Bartlett has just put out the following tweets:
Fox's Andrew Napolitano goes full wanker, calls for Obama impeachment over Bergdahl. http://t.co/Sifm51Mxti
— Bruce Bartlett (@BruceBartlett) June 3, 2014
Napolitano used to be a principled if misguided libertarian. Now he's just another right-wing clown pandering to Tea Party morons.
— Bruce Bartlett (@BruceBartlett) June 3, 2014
In my book, there is nothing wrong with releasing the illegally captured Guantanamo prisoners, who have never been given a public trial. They should all be released and the US should stop its meddling in all foreign lands. That said, Napolitano, as a strict constitutionalist, is correct from his perspective that Obama violated the constitution by releasing the prisoners in a swap, without notifying Congress in advance.
I love when the government attacks itself. Thus, rather than calling Napolitano out for his view, I encourage the idea of an impeachment trial. Congressional harassment of the head of the empire is a beautiful thing. Bartlett's tweets rather than supporting this harassment are implying an evil support for a powerful executive office that can ignore any law it chooses. It's an evil perspective and typical of a Keynesian.
-RW
Tom Woods has said before (if I may paraphrase) that he 'has many hats' that he wears, depending on who he's speaking to: if he's speaking to someone who reveres the constitution, he will use constitutionalist arguments to get his point across, while if he's speaking to a Mises Institute gathering, he'll can say 'to hell with the Constitution'.
ReplyDeleteThe Judge said on Tom Woods' podcast that even while dining with Tom Woods and Lew Rockwell, he is still the most Rothbardian person in the room.
Given this, as well as observing a lawyer's ability to argue within a set of parameters without necessarily approving of them, I would hesitate to call him a strict-Constitutionalist or limited-government advocate.
While I tend to cringe when the Judge gets in to the weeds of what passes as 'law' these days, to this point I've always been impressed with how he makes it back to camp with his integrity intact. However, every time he does this, I still get flashbacks to Willem Dafoe in 'Platoon'.
Bartlett is a true piece of garbage.
ReplyDeleteSucking up to power players in an attempt to be relevant and bask in their reflected power AFTER being exposed to the truth should be punishable in one of the innermost circles of hell.
Bob, two corrections. (1) You accidentally refer to him as Anthony Napolitano instead of Andrew. (2) Bruce's full name is Bruce Won't Somebody Love Me Bartlett, who has chased after fashionable political movements his whole life, hoping to please someone. As he enters his golden years, he sees his strategy not exactly paying off: he has zero following, anywhere.
ReplyDeleteWhen all the "movement" conservatives were sucking up to the GWB Administration, Bartlett was one of the few establishment conservatives to say the Emperor was Naked and got fired from NPAC think tank for writing his book, "Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America "
DeleteAnd then he voted for Obama, going with the cultural/political flow 100%, and demonizing everyone who continued to hold views he himself had defended 10 minutes earlier.
DeleteI too disagree with the Judge's position, but it sounds to me like Bartlett is trying to create divisions among libertarian purists.
ReplyDeleteMay we recommend Pat Choate?
ReplyDeleteRemember, Judge Nap is the "Senior Judicial Analyst" for FOX News, he also served as a superior court judge in New Jersey. I happen to believe in his heart Judge Nap is an ancap, there's a video of him at Mises University where it seemed like he hinted at that. When he's on TV, he's offering his view as a legal scholar. Just like when he was on the bench, he was following the constitution, but in terms of his personal view, he was probably for dismantling the government he worked for. Bartlett seems to be a phony leftist now just trying to get along with the ignorant masses in order to keep his personal self relevant (which it isn't).
ReplyDeleteI agree. He uses his government sponsored legal/judicial bona fides
DeleteDammit, blogger and iPad STILL won't work together.
DeleteThe judge is AnCap. He couches his argument in constitutional language to help explain it to the average moron.
"full wanker" could be referring to what Napolitano said from a PR or pragmatic perspective, rather than a legal or moral perspective. There are not enough votes to impeach Obama at this time, unfortunately. EPJ needs to do a better job informing the public so the next congress will be ready to impeach.
ReplyDelete