Who Is an "Officer?"

One of the more bizarre arguments being made on behalf of Der Furor by his lawyers, acolytes, and sycophants in an attempt to shield him from responsibility for prosecution on a charge of insurrection under the 14th Amendment is that he is not an "officer of the United States" in the meaning of the law. 

Here's the actual text of the 14th Amendment (the italics are mine):

"No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability."

Now, it seems to me that the President of the United States is pretty clearly the most senior and responsible officer of the United States. Under The Constitution he is, after all, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, along with a bunch of other responsibilities (see Article 2, Section 2).  

But does the law actually specify who an officer is? As it happens, it does!

The US Code is the official compilation of the nation's federal laws. It has 50 "Titles" addressing various topics of the law, which are subdivided into hundreds of Chapters and Sections of increasing specificity*. Title 1 (General Provisions) explains the general outline and structure of the US Code; Chapter 1 of Title 1 (Rules of Construction) tells us how to read the rest of the Code; and Section 1 of Chapter 1 (Words denoting number, gender, and so forth) helpfully defines major terms ...

"In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise [...] "officer" includes any person authorized by law to perform the duties of the office;"

Now, that seems pretty clear to me ... but then, I'm not a high-priced lawyer in search of the loopiest of loopholes in service of a desperate client.

Section 1 also helpfully defines other terms useful in today's torture of the law in the defense of the indefensible ...

"... the words "insane" and "insane person" shall include every idiot, insane person, and person non compos mentis;"

and, thanks to the Citizens United decision of the Supreme Court ...

"... the words "person" and "whoever" include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;"

Yep, Furor, you're an officer of the United States. And you're guilty as hell. Just shut up and go away.

Have a good day. More thoughts coming.

Bilbo

* You might recall that God Almighty only needed ten commandments.

Legal Translation

As part of my continuing quest to share interesting stuff with you, I thought I'd riff on this recent article from Atlas Obscura: Istanbul Closes the Books on Its Public Scribes.

The Readers' Digest version of the article is this: the Turkish court system uses an archaic and complicated form of the Ottoman Turkish language for its deliberations and rulings. Because many people were illiterate, few were fluent in the legal dialect, and lawyers were (and remain) expensive, there arose a class of people known as public scribes (arzuhalci, in Turkish) who would, for a modest fee, assist people in drafting petitions and preparing other legal documents. The public scribes are still in business, although they are dying out, being relentlessly opposed by the lawyers from whom they siphon paying customers.

There's more to the story - and it's all fascinating - but what strikes me is how much it reflects our relationship to the law in this country.

The public scribes in Turkey help translate the language of the law, which is so archaic and convoluted that ordinary people can't understand it, into something they can understand. The same situation exists here in America, where we have a priesthood of hundreds of thousands of high-priced lawyers (for those who can afford them) and overworked, underpaid public defenders (for everyone else) whose sole function is to represent people facing laws written in a legalistic Sanskrit they cannot understand.

A friend of mine who's a lawyer once told me that our legal language had grown so convoluted because it needed to be - every twisted word and phrase of it was the way it was because it had been litigated over decades to the point where everyone understood exactly what it meant.

By "everyone" I'm sure he meant "every lawyer," because much of it doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Perhaps we need public scribes instead. They'd certainly be cheaper.

Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.

Bilbo

"Calculated Misery"

In the wake of the moral, economic, and public relations disaster that resulted from the beating and forcible removal of a paying customer from a United Airlines flight last week, there's been a lot of discussion of exactly why such a monstrous thing could happen. Many reasons have been put forward, ranging from the morality of capitalism to devaluation of individual rights and dignity in a me-first culture. Another interesting explanation comes in this article by Alex Abad-Santos, writing in Vox - “Calculated Misery”: How Airlines Profit from Your Miserable Flying Experience.

The bottom line is this: because we are always seeking to pay the lowest price for the goods and services we buy,

"... (the) airlines ... use “calculated misery” to make their baseline products and services so low-quality and unpleasant that lots of people will be willing to pay more to avoid them."

Think of all the things about flying that used to be included in the cost of your ticket: your luggage, the seat of your choice (when it was available), snacks (on short flights) or meals (on longer ones), and enough leg room that your knees didn't prevent you from wearing a headset. Now, of course, you may pay a relatively low price for your ticket, but you are nickel-and-dimed to death for all the things that used to be included. The article points out that although the calculated misery model is used to some degree in other businesses (you pay extra for bacon and cheese on your basic hamburger, for instance), the airlines have taken it to new heights* (when you go into a restaurant, you don't pay extra for all the members of your family to sit together at the same table).

