Friday Open Thread

What's on your mind?

Comments

[Martinned2]

Isn't Elon Musk just a terrible person?

[Mr. Bumble]

No.
Simple answer to stupid question (H/T David Notsoimportent).

[Martinned]

Haven't you heard? Trump has always been at war with Eastasia, letting a private company run essential infrastructure like Starlink is bad now, and subsidies for (Musk-linked) companies are also terrible policy now.

[Mr. Bumble]

Apparently you got an early start on your weekend bender.

[Martinned]

Apparently you haven't been watching OANN or Newsmaxxx or whatever is your propaganda channel of choice all night last night. I assume you'll have your talking points straightened out by Monday.

[Krayt]

OANNists

[Kazinski]

I don't think he's that bad, just a little excitable.

But if Trump and Elon are getting a divorce, I want Trump on weekdays and government shutdowns, and Elon can have custody weekends holidays and Starship launches.

[Martinned]

That's not how loyalty to the Great Leader works.

[Kazinski]

When two people you love dearly get a divorce then that's exactly how it works, even if you are old enough to know they are both flawed.

You try to maximize your benefits, and minimize the disadvantages..

[Kazinski]

Word is they will have a talk tomorrow and try to patch things up.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/05/trump-white-house-aides-signal-a-possible-detente-with-musk-00391502

But of course you wonder if is it going to be a Falcoln 9 launch, or a Starship re-entry.

[Mr. Bumble]

"Word is they will have a talk tomorrow and try to patch things up."
That would be today.
Time for both parties to cool their jets.

[Malika the Maiz]

Or maybe they could have not acted like childish primadonnas in the first place, like maybe a POTUS and CEO should?

[bye]

Like a POTUS ???

The 81-year-old presidentsuggested to the audience he was vice president “during the pandemic." The COVID-19 pandemic began in March 2020 under former President Donald Trump, and Biden, campaigning for president at the time, had not served as vice president since 2016.

When I was vice president, things were kinda bad during the pandemic,” Biden told the audience. “And what happened was Barack said to me ‘go to Detroit and help fix it.’”

BIDEN HAS BEEN STUPID SINCE BIRTH

[David Nieporent]

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/05/trump-white-house-aides-signal-a-possible-detente-with-musk-00391502

"When I called Trump a pedophile, I was just kidding."

[Commenter_XY]

Kaz, POTUS Trump and Elon Musk will mend their r'ship so that they can work together, ultimately. Why? The US needs Elon Musk. What I see is that each got a dose of the other's medicine, and decided it tasted bad enough to talk it out.

This is drama POTUS Trump can ill-afford as he (twists arms? cajoles? dispense political pork?) persuades Senators to vote for the B-cubed bill.

[Nelson]

Anything that prevents Trump from getting that pork-filled deficit-spending bill passed is a welcome thing.

[Commenter_XY]

I am disappointed, quite honestly. I expected better on the spending reduction side. Then I remember the aphorism...politics is the art of the possible. He has to have the votes.

[Nelson]

Then can we just admit that the GOP has no interest in reducing the deficit? They control the White House, both houses of Congress, and have a conservative supermajority in the Supreme Court.

If they aren’t willing to reduce the deficit when they control everything, there isn’t a situation in which they will.

[A Woman of No Importance]

This reminds me of a divorce I once handled. The father was an alcoholic who couldn't hold a job and had multiple arrests, mostly for bar fights. Nevertheless, he ended up with primary custody because the mother was even worse.

[Kazinski]

I'll file for emancipation before I'll go to Congress.

[Riva]

Imagine how bad it would be if we had a mentally declining “Big Guy” in the WH, whose crime family employed his crackhead son as a bagman. Such a thing might result in all sorts of bad behavior. Anything from prosecuting the big guy’s main political opponent, to opening our borders, cocaine in the WH, and the sale of auto signed blanket pardons to cover the whole thing up once the party ended.

[Magister]

Imagine how bad it would be if we had a mentally declining “Big Guy” in the WH, whose crime family employed his crackhead son as a bagman.

Exactly what we do have, and it is bad.

[A Woman of No Importance]

Well, not "exactly" but close enough. And you're right; it's bad.

I've said it before: Trump would be hilarious if he were the president of some third world country rather than the leader of the free world. It's as if Idi Amin came back from the dead and got himself elected POTUS.

[David Nieporent]

There are very few sins that Donald Trump is not guilty of, but I suspect cannibalism is not on his list.

[A Woman of No Importance]

I suspect you're right. I would argue, though, that the similarities between the two are far more significant than the differences.

[Riva]

Excuse the delay in responding, no importance, I was temporarily blinded by the projection. Still seeing after effects. I should have been wearing my eclipse viewing eye shields.

[A Woman of No Importance]

Actually, Riva, the irony of you claiming anyone else is projecting is incredible.

But let us suppose, just for sake of argument, that Biden really was just as bad as Trump. He's no longer president; Trump is. The immediate threat is Trump, not Biden. You'd be taken far more seriously than you are if you recognized that.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Trump (and Putin) is a natioinalist, he wants to go down in history as the greatest leader of the world's greatest country. Idi Amin didn't care about the welfare of Uganda itself.

[Nelson]

“ Exactly what we do have, and it is bad.”

Hey! Don Jr. is a cokehead, not a crackhead. He’s a classy addict.

[Joe_dallas]

Lets summerize the substance of this converstation regarding musk

Kaz & bumble - wasteful, corrupt spending should be exposed

Martineed - musk is bad because he exposed the wasteful spending

[David Nieporent]

Musk did not expose any wasteful spending.

[Nelson]

Yeah, the useful idiots haven’t figured that out yet. And once they do, they’ll keep pretending because admitting Trump is full of shit would break their brains.

[grb]

Joe_dallas : "Kaz & bumble - wasteful, corrupt spending should be exposed"

Except Musk never exposed wasteful and corrupt spending. Of course he repeatedly made grand trolling claims: 150yr olds getting Social Security! Forty percent of the calls into SSA are fraud! But every one was exposed as a childish lie ten minutes after it was made. And whenever DOGE released documentation, it was riddled with miscounts, bogus claims and cheap lying. Every analysis had 40-50% of DOGE "savings" as misstatements or mistruth.

That's not to say Musk didn't do real damage along with his carnival freakshow act. But it wasn't while exposing corrupt and wasteful spending. That would require too much discipline and focus from drug-addled Musk and his merry band of tech-bro pranksters. Instead it was the equivalent of going into random government offices and spraying the room with automatic weapons fire. While wearing a blindfold. But - hey - that's what you'd expect from a White House that governs by gimmicks and stunts.

[Riva]

The stale anti-Trump invective here actually makes me less likely to want to respond to the ridiculous comically contrived rants. What exactly is the motivation for the endlessly contrived nonsense? Is there money in this?

[Stephen Lathrop]

Thirty-three engines, all blowing up at once, makes for a spectacular fireworks display.
Starship launches should be reserved for the 4th of July.

[Swede425]

I hate it when mom and dad fight.
But on the good side: 2 Christmases!!!

[LawTalkingGuy]

We all have that one friend who is actually a great person but occasionally gets a little excitable and tells everyone that we’re a pedophile.

[Nelson]

ROFL

[Martinned]

But seriously, this seemed like an excellent question last night:

Tesla's share price went down 14% yesterday. Is this the market saying:

a) Tesla's value was significantly reliant on Elon skimming governments contracts by being Trump's bestie?

b) The Trump administration will use the machinery of government to enact personal vengeance?

c) Both?

[Mr. Bumble]

d) neither?

[Martinned]

So Tesla's stock price plummeted just for shits & giggles?

[Mr. Bumble]

If you have the markets figured so well, why are you wasting your time commenting here?
Get back when it reaches zero.

[Mr. Bumble]

FWIW: Tesla performance for the past year. Want to explain all the peaks and valleys?
https://markets.businessinsider.com/stocks/tsla-stock

[Martinned]

1. EV mandates are good for business
2. Favours from Trump are good for business
3. Musk being perceived as Trump's buddy annoys the sorts of people who buy Teslas
4. Musk spending very little of his time on Tesla annoys Tesla shareholders

This is not hard.

[Kazinski]

But the Senate and the House already ended the EV mandates last week, and the reconciliation bill passed the house last month ended EV credits, and no chance they are getting back in, so that had nothing to do with today's drop.

Not that the spat didn't have any impact, but I'd think that would impact SpaceX more.

Bezos must be DMing Trump right now offering to lay off more WaPO columnists in return for some launch contracts.

[Malika the Maiz]

That last paragraph is pretty funny (so is the file for emancipation before I go to Congress one).

[Martinned]

I'd think that would impact SpaceX more

It probably does, but SpaceX isn't listed, so there's no (good) way to tell.

(Yahoo Finance has SpaceX up for the month, but that's as reliable as reading tea leaves.)

[Dr. Ed 2]

e) Tesla was only profitable because of the massive Biden-era tax credits for purchasing one, and as those are now gone, the profitability of the company is gone.

[Kazinski]

Tesla's stock started dropping about a week ago, its not out of the question that Elon was upset about the end of the EV mandate, although it will probably hit his competitors harder.

But I think Elon is just not used to Washington yet, and he is frustrated by all the rules that keep things from getting done.

[Mr. Bumble]

"... and he is frustrated by all the rules that keep things from getting done."
...and who wouldn't be?

[myself]

Musk wanted the EV mandate to end, but he might have changed his mind when his antics gave Tesla a massive demand problem.

The other factor is that Musk has a drug problem, and people with drug problems tend to make erratic decisions.

[Kazinski]

Tesla has always relied on EV and Carbon tax credits and allowances for a substantial part of it's income.

A lot of those are ending.

And of course SpaceX biggest customer is the government, but that is true of a lot of corporations.

But you seem to forget Elon supported Democrats up until 2024, and that was the period of Tesla and SpaceX's biggest growth.

None of Elon's success was dependent on Trump.

Not that its a good thing to have both parties hating on you.

[Commenter_XY]

The correct answer is d) neither.

You give atrocious investment advice, eurotrash; TSLA has a very good track record over the last decade. No one should listen to your investing ignorance.

[Martinned]

I don't give any investment advice.

Although, if you want some, BYD is blowing Tesla out of the water at the moment.

[Mr. Bumble]

From 10 days ago:
"https://www.cnbc.com/2025/05/26/chinas-byd-sees-shares-plunge-8percent-as-ev-maker-cuts-prices.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/05/26/chinas-byd-sees-shares-plunge-8percent-as-ev-maker-cuts-prices.html

[Martinned]

That's the problem with being a shareholder in a Chinese company: the company has other priorities than profit maximisation, like pleasing the CCP. And the CCP cares more about world domination in green technology than about profits.

[Armchair]

And the CCP cares more about world domination in green technology than about profits.

Fixed that for you

[Martinned]

In that case, we should probably bend over and spread our cheeks for the guy who wants to invade Greenland. Thanks for clarifying.

[Armchair]

You want to get in bed with Communist China, that's your choice.

[Malika the Maiz]

Doesn’t Musk’s Tesla make a shit ton of stuff in China?

[Kazinski]

They have a factory in China for the Asian and European market, but US Teslas are made in the US.

[Malika the Maiz]

So, they make a shit ton of stuff in China.

[Martinned]

I want to tell the Americans to fuck off if they think they can tell us we're not allowed to make deals with "Communist" China. That's not the same thing, but I doubt you'll understand the difference.

[Dr. Ed 2]

So much for our having kept you from speaking German or Russian.
Now when we need your help, fair weather friends you become.

[Michael P]

e) There's more to life than executive officer chest-beating. https://arstechnica.com/cars/2025/06/tesla-shows-no-sign-of-improvement-in-may-sales-data/

[Sarcastr0]

Tesla's share price went down 14% *yesterday*.

Willful blindness is not a virtue.

[Mr. Bumble]

...and currently it is up almost 6%.
Get new glasses.

[Commenter_XY]

What exactly is MP blind to?

[Riva]

d) you’re an idiot troll?

[Martinned]

This also seems like a sensible observation:

The consequences that befall Musk now that he's attacked Trump publicly will be a measure of how well the US fits the competitive authoritarian model. The more severe, the better the fit. I despise Musk, but for the sake of US democracy, I hope his punishment doesn't violate the rule of law.

If Trump can destroy Musk's business as punishment for the political fallout, the security of property rights would be severely eroded. If he jails/deports him, civil rights/political competition would be eroded. We'll see how well the Trump regime approximates early Putinism. I hope it doesn't.

https://bsky.app/profile/popovaprof.bsky.social/post/3lqv4rrczjs2i

[Martinned]

Her PS also seems worth mentioning, since this is something that often goes wrong in the VC comments section too:

the rule of law envisions this sequence every time the law is violated: legal violation -> punishment. If we have legal violation -> no punishment - > political dissent -> punishment, the rule of law is eroded.

https://bsky.app/profile/popovaprof.bsky.social/post/3lqvav2krsc2i

[Vryedni]

The most sensible response to these developments, as it is to so many others, is fuck Ackman and Ye.

[Frank Drackman]

Let me tell you about the very rich. They are different from you and me (well, from you anyway) . They possess and enjoy early, and it does something to them, makes them soft where we are hard, and cynical where we are trustful, in a way that, unless you were born rich, it is very difficult to understand. They think, deep in their hearts, that they are better than we are because we had to discover the compensations and refuges of life for ourselves. Even when they enter deep into our world or sink below us, they still think that they are better than we
are. They are different.

[bye]

Okay, but by any standard Bezos had a better wife that he traded in for what the British would call " A jumped-up cow" ---and if she even likes him, I'm a monkey's uncle

[Armchair]

No. Next question.

[hobie]

I'm beginning to think there is some sort of interstellar portal beneath the Trump bus, because there is no way all the bodies could fit under there. It should have been well full by the time it was Musk and Leonard Leo's turns

[Magister]

How many sections are possible with an accordion bus? Maybe it's a trombone bus.

[Sarcastr0]

The thing about becoming a monarchy is the palace intrigue matters.

It's fun and all, but we have no idea where it will come out.

The only things we got now are

1) Yet more churn because the mad king is mad again

2) Via Tesla shares' drop, more evidence that everyone knows Trump will use the government for revenge

3) Allowing some people to burnish their purity, or their loyalty. Whichever floats their boat today; giving up consistency of character is one of the bonuses of going MAGA.
----
This regime sucks.

[Armchair]

At least we know who is in charge with this regime.

[Sarcastr0]

But Biden!

[hobie]

Drink!

[David Nieporent]

At least we know who is in charge with this regime.

Yup: Putin.

[Riva]

I thought you’d enjoy the judicial insurrection more, little communist girl that never smiled.

[Bob from Ohio]

"palace intrigue matters"

Yes, disputes between advisors [and sometimes the president] has never happened before in the US!

[Malika the Maiz]

On X, very common!

[Jerry B.]

https://babylonbee.com/news/trump-torches-tesla-dealership

[Dr. Ed 2]

Can anyone recommend a good textbook for understanding Massachusetts Probate Court procedures?

[Kazinski]

Usually their are senior citizen non profits and Government websites and help lines. Took me less than a minute to find this:

https://www.mass.gov/info-details/learn-about-the-types-of-probate-for-an-estate

[TwelveInchPianist]

"an estate with ... no real estate."

People should name things to avoid confusion.

[Krayt]

Well, someone tried. The "real" in real estate is land. As opposed to transient stuff and transient people.

[Frank Drackman]

The Oxford Textbook of Neurological Surgery is current, objective, and readable, oh wait, you're trying to do something much more complicated, Probate.

[Dr. Ed 2]

I'm sorry, whatever is wrong with Elan Musk, it ain't autism!

[Frank Drackman]

and not what's wrong with you, Stupidity.

[Moderation4ever]

He may be a bit slow. Most business people seem to know enough to keep Trump at a distance.

[Stephen Lathrop]

The right to public access of court records remains critical to promoting "trustworthiness of the judicial process, to curb judicial abuses, and to provide the public with a more complete understanding of the judicial system, including a better perception of fairness.

That, from a ruling in the Abrego Garcia case, seems a less-than-forthright expression of legal idealism. It is a principle favorable to lawyers who defend well-heeled clients in major civil cases, and a discomfiture for many plaintiffs. It suggests an openness which the federal system refuses to impose on itself, when it excludes live coverage of trials. It omits any suggestion that judges and juries may fall under unseen influence when they receive unreported threats of violence. It remains callous to chilling exposures imposed on would-be plaintiffs, who are likewise vulnerable.

What would a more-balanced standard of openness look like, in the present state of legal publicity, where an unedited and unconstrained internet is capable to be mobilized by parties interested in using publicity to influence case outcomes?

[A Japanese Student]

Court records in Japan are technically publicly accessible, but not as easily. You have to somehow find the case number (case captions in Japan are very generic, since they are named after cause of action, not the parties), go to the physical courthouse, pay a fee (around 1 dollar), submit a form, and manually write it down to your notepad. You're not allowed to bring a camera and take a photo. Copying is limited to the parties. (That's for a civil case; criminal case records are only publicly available after the conviction is made final and unappealable, and you go to the prosecutor's office, not a courthouse.)

[Dr. Ed 2]

I'm surprised that someone doesn't build their own private database of all the civil actions and then sell access to it.

[A Japanese Student]

Westlaw has a Japanese version?

[Don Nico]

Stephen,
While you make a fair observation, I am afraid that this matter is akin to limits of free speech. We have to accept a range of unfavorable to maintain the principle without erosion.

[Martinned]

You're already not maintaining the principle of free speech without erosion. Lots of speech is banned in the US. You just disagree with the rest of the world what speech should get a person in trouble with the law.

[Krayt]

People aren't sitting in jail for using phrases those in power do not permit them to use.

You can see the impulse by the powerful to work around that, in both parties, demonstrating the wisdom of the absolutist nature of the First Amendment. This abysmal behavior was old news 250 years ago.

[Kazinski]

I'm interested in seeing what some of your banned speech examples may be.

We do have some clearly illegal speech like direct threats.
Probably add unauthorized disclosure of classified material, that was not independently obtained.

Then there is disfavored speech which is not illegal but can get you fired, shunned, or expelled, like overt racism, phrases like "all lives matter", " there are only two genders".

What else do you have?

[Don Nico]

I see that he has not provided an example.

[Don Nico]

And that is whataboutism. If you have something to say on point, say it.

[Kazinski]

I'd like to endorse Warren Buffett's proposal for a constitutional amendment (from 2011):

"I could end the deficit in five minutes. You just pass a law that says that any time there's a deficit of more than three percent of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election. Yeah, yeah, now you've got the incentives in the right place, right?"

