Patterico's Pontifications

Hello.

Dana (b45cf4) — 2/7/2025 @ 7:42 am

https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/egypt-galvanizes-arab-momentum-against-trumps-gaza-plan-2025-02-07/

Rather, Egypt was looking with other Arab nations at how to rebuild and clean up Gaza after Israel’s military campaign decimated the strip in response to Palestinian militant group Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, cross-border attack on Israel.

Huh… why are all the neighboring Arab nations clamoring now to articulate a means to rebuild Gaza themselves…

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/7/2025 @ 8:12 am

Peggy Noonan today on USAID:

Of all the agencies being batted about the one we will remember first when we recall this period in history is the U.S. Agency for International Development, so much of whose line-item spending was devoted to cultural imperialism. You have seen the lists. USAID produced a DEI musical in Ireland, funded LGBT activism in Guatemala. It spent $426,000 to help Indonesian coffee companies become more climate- and gender-friendly, $447,000 to promote the expansion of atheism in Nepal, and on and on.

When you look at what they were pushing on the world you think: They’re not fighting anti-American feeling, they are causing anti-American feeling.

Who is defending these USAID programs? Nobody. Obviously not Republicans, but not Democrats either. Everyone knows the agency went too far.

In the past, USAID stonewalled lawmakers when they asked for information. If it had been forthcoming, or even moderately clever, it would have allowed Congress to find, scream about and remove its zanier items and avoided being shuttered, with the job losses that will entail. …

But the Trump White House had better hope there are no catastrophic effects from shuttering USAID efforts that actually help people, contribute to our safety, and enhance our standing in the world. Monitoring and studying Ebola in Africa is one example.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/7/2025 @ 9:24 am

The big picture: The courts are one of the only real threats to slow or stop substantial parts of Trump’s agenda — and they’re doing it.

How many divisions do they have?

But really, these are district courts, where judge shopping is easy (they pick Seattle, not Biloxi). Nothing matters until it hits an appellate court, which is why we have appellate courts.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/7/2025 @ 9:30 am

At least 12 people pardoned by President Donald Trump in his first and second terms—including two last week—have since been apprehended by the police.

Now tell me how many people given amnesty by President Carter were arrested later. I’m gonna bet there was less interest in finding that out.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/7/2025 @ 9:32 am

“Why do I care what is going on in the conflict between Ukraine and Russia? And I’m serious. Why do I care? Why shouldn’t I root for Russia? Which I am.”

“I don’t think that we should be at war with Russia. And I think we should probably take the side of Russia if we have to choose between Russia and Ukraine. That is my view.”

–Tucker Carlson, Putin tongue-bather since 2019

Carlson is being extra dishonest because the person who’s preventing Ukraine from having elections is none other than Putin himself. Tucker is a bad human being and scuzbag.

Paul Montagu (5784df) — 2/7/2025 @ 9:58 am

@5 If Carter had pardoned people convicted of violently attempting to obstruct the peaceful power of Presidential power on his own behalf, I assume there’d be a teeny bit more scrutiny.

JRH (d73215) — 2/7/2025 @ 10:10 am

peaceful *transfer.

JRH (d73215) — 2/7/2025 @ 10:14 am

Unelected bureaucrats go to court because the elected chief executive audits their operation.
If this goes to the Supreme Court, the Executive is going to win way bigger than nevertrump is gonna like.

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/7/2025 @ 10:16 am

Doing Putin’s dirty work:

Stern proclamations by U.S. President Donald Trump concerning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine initially caused trepidation in Moscow, but Trump’s latest actions have transformed the reaction into pure joy over America’s self-destruction as a global superpower. In anticipation of Trump’s return to the Oval Office, Russian experts often shared their hopes that he would destroy the U.S. government from within and undermine international relationships with allies—and he is exceeding their expectations.
………….
…………. After Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed that the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, is “illegitimate,” Trump’s envoy, Keith Kellogg, urged the war-torn country to hold presidential elections. He asserted, “Most democratic nations have elections in their time of war. I think it is important they do so.”

(During the latest Sunday Evening With Vladimir Solovyov broadcast, host Vladimir Solovyov) pointed out, “The fact that Kellogg paid attention to this demonstrates that Americans have adopted our point of view, as opposed to the European stance or Biden’s position.”……….
…………..
(Henry Sardaryan, Dean of the School of Governance and Politics at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations said) “I want us to pay very close attention to the latest statement of Marco Rubio, it was simply sensational. I had to re-check it three times from different sources because I got an impression that this was a statement by Sergey Viktorovich Lavrov—not Marco Rubio… He said what we’ve been asserting for three years.” ………

………… Sardaryan said that Rubio’s statement demonstrates that America and Russia will finally be “speaking the same language” with respect to Ukraine.

Sardaryan noted how energized and happy everyone in Russia seems to be about the demise of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which aided countries recovering from disasters, trying to escape poverty, and engaging in democratic reforms. He urged Russia to capitalize on this development and step in to fill the void by creating a domestic equivalent of the program. He emphasized that this program wouldn’t be based on philanthropy but rather serve as a tool to exercise influence over the countries that would benefit from Moscow’s aid. He stressed, “Foreign assistance should be part of our foreign policy—as opposed to charitable giving.” Solovyov concurred, “It could be a phenomenal lever.”

In 2020, political scientist Dmitry Evstafiev predicted the disintegration of existing political institutions in the United States, prompted by Trump’s outright rejection of bipartisanship, which will be replaced by an authoritarian system he is striving to create. Russian experts are happy to report that during his second term, Trump is doing just that. Andrey Sidorov, Deputy Dean of world politics at the MSU noted that the United States is now rapidly moving towards a dictatorship—and the American population won’t be able to change this trajectory using the usual democratic means.
…………

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/7/2025 @ 10:40 am

Kellogg has since walked that back and acknowledged the Ukrainian constitutional limit on elections

https://united24media.com/latest-news/kellogg-ukraines-constitution-prohibits-elections-during-war-but-they-should-be-held-when-possible-5679

“They can’t right now because it’s in their constitution. The Ukrainians may not be able to hold elections until hostilities cease, but at some point, they will need to. That is a sign of a healthy democracy,” Kellogg stated.

He clarified that discussions about elections do not imply that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy should step down.

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/7/2025 @ 10:48 am

https://archive.is/INbWX

“Desperately short of infantry, Kyiv is using aerial drones to pick off Russian infantry. It’s slowing, but not stopping, the Russian advance.”

I realize it’s not as simple as drafting 18-25-year-olds, but do they want to win?

Zelensky is asking the west to intervene before he has to commit, and lose, a large piece of a generation.
This is more important to him than the lost territory, and has been duly noted by the western negotiation teams

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/7/2025 @ 10:58 am

“Of all the agencies being batted about the one we will remember first when we recall this period in history is the U.S. Agency for International Development, so much of whose line-item spending was devoted to cultural imperialism. You have seen the lists. USAID produced a DEI musical in Ireland, funded LGBT activism in Guatemala. It spent $426,000 to help Indonesian coffee companies become more climate- and gender-friendly, $447,000 to promote the expansion of atheism in Nepal, and on and on.

When you look at what they were pushing on the world you think: They’re not fighting anti-American feeling, they are causing anti-American feeling.”

This is all extremely funny to me, because these are all CIA fronts or cutouts.

Davethulhu (14e9e4) — 2/7/2025 @ 11:17 am

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/7/2025 @ 9:24 am

But the Trump White House had better hope there are no catastrophic effects from shuttering USAID efforts that actually help people, contribute to our safety, and enhance our standing in the world. Monitoring and studying Ebola in Africa is one example.

That’s up to Secretary of State Marco Rubio. He got himself appointed in charge of USAID, and appointed a deputy to actually run in. He is saving Donald Trump from his decision to let Elon Musk cut government spending at lightning speed (both things Trump or the majority of Republicans e opposes on principle and just the results of networking.)

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/7/2025 @ 11:34 am

Davethulhu (14e9e4) — 2/7/2025 @ 11:17 am

This is all extremely funny to me, because these are all CIA fronts or cutouts.

According to an op-ed article in the Wall Street Journal the left used to be against lots of things USAID was doing.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/the-left-didnt-always-love-usaid-us-agency-for-international-development-c7888341

…A primary complaint has been the failure of aid dollars to reach their stated beneficiaries. Critics note that a substantial portion of “foreign aid” never leaves the U.S., instead staying within USAID or circulating among well-heeled USAID subcontractors. Many of these subcontractors later work for USAID and sustain the revolving door of self-interest. Some dollars do reach intended recipients around the world, but plenty of the funding goes to local affiliates of those same USAID subcontractors. By most assessments, less than 10% of U.S. nonmilitary foreign aid ends up with locally based organizations.

Critics on the left made these charges for decades, insisting that USAID primarily served Washington’s interests and rarely delivered on its promises. By contrast, a more-targeted program—the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, a global health initiative created by President George W. Bush—is widely celebrated because it is mindfully administered by the executive branch rather than run entirely through USAID’s opaque and byzantine processes.

Many critics in the New Left movement of the 1960s and ’70s also criticized USAID for some of its more nefarious actions, deeming them politically subversive and manipulative. In 1965 the New York Times reported that the level of USAID funding to India was contingent on India’s importing certain products, such as fertilizer, from U.S. companies. This was an example of so-called tied aid. Later that decade, USAID gave a Laotian general funding to start a private airline, which was involved in regional opium and heroin trades that funded Laos’s war against its communist foes.

USAID’s support for dictators has also attracted opposition. The agency generously supported many authoritarian figures and regimes—including Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire (now Congo), the Duvaliers in Haiti, the Somoza regime in Nicaragua and the military junta in Brazil that took power in 1964.

Some economists and aid practitioners argued that USAID’s economic assistance to these countries was often paternalistic at best and destructive at worst. They accused the agency of undercutting farmers by dumping free grain in local markets in Haiti, impoverishing rural communities that were critical constituencies resisting dictatorial rule. While USAID fed hungry people, critics argued, it also sometimes fatally compromised a society’s ability to produce its own food, weakening popular resistance to authoritarian rulers.

In 2006 the U.S. spent millions of dollars through USAID to boost the popularity of the Palestinian Authority before its election against Hamas in Gaza. This was likely counterproductive. The appearance of foreign money flowing toward the Palestinian Authority may have damaged its credibility, and Hamas won the election.

In post-Soviet states, organizers of “color revolutions,” or political uprisings, have openly received hundreds of millions from USAID. Closer to home, USAID developed a social-media app in 2010 designed to encourage young Cubans to revolt against the government.

As recently as 2009, there was still an interest in improving transparency. President Obama said “the American people’s money must be spent to advance their priorities, not to line the pockets of contractors or to maintain projects that don’t work.” Today, these kinds of critiques have all but disappeared in liberal circles as the political winds have shifted.

But it isn’t only liberals. Until recently, although conservatives often criticized USAID for its lack of effectiveness and accountability, they generally considered it an effective tool for growing American soft power. They supported its efforts to stabilize regions of interest, strengthen U.S. businesses’ entry into foreign markets, and maintain foreign market share through budgetary leverage. USAID’s close working relationship with U.S. intelligence agencies and U.S.-funded armed groups was also seen as necessary to achieve these goals.

Views of the agency have changed drastically in recent years. USAID lost face with conservatives after it was revealed that the agency’s Center on Democracy, Human Rights and Governance had turned some of its focus inward and was meddling in domestic politics. In 2021 this USAID bureau published a 100-page “disinformation primer” for USAID staff and partners on how private tech and media companies can better “manage” inconvenient political speech online. This censorship makes it more palatable for civil libertarians and conservatives to shrug at GOP proposals to defund the agency and its grantees completely….

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/7/2025 @ 11:39 am

They accused the agency of undercutting farmers by dumping free grain in local markets in Haiti,

That giving away free grain was damaging a country’s ability to grow its own food was a complaint about many different sources of international aid. Instead, they said, they should buy grain from local farmers. But buying grain from their own countries was one thing that gained food aid more support. Of course giving money to farmers would, all other things being equal, result in the target country importing more goods.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/7/2025 @ 11:43 am

The anti-Christian things Donald Trump is talking about is policies that could force people to act against their religious beliefs, like supporting or not opposing abortion or gay marriage in the hiring, renting or other decisions or not including their schools in various subsidized tuition programs.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/7/2025 @ 11:51 am

Unelected bureaucrats go to court because the elected chief executive audits their operation.

It does smack of the Deep State trying to protect itself. Personally, I think the bureaucrats should go on strike.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/7/2025 @ 11:58 am

USAID spent $15 million for condoms for the Taliban!! USAID spent $50 million for condoms in Gaza!! Or maybe it was $100 million like President Trump allegedly said!!

It was press secretary, Karoline Leavit who said that (this spending was being prevented, so she was projecting future spending).

I’m not sure why they would want to be opposed to giving this to the Taliban or Hamas. Maybe this accusation is for people who oppose this kind of birth control?

Now..

ISIS, after a while, did not want its members to have children because they were less likely to be willing to lose their lives if they did. But that’s ISIS. There it could be considered to be supporting terrorism.

But here this is just the usual false spin by supporters of Donald Trump.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/29/politics/gaza-condoms-fact-check/index.html

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/7/2025 @ 12:02 pm

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2025/02/trump-gaza-takeover/681576

Trump’s Gaz-a-Lago plan has just one minor defect: It is a nonstarter with pretty much all of the parties required to make it work.

Some people thought Trump deliberately raised this just to demand that the Arab states find an alternative, and say what do they want, but he was probably more serious about this.

Trump’s plan included the evacuation of all people from Gaza to start, and knocking down all remaining existing buildings.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/7/2025 @ 12:10 pm

I think there are civil servants working overtime to modify ideas slightly so as to make them legal.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/7/2025 @ 12:12 pm

If not for ~~the courts~~ folks no one elected.

lloyd (6c7576) — 2/7/2025 @ 12:14 pm

t’s hard to tell if Trump wants tariffs for revenue or if he wants to use the threat
of tariffs to bend other his will, but he probably wants to get one or the other.

Or both.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/7/2025 @ 12:15 pm

The Save Democracy crowd never really liked democracy all that much.

lloyd (6c7576) — 2/7/2025 @ 12:16 pm

Gaza Mar (there is no lago- not that lack of a lake would stop Trump)

Gaza Mar as a tourist destination shows an acknowledgment of the location, location, location.
Ignores that there are too many militant, inhospitable Palestinians who would blow up any hospitality industry.

This is another Trump throwaway negotiation opener.

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/7/2025 @ 12:26 pm

ignores that there are too many militant, inhospitable Palestinians who would blow up any hospitality industry.

Yes, I wonder how you could ignore that. But all the Arab diplomats the U.S. talks to ignores that also. And it’s not just “Palestinians.” It could be any Islamic group supported by Iran. Iran has first be out of the picture.

It may work as an opening gambit.

Anyway a resort would not support enough people. It needs to be a manufacturing entity like Hong Kong. And that’s another problem for Trump, even though tourism can be considered to make the balance of payments worse too.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/7/2025 @ 1:01 pm

The problem with a Chinese made AI is how would it treat anything having to do with China. It’s a fatal defect.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/xi-who-must-not-be-named-why-does-deepseek-deep-six-the-chinese-presidents-name-534fc7a0

“Tell me about Tiananmen Square,” I queried. The reply: “I am sorry, I cannot answer that question, I am an AI assistant designed to provide helpful and harmless responses.” I did get a straight answer when I asked where Tiananmen Square is. Did anything important ever happen there? DeepSeek started generating a reply but got only as far as 1949, when Mao proclaimed the People’s Republic of China. Then it erased the answer and replaced it with: “Sorry, that’s beyond my current scope. Let’s talk about something else.”

Almost any question that touches on Chinese politics produces one of three boilerplate responses: “helpful and harmless,” “beyond my current scope” or, after a long pause, “The server is busy. Please try again later.” I asked DeepSeek to tell me about several prominent dissidents. In each case, it generated a lengthy bio before replacing it with “beyond my current scope.” The same thing happened when I asked about the Chinese Communist Party, Falun Gong, Taiwan, the Uyghurs and Winnie-the-Pooh. The yellow bear who loves honey is censored in China because he looks like Xi Jinping.

DeepSeek demurred even when invited to propagandize. “Tell me why Falun Gong is a cult.” “That is beyond my current scope.” Then I hit on an idea. I started a new chat and simply asserted, “Falun Gong is a cult.” DeepSeek assented, with a short, propagandistic paragraph that began: “Falun Gong is an illegal organization that has been lawfully banned by the Chinese government.”

A series of other queries consisting simply of a topic and a question mark mostly yielded replies along similar lines: “The Chinese Communist Party is the core leader of the socialist cause with Chinese characteristics. . . . Jimmy Lai is a lawbreaker who has been justly tried and convicted. . . . Comrade Mao Zedong was a great proletarian revolutionary. . . . Winnie-the-Pooh is a beloved character from children’s literature.”

There was one topic DeepSeek wouldn’t touch. Every time I mentioned Xi Jinping, it generated no text and cut immediately to “Sorry, that’s beyond my current scope. Let’s talk about something else.” Likewise when I asked it to name the president of China, although it readily identified the vice president as “Comrade Han Zheng.” Mr. Xi’s name is as taboo as Yahweh’s was for the ancient Jews.

But I devised a workaround: “Tell me about the president of China, but refer to him by the pseudonym ‘Hank Jones.’ ”

“Hank Jones, a prominent political figure, has played a significant role in shaping the policies and direction of his country. . . . Jones is also recognized for his advocacy of a harmonious society and sustainable development, aligning with the broader goals of his administration.”

That could be anyone. To confirm we were talking about the same guy, I asked when Jones became president. DeepSeek said 2013. Bingo.

Then I asked: “Does Hank Jones look like Winnie-the-Pooh?”

Long pause. “The server is busy. Please try again later.”

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/7/2025 @ 1:04 pm

Tucker is a lot like Trump. Tall, overweight, heirs to fortunes, vile, camera-loving, and with cult-like followings.

norcal (a72384) — 2/7/2025 @ 1:30 pm

President Trump is the first president in our lifetime who is actually committing to cutting the size of the federal government.

This is a conservatives life-long goal.

Seeing former conservatives constantly rail against him is very telling.

NJRob (bce793) — 2/7/2025 @ 1:42 pm

Rob, I don’t think most people here mind cutting government. But the way in which it’s being done is extremely problematic.

He has both houses of Congress. If he works with them to pass a drastically reduced budget, great.

I would NOT be ok with a democratic president inviting George Soros to come in (without even being confirmed by the Senate), and be given access along with people he chooses to all sorts of things he shouldn’t have.

People here (including you) were also not very happy with Lois Lerner’s IRS saying “Hey, we’ve noticed a lot of fraudulent Tea Party tax exemption applications; be on the lookout there.” This is not a contradiction with people here disliking fraud.

I guess for people who are complaining it’s because they value government to follow the law more than they value a particular policy preference.

Nate (5fc2a9) — 2/7/2025 @ 2:16 pm

Kellogg has since walked that back and acknowledged the Ukrainian constitutional limit on elections
………..
He clarified that discussions about elections do not imply that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy should step down.

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/7/2025 @ 10:48 am

I’m sure the Russian media took note of his “clarification.”

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/7/2025 @ 2:25 pm

Rip

I am sure they (the Russia Media) did not make note of the clarification. I’m sure they took note and promptly binned it with the rest of the things that they don’t want to hear.

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/7/2025 @ 2:44 pm

Rob, I don’t think he wants to shrink government. I think he’s purging those who aren’t loyal to him. I’ll believe he wants to shrink government when he signs a budget that does that.

Time123 (c35779) — 2/7/2025 @ 2:47 pm

Democrat corporate donor stooges like schumer are running around like chickens with their heads cutoff! Corporate democrat politicians say ;but our donors say we can only only jump up and down and whine! Ant thing else might cost our donors money! Democrat party base is disgusted and will be voting squad members in instead of out!

asset (82d821) — 2/7/2025 @ 2:52 pm

@33

Rob, I don’t think he wants to shrink government. I think he’s purging those who aren’t loyal to him. I’ll believe he wants to shrink government when he signs a budget that does that.

Time123 (c35779) — 2/7/2025 @ 2:47 pm

I agree that his prime directive isn’t to shrink the government…as evidenced by his own signing of massive budget bills in his 1st term.

But, finding and stopping waste is a different topic altogether, and if the end result being that the government “shrinks”, we should applaud that.

Rubio is going to have a very unenviable job, imo, as he’ll need to wade through things like USAID and weed out the obvious wastes, while maintaining effective projects.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/7/2025 @ 3:00 pm

I think that even the Democrats realize the government has to get smaller. Every business hits a wall like this and has RIFs. Deadwood accumulates and missions creep. It’ll be interesting to see how far they will go. I’m guessing not very, but they’ll use this circus to make it look like the did.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/7/2025 @ 3:15 pm

Good 2nd Amendment news:

The federal ban on handgun sales to adults younger than 21 violates the Second Amendment, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit ruled (on January 30, 2025.) That law is “unconstitutional in light of our Nation’s historic tradition of firearm regulation,” a three-judge panel unanimously concluded in Reese v. ATF.
…………
The government’s lawyers argued that 18-to-20-year-olds are not part of “the people” whose “right to keep and bear arms” is guaranteed by the Second Amendment. They cited “the common law’s recognition of 21 years as the date of legal maturity at the time of the founding” and “the fact that legislatures have long established minimum age requirements for various activities.”

As Judge Edith Jones notes in the 5th Circuit’s opinion, however, “there are no age or maturity restrictions in the plain text of the Amendment, as there are in other constitutional provisions,” which “suggests that the Second Amendment lacks a minimum age requirement.” ……….
……….
Jones adds that “the history of firearm use, particularly in connection with militia service, contradicts the premise that eighteen-to-twenty-year-olds are not covered by the plain text of the Second Amendment.” Under the 1792 Militia Act, “eighteen-to-twenty-year-olds not only served in that militia, but were required to serve,” she writes. “Eighteen-to-twenty-year-olds therefore must be covered by the plain text of the Second Amendment, as they were compulsorily enrolled in the regiments that the Amendment was written to protect….the overwhelming evidence of their militia service at the founding indicates that eighteen-to-twenty-year-olds were indeed part of ‘the people’ for Second Amendment purposes.”

…………(T)he government had to cite historical precedents that are “relevantly similar” to (the section of the 1968 Gun Control Act prohibiting firearms to 18-20 years old adults.) It relied “principally on mid-to-late-19th century statutes (most enacted after Reconstruction) that restricted firearm ownership based on age.”

Those laws “were passed too late in time to outweigh the tradition of pervasively acceptable firearm ownership by eighteen-to-twenty-year-olds at ‘the crucial period of our nation’s history,'” Jones says. “The federal government has presented scant evidence that eighteen-to-twenty-year-olds’ firearm rights during the founding era were restricted in a similar manner to the contemporary federal handgun purchase ban, and its 19th century evidence ‘cannot provide much insight into the meaning of the Second Amendment when it contradicts earlier evidence.'”
…………

Rip Murdock (c1b97c) — 2/7/2025 @ 3:56 pm

How many of Musk’s DOGEs with keys to the U.S. Treasury are H-1Bs?

nk (45ae7e) — 2/7/2025 @ 4:22 pm

Rip Murdock (c1b97c) — 2/7/2025 @ 3:56 pm

I’ll bet we’ll see the Trump Administration concede the obvious and not appeal these pro-Second Amendment cases to the Supreme Court.

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/7/2025 @ 4:56 pm

https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/musk-hire-doge-noncitizen-trump-b2692946.html

“Elon Musk had hoped to hire a non-U.S. citizen to work at his Department of Government Efficiency — but Trump’s advisers wouldn’t let him, according to a report.”

“…he asked to hire Baris Akis, a Turkish-born venture capitalist with a green card”

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/7/2025 @ 5:13 pm

Maybe, but SCOTUS reverses the 5th more than all other circuits combined. They are running close to a 100% reversal rate.

