Whether you are thinking about a sunny vacation retreat to escape the cold or just cozying into the sofa next to the fireplace, the indispensable partner for biding your time is Ken Khachigian’s memoir: “Behind Closed Doors – In the Room with Reagan and Nixon.”
My maternal grandparents were farmers and their neighbor was Charlie Place, who was Ronald Reagan's best friend from high school. Charlie was a great storyteller, like Ronald, but passed away when I was young from a farming accident. When Reagan ran for president, my grandparents asked Ida Place--Charlie's widow and also knew Ronald from high school--if she was going to vote for Ronald. She replied that she didn't think Ronald was smart enough to be president. Ida Place was correct. Ronald Reagan was not smart enough and that explains most of his presidency, rather than such a biased book written for one purpose only--to make the author seem important.
I'm former Navy, to include at the NSA, and Nixon was a rat. He was scheming much of the time in office, but like Roger Stone, Khachigian wants to generate book sales from his inside knowledge of the rat. A dunce and a rat...not worth my time being reminded of how glad I am that they are gone.
Roger Stone, how about a podcast on something relevant and material? Gamble v US (2019) is back in the spotlight because of Luigi Mangione. Luigi is correct that constitutional due process is being shredded by removing substantive due process from the procedures of due process. Nazis had lots of procedures, but not much substance, and this is the hallmark of the Robert's Court.
As I've commented before, judicial review is an implied power if and only if the review is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive with respect to the ratified constitution. This indicates that any judicial review must be proven--NO MAJORITY OR DISSENT !! One does not vote on a proof.
Therefore, only Justice Gorsuch's "dissent" is correct, which argues 'exceptions' to the double jeopardy clause are a 'no fly zone'. The "majority" opinion is forbidden. Luigi Mangione's outburst at court, reported by the NY Post and others, reveals this IVY-league educated defendant knows due process better than 8 out of 9 justices.
Nixon (after he left office) spoke about the Carter debacle of facilitating the overthrow of the Shah & bringing in the ayatollah. Stating he would have handled it differently that the “ shah was out of line” that the US should have removed him, let him leave with dignity & put in an individual acceptable to the religious faction in the country. That the Iran problem was entirely Carters responsibility.
My maternal grandparents were farmers and their neighbor was Charlie Place, who was Ronald Reagan's best friend from high school. Charlie was a great storyteller, like Ronald, but passed away when I was young from a farming accident. When Reagan ran for president, my grandparents asked Ida Place--Charlie's widow and also knew Ronald from high school--if she was going to vote for Ronald. She replied that she didn't think Ronald was smart enough to be president. Ida Place was correct. Ronald Reagan was not smart enough and that explains most of his presidency, rather than such a biased book written for one purpose only--to make the author seem important.
I'm former Navy, to include at the NSA, and Nixon was a rat. He was scheming much of the time in office, but like Roger Stone, Khachigian wants to generate book sales from his inside knowledge of the rat. A dunce and a rat...not worth my time being reminded of how glad I am that they are gone.
Roger Stone, how about a podcast on something relevant and material? Gamble v US (2019) is back in the spotlight because of Luigi Mangione. Luigi is correct that constitutional due process is being shredded by removing substantive due process from the procedures of due process. Nazis had lots of procedures, but not much substance, and this is the hallmark of the Robert's Court.
As I've commented before, judicial review is an implied power if and only if the review is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive with respect to the ratified constitution. This indicates that any judicial review must be proven--NO MAJORITY OR DISSENT !! One does not vote on a proof.
Therefore, only Justice Gorsuch's "dissent" is correct, which argues 'exceptions' to the double jeopardy clause are a 'no fly zone'. The "majority" opinion is forbidden. Luigi Mangione's outburst at court, reported by the NY Post and others, reveals this IVY-league educated defendant knows due process better than 8 out of 9 justices.
How did this man’s influence with Reagan play with or against the influence of speech writer Peggy Noonan?
Nixon (after he left office) spoke about the Carter debacle of facilitating the overthrow of the Shah & bringing in the ayatollah. Stating he would have handled it differently that the “ shah was out of line” that the US should have removed him, let him leave with dignity & put in an individual acceptable to the religious faction in the country. That the Iran problem was entirely Carters responsibility.
Nixon later spoke