I'd modify it a little bit:
Section 1:
"No person shall be eligible to be elected to Congress who was a member of Congress during the 2 year budget period immediately preceding the election when the budget deficit as a percentage of GDP exceeds 3%. This section shall take effect in the year 2030, such disability will last for a period of 6 years.

Section 2:
No person shall be eligible to be elected to Congress who was a member of Congress during the 2 year budget period immediately preceding the election when the average budget deficit as a percentage of national GDP exceeds 2.5%. This section shall take effect in the year 2036, such disability will last for a period of 6 years."

[Mr. Bumble]

Seems the odds against something like this are slim and none.

[Brett Bellmore]

I'd love the odds against being slim or none... Unfortunately, it's the odds in favor that describes. The only hope of anything like this is a constitutional convention, not Congress.

The only issue I see is that this probably results in the books being cooked so hard that they're carbonized.

[Bwaaah]

They'll just have to expand their definition of "off-budget expenditures." Note that this rhetorical device is already in use, and fills the gap between the requirement for a "budget" and people who have little regard for fiscal restraint.

The Sarcastr0s of the world think it's an accounting term.

[Sarcastr0]

I guess you just read a new article telling you what to be mad at.

I don't know from off-budget expenditures, but it appears you're using the term wrong.

[Bwaaah]

I just hope we don't have to dip into the "Social Security Trust Fund" ahead of time.

[Krayt]

The odds are slim and none? That's the point. These weasels are about power, not concern for you.

[Martinned]

Why would that be a good thing? In 1944 the Federal deficit was 22% of GDP.

[Mr. Bumble]

War has a way of doing things like that.
Speaking of 1944, D-Day occurred 81 years ago today. That might have had something to do with the deficit.

[Martinned]

Indeed. And Kazinski's proposal would have all of Congress lose their jobs over it.

[Mr. Bumble]

That would be Buffet's proposal (slightly modified). As I said above their is not much chance of seeing an amendment to the Constitution anytime soon (if ever).

[Martinned]

Indeed, because it would be a terrible idea.

[Mr. Bumble]

Agreed. Better for Trump to do it with an EO.

[Kazinski]

I wonder what Europe would think about it:

"For [EU]member states with a public debt above the 60% of GDP reference value or a government deficit above the 3% of GDP reference value, the European Commission will issue reference trajectories for the country-specific net expenditure path, ensuring a compliance with both reference values for debt and deficit in the future. The net expenditure path set annual limits for how much the net expenditure of the general government can grow, and will be determined and communicated by the European Commission ahead of the publication of the first national medium-term fiscal-structural plan, with a default adjustment period covering the four years of the plan -"

They threatened to kick Greece out of the Eurozone if they didn't come into compliance, that seems at least as bad as sacrificing some Congressmen.*

* To be clear my proposal is just to disqualify the offending Congress members, not to cut their hearts out in the rotunda on live TV.

[Commenter_XY]

Do we really care what the antisemitic eurotrash thinks?

I don't have a problem with this proposal. The American electorate are a lot smarter than DC politicians believe.

[Martinned]

O shut up you genocidal bore!

(Which is, admittedly, quite an unusual combination. Although I guess it's less unusual on the internet than offline.)

[David Nieporent]

The American electorate are a lot smarter than DC politicians believe.

DC politicians know that the American electorate elected them, which means they know just how dumb the American electorate is. Infinitely so.

[Mr. Bumble]

Your self awareness is refreshing.

[Martinned]

All of that is also terrible policy. And I said so at the time.

[Brett Bellmore]

A balanced budget is kind of like democracy, the worst form of budgeting except for all others.

Look, if for the last 70 years the government had been alternating between surplus and deficit, and never had a debt that was more than a tiny fraction of gdp, you could argue that a balanced budget amendment was foolish.

But, of course, that's not what's been happening. Deficits as far as the eye can see, and both debt and deficit growing exponentially for the last several decades.

That's not fiscal policy, that's a complete lack of spending discipline.

[Malika the Maiz]

Again, people should be educated on how much of their tax money goes to paying the interest alone

[Stephen Lathrop]

Bellmore — It was Hamilton’s fiscal policy, derived from his study of the basis of English national power. For which history has judged Hamilton a political genius, and the original author of American national power.

Of course, to achieve that distinction, Hamilton had to struggle against the irrelevant householder-based standard of budgeting which was even more commonplace then than now.

[Joe_dallas]

Martinned 5 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Indeed, because it would be a terrible idea.

Summarizing martineed - Responsible Adult supervision of spending is a terrible idea -

[Krayt]

We have a better amendment that compensates for war. And for politicians who thing something is really important.

The budget must be balanced except in case of war, or a 2/3 supermajority.

That's it. This would pass with flying colors if the weasels would send it to the states.

Be ye not afraid of Democracy! Send it to the states, weasels!

[Kazinski]

Well that's the beauty of the proposal, we'd just have to elect a new house of representatives, including some former members, and on third of the Senate.

Surely if a deficit like that was essential then Congress wouldn't sacrifice the country for their own self interest.

[Armchair]

Maybe you could have the "declared war" exemption to it.

In the case of a formal declared war, the budget controls can be exempted, until the war is over.

[TwelveInchPianist]

What could go wrong, amirite?

[bernard11]

In which case we would have at least one declared war going on constantly.

Call up the guy in El Salvador and say,

"Look, we're going to declare war on you, but don't worry. We're not sending any troops or bombers or anything. It's just to get our budget passed. Besides, we'll send you $10M for your trouble."

Brett's point above, that there would be no shortage of ways to evade the rule, is correct.

On top of which it's a dumb idea to begin with.

[Dr. Ed 2]

I think the bigger concern is the consequences of removing all the existing legislators -- we saw a fraction of the consequences of this with the Southern delegations after the Civil War.

You would have a Congress where no one even knew where the bathrooms were, and thus run by the lobbyists. Another Grant Administration and that wasn't exactly a good one.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Good one Kazinski. Trillions in debt ceiling increases now for Trump. None for anyone else later. Cute.

[Kazinski]

The problem didn't start with Trump, its been going on for decades.

But the debt ceiling isn't a factor in the formulation just the annual budget deficit averaged over the previous 2 years.

That's two different numbers, the debt ceiling is essentially the sum of the last 100 years of the deficits.

[NvEric]

Here's a preamble:

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Whereas, the United States owes its existence Solely from the People by their Grace and Agreement, and as such, a reciprocal Respect must be returned to the People by way of a Proper and Just management of the funds extorted as "taxes",

[A Japanese Student]

I think that would just make Congress full of unprincipled people with no political experience, who would be happy to increase the deficit further.

Tbh, I'm surprised that many members of the Congress are concerned about the deficit. I rarely hear that word in Japanese Diet.

[Kazinski]

Bit the difference is that Japan's budget deficits can be completely absorbed by the domestic savings rate, so Japan doesn't have to rely on international capital markets to finance its deficit.

When you only owe money to the taxpayers, who are also the ones paying the interest on the debt then there is a lot less that can go wobbly.

[Commenter_XY]

I am actually surprised the Diet has not addressed Japan's fiscal policy. It has been a 30+ year stagnation, partly b/c of high debt levels.

[Kazinski]

It also might have something to do with that Japan has the highest median age of any major country in the world (they are #2 to Monoco). The US is 69th with an average age of 38, more than a decade younger.

Too many old people and not enough youth is terrible for growth.

[Malika the Maiz]

Isn’t it 2 am where you’re at posting this? Get some sleep!

Boy, daddy Trump and Musk’s tiff has got the regulars all upset.

[Kazinski]

Oh don't worry Malika, I got my full 8 hours of sleep, and I can't recall any bad dreams.

[Dr. Ed 2]

And yet Japan doesn't have Illegal Aliens....

[A Japanese Student]

Which... turns out to be very incorrect. There are tens of thousands of noncitizens unlawfully present, and thousands more seeking asylum. Many of the petitioners are from Southeast Asia or Turkey, while the country with the most number of granted applications is Ukraine.

You can't "cross the border" on foot, but it's easy to overstay your tourist visa.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Interesting. And as the average Ukrainian is about 6 inches taller than the average Japanese, they must be rather visible as well.

[Martinned]

I'm surprised that many members of the Congress are concerned about the deficit

They are not. They are concerned about coming up with reasons to cut popular things out of the budget, so that they can cut taxes with less embarrassment than otherwise.

[Moderation4ever]

Interesting idea but no way this passes Constitutional muster. Better question might be why do people keep electing incumbents when they do nothing about the deficit?

[Brett Bellmore]

Because "campaign reform" gave incumbents so many structural advantages as to render elections virtually futile.

[Sarcastr0]

Brett's sure his ideas are popular, it's just the rules that are the problem!

Hmmmm.

[Don Nico]

Do you deny that the ground-rules favor the incumbent?

[Malika the Maiz]

Is there any empirical evidence that incumbents did differently before and after campaign finance reform?

[David Nieporent]

No, Brett. It's because voters don't actually care about the deficit. To the extent that voters express concern about the deficit, it's one of two things: (a) it's the socially acceptable position to take; and/or (b) it's a pretext for cutting programs that the voter doesn't like.

(We can tell it's the latter because the voters who cite it never want to touch the things that make up the bulk of the federal budget. )

[Kazinski]

They tried, but remember a lot of McCain Feingold was struck, like banning ads from independent expenditures.

And I would argue with futile, 15 representatives lost re-election last year, and 3 Senators (I should say 5 because Manchin and Sinema didn't run because their polling was so bad).

In 2018 34 representatives lost re-election.

[Michael P]

The proposal is to amend the Constitution. On what basis would that not pass Constitutional muster?

[Moderation4ever]

You are correct, I did not notice the amendment part of the initial comment. That said the Congress would have to vote on the amendment and that is not likely to happen either. Again people can simple chose not to vote for their incumbent. I wonder how many incumbents would have to lose for Congress member to sit up and listen to the people? I am guessing that if only about 5% of the incumbents lost for a few election cycles the Congress would be a lot more responsive.

[Michael P]

I don't get the logic -- it throws out even people who voted against the deficit, and it doesn't care whether the "excess" deficit is due to unpredictable economic circumstances. I also don't understand how the "immediately preceding" language interacts with the six-year disability term.

It seems simpler that any budget that results in a reasonable projected deficit larger than 2% of GDP should require 75% of the Senate to approve. Give any state a cause of action that enables impoundment over "reasonable" forecasts that were not.

Bonus points for repealing the 17th Amendment as part of the package.

[Brett Bellmore]

Basically the logic is that the less discriminating the rule, the harder it is to game. If the rule is "If we run a deficit we all lose our jobs, every single one of us without exception."?

Pretty hard to game that.

A more nuanced amendment would be easier to game. Like, if only the people who voted for the spending lose their jobs? Voice votes, and every individual member can plausibly argue they voted "No." or were absent at the time. Or do like they did with the 27th amendment, and just delegate the spending decisions to some unelected panel which just coincidentally does whatever Congress' leadership wants.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Wouldn't it be simpler to just have a Constitutional requirement to balance the budget?

Put in an exception for wars, but then we'd always be in a war.

[A Japanese Student]

Balanced budget provision in the Constitution is rare - and ones with no exceptions are even so.

Constitute Project identified 26 constitutions currently in force mentioning balanced budget: https://www.constituteproject.org/constitutions?lang=en&key=balbudgt&status=in_force

This list is likely both overinclusive and underinclusive, because it does not reflect how the state is actually interpreting the constitution, and is probably analyzed by reading the English translation by someone not familiar with the country's legal system.

Plus, some quick research shows that of those 26 countries, many are apparently running at a deficit anyway...

[bernard11]

Wouldn't it be simpler to just have a Constitutional requirement to balance the budget?

Great idea if you like really long recessions.

Look, the way to have sensible fiscal policy (which is not a strict rule requiring balanced budgets every year) is to get honest about it, including not letting Congress dictate assumptions to the CBO, and teaching people not to accept politicians' statements at face value.

[Kazinski]

Because we can't balance the budget now, even 3% although achievable is hard. Plus events like recessions and pandemics sometimes make deficits necessary.

But maybe to address Michael's objection, lets change it so they are disqualified, but the voters in their district can remove the disqualification by a 60% of the vote. You could put the question on the primary ballot, or allow the November margin of victory to suffice.

[bernard11]

Pretty hard to game that.

Not so sure. I mean, if you have unanimity in Congress it's going to be pretty easy to pass some BS workaround.

[William of Brooklyn]

Re the Buffett proposal and its proposed alterations here, I would propose a different formula:

1. The federal budget should be divided into an operating budget and a capital budget;
2. Federal income tax should exempt the first x dollars of income from taxation (whatever number equals the bottom third.)
3. Income above that threshold should be taxed at a flat rate which will be derived by what it takes to fully fund the operating budget, and to service the capital budget.
4. Eliminate all deductions not directly related to income (e.g., uber drivers can still write off gas, etc.)

The above would result in everyone with the same income paying the same rate in taxes, it would shield the poor, it would showcase the actual costs of what we choose to fund as a nation, it would eliminate pushing the burden down to future generations, and it would save our fisc and therefore the value of our currency.

[Martinned]

If you want something rigid, that's much closer to sensible. But it seems hard to turn that into the kind of language that fits in the US constitution.

[bernard11]

The federal budget should be divided into an operating budget and a capital budget;

Sounds OK, and I think many states do that, but as usual the devil is in the details. What goes in the capital budget, and what formulas and useful lives are used in calculating depreciation?

If those issues could be settled, then it might work, but at the same time, I think the more you complicate matters the more room you have for finagling.

Also, income tax reform proposals all run into the same problem. It's not that calculating the tax is complicated - it's trivially easy. Measuring income is what's hard. Cutting down on the number of categories - capital gains, "carried interest," etc. would help a little, but what's the chance of that? Congress loves to play around with these things, because it's an obscure way to hand out tax breaks to selected groups.

(I'm not a flat tax fan, either, BTW. The 33rd income percentile makes $35K/year. Marginal utility of income does in fact usually decline, so a progressive schedule makes sense to me.)

[JasonT20]

Re: Buffett's proposal/your modifications

Being rich doesn't make one smart.

Being smart doesn't make one wise.

Being wise doesn't make one infallible.

"I could end the deficit in five minutes. You just pass a law that says that any time there's a deficit of more than three percent of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election. Yeah, yeah, now you've got the incentives in the right place, right?"

This is wrong, so he clearly isn't infallible.

This would have all kinds of unintended consequences, so he clearly wasn't being wise.

This fundamentally misunderstands how Congress works, so he wasn't even being smart.

At least he's definitely rich.

Look, the reason that this is a bad idea, no matter how one modifies it, is that the people choose their government. It is reasonable to say that it takes the "will of the people", particularly a supermajority of the people, to pass amendments that restructure the government. But a supermajority that decides to limit their own ability to choose their government in the future is being stupid. And that is what this would be. It would be voters at the time of the amendment being debated and ratified saying, "We, the voters in the present, don't want future voters to choose a government that we don't like." Worst of all, they are also limiting their own ability to choose their government, since they could always change their minds about things.

The unintended consequences should be obvious. Namely, a Congress that appropriates money for spending that requires that level of borrowing deemed "too high" would include members that voted against doing that. This would be barring people from running for re-election that actually want fiscal responsibility and were willing to vote that way.

It misunderstands how all legislatures work, not just Congress, on top of all of that. Term limits in legislatures don't work because it just moves power to party operatives and donors behind the scenes. If Buffett really wanted the incentives to be in the right place, then the consequences of poor budget decisions need to be felt by the voters.

As things stand, the negative consequences of our enormous debt are felt by voters. The problem is that in addition to feeling the consequences of bad decisions, voters also need to accurately identify what the bad decisions were that led to those consequences, and they need to accurately determine which politicians made the poor decisions.

This is all a thought experiment that doesn't give the problem more than a few minutes of thought.

[JasonT20]

All of these ideas people have been posting about constitutional amendments to curb the debt are really missing the point.

If there is enough support from voters to push through a constitutional amendment to curb deficit spending, then there is well beyond enough support to only elect politicians that will curb deficit spending.

Talking about amendments as a solution to irresponsible fiscal policy is ridiculous.

[A Japanese Student]

Democrats proposed a court-packing plan, more than doubling the number of justices of the Supreme Court. This move is seen as a way to influence the President's criminal trial. Although it has passed the committee vote, they delayed the vote in the full chamber. (Oh, forgot to note - this is the Democrats in South Korea.)

https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/southkorea/politics/20250605/supreme-court-expansion-plan-delayed-amid-criticism

Fortunately (or unfortunately), the legislation will presumably be subject to judicial review, not by the Supreme Court, but the Constitution Court, whose number of seats is fixed by the Constitution.

[Commenter_XY]

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2025/06/05/supreme-court-sides-catholic-charities-case-about-tax-exemptions-religious-organizations/

Pretty easy call by SCOTUS (9-0). Unsurprisingly, so many legal beagles here confidently predicted a very different result.

[Martinned]

When has that case ever been discussed here?

[Michael P]

Mostly at https://reason.com/volokh/2024/12/13/supreme-court-adds-two-potentially-significant-cases-to-ot2024-docket/?comments=true , I think. There was another post a few days later about the question presented, but not so much discussion on the merits in that thread.

But I do like the hot take by the perpetually wrong guy about the Catholic Church supposedly having forgotten Matthew 22:16-21.

[Krayt]

I knew what that was, but not from memory, rather context.

I also note this, aside from the famous line above:

But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, “You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me?

For those who think gotchas are some newfangled thing of motivated detractors.

[Dr. Ed 2]

I think it was wrongly decided -- that it instead should have been decided on the inverse of Trinity Lutherin.

Catholic Charities is (today) a social services vendor which receives Federal funding to do social services stuff. As such, it is essentially similar to numerous private nonprofits that do the exact same thing in exactly the same manner.

Catholic Charities does it because of their Catholic faith, ServiceNet does it because of they want to see a better world or something. Much as the law shouldn't discriminate against Trinity Lutherin because it was a church, the law shouldn't discriminate in favor of Catholic Charities because it is one as well.

Exempt all non profits from the UI tax. Perhaps exempt all non profits that have their own viable UI system. But when you have, say, five non profits running a meals on wheels program, you don't treat the one that is religious differently from the four that are secular.

[David Nieporent]

Unsurprisingly, so many legal beagles here confidently predicted a very different result.

I know of no such people; are you just making this claim up?

[not guilty]

I am pleased to see prior Establishment Clause decisions such as School Dist. of Abington Township v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963), Epperson v. Arkansas, 393 U.S. 97 (1968), Santa Fe Independent School Dist. v. Doe, 530 U. S. 290 (2000), and Larson v. Valente, 456 U.S. 228 (1982), cited favorably in a unanimous SCOTUS opinion.