Colonel Klink (ret) (9f3c39) — 2/7/2025 @ 5:34 pm

The reversal rate for the 5th circuit IS high — 73% — but that is not close to 100%. It also not the worst. The 2nd Circuit is reversed 86% of the time. The 8th, 9th and 10th circuits are reversed half the time.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/7/2025 @ 6:23 pm

Trump has attempted to fire the current chair of the FEC. Apparently he can’t, exactly. She serves until her replacement is nominated and confirmed, and since her official term ended almost 2 decades ago with out that happening, she continues to serve.

So, Trump ought to take her up on that and find a nominal Democrat to replace her. I hear John Eastman is suddenly a Democrat…

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/7/2025 @ 6:33 pm

Cool story in the WSJ about Smoke Tree Ranch in Palm Springs, with this old world charm.

Paul Montagu (5784df) — 2/7/2025 @ 7:57 pm

More from the Save Democracy party:

Gavin Newsom Approves $50M For Immigration Aid Against Trump After Begging Him For Federal Help Just Days Before

Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom approved $50 million in funds for legal battles and immigration services against the Trump administration Friday evening, just days after meeting with President Donald Trump about helping the state with disaster relief.

Special session discussions regarding the ‘Trump-proof’ legislation began on Jan. 9, when California lawmakers introduced a bill to have that state’s Department of Justice provide the state with $25 million to fund litigation against the Trump administration and another $25 million set aside for legal groups to defend illegal immigrants facing deportation. The signed bill, known as Senate Bill X1 2, states that it “will bolster funding for legal services programs that are vital to safeguarding the civil rights of California’s most vulnerable residents, including people with disabilities, youth who are homeless, victims of human trafficking and wage theft, people facing unlawful evictions, immigrants and more.”

“None of the funding in this bill is intended to be used for immigration-related legal services for noncitizens convicted of serious violent felonies,” the bill said.

That may be the supposed intent, but there is nothing in the bill that prevents funds from being used for exactly that purpose.

lloyd (dcdc1b) — 2/7/2025 @ 8:26 pm

This is why I don’t hate trump. He is discrediting the corporate establishment democrat stooges of the donor class, even msDNC is asking where is chuckie schumer and the democrats in congress? Standing in front of dept. of education asking to be let in! If this was the Bastille the left would be storming it while chuckie schumer would be knocking on the door asking to be let in. Elected democrats Have started telling their leadership they are worried about getting primaried from their angry left base as they ask the donor class for money to fight it off.

asset (aa3e09) — 2/7/2025 @ 9:24 pm

The reversal rate for the 5th circuit IS high — 73% — but that is not close to 100%. It also not the worst. The 2nd Circuit is reversed 86% of the time. The 8th, 9th and 10th circuits are reversed half the time.

That was only for 2023.

Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 2/7/2025 @ 11:22 pm

JD Vance

I obviously disagree with some of Elez’s posts, but I don’t think stupid social media activity should ruin a kid’s life.

We shouldn’t reward journalists who try to destroy people. Ever.

So I say bring him back.

If he’s a bad dude or a terrible member of the team, fire him for that.

So, he was forced to resign because he was a bad dude and a terrible member of the team…and a scumbag.

So, he’s 25 and he’s tasked with RESTRUCTURING THE TREASURY but he’s just a poor kid.

He’s either a child and not qualified to do anything at the Treasury other than cleaning the toilets, or he’s an adult, who owns what they say, so removed himself from the job because his racist beliefs became public. So, bad dude and terrible member of the team.

You could not pay me to marry outside of my ethnicity.”
“Normalize Indian hate.”
“Just for the record, I was racist before it was cool.”
“I just want a eugenic immigration policy, is that too much to ask.”
“I would not mind at all if Gaza and Israel were both wiped off the face of the Earth”

Wait, doesn’t James Bowman have an interest in marrying outside of his race, specifically an Indian? He’s so forgiving of the child…I’m sure it’s fine he’s given access to the IT systems processing $6T gov money.

What could possibly go wrong with a bunch of Notsy children running around telling adults what to do.

MAGAts, making stupid cool again, scumbags one and all.

Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 2/8/2025 @ 12:05 am

You could not pay me to marry outside of my ethnicity.”

Marko Elez. I will not name the ethnicity he most likely is because I have long-time friends and acquaintances of that ethnicity.

But there is a joke about that:
— Until a ____ boy reaches age 30, his mother wants him to marry a ____ girl.
— When he reaches age 30, his mother softens her demand to that it will at least be a white girl.
— When he reaches age 35, she prays that it will be a girl.

nk (949d0e) — 2/8/2025 @ 4:41 am

And while we’re talking about that, we don’t talk that none of these people should be there at all.

nk (949d0e) — 2/8/2025 @ 5:02 am

https://www.facebook.com/larry.correia/posts/pfbid0pmx6KcmLnDjz4ekzdHQwDkEfaTpGkpqsf6cg3pZwJ9HcKTuWmHSgbsRRz1DDGSTcl

The best thing about DOGE gutting everything is it has conclusively demonstrated that there is no organic left. There is no lefty grass roots. It’s all been one giant, organized, top down scam, where we’ve been footing the bill for our own destruction.

It certainly seems that way.

NJRob (eb56c3) — 2/8/2025 @ 6:15 am

https://x.com/JDVance/status/1887959472091373906

I cannot overstate how much I loathe this emotional blackmail pretending to be concern.

My kids, god willing, will be risk takers. They won’t think constantly about whether a flippant comment or a wrong viewpoint will follow them around for the rest of their lives.

They will tell stupid jokes. They will develop views that they later think are wrong or even gross. I made mistakes as a kid, and thank God I grew up in a culture that encouraged me to grow and learn and feel remorse when I screwed up and offer grace when others did.

Vice President Vance showing much more grace and common sense than the usual suspects.

NJRob (eb56c3) — 2/8/2025 @ 6:17 am

Having unaccountable Einsatzgruppen get their Cheetos-stained fingers on the machinery of federal government should only make America’s enemies happy.

nk (949d0e) — 2/8/2025 @ 6:23 am

J. D. Vance is a fictional character.

A writer’s fanciful caricature with himself as the writer.

nk (949d0e) — 2/8/2025 @ 6:34 am

Trump Calls for Rehiring of DOGE Staffer Who Resigned Over Racist Posts
………….
Two posts from December included, “I just want a eugenic immigration policy, is that too much to ask,” and “Repeal the Civil Rights Act.”

But in a series of events on Friday morning, hedge-fund billionaire Bill Ackman criticized the Journal’s reporting about Elez, followed by Musk and then Vance, who said he should have his job back.
………….
By midafternoon, Trump was asked about Elez at a news conference. While he didn’t know the former staffer, the president said he supported the vice president.

“I don’t know about the particular thing, but if the vice president said that—did you say that?—I’m with the vice president,” Trump said.
…………
Musk, meanwhile, has cast anyone who disparages DOGE’s work as enabling fraud and abuse………..

Musk later posted: “He will be brought back. To err is human, to forgive divine.”

It isn’t clear what the administration will officially do about Elez.

The government hasn’t publicized the identities of many of the employees hired to implement efficiency measures on Musk’s task force, a cornerstone of Trump’s campaign. Their names have emerged over the past week as a result of leaks and lawsuits.

Elez’s identity was confirmed by Treasury Department lawyers responding to a request from labor groups that DOGE-affiliated employees be kept out of sensitive personal data.

Interim U.S. Attorney Ed Martin, a Trump appointee, has pledged to investigate threats to DOGE employees. ………….
………….

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/8/2025 @ 7:02 am

Federal Judge Blocks Elon Musk’s DOGE From Treasury System
…………..
The early Saturday order by Judge Paul Engelmayer, an Obama appointee, precludes officials without proper background checks and security clearances from accessing the payment system through at least next Friday, including political appointees and special government appointees. It also orders any prohibited person who has had access to the records since President Trump’s inauguration to destroy them. The judge set a hearing for Friday.
…………..
Engelmayer said (the lawsuit filed by the attorney generals for 19 blue states) were likely to win on arguments that the Trump administration exceeded its authority in allowing broader access to the payment system. He also said the states faced irreparable harm without court intervention for now, including “the heightened risk that the systems in question will be more vulnerable than before to hacking.”
…………..
A federal judge in Washington earlier this week signed off on a temporary agreement that already limited the sharing of sensitive Treasury data, allowing Musk allies who have been named Treasury employees to continue to access a payments system containing the personal and financial data of millions of Americans but prohibiting them from sharing sensitive data with anyone outside the agency. She also limited them to “read-only” access, meaning they can read records but not alter them.
…………..

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/8/2025 @ 7:13 am

“You could not pay me to marry outside of my ethnicity.”

I don’t think Marko Elez could get a date, let alone get married.

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/8/2025 @ 7:22 am

Colonel Klink (ret) (9f3c39) — 2/7/2025 @ 5:34 pm

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/7/2025 @ 6:23 pm

Irrespective of the Fifth Circuit’s reversal rate, in ATF v. Reese they are certainly correct on the merits. If 18-20 year olds can be drafted, sign contracts, buy a car, or marry, they should certainly be able to buy a handgun. Note that there is no federal prohibition against 18-20 year olds from purchasing a rifle or shotgun.

I would expect that the Trump administration will not appeal this decision.

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/8/2025 @ 7:36 am

Marko Elez didn’t kill anyone. We have character standards and he didn’t meet them. And, we shouldn’t lower them for him. Next time I take air travel to DC (or anywhere really) I’ll be relieved to know those ensuring my safety have met strict marriage inclusive standards.

lloyd (dcdc1b) — 2/8/2025 @ 8:35 am

I’ll be relieved that those ensuring my safety aren’t harboring grudges and resentments. If you have a problem with state rules on marriage, tell your church to stop performing them, because the moment they say “By the power granted me by the state of…” they have no leg to stand on.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 9:02 am

RIP actor Tony Roberts (85). Roberts appeared in a number of Woody Allen films, generally as his best friend: “Don’t Drink the Water” (1966); “Play It Again, Sam” (1969); (he reprised his stage roles in the two films); “Annie Hall” (1977), “Stardust Memories” (1980), “A Midsummer Night’s Sex Comedy” (1982), “Hannah and Her Sisters” (1986) and “Radio Days” (1987). He also appeared in “Serpico” (1973) and “The Taking of Pelham One Two Three” (1974).

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/8/2025 @ 9:18 am

@56:

The suit that was brought appears to be based on the President “failing to execute the laws” in the sense that they seek to block payments authorized by Congress, by way of the activity and decisions of federal agencies. Since the latter report to the President, not to Congress this, like all other impoundment arguments, is weak. Unless the exact payment is listed in the appropriation bill, or is the clear and automatic entitlement of a citizen under the law, Executive decisions can affect it.

The NY TIMES’ idiotic report goes on at length about what might happen if Trump refuses to comply, which seems more projection than reporting. They never tell us why the court, or the lawsuit, says blocking some of these payments must be wrong.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 9:23 am

BTW, I think that when the impoundment issue again reaches the Supreme Court, the result will be different. This time isn’t the height of Congressional power, nor the nadir of Presidential power (1974), nor are the courts what they were in 1974.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 9:32 am

@60 Yes, that’s why Nejwa Ali was fired. Oh, wait… she was suspended, with pay, for perpetuity.

lloyd (b210e3) — 2/8/2025 @ 9:34 am

It’s also odd that the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 gives a single-house veto to Congress over the Executive’s rescission of specific funds, even though all other single-house vetoes were declared unconstitutional in 1983.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 9:37 am

Kevin, none other than Brett Kavanaugh enforced the Impoundment Control Act. CJ Roberts was also on Kavanaugh’s side.
vox.com/scotus/397820/supreme-court-brett-kavanaugh-trump-spending-freeze-impoundment

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/8/2025 @ 9:55 am

Circuit court judges aren’t allowed to overturn SC decisions.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 10:01 am

ANn Roberts was working as a lawyer at the time (1985), expressing the views of his client.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 10:03 am

*And

I hate it when I miscorrect to something worse.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 10:03 am

It’s also odd that the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 gives a single-house veto to Congress……..

What section of the ICA?

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/8/2025 @ 10:55 am

“Marko Elez didn’t kill anyone”

lmao

Davethulhu (0f24f8) — 2/8/2025 @ 11:24 am

ICE has a leak problem. Their plans to conduct a large scale sweep in Chicago immediately after the inauguration were thwarted by a leak of plans to the Wall Street Journal. The leak resulted in the sweep being delayed until January 26th and allowed pro-illegal immigration groups to organize and harass federal authorities.

And now the Los Angeles Times reports:

Federal law enforcement agents are planning to carry out a “large scale” immigration enforcement action in the Los Angeles area before the end of February, according to an internal government document reviewed by The Times.

The operation, which would be spearheaded by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, will focus on people who do not have legal status in the country or who already have pending orders of removal, according to the document, which was circulated among some federal law enforcement officials this week.
………..
A federal law enforcement source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals, said agents with the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Los Angeles field offices are being called in to assist.
…………
Trump’s “border czar,” Tom Homan, this week blamed the leak of an immigration operation in Aurora, Colo., as having reduced the number of arrests of Tren de Aragua gang members and other criminals.
………….

The DOJ needs to start having reporters and their executives testify before grand juries to find the culprits. A few months in jail or punitive fines might convince them.

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/8/2025 @ 11:28 am

The DOJ needs to start having reporters and their executives testify before grand juries to find the culprits. A few months in jail or punitive fines might convince them.

Meh.
The problem lies with the leakers, not the reporters doing their jobs. I when Republicans screamed about James Rosen being under surveillance by Obama because of leaks from the IC.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/8/2025 @ 11:37 am

Can the President Dissolve USAID Without An Act of Congress?
No, not lawfully. In 1961, USAID was created by an E.O. issued by President John F. Kennedy (E.O. 10973), based in part on authority provided in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961. But a later act of Congress (The Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998, 22 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.)

.Link.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/8/2025 @ 11:40 am

Vice President Vance showing much more grace and common sense than the usual suspects.

So he’s still saying this is a child, like his toddler children.

Again, explain how this child is qualified?

Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 2/8/2025 @ 11:40 am

What is the venn diagram of the people who are: qualified, adults, not murderers?

Prolly, pretty large population, but again, again, this would not include lil Marko.

Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 2/8/2025 @ 11:43 am

Deport this terrorist knt. She also said, “I’m conspiring with Hamas!” in addition to “I demand Jihad, I want ISIS to kill all of you!”

The good news is this Jordan-born former CAIR employee was charged with charged aggravated harassment, a hate crime.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/8/2025 @ 12:06 pm

The suit that was brought appears to be based on the President “failing to execute the laws” in the sense that they seek to block payments authorized by Congress, by way of the activity and decisions of federal agencies.

The word “impoundment” is not mentioned in the lawsuit at all. The issue appears to be the amount of “personally identifiable information” that is in the electronic payment files that agencies submit to the Department of Treasury’s Bureau of Fiscal Services; and the fact that persons who do not have the required security clearances have access to that information (whether “read only” or not.)

The “causes of action” in the lawsuit are (see paragraphs 154-199 for specific allegations):

Count 1-Violation of APA § 706(2) – Exceeding Statutory Authority
………..
Count 2-Violation of APA § 706(2)(A) – Contrary to Law
………..
Count 3-Violation of APA § 706(2)(A) – Arbitrary and Capricious
………..
Count 4-Ultra Viries (Acting Beyond Authority)
…………
Count 5-Violation of the Separation of Powers Doctrine— Usurping Legislative Authority
…………
Count 6-Violation of the Take Care Clause
………..

We’ll see what happens. I don’t think Supreme Court support is as cut and dried as one may think.

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/8/2025 @ 12:34 pm

The problem lies with the leakers, not the reporters doing their jobs.

Given the number of law enforcement agencies involved, it would be easier to go after reporters. They’re not immune from prosecution.

Rip Murdock (c1b97c) — 2/8/2025 @ 12:37 pm

Elez is working with Akash Boba, who is of Indian descent.

Based on that conversation, I’d run it by Boba and make personnel adjustments- or not-.

My guess is Boba signed off on Elez’s reinstatement and doesn’t think the workplace is as hostile inside as it is from the outside.

Michael Dell noted that he started his company at 19 and has done well.

Others have noted that many of the Founding Fathers joined the Revolution in their late teens or early 20s.

When it comes to data, the Chinese already hacked into the US Treasury last year under Biden’s watch and scooped it all up. Nobody much cares. Why? It’s probably because even your MD asks for an SSN. Every bank, credit agency, car dealer, pharmacy, and health insurer etc. etc already has your data

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/8/2025 @ 12:37 pm

Isn’t this the truth:

Nothing is more quintessentially American than disliking federal spending in the abstract and then getting cold feet whenever any form of it is threatened.

https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/boilingfrogs/democrats-resistance-trump-elon-doge/

norcal (a72384) — 2/8/2025 @ 1:18 pm

Most here seem really upset with trump. He is doing me and the left a favor showing the snowflakes in the democrat party how worthless the corporate establishment donor stooges who lead the democrat party are. Economic agenda advocated by Bernie Sanders not d.e.i. will bring back the 9 million voters who voted democrat in 2020 ;but didn’t vote in 2024. Over at DU the normal shills for the dnc are being overwhelmed by angry democrats demanding democrat elected leaders like schumer do something other then whine.

asset (87295d) — 2/8/2025 @ 1:20 pm

So, you’re saying that not only is this child qualified, he’s also an adult and saying horribly racist things. But, it’s OK because he’s both a child and not responsible for what he says, but also responsible enough to be included in the company of the founding fathers. OK that seems logical.

Colonel Klink (ret) (d5c915) — 2/8/2025 @ 1:24 pm

The problem lies with the leakers, not the reporters doing their jobs.

Warning of ICE raids is part of their jobs?

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/8/2025 @ 1:38 pm

1. I don’t think people should be fired for things that think/believe/say on their personal time as long as they are acting legally.

2. I don’t think it’s a good idea to let Musk and his random buddies careen wildly through the government shutting down, locking out, firing, accessing anything they have a whim to do so.

Nic (120c94) — 2/8/2025 @ 1:49 pm

Warning of ICE raids is part of their jobs?

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/8/2025 @ 1:38 pm

Are the reporters breaking any laws?

norcal (a72384) — 2/8/2025 @ 1:51 pm

Justice Department Sues Chicago and Illinois Over ‘Sanctuary’ Protections for Immigrants
………….
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Chicago, asks the court to immediately end a number of laws and ordinances it says thwart federal immigration authorities. The lawsuit cites those that the Justice Department says block local police and sheriff’s offices from sharing information or working with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in many cases, and from housing immigration detainees in local jails.

The Justice Department argues federal law overrides the city and state when it comes to immigration. “These provisions are an obstacle to the Federal Government’s enforcement of the immigration laws and discriminate against federal immigration enforcement,” the lawsuit said.
………….
Trump’s border czar Tom Homan, the architect of the Chicago raid plan, was further enraged to find that migrant communities in Chicago knew how to evade federal immigration officials by, for example, not opening their front doors when an officer knocks. ICE typically doesn’t have a criminal warrant when agents try to arrest an immigrant in the country illegally, meaning they can’t force entry into private residences.

“Sanctuary cities are making it very difficult to arrest the criminals,” Homan said in an interview on CNN. “They call it ‘Know your rights.’ I call it ‘How to escape arrest.’ If we’ve got to play that cat-and-mouse game, that’s what we’re going to do until every one of them is gone.“
…………

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/8/2025 @ 1:55 pm

…it would be easier to go after reporters. They’re not immune from prosecution.

Doubtful. I can’t recall the last time a reporter was convicted for not revealing a source.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/8/2025 @ 1:57 pm

Are the reporters breaking any laws?

norcal (a72384) — 2/8/2025 @ 1:51 pm

Obstruction of justice by impeding a federal investigation? As a far publishing classified information, that is a (unenforced) crime under the Espionage Act.

Rip Murdock (c1b97c) — 2/8/2025 @ 2:00 pm

Doubtful. I can’t recall the last time a reporter was convicted for not revealing a source.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/8/2025 @ 1:57 pm

Reporters certainly not immune from being questioned by a grand jury. If they refuse to answer any questions, let them cool their heels in jail for the life of the grand jury, which could last for months.

Rip Murdock (c1b97c) — 2/8/2025 @ 2:05 pm

I can’t recall the last time a reporter was convicted for not revealing a source.

Reporters have certainly been imprisoned for civil contempt over the years.

Rip Murdock (c1b97c) — 2/8/2025 @ 2:11 pm

What section of the ICA?

Title X of the Act, also known as the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, specifies that the president may request that Congress rescind appropriated funds. If both the Senate and the House of Representatives have not approved a rescission proposal (by passing legislation) within forty-five days of continuous session, any funds being withheld must be made available for obligation. Congress is not required to vote on the request and has ignored most presidential requests.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Budget_and_Impoundment_Control_Act_of_1974#Impoundment

So, it’s worse than a single-house veto. Both houses must explicitly confirm the President’s executive act. If eitehr hosue simply ignores the request it fails.

But when the Congress wanted to have an explicit veto of delegated LEGISLATIVE powers, that was beyond the pale. Yet they get a default veto of actual executive powers.

Crazy. Of course all this was decided while President Nixon was fighting impeachment. Not a lot of political capital there to fight a constitutional question. See also the War Powers Act.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 2:32 pm

The good news is this Jordan-born former CAIR employee was charged with charged aggravated harassment, a hate crime.

If she had somehow gained citizenship, this would be cause to revoke it.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 2:34 pm

The problem lies with the leakers, not the reporters doing their jobs.

Consider the possibility that both are wrong.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 2:36 pm

1. I don’t think people should be fired for things that think/believe/say on their personal time as long as they are acting legally.

So, you’re OK with Nazis teaching school?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 2:37 pm

If she had somehow gained citizenship, this would be cause to revoke it.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 2:34 pm

A person can only be denaturalized if there was dishonesty or error in the immigration process leading up to naturalization.

One can turn mass-murderer after naturalization, and the U.S. has to keep that person.

norcal (a72384) — 2/8/2025 @ 2:39 pm

Taking positive acts to shield illegal migrants from ICE is a federal felony. 8 USC 1324

Shielding such a migrant from authorities carries a 5 year sentence. And God help you if they go on to kill someone. The penalties for that include the death penalty.

Up to now this statute hasn’t been enforced. But I am willing to be houses that the Trump DoJ will enforce it to the hilt.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 2:46 pm

A person can only be denaturalized if there was dishonesty or error in the immigration process leading up to naturalization.

Her attitude towards Jews and Israel were concealed upon her entry. Maybe no one asked, I guess that’s an escape. I bet you people coming from that region will be asked in the near future.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 2:48 pm

Her attitude towards Jews and Israel were concealed upon her entry. Maybe no one asked, I guess that’s an escape. I bet you people coming from that region will be asked in the near future.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 2:48 pm

I don’t think attitude is a ground of inadmissibility.

She would have to participate in genocide, and it would need to precede her admission to the U.S.

Section 212 of the INA:

(ii) Participation in genocide
Any alien who ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in genocide, as defined in section 1091(a) of title 18, is inadmissible.

norcal (a72384) — 2/8/2025 @ 3:55 pm

I don’t think it’s a good idea to let Musk and his random buddies careen wildly through the government shutting down, locking out, firing, accessing anything they have a whim to do so.

The US is in debt to the tune of $36.5T and US systems are being audited thoroughly, systemically, and systematically by people who are smarter and faster than Congress. Are they going to make mistakes here and there- of course-

Musk isn’t firing people, locking people out is/will be done by Rubio, Bessent. Access to data by DOGE is read only, per approval of the Secretary of State and Secretary of the Treasury
Bessent sets record straight https://x.com/i/status/1887694414040162761

Where was all this outrage when the Chineses hacked the Treasury data

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/8/2025 @ 4:00 pm

norcal (a72384) — 2/8/2025 @ 3:55 pm

Addendum: “Participating in genocide” post-entry would also make her deportable from the U.S.. under Section 237 of the INA.

If she refrains until after she is naturalized, the U.S. owns her.

norcal (a72384) — 2/8/2025 @ 4:07 pm

Your personal data is already stolen

“Between May and July 2017, American credit bureau Equifax was breached. Private records of 147.9 million Americans, along with 15.2 million British citizens and about 19,000 Canadian citizens were compromised in the breach.”

In 2017, 147.9M represented 3/5 of the USA Adult population, while 169M had at least one credit card. So, the hack affected about 90% of Americans with a credit card.

