Supreme court usurpation
"Trump Effect" Works On Supreme "Court"—Priest-Kings Flinch On Obamnesty, But Not Anti-White Discrimination
Thumb patrick cleburne
June 23, 2016, 02:36 PM
A+
|
a-
Print Friendly and PDF
Today the squad of Priest-Kings laughably called the Supreme “Court” (which is actually America’s senior legislative body) demonstrated their top 2016 priority: avoiding a President Trump.

They split 4-4 on President Obama’s Executive Amnesty, meaning the 5th Circuit decision striking it down stands.

But they upheld "Affirmative Action" - anti-white discrimination in University admissions. Here the vote was 4-3 because Commissar Kagan was obliged to recuse herself.

The Obamnesty ruling has triggered tantrums by the Illegal Lobby and Obama has had to put himself in a bad light by arrogantly promising to continue not enforcing immigration laws. But given the Court’s political objective, it was sensible. Amnesty is wildly unpopular amongst white Americans, which is why the subject was carefully avoided in the 2014 election. Immigration enforcement has been Trump’s strongest card. Stirring these people up is a bad idea. As it is they may go back to sleep under the illusion that the Court has prevented this act of despotism. (Actually the ruling only applies to the 5th Circuit and another challenge could easily reach the Court at a more convenient time.)

Furthermore freeing the Presidency even more from restraint is very unappealing if the President might be called something like Trump. As I noted in WASHINGTON POST (!!!) Denounces Obamnesty: “Unprecedented…Unjustified” this fear existed in thinking Leftist circles even before Trump.

Sadly, upholding the principle that white Americans may be discriminated against in the country their ancestors built also reflects the Trump Effect. Trump has shown no interest in the issue and early on in an interview ruled the subject out. So the Priest-Kings had no fear.

With Kagan not voting, useful idiot Anthony Kennedy had to be drafted in to make up a majority. If Trump had not been in the offing, he would probably have been utilized to affirm Obamnesty too.

The split on the Obamnesty case was three Jews and one Hispanic versus four Catholics. Ethnic animosities and ambitions are what motivate the Court, causing me to ask Can Free Speech (And America) Survive A Minority-Dominated Supreme Court? The answer to this is definitely going to be NO, especially as long as the policy of Supreme “Court” Priest-Kingships: No White Protestant Need Apply is enforced.