If, to get the lowest possible fare, you are willing to be miserable for the length of a flight, jammed into a middle seat with no legroom and hoping you can board early enough to put your too-large "carry-on" bag into an overhead bin before they're all full, that's fine. But the airlines are working hard to make sure that the level of misery you are willing to accept will be exceeded by a margin large enough that you'll swallow all the extra fees for the things that used to be included.

The calculated misery model may be the wave of the future as businesses intent on maximizing profits try to attract customers who have less and less disposable income ... or even jobs. And the ability and willingness to pay for improved levels of service will be a new marker of class distinction in society.

And who knows how far it will go? As far back as 1997, the satirical online newspaper The Onion ran this story: U.S. Offers PlatinumPlus Preferred Citizenship:

"By becoming a PlatinumPlus citizen, you join an exclusive club of elite Americans ... And as part of that club, you'll be eligible for many special benefits, including tax breaks, excusal from jury duty, and vacations at special PlatinumPlus Caribbean resorts, which are off-limits to ordinary, EconoBudget citizenry. It's our way of saying thank you to our best customers ... And, of course, there are never any annual fees ... PlatinumPlus citizens—selected according to a number of demographic factors, including age, race and socio-economic status—will enjoy a wide variety of other benefits, including immunity from speeding tickets; separate, no-wait lines at over 50,000 post-office locations nationwide; and wider, more comfortable window seating ... After just one year in the club, members can also begin earning extra votes for elections. 'Wouldn't you like to earn up to five bonus votes for the next presidential election?' said U.S. Rep. Roger Wicker (R-MS), a co-sponsor of the measure. 'With your new PlatinumPlus citizenship, you can.' According to Wicker, those at the highest level of the new program, or "Diamond Club" citizens, will enjoy additional rewards, including a pass good for acquittal from one crime (misdemeanor or felony), a no-interest credit line of up to $500,000 and, for able-bodied male PlatinumPlus members between ages 18 and 35, excusal from the draft should a foreign war arise."

I can see the Trump administration jumping on this like a hobo on a hot ham sandwich.

So ... are you okay with calculated misery as a way of keeping prices down? Are you okay with the PlatinumPlus Preferred Citizenship that - in many ways - is available to the top 1% today? If so, I'm happy for you.

But, whiner that I am, I'd be happier if we could just go back to the quaint concept of equality of opportunity as the basis for getting that aisle seat. Or a tax break.

Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.

Bilbo

* Sorry.

"Hate Crimes"

One of the things I've always found interesting is that the Bible contains ten commandments (or "Ten Commandments," to put in the capitalization) which lay out the essential rules for righteous behavior. Since there are only ten of them, they can be printed on less than half of one side of a standard 8x10-inch page.

In contrast, Title 18 of the US Code of Laws ("Crimes and Criminal Procedure"), Part 1 ("Crimes") has 123 chapters which contain 2725 sections. And that's just the Federal level ... multiply that my many hundreds to account for state and local criminal laws.

So, if The Almighty only needed ten commandments, why do we need tens of thousands of laws? At what point did we decide that "Thou shalt not kill" needed to be nuanced into "Homicide," "Murder in the First/Second Degree," "Felony Murder," and "Voluntary/Involuntary Manslaughter?" Murder is the taking of a human life ... how much more do you need to parse it?

And to get to today's point, why do we need a new subset (or overlay) of laws that specify some already-defined crimes as "hate crimes?"

The FBI defines a hate crime this way on its website:

"A hate crime is a traditional offense like murder, arson, or vandalism with an added element of bias. For the purposes of collecting statistics, the FBI has defined a hate crime as a “criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender, or gender identity.” Hate itself is not a crime."

It seems to me that any vicious crime - particularly murder and rape - is by definition a crime based on hatred, and that describing it as a hate crime doesn't necessarily make it any worse or more despicable. All it does is provide an avenue by which to generate statistics.

Let's tell it like it is. It's murder or rape or assault or arson or whatever. There's no need to call it a hate crime to prosecute it.

Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.

Bilbo

Disclaimers

Because America has become such a litigious nation, we find it necessary to put warning labels and disclaimers on absolutely everything as a fig leaf in case of the inevitable lawsuit because - for instance - some moron didn't realize that (a) coffee is served hot and (b) if you spill hot coffee on yourself, it hurts. A 60-second commercial for any drug contains 50 seconds of warnings and disclaimers, and any tool or appliance you buy is covered with so many warning labels that it looks like a NASCAR racer.