[bye]

Musk is like Pence, Nikki Haley , and Hillary and esp Michelle Obama -- some people can't get the limelight because they think the adulation is personal and they get a swelled head. If Michelle weren't married to him you probably wouldn't even ask her for car directions

[Malika the Maiz]

This is how a cult works, the Mad King acts like a petty, petulant child in a public spat with a former vizier and the cultists need to bring up anyone but Dear Leader.

[Dr. Ed 2]

I think Trump is being the mature adult here.

For starters, Trump could have said Teslas were unsafe.

And as to a Trump Orgy Island sex tape, if it existed, don't you think that Meritless Garland would have found it & used it?

[TwelveInchPianist]

And expose Clinton?

[Nelson]

“ I think Trump is being the mature adult here.”

I’ll take “Things that have never happened” for $1000, Alex.

[Kazinski]

That's nonsensical.

I don't think ego or a desire for adulation, or a path to power is what caused Mike Pence to do his duty as he saw it on Jan. 6th.

Nor has Michelle Obama attempted to run for office to leverage he popularity among democrats, not that she hasn't cashed in, but that's normal.

Nikki Haley was a politician, who disagreed with Trump and ran against him in th Primaries because she thought he was wrong in contesting the 2020 election.

I don't have anything good to say about Hillary.

And Musk has more entrepreneurial and engineering talent than almost anybody living but his ego gets in his way.

[Mr. Bumble]

"That's nonsensical."
It's Queenie. What would you expect?

[Malika the Maiz]

lol, Kaz was responding to bye, not me.

What a dolt! But it’s bumble, what did anyone expect?

[Mr. Bumble]

My bad, I haven't had much sleep lately but in any event my comment about you still apples.

[Malika the Maiz]

Mr. Bumble 4 minutes ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
My bad, I haven't had much sleep lately but in any event my comment about you still apples.

Apples? lol, stop digging bumble! Turn off the light in your mom’s basement, get some sleep, try again later. It’ll be ok, daddy Musk and daddy Trump will make up.

[Mr. Bumble]

Applies. Never made a typo you fucktard?

[Stephen Lathrop]

ADHD is not a talent. It just means that whatever direction you are driving, you go especially fast, without being impeded by paying attention. Put that characteristic on a lucky course, and it looks like genius. Put it on a difficult or arduous course, and it blows up . . . suddenly.

[Brett Bellmore]

ADHD doesn't preclude talent, though, and if somebody picks enough 'lucky' courses, you eventually should conclude that it's not luck you're watching.

[Stephen Lathrop]

ADHD plus talent can be a dandy way to succeed, if there is a limitless supply of money to pay off all the ill-considered losing bets.

[bye]

All that motorcycle, interview , new house ====All puffing himself up
Former Vice President Mike Pence Buys $1.93 Million Mansion ...
Pence knows he did wrong and the only way out is for everybody ----like you --- to say "No, you are a hero!!"
Could you serve 4 years with Nero and then think "wow, not a good guy"

Nikki Haley seems in the public opinion to have PLUMMETED for her grandstanding.
Politics / May 24, 2024
The Soulless Hypocrisy of Nikki Haley
Haley has abandoned her opposition to Trump for political expediency. Joe Biden should use Haley’s words against her—and Trump.
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/nikki-haley-voting-for-trump/

Anyway, your view is not Mainstream America

[Malika the Maiz]

Remember all the people here who said Sotomayer was obviously a stupid DEI hire because she got the number of COVID patients wrong?

“Secretary of Education Linda McMahon was given a math lesson during a Senate hearing on Tuesday when Senator Jack Reed pointed out that $1.5 multiplied by 10 is not “over a trillion dollars” but actually $15 billion.

Sitting before the appropriations subcommittee that focuses on education, McMahon nodded her head along as Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana mistakenly claimed that the U.S. spends “$1,580,000” on federal grant programs, known as TRIO and GEAR UP, per year and that after 10 years, that adds up to be “over a trillion dollars.”

The U.S. actually spends $1.58 billion per year on the programs, which does not add up to more than a trillion after 10 years. But, McMahon did not correct Kennedy’s math error.

However, Reed, the senator from Rhode Island, did.

“I’m not a great mathematician, but I think you were talking about a trillion dollars? I believe $1.5 billion times 10 is $15 billion, that’s a little bit off from a trillion dollars,” Reed said.
McMahon responded, “I think the budget cuts $1.2 billion for TRIO.”

“Well, $1.2 billion that would be $12 billion, not a trillion dollars,” Reed replied.

“Ok,” McMahon said.“

https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/us-politics/linda-mcmahon-education-budget-senate-b2763082.html

[Martinned]

I guess she was too busy studying up on A1...

[bye]

Just want everyone here to be aware that you seem not to know the 2 HUGELY DIFFERENT meanings of "a billion" ---they are not all Americans

the 'British' billion was 1,000,000,000,000 (ie a million million) whereas the US one that has now been adopted is 1,000,000,000 (a thousand million).

IF WE WANT TO GET SERIOUS 🙂

[Krayt]

I was living in Europe ca. 1990. I watched live on TV as the BBC gave up on the English billion and admitted it was all over, and switched to the American billion.

This has been over for 35 years.

[Bwaaah]

Sotomayor didn't get "the number of COVID patients wrong." She falsely believed COVID was devastatingly fatal to children, when in fact, it presented very little risk to children. It's telling that you had to obscure the truth of her stupidity.

[Malika the Maiz]

Like not knowing that 1.5 x 10=10.5?

[Bwaaah]

Said Sotomayor: “We have over 100,000 children, which we’ve never had before, in serious condition, and many on ventilators.”

Totally false and indicative of delusions about COVID and children.

[Malika the Maiz]

Instead of delusions about multiplying?

[Bwaaah]

You said, "Sotomayor got the number of COVID patients wrong."

That is incorrect in the most essential way.

She said, “We have over 100,000 children, which we’ve never had before, in serious condition, and many on ventilators.”

[Commenter_XY]

It is a huge problem if a SCOTUS justice is basing opinions on erroneous data.

[Magister]

There's no evidence that Sotomayor's incorrect numbers in oral argument made it into any Supreme Court opinion. There's plenty of times conservative Justices based opinions on provably false claims, and perhaps Commenter_XY will look into some of those.

[Drewski]

Dude. $1.5 x 10 = $15.

It doesn't equal 10.5, nor $15 billion.

I get what you're saying but try not to be wrong about the thing you're criticizing someone else for getting wrong.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Yeah, well...

[Bob from Ohio]

Linda not knowing math does not disprove the Unwise Latina being stupid too.

[Kazinski]

I don't think you can blame Linda for not correcting a Senator:

"But, McMahon did not correct Kennedy’s math error."

That's just silly, no one has the bandwidth to do real time fact checks on Senators or Congressman at hearings. They go on a roll, talk for 4 minutes and 45 seconds of their allotted time, then give you 15 seconds to respond if you are lucky.

[Malika the Maiz]

“That’s just silly, no one has the bandwidth to do real time fact checks on Senators or Congressman at hearings.”

That’s what Reed did.

[Malika the Maiz]

The worst and most serious part of the fracas between the Mad King and his late vizier is the former’s threat to revoke government contracts with the latter. This is the behavior of l’estate est moi kings or dictators where government exists to satisfy the petty whims of the Dear Leader rather than follow a rule of law for the benefit of the public welfare.

[Frank Drackman]

Not downplaying D-day (Has no Grade Point Average, all Courses Incomplete) but more Amuricans were killed on 9-11 (2,977, some people say 2,996 but that includes the Terrorists)
Not sure how we did it, the Troops had no Diversity Training, Facial Hair, openly Homosexuals (I know, Rock Hudson served, I said "Openly"), and any man wearing a dress and pretending to be an Admiral would be Keelhauled, the US Army had 8,000,000 men under arms in 1944, now it's under 500,000

Frank

[Malika the Maiz]

This has been Random Thoughts and Capitalizations with the sad, weirdo writer of the Frank Fakeman character.

[ThePublius]

You are a really tiring troll. Frank's comments are infinitely more interesting and humorous than your snipes. He provides content, something to chew on. You just provide shallow, snarky retorts. Please cut it out.

[Malika the Maiz]

Mad because I called your obvious selective partisanship out as wrong a few times this week I see. It’ll get better.

[ThePublius]

No, actually, it's your trolling of Frank that is most annoying. But a troll you are, that's for certain.

[Frank Drackman]

Appreciate the Kudos there Pub, (is that how you say it? "Pub"?) but I can fight my own fights, and engaging with Queenie is like tweaking Dr. Steven Hawkin's nose, you can do it, buy why would you?, and anyway, I'm a made up character, like Natty Bumpo, or Tony Clifton, an enigma, like a Chink, did you know all those Perry Mason episodes are based on BOOKS??? and there wasn't an actual Chingachgook???

Frank

[Malika the Maiz]

Made up stuff Pubes is totally cool with, so no surprise there!

[Frank Drackman]

OK Tyler Durden, go make some Soap.

[Malika the Maiz]

The character Frank Fakeman written to comment on the character Tyler Durden, sad times itself.

[Malika the Maiz]

Sure, cool story bro!

Btw-have you figured out yet whether you were just wrong or lying when you claimed the WaPo article relied solely on the Hamas source?

[Sarcastr0]

Holy shit Malika got ThePublius to openly become a Frank fan.

Savage.

[Malika the Maiz]

Don’t worry, he’ll be going on about civility again soon without noticing any tension.

[Bwaaah]

If I said that your comments are more substantive than Queenie's, would that make me a "Sarcastr0 fan"?

[Sarcastr0]

"He provides content, something to chew on. "

[Bwaaah]

If I said that you "provide content, something to chew on," would that make me a Sarcastr0 fan?

[Sarcastr0]

Yes.

Thank you for your support.

[Bwaaah]

A fan of yours? You won on that note?

Not in this universe. Not in this lifetime. You'd have to step up.

[Sarcastr0]

Even as a hypothetical, I saw you write that I bring that chewy content readers crave.

You're clearly a fan. Clearly.

Own it!

[Frank Drackman]

They're out there Sarc, most remain closeted, like yourself.

[Moderation4ever]

Don't forget we did it without any black soldier fighting. We had them relegated to support staff. Some did fight like the Tuskegee Airman, but when they returned home as veterans we still treated them as second class citizens. So your point is the army was better then?

Also I believe the navy allowed facial hair in WWII.

[Frank Drackman]

Arguably WW2 was the last real war that we won (Desert Storm doesn't count, ask Hobie-Stank)
and while I'm sure you're drawing from your own military service, but while there were Sailors with Beards in WW2 (and Homos too probably) it was due to Operational needs, and not a fashion statement like today.

[ThePublius]

"Don't forget we did it without any black soldier fighting."

Completely incorrect. And then you contradict yourself two sentences later. Why lie?

Don't forget about the 761st Tank Battalion.

And, define "fighting." Logistics are what win wars, and there were blacks on virtually every Navy ship in various capacities. They were in harms way, too.

[Frank Drackman]

"Moderation4ever"?? more like Idiocy4ever, love the Armchair Experts who think they're experts because they've watched "Band of Brothers" (you know what real men do in Wah? they don't wax philosophical)

Frank

[Moderation4ever]

Frank, I am not an expert on military history but I am well enough read to know that it was not until President Truman's administration that the military was desegregated. Well enough read to know that many of the achievements of black Americans including in the military were pushed to the background. Well enough read to know that gay men like Harvey Milk served honorably in the Navy until he was discharged for being gay.

[Kazinski]

Yeah, that was a stupid decision by the Wilson Administration:

"During World War I, the Wilson administration ensured that Black soldiers were segregated into separate units and were generally denied critical roles in the war."

Wilson was by far was the most racist President since 1900, not that Franklin Roosevelt was blameless.

[Armchair]

So, what happened with Musk...a serious conversation.

1) Musk was serious about reducing the deficit. But he doesn't have to get re-elected.

2) Republicans would like to reduce government spending. But they also need to get reelected.
2a) They also understand that if they just reduce the deficit, they will get a lot of bad press
2b) They also understand that if they just reduce the deficit, when the Democrats get into office, the Dems will just massively ramp up spending, and get all the positive benefit.

[Malika the Maiz]

More like Republicans want to cut some government, increase other parts and not pay for it.

[Moderation4ever]

You could also add that the Republicans are delaying the cuts so the cuts will likely never happen.

[Martinned]

What is it like to live in the alternative reality where Republicans reduce the deficit and Democrats increase it? Is your reality (otherwise) anything like ours? Or do you have a green sky, blue grass, and a purple sun?

[Brett Bellmore]

Both parties "want" to reduce the deficit, but not remotely enough to pay the political cost of actually making a real attempt.

Where the parties disagree is at what level of spending and fraction of the economy the deficit should be run. Democrats are comfortable with an ever growing fraction of the economy being routed through government, Republicans leery of that.

So, Democrats are a bit more comfortable with tax increases, knowing that the borrowing will be on top of those taxes, and the fraction of the economy that the government consumes will go up.

[Bob from Ohio]

"alternative reality where Republicans reduce the deficit"

The last time the deficit was modestly reduced was during the Gingrich Congress.

[Malika the Maiz]

And Clinton Presidency, right?

[Bob from Ohio]

I'm constantly reminded here that only Congress can spend and tax. The President just follows the instructions given to him.

[David Nieporent]

Apparently you forgot the part about signing or vetoing bills.

[Malika the Maiz]

He forgets a lot, willfully often. How could you not and be a slavish supporter of Trump?

[austinrussell2025]

Carmina Burana on full blast

[hobie]

Compassionate Conservatism
Truth Social
Fair and Balanced

When your brand is so opposite to the reality, that you have to spell out what should be a given; or rather what you ain't but wish you were.

Marlboro Light: a healthy cigarette for children
Jan 6: Peaceful Political Discourse

I must say, it don't take much to trick the rube

[bye]

Notice, folks, as is true of most liars, he asserts NOTHING

Why?Because if he stood for something, the cowardly misanthrope would have to defend something and he'd probably break down in tears at the first person who didn't say "Oh, how damn intelligent you are"

A complete fraud

[Malika the Maiz]

He’s asserting conservatives often adopt a brand that’s the opposite of what the brand is, ya goof.

[Magister]

He also asserts "it don't take much to trick the rube".

[Malika the Maiz]

“President Trump has long called for escalating the U.S. drug war against Mexican cartels and wants tougher penalties for dealers selling fentanyl and other street drugs in American communities. "I am ready for it, the death penalty, if you deal drugs," Trump said during a meeting with state governors in February, where he said dealers are too often treated with a "slap on the wrist."

But despite his tough rhetoric, Trump has sparked controversy by pardoning a growing number of convicted drug dealers, including this week's move to grant clemency to Larry Hoover, 74, who was serving multiple life sentences in federal prison for crimes linked to his role leading the Chicago-based Gangster Disciples.

Already during the early months of his second term, Trump has granted clemency to at least eight individuals convicted on federal drug charges. Some, including Hoover, have extensive criminal records involving violence and gun charges.

"There's a lot of mixed messages and mixed signals [from the White House] which creates sort of chaos and uncertainty," said Jeffrey Singer, a drug policy analyst at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think-tank. "On the one hand you're threatening even tougher penalties on people who deal in drugs, while on the other hand you're releasing drug dealers from prisons."

https://www.npr.org/2025/05/31/nx-s1-5415939/trump-pardons-drug-kingpins-even-as-he-escalates-the-u-s-drug-war

[hobie]

I think these pardons are in line with Trump's penchant for strongmen

[Frank Drackman]

If it wasn't for D-day that German Chancellor would be speaking German!

[dwb68]

Musk is right: adding 2 trillion to the deficit is disgusting. Spending needs to come down. The interest payments alone are going to be half a trillion.

[Sarcastr0]

1. No mention of taxes
2. Argument via 'number big'
3. Use of an emotional term like 'disgusting' with no upshot to support.

I'm glad you feel as required by your tribe, but this post just looks like a loyalty ritual.

[hobie]

Over at National Review, their set of tax-and-spend hayseeds are grousing in the same manner. Now that it's their tribe doing the spending they're like: 'Golly I hate this, but what are ya gonna do?!'

[Bwaaah]

Just hint at fiscal restraint or sympathy for an Israeli and Sarc loses control of his bladder.

[Malika the Maiz]

Feel the substance!

[Moderation4ever]

Musk is right on spending but the wrong person to do the job. Cutting spending requires a work horse not a show horse.

[dwb68]

I dont know what that means. Cutting spending requires the courage to say "we cant afford everything." And yes tax subsidies are spending.

[Brett Bellmore]

Cutting spending requires magically not losing the next election AFTER you say "we can't afford everything". That's the problem: They're all buying the votes to keep their seats with the borrowed money, and anybody who stops doing it ends up out of office.

[Sarcastr0]

So what you want isn’t popular…it isn’t the rules keeping you down after all.

So you claim crisis. Except you won’t consider tax increases so you aren’t serious.

All you have is empty drama in service of your personal radicalism.

[Brett Bellmore]

No, "cutting spending" IS popular. The problem is that every particular bit of spending is subject to concentrated benefits and diffuse costs.

The only way out of this trap is to prohibit the borrowing, so that spending has to compete against spending, not against the future's desire not to be taxes, which future can't vote.

Prohibiting borrowing outside of emergencies IS wildly popular. Approaching 80%, and across parties. Really the only group opposed to it is the one group in a position to block it: The people running the government. Like you.

Because they don't like the idea that, shorn of borrowing power, they'd have to make hard decisions, and spend less.

[Krayt]

That's a lotta words for "bravely raise taxes", but not bravely cut spending.

[dwb68]

Maybe, or maybe like shutting down the government, very little bad happens.

[Malika the Maiz]

In fairness when the government “shuts down” it keeps doing lots of stuff, and the shutdowns don’t tend to last long.

[Frank Drackman]

so getting rid of that stupid EV mandate is a great idea. Why not a "Ford Mustang Mandate" or "Corvette Mandate"??? But hey, he was able to cut the "Condoms for Gaza"

Frank

[dwb68]

Yes please. Cars should stand on their own merit.

[Malika the Maiz]

It begins….

Aaron Rodgers signing with Steelers: Four-time NFL MVP joins Pittsburgh on one-year deal

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/aaron-rodgers-signing-with-steelers-four-time-nfl-mvp-joins-pittsburgh-on-one-year-deal/

[Moderation4ever]

Aaron Rodgers is a great quarter back but it is time for him to retire. The Jets fiasco should have told him that fact.

[Ska]

On one hand... it's the Jets. On the other... you can't always blame it on playing for the Jets, as counterintuitive as that might sound.

[Commenter_XY]

The one hand was right...it is the Jets. The other hand was wrong, b/c it was the Jets.

[Kazinski]

Can't really say that, until we see him play.

