Patterico's Pontifications

3/14/2025

Weekend Open Thread

Filed under: General — Dana @ 9:06 am



[guest post by Dana]

Let’s go!

First news item

An interesting look at the disappearance of the WASP, and how no one noticed:

[T]here is no way back to an America run by WASPs, nor should we want there to be. But at its best, the WASP establishment gave us some things that every society needs, including leaders with a sense of ownership over the long-term success of their country and a sense that their privileges go hand-in-hand with a responsibility for those born less lucky.

One way to interpret the chaos into which the country is currently descending is to see it as the result of the void left by the disappearance of that old WASP code. And one way to interpret the culture war that seems to be consuming our politics is to think of it as a battle over what set of norms and customs should be put in the place of the ones that have recently vanished.

It would be naive and ahistorical to wish for an America in which the WASPs are still in charge. But their disappearance is one of the reasons for the chaos in which we now find ourselves. Constructing a meritocratic elite that is better than its WASP predecessors at ruling the country—one that actually manages to earn the assent of most Americans, unlike its more recent incarnations—will by no means be easy.

Second news item

Democrats very unhappy with Chuck Schumer over vote for funding bill:

Privately, House Democrats are so infuriated with Schumer’s decision that some have begun encouraging her to run against Schumer in a primary, according to a Democratic member who directly spoke with Ocasio-Cortez about running at the caucus’ policy retreat. Multiple Democrats in the Congressional Progressive Caucus and others directly encouraged Ocasio-Cortez to run on Thursday night after Schumer’s announcement, this member said.

The member said that Democrats in Leesburg were “so mad” that even centrist Democrats were “ready to write checks for AOC for Senate,” adding that they have “never seen people so mad.”

Asked by CNN about fellow Democrats encouraging her to challenge Schumer, Ocasio-Cortez declined to answer and said she was focused on keeping Democrats from backing the funding bill: “We still have an opportunity to correct course here, and that is my number one priority.”

Third news item

Columbia University informs about expulsions and suspensions:

Columbia University said students who occupied the campus’ Hamilton Hall during pro-Palestinian protests last spring have been expelled, suspended for several years or had their degrees temporarily revoked.

The sanctions were issued by the Columbia University Judicial Board on Thursday, the school said.

“The outcomes issued by the UJB are based on its evaluation of the severity of behaviors at these events and prior disciplinary actions,” the university said in a statement sent to the school community. “These outcomes are the result of following the thorough and rigorous processes laid out in the Rules of University Conduct in our statutes, which include investigations, hearings and deliberations.”

Fourth news item

Weighing in on the arrest of Mahmoud Khalil:

Now we get to the hard and important part—the unshakable appearance, if not the reality, that all of this is being done in retaliation for constitutionally protected speech on Khalil’s part. It seems to me that there are three different places where the First Amendment might show up in the litigation over what’s happened: As a challenge to the constitutionality of each of the two grounds on which I’m speculating the government might claim it can remove him; and as a standalone retaliation claim.

Taking the third possibility first, the problem for Khalil is that the Supreme Court, in general, has made it very difficult to use a First Amendment retaliation claim to successfully defeat an enforcement proceeding otherwise supported by probable cause—and especially in immigration cases. In its 1999 ruling in Reno v. American-Arab Antidiscrimination Committee, for instance, the Court stressed that “As a general matter . . . an alien unlawfully in this country has no constitutional right to assert selective enforcement as a defense against his deportation.” To be sure, Justice Scalia’s majority opinion left open the possibility that there could be “a rare case in which the alleged basis of discrimination is so outrageous” as to bar an otherwise valid removal proceeding. This may well be such a case. And the plaintiffs in AADC were not LPRs—which might put even more force into the argument for First Amendment limits here. But it’s worth starting from the baseline that, for better or worse (and, in my view, for worse), the First Amendment doesn’t generally protect non-citizens against being removed for activity that the First Amendment protects.

I’m a bit more sanguine about the possibility of specific First Amendment challenges to the hypothesized grounds for Khalil’s removal. Among other things, the First Amendment might require the Secretary of State to have substantial support for a personal determination that an LPR’s continued presence “would compromise a compelling United States foreign policy interest,” support that, in turn, courts could subject to meaningful scrutiny.

Fifth news item

Evidence of Trump’s cognitive decline?:

During a Thursday press availability with reporters in the Oval Office while meeting with the head of NATO, Trump centubled on his argument that Canada must join the United States, insisting that Canada “only works as a state.” Trump said:

“But it comes a point when you just can’t do that. You have to run your own country. And to be honest with you, Canada only works as a state. It doesn’t. We don’t need anything. They have as a state. It would be one of the great states anywhere. This would be the most incredible country visually. If you look at a map, they drew an artificial line right through it between Canada and the U.S. just a straight artificial line. Somebody did it a long time ago, many, many decades ago. And it makes no sense.

It’s so perfect as a great and cherished state. Keeping, ‘Oh, Canada,’ the national anthem, I love it. I think it’s great. Keep it. But it’ll be for the state. One of our greatest states, maybe our greatest state. But why should we subsidize another country for 200 billion, costs us $200 billion a year? And again, we don’t need their lumber. We don’t need their energy.

We have more than they do. We don’t need anything. We don’t need their cars. I’d much rather make the cars here. And there’s not a thing that we need. Now there’ll be a little disruption, but it won’t be very long. But they need us. We really don’t need them. And we have to do this. I’m sorry. We have to do this.“

If not cognitive decline, how does one explain this nonsensical statement?

Sixth news item

The Panama Canal in play:

The White House has directed the U.S. military to draw up options for increasing the American troop presence in Panama to achieve President Trump’s goal of “reclaiming” the Panama Canal, according to two U.S. officials familiar with the planning.

During a joint address to Congress last week, Trump said, “to further enhance our national security, my administration will be reclaiming the Panama Canal.” Since then, administration officials have not said what “reclaiming” means.

U.S. Southern Command is developing potential plans that vary from partnering more closely with Panamanian security forces to the less likely option of U.S. troops seizing the Panama Canal by force, the officials said. Whether military force is used, the officials added, depends on how much Panamanian security forces agree to partner with the U.S.

The Trump administration’s goal is to increase the U.S. military presence in Panama to diminish China’s influence there, particularly access to the canal, the officials said.

Seventh news item

Trump repeating Russian propaganda:

We had very good and productive discussions with President Vladimir Putin of Russia yesterday, and there is a very good chance that this horrible, bloody war can finally come to an end — BUT, AT THIS VERY MOMENT, THOUSANDS OF UKRAINIAN TROOPS ARE COMPLETELY SURROUNDED BY THE RUSSIAN MILITARY, AND IN A VERY BAD AND VULNERABLE POSITION. I have strongly requested to President Putin that their lives be spared. This would be a horrible massacre, one not seen since World War II. God bless them all!!!

What Putin said:

On Thursday, Putin had said it is now “impossible” for even small groups of Ukrainian troops to withdraw from Russia’s Kursk region because they had lost control of the area, Russian state news outlet Tass reported, characterizing it as an encirclement.

Russia said the same day that it had recaptured Sudzha, the largest town in Kursk, and other settlements in the area. In the biggest sign of Russian advances in the area, Putin paid a surprise visit to Kursk earlier in the week, wearing military fatigues for the trip.

Ukraine denies Putin and Trump comments:

Ukraine’s military denied U.S. President Donald Trump’s claim that thousands of its troops were surrounded, following similar comments by Russia’s President Vladimir Putin.

“Reports about the enemy’s alleged ‘encirclement’ of Ukrainian units in the Kursk region are not true and are created by the Russians for political goals and pressure on Ukraine and partners,” the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine said in a statement.

“The situation has not changed significantly during the day. Hostilities in the operational zone of the Kursk group of troops continue.”

Two lying thugs in a pod. Where is the outrage that a sitting American president is echoing a vile dictator, hater of freedom, and America’s enemy? Why is this okay with any American?

Asking the right question:

I have a very serious question: does the president of the United States rely on any information about the battlefield situation in Ukraine that doesn’t come from Putin’s conversations with Witkoff? Because there aren’t thousands of helpless Ukrainian troops in full encirclement. And asking Putin for an imaginary favor is quite a way to move the goalpost after Putin refused the unconditional 30-day ceasefire.

Eighth news item

Grifters, quacks, and charlatans leading the way – I’m looking at you, RFK Jr.:

When Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was confirmed as America’s secretary of health and human services, neutral observers might have asked themselves: Would it be possible for a lawyer who had questioned the safety of childhood vaccinations for two decades to look at the available data and reconsider his views?

Kennedy’s recent interviews with Fox News, along with an op-ed he published on that outlet’s website, have been enough to make many experts conclude the answer is “no.”

Parsing every claim about the measles vaccine that Kennedy has made would take a long time, so let’s focus on one: that the vaccine causes deaths every year. Researchers say that simply isn’t true, except potentially in a small number of people who are not supposed to receive it — those with compromised immune systems.

“There are adverse events from the vaccine,” Kennedy said in a March 11 interview with Fox’s Sean Hannity. “It does cause deaths every year. It causes — it causes all the illnesses that measles itself causes, encephalitis and blindness, et cetera. And so people ought to be able to make that choice for themselves.”

The Infectious Disease Society of America says there have been “no deaths related to the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine in healthy individuals.” (Since the 1970s, the measles vaccine has been given in a combination shot with mumps and rubella to minimize the number of injections kids get.)

“The MMR vaccine has never been found to cause a death in an immunocompetent individual,” Daniel Griffin, chief of the division of infectious diseases at Island Infectious Disease Medical in New York said, echoing that conclusion. “If you’ve got someone who has a compromised immune system, and someone doesn’t know any better and gives them an active vaccine, which is what you are not supposed to do, then, you know, that could result in a death.”

Ninth news item

This is just evil. How does Marco Rubio live with himself? He sold his soul, even though he knows better. Or knew better, once upon a time:

Even as President Donald Trump and government-demolition czar Elon Musk appear to actively favor Russia’s interests amid discussions of how to end the Russia-Ukraine war, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has struck a studiously neutral posture. Rubio has suggested that any peaceful resolution must take into account Ukraine’s “interests” and “their ability to prosper as a nation.”

But now Rubio’s State Department may have pulled a behind-the-scenes maneuver that appears tilted toward Russia’s interests and could anger Ukraine and its backers in the United States, leading to more questions about the department’s neutrality in the standoff.

The State Department has quietly terminated a contract that was in the process of transferring evidence of alleged Russian abductions of Ukrainian children—a potential war crime—to law enforcement officials in Europe, two people familiar with the situation tell The New Republic.

The nixed award could make it harder to continue tracking down the kidnapped Ukrainian kids and complicate efforts to seek accountability for the abductions, says one of the sources, who has direct knowledge of the ongoing operation.

. . .

The contract is extremely sensitive, because it involves the tracking of some of these abducted children. With this award, which was initially granted several years ago and renewed in late 2023, the State Department has been underwriting work by the Yale School of Public Health’s Humanitarian Research Lab, which has been using highly sophisticated tools, such as satellite imagery and analysis of open-source technology and biometric data, to identify and locate the abducted kids.

The report—which the lab’s executive director, Nathaniel Raymond, presented before the United Nations Security Council—concluded that this may constitute “crimes against humanity under customary international law.” The lab’s work has been shared with the International Criminal Court in connection with its recent charges that Russian officials, including Vladimir Putin, committed war crimes against the kidnapped kids.

The Yale lab had also transferred names and dossiers on the abducted kids it had located to Ukrainian authorities. But the underlying evidence—the hard digital documentation of kids’ movements and locations, compiled with sophisticated technologies—still needs to be transferred to Europol, the European Union’s law enforcement arm, the source with direct knowledge of the operation says.

This transfer to Europol has been interrupted by the Trump-Rubio State Department’s cancellation of the award, according to that source and a Democratic congressional aide with knowledge of the contract. This sort of tracking involves extremely complex and technologically sophisticated work, and the evidence itself—which is essential to proving the abductions—is highly complicated and must be moved via secure channels.

Have a good weekend.

—Dana

378 Responses to “Weekend Open Thread”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (e883ad)

  2. Hi Dana. What happened to JVW?

    lloyd (3c84b5)

  3. Speaking of “grifters, quacks, and charlatans”:

    ………..
    The celebrity physician known as Dr. Oz, who is scheduled to face a Senate hearing Friday on his bid to run the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, would bring a different look to a job usually filled by low-key policy wonks.

    If confirmed by the Senate as expected, the former television host will take over one of the most politically and financially sensitive agencies in the federal government at a time when it is facing unprecedented challenges, including pressure from Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency to cut costs.

    ……..(H)e has also generated controversy over products highlighted on his show, and he has little background in the nuts-and-bolts of health policy or the federal government, including CMS, which oversees $1.5 trillion in annual spending and the coverage of millions.
    ……..
    He has given few concrete indications about his plans. Oz has been a strong supporter of private insurers’ role in Medicare under the program known as Medicare Advantage, at one point writing that uninsured Americans should be covered by such plans. …….

    ……… He has also talked enthusiastically about deploying technology like artificial intelligence to improve access to medical care and preventive treatments.
    ………
    Medical researchers faulted the Oz show for repeatedly recommending health interventions and treatments without sufficient evidence to justify their use. Oz was featured in a skeptical Senate hearing on “false and deceptive” marketing of weight-loss products. Oz has said he believed in products he discussed and presented multiple points of view.
    ………
    He will be taking on the CMS job at a uniquely difficult moment. The agency oversees the health insurance of more than 160 million Americans, including those on Medicare, which primarily covers older people, and Medicaid, largely for those with low incomes. The agency also regulates health plans sold under the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare.
    ………
    At CMS’s helm, Oz will likely face bruising fights over health coverage. Congressional Republicans are eyeing deep cuts to Medicaid, as well as a potential halt to extra federal subsidies that many consumers use to purchase ACA plans.

    Those moves could result in millions losing insurance—and unleash a political backlash. Only about 17% of Americans, and 35% of Trump voters, want to see Medicaid cuts, according to a February poll by the nonprofit KFF. Hospitals, doctors and state officials are expected to lobby hard against reductions.
    ………

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  4. Schumer is in a no-win position because he has to know that, since Newt circa 1995, the parties responsible for government shutdowns end up paying the political price.

    I think he’s gambling on Trump welshing on the Impoundment Control Act, so that this president’s violation of statutory law will be settled in the courts.

    Paul Montagu (354e09)

  5. The member said that Democrats in Leesburg were “so mad” that even centrist Democrats were “ready to write checks for AOC for Senate,” adding that they have “never seen people so mad.”

    So, in response to the observation that the Democrats lost in 2024 because they were unhinged, they ask “Who needs hinges anyway?”

    If they want to appear as a viable alternative to MAGA, being as loony or loonier isn’t the path.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  6. I think he’s gambling on Trump [acting stupidly]

    A near-certain bet.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  7. centrist Democrats were “ready to write checks for AOC for Senate”

    Unlikely projection. But if she does beat Schumer, I’ll be supporting Mike Lawler for the win.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  8. Consumer Sentiment Nosedives on Gyrating Economic Policies

    ……….
    The University of Michigan’s closely watched index of consumer sentiment nosedived an additional 11% to 57.9 in mid-March from 64.7 last month, much weaker than expectations of 63.2. It marks the lowest level since 2022 and a third fall in as many months.

    Compared to this time last year, consumer sentiment is down 27%. A loss of confidence can be a headwind for economic growth, since consumers can delay or abandon planned purchases if they feel downbeat about their prospects.
    ………
    Inflation expectations for the year ahead jumped to 4.9% from 4.3% last month, the highest reading since late 2022, according to the survey.

    While U.S. inflation cooled more than expected in February, according to Labor Department data, that may provide little relief to consumers and the Federal Reserve if tariffs raise prices in the months ahead.

    “Frequent gyrations in economic policies make it very difficult for consumers to plan for the future, regardless of one’s policy preferences,” (said Joanne Hsu, director of the survey.)
    ……….
    Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said after a speech last week that tariffs would likely mean a “one-time price adjustment,” and he wasn’t worried about inflation. ………

    Consumers from all political affiliations were in agreement that the outlook has weakened since February, albeit with varying intensity. The survey’s expectation index declined 10% for Republicans, while it fell 12% for independents and dropped more than 20% for Democrats.

    Indeed, while current economic conditions were little changed, expectations for the future deteriorated across multiple facets of the economy, including personal finances, labor markets, inflation, business conditions, and stock markets, Hsu noted.
    ………

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  9. Where is the outrage that a sitting American president is echoing a vile dictator, hater of freedom, and America’s enemy

    It’s right beside my outrage at his meshuggener tariff policy, his nonsensical tax giveaways (e.g. Social Security tax on the affluent, no tax on overtime, etc), his hack/slash approach to budget cuts and his thuggish threats to keep Republicans in line.

    Some days I prioritize others of these.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  10. Inflation often cools when people are saving up for a recession.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  11. Trump is repeating Russian lies about Kursk being “surrounded”. Once again, this president takes the word of a Russian thug-in-chief above all else, which is yet another reason why he’s with the terrorists.

    Our team has a good understanding of the situation in Kursk. There are no encircled troops. The retreat was generally organized but occasionally chaotic. There is no threat of encirclement, and no evidence suggests otherwise. It’s wise to rely on intelligence, not Putin’s word.

    Paul Montagu (354e09)

  12. “that the vaccine causes deaths every year. Researchers say that simply isn’t true, except potentially in a small number of people who are not supposed to receive it — those with compromised immune systems.”

    So it IS true, but we don’t want to count those instances to make our claim valid…..kinda like the child gun deaths, we have to count 18- and 19-year-olds to make our claims valid.

    Patrick (a6fd0d)

  13. Gee, I wonder what might be in their backgrounds.

    The White House has quietly directed the FBI to halt the background check process for dozens of President Donald Trump’s top staffers, and has transferred the process to the Pentagon, sources familiar with the matter told ABC News.

    The directive came last month after agents tasked with completing the background investigations had conducted interviews with a handful of top White House aides — a standard part of the background check process.

    White House officials took the unusual step of ordering a stop to the background check investigations after they deemed the process too intrusive, sources said.

    That “too intrusive” is a nice touch, isn’t it?

    What are the chances this will inspire investigative reporters to do some digging? Somewhere between 99 and 100 percent.

    (If you know of any problems with any of these staffers, please share them with us.)

    Jim Miller (581560)

  14. Inflation often cools when people are saving up for a recession.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/14/2025 @ 9:57 am

    Then that should offset any tariff-induced inflation impact.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  15. “So it IS true, but we don’t want to count those instances to make our claim valid…..kinda like the child gun deaths, we have to count 18- and 19-year-olds to make our claims valid.”

    How many deaths from the measles vaccine have there been in the last 10 years?

    Davethulhu (14e9e4)

  16. If not cognitive decline, how does one explain this nonsensical statement?

    He can’t think of any good lies as to why the United States needs to annex Canada, and why that is the only good way to get free trade..

    Incidentally, I think he was also trying to argue against the admission of each province of Canada as a separate state. His real reason being that that way he risks giving Democrats permanent control of the United States Senate.

    Sammy Finkelman (8ddc19)

  17. So it IS true, but we don’t want to count those instances to make our claim valid

    We don’t want to count those cases because the approval rules say those people cannot get the vaccine. But they try anyway.

    It’s like people who use an electric hair dryer in the tub. There are lots and lots of warning labels and if you do that anyway the manufacturer is not going to pay out.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  18. Then that should offset any tariff-induced inflation impact.

    No. The tariff impact is a flat cost added and does not reflect marginal demand.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  19. That “too intrusive” is a nice touch, isn’t it?

    TS clearances are supposed to be intrusive. Very intrusive, and lying is a big mistake.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  20. From the “We’re Not In The Best of Hands” thread:

    If the GOP is savaged in 2026, and loses both houses by a lot (e.g. 50 House seats, 8 Senate seats), the survivors will not be happy with Trump and may not think his backing helps them in the general election. It may help them in the primary, but being nominated to lose isn’t all that great.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/14/2025 @ 7:56 am

    That’s big if

    ……..
    The specifics of the 2026 map give the Republicans an opening to once again produce an exception to the midterm seat loss trend for the presidential party in the Senate, although Democrats have credible targets too.

    Republicans find themselves defending 22 seats this cycle, while Democrats are only defending 13. However, 20 of the 22 Republican-held seats are in states that Donald Trump won by double-digits, leaving only Maine, which is reliably Democratic for president but which has a proven incumbent in Republican Susan Collins, and North Carolina, a GOP-leaning battleground where Republican Thom Tillis is seeking a third term, as obvious Democratic targets. Meanwhile, 11 of the 13 Democratic Senate seats are in states that never voted for Donald Trump, while a pair—Georgia, defended by first-term Sen. Jon Ossoff (D), as well as an open seat in Michigan—voted for Trump in two of his three elections.