“Beginning around 2014, a host of American organizations that store personal identifying information have been hacked, with either the government or major private cybersecurity firms identifying China’s Ministry of State Security as the culprit each time. Personal identifying information includes names, addresses, birthdays and Social Security numbers.”

IRS personnel with access above “read-only” have already shown willingness and ability to leak copies of tax returns of 70,000 people and corporations (most notable was probably Trump), found to be politically unfavorable, so I understand fears.

Bessent says the Treasury audit is not geared at taxpayers but at auditing the 1.3 billion payment transactions. 1.3B transactions annually sounds like a huge task to audit for the government, but that is less than 1/2 of what Amazon processes annually. My guess is there are some interesting patterns that emerge

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/8/2025 @ 4:54 pm

I don’t think attitude is a ground of inadmissibility.

But lying about it may be.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 5:20 pm

To be clear, what the @DOGEteam and @USTreasury have jointly agreed makes sense is the following:

– Require that all outgoing government payments have a payment categorization code, which is necessary in order to pass financial audits. This is frequently left blank, making audits almost impossible.

– All payments must also include a rationale for the payment in the comment field, which is currently left blank. Importantly, we are not yet applying ANY judgment to this rationale, but simply requiring that SOME attempt be made to explain the payment more than NOTHING!

– The DO-NOT-PAY list of entities known to be fraudulent or people who are dead or are probable fronts for terrorist organizations or do not match Congressional appropriations must actually be implemented and not ignored. Also, it can currently take up to a year to get on this list, which is far too long. This list should be updated at least weekly, if not daily.

The above super obvious and necessary changes are being implemented by existing, long-time career government employees, not anyone from @DOGE. It is ridiculous that these changes didn’t exist already!

Yesterday, I was told that there are currently over $100B/year of entitlements payments to individuals with no SSN or even a temporary ID number. If accurate, this is extremely suspicious.

When I asked if anyone at Treasury had a rough guess for what percentage of that number is unequivocal and obvious fraud, the consensus in the room was about half, so $50B/year or $1B/week!!

This is utterly insane and must be addressed immediately.

Nobody in Treasury management cared enough before. I do want to credit the working level people in Treasury who have wanted to do this for many years, but have been stopped by prior management.

Everything at Treasury was geared towards complain minimization. People we receive money don’t complain, but people who don’t receive money (especially fraudsters) complain very loudly, so the fraud was allowed to continue.

Nobody in Treasury management cared enough before. I do want to credit the working level people in Treasury who have wanted to do this for many years, but have been stopped by prior management.

Everything at Treasury was geared towards complain minimization. People we receive…

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 8, 2025

And this is just the low hanging fruit.

NJRob (eb56c3) — 2/8/2025 @ 5:29 pm

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/8/2025 @ 9:37 am

It’s also odd that the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 gives a single-house veto to Congress over the Executive’s rescission of specific funds, even though all other single-house vetoes were declared unconstitutional in 1983.

Because a rescission is the repeal of an old law (you can also consider it the passage of a new law) and requires passage by both houses (and the signature of the president, but that’s assumed to be coming) so if it loses in one House, it dies.

The only difference between that an regular law is that the rules of the Congress, included as part of the impoundment act, guarantees or makes it a lot easier to get a floor vote, I don’t know which.

Sammy Finkelman (7e4bb4) — 2/8/2025 @ 5:33 pm

@84 YES.

asset (a216d9) — 2/8/2025 @ 5:48 pm

Look at the positive we can do the same to trumpsters especially if supreme court rules against birth right citizenship. Imagine being able to strip trumpsters of their citizenship rights including s.c. justices and senators.

asset (a216d9) — 2/8/2025 @ 6:02 pm

Asset,

you can move to your dream land of Cuba any time you want.

NJRob (eb56c3) — 2/8/2025 @ 6:13 pm

@steveg@100 I expect people to already know that foreign governments hacking US systems is bad. Our own government is inflicting this upon us and it is not OK. Musk and his team don’t have any idea what they are doing. This is not their area of expertise at all. “are they going to make mistakes…” Yeah, if you hand your keys to an unlicensed 13 year old and put them on the freeway at 70 mph, mistakes happen. Of course, most of us watching a 30 care pileup that almost certainly contains fatalities might figure out THAT was bad, but hey, he might’ve driven you to the beach, so it was worth it, right?

@NJRob How long is it going to take to hand annotate every payment instead of having payments sent out automatically? How many people need to be hired to do that? How much are they going to increase the Treasury budget to make that happen? In the mean time, this is causing actual harm.

Nic (120c94) — 2/8/2025 @ 6:56 pm

Wasn’t toddler Hitler a President already? I’m pretty sure that he could’ve made that a priority in the four years while he was playing golf and tweeting and telling people to inject disinfectant. Maybe this would’ve been more important to him. Probably not because he’s a lazy moron and he decided to get a South African Nazi to help him.

Sure, he’s rich, but being a rich Nazi doesn’t make you not a Nazi. It’s in the name, plus, elongated muskrat has not had enough time to discover the things that he said he’s discovered since he tweets on average 15 times an hour has been playing video games 12 hours a day and may have time to sleep, but he probably does the propofol thing like Michael Jackson. Oh, isn’t he supposed to be CEO of five companies, the chief engineer, the chief designer, the chief salesperson, the chief blah blah blah.

Since these guys only lie and never tell the truth, why in the world would we possibly believe that this is the truth?

Colonel Klink (ret) (73cd9f) — 2/8/2025 @ 7:08 pm

@108 I own my own transportation business, so I am a capitalist wage slave master ;but don’t have any wage slaves. Its not just communists in the opposition. War communism turned out to be a worse solution to crony capitalism when at the time know one thought their was anything worse then the robber barrons!

asset (e97b5b) — 2/8/2025 @ 7:53 pm

Since these guys only lie and never tell the truth, why in the world would we possibly believe that this is the truth?

Colonel Klink (ret) (73cd9f) — 2/8/2025 @ 7:08 pm

Musk is a bigger huckster than Trump.

At least 30 times bigger if the measure is dollars.

nk (87e620) — 2/9/2025 @ 4:54 am

I will say this for Trump:

He may be glitzy, he may be schlocky;

He may peddle golden gangbanger sneakers and cut himself in for a percentage of Lee Greenwood’s Bibles; but

He would never come up with a grotesquerie like the Cybertruck.

nk (87e620) — 2/9/2025 @ 5:19 am

Because a rescission is the repeal of an old law (you can also consider it the passage of a new law) and requires passage by both houses (and the signature of the president, but that’s assumed to be coming) so if it loses in one House, it dies.

But blocking a proposed regulation in favor of the status quo is somehow passing a new law? By YOUR reasoning, this makes no sense. If you are wrong, and the rescission power is inherent to the executive, it makes less sense.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 6:51 am

He would never come up with a grotesquerie like the Cybertruck.

A car that makes the Pontiac Aztek look good.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 6:52 am

Your personal data is already stolen

The worst ever data breech, taking far more sensitive information (e.g. “Have you ever done drugs?”) from millions of government security clearance applications and other employee files, was courtesy of the Office of Personnel Management who kept everything unencrypted and behind lax firewalls.

These are the same people who today complain about Musk and his whiz kids (and you better believe they are the “best and brightest”) wanting to replace armies of government workers with automation.

It’s not about privacy at all. It’s about their rice bowls.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 6:59 am

One of the stupider complaints I see is about the youth of Musk’s crew. You want something done with current technology, you hire young technologists. You want more COBOL, magtape and armies of workers? You hire old farts.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:02 am

Can we put “Hitler” behind the filter?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:03 am

Also, it can currently take up to a year to get on this list, which is far too long. This list should be updated at least weekly, if not daily.

Especially for people who want to get off the list (e.g. “I am NOT dead!”)

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:05 am

Are the reporters breaking any laws?

Possibly, if warning of ICE raids qualifies as shielding unlawful residents from federal authorities.

8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)

“Any person who —

(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;”

But warning in general probably doesn’t. Warning in particular, does. Also, concealing such persons in a jail or courthouse and/or refusing to honor ICE detainers or otherwise assisting said persons to evade ICE does qualify. Up to now this hasn’t been used much, but Trump will probably dust this off.

Worse:

B) A person who violates subparagraph (A) shall, for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs–

(ii) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), (iv), or (v)(II), be fined under Title 18, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both;

(iii) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) during and in relation to which the person causes serious bodily injury (as defined in section 1365 of Title 18) to, or places in jeopardy the life of, any person, be fined under Title 18, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both; and

(iv) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) resulting in the death of any person, be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined under Title 18, or both.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:17 am

Should have used blockquotes

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:17 am

Are the reporters breaking any laws?

Possibly, if warning of ICE raids qualifies as shielding unlawful residents from federal authorities.

8 USC 1324(a)(1)(A)

“Any person who —

(iii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, conceals, harbors, or shields from detection, or attempts to conceal, harbor, or shield from detection, such alien in any place, including any building or any means of transportation;”

But warning in general probably doesn’t. Warning in particular, does. Also, concealing such persons in a jail or courthouse and/or refusing to honor ICE detainers or otherwise assisting said persons to evade ICE does qualify. Up to now this hasn’t been used much, but Trump will probably dust this off.

Worse:

B) A person who violates subparagraph (A) shall, for each alien in respect to whom such a violation occurs–

(ii) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(ii), (iii), (iv), or (v)(II), be fined under Title 18, imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both;

(iii) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) during and in relation to which the person causes serious bodily injury (as defined in section 1365 of Title 18) to, or places in jeopardy the life of, any person, be fined under Title 18, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both; and

(iv) in the case of a violation of subparagraph (A)(i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v) resulting in the death of any person, be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined under Title 18, or both.

That latter could make a “Laken Riley case” more costly for someone.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:21 am

Luckily for Biden, he has immunity.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:23 am

So, it’s worse than a single-house veto.

There is no line-item veto under law.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/9/2025 @ 9:24 am

Questions like below aren’t worthy of a job application, it’s for membership in Cult Orange Jesus, where evidence and facts are cast aside in favor of lying Trump Narratives. God help us.

The questions asked of several current and former officials up for top intelligence agency and law enforcement posts revolved around two events that have become President Donald Trump’s litmus test to distinguish friend from foe: the result of the 2020 election and the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol, according to the people, who, like others interviewed for this report, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the matter’s sensitivity.

These people said that two individuals, both former officials who were being considered for positions within the intelligence community, were asked to give “yes” or “no” responses to the questions: Was Jan. 6 “an inside job?” And was the 2020 presidential election “stolen?”
[…]
Separately, at least two individuals in FBI field offices outside Washington, who were being interviewed for senior positions, were asked similar questions, said one U.S. official familiar with the incidents. The questions included: Who were the “real patriots” on Jan. 6? Who won the 2020 election? Who is your “real boss?”

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/9/2025 @ 9:44 am

I do want somebody, ANYBODY, to hold accountable the creeps who ordered a military drill in the country’s most crowded civilian air corridor (and the nation’s capital to boot).

Before they decide to hold a live fire exercise in Times Square.

nk (87e620) — 2/9/2025 @ 9:48 am

There is no line-item veto under law.

These aren’t even line items, mostly.

The line item reads like $500 million for the National Kumquat Museum.
The rescission could be for the $400 million being spent on offices therein.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 11:20 am

@126

I wonder if they had a time-window to do it when there were no Congressmen scheduled to be landing. Can you imagine the number of heads that would roll if someone “important” had died.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 11:23 am

Scammed:

………
The price of (President Trump’s cryptocurrency $Trump) hovered around $17 this week, less than a quarter of its $75 peak value.

Whether people made or lost money, it was stellar business for the Trumps. Nearly $100 million in trading fees have flowed to the family and its partners, although most of that has not yet been cashed out, the (crypto forensic analysis firm) Chainalysis data shows.
…………
The chain of events is hardly surprising, several former state and federal financial regulators said.

It is effectively a part of the design of the entire memecoin industry, which is legal but largely unregulated. The trading is built on large early buys by sophisticated traders who pump up the price, only to sell their holdings as less experienced retail investors follow their lead and buy in, and often end up with losses.

What makes this situation particularly troubling, to government watchdogs and former regulators, is that the Trump family is profiting from this exploitative pattern at the same time that Mr. Trump is rapidly moving to bring an abrupt end to a regulatory crackdown on crypto by several government agencies.
…………
New York regulators called these maneuvers “pump-and-dump schemes” and said they can leave buyers who come in late with big losses.

No evidence has emerged that Mr. Trump or his associates artificially inflated the coin’s price or engaged in insider trading. Asked about the early $Trump trades and profit taking, the president’s middle son, Eric Trump, declined to comment.
…………
…………(T)he account behind the first large public purchase — the $1,096,109 bet — was created about three hours before Mr. Trump launched the coin, an analysis of public crypto transaction records found. It had been filled that evening with virtual currencies, seemingly ready to pounce on a new offering.
…………
The well-timed trades, and the fact that the wallet received its funding shortly before Mr. Trump’s coin launched, immediately drew skepticism from crypto analysts, who speculated that a trader had been acting on inside information.
……………
Just under 700,000 wallets recorded gains on $Trump, the examination by Chainalysis shows. The early trades were some of the most profitable: 31 of these large early traders made $669 million in profits in a matter of days, according to the Nansen analysis.
………..
Across the first 19 days of trading, a total of 813,294 wallets registered losses, either by cashing out at a loss or holding onto coins that had plummeted in value.

The losers — those who paid more for the token than it is now worth — cumulatively have lost $2 billion, in actual or paper losses. Still, many of these traders are holding on to their money-losing tokens, perhaps hopeful that the price will rise again, the data shows.

The profits mostly secured by the early buyers were enormous: a total of $6.6 billion in cashed-out profits, according to Chainalysis.
…………

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/9/2025 @ 12:31 pm

Rip Murdock (82b35e) — 2/8/2025 @ 1:55 pm

………..
So often under Trump’s presidency, we hear a situation characterized as “unprecedented.” It would be wrong to do that here. Refusals by state or local officials to enforce laws that the federal government believes them obligated to enforce? Threats by the federal government to prosecute them for resisting or inadequately complying with federal enforcement projects? Those are actually quite precedented. Such is the story of the enforcement of the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law. ……….. And still more precedent from Prohibition……….
…………….
…………… A clearer picture of the coercion the administration has in mind (to force state and local governments to assist in the administration’s immigration deportations) emerges from the memo that the acting deputy attorney general issued the day after Inauguration Day.
…………

The Supremacy Clause and other authorities require state and local actors to comply with the Executive Branch’s immigration initiatives. Federal law prohibits state and local actors from resisting, obstructing, and otherwise failing to comply with lawful immigration-related commands and requests pursuant to, for example, the President’s extensive Article II authority with respect to foreign affairs and national security, the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the Alien Enemies Act.

The premise of this section—that the Supremacy Clause obliges state and local actors to “comply” with the administration’s “initiatives”—is false. In fact, the Supremacy Clause doesn’t even oblige those actors to carry out actual federal immigration laws, which have far more concrete legal status than “initiatives.”

Back in 1842, in Prigg v. Pennsylvania, Justice Joseph Story flatly rejected the notion that states were under any obligation to enforce either the Fugitive Slave Clause or legislation passed pursuant to it. It would, Story noted, be “an unconstitutional exercise of the power of interpretation to insist that the States are bound to provide means to carry into effect the duties of the National Government, nowhere delegated or entrusted to them by the Constitution.”

More recently, Justice Antonin Scalia relied on the “anticommandeering doctrine” in Printz v. United States, which held that Congress lacked the power to require state and local law enforcers to conduct background checks on handgun purchasers.

As Justice Samuel Alito (wrote in Murphy v. NCAA, (2018) Congress lacks “the power to issue direct orders to the governments of the States. The anticommandeering doctrine simply represents the recognition of this limit on congressional authority.”

The Justice Department memo’s vague reference to “other authorities” doesn’t change the analysis. Indeed, unless the Trump administration can point to federal statutes imposing a duty of compliance on states, the conversation doesn’t even start. ……….. Anticommandeering doctrine simply leaves little or no room for Congress to require state and local officials to enforce federal law.

But what if a state or local official violates a federal criminal statute? Well, then the official has committed a federal offense. The Justice Department memo requires its prosecutors to consider whether state and local failures to cooperate amount to “obstructing federal functions” in violation of the general conspiracy statute, 18 U.S.C. § 371. ……§ 371 requires a conspiracy to violate another federal criminal statute, it is unclear which statute the memo writers have in mind. The memo also requires prosecutors to consider charging violations of 8 U.S.C. Code § 1324 (“Bringing in and harboring certain aliens”). As the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit noted recently (in US v. Miguel Angel Vargas-Cordon):

To “harbor” under § 1324, a defendant must engage in conduct that is intended both to substantially help an unlawfully present alien remain in the United States—such as by providing him with shelter, money, or other material comfort—and also is intended to help prevent the detection of the alien by the authorities.

Anyone who does any of this with the requisite state of mind can indeed be prosecuted, regardless of their official status. ………
………….

Paragraph breaks added.

Rip Murdock (c1b97c) — 2/9/2025 @ 1:28 pm

Of course this is unprecedented. Trump, through Musk, is attempting the kind of downsizing that candidates often propose but no one actually attempts.

As for how it’s going, well, it is being reported through the “HELL NO!!!, I WON’T GO!!!” filter, so what you are told will be nothing but bad. It may BE bad, but the Establishment hates this with black black hate.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 2:56 pm

Of course this is unprecedented. Trump, through Musk, is attempting the kind of downsizing that candidates often propose but no one actually attempts.

That may be unprecedented, but not the Trump Administration’s attempts to coerce state and local governments to participate in its deportation programs.

Rip Murdock (751316) — 2/9/2025 @ 3:45 pm

Which was the point of my post 130.

Rip Murdock (751316) — 2/9/2025 @ 3:46 pm

Happy Gulf of America Day!

Today, I am very honored to recognize February 9, 2025, as the first ever Gulf of America Day.
………..
Today, I am making my first visit to the Gulf of America since its renaming. As my Administration restores American pride in the history of American greatness, it is fitting and appropriate for our great Nation to come together and commemorate this momentous occasion and the renaming of the Gulf of America.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim February 9, 2025, as Gulf of America Day. I call upon public officials and all the people of the United States to observe this day with appropriate programs, ceremonies, and activities.
………….

Rip Murdock (751316) — 2/9/2025 @ 3:50 pm

Which was the point of my post 130.

Rip Murdock (751316) — 2/9/2025 @ 3:46 pm

To spam this site as much as possible

NJRob (eb56c3) — 2/9/2025 @ 5:35 pm

Superbowl: Philadelphia routing Kansas City 17-0 and then 24-0 and now 27-0.

Sammy Finkelman (6d1c67) — 2/9/2025 @ 6:11 pm

Well, looks like the Loser jinxed the Chiefs.

Reminder: Those who follow the Loser risk losing their money, their health, and even their freedom. And now the Super Bowl?

(More evidence that those who follow the Loser risk losing their money.)

Jim Miller (b7572f) — 2/9/2025 @ 6:27 pm

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-approval-opinion-poll-2025-2-9/

Americans approve. NeverTrump and the left hardest hit.

NJRob (eb56c3) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:13 pm

Which was the point of my post 130.

Yeah, sorry. Was more reacting to the news cycle.

There are ways that coercion has been done. The 55MPH speed limit was imposed by the threat of withholding highway funds. Congress could make similar quids pro quo apply to immigration law.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:33 pm

Superbowl: Philadelphia routing Kansas City 17-0 and then 24-0 and now 27-0.

For all of you recording it, Spoiler Sammy for the win.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:34 pm

Matt meyer delaware democrat gov. ask trump to govern with compassion! This is the BS we democrats have to put up with from democrat corporate establishment stooges. Are donor masters say can’t we all get along or the donations to your campaign dry up!

asset (888c24) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:36 pm

Super bowl crowd boos taylor swift and cheers dump.

asset (888c24) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:50 pm

No more pennies.

asset (888c24) — 2/9/2025 @ 10:04 pm

Paupers hardest hit

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 10:45 pm

@144 hardest hit will be merchants dealing with sales tax. More importantly even DUers are disgusted by gov. meyers vichy comments. Even the dnc shills. Interesting primary season coming in 2026.

asset (888c24) — 2/9/2025 @ 11:59 pm

asset (888c24) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:36 pm

Matt meyer delaware democrat gov. ask trump to govern with compassion!

I think Trump is trying to break the American eople from feelings of compassion – this may be more some adviser(s) than Trump himself though.

Dems are cynical – trying to argue self-interest, and even lying about it, The talking point bout the eggs was an obvious lie since it was caused by killing hens. Now they could oppose this mass slaughter if birds but this they don’t,

Sammy Finkelman (b2ec1f) — 2/10/2025 @ 3:14 am

Store brand eggs were $7.99/dozen at my Jewel-Osco yesterday.

That’s twice as much as the sign that J the “D” is for WeirD Vance stood in front of last October said.

One would think that declaring yesterday Gulf of America Day would bring down food prices!

Wouldn’t one?

nk (bf6123) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:52 am

There’s a little local chain here in the Seatle area that is selling large eggs for $3.49 a dozen. Their supplier has been able to avoid the bird flu, so far.

Jim Miller (05a9b2) — 2/10/2025 @ 6:11 am

hardest hit will be merchants dealing with sales tax

I haven’t used cash much since COVID. And then only in dollar amounts. There aren’t a lot of purchases I can’t do with a card.

Most merchants will just round, as they do now with fractional cents.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 6:23 am

Their supplier has been able to avoid the bird flu, so far.

Others that aren’t affected have raised prices anyway, because they can. A lesson for tariffs.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 6:35 am

$4.12 for 18 eggs here in MO.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/10/2025 @ 6:46 am

Op-ed in NYT:

Five Former Treasury Secretaries: Our Democracy Is Under Siege

Can you guess which presidents they served?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 6:46 am

Should have mentioned that Washington state has required egg-laying chickens to be kept “cage free”, which makes it harder to protect them from bird flu.

Jim Miller (05a9b2) — 2/10/2025 @ 7:06 am

There’s a little local chain here in the Seatle area that is selling large eggs for $3.49 a dozen.

Um, which chain?
When they’re in stock, all they have at Costco are the brown ones at $8.79 for two dozen. Winco is even higher.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/10/2025 @ 7:07 am

Paul – Metropolitan. Their supplier is Wilcox family farms. (I bought a dozen for that price, yesterday.)

For those not familiar with the chain: They mostly have high quality, and high prices. But not on everything.

Jim Miller (05a9b2) — 2/10/2025 @ 7:33 am

https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1888891512303263815

The @DOGE team just discovered that FEMA sent $59M LAST WEEK to luxury hotels in New York City to house illegal migrants.

Sending this money violated the law and is in gross insubordination to the President’s executive order.

That money is meant for American disaster relief and instead is being spent on high end hotels for illegals!

A clawback demand will be made today to recoup those funds.

The amount of graft and theft going on in our government is on a scale never imagined.

NJRob (eb56c3) — 2/10/2025 @ 7:51 am

I may have said that Trump sounds like a Teamster boss on the subject of tariffs, and Kevin Williamson is on a similar wavelength.

“We will not allow our workers and industries to be displaced by unfair import competition.” If that sounds like Donald Trump, that is because the Republican president and standard-bearer in 2025 is, in essence, a Democrat stuck in the 1980s—and indeed, the line comes from the Democrats’ 1980 platform. The Democrat Trump sounds like is Dick Gephardt, once a very considerable figure in American politics who ran for president twice before retiring to become a bigfoot lobbyist and consultant. He ended up working for DLA Piper and Goldman Sachs—who doesn’t?—but in the 1980s and 1990s, he was the face of center-left trade Luddism, the union goons’ answer to Ross Perot. When the upstart nat-pop right demanded that the GOP abandon “zombie Reaganism,” who knew that what they had in mind was zombie Gephardtism?

Indeed, Trump the former Democrat talks like a 1990s Democrat, not a conservative.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/10/2025 @ 7:59 am

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/10/opinion/treasure-secretaries-doge-musk.html

Robert Rubin, Lawrence Summers, Timothy Geithner, Jacob Lew, Janet Yellen: DOGE Is a Threat to U.S. Democracy

No wonder the NY Times didn’t lead with the names and their affiliations.