He was still recovering from an achilles injury last season which is notoriously hard to come back from.

Peyton Manning was much more physically limited when he won his Superbowl for the Broncos because he was still processing at a high level.

Sure his completion % was only 63%, the lowest he's had since 2019, and his YPA was the lowest its been since 2015.

He is still at least average, and a better option than anyone else who is available, like Kirk Cousins who would cost more in salary and draft picks.

His closest comp last year was probably Bo Nix, who got Denver to the playoffs.

[ThePublius]

wrong place, again. site is messed up.

[Malika the Maiz]

Wondering into the wrong place is common place for Pubes.

[hobie]

It's hard to get all of one's hatreds in order

[ThePublius]

STFU

[Malika the Maiz]

Now, now, remember your (selective) civility pearls!

[Frank Drackman]

we don't get pearl necklaces regularly like you do.

[Malika the Maiz]

The writer of the Frank Fakeman character has mistakenly posted this text to his mother.

[Frank Drackman]

at least I know who my father is.

[Malika the Maiz]

For the writer of the Frank Fakeman character it’s the guy hiding in the closet when mom gets those.

[Mr. Bumble]

Play nice boys.

[Moderation4ever]

I read in today's local newspaper, The Wisconsin State Journal, that a gun was stolen from an unlocked car. Again, I say that while the Constitution gives you the right to have a firearm it does mean you should have one. Personal responsibility, if you can not handle the responsibility of having a gun don't get one. We don't need a law for this we need a social attitude.

[ThePublius]

That's unfortunate. I would point out that the gun owner is a victim here, a victim of theft. And, I'd like to know the rest of the story: why did he leave it in the car? Was he going into a post office or other federal building? Or a school? Or a business that prohibits firearms? But, certainly, he should have locked the car, and even better, have a secure container in the car for the firearm, secured to the vehicle.

[Michael P]

Another possibility: another family member left the car unlocked.

My father once had a lot of tools stolen from his pickup truck after one of my siblings left the cargo box unlocked (at home) and my father drove the truck to his workplace (where the tools were stolen from a parking garage). Arguably my father gets the blame either way for what a minor child did, but the person who put the gun in the WI car isn't necessarily the one who left the car unlocked.

[Moderation4ever]

You have both gone to a lot of trouble to try to justify stupidity. If you leave a guns in the car then its your responsibility to see that it is locked. It not enough to find a rationalization for why it was not locked.

[Michael P]

And you have gone to a lot of trouble to blame the victim. Yawn.

[not guilty]

If that stolen gun is used to kill or seriously injure someone, should whoever left the car unlocked be prosecuted for recklessly endangering safety in violation of Wisconsin Legislature § 941.30? https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/941/iv/30

Per § 939.24(i), “criminal recklessness” means that the actor creates an unreasonable and substantial risk of death or great bodily harm to another human being and the actor is aware of that risk, except that for purposes of ss. 940.02 (1m), 940.06 (2) and 940.23 (1) (b) and (2) (b), “criminal recklessness” means that the actor creates an unreasonable and substantial risk of death or great bodily harm to an unborn child, to the woman who is pregnant with that unborn child or to another and the actor is aware of that risk. https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/939/i/24#:~:text=%281%29%20In%20this%20section%2C%20%E2%80%9Ccriminal%20recklessness%22%20means%20that,and%20the%20actor%20is%20aware%20of%20that%20risk.

[Malika the Maiz]

“Nearly 112,000 guns were reported stolen in 2022, and just over half of those were from cars — most often when they were parked in driveways or outside people’s homes, the Everytown report found.”

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/guns-are-being-stolen-from-cars-at-triple-the-rate-they-were-10-years-ago-firearm-safety-group-everytown-says#:~:text=Nearly%20112%2C000%20guns%20were%20reported%20stolen%20in,outside%20people's%20homes%2C%20the%20Everytown%20report%20found.&text=More%20than%201%20million%20guns%20were%20reported,report%20on%20crime%20guns%20released%20last%20year.

[Swede425]

Does the Constitution give you the right or does it recognize that you have an inalienable right(s)?

[ThePublius]

Good point. The constitution doesn't give rights, it recognizes them and prohibits the government from infringing upon them.

Moderation4ever repeats that so often I have grown immune to it.

[Moderation4ever]

It gives you the right. You know there are liberals who claim natural rights to a living wage and healthcare and are just as wrong as you are about the natural right to a gun. Almost all people chose to live in countries and those countries set up what rights people have. Not sure where a person could live with only natural rights, maybe in far out Canada.

[Michael P]

It's generally a lot easier to make the case that negative rights are natural rights than to make the case that positive rights are natural rights. The fact that other leftists are stupid doesn't make you right about that.

[Swede425]

I believe the right that is recognized is that to keep and bear arms, which is understood as necessary in order to secure your own defense.
So, not "granted" but recognized as a right that exists in nature.

[ThePublius]

You are absolutely wrong, Moderation4ever.

It's almost pointless to argue with you on this, you are obviously oblivious to the intent and philosophy of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, or are being deliberately obtuse.

[ThePublius]

"It was under these circumstances that the founders’ vision of a liberal, democratic government whose tasks included protecting civil liberties had evolved. The government still had the responsibility of providing for the common defense and conducting foreign affairs, but among its chief purposes was protecting these “unalienable” rights, in the Declaration of Independence’s memorable verbiage. It is for this reason that the language of the Bill of Rights does not explicitly grant Americans rights, such as freedom of speech or due process of law. Instead, it protects the rights considered to have already been bestowed upon all of us, simply by virtue of being born."

https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/bill-rights#:~:text=It%20is%20for%20this%20reason,by%20virtue%20of%20being%20born.

[Krayt]

"Other countries" does not mean the powerful grant you rights. It just means more thugs taking away your inalienable rights.

Why would you ever, and I mean ever, start with a philosophical baseline your natural state is on bended knee begging for permissions?

[Brett Bellmore]

Let's say that I have a copy of The Anarchist's Cookbook. (I used to; Shed it with most of my books moving out of Michigan; Wasn't enough room in the moving van!) A neighborhood kid finds the door to my house unlocked, sneaks in, and steals it, because my library does not have a lock on the door.

He then proceeds to blow himself up and burn down his family's house, as you'd expect if you were familiar with the Anarchist's Cookbook. Do NOT rely on it!

Am I somehow responsible for the fire, and have you just proven that home libraries should be kept under lock and key?

[Moderation4ever]

Last week it was swimming pool and this week home library. There seems to always be a rationalization you can go to so you don't have to call out people who fail to act responsibly.

[Ska]

It does, however, make me want to start a new playthrough of Blue Prince.

[Malika the Maiz]

A firearm is more immediately dangerous than a book.

[Swede425]

The firearm isn't dangerous at all.
The human wielding it is.
Regardless of their intent.

[Malika the Maiz]

If it makes you happy to say it increases the potential dangerousness of whoever gets it in their possession then go with that Swedish Chef.

[Swede425]

Makes me happy?
I mean, at least in the sense that your last statement is true while the first isn't, I suppose so.

[Malika the Maiz]

The Swedish Meatball can often be heard griping about labels of Danger on explosives, poisons, etc.

[Swede425]

Most inanimate objects are not dangerous in and of themselves.
Guns are like that.
A plutonium rod isn't.
Explosives and poisons?
Depends on the effects of time and decay.
Trifecta in play?
Eagerly awaiting!

[Malika the Maiz]

Awaiting what? People in everyday language know it is common to refer to explosives, poisons or guns as dangerous things even if a person has to do something to help activate that potential. Maybe it’s different in Swedish?

For English speakers:
Dictionary
Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more
adjective
able or likely to cause harm or injury.
“a dangerous animal”

[Drewski]

It's great when ESL speakers encounter a word for the first time, make up a definition in their head, and argue based on it. That's not what "dangerous" means.

[not guilty]

Guns don't kill people.

But gunshot wounds often do.

[Frank Drackman]

What's with the passive voice Obscuration4ever?
Why not the active voice?, "Some Thief stole a gun from an unlocked car", but you're right, locked cars never get broken into or stolen
(at the Atlanta Airport a few years ago the Security peoples were advising to leave your car unlocked, as the Thieves are mostly looking to snatch personal items, and just pull on the door handle, when it doesn't open they break the window)
and unless you're going to declare a Gun in your checked baggage (what a great idea, put a bright sticker on your bag telling everyone that handles it there's a gun inside) you can either leave your gun in your car, or home, ( I hear rumors homes occasionally get broken into also)
Seriously, were your first words "Duh..............."

Frank

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Yes. It's a general principle.

People have a right to marry and have children. Many do so without due care. It causes harm. Personal responsibility is a good thing.

[Michael P]

Woke school system apologizes and pays up over defamation, but doubles down to support a heckler's veto: https://www.carolinajournal.com/student-suspended-for-saying-illegal-alien-will-receive-public-apology-in-new-settlement/

[Sarcastr0]

Could be a legitimate story, I don’t have time to dig in.
but take care - this publication is another astroturf joint.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Locke_Foundation

Art Pope. Oy.

[Brett Bellmore]

I'm puzzled. Are you saying all think tanks are "astroturf"?

Oh, wait, you're complaining that the publication is just a PR front for a think tank.

So? Does that make any part of the story wrong?

[tylertusta]

He had nothing of value to offer for the conversation.

[Michael P]

Denialist trolls are going to do denialist troll things. It would be a refreshing change if something more complex was going on in his head.

[Malika the Maiz]

Gullible dupes are going to do gullible dupe things.

[Sarcastr0]

Man lots of people embracing idiocy here.

The Carolina Journal does not sound like an ideological project.
But it is.

[LexAquilia]

So what? Make your case clearly and directly.

[Krayt]

Think tanks are the places that toss things into the top of echo chambers. So is this site, though about 98% if it is people getting a rush regurgitating someone else's better thinker's gotcha.

[ThePublius]

Let's just assume it's a legit story, O.K., it's covered by Fox News, NY Post, AOL, Daily Mail, etc., etc. We don't need you to "dig in" and affirm or verify it.

[Malika the Maiz]

“it's covered by Fox News, NY Post, AOL, Daily Mail”

All the reliable, fair sources!

[tylertusta]

Because the other outlets have been oh so stellar in criticizing the left's excesses.

[Malika the Maiz]

At best this proves there are other awful sources out there, doesn’t help you much.

[tylertusta]

If there's one thing that the media on the right is best at, it's criticizing the left's excesses.

[Malika the Maiz]

Sadly for you, this conversation isn’t about that, it’s about the veracity of conservative media’s reporting in this story.

[tylertusta]

...conservative media’s reporting in this story.

A story about a student who was punished for saying the word "illegal alien" as it offended the school board's leftist sensibilities.

It seems pretty spot on for this conversation, actually.

[Malika the Maiz]

The facts of the story is the issue, my point is all the sources named are not reliable.

[ThePublius]

The sources of the story are reliable. It is you who in this case is unreliable.

Given this, it is the NY Times and Washington Post who are unreliable sources, for not covering this story.

"Here is a summary of the case:
Parties: The case involves Christian McGhee, a minor represented by his parents, against the Davidson County Board of Education and former Assistant Principal Eric Anderson.
Incident: In April 2024, Christian McGhee was suspended from Central Davidson High School after asking his English teacher if the word "aliens" referred to "space aliens, or illegal aliens who need green cards?".
School's Justification: The school considered his comment "offensive" and "disrespectful," classifying it as a "racially insensitive remark" that caused a class disruption.
Lawsuit Claims: The McGhee family, represented by the Liberty Justice Center, filed a lawsuit alleging violations of Christian's rights to free speech, due process, and access to education. They argued his comment, using a term found in federal law, should be protected under the First Amendment. They also claimed Christian experienced ostracism, bullying, and threats after the suspension, leading his parents to remove him from the school.
Proposed Settlement: A proposed settlement is pending judicial approval and includes:
$20,000 for the McGhee family.
A public apology from the Davidson County Board of Education.
Removal of references to racial bias from Christian's school record.
The school board agreed to acknowledge that characterizing the incident as racially biased was an error, while still maintaining the suspension was warranted due to disruption.
A board member, Ashley Carroll, resigned during the dispute for unrelated personal reasons."

[David Nieporent]

The sources of the story are reliable. It is you who in this case is unreliable.

Given this, it is the NY Times and Washington Post who are unreliable sources, for not covering this story.

As always, MAGA's fallback argument is IKYABWAI?

That's not what "unreliable" means, and there's no reason that these outlets would cover an insignificant local story.

[Bored Lawyer]

The lawsuit is a matter of public record. What proof do you have that any of it is false?

[Malika the Maiz]

Did it get to a trial?

[ThePublius]

Egad, you're really squirming. Are you saying this didn't happen?

It was settled!!! That means it didn't go to trial.

Just because it's not covered by the NYTimes or WaPo doesn't mean it didn't happen.

Geez! What's your point, anyway?

[Malika the Maiz]

So if it didn’t go to trial there are just facts alleged by interested parties.

And if it were covered in the WaPo you’d misrepresent it like you did the Gaza story recently. Would that make you incorrect or lying?

[ThePublius]

So, you have no point, and you refute the reality of this case because it doesn't suit your narrative. Got it.

[Malika the Maiz]

I thought I made my points clear: allegations < adjudicated facts and the sources named are not reliable. It’s you’ve that provided no relevant point.

Also, I see you elided my question yet again.

[Bored Lawyer]

As in many such cases, the root problem is that stupid woke administrators act, but then there are no personal consequences. The taxpayer funds the bill for settlement and attorney's fees.

Make the individual bad actors pay, and you will see less bad acting. How about firing the idiot who decide to suspend this kid without consulting a lawyer?

[Sarcastr0]

Many such cases!

[ReaderY]

This idea that Musk was once a friend of our Dear Leader is a complete fabrication by the enemies of America and everything it stands for. Trump and Musk were always enemies. Unfortunately the internet contains fakenews circulated by our enemies to undermine confidence in our Leader.

Our Leader has been malquoted and malreported by thoughtcriminals. Recdep needs to rectify it immediately!

Our Leader is a brilliant genius who always knows whom to trust. He never makes mistakes. His friends were always his friends. His enemies were always his enemies.

[Moderation4ever]

Well said. Sad that too few people have read 1984.

[Michael P]

Projection.

[Malika the Maiz]

This is a good example of actual TDS. Is Mikie P not aware of the cult of personality around Trump? That he refers to himself as King or Pope? His Cabinet doing those weird fawning openings? The sales of Trump cologne and sneakers?

I bet he wishes Trump and many MAGAns would act differently, but to ignore the many things that Trump and his fans do that makes people think of Dear Leader or Big Brother is derangement.

[Don Nico]

For Trump, it was never more than a marriage of convenience, which has now become inconvenient.

[Bob from Ohio]

All the libs said Musk was co-president or even the real president. Guess not!

[Bored Lawyer]

If anyone wants to know what Globalize the Intafada means, just look at what happened this week in Boulder Colorado. You can see footage here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV27GYJZ0XQ

That's what the Free Palestine crowd supports: setting Jews on fire with Molotov cocktails.

And now it's come to America. Thanks to the open borders advocates. I am sure Professor Somin will come up with some statistics about how immigrants commit fewer crimes than native-borns. How many native-born Americans have protested by setting others on fire?

[Malika the Maiz]

You think everyone who supports a “Free Palestine” supports setting Jews on fire? By that logic when a conservative shoots some people or a pro-life activist blows up something does that mean everyone who believes the same supporter that?

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Mary Ziegler objectively writes about the anti-abortion movement.

She clearly supports abortion rights, but I have seen anti-abortion advocates endorse her work as fair-minded.

It's a helpful approach.

[Bob from Ohio]

"everyone who supports a “Free Palestine” supports setting Jews on fire"

Yes

Or shot or gassed

[Malika the Maiz]

Fun with selective editing, you do your viewpoint proud!

[LawTalkingGuy]

I’m pretty sure that there many Jews who support a free Palestine and also don’t support themselves being murdered.

[Bob from Ohio]

They just think it won't happen to them.

[LawTalkingGuy]

So you agree: they don’t support it?

[Bob from Ohio]

If they live in Israel, its the foreseeable result of their views.

[LawTalkingGuy]

So you agree they don’t support it?

[Don Nico]

You put words in his mouth that he did not say.

[Malika the Maiz]

How did he?

[Don Nico]

They are as delusional as Gays for Palestine.

[Malika the Maiz]

The question wasn’t about delusional, it was about whether they support it.

[Don Nico]

There are stupid people of every ethnic or cultural group. There are even some stupid Jews and those who speak without thinking.

[Malika the Maiz]

Stupid isn’t supporting, why are you straining so hard here?

[Frank Drackman]

It's sort of a Ying/Yang Thang, some want to set us on fire, some want to shoot us, some want to drown us in the Mediterranean, some want to shoot us, then drown us in the Mediterranean (See, "Klinghoffer, Leon")

[Malika the Maiz]

The Frank Fakeman character is written as quite threatened here, but dumb as ever.

[Frank Drackman]

Like you even knew who Leon Klinghoffer was.

[Don Nico]

You don't understand what "Free Palestine" means. It does mean "no Jews in what Palestinians call Palestine."
That doe snot mean that everyone takes up a gun or wears a suicide belt, but it does signal support and encouragement for those who do.

[Don Nico]

"You think everyone who supports a “Free Palestine” supports setting Jews on fire? "
No. Jews can be shot or beheaded or just thorn to bits by shrapnel.

[Malika the Maiz]

This is deranged. Among others, Pope Francis supported a two-state solution, you think this means he wanted Jews burnt, shot, etc?

[Frank Drackman]

Yes, and the Popes named "Leo" haven't been any better (Especially Leo XII, who wouldn't let Jews own property (and he was "Anti-Vax" also)

[Don Nico]

I was never inside his head.
The two state solution died as a real possibility 15 years ago after multiple tries.
Francis may not have known that. BTW Francis was also a collaborator with the fascists in Argentina.
Look we had 17 years of a quasi-two state solution. That did not work out well. Why, because the Palestinians in power are committed to a Jew free Palestine, even those who would not light the match fire, a gun, or wear a suicide vest.

[Malika the Maiz]

Holy wow, he’d throw the Pope under the bus to maintain his position that everyone who disagrees on him with this is a genocidal maniac!

[Frank Drackman]

Queenie, congrats, that ain't just a Straw Man, it's a Tar-Baby-Straw-Man

[Malika the Maiz]

When the writer of the Frank Fakeman character here writes him dumb, it is not a stretch.

[A Woman of No Importance]

Weren't you the one telling us on another thread the other day that it's blood libel to use the word genocide about what's happening in Gaza?

It's possible for two things to be true at the same time. Yes, Hamas behaved abominably. But so is Israel. The truth of one does not preclude the truth of the other.

