Thorn: Grand Jury case a crime scene
The Breonna Taylor case Grand Jury recordings revealed confusion, inept investigation and frustrated grand jurors. Perhaps worse, Attorney General Daniel Cameron said what he recommended to the jurors is not on the tapes, so we do not know what he really told jurors. But we do know he did not present evidence regarding the search warrant that allowed cops to barge into Breonna Taylor’s apartment where they suspected she was alone with a child. We agree with Courier Journal columnist Joe Gerth’s call for Jefferson County Commonwealth’s Attorney Tom Wine to seek an indictment for the cops who took out that warrant. “If laws were broken, people need to be charged,” he wrote.
Rose: SNL, finally relevant
Saturday Night Live has not been funny for, well, since its first few seasons. Last Saturday’s was no exception, including the pointedly accurate message for Cameron from musical guest Megan Thee Stallion. She gets a rose for using an audio clip in her performance of activist Tamika Mallory saying, “Daniel Cameron is no different than the sellout Negroes that sold our people into slavery.” On Fox News, Cameron responded: “The fact that a celebrity that I’ve never met before wants to make those sorts of statements, they don’t hurt me, but what it does, it exposes the type of intolerance ... and the hypocrisy because, obviously, people preach about being intolerant.”
Absurd: Sounds accurate
Speaking of Kentucky’s deserved, unwanted national attention, a cartoon in The New Yorker imagines the nighttime travails of the old, white men who govern our nation: “How do they sleep at night?” About our grand and unbussed, really, really senior senator we are told, “a bed of nails and a sulfur-scented candle and Mitch McConnell is out like a light.”
Thorn: See where this is going?
The U.S. Supreme Court rejected former clerk Kim Davis’ appeal, and even Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito agreed. But they took the opportunity to warn that the marriage-equality decision imperils freedom of religion. “Due to Obergefell, those with sincerely held religious beliefs concerning marriage will find it increasingly difficult to participate in society without running afoul of Obergefell and its effect on other antidiscrimination laws,” Thomas wrote. “Moreover, Obergefell enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman as bigots, making their religious liberty concerns that much easier to dismiss.” No, it insulates all of us from Bible-powered intrusion into government for the people, not for just Christians. (Remember: Davis was acting in her elected, official capacity as a clerk — not a private person — and had no right to deny marriage licenses.)
