We’re in Salem witch trials territory now

| 3:00 pm EDT May 6, 2022
Dear Palmer Report readers, we all understand the difficult era we're heading into. Major media outlets are caving to Trump already. Even the internet itself and publishing platforms may be at risk. But Palmer Report is nonetheless going to lead the fight. We're funding our 2025 operating expenses now, so we can keep publishing no matter what happens. I'm asking you to contribute if you can, because the stakes are just so high. You can donate here.

How strange life is! The past AND the here and now. Sometimes the past can blur with the present — and the future. We can sometimes lose ourselves in analyzing past behavior. We can drown in trying to understand the macabre actions of some from the past.

Take the Salem Witch Trials. I’ve often spoken about them in my articles. Someone else spoke about them on television the other night — and offered some stunning insight. That someone was Lawrence O’Donnell.

O’Donnell was talking about Supreme Court and suggested that Justice Alito might want to erase a particular paragraph from his Roe argument. That paragraph is when Alito cloyingly pays tribute to a man named Sir Edward Coke (also spelled “Cooke” or “Cook” in some places). Alito references him approvingly in the leaked writing.

Alito cited Coke, who wrote in 1644, calling abortion a crime. There is an issue with that. As O’Donnell puts it: “In 1644, in England, they were still having witch trials ending in the execution of the convicted witches.”

“And Sir Edward Coke helped English law define witches when he re-wrote English law in 1604 to make it even more cruel in witchcraft trials.”

Way to go Justice Alito. Yes, I think that should be omitted. But do you see the danger here — the wickedness, the terror that lies in plain sight? I’ve always been honest in my writings, so I will just say the quiet part out loud.

Alito, in my mind, is a monster. I could see him looking sternly at a crying female who might have been deemed a witch in 1604. That is my opinion. As I said, sometimes the past and present blur together as one. Thank you, Lawrence, for making us aware of this.