Is it just a matter of appointing enough critical legal lawyers to the courts, as high up as possible, so they can make stuff up … nod, nod, wink, wink … to push the leftist agenda?

This is exactly what PC selectivity allows. If it’s a law, like obstruction of justice or mishandling confidential info, and it’s Dems who violate it — those are the laws not enforced. If its Reps who violate, THEN it’s enforced.

Quite like Khordokovsky, almost certainly guilty of bribing tax officials and failing to pay taxes. Like all the rich in Russia. But also, stupidly?, going against Putin. Guilty of the charges, but only tried because of opposition to Putin.

HR Clinton was guilty of the crimes, but NOT tried because she’s a PC Dem.

AesopFan: That’s true. And I was intentionally echoing Hillary with that question.

I’m still curious how deligitimizing the Constitution would work, if, for the sake of argument, Americans decided to go that way. How do you decide some laws apply and some laws don’t without following the laws about laws? In fact, going against some laws about laws.

I have a friend who made a summer project of rethinking the Electoral College. He concluded the EC should be abolished. But he’s frustrated that the EC can’t be abolished without the enormously difficult lift of amending the Constitution. So maybe we should make the Constitution easier to amend. Which presents the same problem as getting rid of the EC — too many Americans must be convinced it’s a good idea.

It just doesn’t seem fair!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08uk99L8oqQ

FLASHBACK: When Asked Where the Constitution Authorizes Congress to Order Americans To Buy Health Insurance, Pelosi Says: ‘Are You Serious?’
CNSNews.com originally published this story in which House Speaker Nancy Pelosi dismissed the question of whether Obamacare was constitutional on Oct. 22, 2009.
Monday, December 13, 2010
By Matt Cover

Not too oddly, considering the flexibility of Democrats, the results from my search for that clip turned up numerous current appeals by Pelosi to restrain Trump from acting unConstitutionally.
Maybe she didn’t think he following the requirments with enough respect.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/08/pelosi-trump-senate-guns-1453347

Pelosi to Trump: Use the Constitution to force Senate action on guns
By HEATHER CAYGLE 08/08/2019 05:23 PM EDT Updated 08/08/2019 07:59 PM EDT
Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday called on President Donald Trump to use his constitutional powers to bring the Senate back into session, ramping up her efforts to force Republicans to act against gun violence.

https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/9419-1

Trump Violates the Constitution, Lavish Properties are a Cesspool of Corruption
SEPTEMBER 4, 2019 BLOG
President Trump is violating the Constitution by making money off of his lavish, ritzy resort properties, ultimately prioritizing his profits over the interests of the American people.

–Michael Seidman
https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/31/opinion/lets-give-up-on-the-constitution.html

Seidman’s interview is less than seven years old and already reverence for freedom of speech and religion have acquired sizeable asterisks on his side of the aisle.

It’s a curious piece. He argues we shouldn’t slavishly follow the Constitution, but then what happens? Who decides what happens and how? He seems to assume that 21st Century Americans will all reach the same conclusions, like a school of fish wheeling around, and say, decide to ignore the Electoral College because it’s the perfectly obvious thing to do, so why not?

But what if we aren’t united — and we certainly aren’t on the EC — do we just let the right people like Seidman make the decision? And if we were that united we could just amend the Constitution.

I can only understand it as battlespace prep for future conflicts in which Democrats want to do something unconstitutional and Republicans say, “But that’s unconstitutional…” and Democrats end the discussion by saying, “What difference does that make?”

There are a fair number of us.

Therefore the Left isn’t just opposed to the content of the Constitution; they’re opposed to the whole idea of a Constitution.

no… no.. its BOTH… a desert topping AND a floor wax!!
and you use “Shimmer” to put the shine on..
https://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/shimmer-floor-wax/n8625

put a shine on
Pretending to be happy when you’re really not.
To make the best of a bad situation.