[Mr. Bumble]

Warfare is abominable.

[Bob from Ohio]

Jews aren't allowed to fight back.

[Malika the Maiz]

For Bob Jews get special war rules (or rather anyone fighting brown people do more likely).

[A Woman of No Importance]

Sure they are. They're just not allowed to engage in what more and more is looking like genocide. Reasonable minds may differ on whether it has actually crossed that line.

[Bob from Ohio]

"more and more is looking like genocide"

Only to people who hate Jews.

[A Woman of No Importance]

Right. Just like the teenager who said to her father "You won't let me date the total loser with a felony conviction and three kids from three different women because you hate me." Same dynamic.

[LawTalkingGuy]

While the self-hating Jew is an antisemitic trope, I’m pretty sure there are many Jews who think that who don’t hate themselves or other Jews.

[Don Nico]

AMEN!

[Commenter_XY]

WNI, if this is a genocide, then I have to tell you that we Jews just suck at it. I don't get it. We are so good at everything else; mathematics, singing, praying, etc. Case in point. The IDF sends text messages to all smartphones in a gazan area instructing residents to evacuate before they bomb the shit out of it at a certain point of time in the near future. And after the time passes, the IDF bombs it, usually bags a hamas commander, and damned few civilians. This is certainly the act of utterly incompetent genocidal maniacs.

There is no 'reasonable minds can differ' about it. No other military, including our own, takes the same level of care to preserve life than the IDF. You disagree? Fine, name one.

The war ends when hamas releases the hostages.

[Malika the Maiz]

It’s interesting how so many can have such little faith in our government but so gullible in carrying water for Israel’s.

[Commenter_XY]

I'm not an Israeli, so the government is irrelevant to me. What water?

Killing hamas members, OTOH, is very relevant to me. Israel needs to kill more hamas members faster. That is my biggest complaint.

[Malika the Maiz]

It’s worse you’d carry water for a foreign government while criticizing your own.

[Frank Drackman]

Faith in our government? Dr. Faux-chi has a Randomized Clinical Trial he'd like you to participate in, where you'll get some "very special" Free Treatment
where, umm, Alabama
where in Alabama??
umm, Macon County,
what town in Macon County?
what's with the questions?, it's Free Treatment!,
you're keeping Miss Evers waiting...

Frank

[Don Nico]

What Hamas should do is surrender unconditionally. They have been offered a lower opportunity: immediately release all the hostages.
But of course they won't do it. That is their methods to blackmail Israelis and to hoodwink folks like you.

[Malika the Maiz]

Of course Hamas is terrible. That doesn’t absolve Israel of moral duties in their fight against them. If someone rapes your kids you don’t get to morally rape theirs.

[Don Nico]

You really don't know what genocide is.
Hamas is genocidal concerning the Jews and with respect to Gazan civilians.
What America did in Japan was genocide; what it did in Iraq was genocide; the PLA "slay-to-slay" policy is genocide. What the Arabs did in 1947-48 was genocide.

[Malika the Maiz]

Here the cynics excuse for abominable behavior in war.

[Don Nico]

Abominable behavior? Open your eyes. They are wide shut.
Try looking at the folks who began the war. Look at the continuing attacks on Israeli villages and kibutzim. Try considering the Gazans recently shot by Hamasniks as they tried to access IDF food distribution, try evaluating Hamas stealing food shipments so tht they can finance their futile war.

[Malika the Maiz]

This is “two wrongs justify a wrong” thinking.

[Frank Drackman]

Not only are you a Woman of No Importance, you're a Woman of no Intelligence, if you think "abominably" applies to Israel killing Terrorists.
But if you're attractive I'd still be hitting on you (and know what? you'd enjoy it)
Somehow I get the feeling you're more in the Rosie O'Donnell section (have you noticed she looks more and more like a Leprechaun since she's relocated to Ireland?)

[Mr. Bumble]

More like a troll.

[Malika the Maiz]

The Frank Fakeman character is written to think infants are terrorists

[A Woman of No Importance]

If Israel were only killing terrorists I'd be fine with it. I loved the cell phone operation. But it's not. It's starving children. It's wiping out civilian populations. It's killing civilians by the thousand.

[TwelveInchPianist]

That's Hamas.

[A Woman of No Importance]

Hamas is keeping aid trucks out of Gaza?

[TwelveInchPianist]

They're stealing the aid that gets to Gaza.

[ThePublius]

They are shooting fellow Palestinians who are taking aid from GHF. They would rather take or intercept the aid, keep whatever they need, and sell the balance, as they have been doing. They are behaving exactly like any other organized crime organization.

[Don Nico]

that is irrelevant. no country at war is required to feed its enemy.
The matter really is simple: Hamas can surrender unconditionally.

[Mr. Bumble]

As we demanded of the Germans and Japanese.

[Mr. Bumble]

Rather than the hundreds of thousand killed in WWII.

[Frank Drackman]

It's "starving" future Terrorists, and their supporters. Ham-Ass has all those underground bunkers filled with weapons and ammo, maybe they should have invested in some food and water.

[Don Nico]

WNI, Israel is not committing genocide. If it wanted to, there would be many more casualties.
In contrast, the intent of Hamas, the PLA, and Hezbollah is geoncidal.

[hobie]

As a Free Palestine kinda guy myself, I wasn't aware that I also supported firebombing. This explains yesterday morning when I went to an orthodox Jew's house to buy a used leaf blower. As we exchanged pleasantries I had this strange urge to get a coke bottle and a rag. Maybe we can get me into some kind of therapy

[Frank Drackman]

Free Palestine?, you ought to Free your Mind instead. (HT Lenin/McCartney)

[ThePublius]

So, that can mean a lot of things, mostly either a two-state solution or the total destruction of Israel. On which side are you?

"The Free Palestine Movement (Arabic: حركة فلسطين حرة) is a Palestinian Syrian armed movement and community organization that is led by the businessman Yasser Qashlaq and supported the Ba'athist government of Syria. The organization opposes the existence of Israel, and was mostly known for political activism and social services in favor of Palestinians in Syria and the Gaza Strip before 2012."

[Mr. Bumble]

Is this a possible answer?
https://www.jfeed.com/middleeast/israel-arms-anti-hamas-militia-in-gaza

[hobie]

I want Palestine to be free. You appear to be conflating some private organization called 'The Free Palestine Movement' with the broader cause. But then again, you mask-hating patriots conflate most things these days

[Mr. Bumble]

First define Palestine.
Gaza was freed twenty years ago and chose Hamas as its government.
It is reaping the whirlwind (H/T Chuck Schumer).

[ThePublius]

You always launch personal attacks on people, people who even just ask questions. So, what is it? What does a free Palestine mean?

If you search for that on google, the Free Palestine Movement comes up first.

In your mind what does "Palestine to be free" mean? I'm sincerely asking. Does that involve Israel still supporting Gaza with - just about everything? The Israel-supported welfare state of Gaza? Or would a free Palestine be self-sufficient? Would they stop firing rockets into Israel, and stop teaching their children "from the river to the sea?"

Just let me know your view.

[Malika the Maiz]

“You always launch personal attacks on people, people who even just ask questions.”

The lack of self awareness in this one is strong.

[ThePublius]

A useful reddit comment:
""Free Palestine" is essentially a meaningless phrase because of how varied its usage is. To people like Hamas, it means kill all the Jews and establish an Islamic-supremacy state in all of Israel/Palestine. To most encampment leftists, it means end the "apartheid" and create one secular state called Palestine with equal rights for everybody. To more moderate pro-Palestine people, it means free the West Bank and Gaza for a two state solution. The one unifying factor here is that all of these people think that the Palestinians should no longer live under Israeli control, but the specific way in which they should break free from that control varies depending on who you are talking to."

[Nelson]

That is actually a very succinct, and mostly accurate, breakdown. My position would be this part: “it means free the West Bank and Gaza for a two state solution. The one unifying factor here is that all of these people think that the Palestinians should no longer live under Israeli control.”.

That would include all of the illegal settlements being returned to Palestinian control, of course.

The decades-long occupation of Palestine by Israel are points #1, 2, and 3 in answering the question “why are so many Palestinians dedicated to killing Israelis?”. No one likes an oppressive occupation by a foreign power.

And before some joker jumps in and pretends that’s me saying they are justified, it’s not. I am 100% on the Israeli side of the equation. The Palestinians haven’t turned on Hamas, who started this war, so they are living in a situation they helped create.

But the Israelis aren’t doing good, either. They are the lesser (and more justified) of two evils, but they are firmly on the wrong side of neutral.

[David Nieporent]

The decades-long occupation of Palestine by Israel are points #1, 2, and 3 in answering the question “why are so many Palestinians dedicated to killing Israelis?”. No one likes an oppressive occupation by a foreign power.

This is utterly untrue, since said dedication to killing Israelis (Jews) started before occupation and continued after it ended.

[Nelson]

The Israelis still control the West Bank and have stolen land for illegal settlements. And my point isn’t about what caused antisemitism in the past, it’s about what keeps feeding the terrorist beast today. Until Israel stops occupying Palestinian territory and stealing land to give to fanatics to settle, the terrorists will have a deep and wide pool of people with legitimate grievances and no recourse to recruit from.

[Mr. Bumble]

The “terrorist beast” was born in 610 AD.
Antisemitism was born earlier.

[Frank Drackman]

Man, talk about sounding like a "Hayseed", too bad real life isn't like that Twilight Zone Movie, so you could wake up and find yourself a Jew in Kfar Aza the early morning of Oct 7th, 2023.

[Don Nico]

For you, therapy won't help.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

https://www.scotusblog.com/2025/06/the-supreme-court-should-livestream-opinion-announcements/

It used to be difficult even to read SCOTUS opinions. One college library had slip opinions in a box somewhere. A few major libraries had Supreme Court opinions. I had to go downtown to read federal circuit opinions at the main library. Now it's online for free.

As to audio. Peter Irons (screwing up a bit) released some excerpts of audio in the early 1990s to the general public. SCOTUS oral arguments have been taped since the 1950s and were open for academic study. Irons wasn't supposed to release it wide.

SCOTUS wasn't happy but eventually accepted it. Then, Oyez.com came around. Now, we have lots of oral arguments, and they have opinion announcements too. They are somewhat incomplete before the 1990s, but they have some big earlier cases.

SCOTUS has oral argument audio but does not post the opinion announcements on its website. They think they are important enough to have (sometimes you have dissents from the bench), but you have to wait until around six months after the summer recess & Oyez.com posts them.

I think it's silly & they should just livestream. Some people are like "who cares," but the linked discussion is correct. Justices don't want video, but they already have audio. Include that too. If you want to do it (some justices in the past didn't), you think it's worthwhile.

I support videotaping the open proceedings to show the public SCOTUS doing its work. Video shows things that simple audio does not. The public and press see them in person for a reason. Other courts, here and abroad, manage to have video.

The "play for the camera" bit is overblown. The press can selectively edit audio if they want. And the justices are already getting to be celebrities with books and everything. They aren't Souters. It's a public hearing. Let the public have easy access.

[hobie]

I miss the days when a SCOTUS written opinion was usually one or two pages

[JoeFromtheBronx]

If anything, the Roberts Court has had somewhat shorter opinions than in the past. One opinion this week was nine pages long with wide margins. Some 19th-century ones rambled on and on.

[SRG2]

You should see how long modern patents are compared to times past...

[David Nieporent]

One can argue that today's opinions are longer than they need to be, but what you propose — though I assume a bit of hyperbole — would not be desirable at all. One can read a lot of old SCOTUS opinions that are little more than ipse dixit, with very little explanation of, let alone justification for, their reasoning. No bueno.

[Frank Drackman]

I miss the days when death sentences were carried out in the same millennium the crime was

[Kazinski]

I think one reason they don't livestream audio and especially video is you will get cranks disrupting arguments so they can get their 15 minutes.

It vastly reduces they incentive to try if they know that there is a good chance it won't be played until their trial, right before they are sent away for a few years.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

A few minutes in, this discusses the various reasons why Elon Musk is going after Trump. Interesting.

https://substack.com/inbox/post/165307173

[Life of Brian]

I hadn't run across this guy before, but he sounds very nice and well-adjusted: "It’s delightful. I’m enjoying it. I’m not gonna lie. I hope both of them are angry and frustrated and miserable. I hope that all the time."

I'm sure the rest is much more cool-headed and objective.

[Malika the Maiz]

If he likes this kind of being cool-headed, nice and objective this Brian guy should check out the fellow who is currently President!

[JoeFromtheBronx]

I would say try to be objective about the whole thing using stand-ins.

Two horrible people who caused a lot of damage get into a very public messy fight that is quite embarrassing & airs out dirty laundry that is also quite valid in some of the particulars.

People are going to be somewhat amused about the whole thing. It's human nature. They still realize the two are horrible and cause damage. But they can't do much about that. Also, they are not just laughing at the two people. They are also talking about stuff seriously. They just toss in (honestly) some schadenfreude.

The "oh that is so horrible" bit is hard to take seriously, tbh.

[Life of Brian]

Well, crud. You actually made me go back and read more of that unhinged caustic dreck just to confirm that it actually is unhinged caustic dreck:

Musk just clued in—maybe he’s not high on ketamine today, and he realized what was happening
* * *
Now, his companies are in the toilet, he’s losing money, everyone thinks he’s an asshole and an idiot and a racist, which, he is all of those things.
* * *
And it gives cover for Trump to go the same way, if that’s what he wanted to do. Now, why they would do that? I don’t know. It seems like this is a good bill for the billionaires. I don’t know. I didn’t read the bill. I know the bill sucks. I know it’s got really bad stuff in it.
* * *
Those are the theories that I have. Oh wait, there is one more. One more is: he’s totally fucking high. He’s been high. He’s been on this bender for the last week and he’s just so out of it that he’s hitting it at Trump. But I don’t think that’s true either.
* * *
Is Elon attempting to push out Trump to create a JD Vance technocracy situation?
* * *
That does make sense. Yeah, because we, in talking about this in the lead up to inauguration, we thought that at some point they were going to move Trump aside. Maybe now is the moment.

I'd say these two are looking to be taken about as seriously as an average guest of Art Bell.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

I think his overall analysis, including taking into consideration his commentary over time, has held up but appreciate the extra effort to quote a bit of his analysis past selective concern about schadenfreude.

[Sarcastr0]

This is pearl-clutching plus ad-hominem.

If he's making bad arguments, go after those. This is lazy and pathetic.

[Mr. Bumble]

Douche. Also lazy and pathetic.

[Malika the Maiz]

lol, LOB is appalled, APPALLED, by the “caustic dreck” from someone commenting on the Musk (CEO, former major government advisor) vs Trump (POTUS!) public cat fight.

Every accusation is a confession times a million with this goof!

[John 4]

Trump: Elon’s stealing money from America!

Elon: Trump is an Epstein-linked predator!

Cultists: Anyone who thinks this is entertaining is an awful person!

Fucking clueless rubes.

[Kazinski]

I watched some "expert" on Bloomberg discussing what caused it and what will happen next.

He didn't know anymore than I did, which isn't much.

A bunch of wankers.

[Kazinski]

Maybe that’s why you seem so off base sometimes, you’ve got bad sources:

“Then, you go through the election, Trump is getting his ass kicked by Kamala. He’s to the point where he’s—remember?—he’s in the orange vest and he’s driving the garbage truck. I mean, I almost felt bad for him. Really.”

The garbage truck stunt was end of October a week before the election. Anyone who thought Trump was getting his ass kicked then is an unreliable observer.

And then take this:
“But let’s not forget that Elon Musk is a horrible monster, that he ruined Twitter intentionally”

Kind of defines down the meaning of what a horrible monster is, hard to take people with “insights” like that seriously.

The comments are like some Peoples Front for the Liberation of Judea talking about how much they hate the Romans.

[Malika the Maiz]

Yeah, I think the focus should be on an internet guy being too strident in this unprecedented girl fight between the richest man in the US and his former first buddy the POTUS!

[Kazinski]

I'm not the one who posted the link.

But I will post my own take about what caused the frakus on Sunday's thread.

[Mr. Bumble]

...and in other news:
Jobs report for May released. 139,000 new jobs (down from 147,000 in April) but still OK. Unemployment unchanged at 4.2%.
Jobs came in 100,000 higher than ADP report from two days ago.
ADP is right as often as Paul Krugman.
Markets are up across the board.
Tesla up about 4%.

[Bob from Ohio]

81 years since D-Day. Its passing out of human memory, the very few surviving soldiers and sailors are 98 or older.

[Frank Drackman]

Anyone gets this reference without using AlGores Google Machine, gets one of my hand rolled Saint Luis Ray Maduros (with just a sprinkling of my special medicinal wacky Tabacky, the Glaucoma you see) Only catch is you have to be at the Delta Skyclub on Concourse A, 10am Sunday, don't be late, I got a 10:15 flight
"Elon Musk think's he's Joey DePalma"
(too obscure? Anthony Franciosa)

Frank

[M L]

Bannon: Trump should immediately seize SpaceX, terminate all contracts with Elon Musk, deport him if illegal alien, investigate him as agent of foreign influence due to ties with CCP

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2025/06/06/bannon-trump-should-seize-spacex-deport-elon-musk/

[Malika the Maiz]

It’s what most dictators would do.

[M L]

Dictators would fabricate and make up things like that to go after dissenters, yes. Similar to how an attempt was made to seize Trump's wealth on bogus legal grounds.

I do wonder, though, about the sensitive national security aspect of SpaceX and how it's a private company, when Musk is so invested in China and he went over there and danced on stage for them.

[Malika the Maiz]

Trump was fine with Musk until Musk criticized his policies. A dictator would take revenge for that, yes.

[M L]

It's interesting. On the one hand, a person who is from a foreign country, and who is deeply, deeply invested in CCP China could, nonetheless, in theory, be a great patriotic American citizen. On the the other hand, there would be valid reason to be circumspect. Certainly that person would get a good, long, hard look with respect to any sort of security clearances. I suppose at the end of the day, it comes down to how they act and what they actually do. Musk has built up a lot of goodwill by being staunch supporter of free speech and other things. And on top of that he of course seems to be good at accomplishing some technological things. Maybe his heart is in the right place, as far as US interests go. But I suspect he may have a bit of a drug problem, and that doesn't mix well with national security and usually isn't tolerated.

[Malika the Maiz]

You seem pretty late to the game of being suspect of Musk, wonder what brings that on?

[Don Nico]

Bannon is a shithead.

[Commenter_XY]

It is 'over the top' hyperbole. There is precisely 0% chance of that happening. Musk gets us to Mars, quickly. Mars has a similar day/night circadian cycle to Earth.

[Frank Drackman]

So do Uranus and Neptune, don't leave the lights on.