    Those four states, two on each side, form the competitive core of the 2026 Senate map. This basic alignment works out well for Republicans, because if this holds and there really are only four highly competitive Senate races, the worst they could do would be to lose two net seats, which would still keep them in the majority at 51-49………..
    ……….
    Even if 2026 is an overall “blue wave” environment, expecting Democrats to win back the Senate sets the bar too high—the seats just are not there, at least as we assess the map at the start of the cycle. Likewise, for Republicans, simply holding control of the Senate sets the bar too low for them: They should look at this election as an opportunity to cement their new majority so that when 2028 comes around, the majority isn’t really in play that cycle, either.
    ………..

    The 25 states that voted for Trump three times represent half of the US Senate. I don’t see what could change that dynamic. With the retirements of Senators Gary Peters (D-MI) and Tina Smith (D-MN), Larry Sabato has moved Michigan to a tossup and Minnesota from Likely Democratic to Leans. This analysis doesn’t include Jean Shaheen’s retirement in NH, which could also add a Republican pickup.

    On House side:

    ……….
    The initial 2026 House battleground consists of 64 seats rated as either Toss-up (10 races), Tilt (13), Lean (22) or Likely (19), with two or three races in Ohio currently outstanding over a pending new congressional map.

    The initial playing field is disproportionately Democratic turf, with the party defending 34 vulnerable seats compared with 30 currently in GOP hands. That makeup aligns with the high correlation between presidential results and House outcomes and the fact that there are 13 Democrats who represent districts where President Donald Trump finished ahead of Kamala Harris and just three Republicans who represent districts where Harris beat Trump.

    But Republicans are defending a disproportionately larger share of the Toss-up races. ……..
    ……….
    GOP lawmakers are currently confident they are acting well within a mandate voters gave their party in 2024, but there could be increased tensions between Trump and Republicans on Capitol Hill later in the cycle. House Republicans are poised to take the brunt of voter dissatisfaction if the president’s policies don’t go well, because Trump doesn’t have to face voters in 2026.
    #########

    Even if the House flips to the Democrats, the Senate will remain the red wall against any impeachment threat.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  21. hen that should offset any tariff-induced inflation impact.

    No. The tariff impact is a flat cost added and does not reflect marginal demand.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/14/2025 @ 12:09 pm

    Sorry, I should have labeled that as sarcasm.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  22. His real reason being that that way he risks giving Democrats permanent control of the United States Senate.

    Doesn’t matter. It gives them permanent control of the US House and the Electoral College by essentially cloning California. And really, as separate states some would have GOP Senators.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  23. His real reason being that that way he risks giving Democrats permanent control of the United States Senate.

    That’s laughable. As I pointed out above, 25 states that voted for Trump three times represent half of the US Senate.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  24. I’ve added a 9th news item to the post. It’s absolutely frustrating and maddening.

    Dana (730e71)

  25. In Part I, Zeihan put together over a dozen examples of how Trump’s across-the-board actions have benefited the Russian terrorist state by weakening America, concluding that Trump is partaking in the “deliberate disassembly of building blocks of American power and security”. It’s hard to disagree.

    Considering the breadth and rapidity of what this president has done, speaks to the possible penetration of the White House by Russia with. To me, Trump is obviously the most penetrated, and that Trump listens to Putin but not his intelligence briefings, assuming he even gets intelligence briefings.

    Paul Montagu (354e09)

  26. Those four states, two on each side, form the competitive core of the 2026 Senate map.

    As I said, “in a wave election.” The GOP has 9 seats up that are rated R+8 or less.

    In 2006, the GOP lost MT, MO, VA, PA, OH & RI. They gained no seats
    In 2008, the GOP lost AK, OR, NM, CO, MI, VA, NC & NH. They gained no seats.

    Many of those races they were expected to win in each case.

    Again, if people are going to the polls thinking “Thank God for Donald Trump” then they will do just fine. I am less sanguine.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  27. The contract is extremely sensitive, because it involves the tracking of some of these abducted children.

    I expect to hear Putin and his “American” mouthpieces tell us that there is no evidence of any of these abductions. “Show us your proof!” says Putin.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  28. Does Trump’s immunity cover treasonous official acts?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  29. 9th news item

    From the NewRepublic…

    “…may have pulled…”

    “…two people familiar with the situation tell The New Republic.”

    “…according to that source and a Democratic congressional aide with knowledge of the contract. ”

    and written by Greg Sargent.

    No.

    I don’t care for another “sources say” from a Democratic propaganda arm.

    If true, why aren’t they resigning in protest?

    Isn’t that the principle thing to do?

    whembly (b7cc46)

  30. I’d be concerned if there’s more than just “sources said” citations.

    Right now, my default response is “I call bs”.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  31. Does Trump’s immunity cover treasonous official acts?

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/14/2025 @ 12:43 pm

    What are his “treasonous official acts”; has he meaning “levying war against the United States” or providing “aid and comfort” to what enemy?

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  32. This is upderstandable…

    Very big shift:

    NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte:

    “Russia is there, it will not go away,..

    It would be absolutely normal for Europe and the United States to have normal relations with Russia, but we are not there yet.”

    pic.twitter.com/epTaz8Kg6Q

    — Zineb Riboua (@zriboua) March 14, 2025

    But hopefully this doesn’t slam the door for Ukraine’s entrance into the EU.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  33. providing “aid and comfort” to what enemy?

    Well, we were arming Ukraine against Russia, now we are helping Russia conquer Ukraine. I guess that’s my faulty thinking and I’m just unable to get right with the Party message.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  34. One of Russia’s demands is that Ukraine be neutral country, which would seem to preclude EU membership.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  35. The “two people familiar with the situation” are saying that “the State Department has quietly terminated a contract that was in the process of transferring evidence of alleged Russian abductions of Ukrainian children—a potential war crime—to law enforcement officials in Europe.”

    This is standard two-sourced reporting, whembly.

    Paul Montagu (354e09)

  36. One of Russia’s demands is that Ukraine be neutral country, which would seem to preclude EU membership.

    Maybe Trump will make it a state.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  37. @35

    This is standard two-sourced reporting, whembly.

    Paul Montagu (354e09) — 3/14/2025 @ 1:09 pm

    That’s been abused ad nauseum because more often than not, the story’s wrong.

    Furthermore, it’s TNR, a rapid leftist publican.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  38. @34

    One of Russia’s demands is that Ukraine be neutral country, which would seem to preclude EU membership.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/14/2025 @ 1:07 pm

    An opening negotiation plank.

    Ukraine should say “no”.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  39. Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/14/2025 @ 12:43 pm

    Does Trump’s immunity cover treasonous official acts?

    I don’t think it does – or anything that couldn’t have been done with legitimate motives. Treason specifically though has a hard to achieve definition in the constitution.

    the President must be immune from prosecution for an official act unless the Government can show that applying a criminal prohibition to that act would pose no “dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch.” Fitzgerald, 457 U. S., at 754. Pp. 12–15.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  40. providing “aid and comfort” to what enemy?

    Well, we were arming Ukraine against Russia, now we are helping Russia conquer Ukraine. I guess that’s my faulty thinking and I’m just unable to get right with the Party message.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/14/2025 @ 1:06 pm

    Switches in policy are not, by definition, treason. The “aid and comfort” would need to provided to an enemy at war with the United States; and no war has been declared against Russia. Nor, as far as we know, has Trump sworn an oath to Russia.

    Cramer v. United Statess (1945) was first case interpreting the treason clause by the Supreme Court, and it contains a long historic overview of the treason clause as discussed by the Constitutional Convention:

    ………
    Treason of adherence to an enemy was old in the law. It consisted of breaking allegiance to one’s own King by forming an attachment to his enemy. Its scope was comprehensive, its requirements indeterminate. It might be predicated on intellecutal or emotional sympathy with the for, or merely lack of zeal in the cause of one’s own country. That was not the kind of disloyalty the framers thought should constitute treason. They promptly accepted the proposal to restrict it to cases where also there was conduct which was ‘giving them aid and comfort.’
    ………
    Thus the crime of treason consists of two elements: adherence to the enemy; and rendering him aid and comfort. A citizen intellectually or emotionally may favor the enemy and harbor sympathies or convictions disloyal to this country’s policy or interest, but so long as he commits no act of aid and comfort to the enemy, there is no treason. On the other hand, a citizen may take actions, which do aid and comfort the enemy- making a speech critical of the government or opposing its measures, profiteering, striking in defense plants or essential work, and the hundred other things which impair our cohesion and diminish our strength- but if there is no adherence to the enemy in this, if there is no intent to betray, there is no treason.
    ………
    ……..While to prove giving of aid and comfort would require the prosecution to show actions and deeds, if the Constitution stopped there, such acts could be inferred from circumstantial evidence. This the framers thought would not do. So they added what in effect is a command that the overt acts must be established by direct evidence, and the direct testimony must be that of two witnesses instead of one. In this sense the overt act procedural provision adds something, and something important, to the definition.
    ………

    My emphasis; footnotes omitted.

    You need to get right with the Constitution.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  41. Ukraine should say “no”.

    whembly (b7cc46) — 3/14/2025 @ 1:31 pm

    Yeah, I’m sure Russia will respond positively. In this case, it is the “golden gun rule”: He who has the guns makes the rules.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  42. Austria is neutral as used to be Sweden and Finland.

    I see so is Ireland – both neutral and a member of the EU.

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

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  43. Ukraine should say “no”.

    whembly (b7cc46) — 3/14/2025 @ 1:31 pm

    Ukraine is no position to say “no” about anything.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  44. For treason the United States must also, I think, have declared war on that country in order for t to an enemy.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  45. Austria is neutral as used to be Sweden and Finland.

    I see so is Ireland – both neutral and a member of the EU.

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

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 3/14/2025 @ 1:38 pm

    Neither of which are a battlefield and occupied by a hostile power.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  46. More on the Yale Humanitarian Research Lab…

    Yale’s researchers use open source information, including satellite imagery, social media and Russian publications, to identify, locate and track the whereabouts of Ukrainian children taken to Russia.

    The evidence is then passed on to the Ukrainian authorities, including Bring Kids Back UA, to help find children and repatriate them.

    In one of the lab’s last reports before Donald Trump’s inauguration in January, it gathered evidence on 314 children from Donetsk and Luhansk provinces in eastern Ukraine. One child was from the occupied city of Mariupol. All of the children were aged two to 17.

    Some are pictured on a Russian adoption and fostering website, while others are living with Russian families.

    The lab is part of the Conflict Observatory programme, which was set up with funding from the US State Department’s Bureau of Conflict and Stabilisation Operations to investigate and publish evidence of Russia-perpetrated war crimes and other atrocities in Ukraine. Other organisations also previously fed into the initiative.

    Musk’s controversial Doge agency, created by Trump, has been tasked with cutting US government jobs and other spending. However it has also been accused of being heavy-handed and damaging the functionality of the government.

    The i Paper understands Yale’s work has been on pause since late January, with researchers being shut out from their work and files.

    The lab also shares its evidence with Europol, the law enforcement agency of the European Union, and the ICC, as part of their efforts to prosecute Russian individuals and agencies.

    The abrupt closure meant efforts to transfer its latest evidence to Europol was not completed. It is also understood that the formal evidence-sharing agreement with the ICC ended.

    The website for the Conflict Observatory appears to have been taken down.
    […]
    The original US government press release announcing funding for the Conflict Observatory programme, which is no longer available on the State Department’s website, said its mission was to “capture, analyze [sic], and make widely available evidence of Russia-perpetrated war crimes and other atrocities in Ukraine”.

    It received investment of $6m (£4.6m) and is understood to have received further funding from that point.

    A Yale University spokesperson said: “Researchers at the Humanitarian Research Lab (HRL) were notified recently that government funding for their work on the war in Ukraine has been discontinued. HRL investigates and addresses humanitarian crises worldwide, using data and analysis from open-source and remote sensing.

    “While we are not in a position to comment on the State Department’s decision, we do recognise the importance of HRL’s work and its contributions to international efforts to protect vulnerable populations, including Ukrainian children. Yale remains supportive of its researchers pursuing work that sheds light on urgent global issues.”

    When The i Paper approached the State Department for a response, it was referred to the White House, which is yet to comment.

    Putin’s program to abduct Ukrainian children for his Putin Youth program is nothing short of evil, and it’s this evil that Trump is aligning with.

    Paul Montagu (354e09)

  47. @43

    Ukraine should say “no”.

    whembly (b7cc46) — 3/14/2025 @ 1:31 pm

    Ukraine is no position to say “no” about anything.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/14/2025 @ 1:39 pm

    It takes two sides to “give and take”…

    Otherwise, it’s not a negotiate, but a conquest.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  48. Trump negotiator has stopped negotiating with Hamas and concentrated for now on the Russia0Ukraine war.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/13/world/middleeast/israel-hamas-ceasefire-trump-ukraine.html

    Israel-Hamas Talks Deadlocked as Trump Envoy Turns to Ukraine

    The two sides are supposed to negotiate a second phase of the cease-fire agreement that would end the war, but they remain far apart on how to move forward.

    …Mr. Trump has effectively charged Mr. Witkoff with working to resolve two of the world’s most fraught conflicts — the wars in Gaza and Ukraine.

    The United States tried another channel to talk to Hamas too, using the special envoy on hostages, Adam Boehler, but all that resulted in was the Hamas leaders he spoke to in Qatar playing “good cop.” They impressed Boehler but he had to retract his words.

    This is where Mahmoud Khalil might really interfere with U.S foreign policy – giving Hamas et all hope with his activities that they could get the United States to reverse policy.

    Back to Witkoff:

    https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog-march-14-2025/

    Witkoff: Hamas is making a very bad bet that time is on its side — it is not

    US envoy warns terror group of going beyond unspecified deadline for agreement * In apparent about face, Rubio signs onto G7 statement backing resumption of Gaza aid

    That’s kind of a mistake. Because the alternative to a siege, which kills few people (and also probably impacts the hostages so won’t be too harsh – there’s still water) is a resumption of bombing, though the Arab states probably think it would merely be an attempt to kill the new Hamas leadership and hopefully get another more disposed to leaving power and disarming and maybe even leaving Gaza if someone will give them a place to go. Bear in mind Israel considers the Hamas police to be military units. Or it could be an attack on Iran.

    More from that article:

    Witkoff demands that Hamas immediately release the 20-year-old soldier, and suggests that he has given the terror group a deadline for doing so, warning of consequences if that unspecified date passes.

    “Hamas is making a very bad bet that time is on its side. It is not. Hamas is well aware of the deadline, and should know that we will respond accordingly if that deadline passes,” the top Trump aide warns.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  49. 45. We were taking about a future situation where Ukraine would not be a battlefield. Speculating about a Russian demand that Ukraine be a neutral. I said that that being neutral would not mean it couldn’t be a member of the EU – although, as it is, Russia is against that also.

    Putin probably wants to have a “roof” over Ukraine.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  50. Yale remains supportive of its researchers pursuing work that sheds light on urgent global issues.”

    Meaning they will try to help them sell their services to others.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  51. https://www.statnews.com/2025/03/14/rfk-jr-measles-vaccine-death-claims-scientists-disagree

    hey concluded that except for allergic reactions and blood clot disorders, which were incredibly rare, there was no link between the MMR and deaths.

    This is double talk.

    The meaning is that, while most of the claims about the measles vaccine hurting children were wrong, there were a few deaths, even with treatment, from one or two specified causes – and that that was the price of getting 0 deaths from measles itself.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  52. Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/14/2025 @ 12:42 pm

    I expect to hear Putin and his “American” mouthpieces tell us that there is no evidence of any of these abductions.

    No, they say that members of the childrens’ families can pick them up in Russia, which is mostly true, although they have to travel through Belarus to et there.,

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  53. Trump basically says that Emily Litella was right, m after all.

    In his address to Congress March 4, Donald Trump said:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/04/us/politics/transcript-trump-speech-congress.html?unlocked_article_code=1.1k4.t6W0.QXxFNCgpnb16&smid=url-share

    …$60 million for Indigenous peoples and Afro-Caribbean empowerment in Central America — $60 million. $8 million for making mice transgender — this is real.

    He was accused by fact checkers of mixing up “transgender” with “transgenetic”

    https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/fact-checking-trumps-anti-transgender-comments-address-congress-rcna194969

    He didn’t say “Never mind”

    He released this:

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/03/yes-biden-spent-millions-on-transgender-animal-experiments

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  54. Otherwise, it’s not a negotiate, but a conquest.

    whembly (b7cc46) — 3/14/2025 @ 1:52 pm

    Bingo!

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  55. Patterico is a little pissed. Can’t say as I blame him.

    Paul Montagu (354e09)

  56. BTW, the hypocrisy of Rubio saying this

    Secretary of State Rubio on Hamas: “We’re sitting around as the world, sort of accepting that it’s normal and okay for you to go into a place, kidnap babies, kidnap teenagers, kidnap people who have nothing to do with any wars, that are not soldiers… and taking them and putting them in tunnels for almost a year and a half,” he continues: “They’re ridiculous trades — 400 people for three.”

    …while helping Putin with his child abductions, except there is no trade with Putin, he just takes and, so far he’s taken tens of thousands of Ukrainian children.

    Paul Montagu (354e09)

  57. Hamas only held hundreds, while Putin has kidnapped at least 80 times as many civilians.

    Paul Montagu (354e09)

  58. You need to get right with the Constitution.

    Sept 15, 1787

    Art: II. sect. 2. “he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the U. S. &c”

    Mr Randolph moved to “except cases of treason”. The prerogative of pardon in these cases was too great a trust. The President may himself be guilty. The Traytors may be his own instruments….

    Mr Wilson. Pardon is necessary for cases of treason, and is best placed in the hands of the Executive. If he be himself a party to the guilt he can be impeached and prosecuted.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  59. Sept 15, 1787

    Art: II. sect. 2. “he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the U. S. &c”

    Mr Randolph moved to “except cases of treason”. The prerogative of pardon in these cases was too great a trust. The President may himself be guilty. The Traytors may be his own instruments….

    Mr Wilson. Pardon is necessary for cases of treason, and is best placed in the hands of the Executive. If he be himself a party to the guilt he can be impeached and prosecuted.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/14/2025 @ 4:19 pm

    Irrelevant to your claim that President Trump has committed “treasonous acts.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  60. Indeed

    Trump is once again blaming Ukraine and the US for Putin’s invasion of Ukraine:

    “You don’t want to pick on somebody that’s a lot larger than you.”

    F this traitor

    No matter how many times Trump and his underlings and enablers repeat this lie, it’s still a lie.

    Paul Montagu (354e09)

  61. We are still technically in a state of war with North Korea. No peace treaty was signed in 1953; only an armistice i.e. ceasefire.

    When Putin obtained North Korean troops from King Jong Un, Russia became a co-belligerent of Korea, even though the Soviet Union officially was not during the Korean War having sent only “volunteers”.

    nk (544e57)

  62. Irrelevant to your claim that President Trump has committed “treasonous acts.

    His reverses of long-standing American positions, both in foreign policy and in trade are making war on the United States in the interests of a foreign power as well as giving them aid and comfort.

    So we haven’t declared war? We almost never do. That does not mean that Putin is a friend or that overturning treaties is somehow within the bounds of his office.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  63. His reverses of long-standing American positions, both in foreign policy and in trade are making war on the United States in the interests of a foreign power as well as giving them aid and comfort.

    So we haven’t declared war? We almost never do. That does not mean that Putin is a friend or that overturning treaties is somehow within the bounds of his office.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/14/2025 @ 4:59 pm

    So what? Richard Nixon went from being an anti-communist zealot to traveling to Beijing and sitting down with a leader who was responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans in the Korean War; and which ultimately lead to the US dumping Taiwan and recognizing the PRC. Did Nixon and Carter commit treason?

    Reversing foreign or domestic policies is the prerogative of any President. If Congress objects to Trump’s “revers(al) of long-standing American positions”, they should pass laws to reverse his actions; or they can impeach him. It’s a sign that Congress hasn’t done so that indicates (at least among Republicans) support his actions. But Trump certainly hasn’t committed treason.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  64. Supporting Ukraine is hardly a “ long-standing American position”; at most it’s been a policy for 12 years, if that.

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  65. Rip Murdock (288dd2) — 3/14/2025 @ 5:25 pm

    Rip, the 1994 Budapest Memorandum is an explicit support for Ukraine, where we promised them security assurances in exchange for their giving over the nukes in their possession to Russia. That’s 31 years, until Trump.

    Paul Montagu (354e09)

  66. Rip, the 1994 Budapest Memorandum is an explicit support for Ukraine, where we promised them security assurances in exchange for their giving over the nukes in their possession to Russia. That’s 31 years, until Trump.

    Paul Montagu (354e09) — 3/14/2025 @ 6:16 pm

    The BM was pretty weak tea for everyone. It was never a US treaty commitment; and it required Russia to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity, which it obviously hasn’t. Ukraine as a salient issue in American foreign policy is relatively recent.

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  67. ………
    The memorandum committed the United States, Britain and Russia to respect Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty and existing borders and not to use or threaten to use force against Ukraine.

    The memorandum committed the United States and Britain to seek UN Security Council assistance for Ukraine, but it did not commit those two countries take to military action with their own forces against Russia if it violated its commitments—as Russia did in 2014, when it seized Crimea and fought in Donbas, and in 2022, when it launched an all-out invasion. In response to Ukrainian questions when negotiating the assurances, U.S. officials said the United States would take action if Russia violated its commitments but that would not include sending American military forces.
    ………….