With this in mind, and to prevent anyone from suing me over my blog, here is a collection of actual accumulated disclaimers and warning notices:

Objects may be closer than they appear. Some assembly required. Batteries not included. See your doctor if your erection lasts more than four hours. Any resemblance to persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental. May contain nuts. Prolonged exposure may cause nausea, vomiting, dizziness, dry mouth, flu-like symptoms, gas, headache, insomnia, inappropriate feelings, itching, loss of appetite, confusion, ear pain, agitation, loss of memory, heart palpitations, sweating, tremors, fever, high blood pressure, low blood pressure, increased appetite, decreased appetite, nervousness, or rash. No purchase necessary to win. You must be present to win. Not intended for use by children under 5, or by people who act like it. Use only in well-ventilated areas. Enjoy responsibly. If conditions persist, consult your physician. Do not use machinery or drive until you know how this product affects you. Call before digging. No smoking, matches, or open lights. Serving suggestion. Best by date on package. Package is sold by weight, not volume. Void where prohibited. May cause irritability. Subject to change without notice. Close cover before striking. We do not make any representations regarding the use, validity, accuracy, or reliability of this product. Driver does not carry cash. In no event shall we be liable for any special, indirect, or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever arising from loss of use or profits, whether in an action, contract, negligence, or other tortuous action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the information/data on this site or any sites linked to this site. Other fees and charges may apply. No animals were harmed in the development of this product. Return for store credit only. Slippery when wet. Do not feed the animals. This product is meant for entertainment purposes only. Limit one per customer. This message, and any attachments, is for the intended recipient(s) only, may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or proprietary and is subject to important terms and conditions. Not applicable to prior purchases. Terms of use are subject to binding arbitration and a waiver of class action rights as detailed in the appropriate sections of this contract. You agree not to upload, post or otherwise transmit any User Content that you know to be false, misleading or inaccurate*. Investment products are not FDIC insured, are not bank guaranteed, and may lose value, including your original investment. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message. The information on this site is not intended or implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. I'm not a doctor, but I play one on TV. The Expert guarantees neither the accuracy nor completeness of his/her advice. Contents may have settled in transit. Ensure your heart is healthy enough for sex.

Do not read this blog if you are allergic to ideas other than your own.

Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.

Bilbo

* Not applicable in election years.

Why Bother With Laws?

It's very difficult to have a rational discussion about the gun culture in America, and so today I'll limit myself to a general philosophical question based on one of the points always raised by pro-Second Amendment partisans: that laws which restrict the purchase and ownership of firearms place an unfair and unjust burden on responsible gun owners because criminals will always ignore those laws.

Now, let's follow that argument to its logical conclusion. If we can say,

"Laws which restrict the purchase and ownership of firearms place an unfair and unjust burden on responsible gun owners because criminals will always ignore the law"

Then it follows that,

"Laws place an unfair and unjust burden on responsible citizens because criminals will always ignore the law*."

"Whoa there, big guy!" you say. "That's not the same at all!"

But why isn't it? Gun enthusiasts maintain that laws restricting gun ownership are unfair because the "bad guys" will ignore them and the "good guys," being upstanding and law-abiding citizens, will observe the laws and thereby place themselves and their families in danger. If that's so, then what's the point of laws at all? Will not most people (the "good guys") always obey them and a relatively small minority (the "bad guys") ignore them?

Laws are important because they establish the boundaries for civil behavior within which society can function. If everyone was gentle, honest, and respectful toward one another, we wouldn't need laws ... but unfortunately, we're not like that, and haven't been for a long time. God Almighty, after all, had to provide Ten Commandments** to remind people how to behave.

So, Dear Readers, please don't insult my intelligence by using the argument that laws don't work because criminals won't obey them. Of course they won't ... that's why they're criminals. The law doesn't magically make them good citizens ... it allows the good citizens to punish them for their actions.

That's all.

Have a good day. More thoughts tomorrow.

Bilbo

* Or, as my father was fond of saying, if you lock your doors and windows, all the honest people will stay out.

** Compare that to the US Code, which has 54 "titles" (general subject areas) and constitutes hundreds of thousands of pages of text.

The Lawyer and the Orange

One day in a Contract Law class, the professor called on one of the students and posed this question: "If you were going to give someone an orange, how would you go about it?"

The student thought for a moment, then said, "Here's an orange."

