Posted on 02/16/2016 8:54:50 PM PST by reaganaut1
It was only a matter of time. Donald Trump joined Michael Savage’s Tuesday radio show to talk about Antonin Scalia, and the result was . . . exactly what you’d expect:
SAVAGE: Donald, I need to come back to the topic we’ve all been screaming about here, which is Scalia, was he murdered. I know it’s pretty brutal to say that, and I’m not wanting to drag you into this, but this is going to be bigger and bigger and bigger. I went on the air and said we need the equivalent of a Warren Commission, we need an immediate autopsy before the body is disposed of. What do you think of that?
TRUMP: Well, I just heard today. . . . You know, I just landed and I’m hearing it’s a big topic, the question, and it’s a horrible topic. But they say they found a pillow on his face, which is a pretty unusual place to find a pillow. I can’t tell you — I can’t give you an answer.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Yes over his head and not in back of it
Well he’s a Birther and a 9/11 Truther so why not be a Scalia-er?
Point me to the photos that were taken by the secret service or other legal entity. Oh wait none of that was done.
As far as I can tell, the Secret Service does not provide security to members of the SCOTUS and would have no jurisdiction here.
http://www.secretservice.gov/protection/
And who is to say that photos were not taken? But why should such photos be made public? Let's say my elderly uncle who had a history of heart problems and not necessarily known for following doctor's orders and taking care of himself, was found dead in his bed, with no signs of foul play - should the LEO's take photos before removing the body, should that be made public?
I think too many people get their ideas about forensics from TV shows like CSI (especially CSI) and Law & Order and all their variations. In 60 minutes, less time for commercials, everything is neatly tied up and the forensics people on these shows always find the most obscure cause of death and it's never a "natural death" because there would be no drama in that. But the real world doesn't work like a CSI type TV show.
An autopsy just isn't required or necessary for all deaths.
He was nearly 80 years old, overweight, a smoker and a drinker (and at his age and with his medical issues, even being a moderate or "social" drinker would be risky) and according to his own private doctor who spoke with the officials in TX and with his immediate family, he had HBP and a history of heart problems and was determined not to be in good enough health to undergo surgery for a recent shoulder injury.
To believe that there was a cover up of a murder, one would have to also believe that all the LEO's, the police and I am assuming at least one EMT, and the funeral home director - all would have to be "in" on the "cover up" not to mention Scalia's own family, his wife, children and grandchildren who did not want an autopsy performed.
This was not just a run of the mill death and you know it.
To believe that there was a cover up of a murder, one would have to also believe that all the LEO's, the police and I am assuming at least one EMT, and the funeral home director - all would have to be "in" on the "cover up" not to mention Scalia's own family, his wife, children and grandchildren who did not want an autopsy performed.
I don't believe there was a coverup of a murder, but there was a coverup of something. As I recall the judge was said to have denied any security thinking he was secure enough in this location. I really don't know what security the judges rate or from whom.
The family is not the arbiter of when an autopsy is performed the local laws determine that and in the case of high ranking politicians they should be required.
I remember a young woman that drowned in a car of a Senator that received no autopsy too. Those decisions always are made to protect someone.
That judge sounded out of line, red flags went up first time I saw a couple things there. Maybe following orders. There I go.
The doctor supposedly told the judge over the phone that Scalia had been in twice the week before and other medical issues. One early article I read sounded like Scalia didn't feel well the night before, was lethargic, and stayed in the vehicle and watched the hunt. A subsequent article said he was along to observe.
Why would a sick man go on a hunt on a remote Texas ranch? Why did he have no SS protection, or was that wrong?
Are not in most jurisdictions autopsies mandatory over the objections of family for not just suspicious but when the person is found dead? I never read who Scalia's next-of-kin were.
Then my mind goes where it shouldn't. Yeah but if they'd had an autopsy, would I believe it? No. Not when that judge was involved. Another one, maybe.
Now the unseemly bickering over the next justice, Obama conniving, Grassley digging in, then relenting a little, and the justice isn't even buried yet.