    Source

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  68. “Security assurances” was code for finger wagging at Russia; “security guarantees” implies the use of force, which the US explicitly denied it would use. If it was presented to the Senate as a treaty, it would have failed to pass. In the end the US and Europe have provided far to defend Ukraine than they could have expected under the Memorandum in 1994.

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  69. It was never a US treaty commitment…

    Please don’t move the goalposts, Rip. You said that “supporting Ukraine is hardly a ‘long-standing American position'”, which is false. Supporting Ukraine has been our long-standing American position since Clinton’s first term. Please read the text of that document, because we made promises.

    Paul Montagu (354e09)

  70. So what? Richard Nixon went from being an anti-communist zealot to traveling to Beijing and sitting down with a leader who was responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans in the Korean War

    Nixon (and Kissinger) did that to make the Chinese an offer they couldn’t refuse: Throw the USSR under the bus and have access to our markets. It worked.

    I would like to think that Trump had the same intentions wrt to pulling Russia away from China, but that would take quite a few IQ points he does not have.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  71. The point, if you missed it, was that Nixon was still anti-Communist, he just viewed the USSR as the existential threat.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  72. @61:

    Good point, nk.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  73. The title shouldn’t have to be said, but it had to be said: Canada is an ally, not an enemy. Regarding Canada after 9/11…

    Canada did not send a bloodied and wounded United States thoughts and prayers via social media: When it came time to go after Osama bin Laden et al. in Afghanistan, more than 40,000 members of the Canadian armed forces served in what was not, narrowly speaking, a Canadian cause. And 159 Canadian soldiers died there.

    That may not seem like a very large number, but it is 159 more than the Trump family has sent to fight for the American cause in the century and a half since that family’s first draft-dodging ancestor fled military service in Germany. Frederick Trump, the horse-butchering Yukon pimp who brought the Trump family to the United States, had no plans to stay in the country long term, but was expelled ignominiously from his homeland for his cowardly evasion of military service. During the Trump family’s time in the United States, Americans have fought in conflicts ranging from the Spanish-American War to the two world wars to Korea to Vietnam to the Gulf War to Afghanistan and Iraq. None of Trump’s ancestors served in any of those conflicts, and none of his progeny has, either. The president has occasionally, however, taken the time to sneer at figures such as John McCain, whose service was—whatever you think of his politics—genuinely heroic.
    […]
    Donald Trump has his name on the front of The Art of the Deal. John F. Kennedy’s name is on Profiles in Courage. Both men used ghostwriters, but we may take these works as testament to their priorities.

    From father to son to father to son, the Trumps have been a line of small, oafish, grasping, chiseling, dishonest, dishonorable, cowardly, conniving, dim-witted, donkey-souled plotters and plodders, and no sensible country would trade the lot of them for one of the 159 Canadians who died in Afghanistan—or for one of the hundreds of British troops who died in Afghanistan, or for any one of the French, Germans, Italians, Poles, Danes, Australians, Spaniards, Romanians, Georgians, Dutch, Turks, Czechs, Kiwis, Norwegians, Estonians, Hungarians, Swedes, Latvians, Slovaks, Finns, Portuguese, Koreans, Albanians, Jordanians, Belgians, Bulgarians, Croats, Lithuanians, or Montenegrins who lost their lives in that conflict. And certainly not for the Ukrainians who served alongside U.S. forces in Iraq. Nor for any one of the British and European doctors and nurses who saved the lives of so many wounded Americans evacuated from those battlefields.

    These are our allies, not our enemies. Many of them are our trading partners, too—not a gang of pirates trying to victimize Americans with … abundant goods provided at reasonable prices.

    Donald Trump seems surprised by the ferocity of the Canadian response to his attempts to strong-arm the country with his imbecilic bullying and threats to annex it. I am not. Canadian pride may sometimes take the form of toxic anti-Americanism, but there is no doubting the resolve or the patriotism of our neighbors to the north.

    Paul Montagu (354e09)

  74. The people of Greenland have spoken.

    “We don’t want to be Americans. No, we don’t want to be Danes. We want to be Greenlanders, and we want our own independence in the future,” Nielsen, 33, told Britain’s Sky News. “And we want to build our own country by ourselves.”

    Mazel tov.

    Paul Montagu (354e09)

  75. The national emergency law lays out a fast-track process for Congress to consider a resolution ending a presidential emergency, requiring committee consideration within 15 calendar days after one is introduced and a floor vote within three days after that. But the language House Republicans inserted in their measure on Tuesday declared that, “Each day for the remainder of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day” for the purposes of the emergency that Mr. Trump declared on Feb. 1.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/11/us/politics/trump-tariffs-house-gop-vote.html

    Davethulhu (ae2000)

  76. Item 2 DU is shut down to non dnc members to stop democrats from attacking chuckie or advocating AOC primary him.

    asset (796e2f)

  77. https://pjmedia.com/victoria-taft/2025/03/14/organized-crime-leftists-add-swatting-conservatives-on-x-to-their-tesla-and-trump-terror-tactics-n4937910

    At least five well-known conservatives with large followings on Elon Musk’s X social media platform were “swatted” overnight. These attempts by unknowns to get conservatives killed in a hail of law enforcement gunfire appear to be part of an organized effort to affect politics by acts of violence. That is the textbook definition of terrorism, and it appears to be organized.

    Terrorism by any other name… is still terrorism. This is what we are up against in this nation and turning this country around is the number one priority.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  78. You’d have to look for this story, but Peter Zeihan picked it up, and it’s the first I’ve heard about a US delegation going to Kyiv to talk to Zelenskyy’s opposition, to get them to overturn his presidency, by violating their constitution to conduct an election to elect someone who is more aligned with Trump and therefore more aligned with Putin.

    It’s a sh-t thing to do, diplomatically, this kind of meddling in Ukrainian internal affairs. I wouldn’t be surprised if Putin suggested this idea to Trump, and Trump ran with it, like a puppet. After all, Putin whispered sweet nothings about the Kursk lie into Trump’s ear.

    KYIV — Four senior members of Donald Trump’s entourage have held secret discussions with some of Kyiv’s top political opponents to Volodymyr Zelenskyy, just as Washington aligns with Moscow in seeking to lever the Ukrainian president out of his job.

    The senior Trump allies held talks with Ukrainian opposition leader Yulia Tymoshenko, a remorselessly ambitious former prime minister, and senior members of the party of Petro Poroshenko, Zelenskyy’s immediate predecessor as president, according to three Ukrainian parliamentarians and a U.S. Republican foreign policy expert.

    The discussions centered on whether Ukraine could hold quick presidential elections. These are being delayed in line with the country’s constitution because Ukraine remains under martial law. Critics of holding elections say they could be chaotic and play into Russia’s hands, with so many potential voters serving on the front lines or living abroad as refugees.
    […]
    The key to all of the plans under discussion via back channels is to hold presidential elections after a temporary ceasefire is agreed, but before full-scale peace negotiations get underway in earnest. The idea of an early presidential election is also being pushed by the Kremlin, which has wanted to be rid of Zelenskyy for years.
    […]
    Oleksandr Merezhko, chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the Ukrainian parliament, told POLITICO’s Power Play podcast that elections would only be to Moscow’s benefit.

    “I believe Trump doesn’t care about whether Ukraine has elections or not. It’s Putin’s narrative, Putin’s goal. Trump is being used by Putin to impose elections on Ukraine with only one purpose, to undermine us from within. He wants to remove Zelenskyy because he is a symbol of our resistance. Putin understands that an election campaign during times of war will be destructive for our unity and for our stability,” he said.

    Fortunately, those Ukrainians in the meeting turned us down cold.

    Paul Montagu (354e09)

  79. Please don’t move the goalposts, Rip. You said that “supporting Ukraine is hardly a ‘long-standing American position’”, which is false. Supporting Ukraine has been our long-standing American position since Clinton’s first term. Please read the text of that document, because we made promises.

    Paul Montagu (354e09) — 3/14/2025 @ 7:10 pm

    It’s not goal post moving to say the Budapest Memorandum wasn’t a treaty commitment, as it wasn’t ratified by the Senate; a treaty would have committed the US to a specific course of action. And under the Memorandum what exactly were the. “promises”made by the US? They are nowhere to found in the document; there is no specific provision committing the US to defend Ukraine. The Memorandum is deliberately vague so as not to commit the US (or the UK) to a specific policy response.

    I dare say that Ukraine has more salient to American politics and foreign policy (and the public) over the last four years than the period from 1994-2014. Even after the Crimean annexation there wasn’t any political or public support for intervention to enforce the Budapest Memorandum.

    I also wonder why you criticize our alleged non-compliance with the Memorandum and not Russia’s. It wasn’t the US that has violated Ukraine’s independence, sovereignty, existing borders or “to use or threaten to use force.”

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  80. JD Vance’s Forgotten Wars
    ………….
    Speaking of President Trump’s proposed minerals deal with Kyiv, Mr. Vance told Fox News’s Sean Hannity: “If you want to actually ensure that Vladimir Putin does not invade Ukraine again, the very best security guarantee is to give Americans economic upside in the future of Ukraine. That is a way better security guarantee than 20,000 troops from some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years.”

    Europeans took this as a not-so-veiled jab at the United Kingdom and France, which are leading a European effort to offer Kyiv reassurance amid Mr. Trump’s pro-Russia negotiating strategy. ……..
    ………. British troops fought alongside Americans in Afghanistan and (with Mr. Vance) in Iraq for the entirety of those wars. Four hundred fifty-seven British troops lost their lives in Afghanistan, and 179 in Iraq. France didn’t join the Iraq war, but it sent 70,000 troops to Afghanistan over 13 years, 89 of whom were killed.

    More recently, both countries—among the few in Europe to maintain blue-water navies—are joining the U.S. to defend global shipping around Yemen.
    …………
    The Vice President said (later) it was “absurdly dishonest” to claim he was referring to France and Britain in his comment. But Europeans have drawn a different conclusion, and after the last two weeks we understand why.
    ##########

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  81. I also wonder why you criticize our alleged non-compliance…

    Because we didn’t welsh, Putin did.

    Paul Montagu (240f25)

  82. Also, Rip, there’s no requirement that a promise to another nation has to be codified via treaty. You set up that artificial construct.

    Paul Montagu (240f25)

  83. Also, Rip, there’s no requirement that a promise to another nation has to be codified via treaty. You set up that artificial construct.

    Paul Montagu (240f25) — 3/15/2025 @ 11:22 am

    What were the promises again?

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  84. @73: Biff.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  85. Each day for the remainder of the 119th Congress shall not constitute a calendar day” for the purposes of the emergency that Mr. Trump declared on Feb. 1.

    Why? Do they realize that they don’t have the votes? Or that this makes them look like utter weasels?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  86. Terrorism by any other name… is still terrorism.

    I suppose that the perpetrators of this attempted murder-by-proxy would all it “freedom-fighting.” Of course, were AOC to get swatted in retaliation, they’d call it something else.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  87. Because we didn’t welsh, Putin did.

    More like we welshed after Putin did.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  88. What were the promises again?

    Troll’s game, Rip. Make the other guy repeat their statements, so that you can start the dispute that you lost all over again. Eventually they stop playing.

    Why to you play the troll?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  89. More like we welshed after Putin did.

    We’ve helped Ukraine since 2014, but it’s been weak-assed to half-assed, so I wouldn’t call it a welshing as we’ve been on their side from the get-go.

    Paul Montagu (240f25)

  90. What were the promises again?

    Troll’s game, Rip. Make the other guy repeat their statements, so that you can start the dispute that you lost all over again. Eventually they stop playing.

    Why to you play the troll?

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/15/2025 @ 11:53 am

    Paul wrote:

    Please read the text of that document the Budapest Memorandum) because we made promises.

    Which I did, and I couldn’t find any explicit promises made by the United States towards Ukraine. Since Paul asserted that US “made promises” it’s a fair question and not being a troll. When he says “we made promises” I have no idea what he means.

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  91. Trump’s Choice in Ukraine: Chamberlain or Eisenhower?
    ………….
    President Dwight Eisenhower’s pattern was effective diplomacy backed by the credible threat of force, followed by a strong deterrence posture. In 1953, as the Korean War dragged on, Eisenhower signaled that the U.S. was willing to escalate militarily if necessary. This, combined with a change in the attitude of the Soviet Union following Stalin’s death, produced an armistice that ended the bloodbath and has held for more than 70 years. Although the North Korean regime remains hostile and oppressive, the peace has endured.

    British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s pattern was the opposite. The September 1938 Munich Agreement forced Czech Prime Minister Edvard Beneš to cede his country’s most defensible territory—the westernmost Sudetenland—in exchange for empty German promises to Chamberlain and his French counterpart, Édouard Daladier. After a meeting with Hitler and Mussolini from which Czechoslovakia was excluded, Chamberlain returned to London waving a piece of paper he called “peace for our time.”

    “Our time” passed in the blink of an eye. Within six months, Hitler seized the rest of Czechoslovakia. Within a year, he had occupied Poland, followed by Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, France, Yugoslavia and Greece. After the French collapsed, Britain barely escaped total disaster at Dunkirk.

    ……….. Chamberlain’s misplaced trust in Hitler failed to prevent the war that he feared and made it much costlier than a defense of Czechoslovakia would have been.

    ……….. The question is whether Mr. Trump chooses the path of Eisenhower or Chamberlain.
    ………..
    ………… Convincing the Ukrainian people to accept a compromise armistice that leaves Russia occupying significant portions of eastern Ukraine won’t be easy. But it will likely be necessary to achieve an enduring end to the war, since there is little chance that Mr. Putin will agree to full restoration of the Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity, which Russia promised to respect when it signed the Clinton administration’s 1994 Budapest Memorandum.

    To gain public support for an unpopular compromise, Mr. Zelensky will need firm assurances of continued arms supplies to deter Russian aggression, along with a European military presence on the ground, backed by the U.S. In addition, Ukraine will require massive financial assistance for reconstruction, particularly from wealthy nations in Europe that have the greatest stake in the outcome. The American people need to see that the burden of preserving peace is being shared.

    Ultimately, Ukrainians should envision victory not in terms of regaining lost territory but as rebuilding and strengthening western Ukraine as a free, sovereign, independent and flourishing nation like South Korea. ………..
    …………..

    The analogy with South Korea is very imperfect. Trump won’t make a credible military threat against Russia as Eisenhower did by threatening to use nuclear weapons against China and North Korea in 1953.

    South Korea only achieved its economic success under the protection of the US nuclear umbrella and the stationing of 33,000 or so heavily armed US troops. It is unlikely that the Trump Administration would do either to protect Ukraine, or even provide a backstop (which Trump has already ruled out) to an European military force (which Russia has already rejected.)

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  92. “Why? Do they realize that they don’t have the votes? Or that this makes them look like utter weasels?”

    Gotta keep the boss happy

    Davethulhu (d7e93f)

  93. It is an improvement from ancient Roman days when the Pontifex Maximus alone and not the Roman Senate determined the calendar.

    Democracy!

    nk (c63167)

  94. >Or that this makes them look like utter weasels?

    Only to the tiny fraction of the population who pays attention to this sort of thing.

    A much larger percentage (more than an order of magnitude larger, maybe even two orders of magnitude larger) of the population sees them acting to support Trump against those evil Democrats and cheers it.

    aphrael (bfe711)

  95. What I find the most Deplorable is the glee they are taking at workers losing their jobs.

    nk (c63167)

  96. What unclean spirit makes them identify with globalist billionaire sociopaths on sadistic power trips against ordinary people like themselves who get up five out of seven days a week wash their face and hands and go to work for eight hours to put food on the table, clothes on their backs, and a roof over their heads, for themselves and their families?

    nk (c63167)

  97. > What I find the most Deplorable is the glee they are taking at workers losing their jobs.

    I suspect they think the workers who are losing their jobs are all parasites who are stealing from the people.

    But the entire basis of trumpism has always seem to include finding glee in deliberate cruelty, to me.

    aphrael (bfe711)

  98. > What unclean spirit makes them identify with globalist billionaire sociopaths on sadistic power trips against ordinary people like themselves who get up five out of seven days a week wash their face and hands and go to work for eight hours to put food on the table, clothes on their backs, and a roof over their heads, for themselves and their families?

    See, that’s the thing.

    They don’t perceive the government workers as “ordinary people like themselves”.

    They see themselves as good hardworking people and the government workers as lazy takers who pretend to work in order to steal money from good hardworking people like them.

    aphrael (bfe711)

  99. nk (c63167) — 3/15/2025 @ 2:24 pm

    I’m old enough to remember lockdowns.

    lloyd (b4107e)

  100. What I find the most Deplorable is the glee they are taking at workers losing their jobs.

    So, if you support downsizing you are doing this to make workers lose their jobs? Or might there be other reasons? Like not borrowing from China to support them and their often-unnecessary activities.

    The Rural Utilities Service, formerly the Rural Electrification Administration has 365 employees and a 2024 appropriation of $2.4 billion, or $6.6 million per employee. Much of what it does has been supplanted by StarLink and it original New Deal mission (electricity in the heartland) is long since completed.

    If you close it, what will get reported? The 365 workers out of a job? Suspended projects to cable houses 5 miles apart? The money not borrowed? Heck, we all know the answer to that.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  101. Rip, to me part of what we’re betraying is us values around freedom and self determination. Our history of supporting people fighting against totalitarianism.

    Time123 (9fa39d)

  102. What unclean spirit blames the world’s woes the few whose energy is spent on overcoming them and organizing a workforce to tackle them?

    globalist billionaire sociopaths on sadistic power trips against ordinary people like themselves

    Heinlein was correct on this:

    “Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.

    This is known as “bad luck.”

    And, really, do our problems come from these (mostly self-made) billionaires who attempt to solve them by offering better methods, or do they come from the kind of lawyers who — offering little themselves but criticism — seek only to stop them.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  103. Is everything that Trump attempts based on evil motives?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  104. @99: once again proving the utter falsity of ideological and biased generalization. Most people don’t think “Us” vs “Them” but it is written all over this comment and its demeaning projections.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  105. ” (mostly self-made) billionaires ”

    lmao

    Davethulhu (d7e93f)

  106. I think that people have this view of government workers as making a nice salary/bennies package without really doing any real work. While there have certainly been some workers as higher levels of government who haven been found to have committed crimes to benefit themselves financially or been duplicitous about their accomplishments, etc, I do think that the majority of workers are simply trying to do their jobs as efficiently as possible.

    Trump has targeted government workers as the bad guys, full well knowing he would be giving his supporters a target to direct their anger towards. And it’s worked. Moreover, he frames it as an issue of class: the average angry worker bring lower class, while government workers look their noses down their noses at them. Of course it’s just more manipulation of the everyday man, and it’s been effective to serve Trump’s purpose. A class divide rooted in anger and resentment. C

    Dana (4b17ac)

  107. Is everything that Trump attempts based on evil motives?

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/15/2025 @ 3:51 pm

    If you consider self-serving and being beneficial to him, first and foremost, as evil, then yes.

    Dana (00bc43)

  108. @Kevin@101 I think it’s possible to both believe a reduction in staffing is necessary and feel concerned about the people losing their jobs. Some of the tech companies with really good reputations offer in-house transfers to open positions or job placement services when they do layoffs, for example.

    Nic (120c94)

  109. ” once again proving the utter falsity of ideological and biased generalization. Most people don’t think “Us” vs “Them” but it is written all over this comment and its demeaning projections.”

    You can’t be this naive.

    Davethulhu (d7e93f)

  110. I stopped reading Heinlein somewhere in that part of whatever book of his where his “hero” traveled back in time to have sex with his mother.

    The point is glee. G-L-E-E.

    Sure, many occasions arise when somebody who needs a job cannot have one

    That’s not an occasion for glee. It’s an occasion for regretfulness.

    nk (c63167)

  111. Rip, to me part of what we’re betraying is us values around freedom and self determination. Our history of supporting people fighting against totalitarianism.

    Time123 (9fa39d) — 3/15/2025 @ 3:47 pm

    I have no argument with that, but my point has been the Budapest Memorandum, with its main objective of eliminating the nuclear weapons in Ukraine, didn’t obligate the US to take specific steps to prevent Russia from its depredations in Ukraine; nor did include any specific security guarantees for Ukraine. In a sense it was a very Clintonesque triangulation.

    Rip Murdock (ca089d)

  112. Rip, to me part of what we’re betraying is us values around freedom and self determination. Our history of supporting people fighting against totalitarianism.

    Time123 (9fa39d) — 3/15/2025 @ 3:47 pm

    Up until now, Ukraine has received nearly everything it needs to continue the fight, short of US combat forces.

    Rip Murdock (ca089d)

  113. Rip, to me part of what we’re betraying is us values around freedom and self determination. Our history of supporting people fighting against totalitarianism.

    Time123 (9fa39d) — 3/15/2025 @ 3:47 pm

    That’s all on Trump.