[SRG2]

Musk gets us to Mars, quickly

Hard to tell whether you're joking.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Eisenhower provided a statement beforehand to use if the D-Day landing failed:

“Our landings in the Cherbourg-Havre area have failed to gain a satisfactory foothold and I have withdrawn the troops,” it read. “My decision to attack at this time and place was based upon the best information available. The troops, the air and the Navy did all that bravery and dedication to duty could do. If any blame or fault attaches to the attempt it is mine alone.”

It did not.

On the morning of June 6, 1944, five naval assault divisions stormed the beaches of Normandy. Seven thousand ships and landing craft operated by more than 195,000 naval personnel from eight countries brought almost 133,000 troops to beaches given the code names UTAH, OMAHA, GOLD, JUNO, and SWORD. By the end of the day, more than 10,000 Allied troops were wounded or killed, but the Allies had established a foothold in France that would permit them to flood troops, vehicles, and supplies into Europe. When FDR held a press conference later that day, officials and press alike were jubilant.

https://substack.com/inbox/post/165319204

We continue to honor them on Memorial Day and Veterans Day. We honor them by continuing to defend the principles for which they fought to defend as they ran into the breach.

[bernard11]

+1

[Bob from Ohio]

GOP just took a page out of the left's playbook, making policy through prearranged consent decrees.

"Local News
Texas agrees to end in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants after DOJ lawsuit filed against the state" Updated on: June 5, 2025 / 9:27 PM CDT / CBS Texas "

Kudos to Texas's governor and its next senator!

[Commenter_XY]

File this under....Team D set the rules, we are merely following them.

[Malika the Maiz]

We know you don’t have principles, you don’t have to keep yelling about it.

[Bob from Ohio]

My principles are learn from your opponents and don't unilaterally disarm by not using precedents to your advantage.

[Malika the Maiz]

Your principles are from your opponents? What a morally sad person you are.

[Commenter_XY]

Elections have consequences, Queenie. Another 42 months to go. 😉

[Malika the Maiz]

Might makes right!

[Bob from Ohio]

Good news. Our Dutch friend might have missed this.

"Rubio imposes sanctions on four ICC judges for ‘targeting’ US and Israel"
The Guardian Andrew Roth in Washington and Harry Davies in London
Thu 5 Jun 2025 17.37 EDT

"The United States is placing sanctions on four judges from the international criminal court (ICC) for what it has called its “illegitimate actions” targeting the United States and Israel.

The secretary of state, Marco Rubio, announced the sanctions in a statement on Thursday. They target Solomy Balungi Bossa of Uganda, Luz del Carmen Ibáñez Carranza of Peru, Reine Adelaide Sophie Alapini-Gansou of Benin and Beti Hohler of Slovenia."

[Mr. Bumble]

Of course that would be "little Marco" now one of the Trump agenda's strongest advocates.

[hobie]

Sounds like lawfare and targeting the independence of the judiciary; two of MAGA's biggest bugbears. Or has all that now changed?

[Commenter_XY]

It is a fitting reply to the ICC for their perfidy toward the United States (and Israel, much moreso).

[Malika the Maiz]

What perfidy towards the US?

[Malika the Maiz]

Still waiting

[Frank Drackman]

Sanctions? they should get their names put on a list

[Malika the Maiz]

A list for the sad weirdo who “performs” the Frank Fakeman character here to be furious at (like his dad, who never raised an objection when mom’s “friends” were there).

[hobie]

Today is the last day trans servicemen can voluntarily leave the armed forces. After that, they will be forced out.

In April, when the helicopter and plane collided in DC, the insurrectionists decided to work both sides. Trump blamed minorities and dwarfs in traffic control, while the 'thank you for your service' crowd went after the pilot of the helicopter, Jo Ellis. However, Jo Ellis, a trans 15 year Virginia National Guard veteran and black hawk pilot, was not the pilot. Yet the rubes persisted on X regardless. Now Jo Ellis is being kicked out of the military by Hegseth, and she says she won't leave voluntarily.

If only she were Jewish. Speaking of, I thought you hayseeds didn't like witch hunts.

[Frank Drackman]

Maybe Ellis can get the Add-a-Dick-to-me Operation, and Ironically, (Probably not) the Military has a program to help Servicemen continue any Medical/Mental Health treatment they've been getting in-service during their first few months after Discharge, it's called (Drum Roll...........)
"In Transition"
and I know I'm a Fossil (That's "Dr" Fossil thank you), but I remember a time (dimly) when people only went to see Doctors when they were sick or injured, not because they liked wearing women's panties.

Frank

[hobie]

Now be fair, Frankie. You're severely mentally ill and they still let you serve. And apart from being unable to accurately sex poultry, you had no meaningful skills to offer, whereas these trans troops are highly decorated pilots and medical personnel.

[Malika the Maiz]

The character Frank Fakeman was written as having served.

[Frank Drackman]

Man, I'm takin' up so much space in that nappy Haid' of yours I'm gonna have to get those "Property Brothers" guys over to knock out some walls, (and maybe "Billy the Exterminator" to get rid of some of these Spiders, lots of cobwebs in there) How about some Oak Cabinets? You like Oak? I'm an Oak man myself.

[Malika the Maiz]

Seriously crazy, pathetic person performs a character and when people notice and laugh think they got ‘em.

[Frank Drackman]

Mentally Ill? You got me there Hobie-Stank, on my Psych rotation I was frequently mistaken for a patient (most of whom were less demented than the Medical Staff) On my MEPS (google it) Physical I got a Boner when the (Female! Female!) Doc did the Ball Exam, and at various times I’ve been diagnosed as Anti-Social, Paranoid, Schizoid, Schizotypal, Borderline, Histrionic, Narcissistic, Avoidant, Dependent, Obsessive Compulsive,
“No Meaningful Skills”???, Like Airline Pilots, people think Gas Passers just push a few buttons and then play Fortnite for 2 hours (well, it’s partially true) Funny how they pay us so much for something anybody could do.
As it is now, “Gender Dysphoria” (“Trans Troops”??? Can you use the proper medical term?, it’s a Medical Condition, a “Disease” if you will, with it’s own ICD10 code (F64.9) that the Pentagon has deemed unsuitable for service, like Bedwetting (and it’s Evil sibling Bedshitting), Sleep Walking, and Epilepsy. (I actually knew a Gas Passer who was a Bedwetter, Sleep Walker, and Epileptic, he was a walking punch line.

Frank.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"And apart from being unable to accurately sex poultry..."

We will defer to your superior poultry sexing abilities.

[hobie]

Fuck if I know how to do it. But Frankie has repeatedly crowed about how he could not pass avian agriculture in community college

[Frank Drackman]

Umm, No, I've proudly mentioned my Auburn Poultry Science degree, and the only "Crowing" (shouldn't I "Cluck"??) I've done is that I was lucky enough to get in Med Screw-el (and having a Personality Disorder is almost a Prerequisite) and "Sexing" (Yes, it's "Sexing" not "Gendering") Chickens is tricky, it's like some of those Jap Boy Bands look like chicks, then you have Hillary Swank.

[TwelveInchPianist]

What, this isn't how you sex poultry?!?

My bad.

[hobie]

"In the first days of President Trump’s second term, he issued an executive order barring anyone who is transgender from military service, saying that being trans conflicts “with a soldier’s commitment to an honorable, truthful and disciplined lifestyle.”"

Ironic, isn't it?

[Frank Drackman]

That a Civilian POTUS has more sense than the "Professional" Military Men? I guess, that's the way the founders intended it.

[ReaderY]

Could the National Guild of Satirists sue the current administration for tortious interference with their livelihoods by not only repeatedly stealing all their ideas before they can get them out, but by coming up with shit they couldn’t even imagine if they tried?

[hobie]

Five Proud Boys leaders sue Justice Department over Jan. 6 prosecutions

Henry “Enrique” Tarrio and four others convicted for the Jan. 6 Capitol breach claim the government violated their constitutional rights. They’re seeking $100 million.

Another big check from the Treasury as a performance bonus for Trump's militia

[not guilty]

Attorney General Pam Bondi is under fire from a coalition of about 70 legal professionals, including retired Florida Supreme Court justices, who filed an ethics complaint with the Florida Bar accusing her of serious misconduct and seeking disciplinary sanctions. https://assets.alm.com/91/83/917261494da59cc8f451caad98d2/cfce73-130414ac86464341af2dc53204a03128.pdf

Congress passed the McDade Amendment in 1998 in response to the Department of Justice’s claim that federal government lawyers were not bound by state ethics rules regarding contacting witnesses represented by counsel. Per 28 U.S.C. § 530B:

(a) An attorney for the Government shall be subject to State laws and rules, and local Federal court rules, governing attorneys in each State where such attorney engages in that attorney’s duties, to the same extent and in the same manner as other attorneys in that State.

(b) The Attorney General shall make and amend rules of the Department of Justice to assure compliance with this section.

(c) As used in this section, the term “attorney for the Government” includes any attorney described in section 77.2(a) of part 77 of title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations and also includes any independent counsel, or employee of such a counsel, appointed under chapter 40.

According to 28 C.F.R. § 77.2(a), “The phrase attorney for the government means the Attorney General . . . .” (Italics in original.)

[Bob from Ohio]

"we file this complaint notwithstanding The Florida Bar’s recent reply to two previous ethics complaints filed against Ms. Bondi that it “does not investigate or prosecute sitting officers appointed under the U.S. Constitution while they are in office.”

She's done for now!

[tylertusta]

Our friend Mr. Guilty forgot to mention that part, did he?

[not guilty]

I linked to the complaint which acknowledges and discusses that point at pages 10-11. Did you bother to read the complaint, tylertusta? Yes or no?

[tylertusta]

Mr. Guilty forgot to mention that part

What part of that sentence do you not understand?

The subject?
The predicate?

[not guilty]

Did you bother to read the complaint, tylertusta? Yes or no?

[tylertusta]

In case you missed the hint, I was trying to be charitable towards your motivations. It's clear to me that your omisson here was a deliberate choice, hence your continued deflection on this point.

I wager this is about the time where you remark about how the Marines are still looking for a few good men.

Instead of that, perhaps you should return your law license; in my opinion, the bar needs to review where they went wrong with giving it to you.

[not guilty]

I'm not deflecting anything. Did you bother to read the complaint, tylertusta? Yes or no?

I promise that it won't break your damned keyboard to give a straight answer.

[tylertusta]

You neglected to mention the rather important detail that the FL state bar does not investigate complaints of sitting Federal officers and has already made two such denials against Pam Bondi, which makes this an exercise of the "old man screams at clouds" variety.

But no, please continue and fixate on whether I read your damned link or not. Thats clearly the most important bit in your mental mastubatory fantasy.

Oh, and yes. I did read it.

[not guilty]

Uh, the complaint acknowledges the previous responses and explains why the instant complaint should not be similarly dismissed -- a point which you conspicuously fail to acknowledge, tylertusta.

That -- plus your obstinate, repeated refusal to answer my very germane question -- is why I wondered if you had actually read the document that I linked to.

[tylertusta]

No. I am not talking about the complaint. The complaint offers nothing new; just more unfounded pleas for the bar to reconsider its past denials.

I'm talking about your comment and how you neglected to mention the very important fact that the others were denied. Sadly, that's something I've come to expect from your legal analysis. When I say your stuff is aspirational, this is the kind of thing I'm referring to.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Just because a disciplinary committee is unable to act on a complaint for some reason doesn't mean that the complaint isn't valid or correct.

[Frank Drackman]

Oh, like how the Massachusetts Bar didn't disbar Senator Ted Kennedy for one of a list of multiple charges any competent ethical prosecutor would have filed??? 1: Leaving the scene of an accident 2: Vehicular Homicide, 3: Drunk Driving, 4: Making False Statements, and I won't even get to the ones about paying his aides to have amnesia

Frank

[Sam Bankman-Fried]

Remember when you voted for Bush/Cheney and they sacrificed 7000 soldiers to slaughter innocent Muslims?? That was weird, right??

[not guilty]

Senator Kennedy's conduct at Chappaquiddick was indefensible. Prosecutors should have brought charges for involuntary manslaughter or, if Massachusetts law so provided at the time, reckless homicide or criminally negligent homicide. But it had nothing to do with his practice of law.

I don't know whether he was or was not licensed to practice at the time.

[Malika the Maiz]

The Frank Fakeman character is written to be obsessed with half century old conspiracy theories.

[Life of Brian]

Footnote 13 is just stunning:

This complaint is based entirely on publicly-available primary documents and news reports. The undersigned disclaim any personal knowledge of any of the events discussed here.

What, pray, are the... well, ethics of lodging an ethical complaint based on information gleaned from hot media takes and adversarial characterizations merely curated and regurgitated by the cowardly signatories, who go out of their way to disavow any ability to validate it?

[DZM212]

https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/breaking-kilmar-abrego-garcia-on-his-way-back-to-united-states-from-el-salvador/

[TwelveInchPianist]

Abrego Garcia is on his way back to the United States to face criminal charges for allegedly transporting illegal migrants within the country, ABC News reported, citing multiple sources.

[Frank Drackman]

Maybe Congressman Van Holland can meet him for drinks.

[ThePublius]

"Kilmar Abrego Garcia indicted on human trafficking charges, ordered to appear before judge in Nashville
Salvadoran national who sparked leftist outrage now returning to US to face justice for alleged decade-long smuggling operation"

[SRG2]

And that is how it is supposed to work.

But it's a very strange perspective to think that only leftists were concerned with the government kidnapping and transferring someone to a foreign concentration camp prison.

[Bob from Ohio]

No one was "kidnapped".

[Malika the Maiz]

Guy who doesn’t understand “back” and “reversed” also doesn’t understand “kidnapped.”

[Riva]

He is an illegal alien gangbanger human trafficker who apparently also dabbles in child pornography, among other things. And after he serves his time, he’ll be removed from this country because he has no right to remain here under any notion of due process. No illegal has. That is how it’s supposed to work. But that is something you repulsive troll democrat shills have lied about, in addition to lying about this particularly bad illegals conduct. To say you trolls are beneath contempt doesn’t cover it.

[SRG2]

He is an illegal alien gangbanger human trafficker who apparently also dabbles in child pornography, among other things

Then let the government show this to be true,

You appear to be the kind of idiot who would argue that guilty people don't deserve a trial.

[Riva]

You appear to be someone who doesn’t like the facts and law when they don’t serve your political purposes. But that’s the real mystery here. Why democrats want to make this illegal alien gangbanger a hero is beyond stupid, just politically speaking. Keep it up.

[Malika the Maiz]

“You appear to be someone who doesn’t like the facts and law when they don’t serve your political purposes

Riva-bot not programmed to avoid every accusation is a confession!

[Kazinski]

Boasberg is probably studying the lawbooks for a hook to claim jurisdiction and have him tried in his court in DC.

[tylertusta]

What will Judge Xinis do after this? Will she finally set her hair on fire?

[Frank Drackman]

Maybe Moe-hammad Ramma-Llama-Ding-Dong will do it for her.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Will she finally set her hair on fire?"

Based on her hair style, I thought that had already happened.

[DZM212]

so weird i heard from so many commenters on here he would never come back!!!!! curious!

[David Nieporent]

I assume all the people *cough*Commenter_XY*cough* *cough*bob from ohio*cough* who sneered otherwise will graciously admit they were wrong, both about whether the govt could retrieve him and whether they would.

[Commenter_XY]

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/06/maryland-man-returning-to-us-to-face-charges-after-mistaken-deportation-to-el-salvador.html

Well, well…St. Abrego is resurrecting. How nice. The POS should not be allowed back in. But…They’ll put his wife beating, human trafficking, terrorist ass on trial in TN, where a jury will duly convict him, and DHS can deport St. Abrego back home.

[hobie]

Terrorist! Drink!

[John 4]

lol what a shameless hack

[Bob from Ohio]

Yes, DN is.

[Malika the Maiz]

He just watched the Pee Wee documentary folks.

[not guilty]

The Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia indictment is here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/30541435-a1a2-4422-8e09-e7afc548f31b.pdf

The government may or may not be able to prove its allegations as to Abrego Garcia before a jury. The CNBC story that Commenter_XY links suggests that Pam Blondie is trying to poison the well by yapping and yammering about allegations of uncharged misconduct which may be inadmissible at trial.

I anticipate that there will be a pretrial motion to dismiss for vindictive prosecution in retaliation for the accused’s exercise of his constitutional right of access to the federal courts. A criminal prosecution which would not have been initiated but for vindictiveness is constitutionally prohibited. Blackledge v. Perry, 417 U.S. 21, 27-28 (1974); Bragan v. Poindexter, 249 F.3d 476, 481 (6th Cir. 2000).

[Kazinski]

That's a pretty hard case to make.

The DOJ was probably not aware of the body cam footage until after the case was filed. It would be very hard to make the case that the case they filed when evidence surfaced in May of a federal crime, which federal authorities had been alerted but had never previously investigated.

Similar to the Letitia James case, the DOJ did not dig through her real estate records looking for dirt, but a blogger who has a history of doing his own investigations did. Once the evidence of a crime is made prominently public, what are they supposed to do, just ignore it?

Same with the bodycam footage and officer statements which was the result of the Tennessee Star making inquiries of the THP.

[not guilty]

A defendant may establish prosecutorial vindictiveness through one of two approaches. First, a defendant may demonstrate "actual vindictiveness," i.e., he may establish through objective evidence that a prosecutor acted in order to punish the defendant for standing on his legal rights. This showing, however, is "exceedingly difficult to make." Bragan v. Poindexter, 249 F.3d 476, 481 (6th Cir. 2000), quoting United States v. Meyer, 810 F.2d 1242, 1245 (D.C. Cir. 1987).

Second, a defendant may establish that, in the particular factual situation presented, there existed a "realistic likelihood of vindictiveness" for the prosecutor's action. A court may only presume an improper vindictive motive when a reasonable likelihood of vindictiveness exists. The accused must establish that (1) the prosecutor has "some stake" in deterring the accused's exercise of his rights and (2) the prosecutor's conduct was somehow "unreasonable." Id., at 481-482.

Once a court has found that a realistic likelihood of vindictiveness exists, the government bears the burden of disproving it or justifying the challenged governmental action. In the Sixth Circuit, "only objective, on-the-record explanations can suffice to rebut a finding of realistic likelihood of vindictiveness." Id., at 482, quoting United States v. Andrews, 633 F.2d 449, 456 (6th Cir. 1980) (en banc), cert. denied by, Brooks v. United States, 450 U.S. 927 (1981).