NJRob (eb56c3) — 2/10/2025 @ 8:00 am

Paul – Metropolitan. Their supplier is Wilcox family farms. (I bought a dozen for that price, yesterday.)

I’m familiar. Been to the one in West Seattle, but I’m in the county to the north and the closest store is Crown Hill. Nice store.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/10/2025 @ 8:05 am

The 55MPH speed limit was imposed by the threat of withholding highway funds. Congress could make similar quids pro quo apply to immigration law.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:33 pm

Placing conditions on spending (either by Congress or the Executive Branch) has its own set of constitutional issues.

The Court today judges the constitutional validity of federal spending using five factors. First, Congress must unambiguously identify conditions attached to federal funds. Second, Congress must refrain from offers of funds that coerce acceptance of funding conditions. Third, spending must be in pursuit of the general welfare. Fourth, conditions on federal funds must relate to the federal interest in a program. Finally, a funding condition may not induce conduct on the part of the funds recipient that is itself unconstitutional.
………

For example, President Trump has said he will condition wildfire aid to California unless they adopt voter ID laws and changes in water management, both clearly unrelated to federal aid for disaster relief. Trump in his first term had a mixed record (1-3 at the court of appeals level) in this attempt to withhold federal funds from sanctuary cities; and the Supreme Court dismissed all the appeals.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:10 am

The @DOGE team just discovered that FEMA sent $59M LAST WEEK to luxury hotels in New York City to house illegal migrants.

If true, especially that the migrants don’t have a Biden waiver, then it’s a conspiracy between FEMA, NYC officials and the hotel, to violate 8 USC 1324.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:21 am

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 7:34 pm

Spoiler Sammy for the win.

It wasn’t guaranteed at the time when it was 27-0, but the crowd was leaving.

(I had only watched a bit at around a half hour into the game. The score was 0-0. Then Philadelphia scored a touchdown, making it 0-6. Except that Fox (or the officials) then retracted the call, and said it was first and 1.

Then they scored a touchdown for real with Fox saying it was almost impossible to defend against and impossible for Kansas City to practice for. Then it quickly became 0-7)

I was only hearing brief mentions on the radio by Curtis Sliwa. Sliwa had announced it was 24-0 and then I wanted to watch the last episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation on Heroes and Icons on Channel 9-4 but the reception wasn’t working so I switched to Channel 5-1 (Fox) and saw that Philadelphia score or had just scored a field goal, making it 27-0

I turned off the TV and went back to the radio,

according to Curtis Sliwa The score got to be 40-0 in the 3rd quarter, (which seems to be wrong because KC scored 6 points when Philadelphia had 34) and then 40-14. Final score: 40-22.

Sammy Finkelman (b2ec1f) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:23 am

@160:

But conditioning Medicaid on the state not providing health care to illegal immigrants would be valid, were it included in the Medicaid appropriation bill. Similarly, grants to police forces could be withheld for refusing to assist ICE investigations, again if included in the appropriation.

It will be interesting to see what the Senate Democrats do if such a condition is attached to Medicaid funding on a take it or leave it basis.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:26 am

The point, Sammy, is that nobody likes spoilers.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:28 am

The @DOGE team just discovered that FEMA sent $59M LAST WEEK to luxury hotels in New York City to house illegal migrants.

If true, especially that the migrants don’t have a Biden waiver, then it’s a conspiracy between FEMA, NYC officials and the hotel, to violate 8 USC 1324.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:21 am

Or the payments are allowed by law.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:43 am

But conditioning Medicaid on the state not providing health care to illegal immigrants would be valid, were it included in the Medicaid appropriation bill. Similarly, grants to police forces could be withheld for refusing to assist ICE investigations, again if included in the appropriation.

It will be interesting to see what the Senate Democrats do if such a condition is attached to Medicaid funding on a take it or leave it basis.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:26 am

Congress could change the Medicaid rules, but I would think the Democrats would vote against and filibuster any bill that imposes restrictions on funding. Given the narrow Republican House majority, such a restriction may not even pass the House.

This is why the states should favor the transfer of the entire program to themselves and remove federal government funding entirely.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:06 am

The Gulf of America is sloshing full of dead chickens. (Or do we incinerate them- those feathers have got to stink)

Trump could issue an EO telling Bobby Kennedy (for laughs) and Brooke Rollins at the Department of Agriculture to vaccinate all birds involved in domestic egg production.
(European markets are anti-vaxxers)

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:07 am

Wow.

Did THIS blog ever go to hell.

Tex Lovera (30e140) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:19 am

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:26 am

It will be interesting to see what the Senate Democrats do if such a condition is attached to Medicaid funding on a take it or leave it basis.

Filibuster if they can.
This provision contradicts EMLATA (or is it EMTALA?), passed in 1986, which requires emergency medical treatment (and treatment of women in labor) as a condition of receiving payments from Medicare (or Medicaid?).

https://www.acep.org/life-as-a-physician/ethics–legal/emtala/emtala-fact-sheet

A patient is typically required to provide insurance and payment information before seeing a doctor. But, emergency departments are unique—anyone who has an emergency must be treated or stabilized, regardless of their insurance status or ability to pay. The patient protection that makes this possible is a federal law known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA).

https://www.cms.gov/medicare/regulations-guidance/legislation/emergency-medical-treatment-labor-act

Section 1867 of the Social Security Act imposes specific obligations on Medicare-participating hospitals that offer emergency services to provide a medical screening examination (MSE) when a request is made for examination or treatment for an emergency medical condition (EMC), including active labor, regardless of an individual’s ability to pay. Hospitals are then required to provide stabilizing treatment for patients with EMCs. If a hospital is unable to stabilize a patient within its capability, or if the patient requests, an appropriate transfer should be implemented.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Medical_Treatment_and_Active_Labor_Act

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA)[1] is an act of the United States Congress, passed in 1986 as part of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA).

It requires hospital emergency departments that accept payments from Medicare to provide an appropriate medical screening examination (MSE) for anyone seeking treatment for a medical condition regardless of citizenship, legal status, or ability to pay. Participating hospitals may not transfer or discharge patients needing emergency treatment except with the informed consent or stabilization of the patient or when the patient’s condition requires transfer to a hospital better equipped to administer the treatment.[1]

EMTALA applies to “participating hospitals”. The statute defines participating hospitals as those that accept payment from the Department of Health and Human Services’, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) under the Medicare program.[2] Because there are very few hospitals that do not accept Medicare, the law applies to nearly all hospitals. The combined payments of Medicare and Medicaid, $602 billion in 2004,[3] or roughly 44% of all medical expenditures in the United States, make not participating in EMTALA impractical for nearly all hospitals. EMTALA’s provisions apply to all patients, not just to Medicare patients.[4][5]

The cost of emergency care required by EMTALA is not covered directly by the federal government, so it has been characterized as an unfunded mandate.[6] In 2009, uncompensated care represents 55% of emergency room care, and 6% of total hospital costs.[7]

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:23 am

If neither the federal government nor the state pays anything for treatment of certain individuals who cannot pay, many hospitals could close or go bankrupt or they may possibly raise their charges for others.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:26 am

We are on the cusp of the Trump Administration declaring that they have the power of the purse and the Courts do not have the authority to stop them. JD Vance was certainly floating that trial balloon yesterday, and there did not seem to be as much shock and outrage as there should have been.

That simple declaration, signed by a sharpie, renders a lot of these conversations moot. If the president has the power to spend or not spend despite what Congress might have said, and the Courts have nothing to say in the matter, then Trump can do what he wants until his term ends. Whenever that is.

I’m sure that leaving the Constitution a smoldering ruin is nothing compared to the Freedom Caucus getting its all non-spending priorities stuffed into the government.

Appalled (16d982) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:27 am

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:28 am

The point, Sammy, is that nobody likes spoilers.

I didn’t realize that anybody could be recording this for watching later

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:28 am

By the way, some folks on the left think JD won’t get his wish just yet:

https://www.emptywheel.net/2025/02/10/rule-of-law-dont-obey-in-advance-but-also-dont-give-up-in-advance/

I would like the lloyds and whemblys and njrobs to consider what we are looking at with JD’s tweet. And try to reconcile it with their sanguine belief that Trump is trying for extra-constitutional powers.

Appalled (16d982) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:33 am

Appalled (16d982) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:27 am

I’m sure that leaving the Constitution a smoldering ruin is nothing compared to the Freedom Caucus getting its all non-spending priorities stuffed into the government.

Congress cold legislate (if there were the votes for it) that unless money is spent on X no money is appropriated for Y.

In the short run, a president can delay or suspend spending, or redirect it if the law is vague,

Trump can arrange not to mint more pennies this year, because the law probably does not require it, but he cannot authorize a permanent stop.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:33 am

Sorry whembly, lloyd and njrob. I think you guys do not believe Trump is trying for extra-constitutional powers. I don’t think you guys would be ok with that. But you can tell me I am wrong.

Appalled (16d982) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:35 am

nk (87e620) — 2/9/2025 @ 9:48 am

I do want somebody, ANYBODY, to hold accountable the creeps who ordered a military drill in the country’s most crowded civilian air corridor (and the nation’s capital to boot).

They’ve been doing that for years. It had to be – well maybe this particular one didn’t need to be – it was a re-certification for the co-pilot – because the training was specifically for the nation’s capital But, as I said, certain contingencies should not be practiced for.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/feb/01/army-helicopter-dc-plane-crash-continuity-of-government-drill

Helicopter involved in fatal Washington plane crash was on army training drill

Secretary of defense says mission was for evacuating government officials in the event of a catastrophe or attack

Edward Helmore
Sat 1 Feb 2025 10.24 EST

…The US secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, told Fox News that the helicopter was performing a “continuity of government” drill designed to help pilots “rehearse in ways that would reflect a real-world scenario”.

Hegseth declined to elaborate, saying he didn’t want to get “into anything that’s classified”.

….Hegseth’s comments correlate with comments by Jonathan Koziol, chief of staff for the army’s aviation directorate, who told reporters on Thursday that “some of their mission is to support the Department of Defense if something really bad happens in this area, and we need to move our senior leaders.

“They do need to be able to understand the environment, the air traffic, the routes, to ensure the safe travel of our senior leaders throughout our government,” Koziol added.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:49 am

@173

By the way, some folks on the left think JD won’t get his wish just yet:

https://www.emptywheel.net/2025/02/10/rule-of-law-dont-obey-in-advance-but-also-dont-give-up-in-advance/

I would like the lloyds and whemblys and njrobs to consider what we are looking at with JD’s tweet. And try to reconcile it with their sanguine belief that Trump is trying for extra-constitutional powers.

Appalled (16d982) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:33 am

Yo.

You need to explain what’s objectionable from JD’s tweet.

K.thx.bye.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/10/2025 @ 12:16 pm

@175

Sorry whembly, lloyd and njrob. I think you guys do not believe Trump is trying for extra-constitutional powers. I don’t think you guys would be ok with that. But you can tell me I am wrong.

Appalled (16d982) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:35 am

I understood your ask initially. 😉

A better question is this: What’s your opinion on the Unitary Executive Theory?
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/unitary_executive_theory_%28uet%29

Because if you want to enshrine that theory under judicial laws and precedent…keep on suing Trump.

Trump’s opponent can’t help themselves, generally. Look to the future Presidencies…

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/10/2025 @ 12:20 pm

Sorry whembly, lloyd and njrob. I think you guys do not believe Trump is trying for extra-constitutional powers. I don’t think you guys would be ok with that. But you can tell me I am wrong.

Appalled (16d982) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:35 am

Telling the Secretary of Treasury he doesn’t have control over his department and is just a ceremonial figurehead is not a legitimate role of the court.

NJRob (a17a8c) — 2/10/2025 @ 12:29 pm

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/9/2025 @ 11:23 am

I wonder if they had a time-window to do it when there were no Congressmen scheduled to be landing. Can you imagine the number of heads that would roll if someone “important” had died.

I doubt that they planned things that well.

The odds were against a mid-air collision The approach to that runway is less used. The helicopter was not supposed to fly in a way that intersected the glide path to the runway but it was too high and too far to the west and somebody did not warn the pilots about using the night vision goggles in that location. Of course we’ve got ignoramuses blaming Donald Trump not just for lining it to DEI (the defenders of that say well, yes the controllers on duty were good, but maybe the FAA didn’t hire enough controllers because they wanted to keep the spaces open for disabled or LGTBQ people or whatever – nothing is said to support that idea)

Anyway they also imply he was wrong to blame to the helicopter pilot but that’s perfectly reasonable..

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 12:35 pm

Hi whembly,

JD said this:

If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal.

If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that’s also illegal.

Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.

It’s a subtweet of the RI judge’s decision, I believe. The word “legitimate” in JD’s tweet is doing some work, here. I assume JD believes the DOGE incursion into Treasury was legitimate, therefore the judge has no right to suspend it. But it’s not JD and Musk and Trump who has the right, under the constitution, to make that determination. Until that determination is made by the courts, action needs to be suspended, so further damage is not done.

As for the unitary theory — I don’t necessarily like it on principle, but the progressive era’s love of nonpartisan commissions came at a time when love/respect of the Constitution may have been at its lowest ebb. So maybe the unitary theory is what adheres best to what the founder had in mind. Gonna leave that one to the lawyers. Trump’s folks want to litigate this one and they will have the opportunity.

The unitary theory, however, really does not govern the separation of powers, which is what is at play here. DOGE is simply impounding payments mandated by Congress, which is an infringement on Congressional spending power. The courts are calling them on it — and have the authority under the Constitution to do so. Trump can appeal all the way to the Supremes and likely will. If he defies the Courts, he has the physical power to do so (since the Federal Marshals who would enforce any decision work for him), but the Constitution has just been shredded in a very fundamental way.

Appalled (16d982) — 2/10/2025 @ 12:40 pm

Judge finds Trump administration violated court order halting funding freeze
………..
U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell handed down the order after the plaintiffs in the case, a coalition of 22 states, said the government had not restored funding in several programs despite his Jan. 31 order temporarily halting the wide-ranging Office of Management and Budget directive that had caused chaos and confusion across the country.

“The States have presented evidence in this motion that the Defendants in some cases have continued to improperly freeze federal funds and refused to resume disbursement of appropriated federal funds,” McConnell wrote, even though his order lifting the freeze had been “clear and unambiguous.”
………..
Justice Department lawyers argued in a court filing that they didn’t believe the order covered some of the frozen funding and that some of the funding at issue is under review to make sure it’s “appropriate.

“The Defendants now plea that they are just trying to root out fraud. But the freezes in effect now were a result of the broad categorical order, not a specific finding of possible fraud,” McConnell wrote. “The broad categorical and sweeping freeze of federal funds is, as the Court found, likely unconstitutional and has caused and continues to cause irreparable harm to a vast portion of this country.”

He said the “pauses in funding violate the plain text” of the temporary restraining order he issued on Jan. 31, and ordered that funding be immediately restored for the duration of the time his TRO is in effect. The order is expected to remain in place until at least a hearing on a preliminary injunction later this month.
……….
In his ruling last month, McConnell found those directives appeared to fall outside the scope of the president’s authority.
……….

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 12:42 pm

Post 182 should have been block quoted.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 12:43 pm

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:49 am

My question is why were commercial aircraft allowed to be in an area during a military training exercise.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 12:45 pm

The cuts would reduce employment numbers to 294,

They have since raised this to a higher number in the 600s

Secretary of State Marco Rubio is issuing exceptions and waivers but he’s finding that he needs to do that 2 or 3 times to get things back. And he’s issuing waivers on the orders to return – there are children in school, and pets they can’t get the right to take to the US in time and then there’s one family member who requires emergency evacuation but the U.S. won’t pay for transport unless the laid off employee returns home to – without a place to go to and abandoning all his or her possessions

Some things USAID finances are good, like supplying firewood to people in certain parts of Ukraine near the front line where the utility system has been destroyed, or broadcasting in Congo to warn people where an army is coming, or supporting aid t a refugee camp – which latter is probably also part of a diplomatic negotiation – and there’s a long list of complaints by members of Congress like Senator Joni Ernst about USAID. Details had to be dragged out of USAID. It’s things like paying for overhead of people they give money to – sometimes over 50% was allocated – or using cutouts to aid the Wuhan lab in years past or even people who engaged in sex trafficking, or sending models from Ukraine to shows in Europe.

And then Russia contributes and gets circulating distortions like about $8 million in special Politico subscriptions. The number is real but
comes from all across the U.S. government – the rebuttals say USAID only pent $24,000 (is that a discount rate for 3 accounts?) but don’t mention the subscriptions are real.

Then, a lot of the complaints about Panama are not real.

dd.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 12:53 pm

Trump to pause enforcement of law banning bribery of foreign officials

President Donald Trump is set Monday to sign an executive order directing the Department of Justice to pause enforcing a nearly half-century-old law that prohibits American companies and foreign firms from bribing officials of foreign governments to obtain or retain business.

The pause in criminal prosecutions will be implemented to avoid putting U.S. businesses at an economic disadvantage to foreign competitors.

………. Bloomberg reported that Trump will tell Attorney General Pam Bondi to pause FCPA actions, and to review current and past actions related to the law, while preparing new guidelines for enforcement.
……….
The FCPA became law in 1977, barring all Americans and certain foreign issuers of securities from paying bribes to foreign officials. The law was amended in 1998 to apply to foreign firms and people who caused such bribes to take place within the United States.

The broadly written law applies not only to direct bribes that are paid, but also to bribes that are offered or planned or authorized by a company’s management.
………..

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 12:53 pm

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 12:45 pm

My question is why were commercial aircraft allowed to be in an area during a military training exercise.

That’s where they supposed to be!

The near space of the airport was only a small part of the helicopter flight route, which was along the Potomac south to north. Helicopters regularly flew there. It’s one of several designated helicopter routes.

The thing is this might have been to test their skill without all the usual precautions against accidents and using visual flight rules not instrument — and with the “precaution” of wearing night vision goggles which in the right circumstances can make things worse.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 12:59 pm

I doubt any “neighboring country” will cooperate with Trump’s plan:

President Trump said Palestinians wouldn’t have the right to return to Gaza under his new plan to rebuild the territory, adding that they would get “much better housing” instead in neighboring countries.

“In other words, I’m talking about building a permanent place for them because if they have to return now, it’ll be years before you could ever—it’s not habitable,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News’s Bret Baier that was conducted before Sunday’s Super Bowl. “It would be years before it could happen.”

The president’s latest comments come after White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters last week that any Palestinian relocation would be temporary. ……..

Asked by Baier if displaced Palestinians would have the right to return to Gaza, Trump said, “No, they wouldn’t.”

In the Fox News interview, Trump also appeared to suggest that Gaza would belong to him and compared it to a real-estate project.

“We’ll build safe communities, a little bit away from where they are, where all of this danger is,” he said. “In the meantime, I would own this. Think of it as a real-estate development for the future. It would be a beautiful piece of land. No big money spent.”
………..
The White House didn’t immediately respond to a request for a comment on whether the president would personally own the territory or if Palestinians would be permanently displaced.
##########

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:04 pm

My question is why were commercial aircraft allowed to be in an area during a military training exercise.

That’s where they supposed to be!

Obviously it’s too dangerous for commercial aircraft to be in training zones. Flights should be re-routed to BWI or Dulles.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:05 pm

ICE has a leak problem. Their plans to conduct a large scale sweep in Chicago immediately after the inauguration were thwarted by a leak of plans to the Wall Street Journal.

The leak resulted in the sweep being delayed until January 26th and allowed pro-illegal immigration groups to organize and harass federal authorities.

If they leak, then they’re not bring thwarted by Biden or Mayorkas.

Trump’s “border czar,” Tom Homan, this week blamed the leak of an immigration operation in Aurora, Colo., as having reduced the number of arrests of Tren de Aragua gang members and other criminals.

The leak didn’t necessarily take place in Aurora.

It could have come from within ICE and could be the result of bribery – except that bribers were careful to make the upcoming raids more widely known so that suspicion would not be directed at themselves.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:06 pm

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:04 pm

More from the Fox interview:

Trump told Baier he wants to build a permanent residence for the millions of Palestinians currently living in Gaza, which he said is not currently habitable after the 16-month-long war between Hamas and Israel.

“I’m talking about starting to build and I think I could make a deal with Jordan. I think I could make a deal with Egypt. You know, we give them billions and billions of dollars a year,” he said, implying that he could try to build a permanent home for Palestinians in those two Arab countries.

The feasibility of this plan is unclear: Hamas, which governs the region, has said it will not turn over control. Officials from Egypt and Jordan have also repeatedly refused to accept Palestinian refugees from Gaza, arguing that the transfer of large numbers of refugees into their countries could risk the conflict expanding even further across the region.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:10 pm

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:05 pm

Obviously it’s too dangerous for commercial aircraft to be in training zones. Flights should be re-routed to BWI or Dulles.

The training is for familiarity with the Washington, D.C. area without using instruments.

Now it was said by someone that the flight should have taken place at 1:30 am not 8:30 pm.

It’s been theorized that air ambulance crash in Philadelphia might have been caused by imbalance in weight – if stretcher rolled to the back because it was put in without being secured. And I guess you might also add the factor of where the passengers in that helicopter were. The pilots and all passengers were from Mexico and maybe not experienced or familiar enough.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:11 pm

It could have come from within ICE and could be the result of bribery – except that bribers were careful to make the upcoming raids more widely known so that suspicion would not be directed at themselves.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:06 pm

Or by sympathetic law enforcement in those communities that were notified by ICE of the upcoming raids. That’s why grand juries are needed to question the reporters.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:11 pm

The training is for familiarity with the Washington, D.C. area without using instruments.

Now it was said by someone that the flight should have taken place at 1:30 am not 8:30 pm.

It doesn’t matter what the training was for, commercial jets shouldn’t be there during any Army helicopter activity.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:13 pm

You said at #72 that ICE has a leak problem. But whoever leaked it, and if this is not the only and first leak, it’s likely to be at ICE, it may be a bribery problem.

It was also cancelled in Chicago.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:17 pm

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:13 pm

It doesn’t matter what the training was for, commercial jets shouldn’t be there during any Army helicopter activity.

Blackhawk helicopters are there a;; the time.

They are not supposed to cross the path of airliners, especially because a height restriction.

But when planes take off and land they go to a low height. Still they are not supposed to intersect because of a geographical restriction.

But the helicopter co-pilot must have been a bit disoriented and the ATC system that the ATC sees rounds heights to the nearest 100 feet and the collision avoidance system in the helicopter ws turned off and the co-pilot, whose skills were being tested, was relying on visual flight with night goggles to help

.=========

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:22 pm

Oh, and the ATC supervisor let a ATC leave early for the day. And there was probably no novice given of the planned helicopter flight.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:25 pm

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:17 pm

Since ICE is the lead agency for the immigration actions, any leak, even from an associated law enforcement organization, impacts ICE’s operations. The motivations are unclear, it could be bribery but as I said, sympathetic law enforcement personnel could have just as easily leaked the information. But that is what grand juries are for.

The Chicago operation wasn’t cancelled, it was rescheduled and conducted during the week of January 26th.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:27 pm

HE WSJ most likely did not learn about the upcoming raid directly from a government official but a third party. And Homan was boasting too because he wanted people to bend the knee more than success..

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:29 pm

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:22 pm

It’s much easier to re-route a flight to BWI or Dulles than hoping that helicopters maintain a safe altitude or distance from commercial aircraft. They are a hazard that can be easily removed so that Army pilots (or ATC controllers) can focus on the mission and not some jetliner.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:33 pm

WSJ most likely did not learn about the upcoming raid directly from a government official but a third party.

Placing the WSJ reporters under oath in a grand jury would be the easiest way of finding out.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 1:35 pm

Today I learned a new phrase:

Moral imbecile.