    Rip Murdock (ca089d)

  114. Kevin M – Trumpist rhetoric is openly based in us vs. them thinking, and the rhetoric is echoed at all levels, from Trump down to the people ranting at city council meetings.

    But I thank you for the claim that rather than reporting what I see with my own eyes, I’m simply projecting.

    It does a lot to remind me that I should stop talking to you because you are responding to your own caricature of leftists rather than to me.

    aphrael (8ac906)

  115. @77 As truman said if you can’t stand the heat stay out of the kitchen! AOC and jJasmine Crockett get death threats everyday.

    asset (e00beb)

  116. It does a lot to remind me that I should stop talking to you because you are responding to your own caricature of leftists rather than to me.

    globalist billionaire sociopaths on sadistic power trips against ordinary people like themselves

    Now, who is responding to caricatures?

    I don’t think one could add much more to the pejoratives there. And if anything, Trump is not a “globalist.”

    And when I used the term “self-made” I was not including Trump.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  117. If you consider self-serving and being beneficial to him, first and foremost, as evil, then yes.

    I don’t. Hitler, for one, had other motivations.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  118. “Chuckie” schumer republicans don’t have the votes to pass CR! Senator your donors and aipac are calling. Chuckie we corporate democrats will give trump the votes!

    asset (e00beb)

  119. ” (mostly self-made) billionaires ”

    lmao

    Lessee:

    Edison (electrics)
    Ford (low-cost autos for the masses, other problems though)
    Hewlett and Packard (computer products and test equipment)
    Jobs (Apple)
    Gates (Microsoft)
    Musk (Paypal, Tesla, Space X)

    All of these solved real problems and made a ton of money for it. I guess that some people consider the taint of wealth to be evil, validating that Heinlein quote, but all these folks increased the wealth of everyone.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  120. @115: the whaddabout defense.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  121. @120 I guess you never red “the pirates of silicon valley. Ford was a nazi and musk probabl is.

    asset (e00beb)

  122. Trump has targeted government workers as the bad guy

    Is he though? Many of his supporters see government bloat instead. Even if everything that Trump does is based on his personal whims, that does not mean that his supporters view it the same way.

    Are people who occupy jobs of minimal benefit the good guys? Are government departments that operate in a labor-intensive mode, eschewing modern methods that could increase productivity and reduce head-count not self-serving? Doesn’t government need to be as efficient as reasonably possible, keeping the expense to the taxpayer within bounds?

    I think that government owes fealty to the citizenry and taxpayers, not primarily to employees. The organization’s stated goals are more important than the organization itself.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  123. Ford was a nazi and musk probably is.

    Ford WAS a Nazi, or at least a virulent anti-Semite. American Jews did not buy his cars. I alluded to that with “other problems.”

    Musk? He does have a fairly high opinion of himself, surely. But he has also built 3 wildly-successful companies that have solved 3 pressing problems: electronic payments, electric cars and much cheaper access to space. He probably considers himself a problem-solver and has a fairly low opinion of government in general, which opposes most innovation and imposes stultifying bureaucracy on everyone, especially him, rejecting anything it did not invent. Which is, truth be told, everything.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  124. Which I did, and I couldn’t find any explicit promises made by the United States towards Ukraine.

    We didn’t make any guarantees, just assurances, which was weak on the part of Clinton, but the document was reaffirming our “obligation to refrain
    from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine”, especially after leaving them in the weakened state of not having the nukes they gave over.

    Paul Montagu (240f25)

  125. BTW, if you read any of my posts about Musk’s government intervention you would see that I am not a fan; he knows a lot about business and little about government. One thing does not inform the other.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  126. asset,

    Let’s say that someone is a Nazi, but also say, cures cancer. Do you accept the cure, or do you reject it?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  127. “has a fairly low opinion of government in general, which opposes most innovation and imposes stultifying bureaucracy on everyone, especially him, rejecting anything it did not invent. Which is, truth be told, everything.”

    He has made a tremendous amount of money from government contracts and programs, something that used to make conservatives upset about him.

    “Let’s say that someone is a Nazi, but also say, cures cancer. Do you accept the cure, or do you reject it?”

    Let’s say someone is a Nazi but also makes a lot of money from the government…

    Davethulhu (d7e93f)

  128. Musk lucked out in coming from a well off family who could financially support his earlier efforts in business. He is, however, probably more self-made than Trump.

    Nic (120c94)

  129. It’s just one thing after another that tells us Trump is evil and is on the side of Russian evil. This time it’s his shuttering the Voice of America…

    This is absolutely crazy. It is unilateral disarmament. China won’t be closing CGTN. Russia won’t be closing RT. The theocrats in Iran and their proxies in the Middle East won’t be closing down their media operations.

    Granted, our one governmental media operation is a squirt gun compared to Putin’s governmental media operation firehose, but once again Trump is unilaterally favoring Putin, which disfavors the Ukrainian victim, which has been struggling against Putin’s Haze of Propaganda for eleven years, and it’s condemnable, one of multiple condemnable acts by Trump in less than eight weeks.

    And just to recap, from Geraghty at NRO…

    So far, the Trump administration has conceded:
    
    • Ukraine will not enter NATO.
    • U.S. forces will not participate in any postwar peacekeeping force on Ukrainian soil.
    • The White House asked the State and Treasury departments to “draft a list of sanctions that could be eased for U.S. officials to discuss with Russian representatives as part of the administration’s broad talks with Moscow on improving diplomatic and economic relations.”
    • The Trump Department of Justice disbanded “a Biden-era program aimed at seizing the assets of Russian oligarchs as a means to punish Russia for its invasion of Ukraine.”
    • DOJ also disbanded “the Foreign Influence Task Force, which was established in the first Trump administration to police influence campaigns staged by Russia and other nations aimed at sowing discord, undermining democracy and spreading disinformation.”
    • Attorney General Pam Bondi also ordered federal prosecutors to stop pursuing criminal prosecutions for Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) violations unless they involved “conduct similar to more traditional espionage by foreign government actors.” You may recall last autumn several prominent MAGA commentators getting paid hundreds of thousands of dollars per month as part of “a $10 million scheme to create and distribute content to U.S. audiences with hidden Russian government messaging.” When the indictment describes “hidden Russian messaging,” they mean pounding the desk and shouting, “Ukraine is the enemy of this country! Ukraine is our enemy! Ukraine is the greatest threat to this nation, and the world!” The commentators were never charged with any crimes, but those who hid the source of the payments and failed to register as foreign agents did get charged with conspiracy and money laundering.
    • Roughly 240,000 Ukrainian refugees in the United States will be sent back to Ukraine.
    • The U.S. temporarily halted military aid to Ukraine [lifted when Zelenskyy signed the 30-day ceasefire]
    • The U.S. temporarily halted intelligence sharing with Ukraine [lifted when Zelenskyy signed the 30-day ceasefire]
    • U.S. officials have refused to state the obvious, that Russia started the war by invading Ukraine.
    • Trump has denounced Volodymyr Zelensky as a “dictator,” while explicitly ruling out that label for Vladimir Putin.
    • When Liesyl Franz, deputy assistant secretary for international cybersecurity at the U.S. State Department addressed a United Nations working group on cybersecurity in February, she discussed the threats from China and Iran, notably omitting Russia, even though the U.S. Cybersecurity Infrastructure and Security Agency at the Department of Homeland Security has deemed Russia “an enduring global cyber threat.”
    
    There have been multiple reports that the Pentagon has halted offensive cyberoperations against Russia; the Pentagon’s Rapid Response X account says Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth “neither canceled nor delayed any cyber operations directed against malicious Russian targets and there has been no stand-down order whatsoever from that priority.”
    
    And in return . . . Russia hasn’t conceded anything.

    Paul Montagu (240f25)

  130. So, here’s what Musk’s little brownshirts are doing to the Department of Defense. Not looking into why the Pentagon can’t pass an audit but things like the following:

    Maj Gen Charles Rogers was a Medal of Honor recipient from the Vietnam war. He’s also black. I’ve linked his wikipedia entry here. In the references section there’s a link to an item on him on the defense.gov website. The link url looks like this:
    https://www.defense.gov/News/Feature-Stories/Story/Article/2824721/medal-of-honor-monday-army-maj-gen-charles-calvin-rogers/
    if you try to visit that link, you get a 404 error and the url has been changed to this:
    https://www.defense.gov/News/Feature-Stories/Story/Article/2824721/deimedal-of-honor-monday-army-maj-gen-charles-calvin-rogers/

    see the difference?

    Davethulhu (d7e93f)

  131. While Trump is on his back with his legs up to the Great Vlad, Hungarians are mass-protesting against Orban, who is laying right next to Trump in the same prone position.

    Like in Hungary, there are similar mass protests in Serbia against Putin.

    They’re also in the streets of Bucharest, Romania for the same reason. Last December, the Romanians courts canceled a presidential candidate because of Putin’s intensive meddling in their electoral systems.

    Paul Montagu (240f25)

  132. This is what abuse of our First Amendment looks like by our enemies and adversaries, made worse by Trump’s unilateral canceling the broadcast of American values and principles over Voice of America…

    Russia and China have their propaganda all over X,

    Western social media is banned in China and Russia.

    China controlled TikTok and WeChat are operating freely.

    And the USA is defunding Radio Free Asia, Europe and Voice of America.

    USA is losing the media war in a forfeit.

    Speaking of TikTok, Trump is ignoring statutory law by not canceling ByteDance, letting the ChiComs continue to monitor Americans via their algorithms.

    Paul Montagu (240f25)

  133. And for the sake of “fair and balanced”, I agree with Trump bombing the sh-t out of the Iranian-supported Houthis.

    Paul Montagu (032a22)

  134. @127 when a nazi cures my cancer I will let you know. I notice you didn’t want to mention the pirates of silicone valley. Eniac stole computer idea from abc computer. Gates ripped off seattle programer for is operating system. Who came up with the mouse? It sure wasn’t steve jobs and apple.

    asset (e00beb)

  135. It is written that the Lord has made everything for His purpose and I suppose that includes parasitical grifters with dollar signs for eyes amassing wealth drop by drop from the sweat, and often the blood, of others.

    I will not quarrel with Him over that, anymore than I would over the fact that it was 66 Fahrenheit in Chicago when I went to bed last night and now it’s 36.

    Especially not on a Sunday.

    And more especially since it only serves to deflect from the soullessness of taking glee in the misfortune of others which I reiterate was my point.

    nk (d10c99)

  136. https://x.com/NapolitanNews/status/1900934503020826648

    Trump at 54% approval. Seems the American public approves.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  137. I have been binging on “Get Smart” TV episodes myself. I’m up to Episode 33 where Siegfried of KAOS played by Bernie Koppell makes his first appearance.

    I would not object to a Lifetime Achievement In Television Emmy Award for Trump. I think he more than deserves it.

    Maybe a live theater Tony Award for his rally performances too. A ten-year run is not bad. Not bad at all.

    nk (d10c99)

  138. “Let’s say that someone is a Nazi, but also say, cures cancer. Do you accept the cure, or do you reject it?”

    Let’s say someone is a Nazi but also makes a lot of money from the government…

    You respond to a hypothetical with more libel. Fine, it’s how you roll.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  139. the soullessness of taking glee in the misfortune of others which I reiterate was my point.

    I believe it is in cutting down the size of government that they are taking glee in.

    Although I’ve never heard you complain about people taking glee in the deaths of young Russians in Ukraine. Probably because they were taking glee in Ukraine’s robust defense, where the young Russians were “just” collateral damage.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  140. And really, why do you repeat the propaganda from those whose main cause is to defend the federal blob? You accuse Musk from making money off government, but he isn’t defending the bloat as you are.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  141. He has made a tremendous amount of money from government contracts and programs, something that used to make conservatives upset about him.

    If his activities were as piss-poor as most of government, they wouldn’t be paying him and he’d be broke. Leftists call him a Nazi because he does well in the private sector and upstages those other government contractors — like Boeing — that have nothing to offer of late. Oh, and they have pictures of him raising his arm. The horror!

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  142. Trump has 47% approval, with 55% disapproving his handling the economy.

    I recall during the campaign when Trump or one of his eunuchs said he’d invoke the Alien Enemies Act to avoid due process. Sure enough, Trump invoked it and a federal judge blocked it because we’re not in a declared war.

    There was a time when Americans made it easy for Cubans to escape socialist oppression, and now they’ve become a powerful Republican voting bloc in Florida, to which Rubio (whose parents left the island prison) could attest. Today, when there’s a similar situation in Venezuela, we’re doing the exact opposite.

    Paul Montagu (240f25)

  143. see the difference?

    Both links are dead, but Musk is not in the chain of command. How is this his fault?

    I don’t defend whoever did that and I’ve said that a lot of Trump’s heavy-handed retail firings are misapplied. What he needs to do is cut entire organizations, not just the DEI or leftists engaging in #Resistance inside the government.

    However, DEI is toxic as a method of achieving racial balance as much of it (especially “Equity”) is intended to separate performance from reward. The popular conception is that DEI is a codeword for institutional favoritism and that is especially galling to those hoping to advance their situation by working hard to do so, only to see less qualified people get the advancement instead. In some DEI regimes, anyone who complains is fired for being a bigot, generating no love for a program that is racist and sexist at its core.

    It would seem that the idiocy of that weblink change is local to the group in charge of such things, and that the change was embarrassing (as it should have been).

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  144. Trump invoked it and a federal judge blocked it because we’re not in a declared war.

    ACLU, friend to thugs, death merchants and terrorists everywhere. Are people who enter the country illegally and join violent gangs here really due the same process as a citizen? Why isn’t ascertaining nationality, gang membership, and illegal entry all the process they are “due”?

    If we find ourselves in a declared war an authorized military action, it will be the ACLU’s fault. Everything I’ve been told about the control Trump has on the Congress suggests that he has the votes.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  145. ACLU, friend to thugs, death merchants and terrorists everywhere.

    It’s a plain reading of the law, Kevin. We’re not in a declared war.

    Paul Montagu (240f25)

  146. #53 It occurred to me that, if we are going to do transgender experiments — and apparently we are going to continue doing so — we ought do them on mice, rather than our children.

    Jim Miller (d4e315)

  147. Which I did, and I couldn’t find any explicit promises made by the United States towards Ukraine (in the Budapest Memorandum.)

    We didn’t make any guarantees, just assurances, which was weak on the part of Clinton, but the document was reaffirming our “obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine”, especially after leaving them in the weakened state of not having the nukes they gave over.

    Paul Montagu (240f25) — 3/15/2025 @ 10:05 pm

    Which means the United States did uphold its end of the bargain; as I don’t think the US has ever intended to threaten or use force against “the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine”. That was our only obligation under the Budapest Memorandum; except to report violations to the UN Security Council.

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  148. Are people who enter the country illegally and join violent gangs here really due the same process as a citizen? Why isn’t ascertaining nationality, gang membership, and illegal entry all the process they are “due”?

    Unfortunately, the 5th Amendment due process clause, (which constrains the federal government) states that “no person…….shall be deprived be deprived of life, liberty…….without due process of law,” not just citizens.

    The Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause protects all persons within U.S. territory, including corporations,6 aliens,7 and, presumptively, citizens seeking readmission to the United States.8

    My emphasis. Footnotes at link.

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  149. Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/16/2025 @ 8:09 am

    More:

    With regard to aliens physically present in the United States, however, the Court has recognized that due process protections may constrain the government’s exercise of its immigration power.6

    6. (See Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, (2001) ……….once an alien enters the country, the legal circumstance changes, for the Due Process Clause applies to all ‘persons’ within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.); Mathews v. Diaz, 426 U.S. 67, 77 (1976) (Even one whose presence in this country is unlawful, involuntary, or transitory is entitled to that constitutional protection.).

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  150. Putin understands that an election campaign during times of war will be destructive for our unity and for our stability,” he said.

    What if an election can only take place after the suspension of martial law, and that that will happen only after say, a complete ceasefire has lasted for 180 days and continues till he date of an election. Putin is likely to overestimate the chances of a candidate he backs winning the election, Ukrainians overseas and in occupied zone will have to be arranged ib such a way so that Putin cannot cheat or at least not add more than 5% fraudulent or coerced votes. (he’ll have overconfidence in their impaact too),

    After about 290 days he will be hard put to resume the war. (up till almost the last minute resuming the war could result in restoring martial law and cancelling the election or the counting of votes.)

    This is maybe the only thing that will work: Putin thinking he has won a diplomatic victory (that depends on almost absolutely no fighting) where he hasn’t, and overcommitting himself to pause the war.

    Sammy Finkelman (a94d2c)

  151. > If we find ourselves in a declared war an authorized military action, it will be the ACLU’s fault.

    Clearly neither Trump nor Congress have any moral responsibility for the choices they make. They’re *forced* to do things they don’t want to do by evil liberals like the ACLU, they have no actual agency of their own, they’re just puppets.

    aphrael (124065)

  152. 53, 147 I git the alleged confusion between transgender and transgenetic from something Jimmy Kimmel said and later dida google search for both words but transgenetic does not appear to be on the NBC website, nor a word recognized here.

    Sammy Finkelman (a94d2c)

  153. RIP author and former LAPD detective Joseph Wambaugh (88):

    …………
    In 1971, eleven years after joining the LAPD, Wambaugh saw his first novel, The New Centurions, published by Little, Brown and Co. The story of rookie LAPD cops in the early 1960s became his first bestseller and, the following year, the first movie based on his work. The film adaptation starred George C. Scott and Stacy Keach.
    ………..
    His non-fiction book The Onion Field, published in 1973, would stand as, arguably, his literary masterpiece, a skillful telling of the true tale of a 1963 kidnapping of two LAPD officers and the brutal murder of one of them. An acclaimed 1979 film adaptation directed by Harold Becker (with a screenplay by Wambaugh) and starred John Savage, James Woods, Franklyn Seales and Ted Danson.

    (Other novels that followed included The Blue Knight (1972)), The Choirboys (1975), The Black Marble (1978), The Glitter Dome (1981), The Delta Star (1983), The Secrets of Harry Bright (1985), The Golden Orange (1990), Fugitive Nights: Danger in the Desert (1992), Finnegan’s Week (1993) and Floaters (1996). ……………
    Another of Wambaugh’s most revered projects was the 1973-1978 NBC series Police Story, which he created and developed. The gritty cop series paved the way for later series celebrated for a new realism such as NYPD Blue and even ER.
    ………….

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  154. “Both links are dead, but Musk is not in the chain of command. How is this his fault?

    I suppose it could have been noted rapist and alcoholic Pete Hesgeth. I had him pegged as a christian nationalist, not an overt racist, but I guess he contains multitudes.

    Davethulhu (de027b)

  155. Why isn’t ascertaining nationality, gang membership, and illegal entry all the process they are “due”?
    ……..
    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/16/2025 @ 8:09 am

    Despite the government’s broad power over immigration, the Supreme Court has recognized that aliens who have physically entered the United States generally come under the protective scope of the Due Process Clause, which applies to all ‘persons’ within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent. Consequently, there are greater due process protections in formal removal proceedings brought against aliens already present within the United States. These due process protections generally include the right to a hearing and a meaningful opportunity to be heard before deprivation of a liberty interest.
    …………

    Moreover:

    ..……. the Supreme Court has held, an order of removal may be entered only if the government presents clear, unequivocal, and convincing evidence that the facts alleged as grounds for deportation are true. Woodby v. INS, 385 U.S. 276, 286 (1966). However, an alien in formal removal proceedings has the burden of proving his or her eligibility for discretionary relief from removal.
    …………
    (See also) Dep’t of Homeland Sec. v. Thuraissigiam, No. 19-161, slip op. at 2, 34–36 (U.S. June 25, 2020) (holding that, while aliens who have established connections in this country have due process rights in deportation proceedings, an alien at the threshold of initial entry, including a person who is detained shortly after unlawful entry, has only those protections regarding admission that Congress provided by statute);

    United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259, 271 (1990) (These cases, however, establish only that aliens receive constitutional protections when they have come within the territory of the United States and developed substantial connections with this country.);

    Landon v. Plasencia, 459 U.S. 21, 32 (1982) ([O]nce an alien gains admission to our country and begins to develop the ties that go with permanent residence his constitutional status changes accordingly.); (and)

    Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763, 770 (1950) (The alien, to whom the United States has been traditionally hospitable, has been accorded a generous and ascending scale of rights as he increases his identity with our society.).
    ………..

    Paragraph breaks added. Source

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  156. (Trump) reverses of long-standing American positions, both in foreign policy and in trade are making war on the United States in the interests of a foreign power as well as giving them aid and comfort.

    Even John Walker Lindh, who served and fought with the Taliban, wasn’t charged with treason against the United States. If he couldn’t be charged (probably due to the two-witness requirement), then nobody will be.

    Rip Murdock (288dd2)

  157. On a much lighter note, here’s a challenge for all of you. Describe a likely encounter between the Loser and a super hero. Here are two examples to get you started:

    1. Superman agrees To play a round of golf with the Loser. Does the Loser try to cheat? Almost certainly in my opinion.

    2. Wonder Woman captures the Loser with her Lasso of Truth. Is he forced to tell the truth? Yes, and the shock to him is great.