The federal government was on notice of the traffic stop of Abrego Garcia since November 30, 2022, the day of the stop. The DOJ did not indict until May 21, 2025. A 16 year veteran of the U.S. Attorney's office in the Middle District of Tennessee, chief of the criminal division, announced his resignation on that day. ABC News reports:

The decision to pursue the indictment against Abrego Garcia led to the abrupt departure of Ben Schrader, a high-ranking federal prosecutor in Tennessee, sources briefed on Schrader's decision told ABC News. Schrader's resignation was prompted by concerns that the case was being pursued for political reasons, the sources said.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/mistakenly-deported-kilmar-abrego-garcia-back-us-face/story?id=121333122

Multiple alleged co-conspirators have not been charged. Abrego Garcia was himself not charged until several weeks after he initiated and pursued an action for writ of habeas corpus in Maryland and embarrassed the DOJ before every court that considered the matter, up to and including the Supreme Court. The Attorney General has taken to national media airwaves to taint the prospective jury pool by bringing up allegations of uncharged misconduct which may not be admissible at a jury trial.

These facts are plainly sufficient to establish the existence of at least a "realistic likelihood of vindictiveness," and they may well be sufficient to show actual vindictiveness.

[Riva]

Are you even aware of the facts? Ok “alleged” facts. I’m sure he was just taking a lot of vacations and not smuggling illegals in those 100 or so trips because he loved the country and wanted to see more of it. Like other illegal gangbangers do. He just forgot his luggage.

But here’s the thing, even in some alternate reality where the illegal gangbanger manages to skate, he’ll be immediately removed from the country because on top of everything else, he’s an illegal. And illegals have no due process right to live in this country. That’s why we have expedited summary deportation procedures.

[Riva]

But the real absurdity is that you, NG, a champion of the political lawfare employed against President Trump, now invoke a defense of prosecutorial vindictiveness for this illegal alien gangbanger human trafficker and dabbler in child pornography. But it is oddly consistent. Only in the sense that you don’t mind distorting the law for political purposes. Democrats would make the Committee of Public Safety blush.

[David Nieporent]

Donald Trump is an actual criminal. (And according to Elon Musk, an actual pedophile, too.) Convicted and everything. And it didn't require the buying of testimony from a convicted criminal to prove it.

[Riva]

I doubt even Robespierre would have hired a clown like you.

Frankly, I’m still finding it hard to believe anyone would embarrass themselves like you do for free here. As apparently deranged as he is, even Musk has underlying business interests he’s trying to advance. If anyone is actually paying you for your nonsense comments, they’re apparently not too worried about money, probably because if they are it’s likely gov’t grant money to a democrat NGO and not their money.

[David Nieporent]

Once again a programmed random stream of consciousness non-response from the bot.

[Riva]

It's not random you ignorant burk. It relates to my comment and your asinine response. That would be your first asinine response. This comment responds to the second. I know you're an a-hole, but do you have to be such a stupid a-hole?

[Sarcastr0]

Addle-cove: An idiot. “Did you hear what that addle-coved wizard wanted us to do?”

Berk: A fool or loser, especially one who got himself into a mess when he should have known better.

Bone-box: One’s mouth. “Stop rattling your bone-box,” is telling a berk to lay off the threats or bragging.

Chant, the: News, local gossip, the facts, the moods, or anything else about what’s happening. “What’s the chant?” is a common way of asking the latest news.

Cutter: A generic complimentary term for a person that suggests resourcefulness or daring.

Dark: Secret information. “Here’s the dark of it,” is a way to start sharing a secret.

Give ’em the laugh: To escape or slip through the clutches of someone.

Jink: Money or coin.

Kip: A residence or place to stay. To "call kip" is to make a place a body's home, at least for a while.

Yawn, the: The state of being bored. "This place gives me the yawn."

[Riva]

I appreciate the troll solidarity but why don't you let crazy Dave fight his own battles little communist girl that never smiled? He (or whatever makes his comments) will never learn if his little communist troll girlfriend keeps interrupting. Now go away.

[Riva]

And if you really wanted to help your boyfriend, little communist girl that never smiled, maybe you should have defined "random." That seems to be something crazy Dave has some difficulty understanding.

[Mr. Bumble]

Garcia's current position;
better, worse?

[David Nieporent]

Is it better to be in a U.S. prison, with access to lawyers and due process and everything, or to be in a third world concentration camp from which the govt boasts that nobody ever is released? Hmm; let me ponder that for a while.

[Mr. Bumble]

Well, hopefully for him the jail he is being held in awaiting a possible trial is better than the DC jail J-6ers were held in. (or Rikers, or Fulton County .....)

[not guilty]

Riva, I don't claim to know what Abrego Garcia did or didn't do. I do see, however, that the decision to charge him criminally in apparent retaliation for his habeas corpus litigation stinks to high heaven.

I anticipate that defense counsel will file a motion to dismiss the indictment based on vindictive prosecution, and I anticipate that Judge Crenshaw will hold an evidentiary hearing on that motion. It would not surprise me in the least if the defense calls Ben Schrader to testify at that hearing about what led to his decision to resign.

[Riva]

Please stop. Your sudden interest in vindictive prosecution given your support of politicized lawfare justice is really making me quite ill. And you should thank me for intervening. The more you go on the more credibility you lose.

[not guilty]

If my commentary is making you ill, Riva, how is that a reason to stop? How close is your illness to becoming terminal, and what can I do to hasten that process?

[Riva]

Still defending this illegal alien human trafficking gang banger, NG? The guy who made 100 trips back and forth from the United States to smuggle violent gang members and terrorists, as well as thousands of illegal aliens? The guy who also transported minor children? The guy who used SUVs with false bottoms to smuggle firearms and narcotics? The guy who abused undocumented alien females and solicited nude photographs and videos of a minor?

Just wanted to be sure this was the guy, Maybe you and democrat leadership want to have a coming “home” margarita party? You can all paint MS13 on your faces in solidarity.

[David Nieporent]

You can all paint MS13 on your faces in solidarity.

Why bother? Trump will just photoshop that in for us.

[Riva]

Would you offer to help his defense? Please. I’ll take up a collection. Well worth the money to guarantee a conviction (as if that wasn’t all but guaranteed anyway but your input would add comic relief)

[bernard11]

Goalposts getting heavy, XY?

[Malika the Maiz]

Look how furious Commenter is at the idea that someone brown might get due process.

[Nelson]

“ and DHS can deport St. Abrego back home.”

Unless I missed something, the government is still barred (by the 2019 ruling declaring him deportable) from deporting him back home to El Salvador.

I have no idea if he is guilty of any of the various things that the paleocons accuse him of, but it will be nice to find out through an actual trial.

This is exactly how things are supposed to work. Due process, with all parties (including the government) following the rulings of the court. It’s insane that something so basic and normal is viewed as extraordinary these days.

[ThePublius]

Oh, like you've ever admitted you were wrong!

[David Nieporent]

I thought I was once. But I was mistaken.

[hobie]

haha!

[Mr. Bumble]

Define "Free Palestine".

[Riva]

If anyone was looking for intellectual integrity from crazy Dave or any other trollish lowlife here, they were looking in the wrong place.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Bondi said Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele agreed to return Abrego Garcia to the U.S. after U.S. officials presented his government with an arrest warrant.

Yup. You were right, there was a way to get him back.

I wonder if he has some sort of due process argument based on the Boasberg order. Can a court order the government to file charges against someone?

[David Nieporent]

Yup. You were right, there was a way to get him back.

Yes: ask. Just like we said multiple times.

I wonder if he has some sort of due process argument based on the Boasberg order. Can a court order the government to file charges against someone?

No, and no?

[Frank Drackman]

Well he should be safe in an Amurican Prison, I don't think they have Salvadoran Gangs there.

[tylertusta]

come back

I believe the term is "extradicted."

And I doubt that many of us had "he's coming back in irons to cool his heels in a TN jail" on our bingo cards for this case.

[David Nieporent]

The thing is, based on what has been reported about the TN traffic stop, the only possible way that Abrego Garcia could be convicted would be if they get the one described as his boss to flip on him. (Some unrevealing body cam footage and the opinion of the cop who made the stop is not evidence of any crime, let alone sufficient evidence to convict.)

Which means that in a sad, pathetic attempt to save face while being vindictive, they are going to be making a deal with someone who — by their own narrative — is a senior criminal in order to secure a conviction of a lower level guy.

[LawTalkingGuy]

Odds this thing is eventually quietly dismissed without prejudice?

[Frank Drackman]

You never watch "Law & Order"?? ("Closing Cellblock Door Sound Effect") that happens all the time.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Which means that in a sad, pathetic attempt to save face while being vindictive, they are going to be making a deal with someone who — by their own narrative — is a senior criminal in order to secure a conviction of a lower level guy."

That would be funny, yes.

[LawTalkingGuy]

Yes it’s real funny to deprive those human trafficking victims of justice isn’t it?

[Kazinski]

DN is misstating what happened.

Garcia's boss was already charged, convicted, and served his sentence and was deported for human trafficking. Now he is cooperating to get some benefit for another charge.

"Jose Ramon Hernandez-Reyes, who was convicted of smuggling illegal migrants in 2020, told federal investigators that he previously operated a smuggling service based in Baltimore — and hired Abrego Garcia on “multiple occasions” to transport border crossers across the country, ABC News reported.

The Department of Justice sent federal agents to a prison in Talladega, Alabama, late last month to question Hernandez-Reyes, 38, about Abrego Garcia, the alleged gangbanger at the center of a high-profile court battle over his mistaken deportation from Maryland to El Salvador by the Trump administration."
https://nypost.com/2025/05/07/us-news/kilmar-abrego-garcia-was-allegedly-hired-by-a-convicted-human-smuggler-to-transport-illegal-migrants/

[David Nieporent]

Garcia’s boss was already charged, convicted, and served his sentence and was deported for human trafficking. Now he is cooperating to get some benefit for another charge.

Yes, and? How does that refute what I said? The boss — according to their narrative — is the higher ranking criminal. They're offering him leniency in exchange for him flipping on a subordinate. Which offense the guy happens to be in prison for at the moment doesn't change that structure.

[Life of Brian]

They’re offering him leniency in exchange for him flipping on a subordinate.

At some point are you going to educate us on the Sacred Rules of Flipping™ and how those are being broken here?

[tylertusta]

"You see, when my side does it, it's OK. When your side does it, it's unethical, illegal, or both."

[Sarcastr0]

What similar examples are you referring to?

[HazelMeade]

Usually the government tries to catch the higher level criminals, and not just some nobody who just drove a van. But clearly, the fact that the whole case is an embarrassment to Dear Leader means that the low-level nobody has to go to prison, so we cut a deal with the boss guy to help save the Leaders face.

[Sarcastr0]

The idea that you go up the chain from foot soldiers to bosses is pretty elementary.

Why the administration is doing the reverse is likewise obvious.

That you're playing ignorant in service of sealioninig is also no surprise.

[Life of Brian]

That's often how it's done, yes -- when the boss hasn't already been taken down and you're trying to get to him.

But I'm eager for one of you big brains to point me to a categorical rule that you can't do it in the other direction when you happen to get the boss first.

I'm for sure not holding my breath on that given that substance ain't exactly your thing, but definitely am looking forward to the next round of indignant table pounding.

[Sarcastr0]

We’re un-taking down the boss to get at the underling.

point me to a categorical rule
Tediously predictable.
'bring me a bright line or you lose' wouldn’t fly in high school debate club.

[Life of Brian]

We’re un-taking down the boss

Oh, he's being released? Missed that. Got a link?

‘bring me a bright line or you lose’ wouldn’t fly in high school debate club.

We're not debating. The usual poop-flingers are saying the DOJ has done something wrong here, and thus need to support that or move on to their next sad-sack endeavor.

[Sarcastr0]

You're smart enough to recognize your excluded middle between immediate release and a reduced sentence.

We’re not debating
Well, you're sure not. The Sorites paradox never looked so dumb.

[tylertusta]

It turns out that Garcia's conviction is now worth more than senior gang member's sentence. Congrats!

Garcia may well spend the next year in jail awaiting trial in Tennessee (and safely out of Paula Xinis's clutches). If acquitted, he's going right back to El Salvador as there's nothing stopping his WOR from being dissolved.

You got your spectacle in the press, the administration is getting its pound of flesh, and Garcia gets thrown in the pokey.

Everyone wins. Except Garcia, of course.

[HazelMeade]

I'm, sort of hoping they cut a deal where he agrees to "self-deport" in exchange for them dropping the charges. That way he can apply for a legal visa through marriage, even if it takes a few years. That would be the just outcome.

[tylertusta]

That's the best outcome for him at this point.

[Kazinski]

How could he be getting leniency on the Human Trafficking charge when he already served his sentence?

I think he's being held now for re-etering after he had already been removed and barred from re-entry.

[not guilty]

“How could he be getting leniency on the Human Trafficking charge when he already served his sentence?”

Was he ever convicted or acquitted on a charge of conspiracy to transport aliens under 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(v)(I) or conspiracy to commit a federal offense under 18 U.S.C. § 371? If not, he still could be. He has plenty of incentive to fabricate in order to avoid being charged under these statutes.

[Kazinski]

Here is the press release for the guilty plea:

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdms/pr/two-plead-guilty-illegal-alien-smuggling-operation-three-illegal-aliens-sentenced

Looks to me like:

8 USC §1324. Bringing in and harboring certain aliens
(a) Criminal penalties
(1)(A) Any person who-
...
(ii) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered, or remains in the United States in violation of law, transports, or moves or attempts to transport or move such alien within the United States by means of transportation or otherwise, in furtherance of such violation of law;"

That's likely the same charge Albrego is facing.

[not guilty]

Thank you for the link to the press release. It looks like, as I suspected, the defendant was not convicted or acquitted on a charge of conspiracy to transport aliens under 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(v)(I) or conspiracy to commit a federal offense under 18 U.S.C. § 371. He can therefore still be charged with either or both of those offenses unless he dances to the DOJ's tune.

[Brett Bellmore]

"He has plenty of incentive to fabricate in order to avoid being charged under these statutes."

Or to just honestly testify to avoid being charged. Why so sure Garcia is innocent?

[Sarcastr0]

'He has plenty of incentive to fabricate' goes to the probity of his testimony.

Nothing more, nothing less.

[David Nieporent]

How could he be getting leniency on the Human Trafficking charge when he already served his sentence?

Why on earth does it matter which charge he's getting leniency on? They're still buying his testimony.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Kazinski, you seem to be conflating, “alleged gang banger,” with the crime of transporting undocumented migrants. They are not the same; the latter does not prove the former. And without the “gang banger,” why would Garcia get deported under an emergency power alleged by Trump?

Given what has happened so far, why is this not retaliatory prosecution, supported by vindictive public lies suggesting criminal conduct not charged in the indictment?

Elon Musk is one of the world’s most powerful people, but now he is dismayed to discover that when you get too close, you get Trump cooties. I guess you figure that if you stay anonymous, no cooties for you. But no rewards, either. Why do this?

[bernard11]

Um.

Garcia’s boss was already charged, convicted, and served his sentence and was deported for human trafficking. Now he is cooperating to get some benefit for another charge.

The Department of Justice sent federal agents to a prison in Talladega, Alabama, late last month to question Hernandez-Reyes, 38, about Abrego Garcia, the alleged gangbanger at the center of a high-profile court battle over his mistaken deportation from Maryland to El Salvador by the Trump administration.”

If he was charged, convicted, served his sentence, and was deported, what is he doing at a prison in Talladega.

Did he sneak back in to watch the races?

[David Nieporent]

He snuck back into the U.S. after he was deported. Probably not to watch the races, though.

[Mr. Bumble]

Is that a criminal act? If so what are the possible penalties?

[David Nieporent]

It is a criminal act. Depending on why the person in question was deported, the maximum penalties (keeping in mind that maximum penalties are very rarely imposed under the sentencing guidelines) can range from 2 to 20 years.

[Kazinski]

Ummmm, the Boss flipped on him in May, you must have missed that.

The boss is currently in federal lockup after sneaking back into the country after he was deported after he served his sentence for human trafficking.

[David Nieporent]

Ummmmm, I didn't miss anything. I discussed that above. (They are trying to flip him; until he testifies, there's been no flipping.)

[Kazinski]

See below, I said that was a distinct possibility in the comments beginning of May.

[tylertusta]

You called the indictment, but you didn't call the extradition as being how he comes back into the country.

That's like 90%, so good job.

[Kazinski]

You're tough grader, I'd say I'd get 95%:

"If he does ever come back into the country that will be the first order of business.”

I certainly didn't foreclose the posibility.

[tylertusta]

Many years ago I tried to dispute a grade on a test with my history professor.

The difference was between a 98% and a 100%. I felt that the one question I got wrong had two answers and I shouldn’t have to guess which one the professor was looking for. I wanted the 100% mostly for bragging rights- my GPA wasn’t going to be impacted either way.

He told me to sit down and shut up because I was already getting an A in the class and he had better things to do.

So I’ll pay it forward to you as well: you’re already getting an A in this class. No need to quibble over details that don’t matter.

[David Nieporent]

Meanwhile, Paul Weiss has lost another key lawyer as fallout from its capitulation to Trump continues. Boy, C_XY is really having a bad day.

[Kazinski]

Kind of shows that when law firms get overly political, you plain old can't win.

Capitulating to Trump isn't helping Weiss, and I think the other law firms like Perkins Coie are losing business too, even if they are not losing partners.

The lesson to me is run your business, represent your clients and don't go out of your way to pick sides in political fights, that are not your own.

[Sarcastr0]

This doesn’t have to do with getting political.

It has to do with Trump.

Apologist.

[Stephen Lathrop]

"Don't pick fights not your own?

You mean, don't be a lawyer at all?

[David Nieporent]

The lesson to me is run your business, represent your clients and don’t go out of your way to pick sides in political fights, that are not your own.

None of the law firms that Trump has illegally targeted "picked sides in political fights."

[Commenter_XY]

I won't cry at PW's demise.

[David Nieporent]

But you also won't admit that you were completely wrong to think they made a good decision.

[TheAtomicEsquire]

So, with regard to the Kilmar Abrego Garcia indictment, to make sure I'm following the exact chain of events correctly:
1) Man who is eligible for removal, but cannot be deported to Guatemala, is removed to Guatemala in a midnight smash-and-grab;
2) High-profile litigation ensues to compel the return of said man, which ultimately culminates in an April Supreme Court ruling that he should be returned to the United States.
3) The White House shrugs, giddy disdain barely suppresed, and says there's nothing it can do to bring him back.
4) All the while, the Department of Justice also has evidence of at least one episode of alleged trafficking in illegal immigrants from 2022 and, more broadly, a nine-year-long alleged MS-13 conspiracy.
5) Said man is indicted at the end of May for the alleged criminal acts in Step #4.
6) Said man is returned to the U.S. after the unsealing of the indictment.

