There are certain jobs where favoritism is disaster. Ask an NFL referee. Even the appearance of favoritism, of \u201chaving a side\u201d; and teams, coaches, and fans all pile on. The smiling joke with Joe Burrows, the admiring handshake with Tom Brady, the flag thrown directly at the helmet of Cleveland Brown receiver Orlando Brown: all are \u201cevidence\u201d of bias. We don\u2019t want those in stripes to be biased, we want them to be cold, calculated, enforcers of the rules. \u201cCall it both ways\u201d is the battle cry from the sidelines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
WWE (entertainment \u2018wrestling\u2019) has referees, but we know they are part of \u201cthe show\u201d, scripted to \u201ccall\u201d the match in a particular way.\u00a0\u00a0What\u2019s the difference?\u00a0\u00a0We know the outcome of WWE is pre-determined. It’s a planned show for our entertainment.\u00a0\u00a0We believe the NFL is an open competition.\u00a0\u00a0 Even the Bengals might beat the Bills (but not the Chiefs?).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
And if you think that\u2019s true for NFL referees, how do you feel about two of America\u2019s most important institutions: the Supreme Court, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Federal Judges (not the \u201cSupremes\u201d) are required to follow a strict code of behavior when it comes to bias. They have to not take a side, financially, ideologically, or socially. And the code goes even farther: Judges are not supposed to even have \u201can appearance\u201d of bias. To use a worn analogy, those holding the scales of Justice need to be blind to those that appear before them. They must judge on the law, and nothing more.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
At least, that what\u2019s it supposed to be.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But like much else in our society today, we now know way too much about what\u2019s under the Judicial robes. No longer are many judges simply interpreters of the law, they seem to be drivers of ideology. In today\u2019s news, judges aren\u2019t listed by seniority, but by who appointed them: \u201c\u2026the case will be heard by two Trump appointees and a Bush appointee, not a good panel for the pro-choice litigants\u2026\u201d. Or, \u201cAll of those Obama appointed Judges on the DC Federal Court means that Trump will never get a \u2018fair\u2019 hearing\u2026\u201d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
And even if all those judges are the paragon of Judicial fairness: equitable, impartial, unbiased, dispassionate, objective; it doesn\u2019t matter. Our society today predetermines outcomes based on our own preconceptions. Obama, or Trump, or GW Bush would never have put a \u201cfair\u201d judge on the bench. Ask the Post<\/em>, or the Journal<\/em>, or Newsmax<\/em>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The obvious improprieties of Clarence Thomas don\u2019t help one bit. He has taken a side, and a lot of money, from one particular billionaire. They are \u201cfriends\u201d; they travel together, smoke cigars together, and the billionaire buys Thomas\u2019s property but lets him (or his mother) stay there, and pays for Thomas\u2019s grand-nephew’s expensive private schooling. \u201cAppearance of impropriety\u201d of bias, is a fact, no matter what Thomas says, or even how he rules.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It’s one thing to see the partisan Congress or the President as biased \u2013 we know they are. They\u2019re supposed to be. But we aren\u2019t so used to thinking of the nine Justices of the Supreme Court in the same way. Even the \u201cGreat Friends\u201d of the Court, Ginsburg and Scalia; were on opposite sides of the legal spectrum, but seemed to be impartial on the law. And they were balanced by Kennedy in the \u201cmiddle\u201d, and even Chief Justice Roberts from time to time, worried that the Court might be \u201cappear\u201d to be biased. <\/p>\n\n\n\n And when it comes to the FBI, I have to chuckle. The FBI has always represented the most conservative institution in America\u2019s panoply of Federal agencies. Is the FBI investigating Black Lives Matter and the non-organized ANTIFA movement? Of course they are, that\u2019s what the FBI has always done. They\u2019ve \u201cmet\u201d expectations, both of conservative Americans, and frankly, of the members of BLM and those anti-fascists. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Tradition, dating back to the 1920\u2019s, shows the FBI with a bias against any \u201cleftist\u201d group. Ask the Southern Christian Leadership Conference in the 1950\u2019s and 60\u2019s, or the Black Panthers, or the Weather Underground. But we also knew that the FBI was infiltrating the Ku Klux Klan, and other right-wing \u201ccrazies\u201d. So while there was a conservative bias in the Bureau, it was also protecting the \u201cright flank\u201d against the crazies with torches and bombs. <\/p>\n\n\n\n But what happens when the \u201ccrazies\u201d and the \u201cmainstream\u201d seem to merge onto the same \u201chighway to Hell\u201d? What happens when the Congress defends conspiracy theories and Insurrectionists? Even if the FBI \u201ccalled it both ways\u201d, the House of Representatives seems dead set on protecting one team. Many Republicans in the House are calling for \u201cdefunding\u201d the FBI; kind of funny from a group that took such great umbrage at BLM use of the term.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The \u201cright\u201d will take the failed Durham investigation of rehashed information and use it to beat the FBI down. And when they\u2019re done, there will be about as much trust in the FBI as there is in Homeland Security\u2019s ICE \u2013 none.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If the Judges are irretrievably biased, and so are the investigators what will America do? Who\u2019s left to call the game? Where can our Justice system go to get their integrity \u201cback\u201d? Or is it now just another new version of WWE \u2013 a pre-determined outcome from start to finish? And, if Americans believe that \u2013 then why would the even play? <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Appearance <\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Merging on the Right<\/h3>\n\n\n\n