    Jim Miller (0a64aa)

  158. Davethulhu (de027b) — 3/16/2025 @ 11:55 am

    Do you still support the designated terrorist group, antifa?

    NJRob (7feac6)

  159. Rob, is Antifa a “designated terrorist group”? What’s your proof?

    Paul Montagu (240f25)

  160. Dr. Thomas Sowell on tariffs.

    Paul Montagu (240f25)

  161. Go ask Senator Bill Cassidy Paul.

    You know they are terrorists. So why ask the question.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  162. “Rob, is Antifa a “designated terrorist group”? What’s your proof?”

    There was a declaration, similar in impact to declaring today the start of “National Poison Prevention Week”.

    Davethulhu (de027b)

  163. You know they are terrorists. So why ask the question.

    You made a specific claim, Rob, that they’re a designated terrorist group”, but a symbolic Senate resolution does not designate a terrorist group make, and they’re not on the FBI list of domestic terrorists.

    This doesn’t mean they’re not violent or terrorists or don’t seek the overthrow of the US government, but words mean things, Rob, and making sh-t up doesn’t help you.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  164. Sure it does. You are ignoring reality and moving goalposts as usual

    I’m not surprised you’d give aid and comfort to leftist terrorists. It’s par for your course.

    I didn’t specify the FBI. You did.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  165. You said the phrase “designated”, Rob, so your intellectually dishonesty again rears its ugly head.
    Seriously, you seem incapable of not engaging in gross hyperbole and exaggeration, all in furtherance of your MAGA Narrative and Orange Leader.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  166. It’s a plain reading of the law, Kevin. We’re not in a declared war.

    And yet, Gitmo for terrorists in 2004. That wasn’t a “declared war” either, if you want to be a stickler about it.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  167. the 5th Amendment due process clause, (which constrains the federal government) states that “no person…….shall be deprived be deprived of life, liberty…….without due process of law,” not just citizens.

    But what IS due process anyway? Is it the same for every inhabitant?

    (See also) Dep’t of Homeland Sec. v. Thuraissigiam, No. 19-161, slip op. at 2, 34–36 (U.S. June 25, 2020) (holding that, while aliens who have established connections in this country have due process rights in deportation proceedings, an alien at the threshold of initial entry, including a person who is detained shortly after unlawful entry, has only those protections regarding admission that Congress provided by statute);

    United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259, 271 (1990) (These cases, however, establish only that aliens receive constitutional protections when they have come within the territory of the United States and developed substantial connections with this country.);

    Landon v. Plasencia, 459 U.S. 21, 32 (1982) ([O]nce an alien gains admission to our country and begins to develop the ties that go with permanent residence his constitutional status changes accordingly.); (and)

    Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763, 770 (1950) (The alien, to whom the United States has been traditionally hospitable, has been accorded a generous and ascending scale of rights as he increases his identity with our society.).

    All of these suggest that one gains 5th Amendment rights as part of one’s assimilation into American society. M5 was never about assimilation. They were just a gang preying on American society.

    Again, what process are they due? Is what is due to a citizen the same as what is due to a violent illegal immigrant and gang member? Bork suggested that it was whatever process that they are given.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  168. Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/16/2025 @ 8:35 pm

    Ridiculous.
    AUMFs are tantamount to declarations of war. Liberals challenged that very thing decades ago and lost.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  169. “I know it when I see it”

    –Potter Stewart

    I’m wondering if anyone disputes that the M5 gang engages in terrorism.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  170. AUMFs are tantamount to declarations of war

    But they aren’t actually the same. Among other things, they don’t name a State adversary, and they don’t have a well-understood method of ending the conflict. They aren’t “war” in the Constitutional sense, they simply authorize the use of military force.

    Time and again we run up against the limitations that not-being-a-war entails. Or do you argue that an AUMF against drug gangs in Mexico means that illegal entry from Mexico is an “invasion”?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  171. I seem to recall when Trump tried to block immigration from countries where an AUMF was in force, the judges blocked enforcement of his EO, where they would never, ever, do that in the case of an actual Declaration of War.

    Clearly not the same thing.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  172. Njrob – so the courts are no longer a check on unconstitutional actions by the executive, apparently.

    Why do you think it is a good thing?

    aphrael (dbf41f)

  173. But they aren’t actually the same.

    Yet the courts didn’t make that distinction 20 years ago when the CodePink communists et al challenged the 2003 AUMF.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  174. @143 Ever hear of batista? Godfather II goes into it a little bit. Hugo Chavez was voted in like trump at which point US govt. and business interests began sabotaging him. You can’t rob pillage and rape and then ask th US to save you from the people’s wrath. Look what chinese sabotage with covid did to trump or he would have won in 2020 and AOC would have won in 2024.

    asset (fb67f4)

  175. Chuckie The democrat party, even the government unions want me to stand firm on no CR so I will! Senator aipac and your other donors are calling. I just got an offer I couldn’t refuse so I caved and will support CR! AOC can’t primary me untill 2028!

    asset (fb67f4)

  176. @174,
    Because he loves big government. Hates our constitutional System of government because it impedes his authority in tendencies, and most importantly, they took action against his preferred team therefore, they are his enemy. Figuring him out is easy.

    Time123 (5410c8)

  177. so the courts are no longer a check on unconstitutional actions by the executive, apparently.

    Why do you think it is a good thing?

    aphrael (dbf41f) — 3/16/2025 @ 9:42 pm

    Strawman. The actions were not unconstitutional and a leftist judge saying it is does not make it so.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  178. Because he loves big government. Hates our constitutional System of government because it impedes his authority in tendencies, and most importantly, they took action against his preferred team therefore, they are his enemy. Figuring him out is easy.

    Time123 (5410c8) — 3/17/2025 @ 4:31 am

    You’re lying as usual.

    One side is trying to shrink the government and reduce the power of the state and You’re fighting against it tooth and nail.

    Fraud.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  179. Again, what process are they due? Is what is due to a citizen the same as what is due to a violent illegal immigrant and gang member?

    Is what is due for a Faberge egg the same as what is due for a hardboiled yegg (sic)? The due process is to determine what you have.

    It’s not complicated:
    1. A duly enacted law;
    2. Credible evidence that the person is or is not in compliance with that law;
    3. An impartial adjudicator of pure Aryan heritage traceable back to 1750.

    nk (fb3cb9)

  180. Hi Rob. I’ll wait patiently while you produce anything I’ve written that’s oppositional to the current efforts to shrink the government.

    But the fact that you like the president reducing departments you feel are liberal doesn’t mean you want small government. I think you’re just happy Trump is attacking ppl you think are your political ‘enemies’. I also don’t think you care if he breaks the low or expands the power of the executive branch in his quest to do so.

    As I’ve said in the past, you don’t want a smaller government that lets ppl do as they please. You want big government that forces ppl to do as you please. The only consistent principle you display is support for your culture war team. You seem to be completely amoral in all other regards.

    Time123 (4d5e8f)

  181. NK, I think that’s unfair. While Rob does seem to be at least mildly racist his primary adherence is to political tribalism more so than Bloodline.

    Time123 (4d5e8f)

  182. I hope they catch and prosecute the ppl who are vandalizing Tesla dealerships and cars. If they’re guilty of terrorism I hope they’re charged with that as well. Violence and criminality have no legitimate place in our politics.

    Time123 (4d5e8f)

  183. I was responding to Kevin M @ 169 (3/16/2025 @ 8:52 pm), not NJRob.

    nk (a39bae)

  184. For context, the SS (Schutzstaffel) were the ones who packed the boxcars for “relocation”, and pure Aryan heritage traceable back to 1750 was a requirement for membership in their ranks with the occasional exception or exemption on a case by case basis.

    nk (a39bae)

  185. @185, My bad.

    Time123 (4d5e8f)

  186. @65

    Rip, the 1994 Budapest Memorandum is an explicit support for Ukraine, where we promised them security assurances in exchange for their giving over the nukes in their possession to Russia. That’s 31 years, until Trump.

    Paul Montagu (354e09) — 3/14/2025 @ 6:16 pm

    Obama put an end to that Paul by not observing that Memorandum. Any agreement after that is dead.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  187. @88

    Because we didn’t welsh, Putin did.

    More like we welshed after Putin did.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/15/2025 @ 11:51 am

    Correct, both the US (Obama) and the UK did zilch.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  188. Time and again we run up against the limitations that not-being-a-war entails. Or do you argue that an AUMF against drug gangs in Mexico means that illegal entry from Mexico is an “invasion”?

    Declarations of war also authorize the use of military force. While al Qaeda was the purported target, the practical result was toppling the governments of two nations, like in a declared war.

    As for this “invasion” from Mexico, seems like it would have to qualify as an invasion in the first place, which it don’t.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  189. Strawman. The actions were not unconstitutional and a leftist judge saying it is does not make it so.

    That wasn’t the Executive Branch’s call to make. If Trump didn’t like it–given that he swore an oath to defend and uphold the Constitution–was to appeal the ruling, not flout it like the fascist he is (and you by extension).

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  190. @190

    As for this “invasion” from Mexico, seems like it would have to qualify as an invasion in the first place, which it don’t.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595) — 3/17/2025 @ 7:14 am

    Lets look at the word invasion.

    Why does a state-actor or group invade their target?

    It could be for territory.

    It could be to punish their targets.

    It could be to put diplomatic pressure on nations.

    It could be to extract resources (theft).

    These economic illegal aliens, breaking our laws or even abusing our asylum laws, are simply looking to for a better life.

    Unfortunately, they’re doing so either after breaking laws, or under false pretense or otherwise NOT in good faith.

    That’s theft at the very least.

    Done in massed like recently?

    Yeah, that’s an invasion.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  191. Obama put an end to that Paul by not observing that Memorandum. Any agreement after that is dead.

    A weak-ass response doesn’t mean that, in your opinion, we violated the deal.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  192. so the courts are no longer a check on unconstitutional actions by the executive, apparently.

    Why do you think it is a good thing?

    So, the powers granted to the executive are subject to reversal by ANY district court judge? There’s maybe 700 of them, and a litigant only needs to find one favorable to their cause.

    Makes one wonder why they didn’t include that little detail in the Constitution where they [pretended to] empower the Executive.

    Also, given the tendency of courts to suggest that minimal interference with statutory powers is a duty when the executive does it, why does that not also apply to the courts? Maybe district courts should automatically stay their orders until an appeals court can hear the case. If it’s that important, won’t the appellate court take the appeal soonest?

    Because that’s the line they’d use on the Executive. And it’s mostly not true.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  193. whembly (b7cc46) — 3/17/2025 @ 7:21 am

    Given the 7-minute time difference between our comment and the time it took to write your response, it’s clear to anyone that you didn’t read the link, so your opinion is weighted and dismissed accordingly.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  194. I was responding to Kevin M @ 169 (3/16/2025 @ 8:52 pm), not NJRob.

    Thanks, nk. It’s always good to know who you want to slander.

    However the stuff you called out is lifted directly from Rip’s #156, which itself is lifted from US Supreme Court holdings and/or sustained appellate court rulings.

    So as it turns out, I’m not completely sure who you wished to slander

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  195. nk and Time123, filling the smear void left by Klink.

    lloyd (ad7579)

  196. Did Klink leave or get banned?

    Time123 (c5e8b1)

  197. Seems like there’s an attendance to try and place romantic games with certain words, like invasion treason, traitor. In Some uses those words have specific meanings that require or justify specific responses. In other others, there being used rhetorically or not as terms of art or legal terms.

    For example, when I say that left-wing support of communism or left-wing criticism of US policy with respect to totalitarian regime in the Middle East is treasonous, I am saying that they are betraying their country with their vocalized support and opinions. I am not saying that they have committed the criminal act of treason and should be treated accordingly.

    Likewise, to say that large numbers of central American immigrants entering our country is an invasion makes perfect sense rhetorically. Attempting to use that rhetorically accurate phrase to justify the type of government response. We would see if a hostile army armed accordingly entered our country and began seizing territory is silly and a rhetorical game

    Time123 (c5e8b1)

  198. @190, I’ll try again since you seem to have misunderstood the question:

    Or do you argue that an AUMF against drug gangs in Mexico means that illegal entry from Mexico is an “invasion”?

    The point is that you aren’t being responsive to the AUMF vs Delcaration of War question. I hope to pin you down.

    Code Pink argued that using military force required a declaration of war, and (unsurprisingly) the court said it is the same as far as actually using military force was concerned.

    But your assumption that is was the same for everything (e.g. immigration controls) when it clearly was not (that would require suspension of habeas corpus or other domestic rights as part of the AUMF).

    So, they are NOT the same thing, and your observation is off-point.

    Note: I am not claiming anything about NJRob’s beliefs — they are his, not necessarily mine, and if you want to question those beliefs, ask him.

    Also I didn’t claim that a hypothetical fentanyl AUMF justified calling “illegal entry from Mexico” part of an “invasion”, only whether the AUMF would do so by default. I don’t think it does for non-combatants.

    Extra credit: Would someone carrying fentanyl across the border, given that AUMF, be accurately called an “invader” since they are effectively combatants?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  199. Ever hear of batista?

    For some people nothing ever happens in history, except for ancient grudges.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  200. There are multiple issues here wrt “invasion” and I think the most important one is whether policing immigration is a proper function of the Border Patrol. I can’t see anyone arguing that it is not.

    Is calling an individual who may be entering illegally, by means of falsifying documents or other subterfuge, an “invader”? No, unless you can demonstrate an organized series of attempts.

    But, at the border, not all of the rights that pertain elsewhere necessarily apply there. In fact “an alien at the threshold of initial entry, including a person who is detained shortly after unlawful entry, has only those protections regarding admission that Congress provided by statute.” SCOTUS 2020.

    The rest of Rip’s citation list agrees that rights are not as complete for some time after entry, measured by the degree that a person becomes part of our society. Do gang members, entering to join members of their foreign gang, satisfy that condition? Or is it more that they are part of the gang’s organized attempt to “invade”?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  201. For those that think their rights extend to attempted entry, I suggest bringing a laptop the, when they ask you to open it and enter the password, tell them to F.O.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  202. Since everyone is talking about the Budapest Memorandum, the text of it is here:

    https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%203007/Part/volume-3007-I-52241.pdf

    Russia violated this portion:

    The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and The United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.

    The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and The United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

    This is the only promise the US made:

    The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and The United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon state party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.

    Appalled (2e3820)

  203. Wow did voice to text ever garble my comment. 🤣sorry about that

    Time12 (4b0220)

  204. Again, what process are they due? Is what is due to a citizen the same as what is due to a violent illegal immigrant and gang member? Bork suggested that it was whatever process that they are given.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/16/2025 @ 8:52 pm

    Congress is free to design a due process system for violent illegal immigrants and gang members, as long as it comports with Supreme Court precedents.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  205. Rip, the 1994 Budapest Memorandum is an explicit support for Ukraine, where we promised them security assurances in exchange for their giving over the nukes in their possession to Russia. That’s 31 years, until Trump.

    Paul Montagu (354e09) — 3/14/2025 @ 6:16 pm

    The Budapest Memorandum doesn’t define “security assurances,” so both the US and UK are free to interpret what it means.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  206. Appalled (2e3820) — 3/17/2025 @ 8:29 am

    Exactly my point-the Memorandum didn’t commit the US to anything beyond consulting with the UN Security Council. Any other interpretation goes beyond the plain text of the agreement.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  207. @195

    Given the 7-minute time difference between our comment and the time it took to write your response, it’s clear to anyone that you didn’t read the link, so your opinion is weighted and dismissed accordingly.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595) — 3/17/2025 @ 7:25 am

    MBIC you might want to get off your high horse, or you shall too be weighed, and be found wanting…

    whembly (b7cc46)

  208. @199

    Seems like there’s an attendance to try and place romantic games with certain words, like invasion treason, traitor. In Some uses those words have specific meanings that require or justify specific responses. In other others, there being used rhetorically or not as terms of art or legal terms.

    Time123 (c5e8b1) — 3/17/2025 @ 7:57 am

    Sorry, now… what are the rules?

    I’ve been told that Trump’s speech was an insurrection on j6th…

    Please help me keep these straight, it’s getting a weee bit confusing…

    whembly (b7cc46)

  209. So, the powers granted to the executive are subject to reversal by ANY district court judge? There’s maybe 700 of them, and a litigant only needs to find one favorable to their cause.

    Yes, the principal of judicial review of executive branch actions (and laws passed by Congress) was established in Marbury v. Madison (5 US 137 (1803). But I’m sure you knew that.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  210. @whembky, you should direct that question to whoever said that about his speech.

    Time12 (4b0220)

  211. Well, Trump is truthing that Biden’s “autopen” is void and null.

    Nope.

    No chance.

    Don’t see how that’s possible… like how would that work?

    Let’s agree with this premise: Biden was unaware and totally non compos mentis. His staff used the autopen to sign everything.

    Say that’s true.

    Even then, there’s no way to revert it, no way to “void” laws/EO/Pardons signed by the autopen.

    I see no mechanism.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  212. @212

    @whembky, you should direct that question to whoever said that about his speech.

    Time12 (4b0220) — 3/17/2025 @ 8:57 am

    I have, numerous times.

    See past topics about using the 14th Amendment insurrection clause to kick Trump off the ballot.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  213. #213

    Do you think the Justice Department is going to ignore Trump’s declaration? Particularly if he converts it to an executive order?

    Appalled (2e3820)

  214. Or do you argue that an AUMF against drug gangs in Mexico means that illegal entry from Mexico is an “invasion”?

    I reject the premise of the question, Kevin, because it’s circular and I’m not going to belabor your “invasion” theory because it’s a hypothetical that has no basis under law.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  215. MBIC you might want to get off your high horse, or you shall too be weighed, and be found wanting…

    whembly, your intellectual laziness is there for anyone to see, earlier with tariffs and now with “invasion”.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  216. @215

    #213

    Do you think the Justice Department is going to ignore Trump’s declaration? Particularly if he converts it to an executive order?

    Appalled (2e3820) — 3/17/2025 @ 9:06 am

    We’ll know if DOJ charges people like Fauci or J6 committee members.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  217. @217

    MBIC you might want to get off your high horse, or you shall too be weighed, and be found wanting…

    whembly, your intellectual laziness is there for anyone to see, earlier with tariffs and now with “invasion”.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595) — 3/17/2025 @ 9:11 am

    Cool… more appeal to authority arguments.

    …and I’m the lazy one?

    whembly (b7cc46)

  218. That’s a nice slight of hand. You reject something saying that it’s not accurate, then when the person you’re talking to provides justification for its accuracy, you accuse them of engaging in an appeal to authority and ignore the justification provided completely.

    Time123 (c5e8b1)

  219. @214, I guess I was confused because you directed the statement to me, and I don’t recall that I’ve ever said that Trump‘s speech constituted criminal insurrection.

    But I have to acknowledge that his actions in totality could reasonably argued to do so

    Time123 (c5e8b1)

  220. Yes, the principal of judicial review of executive branch actions (and laws passed by Congress) was established in Marbury v. Madison (5 US 137 (1803). But I’m sure you knew that.

    I’m pretty sure that Marbury did not establish that a district court could ORDER actions to be carried out by the President, or settle all disputes, nationwide, of a given type after hearing about one case.

    It seems like what we have now is an ELECTED President and 700 minders with the power to veto, or require, actions that fall withing the enumerated powers of the Presidency after hearing from a party that chose their court for their likely ruling.

    If I really wanted to sabotage the Rule of Law, this is how I would do it.

    At the very least, only an appellate court should possess this kind of power, and any order desired by the trial court should be suspended until such review. The case should first be brought in the state or district where the tort occurred, in deference to Art III, Section 2, pp 3, and the 6th amendment.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  221. I reject the premise of the question, Kevin, because it’s circular and I’m not going to belabor your “invasion” theory because it’s a hypothetical that has no basis under law.

    Just for Fing once, read what people write, not what you think they must have written because your (wildly incorrect) assumptions about their beliefs cloud your mind.

    For starters, it was a HYPOTHETICAL, not an assertion, you pompous prig.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  222. @220

    That’s a nice slight of hand. You reject something saying that it’s not accurate, then when the person you’re talking to provides justification for its accuracy, you accuse them of engaging in an appeal to authority and ignore the justification provided completely.

    Time123 (c5e8b1) — 3/17/2025 @ 9:22 am

    No magic here.

    Paul’s mad that the tariff citation he presented to buttress his arguments isn’t given the same weight as he would like, when I brought up how other “experts” in their fields were proven wrong in recent years.

    All I said was because of that history, we should proceed with caution.

    He took umbrage to that.

    Then, fast-foward to the immigration invasion argument, by presenting a link from Ilya Somin, and claiming that I didn’t read his link when I responded. (I knew of that whitepaper for quite some time).

    Again, choosing to appeal to authority as fact, when in reality it’s much greyer.

    He’s being catty, Time123.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  223. Kevin, that approach definitely makes a lot of sense. It’s not how we’ve been doing things and while I’m not a lawyer I think current law requires it to go to a district court first. Are you envisioning it that the district courts injunction would only apply to their jurisdiction? So people and other jurisdictions would have to file their own claim if they wanted relief from an order they believed to be unconstitutional?

