Mensch tracht, un Gott lacht

Sunday, February 27, 2022

Trading Topplers for Troubadours

"We interrupt the current toppling of your nation's monuments to ask you to fight for your nation's interests." 

"We interrupt the current campaign for the elasticity of America's unenforceable borders to ask you to fight for the firm fixity of Ukraine's sovereign borders."

"We interrupt the current incursion of the freedom of Americans to ask you to fight for the freedom of Ukranians."

Isn't this all a bit too rich? But a people will suffer a lot of rot if only you will sing them a song. 

But a people will not fight merely for national "interests." For mere national interests, a people probably won't even stop toppling their monuments, if they've developed a taste for it. But they might – they just might – fight for their nation's glory.


McDermott's War Song, performed by Robin Hunter.

Soft Power


Seth Barrett Tillman, ‘Soft Power,’ New Reform Club (Feb. 27, 2022, 8:41 AM), <>; 

Friday, February 25, 2022

Empathy and War


Seth Barrett Tillman, Empathy and War,’ New Reform Club (Feb. 25, 2022, 9:54 AM), <>; 

The Manhattan District Attorney’s Trump Probe



The story that is being reported in The NY Times, Politico, and elsewhere is that Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan District Attorney, and his two subordinate prosecutors, Pomerantz and Dunne, see the facts differently. According to reports in the mainstream media, Pomerantz and Dunne want the grand jury proceedings to continue, and that they remain ready to make representations before a judge that the life of the current grand jury should be extended. According to this view, the stick-in-the-mud is Bragg. Because he thinks the legal case is weak, he is for allowing the grand jury proceedings and investigation to terminate. Hence, the resignations by the frontline prosecutors.


The problem with that story is that there are no statements in the record from Bragg, Pomerantz, or Dunne. The media’s sources are all confidential and off-the-record, and naturally, such sources (if they exist all all) often have their own agendas.


Here is another possibility.


Pomerantz and Dunne know they have, at best, a weak case. Perhaps, they have no case at all. They are consummate legal professionals and are wholly unwilling to make knowingly false representations before the judge—who has oversight over the grand jury and who has lawful authority to extend the grand jury’s term. If so, why the resignations? Perhaps because Bragg has told them: “Do whatever is necessary to extend the life of the grand jury, and swear out whatever certification you must before the judge—Do it or you are fired.” So, instead of being fired, Pomerantz and Dunne resigned.


Pomerantz and Dunne are bound by ethics rules in regard to grand jury testimony secrecy. But, apparently, someone is talking to the media. This is how we will know who wants the grand jury probe terminated and who wants its life extended. If Bragg shops around for new prosecutors and they decide to restart the investigatory process before a newly impanelled grand jury, then that likely means that Bragg wants—and has always wanted—the investigations to go forward. Otherwise, it was Bragg who was for closing the investigation down.

Which theory is more likely? 


Seth Barrett Tillman, The Manhattan District Attorney’s Trump Probe,’ New Reform Club (Feb. 25, 2022, 8:54 AM), <>;


Thursday, February 24, 2022

Russian Oil


Seth Barrett Tillman, Russian Oil, New Reform Club (Feb. 24, 2022, 10:34 AM), <>; 

Thursday, February 17, 2022

The Washington Post’s Racial Reductionism [Updated]



Seth Barrett Tillman, Associate Professor

Maynooth University School of Law and Criminology

Scoil an Dlí agus na Coireolaíochta Ollscoil Mhá Nuad


County Kildare W23 F2H6


February 17, 2022

Letters Editor

The Washington Post

cc: Cleve R Wootson Jr & Marianna Sotomayor


Re:   Cleve R. Wootson Jr & Marianna Sotomayor, Clyburn wields his clout for Supreme Court pick, Washington Post (February 17, 2022), <>


Dear Letters Editor,

Wootson and Sotomayor characterize Justice Clarence Thomas as the “Black justice whose rulings often resemble the thinking of White conservatives.” Leaving aside the racial reductionism, Justice Thomas is the most senior among the conservative-leaning Justices on the Supreme Court of the United States, and he is older than the other conservative-leaning Justices on the Court. So, it is probably better to say that many young White people are following in his footsteps.



Seth Barrett Tillman

Seth Barrett Tillman, The Washington Post’s Racial Reductionism [Updated],’ New Reform Club (Feb. 17, 2022, 10:30 AM), <>;

Update: partial retraction from Washington Post

See <>;

Wednesday, February 16, 2022

Friday, February 11, 2022

Judicial Spouses


Seth Barrett Tillman, Judicial Spouses,’ New Reform Club (Feb. 11, 2022, 3:27 AM), <>; 

Monday, February 07, 2022

Trust in the Media


Seth Barrett Tillman, Trust in the Media, New Reform Club (Feb. 7, 2022, 5:07 AM), <>; 

Friday, February 04, 2022

Cultural Appropriation is the Highest Virtue


Seth Barrett Tillman, 'Cultural Appropriation is the Highest Virtue,' New Reform Club (Feb. 4, 2022, 11:19 AM), <>; 

Thursday, February 03, 2022

Yesterday and Today


Seth Barrett Tillman, Yesterday and Today,’ New Reform Club (Feb. 3, 2022, 10:32 AM), <>; 

Wednesday, February 02, 2022

The Washington Post’s Constitution [Updated]


Seth Barrett Tillman, Associate Professor

Maynooth University School of Law and Criminology

Scoil an Dlí agus na Coireolaíochta Ollscoil Mhá Nuad

New House—#53

Maynooth University


County Kildare

Ireland W23 F2H6

(academic title & affiliation for identification purposes only)

February 2, 2022

Letters Editor

The Washington Post


Re:     Amber Phillips, ‘The never-ending fight over whether to include the Equal Rights Amendment in the Constitution,’ The Washington Post (Jan. 31, 2022, 2:22 PM EST), <>.

Dear Letters Editor, 

Ms Phillips wrote that: “Two-thirds of the states have ratified the ERA, which meets the constitutional requirements for adding to the Constitution.” This is not correct. Article V of the United States Constitution, which governs the constitutional amendment process, requires ratification by the legislatures of ¾ of the states. In certain circumstances ratification is possible by the conventions of ¾ of the states, but those circumstances are not applicable to the proposed Equal Rights Amendment.

In any event, as long as the United States has 50 states, ratification requires action by ¾ or 38 states, and not 2/3 or 34 states.



Seth Barrett Tillman 

UPDATE: The Washington Post has corrected the article.

Seth Barrett Tillman, The Washington Posts Constitution [Updated], New Reform Club (Feb. 2, 2022, 3:57 AM), <>;