I just watched Meet the Press, and went online to read the transcript of his interview with Stephen Miller, Trump’s senior policy advisor.  Or I tried to.

I had to stop.  There was just so much dishonesty in his fixed talking points. This stuff is painful to work through.

Moderator Chuck Todd asked Miller about the recent court decision against the Trump Muslim Ban by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Todd asked if the White House was going to appeal, or rewrite the Executive Order. Miller replied:

Well we’re considering all of our options right now Chuck. That includes: you can continue the appeal in the ninth. You can seek an emergency stay at the Supreme Court. You can have a trial hearing on the merits at the district level. Or you can take in en banc for the emergency hearing also at the ninth circuit and yes, you could pursue additional executive actions….

I was good for this half of the answer. I thought Miller listed out the White House options pretty well.  Miles ahead of Trump’s “SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!” tweet.

But then it was like Miller suddenly got tired of thinking, and jigged a hard right into red-meat political posturing:

The bottom line is that we are pursuing every single possible action to keep our country safe from terrorism…

Odd think to lie about. I don’t want to doubt their intentions (though I reserve the right), but it’s silly phrase to spout: just dumb nonsense. Nobody can do everything. Hell, the White House haven’t even decided what they’ll do next. Maybe Miller thought that rabid posturing would make him look taller.

Then it took an even darker turn:

…And I also want to be clear we’ve heard a lot of talk about how all the branches of government are equal. That’s the point. They are equal.

Having put ‘equal branches’ in a sentence, Miller did a quick 180:

There’s no such thing as judicial supremacy. What the judges did, both at the ninth and at the district level was to take power for themselves that belongs squarely in the hands of the president of the United States.

Let me paraphrase.  “Yeah, sure, equal, but not as equal as the President, for god’s sake!” They have said in court and in public that the courts should not even be reviewing what the President does.

The court said clearly and unequivocally that they served the Constitution.  Even Presidents have to answer to the law. And, yes, all the time.