The professor was furious. "No, no!' he shouted. "Think like a lawyer!"

The student collected himself, then stood tall and said, "I hereby give and convey to you all and singular, my estate and interests, rights, claim, title, claim and advantages of and in said orange, together with all its rind, juice, pulp, and seeds, and all rights and advantages with full power to bite, cut, freeze and otherwise eat the same, extract the juice of, or give the same away with or without the pulp, juice, rind and seeds, anything herein before or hereinafter or in any deed, or deeds, instruments of whatever nature or kind whatsoever to the contrary in anywise notwithstanding ..."

The professor beamed proudly. "Now you're thinking like a lawyer!"

Have a good day, good being defined as intellectually challenging, meteorologically pleasant, financially sound, and medically unimpaired, and day being defined as the 24-hour diurnal period defined by the rotation of the earth one time around its axis. The act of "having" in this context is intended and determined to encompass possession, experience, and enjoyment, without boundary or limit.

So there.

Have it, anyway.

Bilbo

Why We Have an Economic Crisis

I have to go to the dentist this morning, and so I need to spend some extra time cringing and whining in the bathroom. This, of course, limits the amount of time I am able to spend on my blog. With that in mind, here are two examples of why we have an economic crisis in this country ...

and ...

What more can I say?

Come back tomorrow for Cartoon Saturday ... I'll be back in stride then, and the post-dental visit drooling should be over*.

Have a good day. See you tomorrow.

Bilbo

* Sorry about that visual.

There Oughta Be a Law. Maybe.

This past Monday, Heidi's blog post titled A Seriously Odd Law discussed an Alabama law that prohibited bear wrestling. It's an odd law, to be sure, but one that probably seemed like a good idea at the time*, or reacted to a perceived need for such an ordinance**.

Speaking of odd laws, I thought I'd pull this one out of my humor archive and run it past you. I may have posted this a few years ago, but I can't remember***. In any case, it's funny and worth looking at again.

WASHINGTON 1986/87 ATTORNEY SEASON AND BAG LIMITS

------------------------------------------------

1300.01 GENERAL

1. Any person with a valid Washington State hunting license may harvest attorneys.

2. Taking of attorneys with traps or deadfalls is permitted. The use of currency as bait is prohibited.

3. Killing of attorneys with a vehicle is prohibited. If accidentally struck, remove dead attorney to roadside and proceed to nearest car wash.

4. It is unlawful to chase, herd, or harvest attorneys from a snow machine, helicopter, or aircraft.

5. It shall be unlawful to shout "whiplash," "ambulance," or "free Perrier" for the purpose of trapping attorneys.

6. It shall be unlawful to hunt attorneys within 100 yards of BMW or Mercedes dealerships.

7. It shall be unlawful to use cocaine, young boys, $100 bills, prostitutes, or vehicle accidents to attract attorneys.

8. It shall be unlawful to hunt attorneys within 200 yards of state or federal government offices, courtrooms, law libraries, whorehouses, health spas, ambulances, or hospitals.

9. It shall be a felony to hunt, trap, or possess an attorney which has been elected to government office.

10. Stuffed or mounted attorneys must have a state health department inspection for AIDS, rabies, and vermin, and a certificate attesting to such inspection shall be prominently posted.

11. It shall be illegal for a hunter to disguise himself as a reporter, drug dealer, pimp, female legal clerk, sheep, accident victim, bookie, or tax accountant for the purpose of hunting attorneys.

BAG LIMITS

Yellow Bellied Sidewinder - 2

Cut-Throat - 2

Two-faced Tort Feasor - 1

Back-Stabbing Whiner - 2

Back-stabbing Divorce Litigator - 4

Brown-Nosed Judge Kisser - 2

Big-mouthed Pub Gut - 2

Silver-Tongued Drug Defender - $100 Bounty

Hairy-Assed Civil Libertarian - 7

Honest Attorney - EXTINCT

And there you have it. If you are in the great state of Washington, as opposed to the other wretched hive of scum and villany⁺ of the same name, be careful about how you hunt attorneys. You don't want to end up needing one.

Have a good day. More thoughts coming.

Bilbo

* I suspect that this is why we have about 80-90% of our more bizarre laws.

** It's difficult to imagine a raging plague of bear wrestling that requires a legal remedy ... but then, it's also difficult to imagine the GOP bugbear of millions of cases of rampant, widespread voting fraud.

*** You'll appreciate that when you get to be my age.

+ You get extra credit for knowing the film reference.