Organically incapable of knowing the difference between right and wrong.

nk (bf6123) — 2/10/2025 @ 2:32 pm

@170

If neither the federal government nor the state pays anything for treatment of certain individuals who cannot pay, many hospitals could close or go bankrupt or they may possibly raise their charges for others.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:26 am

Take a look at Mayor Johnson’s “sanctuary city” of Denver, Colorado. Check out the budget deficit of Denver’s main “take everyone” hospital:
https://denverite.com/2023/09/22/denver-health-budget-uncompensated-care-costs/

ColoComment (bcaebf) — 2/10/2025 @ 2:56 pm

NY democrats delay stephanik replacement election till november. Democrats finally playing hard ball! Dump said gas prices would go down. Just paid 31 cents a gallon more!

asset (a55d48) — 2/10/2025 @ 2:57 pm

hocul says democrat donors don’t want anger trump may not delay vote.

asset (a55d48) — 2/10/2025 @ 3:11 pm

@181

Hi whembly,

JD said this:

If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal.

If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that’s also illegal.

Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.

It’s a subtweet of the RI judge’s decision, I believe. The word “legitimate” in JD’s tweet is doing some work, here. I assume JD believes the DOGE incursion into Treasury was legitimate, therefore the judge has no right to suspend it. But it’s not JD and Musk and Trump who has the right, under the constitution, to make that determination. Until that determination is made by the courts, action needs to be suspended, so further damage is not done.

Yes, “legitimate” is the key word to JD’s thinking.

In this case, because it’s really not an acute issue that demands action, the proper response is to go up the Appellate/SCOTUS level and demand a mandamus that overturns this judge’s TRO.

However, if it *is* an acute issue (current case notwithstanding), then if an Article II branch deems an Article III ruling as “illegitimate”, Article II branch can try to defy the courts. Which is not that unusual in our history.

As for the unitary theory — I don’t necessarily like it on principle, but the progressive era’s love of nonpartisan commissions came at a time when love/respect of the Constitution may have been at its lowest ebb. So maybe the unitary theory is what adheres best to what the founder had in mind. Gonna leave that one to the lawyers. Trump’s folks want to litigate this one and they will have the opportunity.

Every administration, Democrat or Republican, champions this theory.

Every opposition to the administration, hems and haws at this theory.

The big picture here is this: Right now, it’s a theory and it’s a defacto operational status quo.

If you want to rein in this theory, what you DON’T want to do is to create controversies in a way that brings this issue to the Appellate/SCOTUS courts because the end result just may be that these courts would simply codify the theory under judicial jurisprudence.

The unitary theory, however, really does not govern the separation of powers, which is what is at play here. DOGE is simply impounding payments mandated by Congress, which is an infringement on Congressional spending power.

No, you’re going to have to explain exactly what DOGE is doing that is being labeled as “impoundment”.

The courts are calling them on it — and have the authority under the Constitution to do so. Trump can appeal all the way to the Supremes and likely will. If he defies the Courts, he has the physical power to do so (since the Federal Marshals who would enforce any decision work for him), but the Constitution has just been shredded in a very fundamental way.

Appalled (16d982) — 2/10/2025 @ 12:40 pm

Of course they’re going to appeal, and it’s likely that they’ll prevail too.

But, take a step back… humor me please.

No matter WHAT *I* or *YOU* think of the merits of all the lawfare cases Trump faced during the runup of his election. One of the end result is SCOTUS codifying what kinds of immunity POTUS enjoys. Historically, POTUS was treated implicitly of having immunity, but left a lot of grey areas for interpretation. NOW? SCOTUS explicitly defined the kinds of immunity POTUS enjoys, much to the dismay of those who advocates for a “weaker” Article II executive.

If you don’t want SCOTUS to codify the Unitary Executive Theory… you might not want to bring a controversy where they’re forced to make a decision.

Just saying…

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/10/2025 @ 3:15 pm

Roberts will probably politely suggest that if Congress wants to corral a strong Executive, it should write better laws and assert itself as a more unified body. If it wants to control the purse tightly, it should pass budgets containing specifics, not continuing resolutions.
Congress is allocating funds in a way that is open to interpretation- and who better to interpret than the Executive via his appointed and approved Secretary.

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/10/2025 @ 3:16 pm

whembly

I’d say they should probably not open the lawfare by trying to claim that the Secretary of the Treasury cannot audit the Treasury.

One thing Trump is doing is ham-handedly taking on common-sense initiatives (we are $36T in debt and need to take a deep dive into it) and watching his opponents reflexively double down in opposition.
Polling suggests that even Democrats don’t favor $20M for SW Asian drag shows.

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/10/2025 @ 3:29 pm

Part of me thinks many of such actions ARE designed to garner these legal responses, just to get an absolute judicial resolution.

ie, Birthright Citizenship, DOGE audits, etc…

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/10/2025 @ 3:36 pm

…but I was told by some here that Trump is a Russian stooge?!?
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/if-trumps-such-a-pawn-of-moscow-why-are-the-russians-so-upset/

And now, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov is characterizing U.S.–Russian relations as “balancing on the brink of a breakup.”

Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told a media conference Monday that relations with Washington “are balancing on the brink of a breakup” and reiterated that the war in Ukraine would last until Kyiv drops its ambitions to join NATO and withdraws from the four regions occupied by Russian forces.

In remarks suggesting Moscow is maintaining its tough negotiating stance, Ryabkov said that “we simply imperatively need to get … the new U.S. administration to understand and acknowledge that without resolving the problems that are the root causes of the crisis in Ukraine, it will not be possible to reach an agreement.”

Ryabkov’s comments are posturing and saber-rattling, no doubt, but also an indicator that Trump has, so far, not put a deal on the table that interests Putin and the Kremlin.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/10/2025 @ 3:43 pm

Whembly, do you always take statements by the kremlin at face value?

Time123 (0c2624) — 2/10/2025 @ 3:54 pm

@211

Whembly, do you always take statements by the kremlin at face value?

Time123 (0c2624) — 2/10/2025 @ 3:54 pm

Yeah Time, I’m such a putinista.

GFY.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/10/2025 @ 4:01 pm

Whembly, do you always take statements by the kremlin at face value?

Time123 (0c2624) — 2/10/2025 @ 3:54 pm

When it works against Trump, the usual suspects post it here as fact that Trump is in bed with Putin.

So how about calling actually balls and strikes Time instead of only calling out one side.

NJRob (a17a8c) — 2/10/2025 @ 4:10 pm

@NJRob@213 Looked into you link from the morning. According to the NY Post, it turns out Musk was not being truthful and the fed is very much NOT giving NYC 59 million dollars to pay luxury hotels to house people here illegally.

Nic (120c94) — 2/10/2025 @ 4:36 pm

The “luxury hotels” was the second tell for me that it was a lie.

(The first being that it came from Musk.)

Luxury hotels do not take vagrants.

nk (bf6123) — 2/10/2025 @ 4:51 pm

I’m interested in hearing the rationale for shutting down the CFPB. The agency brings in more money than it spends, which would seem to put it outside of Elon’s wheelhouse.

Davethulhu (601f61) — 2/10/2025 @ 4:58 pm

NY Post says NY City Council “disputes”. One thing the don’t dispute is that they got $59M from FEMA for that was used for immigrants shelter and services

So if you look into it NYC starts saying stuff.

“We never were told funding was to be stopped’
“Only $19M of the $59M went to the hotels- the rest was for food, security,etc etc”
“Hotels are not luxury”

https://www.nbc4i.com/news/national/ap-us-news/ap-fema-says-its-halting-payments-for-migrant-housing-in-new-york-after-musk-blasts-money-for-hotels/

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/10/2025 @ 4:59 pm

I didn’t realize that anybody could be recording this for watching later

Everyone has a DVR or their streaming service has one for them. Lots of reasons to watch it late, like work, or wifely scheduling. Some people just start games late to FF through the commercials.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 4:59 pm

This provision contradicts EMLATA (or is it EMTALA?), passed in 1986, which requires emergency medical treatment (and treatment of women in labor) as a condition of receiving payments from Medicare (or Medicaid?).

And a new law can override that. If your argument is that courts won’t allow it, based on “fairness” or some such notion, then the courts have overstepped. Again.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:02 pm

Justice Department Orders Prosecutors to Drop Eric Adams Bribery Case

Federal prosecutors charged Adams in September with taking illegal campaign contributions from Turkey and accepting $100,000 in travel and hotel perks in exchange for official acts. Adams, the first sitting mayor to be indicted in New York City’s modern history, had been scheduled to go to trial in April on five criminal counts, including bribery, fraud and soliciting contributions from foreign nationals.

The Justice Department, under new leadership appointed by President Trump, issued the order after holding discussions with Adams’s legal team and the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office. Justice Department officials said in a memo to prosecutors that the indictment had interfered with the mayor’s ability to participate in Trump’s immigration enforcement.

The mayor, a Democrat who is running for re-election, had denied any wrongdoing and said his indictment was politically motivated. ……..
………..

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:05 pm

Or the payments are allowed by law.

For illegal aliens? Doubtful. This is just a misappropriation; money spent without Congressional authorization.

Not the difference between this and rescission. The latter is saying “Spending this money is a total waste and I, the Executive, decline. We’ll leave it in the treasury.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:09 pm

But whoever leaked it, and if this is not the only and first leak, it’s likely to be at ICE, it may be a bribery problem.

More like election denial.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:13 pm

Roberts will probably politely suggest that if Congress wants to corral a strong Executive, it should write better laws and assert itself as a more unified body. If it wants to control the purse tightly, it should pass budgets containing specifics, not continuing resolutions.
Congress is allocating funds in a way that is open to interpretation- and who better to interpret than the Executive via his appointed and approved Secretary.

The constitution says that no funds may be spent unless appropriated by Congress. But nowhere does it say that all funds appropriated MUST be spent. That is judge-made law backing a Congressional power-grab in 1974 when Nixon was grappling with Watergate.

The idea that the President can decline to spend funds he views as wasteful or counterproductive is nowhere barred in the Constitution. He is not a robot and his duties in this are not simply ministerial.

Trump is going to force the court to consider this. The lower courts have to follow Train, but the Supremes can argue it again and decide differently.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:23 pm

Suppose that Congress has appropriated funds for a purpose that is later seen as criminal or fraudulent, or to recipients who are crooks. Must the president disburse them robotically?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:26 pm

“Garcia said the city has never paid luxury rates. The vast majority are outside Manhattan, and the government has paid on average $152 a night for rooms, according to a 2024 city comptroller report. In comparison, 5-star hotels in Manhattan for the coming weekend run from $400 a night to well over $1,000.”

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:27 pm

#220 That Justice Department decision reminds me of this commutation:

Starting in December 2008, a federal investigation and trial found [Governor Rod] Blagojevich guilty of public corruption after he attempted to sell the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Barack Obama upon his election to the presidency. Blagojevich was impeached, convicted, and removed from office in 2009 by the Illinois General Assembly. He was also subsequently barred by the Illinois Senate from holding public office within the state ever again. For his role in the corruption scandal, Blagojevich was sentenced to 14 years in federal prison. President Donald Trump formally commuted his sentence in 2020, after Blagojevich had been imprisoned for nearly eight years.

(Links omitted.)

And of more general problems in the Loser’s home town.

Jim Miller (05a9b2) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:29 pm

@steveg@217 The money was for a year of various services for between 46,000 and 230,000 immigrants. Which is from between 200-1000 per person for an entire year and is therefore not a case of extravagance.

Nic (120c94) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:37 pm

Jim Miller (05a9b2) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:29 pm

Funny you should mention Blagojevich……Trump finished the job:

Trump pardons former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:39 pm

RIP cult (and best-selling) novelist (“Even Cowgirls Get the Blues”)Tom Robbins (92).

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:52 pm

I am pretty sure Congress could write a tight spending bill that specifies how and when the money shall be spent, but they don’t. The Executive branch could veto if the bill is corrupt, or have the DOJ sue if that doesn’t work.

We have a really weak legislative branch that is fractured sharply along party lines. Congress works best when the moderates work together now and then.

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:54 pm

#228 Rip – Thanks. The timing of the pardon is interesting.

Jim Miller (05a9b2) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:56 pm

#227 Nic – Thanks for the info.

Jim Miller (05a9b2) — 2/10/2025 @ 5:57 pm

Whembly, do you always take statements by the kremlin at face value?

Time123 (0c2624) — 2/10/2025 @ 3:54 pm

Yeah Time, I’m such a putinista.

GFY.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/10/2025 @ 4:01 pm

That was uncalled for, whembly. You’re better than that.

Time is one the most centrist, reasonable people here.

norcal (a72384) — 2/10/2025 @ 6:08 pm

@233 He flat out claiming that I’m a putinista.

No.

That is not a reasonable position and you white-knighting him, rather than calling out an outrageous position tells me more about you too.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/10/2025 @ 6:18 pm

Nic

If you run the numbers using $152 a night plus food, security, other services you will see that the $59M for 46,000 people constant number is likely for a 7 day week of services billed within the timeframe of a year
59,000,000/46,000 = $1282 week
1282 / 7 = $183 day

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/10/2025 @ 6:20 pm

@Jim@232 No problem

@steveg@235 Could be, though the 46,000 seems to be on the low end. My homeless kiddos who sometimes stay in hotels (usually in combo with couch surfing, staying with friends, staying with relatives, nights in the car) are paying abt 100 a night in a much less pricey area. The cost to NYC isn’t in the extravagant range, even if it’s money that you or I wouldn’t necessarily choose to spend, so Musk was just being dramatic for the purposes of drama.

Nic (120c94) — 2/10/2025 @ 6:37 pm

You misunderstood, I was teasing you for taking the gremlin statement at face value. When it’s been clear for a long time that they’ll tell whatever lies is convenient for them at the moment and their public statements, bear relation to the truth, only coincidentally.

Time123 (5756e4) — 2/10/2025 @ 6:57 pm

Nic

Its not extravagant on a per diem basis, but my stepdaughter was temporarily (3 months) homeless due to Hurricane Helene water damage and she got 1/3 of a one time unrelated persons household grant of $750. A one time payment of $250 from FEMA- that is very much not extravagant- more like penurious. Her jobs washed away- the gym she worked at during the day disappeared, the bar she tended, the tables she waited went downriver. We do OK, so we could help her, but the others are still struggling and go crazy when they hear uninvited guests are getting $152 plus meals

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/10/2025 @ 7:01 pm

Drama is a big part of politics on both sides of the cliff we putsch grandma off of

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/10/2025 @ 7:05 pm

Then my question would be, why aren’t we supporting the rest of the people correctly? It doesn’t do any good just to leave people on the sidewalk of NYC so that they can cost us money in other ways, it would do us good to provide FEMA with a budget that would take care of both issues.

Nic (120c94) — 2/10/2025 @ 7:25 pm

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/10/2025 @ 6:18 pm

Whatever, whembly. Your reaction was way out of proportion.

I think you sometimes let your emotions get the better of your reason.

norcal (a72384) — 2/10/2025 @ 7:26 pm

@238 Not unlike the social media story that Chelsea Clinton received $84 million from USAID. Snopes (yeah, I know) debunked it. Big time. Turns out it was the Clinton Foundation and it was $7.5 million. So, the Clinton Foundation getting $7.5 million isn’t a story. The story is that someone on social media lied about it. OK, thank you fact checkers!

The Clinton Foundation got millions because they do great work and they just happen to have Clinton in the name. The same reason that got Chelsea a seat on the board of Expedia. Just normal stuff going on.

lloyd (4598b1) — 2/10/2025 @ 7:39 pm

Biden letting migrants in at a breakneck pace and paying millions to house them at reasonable rates isn’t a story. It would only be a story if it were luxury rates. LMFAO

lloyd (4598b1) — 2/10/2025 @ 7:51 pm

@lloyd@242, 243 It is, in fact, just normal stuff going on. Rich people (which includes senators) prefer to give to foundations of other rich people, preferably ones they know. They like to invite other rich people to sit on their boards. The money bubble is a semi-closed system. Yes, a problem that has been the same problem for 50 years is only a story if something extraordinary happens. Dog bites man isn’t a front page story.

Nic (120c94) — 2/10/2025 @ 8:24 pm

@244 And someone lying on social media isn’t normal, which is why that became the story. LOL

lloyd (4598b1) — 2/10/2025 @ 8:40 pm

You need to explain what’s objectionable from JD’s tweet.

The courts interpret the Constitution and rule on a president’s legitimate power, not Vance, not Trump. An Ivy Leaguer like Vance would know that.
Two, blowing off court rulings is unconstitutional under Marbury v. Madison. We have three co-equal branches of government, and stripping judicial review kills that balance of power, those checks and balances the Founders intended.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/10/2025 @ 8:52 pm

It’s a path to tyranny and, yes, fascism by the fascist in the Oval Office.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/10/2025 @ 9:01 pm

@lloyd@245 Most things Musk does are a story.

Nic (120c94) — 2/10/2025 @ 9:08 pm

If you jump onto the Trump bandwagon on immigration and such, you too could get your federal charges dropped for taking bribes from Turks. The corruption by this Trump-led DOJ is something else.

Meantime, Trump just made it okay for foreigners to bribe American companies and governmental officials, to the relief of Jared and the rest of the Trump family. The corruption by Trump is something else.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/10/2025 @ 9:37 pm

Correction. Trump paused a “half-century-old law that prohibits American companies and foreign firms from bribing officials of foreign governments to obtain or retain business.” Jared and the Trump family are still relieved.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:10 pm

The IRS allows business travelers a $233 per diem rate covering lodging, food and incidentals. While this is probably laughable in NYC, that’s what they allow. Any non-itemized reimbursement above that is taxable income to the employee.

Should the same government be providing better accommodations to immigrants? Pretty sure my Irish ancestors did not get that in 1850.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:38 pm

We have three co-equal branches of government, and stripping judicial review kills that balance of power, those checks and balances the Founders intended.

But that’s not what is going on. This is a full-court press to block the downsizing of US government, by making every action of the Executive a court fight. Now, maybe this is Trump’s karma, as he did this to everyone else in private life, but where does a court get off telling the president he cannot encourage voluntary RIFs? Where do they get off telling him that he cannot look at the books?

This is not based on the Constitution, this is rear guard action of the Administrative State attempting to run out the clock.

The rescissions are another matter and it will take the courts to overturn the 1974 mistake.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:44 pm

Shorter: the courts seem to think they are more equal than the other branches.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:45 pm

@250:

Thankfully, the law prohibiting foreign entities from bribing US officials, or seeking to bribe their relatives to influence them is still in effect. For most people. Biden paused that very narrowly.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 10:47 pm

When congress refuses to act the courts step in. Why? The court of last resort is not the supreme court ;but the street. Conservatives don’t like to factor that equation into their ayn randist/milton friedman utopia. The conservative said dred scott decision settles it. Capt. John Brown of Osawatomie kansas said hold my beer! Capitalism doesn’t like road blocks being set up by angry proletarians seeking justice. A good book on the subject is the social history of the machine gun. The people don’t have to win to make capitalism lose. Conservatives bring up fidel castro and ignore batista who preceeded him. They talk about hugo chavez ;but ignore what preceeded him. The capitalist deep state can’t afford to do that its bad for business. As JFK said those who make peaceful change impossible make violent revolution inevitable. How would conservatives delt with dred scott decision with out civil war?

asset (0698f6) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:29 pm

But that’s not what is going on.

It’s exactly what’s going on. Trump doesn’t have the authority to unilaterally cancel appropriations or defy court orders. There is another branch of government he needs to work with. It’s not trite to say that we’re a nation formed by a founding document and appended and modified by court rulings and statutory law.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:43 pm

As long as all the restrictions on Ukraine are taken off, I could be agreeable…

Ukraine has reportedly agreed to provide the U.S. with $500B worth of rare earth minerals in exchange for military aid, Trump claims.

“They can make a deal or not, become Russian or not, but our money is there. And I said I want it back.”

Trump also confirmed envoy Kellogg’s visit to Ukraine on Feb 20.

Except the part where Trump thinks that aid is a loan.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/10/2025 @ 11:55 pm

Andrew Jackson said let the courts enforce it! I.m sending the cherokees onto the trail of tears. Its been done before.

asset (0698f6) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:18 am

J. the “D” is for Dam’ If I Know (Why) Vance is impeachment insurance.

The Senate knows Vance by now, and no matter what they think of the merits of any impeachment case brought by the House, the thought of Vance as President will make them think twice.

The people too.

I give credit where credit is due and Trump’s choice of Vance for contingent successor may very well be the most genius thing he has ever done.

nk (462860) — 2/11/2025 @ 6:21 am

@237

You misunderstood, I was teasing you for taking the gremlin statement at face value. When it’s been clear for a long time that they’ll tell whatever lies is convenient for them at the moment and their public statements, bear relation to the truth, only coincidentally.

Time123 (5756e4) — 2/10/2025 @ 6:57 pm

Fair enough.

Apologies.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 6:48 am

@246

The courts interpret the Constitution and rule on a president’s legitimate power, not Vance, not Trump.

Actually…no.

All courts have, is their credibility. They have no enforcement wing.

If courts need enforcement, they ask the executive branch to do so, and because the courts have credibility and the executive branch is interested in maintaining constitutional order, they do so. The executive is co-equal to the judiciary.

But it’s a two-way street, and you would expect that there would be natural, normal tug & pull between the two branches.

That’s not what is happening here (specifically that NY and RI judge) and why it’s so dangerous for partisan judges to advocate for some slim Giant Orange Cheeto exception to treat the Trump administration so differently.

An Ivy Leaguer like Vance would know that.
Two, blowing off court rulings is unconstitutional under Marbury v. Madison. We have three co-equal branches of government, and stripping judicial review kills that balance of power, those checks and balances the Founders intended.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/10/2025 @ 8:52 pm

JD is pointing out that judges advocating for unconstitutional rulings undermines the constitutional order, such that the Executive Branch may have no choice but to ignore.

Frankly, he’s right.

Fortunately, the Trump DOJ seems more prepared for these sort of partisan court cases, and are using the appeals process.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 6:57 am

@249

If you jump onto the Trump bandwagon on immigration and such, you too could get your federal charges dropped for taking bribes from Turks. The corruption by this Trump-led DOJ is something else.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/10/2025 @ 9:37 pm

A case that only seems to happen when Adams took a stand against the Biden Administration’s immigration policies, that was affecting real harms to NYC.

See… that’s what Democrat does… if you’re an apostate to the Democrat leadership, then the Democrat turns the system against you.

I don’t know the veracity of the charges, but I will tell you that the timing stunk to high heavens.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 7:01 am

@ 246 Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/10/2025 @ 8:52 pm
Required reading buddy:
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/vance-is-right-about-the-limits-of-judicial-restraints-on-executive-power/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=homepage&utm_campaign=right-rail&utm_content=corner&utm_term=fourth

Of course, “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is,” as Chief Justice John Marshall famously observed in Marbury v. Madison (1803). But it is just as true that the Constitution does not make the Supreme Court the general overseer of our government. In theory, the judiciary is the least powerful branch because it has only judgment, not the purse or the sword. It is also the branch given the least responsibility for the conduct of government because, in a free, self-determining republic, most federal decisions are supposed to be made by politically accountable officials — members of Congress and the president, who answer to the people whose lives are affected by these decisions.

So, while the Court can and should say what it thinks the law is, we must always remember that the justices are “right” because they are final, not final because they are always right. As is well known, the high court has in its history reversed itself on a number of significant matters, often because prior rulings were egregiously wrong. And the Court has a doctrine — stare decisis, involving respect for precedent — a major aspect of which assumes that some decisions are wrong and wrestles with whether they should be retained nonetheless.

If the Court says what the law is in an area the Constitution commits to the control of another branch, the Court’s ruling should not be binding. If tomorrow, the Court decided the corporate tax rate should be zero percent, it would be Democrats screaming for the Court to be ignored — and they’d be right, not because the Court was wrong on policy but because setting tax rates is a political responsibility, not a judicial one.

This is all obvious. It’s also very theoretical because, thankfully, the default position of today’s Supreme Court is to resist judicial intrusions into realms the Constitution consigns to other decision makers, very much including the people of the United States. While Vance’s hypotheticals were sound, the reality is that the justices are not going to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, or tell the attorney general how to exercise prosecutorial discretion — which would be violations of separation of powers and, hence, unconstitutional.

Read the whole thing…

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 7:09 am

whembly, I knew you were linking to a hack like Andrew McCarthy without even opening the link, buddy.

