 19, 2018 at 1:23 am — Reply

        An interesting suggestion to march in the streets in protest. I’m reminded of Charlottesville, Portland, and other places of recent note where well-meaning Whites have tried this only to have the “authorities” set them up for violence from antifa-type or non-White contingents and are subsequently arrested for self-defense. These events have no friendly (to Whites) media coverage on a par with the Jewed media (I refuse to speak in code with triple parentheses when referring to Jews, sorry) and the masses of Whites are barraged with anti-White vitriol.

        This must change, and this is what I was referring to when discussing new institution building. Before we can protest in the streets, before we can subject politicians to our criticisms (and have them heard), before we can move the masses we must have the means to reach nearly all of our people effectively over every part of the lands we live in as a beginning. We need help with legal matters, educational programs, (outside of this forum, who has even heard of Cosmotheism much less explain its basic tenets?), and other matters critical for us to have up and running before putting people in the streets for protests. At present, we’re fresh meat for the present corrupt system when we march in protest and there’s no sense in giving our enemies that at this time, now is there? Protesting now is putting the cart before the horse then wondering why we’re not getting anywhere.

        What we can do is build ourselves now through consistent outreach, but within limits that deny our enemies a chance to bust our heads and blame us for it happening, and institution building. Sadly, nearly all of us are just individual activists at present. We need to make teams. Then communities. And so on. It’s been done before, as the NA has demonstrated with numerous Local Units (the teams just mentioned) throughout North America built up at the time of Dr. Pierce’s passing. And it can be done again–and then some.
        There’s no glamour in it, it can be frustrating with a lack of immediately noticeable tangible results, it’s not monetarily rewarding, and often we don’t get recognized or appreciated but it must be done.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Slander, crude language, incivility, off-topic drift, or remarks that might harm National Vanguard or its users may be edited or deleted, even if unintentional. Comments may be edited for clarity or usage.