Still, it would be a stretch to believe foul play was involved. But maybe something had started some time before . . . . .that's how it goes when people lose their trust.
I guess it's like my reaction when Princess Diana died (or JFK, Jr.), first shock, then my thoughts go right to "how convenient". But I never could settle my mind for certain one way or another.
Obama has an anti-gun agenda. The most conservative justice who is allegedly unwell, goes on a hunt, where guns will be fired, to observe. Was he carrying a weapon? We aren't told. Did he take a weapon on the trip? We aren't told. And dies in his sleep. It happens.
Read this today, thought it myself, if the Senate tries to block a nomination, especially of a female minority, it will benefit Hillary in the election.
Let's hope it doesn't turn into another, "I won, I guess that trumps you . . ." an Obama quote that has disappeared into the cyber black hole from all but one site that on observation doesn't look very credible. But I saw the clip and heard him say the words, just can't remember the occasion and person to whom he said them . . .
No, some of as are well aware of it.
That’s like Bill Clinton ordering an autopsy for Vince Foster or that corrupt medical examiner in Arkansas.
It’s a hit piece by the regime’s mouthpiece, the Washington Compost, meant to cast aspersions on the late Justice.
What if he wasn't lily pure and there has been a coverup but not necessarily involving the manner of his death? Roberts has already betrayed us imo. I don't like the air of secrecy about things.
I start out buying the official story, then mostly because of others, I start seeing the holes in it. They sure came up with a lot of innuendos. They being the WAPO writer(s) and, by extension, their editorial board which endorses Hillary and even their nominal "conservative" writers can't keep their jobs if they put too much truth finding, independent thinking into it.
What's this about Fedx & UPS trucks in PA? I live there so I'm curious.
It wasn't gory but you knew there had to be a lot of the smaller vehicles with worse effects. I saved that photo and don't save many.
A few days later it came out there were 3 fatalities, two men and one women, all in their 50's.
People were saying the whole gamut of things but there was a lot of criticism of the big trucks and how they have schedules and can't or won't slow down in whiteout conditions.
I didn't see any UPS trucks. No, I finally found it. Now the couple I find one is cropped, one shows another bad view. There is a smaller version of the one I saved on WAPO, second down. Go to google images and put in bethel pennsylvania whiteout crash.
I don't mean to be ghoulish about it; I'm terrified to drive or be a passenger on those roads in good conditions any more, let alone bad. They were designed to be safer and prevent headons, now there is so much traffic, speeding, thousands of trucks. It made me feel safer before but not any more. I got the you know what scared out of me when I had to drive in those conditions, I slowed way way down but cars and trucks were whizzing by. One time I got so scared when snow had drifted back up on the interstate, I don't know how many cars in ditches, I tried to drive the last 20 miles on the far right emergency side but the police made me get back on. Another time I started fishtailing in sleet in heavy traffic. I do not know how I instinctly knew how to steer to get my car back in control but I did and got off on the next exit.
The worse thing is you can drive totally defensively and still be in a situation where you are not in control.
Why not? Just because he was a Supreme Court Justice (nearly 80 years old and by many accounts not in the best of health) doesn't mean that there has to be an investigation, inquest and autopsy when the death was determined to be from natural causes.
I don't believe there was a coverup of a murder, but there was a coverup of something. As I recall the judge was said to have denied any security thinking he was secure enough in this location. I really don't know what security the judges rate or from whom.
So there was no cover up but yet there was a cover up? Makeup your mind.
Evidently members of the SCOTUS do not routinely have security details especially when on personal travel.
Justices Sit on Highest Court, but Still Live Without Top Security
"Court officials do not discuss security arrangements in detail, but according to longtime observers and Congressional budget requests, they vary depending on a justice's location: traveling out of town for a speech, walking around Washington or working inside the heavily fortified court building."
"In the capital, the justices are protected mainly by the court's own small force, said a spokeswoman, Kathy Arberg. When the justices leave Washington, the United States Marshals Service takes over, and local police departments help, too."
As I understand, in Texas as in many other jurisdictions and depending on statute, an autopsy is only required if there is suspicion or evidence of foul play, in cases of suicide or the sudden unexplained death of a child.