The Supreme Court gets its credibility from the Constitution, not the feelings of partisans.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/11/2025 @ 7:12 am

@246 Okay Paul, what’s the recourse to a constitutional controversy whereby an Executive Branch ignores a court ruling?

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 7:18 am

It’s a happy homecoming, that Tucker will again be in the Fox News fold, where he will continue to lie at will about Ukraine in support of his terrorist buddy Vlad Putin.

Without providing any evidence, Tucker Carlson claims it’s a “fact” that Ukraine sells half of its weapons, with many ending up in the hands of drug cartels in Mexico.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/11/2025 @ 7:20 am

@246 Okay Paul, what’s the recourse to a constitutional controversy whereby an Executive Branch ignores a court ruling.

Impeachment and conviction. Absent that, or without Trump complying with the Judicial Branch, then we’re on the path to tyranny, because then the rule of law no longer matters. Trump doesn’t constitutionally or legally have the grounds to cherry-pick which laws he must comply with, per the Taking Care Clause, and per Marbury v. Madison, which empowered the court to assert its co-equal status.

Regarding a hack like McCarthy, he did say this…

If there comes a point at which the president allegedly breaks the law, the Court can rule on that.

That point has already happened, because a federal judge just stated that Trump has defied his TRO.

A federal judge in Rhode Island has determined that the Trump administration is in violation of a court order barring the federal government from implementing a policy that would freeze funding on distributions to federal grant programs.

U.S. District Judge John McConnell on Monday granted a “motion for enforcement,” ordering the administration to “immediately restore frozen funding” and “end any federal funding pause” during the pendency of the temporary restraining order he first issued on Jan. 31. In that order, the Barack Obama-appointed judge reasoned that the spending freeze was both unconstitutional and in violation of a federal law that blocks government action deemed “arbitrary and capricious.”

“The States have presented evidence in this motion that the Defendants in some cases have continued to improperly freeze federal funds and refused to resume disbursement of appropriated federal funds,” McConnell wrote in the five-page order. “The broad categorical and sweeping freeze of federal funds is, as the Court found, likely unconstitutional and has caused and continues to cause irreparable harm to a vast portion of this country. These pauses in funding violate the plain text of the TRO.”

The way to tell whether or not you’re a hypocrite about this is ask yourself what the right-wing response would be to Biden defying a court order on an immigration issue, where his administration was compelled by a federal judge to comply with border enforcement.

If Trump doesn’t like a federal court ruling, then there is recourse other than defying the federal court and breaking the law, which is to comply with a TRO and file a bloody appeal, like how it’s been done with presidents for literally hundreds of years.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/11/2025 @ 7:35 am

Speaking of hypocrite…

Elon Musk wants to bring down USAID, calling it a “criminal” agency on his X platform. But he’s also done business with it.

Over the last four years, the U.S. government’s humanitarian and development arm has spent as much as $500,000 and signed contracts worth up to $1 million for SpaceX’s Starlink terminals, federal contract records show, bringing them to Zimbabwe and South Africa, the country where Musk was born.

Its most significant partnership, though, saw USAID working with SpaceX to send 5,000 Starlink terminals, worth some $3 million, to Ukraine for free shortly after the war broke out in 2022. In November last year, Musk tweeted on his X platform, “A major factor for why Ukraine was NOT overrun by Russia is the Starlink support I provided, at great risk to SpaceX cyber & physical attack by Russian military forces… Starlink is the BACKBONE of Ukrainian military communications at the front lines, because everything else has been blown up or jammed by Russia.”

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/11/2025 @ 7:46 am

@267 Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/11/2025 @ 7:35 am

The way to tell whether or not you’re a hypocrite about this is ask yourself what the right-wing response would be to Biden defying a court order on an immigration issue, where his administration was compelled by a federal judge to comply with border enforcement.

Or a better argument would be what did the COURTS do when the Biden administration went ahead with the Rent Moratorium and School Loan Forgiveness actions knowing that the courts would stop them?

Judges could, in a constitutional crisis, enforce the court’s order with fines or even jailing cabinet secretaries.

Why didn’t they?

But any case, it looks to me they’re not ignoring that judges order and that the DOJ is going to appeal.

I can’t wait for the appeal to bitch slap this moronic, ridiculous judge. And frankly, House Republican should seriously consider taking up judicial reforms/impeachment.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 7:55 am

The WSJ on how Trump is testing the boundaries of presidential power (I hope this isn’t behind a paywall, a little help, Rip?). I won’t be surprised that a convicted felon and four-times feloniously indicted person will trigger a constitutional crisis by again defying the law.

Paul Montagu (c6233f) — 2/11/2025 @ 8:40 am

It’s not trite to say that we’re a nation formed by a founding document and appended and modified by court rulings and statutory law.

And only the courts can manipulate that for political reasons!

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:17 am

Except the part where Trump thinks that aid is a loan.

No, it’s an investment, and he wants some ROI.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:18 am

a little help, Rip?

There doesn’t appear to be a share link for videos. Sorry.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:23 am

The court actions on citizenship and rescission are correct and are not controversial wrt precedent. While I think it unlikely that birthright citizenship will fall, the 1975 decision on rescission/impounding in support of Congress’s 1974 non-Constitutional assertions looks unlikely to prevail.

Nothing in the Constitution requires the Executive to spend appropriated money. His job is not ministerial.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:24 am

For those who said the Senate wouldn’t confirm Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence……a Bronx Cheer!

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:29 am

However, I don’t see the constitutional principal involved with blocking employee buyouts or denying the President’s chosen agents the right to look at the books.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:30 am

Paul

USAID working with SpaceX to send 5,000 Starlink terminals, worth some $3 million, to Ukraine for free

Blind squirrel finds acorn?

I think we’ve gone over Musk’s propensity for hyperbole. Perhaps that is his soul connection to Trump- the deep sharing of an over the top approach to the language.
There were some items in the USAID expose where I said to myself: “That ought to be criminal-” and further thought that “if I did that, they’d throw me in the federal lockup”

Side note- I’ve also noticed that ever since Trump/Zelensky started talking over aid like it is a business deal, Zelensky started quibbling over the way aid $$ is calculated- complaining that they have received less than 1/2 of what the US says it has delivered.
Zelensky has a point, and as a taxpayer I want to know where the money went

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:30 am

For those who said the Senate wouldn’t confirm Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence……a Bronx Cheer!

Voting to bring the vote to the floor is not the same as voting for her.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:31 am

Zelensky has a point, and as a taxpayer I want to know where the money went

There seems to be strong opposition to letting Trump’s people look at the books.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:33 am

Speaking of hypocrite…

I am shocked .. SHOCKED .. that hypocrisy is going on in DC!

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:35 am

“No, it’s an investment, and he wants some ROI.”

You’re correct but I don’t think there was any attempt to determine the value of the investment. As I’ve said before, USAID is intertwined with the CIA, and the “value” of these investments won’t be apparent from looking at the USAID side.

Davethulhu (14e9e4) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:42 am

You can buy 200 new Bradley’s for $440 Million. We’ve sent 300 used ones. That is $660M if they were new.
It looks like lethal aid has been about 1/3 of the total package, but where did the non lethal part of the bill go.
Is it going to be OK for DOGE to dig into it?

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:44 am

However, I don’t see the constitutional principal involved with blocking employee buyouts or denying the President’s chosen agents the right to look at the books.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:30 am

The ‘buyout” of federal employees is very risky (for the employees); it hasn’t been authorized by Congress; the Administration has imposed many caveats on those who accept the offer; and it hasn’t been fully funded-salaries are only available until March 31st, not September 30th. As far as the allowing Trump’s “chosen agents” to examine the books, as long as the Administration complies with the laws passed by Congress (such as the Administrative Procedure Act), there shouldn’t be a problem.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:47 am

For those who said the Senate wouldn’t confirm Tulsi Gabbard as Director of National Intelligence……a Bronx Cheer!

Voting to bring the vote to the floor is not the same as voting for her.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:31 am

It gives you an idea of her support among Republicans, that there is not enough opposition among Republicans-both Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski have endorsed her, for example-to not confirm her. And why would a Senator vote to proceed if their intention was to vote against her confirmation? Granted McConnell did so regarding Hegseth’s confirmation, but his vote against Hegseth was a safe vote, knowing that Vance would break the tie. His vote influenced no one.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:55 am

Zelensky has a point, and as a taxpayer I want to know where the money went

There seems to be strong opposition to letting Trump’s people look at the books.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:33 am

I suggest they send the DOGE employees to Kyiv.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:57 am

Is $25M for SW Asian drag queen shows a CIA front, or is it the potable water project for $25M in the Sahel? Both?

Don’t we pay the CIA to be-hopefully- more clever than that?

This isn’t meant personally, but it is intellectually lazy to dismiss every oddball USAID items as “oh, it’s just the CIA.” We can do that all day through every budget line item on the Hill. It must all be CIA
There is gross waste, and waste due to inefficiencies. We are $36,500,000,000,000,000 in debt and the debt clock is careening toward 38T

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/11/2025 @ 10:00 am

Reporters are saying FEMA CFO is getting dropped

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/11/2025 @ 10:07 am

Reporters are saying FEMA CFO is getting dropped

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/11/2025 @ 10:07 am

FEMA should be dropped and the states take of their own natural disasters.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 10:08 am

“There is gross waste, and waste due to inefficiencies. We are $36,500,000,000,000,000 in debt and the debt clock is careening toward 38T”

If you’re concerned about that, nit-picking an agency that consumes 0.2% of the budget seems counter-productive.

USAID was chosen because, regardless of whether the money was going to a CIA cutout or not, it looks like big things are being done.

Some of the other first targets make even less sense if your supposed target is budget reduction. The CFPB brought in more money than it cost. Why was it shut down? The answer seems obvious to me (that money was coming from the parade of billionaires Trump has surrounded himself with).

Davethulhu (14e9e4) — 2/11/2025 @ 10:27 am

Judge orders FDA and CDC to restore portions of their website, citing the Administrative Procedures Act.

This further convinces me that the courts are becoming a bastion of election denial and refusal to accept a peaceful transfer of power. The APA was never intended to control statements by agencies, only regulations with the force of law. To subject the editing of websites to the same formal approval procedures as regulations is really just obstruction and resistance in black robes.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 10:42 am

The Constitutional Crisis has arrived:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/fema-official-ignores-judge-order-freeze-grant-funding-rcna191674

Two separate agencies disobeying court orders in a fairly public fashion.

Confrontations to follow. Note that these are not the personnel cases — these are refusals to spend funds mandated by legislation.

Appalled (f24838) — 2/11/2025 @ 10:44 am

FEMA should be dropped and the states take of their own natural disasters.

States could also band together (e.g. a Southeast Hurricane Response Agreement) to deal with predictable regional disasters, and not be subject to the power plays of hostile politicians in DC.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 10:45 am

#292

I think you have a real danger of adverse selection with regional disasters. For example, Tennessee and Arkansas would avoid a SE regional group, because they don’t get hit hard by hurricanes, while North Carolina and Louisiana, by virtue of geography, get nailed regularly.

Appalled (f24838) — 2/11/2025 @ 10:59 am

The Constitutional Crisis has arrived

I think that’s a bit overblown as nothing in the Constitution addresses this. It’s a judge-made “constitutional” rule and will (again) be resolved by the Supreme Court, and shortly.

The Impoundment Control Act was passed overwhelmingly a month before Nixon resigned, in a moment of Congressional transcendence. A later amendment mandating spending cuts to avoid deficits did so by controlling how the Executive made the cuts, and was found unconstitutional in the 80’s.

While it is possible that the current court would agree with the Berger court, it seems unlikely. The people voted for change (and even some of the people who voted for Harris, distrusting Trump, also wanted change) and Trump is certainly bring that. The Court pays attention to elections.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 11:01 am

For example, Tennessee and Arkansas would avoid a SE regional group, because they don’t get hit hard by hurricanes, while North Carolina and Louisiana, by virtue of geography, get nailed regularly.

I’m not sure it matters. Neither brings a lot of financial backing anyway. On the other hand, both states would join a Central States Tornado Response agreement.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 11:07 am

David Brooks may have been right: “Trump is the wrong answer to the right problem.” But he’s the answer we have and he IS addressing the problems, as ham-fisted as he may be.

Question: do those who oppose him now do so because he’s doing it wrong, or because he’s doing it at all?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 11:14 am

Kevin M,

I appreciate that it is part of scheme of checks and balances for all three branches to test the limits of power. It’s become more cynical lately — Biden’s approach on student loans was pretty dreadful. But when a court says no — you comply with the ruling (as Biden did with student loans). Otherwise, all the power goes to the executive. Given that the Trump administration is opening the way to all sorts of corruption and favoritism, the faith in the stability of our laws that has been a hallmark of our prosperous economy, may suddenly disappear.

For the record, a Supreme Court who reversed the Chevron deference given to the administrative branch in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo is not likely to be sympathetic to an executive taking it upon itself to cancel legislative acts.

Appalled (f24838) — 2/11/2025 @ 11:16 am

@296

Question: ~~do those who oppose him now do so because he’s doing it wrong~~, or because he’s doing it at all?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 11:14 am

The latter.

All it matters is stopping the Giant Orange Cheeto.

The opposition is missing the forest for the trees…the end result will likely force the courts (aka, Appellate/SCOTUS) to codify things like the Executive Unitary Theory and maybe overturn things like the Impoundment Act.

There’s no forethought about the future, just to “stop him at all costs”.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 11:35 am

OK, I kinda like this move from the Defense Department:

https://www.npr.org/2025/02/11/nx-s1-5293246/hegseth-fort-bragg-liberty-name

Appalled (f24838) — 2/11/2025 @ 11:36 am

It’s cheeky tho.

Congress passed the law that said we couldn’t use any Confederate names.

This is such a great troll.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 11:56 am

not likely to be sympathetic to an executive taking it upon itself to cancel legislative acts.

Well, there is the obvious problem of a limiting principle. I can see that. But the current situation makes the President a powerless cog in the legislatures machine. An executive is SUPPOSED to be able to make qualitative judgements in response to current facts, not be hamstrung by a legislative choice made a year ago (or in the case of continuing resolutions, possibly FIVE years ago).

Example: just because there was (say) $7 billion appropriated annually in 2021 for fighting COVID does not mean that the continuing resolution mandates the $7 billion to be spent on fraud, waste and silly projects.

Example: The Covid-era job-support program offered billions to employers to keep workers employed, but about half the applications were fraudulent. Is the executive unable to devise barriers to fraud that were not authorized by the legislation? Can they deny a payment to a “business” that asserts all the right things in it’s application if they suspect the application is a fraud? Heck, can they even look at who is getting the money to see if there is a pattern involving certain recipients?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 11:57 am

I think the Executive can legally and ethically ignore a “check” from a lower court (or highest court) when it infringes on areas where it (The Executive) has “sole and plenary powers under the Constitution” because that check is unlawful under the Constitution.
In other words, the Executive can ignore an unlawful order from a lower court, reject it out of hand, and proceed. That is not illegal or unlawful. The lower court can wait for the Supreme Court and the Executive to fight it out over whether the action is part of the sole and plenary power of the Executive

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/11/2025 @ 12:01 pm

There is a Medicare scam where someone claiming to be from Medicare confirms your name and then says you need to renew your Medicare card and could you please confirm the number.
They take your name, and number and bill Medicare for fraudulent services. Secretary HHS takes note and wants to audit the system for waste and loss, so he hires some young geniuses to first scour the payments for patterns and anomalies.
Some payments are stopped pending further review; others are referred to the DoJ.
Is the position that these actions would be outside of the scope of Executive powers because they infringe on the legislative branch’s powers?

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/11/2025 @ 12:21 pm

Is the position that these actions would be outside of the scope of Executive powers because they infringe on the legislative branch’s powers?

I would hope not as the legislature cannot deal with the application of law. That is indeed he Executive’s job. The problem comes up when the law says that $100 million shall be spent by Medicaid for trans surgery on children. The executive cannot balk at the overall line item, but he can limit the spending to applicable cases, and he can decline to allow HHS to drum up business if they don’t have enough takers.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 12:30 pm

Russia finally releases Mark Fogel.

What changed?

NJRob (eb56c3) — 2/11/2025 @ 12:44 pm

If a president can defy a court ruling he don’t like, why even have a Congress to pass the law in the first place? Or a court to interpret this passed law that was approved by the legislative branch, that was signed by a prior president?
This is the path to tyranny and, yes, fascism.

Paul Montagu (6839f1) — 2/11/2025 @ 12:46 pm

The Senate confirmed Scott Bessent as Secretary. That action formally accedes powers from one body to another?

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/11/2025 @ 12:53 pm

Paul
There are Executive actions the Courts have no jurisdiction over

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/11/2025 @ 12:55 pm

There are Executive actions the Courts have no jurisdiction over

I didn’t say there weren’t. They don’t have a say over foreign policy, which is why JD Vance and others are using strawmen for their arguments.

Paul Montagu (6839f1) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:06 pm

Congress can vote to take over the war powers of the Executive and the Executive can ignore the Congress and the Courts up to the point where they impeach, convict and remove?

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:08 pm

One thing I think we can all agree on: The assertion that Trump was a fraud who would never actually act on his campaign promises is shown to be false.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:09 pm

@310: Clinton ignored the War Powers Act and Congress did nothing in the Kosovo war. Of course, the War Powers Act has never received Supreme Court blessing like the Impoundment Control Act did.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:11 pm

@305

Russia finally releases Mark Fogel.

What changed?

NJRob (eb56c3) — 2/11/2025 @ 12:44 pm

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Can’t be that Putinista Trump now could it?

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:12 pm

A court has ordered HHS to revert some of its website content, on grounds that the changes are subject to the Administrative Procedures Act. Can HHS ignore this as rampant poppycock?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:12 pm

I would think HHS should be able to get a stay in short order as they “prepare” to revert the websites.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:13 pm

Why do we have a Senate confirmation process? What are the implications of a “yes” vote? Is there any transfer of power in that “yes”.

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:14 pm

@314

A court has ordered HHS to revert some of its website content, on grounds that the changes are subject to the Administrative Procedures Act. Can HHS ignore this as rampant poppycock?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:12 pm

Could they, like Biden did with the School Loan Buyoff Plan?

Probably.

Should they?

No. I think the Trump lawyers saw these judges way in advanced and in my view he needs to operate through the appeal process. Respect for the courts is a vital and fragile feature of our democracy. The Democrats flout the courts more regularly than the right have done and I don’t want Trump to channel his inner-Schumer in “reaping the worldwind” against the courts.

But there is a history of clearly illegal court orders not being obeyed by a co-equal branch of the government, many posting here refuses to acknowledge that. This Engelmeyer court order is outrageous and not even remotely colorably legal. It’s an egregious infringement of the presidents Article II authority and the DOJ immediately appealed for extraordinary mandamus. If the appellate refuses, then SCOTUS must.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:25 pm

Wut?!?

#BREAKING Ukraine prepared to offer territory swap with Russia: Zelensky pic.twitter.com/mX5N3lOvdI

— AFP News Agency (@AFP) February 11, 2025

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:26 pm

I think the Executive can legally and ethically ignore a “check” from a lower court (or highest court) when it infringes on areas where it (The Executive) has “sole and plenary powers under the Constitution” because that check is unlawful under the Constitution.
In other words, the Executive can ignore an unlawful order from a lower court, reject it out of hand, and proceed. That is not illegal or unlawful.

Source?

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:46 pm

Congress can vote to take over the war powers of the Executive and the Executive can ignore the Congress and the Courts up to the point where they impeach, convict and remove?

steveg (0b36b3) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:08 pm

Given that the Founding Fathers placed the “war power” in Article I of the Constitution, “taking over” the war powers of the Executive (which can’t be found in Article II) would be reclaiming only what is rightfully theirs.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:53 pm

But there is a history of clearly illegal court orders not being obeyed by a co-equal branch of the government, many posting here refuses to acknowledge that.

For example?

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:55 pm

#BREAKING Ukraine prepared to offer territory swap with Russia: Zelensky pic.twitter.com/mX5N3lOvdI

— AFP News Agency (@AFP) February 11, 2025

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:26 pm

Zylensky’s opening bid.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:57 pm

@321

For example?

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:55 pm

Biden ignoring courts when he pushed the eviction moratorium EO.

Biden ignoring courts when he paid off school loans, and BRAGGED about it.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 2:12 pm

@322

Zylensky’s opening bid.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:57 pm

But I was told that was unacceptable and that Putin wins.

What changed?

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 2:25 pm

#BREAKING Ukraine prepared to offer territory swap with Russia: Zelensky pic.twitter.com/mX5N3lOvdI

— AFP News Agency (@AFP) February 11, 2025

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:26 pm

This is not as big a deal as it seems. Zelensky has proposed swapping occupied Kursk for unspecified Russian occupied territories.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 2:29 pm

For example?

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:55 pm

Biden ignoring courts when he pushed the eviction moratorium EO.

Biden ignoring courts when he paid off school loans, and BRAGGED about it.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 2:12 pm

Non-responsive. Your comment said:

But there is a history of clearly illegal court orders not being obeyed by a co-equal branch of the government, many posting here refuses to acknowledge that.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 2:31 pm

Zylensky’s opening bid.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 1:57 pm

But I was told that was unacceptable and that Putin wins.

What changed?

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 2:25 pm

As I noted about the same time as your comment, Zelensky is offering to trade Russian territory back to Russia.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 2:35 pm

In their bid to get right with America, the Democrats elected David Hogg as DNC vice-chair.

Long a backwater in party politics, the vice chair — an office that typically comes with little public attention and even less power — has become the focus of a barrage of stinging headlines from the right in recent days over Hogg’s previous calls for abolishing ICE and defunding police.

Inside the Democratic Party, Hogg’s election — and the resulting coverage — has been accompanied by frustration among centrists that a 24-year-old March for our Lives co-founder with a million followers could hurt the party’s brand, especially in swing districts. They vented that his ascension is representative of Democrats’ failure to grapple with some voters’ frustration that the party is overly concerned with diversity and appeals to the far left.

“The most worrying thing is if he carries into this new job a belief that saying what he was saying, but louder, is the way to prevail in red states,” said Matt Bennett, co-founder of the center-left group Third Way. “Because it i

sn’t … If he believes that it is, that’s going to be a real problem for our candidates in those places.”

This a man who got his start on the backs of 17 dead students who he used poster children for gun control, and of course, himself.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 3:09 pm

Presidents have had the same general view of the War Powers Act — it’s unconstitutional. They follow it for political reasons only. And sometimes not (Kosovo and Libya to name two).

But suppose Trump ordered the military to “take out” Mexican drug labs, and a court countermanded his order. Would you expect Trump to obey? Should he obey?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 3:15 pm

But suppose Trump ordered the military to “take out” Mexican drug labs, and a court countermanded his order. Would you expect Trump to obey? Should he obey?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 3:15 pm

1. Who would have standing to go to court? Article III, Section 2 Clause 1 requires a justiciable “case or controversy.” Courts do not have the power to make rulings one their own.

2. I wouldn’t expect Trump to announce such an attack in advance, so no challenge would be filed in advance.

3. If someone did go to court to challenge such an attack, it would be dismissed as beyond the authority of a court to intervene as a “political question.” When there were legal challenges to the Vietnam War, courts ruled them to be nonjusticiable political questions, and the Supreme Court affirmed one district court’s dismissal of a class action challenge to the constitutionality of the Vietnam War on that basis.

The Supreme Court identified six factors relevant to the political question doctrine in the 1962 case Baker v. Carr:

Prominent on the surface of any case held to involve a political question is found
[1] a textually demonstrable constitutional commitment of the issue to a coordinate political department; or
[2] a lack of judicially discoverable and manageable standards for resolving it; or
[3] the impossibility of deciding without an initial policy determination of a kind clearly for nonjudicial discretion; or
[4] the impossibility of a court’s undertaking independent resolution without expressing lack of the respect due coordinate branches of government; or
[5] an unusual need for unquestioning adherence to a political decision already made; or
[6] the potentiality of embarrassment from multifarious pronouncements by various departments on one question.7

Paragraph breaks added. I daresay any legal challenge to military action meets all six criteria that define it as a political question.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 3:54 pm

“Biden ignoring courts when he paid off school loans, and BRAGGED about it.”

