Connect with us

International

Biden to propose term limits, new code of ethics for the Supreme Court: report

Published

3 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Calvin Freiburger

Joe Biden is not likely to succeed in getting enough support to amend the Constitution for his plan, but talking about it caters to left-wing ire about the Supreme Court over decisions such as overturning Roe v. Wade, affirming presidential immunity, and gutting bureaucratic power.

Embattled Democrat President Joe Biden is planning to propose a set of dramatic changes to the U.S. Supreme Court meant to appease left-wing rage over its recent ruling in favor of presidential immunity and other outcomes favored by their political foes, according to a new report in The Washington Post.

The Post reported Tuesday that over the weekend Biden shared with members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus the details of his plan, which include term limits for Supreme Court justices and a new and “enforceable” code of ethics.

“I’m going to need your help on the Supreme Court, because I’m about to come out — I don’t want to prematurely announce it — but I’m about to come out with a major initiative on limiting the court,” he reportedly told the left-wing lawmakers. “I’ve been working with constitutional scholars for the last three months, and I need some help.”

The plan also includes proposing a constitutional amendment that would “eliminate broad immunity for presidents and other constitutional officeholders,” according to the Post.

The proposals, most of which would require the difficult process of amending the U.S. Constitution, are not likely to become reality even if Biden wins reelection in November, as it would require either a two-thirds supermajority in both chambers of Congress or a convention called by two-thirds of the state legislatures, then ratification by popular vote in 38 states.

But they continue Democrats’ catering to liberal activists’ hatred of the Court over a string of high-profile rulings that have gone against their interests, including overturning Roe v. Wade in 2022 and this summer affirming some presidential immunity for Donald Trump and overturning the Chevron doctrine that gave significant regulatory discretion to unelected bureaucrats; as well as ongoing attacks on conservative Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

In any event, Democrats continue to question whether they will get an opportunity to try to put such plans into action next year in light of ongoing discontent over Biden’s age, mental ability, and political viability.

Polling aggregations by RealClearPolitics and RaceToTheWH indicate a slim popular-vote lead for Trump in the November election, and, more important, leads in swing states translating to an Electoral College advantage over Biden.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

armed forces

Top Brass Is On The Run Ahead Of Trump’s Return

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Morgan Murphy

With less than a month to go before President-elect Donald Trump takes office, the top brass are already running for cover. This week the Army’s chief of staff, Gen. Randy George, pledged to cut approximately a dozen general officers from the U.S. Army.

It is a start.

But given the Army is authorized 219 general officers, cutting just 12 is using a scalpel when a machete is in order. At present, the ratio of officers to enlisted personnel stands at an all-time high. During World War II, we had one general for every 6,000 troops. Today, we have one for every 1,600.

Right now, the United States has 1.3 million active-duty service members according to the Defense Manpower Data Center. Of those, 885 are flag officers (fun fact: you get your own flag when you make general or admiral, hence the term “flag officer” and “flagship”). In the reserve world, the ratio is even worse. There are 925 general and flag officers and a total reserve force of just 760,499 personnel. That is a flag for every 674 enlisted troops.

The hallways at the Pentagon are filled with a constellation of stars and the legions of staffers who support them. I’ve worked in both the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Starting around 2011, the Joint Staff began to surge in scope and power. Though the chairman of the Joint Chiefs is not in the chain of command and simply serves as an advisor to the president, there are a staggering 4,409 people working for the Joint Staff, including 1,400 civilians with an average salary of $196,800 (yes, you read that correctly). The Joint Staff budget for 2025 is estimated by the Department of Defense’s comptroller to be $1.3 billion.

In contrast, the Secretary of Defense — the civilian in charge of running our nation’s military — has a staff of 2,646 civilians and uniformed personnel. The disparity between the two staffs threatens the longstanding American principle of civilian control of the military.

Just look at what happens when civilians in the White House or the Senate dare question the ranks of America’s general class. “Politicizing the military!” critics cry, as if the Commander-in-Chief has no right to question the judgement of generals who botched the withdrawal from Afghanistan, bought into the woke ideology of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) or oversaw over-budget and behind-schedule weapons systems. Introducing accountability to the general class is not politicizing our nation’s military — it is called leadership.

What most Americans don’t understand is that our top brass is already very political. On any given day in our nation’s Capitol, a casual visitor is likely to run into multiple generals and admirals visiting our elected representatives and their staff. Ostensibly, these “briefs” are about various strategic threats and weapons systems — but everyone on the Hill knows our military leaders are also jockeying for their next assignment or promotion. It’s classic politics

The country witnessed this firsthand with now-retired Gen. Mark Milley. Most Americans were put off by what they saw. Milley brazenly played the Washington spin game, bragging in a Senate Armed Services hearing that he had interviewed with Bob Woodward and a host of other Washington, D.C. reporters.

Woodward later admitted in an interview with CNN that he was flabbergasted by Milley, recalling the chairman hadn’t just said “[Trump] is a problem or we can’t trust him,” but took it to the point of saying, “he is a danger to the country. He is the most dangerous person I know.” Woodward said that Milley’s attitude felt like an assignment editor ordering him, “Do something about this.”

Think on that a moment — an active-duty four star general spoke on the record, disparaging the Commander-in-Chief. Not only did it show rank insubordination and a breach of Uniform Code of Military Justice Article 88, but Milley’s actions represented a grave threat against the Constitution and civilian oversight of the military.

How will it play out now that Trump has returned? Old political hands know that what goes around comes around. Milley’s ham-handed political meddling may very well pave the way for a massive reorganization of flag officers similar to Gen. George C. Marshall’s “plucking board” of 1940. Marshall forced 500 colonels into retirement saying, “You give a good leader very little and he will succeed; you give mediocrity a great deal and they will fail.”

Marshall’s efforts to reorient the War Department to a meritocracy proved prescient when the United States entered World War II less than two years later.

Perhaps it’s time for another plucking board to remind the military brass that it is their civilian bosses who sit at the top of the U.S. chain of command.

Morgan Murphy is military thought leader, former press secretary to the Secretary of Defense and national security advisor in the U.S. Senate.

Continue Reading

conflict

Trump has started negotiations to end the war in Ukraine

Published on

For the first time since Russian soldiers entered Ukraine in February 2022, the US is negotiating with Vladimir Putin.  Surprisingly it’s not President Biden’s team at work, but President Elect Donald Trump.  Trump has been working through Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban.  President Orban traveled to the US to meet with Trump a day before he had an hour long phone conversation with Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

Clearly Trump is looking for at least a quick de-escalation if not an all out end to the conflict in Ukraine.  Alex Christoforou and Alexander Mercouris of The Duran podcast explain the current situation.

Continue Reading

Trending

X