    Time123 (c5e8b1)

  224. I hope they catch and prosecute the ppl who are vandalizing Tesla dealerships and cars. If they’re guilty of terrorism I hope they’re charged with that as well. Violence and criminality have no legitimate place in our politics.

    Time123 (4d5e8f) — 3/17/2025 @ 5:50 am

    There is no federal crime of “domestic terrorism” (DT) in the federal domestic code (some states do have a “domestic terrorism statute).

    Unlike foreign terrorism, the federal government does not have a mechanism to formally charge an individual with DT, which sometimes makes it difficult (and occasionally controversial) to formally characterize someone as a domestic terrorist. Further, domestic terrorists may adhere to the ideologies of certain extremist movements or belong to hate or extremist groups, but unlike the formal process involved in designating foreign terrorist organizations, DT movements and groups are not officially labeled as such by the federal government, thereby making it difficult to categorize the threat presented by any group or movement as a DT threat. While some observers may look to terrorism-related incidents, investigations, and arrests to help understand the scope of the DT threat, these data are limited.
    ………..

    ……….While an individual may commit crimes that are widely considered to be acts of DT, they cannot be charged at the federal level with committing an act of DT because there is no federal criminal provision expressly prohibiting domestic terrorism. For example, Timothy McVeigh, widely considered a domestic terrorist in the United States, was never charged with or convicted of DT. Instead, he was convicted of murder, conspiracy, and using a weapon of mass destruction in the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City that killed 168 people. Some states have DT laws, and individuals who commit certain offenses in those states may face prosecution for DT under state law. For example, in 2019 James Jackson was convicted of DT as well as other crimes in New York for the “white supremacist murder” of Timothy Caughman.

    Presumably those who have firebombed Tesla dealerships can be charged under the federal arson statute (18 U.S.C. § 844(i)), which makes it a crime for

    Whoever maliciously damages or destroys, or attempts to damage or destroy, by means of fire or an explosive, any building, vehicle, or other real or personal property used in interstate or foreign commerce or in any activity affecting interstate or foreign commerce……

    Perpetrators could also be charged with

    18 U.S.C. § 2339A (providing material support to terrorists; charges must relate to a separate federal offense listed in the statute);

    18 USC 842 (unlawful acts involving explosives)

    18 USC 844 (prohibiting “maliciously” using means of “fire or an explosive” to damage or destroy (or attempt to damage or destroy) a building, vehicle, or other real or personal property that is either (1) owned, possessed, or leased by the federal government or any institution or organization receiving federal financial assistance; or (2) used in interstate or foreign commerce or an activity affecting interstate or foreign commerce……)

    As well as any co-conspirators. After conviction, the prosecution can ask for a “domestic terrorism sentencing enhancement” but the final decision is up to the judge.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  225. I’m not going to belabor your “invasion” theor

    I guess you group all who disagree with you as part of the same deplorable mob and figure you can slander any of them equally, since “they all deserve it.”

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  226. @221

    @214, I guess I was confused because you directed the statement to me, and I don’t recall that I’ve ever said that Trump‘s speech constituted criminal insurrection.

    But I have to acknowledge that his actions in totality could reasonably argued to do so

    Time123 (c5e8b1) — 3/17/2025 @ 9:25 am

    That is what I was referring to.

    Here you are, making some noises how “words have specific” and how some are being “used rhetorically”.

    You making the case that Trump’s “actions in totality could reasonably argued to do so”, is textbox hyperbolic.

    Again.

    I beseech you to tell me the rules.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  227. Are you envisioning it that the district courts injunction would only apply to their jurisdiction?

    Ideally, but that was not my intent here.

    It was to limit the initial district court to one within the state and district in which the tort occurred to avoid, say, dragging an action in California into an East Texas court. While the constitution does not require that for civil cases (it does for crimes), it is indisputable that court-shopping of this sort DOES happen, for largely the same reasons that it was banned in criminal cases.

    I admit that local judges issuing global orders rankles. I would be happier about it if the court was colocated with the problem and not just the one most likely to give the right answer. Such as an Hawaiian court making rulings about the southern border, or an East Texas court making rulings on product safety in a case whose main parties are in New York.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  228. Yes, the principal of judicial review of executive branch actions (and laws passed by Congress) was established in Marbury v. Madison (5 US 137 (1803). But I’m sure you knew that.

    I’m pretty sure that Marbury did not establish that a district court could ORDER actions to be carried out by the President, or settle all disputes, nationwide, of a given type after hearing about one case.

    I can’t recall, but did you make the same argument when the Biden Administration was sanctioned by district courts with nationwide injunctions concerning student loan relief (or mifepristone)? As far as I know, the Supreme Court has never ruled against the concept of nationwide injunctions.

    I think the number of nationwide injunctions against the current Trump Administration reflects his numerous attempts to test the limits of Presidential power over the past two months.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  229. Cool… more appeal to authority arguments.

    No, just an appeal for you to read an argument for once, from people who happen to have expertise on a subject, but I can tell you’re stuck in your right-wing intellectual silo like the other MAGAs, so…

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  230. Paul… a little truce here.

    Here’s where I’m coming from.

    We now know that governments world-wide knowingly lied and leveraged media/social media to prevent certain icky people from discussing certain icky facts that, oops! are now true, is why people don’t listen to “experts” in their fields, including public health officials.

    Those who perpetuated these lies and censorship are scurrying behind any shelter and throat-clearing exercise and I’m here to remind the masses that we should keep these things in mind whenever “experts” makes certain positions, particularly when there’s heavy political contexts.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  231. so the courts are no longer a check on unconstitutional actions by the executive, apparently.

    Why do you think it is a good thing?

    “By any means necessary.”

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  232. Let me tray again.

    Words have both ‘technical’ and ‘rhetorical / common’ usage.

    Murder is an example. If I say that the health insurance company “Murdered” someone because they we’re unable to afford necessary care and died I could reasonable construed to mean
    “The actions of the health insurance company were unjustified, immoral, and significantly contributed to the death” It would not be reasonable to concluded that I’m saying the facts show that they meet the legal elements for criminal Murder.

    “Invasion” is similar. Many people agree that in casual usage a large influx of people seeing asylum or a jobs is an ‘invasion’. That’s not the same as saying that it’s the same thing as armed soldiers taking Land by force. WRT to the souther border it seems as if some people are asserting that because there’s some agreement that the rhetorical application of invastion is appropriate that the miltairy responses we would use if a ‘technical’ invasion occurred is also appropriate.

    Is that more clear? I know the V2T really messed up my previous comment.

    Time12 (4b0220)

  233. @231

    No, just an appeal for you to read an argument for once, from people who happen to have expertise on a subject, but I can tell you’re stuck in your right-wing intellectual silo like the other MAGAs, so…

    Paul Montagu (6e4595) — 3/17/2025 @ 9:49 am

    For the record, I have.

    But that doesn’t mean they’re always right.

    Economist get things wrong all the time.

    Lawyers, of all people, get things wrong too.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  234. For starters, it was a HYPOTHETICAL, not an assertion, you pompous prig.

    Kevin, I literally said your question was a hypothetical. Like you said, “read what people write”.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  235. But that doesn’t mean they’re always right.

    That’s not an argument against what Lincicome wrote and in this very thread, Thomas Sowell, it’s a pout.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  236. Kevin, that makes sense. It’s not how we’ve been running things, but it’s logical.

    Time (4b0220)

  237. Again, choosing to appeal to authority as fact, when in reality it’s much greyer.

    Still missing the point, whembly, because you didn’t address any tariff or invasion arguments made, or say where any of them got any of it wrong. Instead, you just waved it off because some experts got something wrong, therefore all experts should all be dismissed. That’s more than intellectually lazy, it’s intellectually dishonest.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  238. can’t recall, but did you make the same argument when the Biden Administration was sanctioned by district courts with nationwide injunctions concerning student loan relief (or mifepristone)?

    Well, they lost the one they should lose and won the one should should have won. I had dismissed the silly mifepristone as not worth my time (and it was just such formum-shopping as I detest). I may have supported the student loan case(s) if I could remember which one. All were sustained anyway, indicating the local court had little hope to prevail (and was the one overstepping).

    I think the number of nationwide injunctions against the current Trump Administration reflects his numerous attempts to test the limits of Presidential power over the past two months.

    Perhaps. It is a president’s job, particularly one elected to make that his job, to test out erroneous limits of this sort. As long as the judge’s orders are stayed for review and not, say, verbal orders not in the decision or the time-frame for response does not prevent an appeal, I have no huge problem. But these hand-picked dragon-slaying judges ought to embarrassing even for the plaintiff.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  239. can’t recall, but did you make the same argument when the Biden Administration was sanctioned by district courts with nationwide injunctions concerning student loan relief (or mifepristone)?

    This illustrates the challenge of systemic reform, the Status Quo always benefits someone in the moment. You ca have a principled view of what should happen, but if that system hurt Pepsi today they won’t want to do it. Coke will want to do it, but only until doing it would help Pepsi. At that point Coke is opposed to the change.

    Also, I’m not sure who wrote that, but Kevin is usually a reasoned and principled commenter (even if he does disagree with me a lot) and If he’s saying he believes something I’m inclined to assume he’s being honest and not arguing based on partisanship.

    Time (4b0220)

  240. Kevin, I literally said your question was a hypothetical.

    I reject the premise of the question, Kevin, because it’s circular and I’m not going to belabor your “invasion” theory because it’s a hypothetical that has no basis under law.

    It is only circular because you insisted on it being so.

    How is it circular to ask if an organized group, coming over the border to sell drugs and kill people, in concert, an “invasion” if there is an AUMF to stop them from doing so?

    Yes, it is hypothetical because I do NOT believe that immigration for economic advantage is an “invasion” so I decline to use that to find out what you really think.

    But you won’t tell me and I have to wonder why. You only mention it BEING hypothetical after you’ve declined to answer because it’s “circular” and because you confuse me with Rob.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  241. not arguing based on partisanship.

    It would be a bit odd as I have never, not once, voted for Donald Trump. A pox on both their houses. I may, however, support some of his actions.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  242. This illustrates the challenge of systemic reform, the Status Quo always benefits someone in the moment.

    Indeed.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  243. an organized group, coming over the border to sell drugs and kill people, in concert, an “invasion” if there is an AUMF to stop them from doing so?

    It’s not a military invasion. It might meet the non-military definition if there’s a lot of them. But as written this could be an organized group of 3 ppl.

    Time (4b0220)

  244. It might meet the non-military definition if there’s a lot of them.

    I believe that I suggested “M5” somewhere up thread. They are very organized and there are a “lot of them” throughout Central America. If there were only 3, it wouldn’t be a huge (or long-lasting) problem.

    Depending on what one means by “military” it could even be that. If they have to be controlled by a nation-state, no, but as we’ve seen not all militaries are that way. We fought the Taliban for a while and they did proclaim themselves a “military” — while observing none of the rules. Was al-qaeda a military or just a bunch of terrorists? Yet we fought them with our military and treated them, more of less, under the Geneva rules.

    The drug gangs in Mexico and Central America have destabilized every country in the region. Is that the actions of a few people?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  245. At the very least, only an appellate court should possess this kind of power, and any order desired by the trial court should be suspended until such review.

    District courts are under the authority of the Circuit Court, thus their rulings are enforceable. This really hasn’t been a serious argument until Trump started with all the flouting.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  246. How is it circular to ask if an organized group, coming over the border to sell drugs and kill people, in concert, an “invasion”…

    Again, because it’s not an invasion under law, so I’m not going there with you. I didn’t cite Somin because blue is a pretty color.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  247. Funny how the Rule of Law suddenly matters on immigration after the same folks looked the other way the past four years.

    lloyd (39bdfb)

  248. @239

    That’s more than intellectually lazy, it’s intellectually dishonest.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595) — 3/17/2025 @ 10:05 am

    No.

    You:

    Some points about tariffs and pointed to citation.

    Me:

    Issued generic statements that experts has been wrong.

    You:

    Immigration isn’t an invasion and pointed to citation.

    Me:

    Opining that certain immigrations could be argued as an invasion.

    You:

    Immediately presume that I didn’t read your link and simply disregarded my post in a hissy fit.

    Me:

    I pointed out said hissy fit and you’re still mad.

    Shall we keep going?

    whembly (b7cc46)

  249. Kevin, I shouldn’t have taken more time to consider the intent of the question. I still don’t think it counts as a military invasion…a large criminal enterprise is very different from the paramilitary arm of a state. It’s closer to a multi-national terrorist organization. But, I don’t think a large percentage of illegal immigrants are affiliated with the cartels. I don’t think treating it as we should a military invasion is a good or effective idea.

    Time (4b0220)

  250. *should hhave

    Time (4b0220)

  251. The drug gangs in Mexico and Central America have destabilized every country in the region. Is that the actions of a few people?

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/17/2025 @ 10:36 am

    Relative to the total populations of each country, I would say yes.

    Concerning “what is an invasion,” see Guarantee Clause (Article IV, Section I):

    …….(T)he United States makes three related assurances to the states: (1) a guarantee of a republican form of government; (2) protection against foreign invasion; and (3) upon request by the state, protection against internal insurrection or rebellion.
    ………
    An early version of the Guarantee Clause was among the resolutions of the Virginia Plan introduced at the Constitutional Convention by Edmund Randolph and attributed to James Madison. …….

    Answering Gouverneur Morris’ objection (to an early version of the Clause), James Madison moved to substitute language that the Constitutional authority of the States shall be guarant[eed] to them respectively [against] domestic as well as foreign violence, with Edmund Randolph then moving to add language that no State shall be at liberty to form any other than a Republican [Government]. James Wilson then introduced, as a better expression of the idea, language substantially similar to the final form of the Guarantee Clause,

    (“resolving that a Republican [form of Government shall] be guarantied to each State & that each State shall be protected agst. foreign & domestic violence”.)

    ……….
    (See also Federalist Papers 21 and 43).

    In light of its text and framing, the Guarantee Clause was intended to be more than an authorization for the federal government to protect states against foreign invasion or internal insurrection, a power already conferred elsewhere in the Constitution (see Article I, Section 8, Clause 1: Congress’s Power to Call Militias.) While the precise contours of what constitutes a republican form of government are debatable, an additional object of the Guarantee Clause was to prevent states from establishing monarchical or despotic governments.
    ………
    The Supreme Court and other federal courts have largely declined to hear legal challenges based on the Guarantee Clause because they present nonjusticiable political questions.

    Footnotes omitted.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  252. Since the Founding Fathers had no conception of illegal immigration or transnational drug gangs, it should be obvious the that reference to “foreign violence or invasion” was in a military context.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  253. Rip, what about Pirates? Some of those early colonies had real problems there?

    Not arguing. Just wondering what you think and if that applies.

    Time123 (3a7079)

  254. @255

    Rip, what about Pirates? Some of those early colonies had real problems there?

    Not arguing. Just wondering what you think and if that applies.

    Time123 (3a7079) — 3/17/2025 @ 1:12 pm

    They were well aware of pirates when the US Constitution was passed… in Article I, Section 8, Clause 11, grants Congress the power to “grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal,”

    Since the Founding Fathers had no conception of illegal immigration or transnational drug gangs, it should be obvious the that reference to “foreign violence or invasion” was in a military context.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/17/2025 @ 1:09 pm

    Actually, no, it’s obvious that we don’t know it was in a military context. At best, it hasn’t been tested.

    Congress really should pass laws addressing this.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  255. Rip, what about Pirates? Some of those early colonies had real problems there?

    Not arguing. Just wondering what you think and if that applies.

    Time123 (3a7079) — 3/17/2025 @ 1:12 pm

    The Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clause 11) granted Congress the power to issue “letters of marque and reprisal.” Rather than being a problem, many pirates were based in the colonies and colluded with colonial governors (for a percentage, of course.) Since many of the ships that were attacked were British, there was no love lost between the colonists and the shipowners.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  256. Congress really should pass laws addressing this.

    whembly (b7cc46) — 3/17/2025 @ 1:27 pm

    Congress should be doing a lot of things.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  257. Actually, no, it’s obvious that we don’t know it was in a military context. At best, it hasn’t been tested.

    If you are an originalist, you do know. 😉

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  258. Trump Lays Groundwork for Investigating People Pardoned by Biden

    President Trump questioned the validity of pardons granted by President Joe Biden before he left office, signaling that the new administration could move to investigate those given legal immunity by his predecessor.
    ……….
    Trump asserted early Monday morning in a social-media post that Biden’s pardons were “void, vacant, and of no further force of effect” because they were signed with an autopen. Without citing evidence, the president said that the documents weren’t properly explained to Biden and that the staff who used the autopen “may have committed a crime.”
    ………
    ………In 2005, the George W. Bush administration (Office of Legal Counsel) concluded, “The President need not personally perform the physical act of affixing his signature to a bill he approves and decides to sign in order for the bill to become law.”
    ………
    Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said Trump’s concerns are focused on whether Biden was aware that the pardons were being issued. “I think it’s a question that everyone in this room should be looking into,” Leavitt said when asked whether Trump had any reason to believe that Biden wasn’t aware of the pardons.
    ………
    Trump made the post as he arrived back at the White House early Monday morning and told reporters that a decision about the legality of Biden’s autopen pardons would be made by the courts.

    “It’s not my decision—that’ll be up to a court—but I would say that they’re null and void, because I’m sure Biden didn’t have any idea that it was taking place, and somebody was using an autopen to sign off and to give pardons,” Trump said.
    ………..

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  259. @259

    If you are an originalist, you do know. 😉

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/17/2025 @ 1:36 pm

    I think you meant Textualist.

    Originalism would imply that there’s a verifiable rationale someone can easily point to.

    I might have some history homework… What did the state *do* during the American-Indian wars? I somehow don’t think the state sat down and waited for the Army to show up everytime battles sprung up.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  260. Rip, I would say a pirate fleet bombarding a Charlotte until they surrender and pay ransom has more in common with a traditional military invasion then what we see at the southern border. The fact that they didn’t treat it as an act of war implies that some sort of ‘in between’ action was considered appropriate.

    The boarder patrol is very well armed. The US army a much better equipped, but I don’t think Tanks and HIMARS are needed to in Laredo.

    Time (cc3270)

  261. @260

    Trump Lays Groundwork for Investigating People Pardoned by Biden

    President Trump questioned the validity of pardons granted by President Joe Biden before he left office, signaling that the new administration could move to investigate those given legal immunity by his predecessor.
    ……….
    Trump asserted early Monday morning in a social-media post that Biden’s pardons were “void, vacant, and of no further force of effect” because they were signed with an autopen. Without citing evidence, the president said that the documents weren’t properly explained to Biden and that the staff who used the autopen “may have committed a crime.”
    ………
    ………In 2005, the George W. Bush administration (Office of Legal Counsel) concluded, “The President need not personally perform the physical act of affixing his signature to a bill he approves and decides to sign in order for the bill to become law.”
    ………
    Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said Trump’s concerns are focused on whether Biden was aware that the pardons were being issued. “I think it’s a question that everyone in this room should be looking into,” Leavitt said when asked whether Trump had any reason to believe that Biden wasn’t aware of the pardons.
    ………
    Trump made the post as he arrived back at the White House early Monday morning and told reporters that a decision about the legality of Biden’s autopen pardons would be made by the courts.

    “It’s not my decision—that’ll be up to a court—but I would say that they’re null and void, because I’m sure Biden didn’t have any idea that it was taking place, and somebody was using an autopen to sign off and to give pardons,” Trump said.
    ………..

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/17/2025 @ 1:43 pm

    Nope. Courts won’t touch it.

    Nothing can be done.

    This is a political question, not a legal one.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  262. How do you see this as a political question? If things signed using the auto pen are invalid there’s likely a huge list of things that currently being treated as law when they shouldn’t be.

    Either the auto pen is legal or it’s not….seems like a court case to me.

    Also we’re probably 1 news cycle from a list of things Trump used the auto pen for.

    Biden should have been impeached for his abuse of the Pardon power. He wasn’t. But that doesn’t mean Trump can ignore that it happened under some dumb pretext.

    Although in fairness Trump asking for criminal investigation as a form or retribution does make some of Biden’s pardons appear less unjustified.

    Time (cc3270)

  263. @264

    How do you see this as a political question? If things signed using the auto pen are invalid there’s likely a huge list of things that currently being treated as law when they shouldn’t be.

    Because courts have to presume that the Executive authorized it and it’s non-justiciable.

    Unless JOE BIDEN himself, OR a documented recording otherwise, states that he didn’t know what the blazing was going on when these things were signed, I don’t see any avenue in court to revoke/reverse anything Biden AUTOPEN signed.

    The proper channel would be:
    a) impeachement
    b) amendment #25

    What does a & b equal to? Political questions that courts have traditionally stayed away from.

    The fact that a or b didn’t happen doesn’t rend AUTOPEN’ed laws/EO/directives less valid.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  264. Shall we keep going?

    Nope.
    You: Down is up

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  265. Here’s another flouting of a court order. How many more floutings before Trump’s regime is fascist? When it’s a Circuit Court ruling?