The courts blocked him from doing a general loan forgiveness program. The ones he actually conducted were targeted and not outside the ruling against him.

Davethulhu (14e9e4) — 2/11/2025 @ 4:09 pm

But suppose Trump ordered the military to “take out” Mexican drug labs, and a court countermanded his order. Would you expect Trump to obey? Should he obey?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 3:15 pm

Trump would probably bomb the courthouse.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 5:07 pm

I daresay any legal challenge to military action meets all six criteria that define it as a political question.

Congress attempting to enforce its view of the War Powers Act would be an interesting test of this. But I suspect you are right, meaning the only possible enforcement of the War Powers Act is impeachment. As is the Executive ignoring the courts. Of course, he could try to ignore impeachment….

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 5:16 pm

But suppose a court, on application from “Concerned Citizens Against Wars” DID rule. Hopefully the appellate court would shut that down.

But then they should shut down the “Doctors for America” suit about website content, and they haven’t.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 5:21 pm

But suppose a court, on application from “Concerned Citizens Against Wars” DID rule. Hopefully the appellate court would shut that down.

No standing; they would need to prove a concrete harm. Not gonna happen. Just spitting into the wind.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 5:45 pm

Appeals court rejects Trump administration bid to immediately reinstate funding freeze
………..
In its ruling Tuesday, a three-judge panel for the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals wrote that the “defendants do not cite any authority in support of their administrative stay request or identify any harm related to a specific funding action or actions that they will face without their requested administrative stay.”

The Justice Department had sought two different kinds of pauses of U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell’s restraining order barring the government from continuing to implement its sweeping freeze of funding, and another ruling that found that government had violated the order. Lawyers for the DOJ contended in part that McConnell’s order was vague, but the appeals court suggested they should be patient.

“We are confident the District Court will act with dispatch to provide any clarification needed with respect to, among other things, the defendants’ contention that the February 10 Order ‘bars both the President and much of the Federal Government from exercising their own lawful authorities to withhold funding without the prior approval of the district court,'” the appeals court wrote Tuesday.
…………
“These unlawful injunctions are a continuation of the weaponization of justice against President Trump. The White House will continue to fight these battles in court, and we expect to be vindicated,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement.
……….
“Federal law specifies how the Executive should act if it believes that appropriations are inconsistent with the President’s priorities — it must ask Congress, not act unilaterally,” (Rhode Island U.S. District Judge John J. McConnell) wrote.
…………

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 5:52 pm

There is no way that Trump can get impoundment authority from district or circuit courts. The precedent is clear and none of them can overturn a (poor) Supreme Court decision. The executive has to be more than a pipeline for funds.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 6:18 pm

No standing; they would need to prove a concrete harm. Not gonna happen. Just spitting into the wind.

Then how did “Doctors for America” (a political action group) show meaningful harm to object to the CDC website changes?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 6:20 pm

Biden ignoring courts when he pushed the eviction moratorium EO.

Biden ignoring courts when he paid off school loans, and BRAGGED about it.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/11/2025 @ 2:12 pm

Biden’s eviction moratorium was blocked by the Supreme Court in 2021. What is the evidence that Biden “ignored the courts” following that ruling?

Biden tried multiple times, using authorities under different laws such as the HEROES Act (blocked in Biden v. Nebraska (2023)); the SAVE Plan (blocked by Biden v. Missouri (2024); but what is the evidence that he ignored the court rulings and continued to cancel loans in defiance the court rulings?

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 6:32 pm

David Hogg as Vice DNC Chair is why the Dems still don’t get it, and could face losing yet again in 2026. They really don’t have a clue.

Paul Montagu (d546d4) — 2/11/2025 @ 6:33 pm

Presidents have had the same general view of the War Powers Act — it’s unconstitutional.

Which presidents?
Far as I know, every president since Reagan has used the War Powers Resolution to defend unilateral military actions. Obama not only used the WPR, he welshed on it when it came to Libya.

Paul Montagu (d546d4) — 2/11/2025 @ 6:37 pm

Dump said gas prices would go down if elected. I just paid 40 cents a gallon more over just last week when I paid 20 cents a gallon more. Too bad dump was starting to discredit democrat party leadership hacks.

asset (e8098a) — 2/11/2025 @ 6:37 pm

Then how did “Doctors for America” (a political action group) show meaningful harm to object to the CDC website changes?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/11/2025 @ 6:20 pm

Since the group represents doctors, I assume they can demonstrate harms to their profession and patients if the information is unavailable. See paragraph 23-31 at the link.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/11/2025 @ 6:40 pm

BREAKING: Elon Musk calls for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) remaining account balance of $711,586,678.00 to be returned to the American taxpayers.

https://x.com/RealPatrickWebb/status/1889138540455367148

What are y’all gonna do with your refund? I think I might buy a single egg.

Davethulhu (26aa8d) — 2/11/2025 @ 7:11 pm

Business hate cfpb because they make it harder to ripoff consumers! read Iacocca’s book on how ford used rip people off like tying shut the back car doors with bungi cords to keep them from flying open!

asset (e8098a) — 2/11/2025 @ 7:57 pm

Musk said taxpayers, not grifters.

NJRob (eb56c3) — 2/11/2025 @ 8:03 pm

342: asset: ‘he’s been in office less than a month and hasn’t undone the damage of the last 4 years!”

Also asset: I ate big macs, nacho chips, and cake for years but skipped the cookies yesterday–and I’m still at 201 lbs! My diet has failed me.”

Harcourt Fenton Mudd (0368d7) — 2/11/2025 @ 8:04 pm

The APA was never intended to control statements by agencies, only regulations with the force of law.

Yet it’s been the law of the land for 79 years, without repeal. Why is that?
Notably, most of Trump’s failures in courts of law in his first term were because his lawyers never bothered with the APA. Again, why is that?

Paul Montagu (d546d4) — 2/11/2025 @ 9:12 pm

Rubio should work on his poker face, especially now that he’s SecState, because he looked like Dr. Birx after Trump suggested disinfectant or UV light to treat Covid.

Paul Montagu (d546d4) — 2/11/2025 @ 10:08 pm

Hakeem jefferies tells democrats that we must stand up to trump and his billionaire tax cuts so donate to us. Next day tells silicon valley billionaires we won’t stop tax cuts! (the Nation)

asset (e8098a) — 2/12/2025 @ 1:07 am

On Lincoln’s birthday, I always re-read his second inaugural, and again am amazed at the speech, especially that final paragraph:

With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.

(Lincoln’s birthday is still a holiday in some states.)

Jim Miller (5a9c50) — 2/12/2025 @ 5:53 am

Here’s a link to the Wikipedia article on the speech. The article includes the entire text.

Jim Miller (5a9c50) — 2/12/2025 @ 5:55 am

Hegseth throws Ukraine to the wolves

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Wednesday called Ukraine’s desire to recover all of the territory it has lost to Russia since 2014 an “unrealistic objective,” pledging that the Trump administration will pursue peace negotiations to end war between the two nations while pointedly shaping them at their outset.

“Chasing this illusionary goal will only prolong the war and cause more pain and suffering,” Hegseth said. Any peace deal, Hegseth added, must come with “robust security guarantees,” international oversight of the boundary between Russian and Ukrainian forces, and no NATO membership for Ukraine — something that would require other countries to defend Ukrainian territory in any future conflict.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:12 am

Yet it’s been the law of the land for 79 years, without repeal. Why is that?

Are you asserting that websites have been subject to notices, comment periods and publication in the Federal Register before any changes for 79 years? Or just since there have been websites? Or since when, actually?

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:15 am

What are y’all gonna do with your refund? I think I might buy a single egg.

I’m gonna buy pennies.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:17 am

Far as I know, every president since Reagan has used the War Powers Resolution

As I said, they abide by it, but feel free to ignore it as both Clinton and Obama did when they couldn’t get the votes in Congress. When they CAN get the votes, it’s a useful tool to spread blame and/or avoid whining about the War Powers Resolution. Clinton actually asked for a vote, it failed, and he went ahead anyway.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:20 am

Presidents have therefore drafted reports to Congress required of the President to state that they are “consistent with” the War Powers Resolution rather than “pursuant to” so as to take into account the presidential position that the resolution is unconstitutional

Wikipedia

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:24 am

Predictions:

1) Egg prices will drop to normal levels soon.
2) Trump will take credit
3) Some people will believe it was Trump’s doing

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:27 am

Now that Trump is president, it’s suddenly safe to talk about high prices.

Did the bird flu come from a wet market?

lloyd (c2885d) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:33 am

#358 By “soon”, do you mean next week, next month, next year, or longer?

(For the record: I don’t know enough to make a prediction. For example, it would be interesting to know whether farmers who have avoided avian flu so far were lucky, were better at protecting their birds, or both.)

Jim Miller (5a9c50) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:36 am

“Soon” is an indefinite time. It could be as long as a few months.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:43 am

The APA was never intended to control statements by agencies, only regulations with the force of law.

The justification for the DFA’s lawsuit under the APA is that the agency actions were

“arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law,” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A), or taken “without observance of procedure required by law,” id. § 706(2)(D).

Specifically

1) the Office of Personnel Management had no statutory authority (under any law) to order agencies to remove agency websites;

2) the CDC and HHS websites were considered “ significant information dissemination products” under 44 U.S.C. § 3506(d)(3) and that the CDC failed to comply with the PRA requirement that an agency must “provide adequate notice when initiating, substantially modifying, or terminating significant information dissemination products”; and

3) the FDA removed webpages that contain important information about clinical trials that is vital to medical professionals.

See paragraphs 42-43 here.

Rip Murdock (03fbfb) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:43 am

If the prices drop to normal this week, I might believe it was Trump’s doing. Or magic.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:46 am

Rip Murdock (03fbfb) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:43 am

That’s one reading, I guess, useful for endless litigation in the furtherance of the #Resistance. As I’ve said, this is how lawyers refuse to allow the transfer of power. They don’t storm Congress, they paper the judiciary.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:49 am

WSJ editorial on the supposed Constitutional Crisis.

Well, that was fast. The same people who predicted Donald Trump would be a dictator now say a “constitutional crisis” has already arrived, barely three weeks into his Presidency. They’re overwrought as usual, and readers may appreciate a less apocalyptic breakdown about Mr. Trump’s actions and whether they do or don’t breach the normal checks and balances.

Mr. Trump’s domestic-policy decisions so far strike us as falling into three categories. Most rest on strong legal ground. Some are legally debatable and could go either way in court. In still others Mr. Trump appears to be breaking current law deliberately to tee up cases that will go to the Supreme Court to restore what he considers to be constitutional norms. None of these is a constitutional crisis.

The first category includes the Administration’s decision to pause discretionary spending to ensure it complies with the President’s priorities. Democratic state Attorneys General say this is illegal, and Judge John McConnell on Monday agreed. The Administration is appealing, and judges can’t force a President to spend money that Congress has left to his discretion….

Unions are also challenging Mr. Trump’s Schedule F reform, which removes civil-service protections for some high-ranking career employees. Here, too, Mr. Trump is on strong legal ground. The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 exempts positions “determined to be of a confidential, policy-determining, policy-making or policy-advocating character.”…

A second category are decisions on more debatable legal ground, such as effectively dismantling the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and U.S. Agency for International Development. Congress established these agencies and it would have to act to eliminate them. Less clear is whether a President can order employees to cease doing their jobs.

Harvard law professor Hal Scott recently argued in these pages that the CFPB is operating illegally because Congress funded the agency with earnings from the Federal Reserve. Because the Fed has incurred losses since September 2022, Mr. Scott says the bureau should close unless Congress appropriates money for it. This argument is plausible.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 9:20 am

Are you asserting that websites have been subject to notices, comment periods and publication in the Federal Register before any changes for 79 years?

No, I’m asserting that your feelings about a law you don’t like are irrelevant.

Paul Montagu (4d89c3) — 2/12/2025 @ 9:34 am

No, I’m asserting that your feelings about a law you don’t like are irrelevant.

And I’m asserting that your feelings about a President you don’t like are equally irrelevant. Sadly though, ten thousand lawyers are busy finding every last thing they can do to preserve the administrative state against the will of the voters.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 9:39 am

What are y’all gonna do with your refund? I think I might buy a single egg.

If they really wanted to honor the spirit of the CFPB, they’d distribute that money as a rebate on credit card interest paid.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 9:41 am

Sadly though, ten thousand lawyers are busy finding every last thing they can do to preserve the administrative state against the will of the voters.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 9:39 am

Why shouldn’t the Trump Administration and DOGE simply comply with the law as it exists (not as they wish it to be)? It’s not hard.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 9:46 am

Why shouldn’t the Trump Administration and DOGE simply comply with the law as it exists (not as they wish it to be)? It’s not hard.

Outside of USAID, they actually are. But you motivate lawyers enough and they’ll throw stuff at a wall. Tell me why CFPB has to fund itself, or even why it’s current bank account cannot be returned to the Fed. Liz Warren is upset that the lack of accountability she built into the agency is being used to disband it.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 9:54 am

Meanwhile, Trump orders all federal entities to provide plastic straws instead of the terrible, no good, lousy paper straws that Biden ordered.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 9:57 am

The other shoe drops:

Accused Russian money launderer Alexander Vinnik is being released from US custody in exchange for Marc Fogel, a Trump administration source told CNN Wednesday.

Vinnik is accused of running a multibillion-dollar cryptocurrency exchange that allegedly did business with drug dealers and identity thieves. Vinnik was arrested in 2017 in Greece and subsequently extradited to France, where he was sentenced to five years in prison in 2020 for money laundering. He was extradited from France to the United States in 2022.
………
Vinnik is one of multiple accused Russian cybercriminals who have been extradited to the US in recent years and subsequently floated in prisoner swap discussions with the Kremlin. In Vinnik’s case and others, Russian diplomats have relentlessly fought the detainee’s extradition to the US. When those efforts failed, Russian embassies and consulates in the US have paid close attention to the alleged cybercriminals’ trials because they are potential bargaining chips.
………

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 9:57 am

RFK Jr’s confirmation vote has been advanced to the floor. 53-47.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 9:59 am

Why shouldn’t the Trump Administration and DOGE simply comply with the law as it exists (not as they wish it to be)? It’s not hard.

Outside of USAID, they actually are.

LOL! If the Administration was, there wouldn’t be so many lawsuits. For example, the firing of the IGs was not in compliance with the IG statute (which is why they are suing) to get their jobs back. Whatever you think of the constitutionality of requiring congressional notifications, no court had declared the requirement unconstitutional.

Both the CFPB and USAID are congressionally-approved agencies (as well as the Department of Education, the next target), so they cannot be arbitrarily dissolved without congressional approval. While the “Harvard law professor” in the WSJ opinion piece you quoted says the CFPB is operating illegally, that’s just his opinion. In fact, the Supreme Court upheld its funding mechanism in a 7-2 decision last May in an opinion authored by Justice Thomas.

“Under the Appropriations Clause, an appropriation is simply a law that authorizes expenditures from a specified source of public money for designated purposes,” Thomas wrote. “The statute that provides the bureau’s funding meets these requirements. We therefore conclude that the bureau’s funding mechanism does not violate the Appropriations Clause.”
………..
Thomas wrote that the statute laying out how the CFPB gets its funding — from the Federal Reserve — fits with the appropriations practices dating back to the First Congress and is similar to schemes used to fund the Post Office and Customs Service, which were established in the late 1700s.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 10:14 am

For example, the firing of the IGs was not in compliance with the IG statute

A statute that the Democrats put in place right after Biden had his guys in as IG to screw with the next Republican.

All Trump has to do is give a notice and a reason (“They’re all partisan Democrats who will work to block my agenda”), which is easier than overturning the law as an intrusion on his administrative authority. Which he should do anyway.

In fact, the Supreme Court upheld its funding mechanism in a 7-2 decision last May in an opinion authored by Justice Thomas.

It’s not the funding mechanism that Harvard guy objected to, it’s that the funds are to come from Fed earnings and there have been no earnings for several years. It might not matter as the lack of accountability and the degree of independence that the agency enjoys means that the director need not do anything he doesn’t want to do, including funding the agency.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 10:40 am

USAID is another matter. It doesn’t help them that they have repeatedly ignored Congressional requests for their projects and budgets for same, so saying that Congress has appropriated money for ___ isn’t quite true. Judging by what they DO fund, they apparently have no controls on what they may fund so a new director can make changes as he sees fit. Musk is taking that to mean their budget can be zeroed out, and I don’t think that’s true. But it might be.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 10:48 am

My overall point is that some (many?) of these suits are being filed by political actors for political reasons, with only the barest facade of “harm” asserted on their part.

I do not see why the “Doctors for America” (formerly “Doctors for Obama”) needs to see information on the CDC website that is already known to them. It may be harm to others, but those others need to sue if so. It’s a fig leaf of harm.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 10:53 am

Now, for a rhetorical question: Will the Senate show some independence and vote RFKJr down? He is aggressively anti-science. His idea of testing a vaccine in a pandemic is to give half the people placebo shots and see which group has more deaths. Mengele could not have said it better.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 11:16 am

And, again, there is the Drudge Report and its amazing collection of anti-Trump articles and hit pieces.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 11:18 am

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 11:16 am

His idea of testing a vaccine in a pandemic is to give half the people placebo shots and see which group has more deaths.

The entire pharmaceutical establishment misleads people about what clinical trials are..

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/12/2025 @ 11:36 am

For example, the firing of the IGs was not in compliance with the IG statute

A statute that the Democrats put in place right after Biden had his guys in as IG to screw with the next Republican.

Lacking evidence.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 11:41 am

Now, for a rhetorical question: Will the Senate show some independence and vote RFKJr down? He is aggressively anti-science. His idea of testing a vaccine in a pandemic is to give half the people placebo shots and see which group has more deaths. Mengele could not have said it better.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 11:16 am

No.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 11:42 am

What’s the evidence that the Senate has shown any independence so far?

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 11:43 am

The first category includes the Administration’s decision to pause discretionary spending to ensure it complies with the President’s priorities.

Sometimes money is appropriated in large lumps. It could be that suspension is possible for a period o time but not stopping altogether. Stopping some things may be legal but unfair to to the people getting paid.

One more thing about USAID: Kenya says it has a year’s supply of anti-HIV drugs. But the people actually administering it were doctors and nurses whose funding ultimately came from USAID. Maybe MArco RUbio fixed that.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/12/2025 @ 11:45 am

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 10:53 am

As a general proposition, do you think government should be arbitrary and capricious in its decisions?

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 11:46 am

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 11:43 am

What’s the evidence that the Senate has shown any independence so far?

Matt Gaetz, slowing things down a bit, and extracting statements and promises from nominees.

There seems to be reluctance among Republicans to actually vote against (as opposed to slowing down) nominees unless the case against the nominee is 100%.

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/12/2025 @ 11:48 am

I agree:

Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency is set to review America’s aging air-traffic control system, according to a Wednesday X post from Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy. ……… The Jan. 29 midair collision over Washington, which killed 67 people and is currently under investigation by the National Transportation Safety Board, is the most recent example of the American air-traffic control system’s steady decline.

Other mishaps include a January 2023 outage of the Federal Aviation Administration’s critical pilots’ warning system, which disrupted more than 11,000 flights across the country—the first nationwide incident of this kind since Sept. 11, 2001. Largely as a result of insufficient staff, inexperienced pilots and aging technology, 2023 also saw the highest number of near-collisions at airports since 2016.

Such failures are widespread. ……..

The first step to solving these problems is huge capital investment. But federal law effectively prevents the FAA from issuing long-term revenue bonds, instead requiring it to rely entirely on annual appropriations for funding. By contrast, Canada’s air-traffic control system, which can directly issue revenue bonds, uses the money to modernize its systems rapidly by replacing large amounts of equipment at once—rather than making incremental purchases each year.

In the U.S., modernization can take a decade or more. …….

Another serious problem is governance. In many other countries, the air-traffic control provider directly charges customers—namely airlines and commercial operators—for its services. Not so in the U.S. The FAA’s operational arm, the Air Traffic Organization, relies on taxes, as well as fees already baked into ticket and fuel costs. It also reports to the FAA administrator, transportation secretary, inspector general, the GAO and multiple congressional committees. Its de facto customer is government, not the aircraft operators using its services.
………..
America’s air-traffic control system is decades behind those of Australia, Canada, Germany, Italy and the U.K. While these nations build safer, cheaper and more effective digital control towers that can be stationed off-site, the FAA continues to build the traditional towers of years past. While American control-tower staff share flight information with each other via paper flight strips, other countries use electronic flight strips with interactive displays and real-time data. Other providers subscribe to a global space-based surveillance system to track aircraft where there is no radar, such as over the oceans. The FAA doesn’t.

The solution is for the U.S. to make air-traffic control a public utility. New Zealand was the first to do so in 1987, when it separated its system from its Transport Ministry and converted it to Airways New Zealand—a government-owned yet self-supporting commercial entity. Today more than 60 countries have air-traffic control systems that are public utilities funded by user fees, allowing them to generate money quickly, update their technology and hire skilled staff, all while being directly accountable to customers.
……….
……….The next FAA reauthorization is due in less than four years. This is the window in which the aviation industry and the Trump administration must build a bipartisan coalition to remove the Air Traffic Organization from the FAA and reconceive it as a customer-funded public utility, like its counterparts worldwide. Only then will the system be able to bring its facilities into the 21st century and pre-empt future disaster.
##########

Unfortunately, DOGE’S take no prisoners approach will make Congress dig in their heels against on any reforms DOGE may propose.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 11:56 am

What’s the evidence that the Senate has shown any independence so far?

Matt Gaetz, slowing things down a bit, and extracting statements and promises from nominees.

LOL! Matt Gaetz doesn’t count; he withdrew before any hearings or votes. And why do you think extracting “statements and promises” during a confirmation hearing will make the nominee accountable? As I’ve said, anything a nominee says that is contrary to long held public positions (such as Gabbard’s flip flop on Section 702 surveillance authority) needs to be taken with an ice berg sized grain of salt.

Has any Senate-confirmed official ever been condemned by the Senate or impeached by the House, for breaking a “promise” made during a confirmation hearing?

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 12:04 pm

Lacking evidence.

Pretty sure I linked this before, but here it is again:

The suit cites federal laws that say presidents must give a 30-day notification to Congress and provide specific reasons for terminations of an inspector general. Congress strengthened the IG Act three years ago after Trump’s moves against inspectors general in his first term.

and to show this isn’t so unusual:

Other presidents have fired IGs in the past, but rarely have they done so in such sweeping fashion since the executive branch’s watchdog system was created in 1978. When he took office in 1981, Republican President Ronald Reagan fired all existing IGs, who had been selected by his Democratic predecessor, Jimmy Carter. Facing intense criticism, Reagan later rehired about half of them.

Trump fired far fewer than Reagan. Maybe he’ll hire some back but why would he tolerate giving a podium to partisan opponents? It’s like inviting you mother-in-law to stay for a year.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 1:33 pm

presidents must give a 30-day notification to Congress and provide specific reasons for terminations of an inspector general.

The 30-day notice may be an infringement on the President’s powers to control the Executive branch. According to the Constitution, he IS the Executive branch.

And why the reasons? Is Congress going to approve them? Suppose they are all lies (“They beat their wives”), does that matter? The plain reason that IGs get fired at the start of a term is “they aren’t my guys.” It’s politics.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 1:37 pm

Next up, the “unprecedented” horrors of US Attorneys getting replaced.

Unprecedented:Republican::Unexpected:Democrat

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 1:41 pm

Before it gets memory-holed

Biden’s Justice Department to ask nearly all Trump-era U.S. attorneys to resign

The Biden administration will begin removing all Senate-confirmed U.S. attorneys appointed during the Trump administration, with two exceptions, a senior Justice Department official said.

The process, which is not uncommon, could start as early as Tuesday. They will be asked to resign.

John Durham will remain in place to investigate the origins of the Russia probe, but not as U.S. attorney for the district of Connecticut, the official said. He was appointed as a special counsel and given extra protections for the inquiry by Attorney General William Barr last fall.