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.49.htm
Art. 49.04. DEATHS REQUIRING AN INQUEST. (a) A justice of the peace shall conduct an inquest into the death of a person who dies in the county served by the justice if:
(1) the person dies in prison under circumstances other than those described by Section 501.055(b), Government Code, or in jail;
(2) the person dies an unnatural death from a cause other than a legal execution;
(3) the body or a body part of a person is found, the cause or circumstances of death are unknown, and:
(A) the person is identified; or
(B) the person is unidentified;
(4) the circumstances of the death indicate that the death may have been caused by unlawful means;
(5) the person commits suicide or the circumstances of the death indicate that the death may have been caused by suicide;
(6) the person dies without having been attended by a physician;
(7) the person dies while attended by a physician who is unable to certify the cause of death and who requests the justice of the peace to conduct an inquest; or
(8) the person is a child younger than six years of age and an inquest is required by Chapter 264, Family Code.
(b) Except as provided by Subsection (c) of this section, a physician who attends the death of a person and who is unable to certify the cause of death shall report the death to the justice of the peace of the precinct where the death occurred and request that the justice conduct an inquest.
(c) If a person dies in a hospital or other institution and an attending physician is unable to certify the cause of death, the superintendent or general manager of the hospital or institution shall report the death to the justice of the peace of the precinct where the hospital or institution is located.
(d) A justice of the peace investigating a death described by Subsection (a)(3)(B) shall report the death to the missing children and missing persons information clearinghouse of the Department of Public Safety and the national crime information center not later than the 10th working day after the date the investigation began.
As I understand Justice Scalia was under the care of a physician who was informed and consulted by the officials in Texas and who also consulted with the family. His personal physician confirmed Justice Scalia's various health conditions - HBP, heart condition, being overweight, a smoker, a social drinker, having been determined to not be in good enough health to undergo surgery for a shoulder injury, and may have also been in a position to comment on whether Scalia was a "compliant" patient, i.e. was he good about taking prescribed medications, modifying his diet, quit smoking, etc.
The family is not the arbiter of when an autopsy is performed the local laws determine that and in the case of high ranking politicians they should be required.
Scalia Death Inquest by Phone Valid Under Texas Law: Officials
http://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/autopsy-16080
Required autopsies
An autopsy may be required in deaths that have medical and legal issues and that must be investigated by the medical examiner's or coroner's office, the governmental office that is responsible for investigating deaths that are important to the public's health and welfare. Deaths that must be reported to and investigated by the medical examiner's or coroner's office can vary by state and may include those that have occurred:
Suddenly or unexpectedly, including the sudden death of a child or adult, or the death of a person who was not under the care of a doctor at the time of death.
As a result of any type of injury, including a fall, motor vehicle accident (MVA), drug overdose, or poisoning.
Under suspicious circumstances, such as a suicide or murder.
Under other circumstances defined by law.
In some of these deaths, an autopsy may be required, and the coroner or medical examiner has the legal authority to order an autopsy without the consent of the deceased person's family (next of kin). If an autopsy is not required by law, it cannot be performed unless the deceased person's family gives permission.
in the case of high ranking politicians they should be required.
Should be - perhaps but that is not current law. I guess I also have a problem with the idea that government officials and office holders are special, more special than us average Joe's and Jane's.
Besides, as an autopsy was not required under Texas law and his own personal physician, his wife and family also did not feel that an autopsy was necessary (and they could have requested one had they thought the death was suspicious), why should it have to be performed, presumably at tax payer's expense and cause a delay in the family making funeral arrangements and what they may feel was not only unnecessary but an indignity to his body?
I will also mention that for the conspiracy minded, those who have already made up their minds, even an autopsy that would confirm a natural death, would be met with suspicion.
Justice Scalia's Son Calls for End to 'Hurtful' Conspiracy Theories Over Dad's Death
"Our family just has no doubt he died of natural causes. And we accept that. We're praying for him. We ask others to accept that and pray for him," the Scalia heir insisted.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.