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  266. If you are an originalist, you do know. 😉

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/17/2025 @ 1:36 pm

    I think you meant Textualist.
    ………
    whembly (b7cc46) — 3/17/2025 @ 1:46 pm

    No, I mean originalist.

    The difference between them is one of scope, not philosophy: Originalism specifically refers to interpreting the Constitution based on the meaning the words carried at the time of writing, whereas textualism refers to interpreting all legal texts by the ordinary meaning of the text, setting aside factors not in the text itself.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  267. Actually, scratch that.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  268. Whembly, I think this type of question (what is the process to make a presidential decision official) is something the courts can engage in. Courts have gotten involved in the past with what does/doesn’t count as an official presidential act. The Trump administrations claim (in court) that his delcarations on twitter were not sufficient to declassify a document are an example of that.

    ….but I agree with you that eliminating auto pen as a valid way to document the presidents directives would require a political change.

    Time (cc3270)

  269. Trump Lays Groundwork for Investigating People Pardoned by Biden

    Nope. Courts won’t touch it.

    Nothing can be done.

    This is a political question, not a legal one.

    whembly (b7cc46) — 3/17/2025 @ 1:50 pm

    No one said anything about actually prosecuting those pardoned by Biden, but the use of the autopen, and Biden’s knowledge of the pardons, can certainly be investigated by the DC US Attorney and FBI. I’m sure they will take the hint.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  270. Wait, now I see that you were talking about the Trump’s claim that Biden didnt’ know what he was doing. I’m lumping that under “Trumps lies all the time and no one should believe anything he claims without independent proof”

    Time (cc3270)

  271. Unless JOE BIDEN himself, OR a documented recording otherwise, states that he didn’t know what the blazing was going on when these things were signed, I don’t see any avenue in court to revoke/reverse anything Biden AUTOPEN signed.

    That’s what grand juries are for.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  272. @RIp, i look forward to seeing how the Trump circus does this.

    Time (cc3270)

  273. Rip, I would say a pirate fleet bombarding a Charlotte until they surrender and pay ransom has more in common with a traditional military invasion then what we see at the southern border. The fact that they didn’t treat it as an act of war implies that some sort of ‘in between’ action was considered appropriate.

    I’ not certain as to what you are referring to.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  274. @RIp, i look forward to seeing how the Trump circus does this.

    Time (cc3270) — 3/17/2025 @ 2:42 pm

    My guess it will be harassing investigations by the DC US Attorney, FBI, and Jim Jordan.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  275. @270

    Whembly, I think this type of question (what is the process to make a presidential decision official) is something the courts can engage in. Courts have gotten involved in the past with what does/doesn’t count as an official presidential act. The Trump administrations claim (in court) that his delcarations on twitter were not sufficient to declassify a document are an example of that.

    ….but I agree with you that eliminating auto pen as a valid way to document the presidents directives would require a political change.

    Time (cc3270) — 3/17/2025 @ 2:32 pm

    The autopen, itself, isn’t the issue.

    As far as I know, its been used by multiple administrations just fine.

    The issue, is whether or not Joe Biden authorized it in each case.

    We can probably agree that, towards the end, Joe Biden probably didn’t know where he was half the time and we can agree, that it was people within his administrations when abused the autopen to push their pet law/EO/pardons through.

    But, I don’t think the courts will entertain whether or not Lynn Cheney’s pardon is valid if the Trump administration chooses to indict her.

    All Cheney’s attorney has to say, is that “my client has a pardon signed by President Biden”.

    If the DOJ pushes and demands that the Biden pardon is invalid, what is the court going to do? Request the former President to state whether he remembered ordering/signing this pardon???

    I think the courts is going to accept Cheney’s attorneys’ statement that the pardon was issued by President Biden, and leave it at that.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  276. All this whining about the courts since your court of last resort is the supreme court. In 1856 we had the same problem with the dread scott decision. President Jackson ignored the supreme court and forcible sent my people on a death march to oklahoma. The US later stloe most of that land from them. These were not savages ;but peaceful citizens living beside their white neighbors. Thats why the left’s court of last resort is different. From John Brown to Malcolm X. From Lexington green to today.

    asset (976fba)

  277. We can probably agree that, towards the end, Joe Biden probably didn’t know where he was half the time and we can agree, that it was people within his administrations when abused the autopen to push their pet law/EO/pardons through.

    That has about as much evidence as Trump’s Truth Social post, which is to say, nothing.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  278. If the DOJ pushes and demands that the Biden pardon is invalid, what is the court going to do? Request the former President to state whether he remembered ordering/signing this pardon???

    Why not?

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  279. @280

    If the DOJ pushes and demands that the Biden pardon is invalid, what is the court going to do? Request the former President to state whether he remembered ordering/signing this pardon???

    Why not?

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/17/2025 @ 3:00 pm

    Because it’s one of the core function of the Presidency. I don’t think courts can even wade into this controversy even if they wanted to…

    whembly (b7cc46)

  280. Because it’s one of the core function of the Presidency. I don’t think courts can even wade into this controversy even if they wanted to…

    whembly (b7cc46) — 3/17/2025 @ 3:14 pm

    But what if what Trump said is true? Even you believe his aides signed off on pardons. That would be criminal.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  281. Because it’s one of the core function of the Presidency. I don’t think courts can even wade into this controversy even if they wanted to…

    whembly (b7cc46) — 3/17/2025 @ 3:14 pm

    I’m sure the US Attorney in DC, the FBI, and Jim Jordan will feel less constrained.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  282. @283

    Because it’s one of the core function of the Presidency. I don’t think courts can even wade into this controversy even if they wanted to…

    whembly (b7cc46) — 3/17/2025 @ 3:14 pm

    But what if what Trump said is true? Even you believe his aides signed off on pardons. That would be criminal.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/17/2025 @ 3:20 pm

    Criminal, how, assuming Trump’s right?

    Was the 25th Amendment invoked that I was unaware of?

    Was Joe Biden adjudicated in court of law that he’s non compos mentis?

    You just cannot declare he was out of his mind. There have to be verifiable proof that he was gone.

    Or, someone ‘fesses up.

    Don’t see either of those happening.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  283. I’m lumping that under “Trumps lies all the time and no one should believe anything he claims without independent proof”

    Now, now, Time123. Poor Mr. President Trump is simply trying to help out the organic farmers of America because the Ukraine War sanctions paused the importation of Russian fertilizers.

    nk (0dc86e)

  284. Some thoughtsg:0

    President Trump posted this on Truth Social:

    The “Pardons” that Sleepy Joe Biden gave to the Unselect Committee of Political Thugs, and many others, are hereby declared VOID, VACANT, AND OF NO FURTHER FORCE OR EFFECT, because of the fact that they were done by Autopen. In other words, Joe Biden did not sign them but, more importantly, he did not know anything about them! The necessary Pardoning Documents were not explained to, or approved by, Biden. He knew nothing about them, and the people that did may have committed a crime. Therefore, those on the Unselect Committee, who destroyed and deleted ALL evidence obtained during their two year Witch Hunt of me, and many other innocent people, should fully understand that they are subject to investigation at the highest level. The fact is, they were probably responsible for the Documents that were signed on their behalf without the knowledge or consent of the Worst President in the History of our Country, Crooked Joe Biden!

    Here’s my tentative sense of the matter:

    [1.] As I understand it, Presidential pardons need not be signed at all, see Rosemond v. Hudgins (4th Cir. 2024):

    [A] writing is [not] required as part of the President’s exercise of the clemency power. … The plain language of the Constitution imposes no such limit, broadly providing that the President “shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.” U.S. Const. art. II, § 2, cl. 2. The constitutional text is thus silent as to any particular form the President’s clemency act must take to be effective…….
    ……..

    [2.] When it comes to autopen signatures, the 2005 Nielsen Memorandum from President George W. Bush’s Office of Legal Counsel opines that autopen signatures on bills are valid, even when they are affixed outside the President’s presence………

    ………If no signature and even no writing is required for the pardon, then an autopen signature is even more clearly not a problem.

    [3.] Of course, something is required, and that something is presumably a statement by the President that he is pardoning someone. If (and this is a very big if) a President actually didn’t make such a statement, and an assistant just affixed the President’s signature to a document purporting to be a pardon without the President’s authorization, then I don’t see how that would be a valid pardon (at least unless it’s somehow ratified by the relevant President). But that turns on a factual question about whether the President was actually involved in the creation of the pardons, not on a legal question about whether an autopen signature renders the pardon invalid.
    ###########

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  285. Judge: “Hey Joey Boy… did you pardon your son and brother?”

    Former President Biden: **shifts eyes sideway**
    “…Yeah?”

    Judge: “SWELL mate! Have a good day sir!”.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  286. whembly (b7cc46) — 3/17/2025 @ 3:36 pm

    That’s why a grand jury needs to investigate.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  287. I think the important thing to remember is that this is good, Trump is demonstrating that he is a stable genius who is focused on the people’s business and not distracted by his own desires for retribution or petty concerns. I like that he’s getting a good nights sleep and not staying up ranting and raving like a lunatic on the Internet.

    Time123 (da2924)

  288. @288 If we’re gonna pretend this is a serious thing, what crime would you expect them to investigate? And on what basis do you believe that the crime was committed?

    Time123 (da2924)

  289. To scrutinize Trump’s ravings too closely is to walk a perilously narrow path between perplexity and soul-destroying insanity.

    nk (9267cf)

  290. @288 If we’re gonna pretend this is a serious thing, what crime would you expect them to investigate? And on what basis do you believe that the crime was committed?

    Time123 (da2924) — 3/17/2025 @ 3:46 pm

    Whether Biden’s staff used his autopen to issue pardons without his knowledge or approval.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  291. Another win for Putin the war criminal, given to him by Trump…

    The Justice Department has informed European officials that the United States is withdrawing from a multinational group created to investigate leaders responsible for the invasion of Ukraine, including President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, according to a letter sent to members of the organization on Monday.

    The decision to withdraw from the International Center for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine, which the Biden administration joined in 2023, is the latest indication of the Trump administration’s move away from President Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s commitment to holding Mr. Putin personally accountable for crimes committed against Ukrainians.

    The group was created to hold the leadership of Russia, along with its allies in Belarus, North Korea and Iran, accountable for a category of crimes — defined as aggression under international law and treaties that violates another country’s sovereignty and is not initiated in self-defense.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  292. Things not do with your Tesla:

    A Tesla Cybertruck took an accidental swim in the Ventura Harbor (last) Monday, prompting a multi-agency response to carefully retrieve the electric vehicle from the water without sparking a toxic battery fire.

    Tesla founder Elon Musk tweeted in 2022 that the Cybertruck “will be waterproof enough to serve briefly as a boat, so it can cross rivers, lakes & even seas that aren’t too choppy.” This truck, however, quickly sank in 8 feet of water, said Carson Shevitz, captain of TowBoatUS Ventura, who helped coordinate the rescue.

    ………The driver told Shevitz that he meant to put the vehicle in drive after launching a Jet Ski but accidentally threw it in reverse, causing it to slide down the ramp and into the water.

    Shevitz dived into the water himself and attached the front of the submerged vehicle to a tow truck that hauled it ashore. He said he worked with Tesla and fire officials to plan the mission carefully because of the dangers posed by lithium-ion batteries.
    ………
    Fortunately, the truck’s electronics did not appear to be severely damaged by the dip. Shevitz’s team did not spot any bubbling or hissing — signs that Tesla’s engineers warned could indicate the batteries were releasing gas.
    ………
    “Tesla advised that the best thing to do was to set up a perimeter of about 45 feet of defensible space around the vehicle once we pulled it out,” Shevitz said. “They sent out a couple field engineers who were able to confirm that the truck was in a safe enough condition to be transported back to their service center.”
    ………

    Video of the recovery. Notice that the Cybertruck is tooting its “dive, dive, dive” horn.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  293. Kremlin told U.S. it didn’t want Trump’s Ukraine-Russia envoy at peace talks

    ………..
    Retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg was conspicuously absent from two recent summits in Saudi Arabia — one with Russian officials and the other with Ukrainians — even though the talks come under his remit.
    ………..
    ……….Kellogg did not attend U.S.-Russia talks in Riyadh, the Saudi capital, on Feb. 18. Russian President Vladimir Putin thought he was too pro-Ukraine, a senior Russian official with direct knowledge of the Kremlin’s thinking told NBC News.

    “Kellogg is a former American general, too close to Ukraine. Not our kind of person, not of the caliber we are looking for,” according to the official, who is not authorized to speak publicly on the matter.

    A U.S. official in the Trump administration, who is also not authorized to speak publicly, confirmed that Russia did not want Kellogg involved. The official did not know when that was communicated to the White House.

    Where this leaves Kellogg is unclear.
    ………..
    Asked last week whether Russian officials had requested that Kellogg not be included in the high-level talks, Russian Foreign Affairs Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that it was up to American leaders to “fix their delegation” and that Russia’s diplomats had “great experience of dealing with different envoys.”
    ……….

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  294. Link to post 295.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  295. So what is it we aren’t supposed to be paying attention to while Trump has this relentlessly stupid tantrum about autopen pardons?

    Nic (120c94)

  296. So what is it we aren’t supposed to be paying attention to while Trump has this relentlessly stupid tantrum about autopen pardons?

    Nic (120c94) — 3/17/2025 @ 4:47 pm

    This:

    ……….
    ………. (T)alking to reporters on Air Force One while returning from Florida on Sunday night, Mr. Trump made clear that his scheduled phone conversation with Mr. Putin on Tuesday would be focused on what lands and assets Russia would retain in any cease-fire with Ukraine.
    …………
    “We’re doing pretty well, I think, with Russia,” Mr. Trump said, adding “I think we have a very good chance” of reaching a cease-fire. But then he turned to the question of what Ukraine might have to give up.

    “I think we’ll be talking about land, it’s a lot of land,” he said. “It’s a lot different than it was before the war, as you know. We’ll be talking about land. We’ll be talking about power plants,” apparently referring to the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, the largest nuclear site in Europe. “That’s a big question. But I think we have a lot of it already discussed very much by both sides.”

    Mr. Trump was careful not to say much about which parts of Ukrainian territory he was discussing, or whether he would try to limit Mr. Putin’s ambitions. The Trump administration has already made clear it expects Russia to control the land that its troops already command, roughly 20 percent of Ukraine. But aides to President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine said last month they were concerned that Mr. Trump may entertain Mr. Putin’s other desires for parts of Ukraine, perhaps including the critical port of Odesa.
    …………
    There are other issues that may become central to the negotiation. France and Britain have offered to put troops inside Ukraine, perhaps with other European powers. But it is not clear that Mr. Putin will agree to a peacekeeping or “trip wire” force. Those forces would be part of a security guarantee for Ukraine, though it is unclear how effective European troops would be without backup from Washington.
    ………..
    …………(A)s Monica Duffy Toft, a professor of international politics at Tufts University, wrote in Foreign Affairs recently, “today’s geopolitical landscape particularly resembles the close of World War II” because “major powers are seeking to negotiate a new global order primarily with each other, much as Allied leaders did when they redrew the world map” at Yalta.

    In an interview, Professor Toft said that land expansion “is what Putin wants, and it’s obviously what Trump wants — just look at Greenland and Panama and Canada.”
    ………..

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  297. “So what is it we aren’t supposed to be paying attention to while Trump has this relentlessly stupid tantrum about autopen pardons?”

    Trump sent a bunch of people to a slave labor camp in central america without due process, and ignored the judge who told him it was illegal.

    Davethulhu (14e9e4)

  298. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that President Trump was “begging the question” when declaring former President Joe Biden’s apparently auto-penned pardons were “void, vacant, and of no further force of effect” — as the practical effect of the current commander in chief’s pronouncement remains in question.

    Leavitt said that Trump — who wrote on Truth Social media early Monday that recipients were henceforth “subject to investigation” — was “raising the point” that the clemency might not be legal.

    “The president was raising the point that, ‘Did the president even know about these pardons? Was his legal signature used without his consent or knowledge?’” Leavitt said at her regular briefing Monday.

    “Was he aware of his signature being used on every single pardon? That’s a question you should ask the Biden White House.”

    Doing your homework for you.

    NJRob (eb56c3)

  299. RIP, on what basis do you believe that crime occurred?

    Time123 (8b7385)

  300. @300 I think everybody knew that the allegation was complete BS. But it’s nice when the White House spokesperson acknowledges that it’s BS. It’s kind of you to provide the evidence that Trump was full of crap. This sort of even handedness is new for you.

    Time123 (8b7385)

  301. RIP, on what basis do you believe that crime occurred?

    Time123 (8b7385) — 3/17/2025 @ 5:30 pm

    I have no idea if a crime occurred-but let’s investigate anyway!

    (To be honest, I was trolling those who do believe a crime occurred).
    😉

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  302. You know who you are.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  303. DCSCA trolling?

    Shocking.

    Meanwhile this is going on.

    Dustin (aabc87)

  304. Doing your homework for you.

    No, that’s called gasbagging and gaslighting to CYA for what he actually said, which was this…

    “The ‘Pardons’ that Sleepy Joe Biden gave to the Unselect Committee of Political Thugs, and many others, are hereby declared VOID, VACANT, AND OF NO FURTHER FORCE OR EFFECT, because of the fact that they were done by Autopen. In other words, Joe Biden did not sign them but, more importantly, he did not know anything about them!”

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  305. > I think the courts is going to accept Cheney’s attorneys’ statement that the pardon was issued by President Biden, and leave it at that.

    I believe this is an accurate prediction.

    aphrael (dbf41f)

  306. 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c) (1) & (2) [Sarbanes-Oxley]

    (c) Whoever corruptly—
    (1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or
    (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,

    shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

    It would be so very just.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  307. That last was to #290.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  308. @293: Why would you want Trump investigating Putin?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  309. Trump sent a bunch of people to a slave labor camp in central america without due process

    What process were they due, and what process did they get. All you have is the opinion of one judge that they didn’t get “enough” at least not to his satisfaction. The order was given in such a way that it could not be appealed.

    Then there is this: The 5 named plaintiffs, who feared being returned to Venezuela, were not transported; they remain in US custody. Instead the entire brouhaha is over persons transported who were not litigants in the first place.

    I thought that is was a tradition that people not party to a case should not have orders entered in their name.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  310. The judge’s admonition to the DoJ folks was

    “You can’t violate the injunction. If you don’t like it, you can appeal it or seek to modify it”

    as if the verbal order to turn the planes around was possible to appeal.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  311. OTOH, I agree that it would be better if there was a second source to these Trumpian revelations.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  312. Did Klink leave or get banned?

    Nope, why argue. Everyone on here knows the score, a neo-fascist Nazi curious gasbag ran for president as a Nazi curious gasbag, and since enough Americans’ are still sympathetic to a Nazi curious gasbags, that’s what we got.

    All the trying to pick a kernel out of this blizzard of shyte, is irrelevant. He’s evil, his party is evil, and if you’re spending a billionth of a second defending any of it. Well, you chose the 2025 Nazi short bus.

    Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a)

  313. What we are seeing now, regarding deportations, is an attempt to confuse and distort reality by those who actually want ALL deportations stopped forever, for whatever reason.

    So, when thousands of fully justified deportations happen daily, what makes the “news” are those that are questionable. Not wrong, just questionable as in “a question could be asked as the government has not utterly proven every case beyond a reasonable doubt.”

    So we get reports on a professor returned to Lebanon, but nowhere is the WHY question entertained.

    So we get reports of poor, misunderstood, Fentanyl-slinging drug dealers who cannot show how they got in being sent off to thug prison in a central American hellhole, which strikes few as wrong.

    Why are these things happening? It’s like this: for 30 years we have been ignoring the law and we now have someone who is tired of it. What do we get? The same people how have been FIGHTING to ignore the law for 30 years now turn out to be experts on it.

    Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  314. Well, you chose the 2025 Nazi short bus.

    You just chose the plain old short bus. We know what you are. Blithering idiot.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  315. Why is it always invective, lies and personal attacks with this clown?

    Trump will win as long as his opponents go all stompyfoot and call people names. Screaming won’t help.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  316. “What process were they due”

    They’re due the process that any person in the united states is due

    “and what process did they get.”

    You tell me.

    “All you have is the opinion of one judge”

    How many judges do they need?

    “as if the verbal order to turn the planes around was possible to appeal.”

    sorry, we’re too far along in our crime to stop now.

    Davethulhu (2546b0)

  317. “So we get reports of poor, misunderstood, Fentanyl-slinging drug dealers”

    How do you know that they’re drug dealers?

    Davethulhu (2546b0)

  318. Scientists have just cured pancreatic cancer with a vaccine (DU) To bad trump is shutting the program down to use the money for tax cuts for the rich.

    asset (87a21a)

  319. “I just won the Golf Club Championship, probably my last, at Trump International Golf Club, in Palm Beach County, Florida,” he wrote on Sunday afternoon. “Such a great honor! The Awards dinner is tonight, at the Club. I want to thank the wonderful Golf Staff, and all of the many fantastic golfers, that participated in the even. Such fun!”

    Ahh…Kim Jong Un, you up?

    Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a)

  320. The leader of North Korea is considered to be the best golfer in the world. In 2004, North Korean media reported on the golfing prowess of Kim Jong Il, the father of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Kim shot 38 under, including 11 holes-in-one, at the 7,700-yard championship course at Pyongyang in the VERY FIRST golf round of his life, according to North Korean state media. This was in 1994, when Kim was 52 years old. The North Korean media does not report on the golf skills of the current leader, Kim Jong-un, but perhaps North Koreans are convinced he’s very good, because his father was the ‘God of Golf’.

    Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a)

  321. I don’t mind Andrew Giuliani picking up Trump’s ball at the tee, walking it over to the lip of the hole, and marking it as three strokes for the hole when Trump taps it in.

    I do mind A Girl, A Goat, A Dog, And A Gun’s Ho Man detaining U.S. citizens as illegal aliens because they have a name that ends in a vowel.

    The motion outlines the detainment of 54-year-old Julio Noriega, a U.S. citizen, who was detained by ICE agents Jan. 31, as he was walking near Cermak Road and Harlem Avenue in Berwyn while he was handing out his resume to businesses.

    Noriega was handcuffed and placed in a van then taken to an ICE processing center where he remained for at least 10 hours before agents realized he was a U.S. citizen, said Mark Fleming, the associate director of litigation for NIJC. He was released after midnight without any way to return home and without documentation of what happened, Fleming said.

    nk (9267cf)

  322. I’m afraid that we are seeing only the tip of the iceberg with the cases of Mahmoud Khalid, Dr. Rasha Alawieh, Rebecca Burke, and Julio Noriega.

    Not overzealousness, but soft targets. Low-hanging fruit.

    I think that Tom Homan, once a cop but now a bureaucrat and political appointee, is padding his deportation numbers by going after “aliens” who are easy to identify and easy to catch because they are documented, having applied for Adjustment Of Status through e.g. marriage to a U.S. citizens or H-1B employment by a U.S. employer, and “undocumenting” them.

    That’s not stopping an invasion. That’s malevolence.

    nk (9267cf)

  323. @308

    18 U.S.C. § 1512(c) (1) & (2) [Sarbanes-Oxley]

    (c) Whoever corruptly—
    (1) alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding; or
    (2) otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,

    shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

    It would be so very just.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/17/2025 @ 7:12 pm

    Oh my brother in Christ, you just know Trump is petty enough to pursue this.

    That’s the exact statute the Biden DOJ used to enhance the J6ers to felonies.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  324. They should have used domestic terrorism laws for that.

    Time123 (5e77a6)

  325. sorry, we’re too far along in our crime to stop now.
    Davethulhu (2546b0) — 3/17/2025 @ 8:10 pm

    lmao

    lloyd (eca42e)

  326. @326

    They should have used domestic terrorism laws for that.

    Time123 (5e77a6) — 3/18/2025 @ 6:54 am

    You wanna know why they didn’t do that?

    Because even with the most zealous prosecutors and the most compliant judges/juries these democrats could ever hope for…even they didn’t think it was applicable.

    That’s was WHY they went with §1512(c)(2) with most of j6ers, to try to force a square peg into a round hole, in order to elevate misdemeanors to felonies. Whom SCOTUS biatch-slapped the Biden DOJ in Fischer v. United States.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  327. That’s not stopping an invasion. That’s malevolence.

    nk (9267cf) — 3/18/2025 @ 4:57 am

    Bullspit. It’s getting rid of terrorist supporters who are providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

    NJRob (390907)

  328. @328 You don’t think violently assaulting the police and seizing control of the US capital is an act of domestic terrorism?

    Time (4a58b7)

  329. “Bullspit. It’s getting rid of terrorist supporters who are providing aid and comfort to the enemy.”

    Trump massively oversold the number of “criminal aliens” so now he’s rounding up anyone with a tattoo and calling them M13.

    Davethulhu (14e9e4)

  330. @330

    @328 You don’t think violently assaulting the police

    That’s not terrorism.

    That’s assault of a police offer and there are laws on the books for that.

    and seizing control of the US capital is an act of domestic terrorism?

    Time (4a58b7) — 3/18/2025 @ 9:15 am

    “seizing control”??

    The idea that the capitol was “seized” like some capture the flag tactics is so far from reality, that it’s lunacy.

    The Trump Era really did damage to some of ya’lls perception to reality.

    And you whine about people not being precise with words just recently.

    Time, I don’t know what to do with you…

    whembly (b7cc46)

  331. There have been many acts of violence at the US Capitol during our history. Some ended in civil war. The rest led to the maximum criminal charges against the perpetrators that sent a message not to use violence at the Capitol, including the J6 defendants. Carter and Trump are the only presidents who pardoned the perpetrators.

    DRJ (a84ee2)

  332. Whembly, good to know how you view the situation.

    Time (4a58b7)

  333. Time’s analysis and use of language is accurate. It was terrorism (the unlawful use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims) and an effort to seize conttol (to attempt to take control of something, often forcefully or unexpectedly, and without permission or authority).

    DRJ (a84ee2)

  334. And you whine about people not being precise with words just recently.

    Probably more poor communication on my part but that wasn’t at all what I was trying to say.

    My point was that words have multiple meanings and you can’t use agreement on Definition 1 to justify the response you’d have with definition 2.

    Maybe that will be a better way to present my point.

    Time (4a58b7)

  335. @335, it was only for a few hours but Republican Terrorists did successfully seize control of the Capital building.

    Time (4a58b7)

  336. Seizing the administration building at Columbia wasn’t terrorism, right? I’m told it was free speech.

    The J6 folks were jailed and cancelled. What more do you want?

    lloyd (392973)

  337. Unacceptable. All three below are advantage Putin….

    “The Russian version by the Kremlin also mentions the following demands for a 30 day ceasefire:

    1. Stop on any military aid from the U.S. and any other ally

    2. Stop on intelligence sharing [so Ukraine doesn’t know when and if Russia is preparing to attack it]

    3. Stop draft”

    Paul Montagu (ceb12d)

  338. @335

    Time’s analysis and use of language is accurate. It was terrorism (the unlawful use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims) and an effort to seize conttol (to attempt to take control of something, often forcefully or unexpectedly, and without permission or authority).

    DRJ (a84ee2) — 3/18/2025 @ 9:59 am

    or, here me out… it was a riot that got out of control.

    Hyperbolically, making a mountain of an anthill undermines your positions when discussing this topic.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  339. I’ve commented before that there will be negative consequences of the elimination of the post WW2 order. My main concern is nuclear proliferation. But the announcement that 4 nations that border Russia are withdrawing from the land mine treaty.

    It’s not the end of the world, but it’s a sign that my concern has some validity.

    Time (4a58b7)

  340. The idea that the capitol was “seized” like some capture the flag tactics is so far from reality, that it’s lunacy.

    J6 protestors did enter the Senate and House chambers, prevented the Electoral College vote count from continuing (forcing the evacuation of Pence and others), and ransacked offices. They weren’t tourists.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  341. @342 And that’s what many of them wanted to do. It wasn’t an unintended consequence of a protest that got out of control. Large amount of evidence available about the Republican Terrorists intent.

    Time (4a58b7)

  342. @344 he wasn’t wrong there.

    Time (4a58b7)

  343. RIP, John “Paddy” Hemingway, 105. Last “Battle of Britain” pilot

    Addressing the British House of Commons in August 1940, Prime Minister Winston Churchill paid tribute to the pilots of the Royal Air Force who were staving off an impending German invasion of the British Isles in what would be known as the Battle of Britain.

    “Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few,” Churchill proclaimed.

    When John A. Hemingway died in Dublin on Monday at 105 — the Royal Air Force announced his death — he was the last known survivor of the “few,” nearly 3,000 pilots and crew who saved Britain in the early stages of World War II.

    Mr. Hemingway, who was known as Paddy, piloted Hurricane fighters in the battle, which took place in the skies above Britain between July 10 and Oct. 31, 1940.

    Hitler had planned a September 1940 invasion of the British Isles, known as Operation Sea Lion. But he postponed it indefinitely when the R.A.F. — vastly outnumbered at the height of battle, with 749 fighter aircrafts compared with the Luftwaffe’s 2,550 — beat back German bombers and fighters, foiling his quest to establish the air supremacy that Germany needed to support invading ground troops….

    He first saw combat in the spring of 1940 when he flew in support of the British Expeditionary Force’s ultimately futile quest to turn back the German invasion of France. He shot down a German bomber in May, but the next day he had to make a forced landing when his plane was hit by antiaircraft fire.

    The British Army, routed by the Germans, returned home in the storied evacuation from the French port of Dunkirk in late May and early June. France capitulated to Hitler with the signing of an armistice on June 22.

    Flying afterward in defense of Britain, Mr. Hemingway was intercepting German bombers over the English Channel on Aug. 18 when his Hurricane was shot up.

    “Somebody clobbered me,” he told The Daily Mirror in 2018. “They hit me in the engine. It covered the inside of the cockpit with oil, and things got very smelly and hot. I had no hope of getting to England, so I bailed out and landed in the sea.

    “There were jellyfish everywhere,” he continued. “I started swimming. Two hours later, a rowboat from a lightship bumped into me.”

    He climbed aboard, grabbed an oar and helped the crew return with him to England.

    He was shot down 4 times during the war. He died Monday at the age of 105.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  344. Thank you for posting that, Kevin. There were many men like him then, thankfully.

    DRJ (a84ee2)

  345. If Donald Trump had been elected President instead of FDR in 1940, he would have ended that conflict within 24 hours of the elections while still President-Elect.

    nk (7c9181)

  346. @346 Don’t forget the polish squadron 303 who despite prejudice was the highest scoring squadron in the battle of Britain. Dowding said without them I don;t see how we would have won the battle of Britain.

    asset (634e80)

  347. Welcome back to NASA astronauts Sunita Williams and Barry “Butch” Wilmore! (We can discuss what went wrong, in a week or two.)

    Jim Miller (7b1582)

  348. > It’s getting rid of terrorist supporters who are providing aid and comfort to the enemy.

    Bureaucrats, like all humans, make mistakes. The fact that the people *removing* the individuals who were removed believe them to be terrorist supporters providing aid and comfort to the enemy doesn’t mean that they’ve got the right people.

    We’ve all seen stories of warrants being served on the wrong apartment, people being arrested because they happen to have the same name as the person who was intended to be arrested, and the like.

    The *point* to the due process requirement in the fifth amendment is in part to protect people from this kind of accident. We should not have to take the government at its word that it didn’t make a mistake and pull the wrong people accidentally; the government should be required to *demonstrate* that it didn’t make a mistake before shipping people off to an El Salvadoran jail.

    Otherwise there is no bar whatsoever to it being done to *any of us*, by mistake, and nobody is safe.

    aphrael (dbf41f)

  349. https://pjmedia.com/chris-queen/2025/03/18/watch-live-stranded-astronauts-return-to-earth-n4938038

    Just doing the rescuing the last administration refused to do.

    NJRob (c2842a)

  350. Aphrael,

    how many gang tattoos do you accidently have and how many gang affiliations?

    I’m guessing zero.

    NJRob (c2842a)

  351. Other than the fact that the administration claims the people it ejected have these characteristics, how do you know they do?

    The entire point to procedural due process is that we can’t trust any executive with the power to do these things without someone independently verifying that they aren’t just making shit up and/or wrong about the people they are going after.

    Why do you trust this administration to be so inhumanely capable that they will make no mistakes?

    aphrael (417bf6)

  352. “Just doing the rescuing the last administration refused to do.”

    They weren’t stranded.

    Davethulhu (14e9e4)

  353. Admins – I have a comment on moderation, probably because I used the phrase “making s— up”

    aphrael (417bf6)

  354. Other than the fact that the administration claims the people it ejected have these characteristics, how do you know they do?

    The entire point to procedural due process is that we can’t trust any executive with the power to do these things without someone independently verifying that they aren’t just making stuff up and/or wrong about the people they are going after.

    Why do you trust this administration to be so inhumanely capable that they will make no mistakes?

    aphrael (417bf6)

  355. “how many gang tattoos do you accidently have and how many gang affiliations?”

    Asserting facts not in evidence.

    Davethulhu (14e9e4)

  356. If the left ever wants to get back in power it needs to stop being on the side of perverts and criminals on all the 80/20 issues.

    NJRob (c2842a)

  357. Like him?

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  358. Trump Bills of Attainder Target Law Firms

    President Trump’s executive orders penalizing three law firms—Covington & Burling, Perkins Coie and Paul Weiss—threaten the constitutional structure that the Framers envisioned. ……
    In a remarkable opinion rendered barely 24 hours after Perkins petitioned the court, Judge Beryl A. Howell granted a temporary restraining order against parts of the executive order. She found Perkins suffered irreparable harm from the president’s order and that the law firm would likely prevail on several of its claims. The most important objection was one Judge Howell astutely raised, although Perkins hadn’t: The order constitutes a bill of attainder, which is explicitly prohibited by the Constitution. All three orders likely do.

    A bill of attainder is a law that imposes punishment without trial on specific people retroactively. The order cites no law that Perkins violated but instead critiques activity that the administration alleges took place, running back to the 2016 presidential campaign. Like a bill of attainder, the order appropriates from the judiciary the constitutional power to determine guilt and impose punishment.
    ………..
    The Trump administration argues that because the Constitution’s prohibition against bills of attainder appears in Article I, which sets forth Congress’s powers, it applies only to lawmakers and not the president, whose powers come from Article II. Judge Howell disagreed. Pointing out that the framers didn’t anticipate Washington’s present-day reliance on executive orders which have the force of law, she could conceive of no reason that the prohibition would apply only to acts of Congress. If anything, the administration’s argument implies that it is swallowing up legislative as well as judicial powers.

    Perkins Coie will likely prevail on due process or free-speech grounds, but what Mr. Trump has done is worse than limiting either of those constitutional rights. A presidential bill of attainder places the powers of all three governmental branches in the hands of one man. As James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 47: “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”
    ###########

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  359. The 1798 law allowed japanese americans to be put in internment camps so we can use the law when democrats win to put trumpsters in camps.

    asset (2a8065)

  360. It’s not just about the indiscriminate slashing, it’s the malevolence that goes along with…

    PEPFAR saved 25,000,000 lives and has driven costs per life saved to just $58/year. Like Hoover’s Food Aid after WWI and the Marshall Plan after WWII, it operated at a scale that non private charity ever could and promoted American values. It was neither waste nor fraud.

    Paul Montagu (6e4595)

  361. @362

    Trump Bills of Attainder Target Law Firms

    President Trump’s executive orders penalizing three law firms—Covington & Burling, Perkins Coie and Paul Weiss—threaten the constitutional structure that the Framers envisioned. ……
    In a remarkable opinion rendered barely 24 hours after Perkins petitioned the court, Judge Beryl A. Howell granted a temporary restraining order against parts of the executive order. She found Perkins suffered irreparable harm from the president’s order and that the law firm would likely prevail on several of its claims. The most important objection was one Judge Howell astutely raised, although Perkins hadn’t: The order constitutes a bill of attainder, which is explicitly prohibited by the Constitution. All three orders likely do.

    A bill of attainder is a law that imposes punishment without trial on specific people retroactively. The order cites no law that Perkins violated but instead critiques activity that the administration alleges took place, running back to the 2016 presidential campaign. Like a bill of attainder, the order appropriates from the judiciary the constitutional power to determine guilt and impose punishment.
    ………..
    The Trump administration argues that because the Constitution’s prohibition against bills of attainder appears in Article I, which sets forth Congress’s powers, it applies only to lawmakers and not the president, whose powers come from Article II. Judge Howell disagreed. Pointing out that the framers didn’t anticipate Washington’s present-day reliance on executive orders which have the force of law, she could conceive of no reason that the prohibition would apply only to acts of Congress. If anything, the administration’s argument implies that it is swallowing up legislative as well as judicial powers.

    Perkins Coie will likely prevail on due process or free-speech grounds, but what Mr. Trump has done is worse than limiting either of those constitutional rights. A presidential bill of attainder places the powers of all three governmental branches in the hands of one man. As James Madison wrote in Federalist No. 47: “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”
    ###########

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/18/2025 @ 5:35 pm

    That’s not a Bill of Attainder.

    Bill of Attainder is a legislative function (that’s banned).

    I don’t know what Trump’s executive action here would be called, but it’s not the legislative attainder.

    Trump essentially commanded the executive branch not to do business with a certain law firm.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  362. whembly:

    You way understate what Trump’s EO did. All security clearances for Perkins Coie have been removed, as have been access to federal facilities. That could be construed as keeping Perkins Coie lawyers out of the courthouse or any regulatory agency buildings. This is a direct assault on PC’s ability to do business as a law firm. It’s kind of equivalent to an executive branch disbarment of the entire law firm.

    I think Trump loses this battle — provided he does agree to submit to court orders.

    Appalled (2e3820)

  363. I don’t know what Trump’s executive action here would be called, but it’s not the legislative attainder.

    Trump essentially commanded the executive branch not to do business with a certain law firm.

    whembly (b7cc46) — 3/19/2025 @ 7:12 am

    The Executive Orders does more than that; by denying security clearances and access to federal buildings to Paul Weiss and Perkins Coie lawyers and support staff, it deprives their clients the lawyers of their choice to represent them in civil or criminal litigation in any context.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  364. Covington & Burling is the third law firm that has been blackballed by Trump. So far only Perkins Coie has fought back, winning a temporary restraining order blocking parts of Trump’s EO. I expect the law firm that is representing them, Williams Connolly, will be the fourth law firm to be blackballed.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  365. The CBS EVEning News led off last night with a story about a Venezuelan who was sent to that orison camp in EL Salvador whose family is unable to contact him (cellphones are disabled there and their heads are shaved)

    They suspect (but were not told) it’s based on a tattoo that he got when his daughter was born. He was detained when he came in for his check-in.

    There are more stories like that.

    These fools don’t know what is a gang tattoo and what is not, and didn’t investigate, nor do they understand that nit all tattoos qualify as insignia of gang membership (it has to be something recognized by a gang to be useful to them) and they don’t care and the people in charge assert they don’t need to care, because presence in America is a privilege.

    Sammy Finkelman (5aee2e)

  366. Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/20/2025 @ 9:32 am

    it deprives their clients the lawyers of their choice to represent them in civil or criminal litigation in any context.

    They can still use them, but they will have to hire other lawyers too.

    Now there is a real problem with some of these law firms.

    Sammy Finkelman (5aee2e)

  367. Sammy,

    There is a good collection of stories here:

    https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69741724/jgg-v-trump/

    Click on the exhibits in Item 44. Here is a sample story that is pretty horrifying:

    https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.278436/gov.uscourts.dcd.278436.44.5_5.pdf

    Appalled (e7d5f2)

  368. > Covington & Burling is the third law firm that has been blackballed by Trump. So far only Perkins Coie has fought back, winning a temporary restraining order blocking parts of Trump’s EO. I expect the law firm that is representing them, Williams Connolly, will be the fourth law firm to be blackballed.

    The endgame on this is to blackball any law firm with the temerity to represent someone suing the federal government, thereby effectively immunizing the federal government from any sort of legal process.

    The republic has fallen. Welcome to the dictatorship.

    aphrael (4b5942)

  369. Now there is a real problem with some of these law firms.

    Sammy Finkelman (5aee2e) — 3/20/2025 @ 11:17 am

    Specifically, what problems?

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  370. Time (4a58b7) — 3/18/2025 @ 11:49 am

    Large amount of evidence available about the Republican Terrorists intent.

    Which means it wasn’t instigated by Trump’s speech at the Ellipse. And the fact that Trump expected to go the Capitol is proof he had no idea it would happen – had already started happening in fact.

    And it interfered with and upended his real plans for the day (which were doomed to fail by the way) and had they succeeded in stopping the count for two weeks it would only have made House Speaker Nancy Pelosi Acting President.

    It would not have extended Trump’s term by a single additional second. And Trump knew that he needed to be certified President-Elect to continue in office.

    Sammy Finkelman (5aee2e)

  371. Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/20/2025 @ 11:25 am

    Specifically, what problems?

    They hired Christopher Steele and were used to avoid camoaign finance reporting laws. They lied about Steele being hired first by a Republican (it was for searching public records)

    Perkins hired Steele as a spy to find out why Putin was supporting Trump. They got back nonsense, (Putin probably thought he was working for somebody British)

    After thinking it over, they then decided to use it anyway to try to get an FBI investigation of Trump started and then leak it. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid wrote about it October 30, 2016.

    They also helped cover up Hillary’s email situation,

    Sammy Finkelman (5aee2e)

  372. Sammy Finkelman (5aee2e) — 3/20/2025 @ 11:37 am

    Parroting Trump’s argument in the EO. Was any of that illegal or unethical?

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  373. I think it was, but there’s a large grey area.

    The judge called it a Bill of Attainder because she must have thought some of the allegations were of doing things that were unethical or even illegal, but unproven.

    Sammy Finkelman (5aee2e)

  374. @379

    Was any of that illegal or unethical?

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/20/2025 @ 11:45 am

    Illegal? Possibly skirting campaign finance laws and others.

    Unethical? You betcha.

    whembly (b7cc46)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2120 secs.