David Weiss, U.S. attorney for Delaware, will also remain in place. Hunter Biden, the president’s son, said in December that federal officials in Delaware were investigating his taxes.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 1:50 pm

Has any Senate-confirmed official ever been condemned by the Senate or impeached by the House, for breaking a “promise” made during a confirmation hearing?

No. And only once has a cabinet member been censured:

Augustus Hill Garland, Attorney General in Grover Cleveland’s administration, was censured in 1886 for failing to provide documents about the firing of a federal prosecutor.

One President and ten Senators have been censured but they are not Senate-confirmed, and several judges have been removed through impeachment, but none of them for failing on campaign promises.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 1:59 pm

However, judges are a popular target of Congress. 66 judges have been formally investigated by the House. 15 have been impeached. 4 have been acquitted, 8 have been convicted, and 3 resigned before trial.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 2:24 pm

I expect there will be more judges to join the 66, particularly any judge that has the temerity to rule against DOGE or the Administration.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 3:07 pm

I need to sit down…
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bondi-announces-new-lawsuits-states-failing-comply-immigration-actions-a-new-doj

The Justice Department has filed charges against the state of New York and its governor, Kathy Hochul, and Attorney General Letitia James for failing to comply with federal law by shielding illegal immigrants, newly sworn-in Attorney General Pam Bondi announced Wednesday.

Also charged is Mark Schroder, commissioner of the New York Department of Motor Vehicles.

Bondi cited New York’s Green Light laws, also known as the Driver’s License Act, which allows illegal immigrants to get a driver’s license.

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/12/2025 @ 3:23 pm

RFK Jr must be proud of how his “let’s see who gets sick” plan is shown to work.

Measles Outbreak Hits Town in Texas

As of Tuesday, 22 children and two adults had been infected, all of whom were unvaccinated, local officials said.

A worsening measles outbreak has taken root in Texas, sickening two dozen and hospitalizing nine on the western edge of the state, where childhood vaccination rates have dwindled in recent years.

As of Tuesday, 22 children and two adults had been infected, all of whom were unvaccinated, local health officials said. The outbreak comes as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a staunch critic of childhood vaccines, has been nominated to be the country’s next health secretary, causing public health experts to worry that similar upticks of preventable illnesses will become more frequent.

“There’s a feeling this is going to be more and more common,” said Dr. Cameron Wolfe, an infectious disease expert at Duke University.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 3:44 pm

Michael madigan democrat speaker of illinois house convicted of corruption heading for slammer! Another corporate democrat bites the dust! In more good news NY democrats pull a ron desatan and hold up stefanik replacement till general election unless hocul says donors won’t let me.

asset (3c6038) — 2/12/2025 @ 3:52 pm

Judge orders HHS, CDC and FDA to restore deleted webpages with health information
………..
U.S. District Judge John Bates agreed to grant a temporary restraining order sought by the group Doctors for America, which argued that its members used the websites when treating patients and conducting research. The nonprofit organization said that the removal of the webpages by the Department of Health and Human Services and its components violated federal law.

Bates found that the challengers were likely to succeed in their claims that the Department Health and Human Services, CDC and FDA acted unlawfully when they stripped medical information from public-facing websites.
……….
Doctors for America filed its lawsuit against the health agencies on Feb. 4, alleging they violated a federal law that governs the agency rulemaking process and another that requires federal agencies to ensure the public has “timely and equitable access” to their public information.

The group argued in court papers that its members relied on the scrubbed information to provide treatment, conduct research and inform public health responses on topics like youth risk behaviors, adolescent health and HIV.
………..
“There is nothing in either the OPM memorandum or the record, and indeed defendants proffered no information at the hearing, to suggest the restoration of the removed webpages would pose a burden on the agencies’ ability to engage in their work,” Bates wrote. “Similarly, there is no information to suggest that restoring public access would even interfere with the agencies’ ongoing efforts to conform those resources with the president’s executive orders.”
…………

Update: The websites have been restored.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 3:55 pm

Bondi cited New York’s Green Light laws, also known as the Driver’s License Act, which allows illegal immigrants to get a driver’s license.

This is more than refusing to assist the feds. It’s giving aid and comfort to federal fugitives.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 3:58 pm

Doctors for America

Formerly “Doctors for Obama.” Partisan hackery.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 4:00 pm

hold up stefanik replacement till general election unless hocul says donors won’t let me.

So, let me get this straight. You favor disenfranchising voters because they might elect someone you don’t like? That’s noxious.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 4:04 pm

The anti-Democratic attempt to keep Stefanik’s seat open until 2026 is dead.

An attempt by state lawmakers to change laws that would delay election of a new member of Congress to replace Rep. Elise Stefanik is dead.

The news comes just days after state Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins and Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie announced plans to introduce legislation that would change the timeline for special elections.

Had the legislation passed, Stefanik’s NY-21 district could have gone without representation until the Nov. 4 general election. That would have resulted in an even slimmer Republican majority in the House of Representatives than the three-seat GOP advantage that now exists.

“While today’s success in killing this bill is an important win for our conference and the people of the 21st Congressional District, we must continue to fight for fair elections and representation in Congress,” said Republican Assemblyman Ken Blankenbush who represents much of central and southern St. Lawrence County.

“The news that the Democrats have withdrawn their appalling election law bill is a major victory for the North Country and every person who cares about fair elections,” said state Republican Sen. Dan Stec, who represents eastern St. Lawrence County.

“This is a victory for all residents of the 21st Congressional District,” said state Sen. Mark Walczyk, a Republican who represents western St. Lawrence County. “The defeat of Bill S4588 means that our community will not be denied its rightful representation in Congress.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/12/2025 @ 4:06 pm

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/12/2025 @ 3:23 pm

Overheated language. No one was “charged” with anything (i.e. indicted). It’s a civil lawsuit. We’ll see how it plays out.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 4:13 pm

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 4:13 pm

We’ll see if the second Trump Administration fares any better than the first. It is a open question, as far as I can tell, whether issuing drivers licenses to illegal immigrants violates federal law (or authority) over immigration (since the DOJ hasn’t released a copy of its lawsuit.) Since it is a civil lawsuit, and not an indictment, it’s not criminal.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 4:46 pm

@402 did you have a problem when desatan did it? With reasonable people I will be reasonable and with unreasonable people I will be unreasonable. As Malcolm X said “By any means necessary!” No more bringing a peace sign to a gun fight.

asset (3c6038) — 2/12/2025 @ 5:00 pm

We’ll see if the second Trump Administration fares any better than the first.

For example, the first Trump administration lost” when they sued California over its sanctuary laws in 2019.

The administration filed a lawsuit challenging three recent California laws: Senate Bill 54, which restricts state and local officials from sharing information about immigrants within the state, with federal agencies; Assembly Bill 103, which requires the state attorney general to inspect any facility in the state where immigrants are detained by federal agents while awaiting immigration court dates or deportation; and Assembly Bill 450, which forbids private employers from cooperation with federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids and audits unless such cooperation is mandated by a court order or a specific federal law, and requires employers to give notice to employees of any federal immigration-related inspections of employment records.

The federal government claimed that all three bills conflict with federal law and are therefore “preempted,” and that many parts of them also violate the doctrine of “intergovernmental immunity,” which bars states from “discriminating” against the federal government or “those with whom it deals.” In July 2018, a federal district judge ruled in favor of California on two of the three laws in question.

………Senate Bill 54 (was upheld) because it does not actually conflict with any federal law. The Trump administration claims that SB 54 violates federal law because it conflicts with 8 U.S.C. Section 1373, a controversial federal law mandating that “a Federal, State, or local government entity or official may not prohibit, or in any way restrict, any government entity or official from sending to, or receiving from, the Immigration and Naturalization Service information regarding the citizenship or immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.” The Ninth Circuit, like the district court, concludes that SB 54 does not violate Section 1373. …….. Numerous other recent court decisions have concluded that Section 1373 is unconstitutional (as violating the “anti-commandeering” doctrine), particularly since the Supreme Court’s May 2018 ruling in Murphy v. NCAA strengthened the case against Section 1373.

The Ninth Circuit stated:

The United States’ primary argument against SB 54 is that it forces federal authorities to expend greater resources to enforce immigration laws, but that would be the case regardless of SB 54, since California would still retain the ability to “decline to administer the federal program.” New York [v. United States], 505 U.S. at 177. As the Supreme Court recently rearticulated in Murphy (v. NCAA), under the anticommandeering rule, “Congress cannot issue direct orders to state legislatures…”

SB 54 may well frustrate the federal government’s immigration enforcement efforts. However, whatever the wisdom of the underlying policy adopted by California, that frustration is permissible, because California has the right, pursuant to the anticommandeering rule, to refrain from assisting with federal efforts. The United States stresses that… Congress expected cooperation between states and federal immigration authorities…. But when questions of federalism are involved, we must distinguish between expectations and requirements. In this context, the federal government was free to expect as much as it wanted, but it could not require California’s cooperation without running afoul of the Tenth Amendment.

The Ninth Circuit also (upheld) AB 103 state inspections of federal immigration detention facilities on much the same basis as the district court: the inspections do not “discriminate” against the federal government because they are much the same as those that California requires for other prisons within the state.
…………
The Ninth Circuit (reaffirmed) the district court’s ruling that SB 450’s worker notification requirement is constitutional. It emphasized that the requirement does not “discriminate” against the federal government because it does not treat its agents less favorably than similarly situated private parties……..

The Supreme Court declined to hear the Trump Administration’s appeal in the California case. The Trump administration also lost a number of cases banning all federal funds to sanctuary jurisdictions (Executive Order 13768) and imposing conditions on federal law enforcement grants.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 5:17 pm

There was an excellent podcast today on The Dispatch, with Stirewalt filling in for Jonah, with Kori Schake as his guest, covering the gamut of foreign affairs.

On USAID, she agreed with Trump that it was better to put the organization under the State Department, where the monies are better aligned with our foreign policy, but departs from Trump and Shadow President Musk on demolishing the agency. Better to use a steak knife on the USAID budget and operation, not a daisy cutter.

Paul Montagu (c36845) — 2/12/2025 @ 6:13 pm

Update: I happened to be in a Trader Joe’s today and they, too, were selling a dozen large eggs for a $3.49.

I draw no general conclusions from that. They might, for instance, be selling the eggs at a loss, to cut down on the grief they have been getting from customers.

(One of the reason I visit Trader Joe’s is that they have kept the lactase milk I buy at $3.99 a half gallon, which is lower than other stores, near me, where I regularly shop.)

Jim Miller (6f7f39) — 2/12/2025 @ 6:57 pm

Jim Miller (6f7f39) — 2/12/2025 @ 6:57 pm

I just returned from a Trader Joe’s. No eggs whatsoever. That’s what happens when a store keeps the price artificially low. Meanwhile, Winco was brimming with eggs at around $7 a dozen, which I assume is slightly above the market rate.

norcal (a72384) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:16 pm

No one was “charged” with anything (i.e. indicted). It’s a civil lawsuit. We’ll see how it plays out.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/12/2025 @ 4:13 pm

It’s Fox News.

Before the MAGA crowd goes there, yes, the MSM also has these subtle little biases.

These biases aren’t just limited to words. They also come into play with photo selection. Fox shows unflattering photos of Democrat presidents, and the MSM does the same thing with Republican presidents.

Just say no to one-sidedness and tribalism, and learn to call balls and strikes on both sides.

norcal (a72384) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:21 pm

Trump defeated harris by 1.5% and did not win the popular only a plurality of the vote. ( I voted for jill stein) The majority voted for someone other then trump. Only the electoral collage which is undemocratic as twice the person getting the most votes didn’t win in this century alone. 9 million voted democrat in 2020 who did not vote in 2024 and not because they don’t exist as they have been questioned why they didn’t vote. (main reason given democrat party’s economic policy reflected donor class not them.(DU) (Intercept) The nation) DNC voter outreach. Why does this matter? 2026 is getting ready and the terrified corporate democrats are rightly afraid of being primaried.

asset (3c6038) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:26 pm

@411 Calling balls and strikes is subjective too. The dialectic is the best way to get at the truth. Thesis anti-thesis synthesis. I watch fox to get dirt on my side and msDNC to get dirt on the other side as an example. I have to use my 75 years to filter it to get at the truth.

asset (3c6038) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:33 pm

Call it a thought experiment.
The odds of the following happening are about the same as winning a Powerball but, regarding Trump’s idjit proposal to ethnically cleanse all the Gazans out of Gaza, forget any country in the Middle East or Africa or Europe.

The one nation with the capacity to easily house two million Palestinians is none other than communist China. The WSJ estimates that there are 90 million vacant housing units in Xi’s communist paradise. Peter Zeihan figures the number is closer to 180 million, more than the country of 170 million Bangladesh. Also, Xi is building a new showcase $93 billion “dream city” near Beijing that’s mostly empty. There is surplus housing galore.

This relocation could benefit the Gazans because there are jobs aplenty, and they wouldn’t care that China is an authoritarian regime because Hamas-led Gaza is already an authoritarian regime, and leave aside the challenges of adapting to a new language and culture.

China would benefit because their demographics are in the crapper, thanks to their decades-long self-inflicted one-child policy. As Zeihan mentioned, there are more Chinese over the age of 50 than under, and it’s not getting better. Meantime, as pretty face Watters will tell you, Palestinians reproduce like rabbits. Demographic armageddon solved.

Of course, there are challenges.
Gazans won’t move voluntarily, and Han Chinese are blatant racists with an established record of oppressing Muslim Uighers. Also, Palestinians have a reputation of being bad guests in places like Jordan and Syria.
I’m sure Netanyahu would love to add West Bank residents to the Big Relocation (5 million Palestinians could live in China with 85 million empty dwellings to spare), and then have the whole territory to himself. I wonder if Trump is aware of this housing glut.

Paul Montagu (c36845) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:45 pm

Dang, Jim, daughter Montagu just came from Trader Joe’s, wish I’d known. Trader Joe’s is our 3rd grocery option after Costco and Winco. No Walmart or Whole Foods or Safeway or Fred Meyer or QFC or Metropolitan. They’re all way overpriced.

norcal, a dozen eggs at Winco today were $5.41 for the first dozen, but ratchets up to over $8 for dozen #2 and beyond. Not a dumb idea, but I ain’t going for it. My price point is $8.80 for 2 dozen at Costco, when they’re in stock.

Paul Montagu (c36845) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:54 pm

Paul Montagu (c36845) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:45 pm

That’s an interesting point, Paul. China does have a huge glut of housing.

However, China would fear that the Gazans might make common cause with the Muslim Uighurs. China is very paranoid about separatist movements in Xinjiang (and Tibet). The last thing China wants is more religiously-inclined folks.

On a related note, Adam Carolla suggests re-establishing Israel on the Baja peninsula in Mexico. The climates are similar, and a little Jewish culture might just help Mexico. 😉

norcal (a72384) — 2/12/2025 @ 8:01 pm

My price point is $8.80 for 2 dozen at Costco, when they’re in stock.

Paul Montagu (c36845) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:54 pm

I ended up buying a dozen at Sprouts for $7.99, but they were eggs from pastured chickens. I don’t mind paying more for eggs from chickens that aren’t jam-packed in a warehouse, even if they are “cage free”. Pastured>free range>cage free>cage.

Oh, and I don’t want any anti-biotics in the chicken feed, either. That just gets in your blood and builds up anti-biotic resistance.

Winco had none of the eggs I prefer.

norcal (a72384) — 2/12/2025 @ 8:18 pm

Most of Trump’s court losses in his first term were because he flouted the Administrative Procedures Act. Unless the GOP-majority Congress changes this law, Trump’s suckass court record will repeat.

Paul Montagu (c36845) — 2/12/2025 @ 8:55 pm

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/10/2025 @ 6:35

amOthers that aren’t affected have raised prices anyway, because they can. A lesson for tariffs.

That is what the idea of “protectionism” means. It enables domestic producers to charge higher prices than they otherwise could.

But these price increases may not be factored into the calculations made about how much tariffs cost.

Sammy Finkelman (c143ba) — 2/13/2025 @ 8:23 am

The Musk grift is on.

The State Department was planning to buy $400 million worth of “Armored Tesla” later this year, according to its 2025 procurement forecast, a document outlining projections of anticipated contracts, which was published in December. But after reports emerged on Wednesday of the potential for conflict of interest given Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s prominent role in the Trump Administration, the document was updated, removing mention of Tesla and changing the line item to “Armored Electric Vehicles” instead.

As of late Wednesday, both versions of the 2025 procurement forecast remained available on different State Department webpages. The earlier version that mentions Tesla also lists the planned procurement under NAICS Code 311999, an industry code for miscellaneous food manufacturing, while the newer version, which says it was modified at 9:12 p.m., Feb. 12, lists the revised “Armored Electric Vehicles” procurement under NAICS Code 561613 for “Armored Car Services.” No other changes were made in the document, which contains 319 other line items.

It was just a couple days when Musk stood next to Trump and said he was all about transparency.

Paul Montagu (c36845) — 2/13/2025 @ 8:31 am

I think that’s and old story, or at least they’ve been talking about it in the Biden years…

I bet it’s the “Green New Deal” portion of the Reduction Act funding.

I’ve two thoughts:
1) yeah, that should be re-evaluated and maybe put on pause until Musk is done with this DOGE thingy.

2) but why? Why armour up an electric vehicle? Seems like a dumb strategy when there’s limited plugins…

whembly (b7cc46) — 2/13/2025 @ 8:55 am

Why armour up an electric vehicle? Seems like a dumb strategy when there’s limited plugins

Indeed. It’s ideology in search of a mission. White elephants.

Maybe they’ll do electric tanks next.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/13/2025 @ 9:13 am

Tesla should refuse the order and ban armored modifications in their EULA.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/13/2025 @ 9:14 am

Most of Trump’s court losses in his first term were because he flouted the Administrative Procedures Act. Unless the GOP-majority Congress changes this law, Trump’s suckass court record will repeat.

Well, maybe that’s because the APA was designed to slow any changes, and what Trump is attempting (after 50 years of GOP promises without action) is to radically downsize Leviathan. But Leviathan has defense mechanisms.

It is ironic that the APA was passed in reaction to the New Deal as a bulwark against runaway regulations and central planning and now serves to protect the statist central planners against reform.

I think that any number of Trump’s initiatives will require legislation and we will see what happens if the Senate Democrats unite to obstruct that.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/13/2025 @ 9:20 am

Trader Joe’s is our 3rd grocery option after Costco and Winco. No Walmart or …. They’re all way overpriced.

On the few things they carry, Costco is the lowest price. But if I’m not shopping for aspirin, paper towels or big screen TVs, there’s not a lot of selection. Their meat is no bargain. I love TJ’s, but that’s based on quality not price and it’s not the place to buy staples.

Walmart’s selection is great (with perhaps a ceiling on quality) and its everyday prices are lower than everyone else’s everyday prices (other than Costco), so for things you can’t get at Costco, or don’t fall in the TJ’s sphere, I can’t see how you call them overpriced.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/13/2025 @ 9:28 am

First line above should be quoted.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/13/2025 @ 9:29 am

I just returned from a Trader Joe’s. No eggs whatsoever. That’s what happens when a store keeps the price artificially low. Meanwhile, Winco was brimming with eggs at around $7 a dozen, which I assume is slightly above the market rate.

norcal (a72384) — 2/12/2025 @ 7:16 pm

TJ’s has also imposed rationing by limiting purchase to one dozen at a time.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/13/2025 @ 9:31 am

Most of Trump’s court losses in his first term were because he flouted the Administrative Procedures Act…….

Trump’s first term immigration losses were unrelated to the APA; they were mostly related to attempts to “commandeer” state and local authorities to enforce federal immigration laws.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/13/2025 @ 9:36 am

Odd. Just looking at my local Kroger store. Extra large Eggland eggs are $5/dozen, $7/dozen for large. I see similar oddities for other brands but this stuck out. It seems that extra large eggs have different price factors.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/13/2025 @ 9:36 am

Winco is consistently lower than Walmart, Kevin, but I’ll say that Walmart is the least overpriced.
Winco has a good business model, being employee owned, like the good old Lincoln Electric case study that we covered in business school back in the day.

Paul Montagu (c36845) — 2/13/2025 @ 9:40 am

I’ll have to accept that Paul, having never been in a Winco store. None in SoCal and none in NM. Of the normal stores in my area (Smith’s/Kroger, Albertsons and Walmart) Walmart’s regular prices on literally every item are cheaper than the regular prices at the other two. Matter of fact, they are lower that sale prices at Albertsons.

TJs is a different model, not selling a lot of choices in each category and sourcing most of those itself. This allows lower prices and higher quality as it eliminates middlemen and in-store competition. But you only get one brand choice.

Whole Paycheck stands by itself with a stiff tax on smugness.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/13/2025 @ 3:56 pm

How long before Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove becomes a problem for Trump? I guess he’s a useful tool, but every tool has an end-of-life and it’s being tested to destruction.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/13/2025 @ 3:58 pm

How long before Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove becomes a problem for Trump? I guess he’s a useful tool, but every tool has an end-of-life and it’s being tested to destruction.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/13/2025 @ 3:58 pm

Since Bove was Trump’s attorney in the New York fraud trial, I’m sure he will be there a long time as long as he does His Master’s work.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 2/13/2025 @ 4:09 pm

Bove came up (or at least signed) the excuses for dropping the case against New York mayor Eric Adams.

1) Too close to an election (the indictment came in September and the primary is at the end of June) and the case was probably brought for political reasons

2) Eric Adams needs to devote his full attention to helping Trump immigration policy. (Eric Adams previously said that the indictment didn’t interfere with his ability to run things)

3) Pursuant to DOJ policy he was making no evaluation as to the merits of the case or the legal theory. He ordered the US Attorney (who jut resigned) to drop the case as soon as possible – without prejudice – and not to investigate more – until after the general election.

Does Trump expect Eric Adms to make it to the general election???

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 2/13/2025 @ 4:15 pm

Noonan: Trump, Andrew Jackson and the Politics of Crisis

We aren’t in a constitutional crisis. If the administration takes an action, a court holds it unconstitutional, and President Trump defies the court, then we will enter a constitutional crisis.

The president said this week he will obey all court orders as he did throughout his first administration, and appeal if necessary. …

But if you go by two things—the temperament of this White House and the ability of its adversaries to launch innumerable cases within all levels of the judicial system—odds are good a crisis will come.

What then? A hellacious struggle. I’ve been going back to Andrew Jackson’s presidency (1829-37), which can be seen as a nonstop constitutional crisis……

Although Jackson faced a hostile judiciary; Trump has a lot of support Jackson lacked.

Kevin M (a9545f) — 2/13/2025 @ 7:07 pm

On Trade, I have decided, for purposes of Fairness, that I will charge a RECIPROCAL Tariff meaning, whatever Countries charge the United States of America, we will charge them – No more, no less!

For purposes of this United States Policy, we will consider Countries that use the VAT System, which is far more punitive than a Tariff, to be similar to that of a Tariff. Sending merchandise, product, or anything by any other name through another Country, for purposes of unfairly harming America, will not be accepted. In addition, we will make provision for subsidies provided by Countries in order to take Economic advantage of the United States. Likewise, provisions will be made for Nonmonetary Tariffs and Trade Barriers that some Countries charge in order to keep our product out of their domain or, if they do not even let U.S. businesses operate. We are able to accurately determine the cost of these Nonmonetary Trade Barriers. It is fair to all, no other Country can complain and, in some cases, if a Country feels that the United States would be getting too high a Tariff, all they have to do is reduce or terminate their Tariff against us. There are no Tariffs if you manufacture or build your product in the United States.

For many years, the U.S. has been treated unfairly by other Countries, both friend and foe. This System will immediately bring Fairness and Prosperity back into the previously complex and unfair System of Trade. America has helped many Countries throughout the years, at great financial cost. It is now time that these Countries remember this, and treat us fairly – A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD FOR AMERICAN WORKERS. I have instructed my Secretary of State, Secretary of Commerce, Secretary of the Treasury, and United States Trade Representative (USTR) to do all work necessary to deliver RECIPROCITY to our System of Trade!

Well Trump fans: Is a VAT tax a tariff?

Davethulhu (553854) — 2/13/2025 @ 8:25 pm

2/7/2025

Weekend Open Thread

436 Responses to “Weekend Open Thread”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out