I'm just left to wonder what exactly the point of Steps #1-3 was. If Kilmar Abrego Garcia was such a threat to public safety as to warrant the frankly absurd actions taken to remove him in the first place, why was he not just swiftly indicted and placed into pretrial detention with a bail request reasonably measured in fractions of an AU? TACO apparently exists even in the legal sphere, but this whole legal cul-de-sac is dumb even by TACO standards.

[Kazinski]

As I predicted a month ago:

" they have enough evidence in that bodycam footage, along with Garcia’s assertion that the owner of the van was his boss, and the fact the owner of the van had already been convicted of using that van for human trafficking, to indict Garcia tomorrow for the 2022 stop.

If he does ever come back into the country that will be the first order of business."
https://reason.com/volokh/2025/05/02/friday-open-thread-18/?comments=true#comment-11030292

[David Nieporent]

And as I replied, that isn't even remotely enough. They need the testimony of the boss, which they have apparently now bought. (Also, I don't think your above claim is correct, though it doesn't matter; the owner had not been convicted of "using that van.")

[Kazinski]

They had the owners cooperation a month ago, I posted the link about that above.

As for whether the van had been used by the owner, yes, I'm making that assumption, the van was registered in his name, he was arrested in 2019, sentenced in 2020, then deported.

Just when would he have the opportunity to buy and register the van before Garcia used it in 2022? Although I suppose its possible their operation was big enough they could have more than one van.

[bernard11]

The point of 1-3 was to show off and posture. Just bringing an alleged criminal to trial doesn't get Trump or ICE or DOJ anyone any publicity and cheers from the likes of XY.

[Stephen Lathrop]

I’m just left to wonder what exactly the point of Steps #1-3 was.

Lying is the point. Open, defiant lying, to prevail. In confidence that a corrupt Supreme Court cabal will knowingly endorse the lie, to spare its Trump/MAGA darlings embarrassment by truth.

I have no doubt America's founders worried in an abstract way whether simultaneous 3-branch rot was possible. I do not believe they ever expected the nation to see it.

[Kazinski]

Trump and DOGE got a big win at SCOTUS, although not final yet shielding their internal communications for FOIA:

"Washington — The Supreme Court on Friday halted lower court orders that required the White House's Department of Government Efficiency to turn over information to a government watchdog group as part of a lawsuit that tests whether President Trump's cost-cutting task force has to comply with federal public records law.

The order from the high court clears DOGE for now from having to turn over records related to its work and personnel, and keeps Amy Gleason, identified as its acting administrator, from having to answer questions at a deposition. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.

"The portions of the district court's April 15 discovery order that require the government to disclose the content of intra–executive branch USDS recommendations and whether those recommendations were followed are not appropriately tailored," the court said in its order. "Any inquiry into whether an entity is an agency for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act cannot turn on the entity's ability to persuade. Furthermore, separation of powers concerns counsel judicial deference and restraint in the context of discovery regarding internal executive branch communications."

The Supreme Court sent the case back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for more proceedings.

Chief Justice John Roberts temporarily paused the district court's order last month, which allowed the Supreme Court more time to consider the Trump administration's bid for emergency relief. A district judge had ordered DOGE to turn over documents to the group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, by June 3, and for Gleason's deposition to be completed by June 13."

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-halts-lower-court-order-requiring-doge-to-hand-over-information-about-work-and-personnel/

[bernard11]

They also allowed DOGE to have access to Social Security records. That, IMO, is an outrageously bad decision.

Letting a bunch of smug, lying assholes pore through the SS records is not a good idea.

[Kazinski]

What have you got against federal employees having access to federal records?

If every smug lying asshole in federal service was denied access to federal records there would hardly be anybody left.

[bernard11]

Well, to start with they are not "federal employees," but rather soem sort of BS "Advisory group" to the President.

Second, no, I don't think all federal employees should have access to all federal records. In fact, I think it's a stupid idea. Even SS employees can't randomly root around in the records. Looking at anyone's SS file without permission is in fact grounds for termination.

Stop making BS excuses.

[Stephen Lathrop]

If every smug lying asshole in federal service was denied access to federal records there would hardly be anybody left.

One of the stupidest things ever uttered by Kazinski on this blog. The government could not function if most of its employees were not denied access to any data but that available to the public, or within the purview of their own responsibility.

[Michael P]

Letting a bunch of smug, lying assholes pore through the SS records is not a good idea.

This is, of course, very (D)ifferent from how Obama let smug, lying, data-stealing assholes have free access to IRS and OPM records -- but not in the direction you presumably wish.

[Sarcastr0]

But Obama!

[bernard11]

Is that the best you can do?

WTF does that IRS business have to do with anything?

[Michael P]

So far, there has been no illegal release of Social Security data, and no apparent misuse. Contrast to leaking tax returns and illegal targeting of conservative groups during the Obama administration. That's what the IRS has to do with this.

[Frank Drackman]

Speaking of smug, lying, assholes, the Chairman of the House Ways & Means Committee has access to every Amurican's tax return, not like they would ever use it for illegitimate reasons.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Bernard11 — This to me is the filthiest bit of straw in the wind so far. It discloses this Supreme Court majority will refuse to take judicial notice of Trump's corrupt attack on American constitutionalism. Here is what SCOTUS is defending:

"These teams have a business need to access the data at their assigned agency and subject the government’s records to much-needed scrutiny,” Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in court papers."

Note, "A business need." That is not Sauer defending separation of powers, or even government power. He is defending what he acknowledges is power by contractors to act at will, without even capacity for the public to demand proof the contractors are properly authorized. They are to be allowed to access for whatever use they please, what every other member of the public is denied by law to access, to see, or to use likewise.

Worse, the SCOTUS also shut down Freedom of Information Act requests to discover what Musk's operatives are doing with the data, or plan to do. The public is not even permitted to question the apparently fraudulent claim that DOGE is headed by some obscure functionary who when asked seemed unaware she had been named as involved in DOGE.

It is hard not to conclude SCOTUS is signing on without reservation to pledge loyalty to Trump/MAGA, and to forget their oaths of office.

The baleful implication is that if the nation ever can reassemble political power sufficient to thwart Trumpism (with or without Trump in office), it will need also to dismantle an ongoing Supreme Court cabal of Trumpist allies.

[bernard11]

They are to be allowed to access for whatever use they please, what every other member of the public is denied by law to access.

Those denied access include SS employees not working on something that requires access to specific, identified, records.

[LawTalkingGuy]

https://abcnews.go.com/US/mistakenly-deported-kilmar-abrego-garcia-back-us-face/story?id=121333122

“The decision to pursue the indictment against Abrego Garcia led to the abrupt departure of Ben Schrader, a high-ranking federal prosecutor in Tennessee, sources briefed on Schrader’s decision told ABC News. Schrader’s resignation was prompted by concerns that the case was being pursued for political reasons, the sources said.

Schrader, who spent 15 years in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Nashville and was most recently the chief of the criminal division, declined to comment when contacted by ABC News.”

This case is off to a great start.

[Kazinski]

I hope you don't think the Trump Administration is upset he's leaving.

The already fired one lawyer for not meeting their expectations on the Garcia case:

"Bondi, appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” referenced Reuveni’s suspension.

“He was put on administrative leave by Todd Blanche on Saturday. And I firmly said on Day 1, I issued a memo that you are to vigorously advocate on behalf of the United States. Our client in this matter was Homeland Security — is Homeland Security. He did not argue. He shouldn’t have taken the case. He shouldn’t have argued it, if that’s what he was going to do. He’s on administrative leave now,” she said.

“You have to vigorously argue on behalf of your client.”
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/5235778-doj-suspends-lawyer-deportation-case/

[LawTalkingGuy]

No I don’t think the Trump admin is upset he left, because they don’t take legal ethics seriously. Good lawyers, however, do. DOJ lifers don’t just walk up and leave a good gig over a case unless they genuinely think they can’t ethically prosecute it.

[HazelMeade]

The thing is that if prosecutors up and resign because they don't think the case should be pursued, that doesn't bode well for it's likelihood of prevailing in court. The administration can't fire judges.

[Mr. Bumble]

...because prosecutors are never wrong.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Parents charged with manslaughter for letting kid walk home from store.

[ThePublius]

Interesting. The kid killed was 7, but was with his 10 year old brother. When I was 10 in NYC we went all over the place on our own.

[Michael P]

7- and 10-year-old kids in my neighborhood walk or bike by themselves all the time, although the speed limit here is 25 rather than 45 (per the picture there). That's the kind of event that makes people glad when they take keys away from elderly family members.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"A judge set the parents' bond at $1.5 million during a court appearance on Friday."

I really hope more judges get arrested and prosecuted.

[Michael P]

Prosecuted for what? Assuming the behavior is truly bad but within the legal bounds of their office, shouldn't they at most face impeachment and removal (or recall or whatever equivalent exists in their jurisdiction)?

[TwelveInchPianist]

I'm sure this guy's done something.

As they say in Moracco, even if the Trump Administration doesn't know why it's arresting the judge, the judge will.

[not guilty]

"I really hope more judges get arrested and prosecuted."

WTF?? Do you claim that this particular judge's setting a bail bond violates any criminal statute? How so?

[TwelveInchPianist]

That's not what I said.

[not guilty]

That is exactly why I asked, TIP -- because your comment puzzled me.

Why do you hope more judges get arrested and prosecuted, and how is that hope germane to this comment thread?

[TwelveInchPianist]

Because they do the crap described in the lined article. I thought that was clear.

[not guilty]

What statute(s) do you claim to have been violated? Based on what facts? Please be specific.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Sigh. I didn't claim any statues were violated. Read much?

[bernard11]

I really hope more judges get arrested and prosecuted.

I didn’t claim any statues were violated.

Then why do you think they should be arrested and prosecuted. For what? You are just spewing inconsistent, illogical, MAGA BS.

[TwelveInchPianist]

As I said, I'm sure they've done something.

[not guilty]

"As I said, I’m sure they’ve done something."

As Ron White was fond of saying, you can't fix stupid. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDvQ77JP8nw

[TwelveInchPianist]

And that's why I want the stupid judges arrested.

[hobie]

Let's arrest everyone! Surely everyone has done something

[Michael P]

Good news for Tesla owners: Harry Bolz is no longer a Nazi. He's apparently one of the respectable socialists again.

https://www.semafor.com/article/06/06/2025/khanna-steps-up-his-work-to-pull-musk-toward-democrats

[Sarcastr0]

Do you have any idea who Ro Khanna is?

He represents silicon valley.

Suffice to say he's not exactly the voice of the new left.

[hobie]

Oh, Elon is thoroughly, permanently excommunicated. Just consider him our Liz Cheney

[Mr. Bumble]

Define "Free Palestine".

[hobie]

Withdraw all forces from West Bank and Gaza, return all the settlement land illegally stolen from the rightful owners, including most of Jerusalem. Probably 80% of of the current state of Israel is stolen land, but I'm willing to compromise at the moment and accept just the three small token returns mentioned above. If they don't want to return the stolen land then adequate restitutions should be considered

[ThePublius]

The Bible indicates Jerusalem's significance as a central city for Israel, and some interpret it as the eternal capital. Passages like 2 Chronicles 6:5-6 and Psalm 132:13-14, alongside numerous mentions of Jerusalem throughout the Bible, suggest it was chosen by God and is central to His plans for Israel.

[Sarcastr0]

Israel is bait for the Jesus trap? What a shit reason to support Israel, much less to make any kind of factual argument about.

The good news is one can be a Zionist without this theocratic nonsense.

[ThePublius]

I don't get most of what you're saying. But I support Israel, over that bloodthirsty, genocidal tribe called Palestinians. Note that no country in the middle East wants them. I wonder why?

[Sarcastr0]

The good news is one can be a Zionist without this racist nonsense.

[ThePublius]

It's not racism, it's a statement of fact.

[Sarcastr0]

The song of the bigot.

You put the moral teachings of Jesus to shame with your awfulness.

[ThePublius]

Again, as always, a personal attack by Sarcastr0, rather than a comment with content. Pitiful.

[Sarcastr0]

In the same thread as you invoke biblical authority, you make a bare, bigoted assertion about a demographic group.

I called you out.

Simple as.

I'm a Unitarian with a pretty broad view of ways to be within the Christian faith, but open bigotry is outside that bound. Check out the parable of the Good Samaritan sometime.

[hobie]

No one in the middle east wants the Jews either, even though, like the Palestinians, I'm sure they're fine people

[Don Nico]

Finally you are admitting to the ethnic cleansing of Jews in 1947-48 by all the Arab states, The same states that "urged" arabs to leave their homes "temporally" in 1948, so that they could wage an unsuccessful war against the Jewish State. The same Arabs who now make excuses for themselves by calling their war the Nakba

[Don Nico]

"the Jesus trap"?
Shabbat shalom, S_0.

[Mr. Bumble]

Israel withdrew all its forces from Gaza 20 + years ago. They are back there because Hamas (the Gazanians chosen government) has continually attacked Israel, culminating on the October 7 attack.
Attacks also continue from the West Bank.
Jerusalem has been the center of Jewish life for a thousand years before Islam reared its ugly head and will never under any circumstances be surrendered.

[Don Nico]

"Probably 80% of of the current state of Israel is stolen land"
You promote gross lies based on your hatred of Jews.
Most of the land was bought. As for Judea and Samaria, it was stolen by Jordan, which lost it in a war to Israel. Egypt lost Gaza but refused to take it back.

[Kazinski]

He has a 98.12 lifetime overall score from Progressive Punch, which puts him ahead of AOC or Jasmine Crockett.

You have no idea, as usual, of what you are talking about.

[ReaderY]

Trump has ordered the National Guard into Los Angeles. But the Constitution expressly refuses to give the President autjority to call in troops to quell “domestic violence” without the consent of its governor. While the 14th Amendment gave the President authority to call in troops to enforce civil rights violations, there are none alleged here.

I understand that the Imsurrection Act purports to give the President authority to enforce general federal laws or quell domestic violence if the President determines the civil government of a state is incapable of doing so. But this portion of the law is patently unconstitutional. The Constitution gives the President authority to call in troops only to repel invasion, suppress rebellion. enforce 14th Amendment rights, or AT THE REQUEST OF A STATE’S GOVERNOR, to quell domestic violence. None of these circumstances have happened here.

California Governor Newspme needs to go into court to enjoin and declare void the President’s purported orders.

[ReaderY]

Actually it’s at the request of the state’s legislature. The framers were extremely careful about limiting the President’s power to call in troops.

[tylertusta]

Before the passage of Posse Comitatus Act, the Federal government regularly used Federal troops to enforce federal law.

[ReaderY]

All in the exception categories enumerated in my post - putting down rebellion and enforcing 14th Anendment rights.

Enforcing immigration law is neither.

All constituonal powers are limited, usable in particular circumstances. The fact that a power was used in the past, unqualified, is never an argument that the constitution permits its use in particular circumstances, for a particular purpose. Let’s apply your argument to a claim that the FBI can arrest people for belonging to the Democratic Party. Does it follow that because the FBI has “made arrests” in the past, it can “make arrests” for this purpose? It doesn’t.

[Brett Bellmore]

"The Constitution gives the President authority to call in troops only to repel invasion, suppress rebellion."

Well, there you go. You've got Californians attacking federal officers with Molotov cocktails, and the state government conspicuously isn't lifting a finger to stop it.

You'll notice Trump didn't call out the National Guard in NY, where the local police have been permitted to stop the rioters.

[tylertusta]

Feels mighty insurrection-y, don't you think?

[Sarcastr0]

You think ICE (and whatever other willing federal people they managed to cobble together; these are weird opps) having trouble grabbing like 7 people from a Home Depot constitutes a rebellion?

Amazing how often you end advocating for state force, when it's against liberals.

Living in a political thriller makes you not a very good libertarian.

[Mr. Bumble]

You A-hole.
Guess you forgot about how Roger Stone (among others) was arrested.

[Bwaaah]

Like the deceitful person you are, you describe the scene as “ICE having trouble grabbing like 7 people from a Home Depot.”

Is that all that was going on?

Your description omits all material context. Il Douche speaks.

[Sarcastr0]

In terms of what government functions are being interfered with, what else is going on?

[ThePublius]

First you disparage the law enforcement officers trying to carry out their lawful duties. Then you reverse the situation, saying that what they are doing doesn't constitute a rebellion. It doesn't! What the so-called protesters - those using violence to disrupt the lawful execution of the law - are doing does constitute a rebellion. Then you disparage Brett.

Such juvenile arguing. Why don't you say something of substance, like the reasons you object what the government is doing, and why you support the illegal immigrants and the violent protesters?

[Sarcastr0]

'they are only following orders' is quite the defense to deploy, TP.

But you're beating your chest on behalf of the honor of these Gestapo operations, and below you're all for some killings of those opposing the. So I guess a failed Nazi defense does fit.

[Don Nico]

" these Gestapo operations, "
Wow, you are off- the deep end.
You believe in the rule of law until it is inconvenient for your politics. Good for you.

[Don Nico]

S_0, did you actually watch the news reports of widespread physical violence against federal agents, trapping them in a building, having Mayor Bass ordering the LAPD not to assist ICE leaving the building.
You have zero credibility with that comment.

[ThePublius]

So, you have determined what parts of the law are unconstitutional? Wow, we could save a lot doing away with SCOTUS and just asking you!

Here's the relevant part of the WH statement:

"In light of these incidents and credible threats of continued violence, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard under 10 U.S.C. 12406 to temporarily protect ICE and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions, including the enforcement of Federal law, and to protect Federal property, at locations where protests against these functions are occurring or are likely to occur based on current threat assessments and planned operations."

It is my understanding that POTUS may federalize the national guard to protect federal employees and facilities.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/06/department-of-defense-security-for-the-protection-of-department-of-homeland-security-functions/#:~:text=In%20light%20of%20these%20incidents,temporarily%20protect%20ICE%20and%20other

Of course, it's only a matter of time before some judge enjoins this, as usual.

What happens then, with the destruction or vandalization of federal property (mostly automobiles) and the eventual injury or death of federal agents (ICE) at the hands of those obstructing them??? Can they protect themselves?

What do you want? Do you want the rioters to stop ICE? Do you think that's right and just?

[Sarcastr0]

I don’t know this law at all, but it’s really short.

Even assuming there's a rebellion here (this is not a rebellion) it says:
“Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States or, in the case of the District of Columbia, through the commanding general of the National Guard of the District of Columbia.”

That seems to not fit this situation.

[ThePublius]

It is a rebellion!

Oxford:
"an act of violent or open resistance to an established government or ruler."

That's exactly what's going on in LA right now, is it not? There's resistance to federal law enforcement. There's violence - a lot of it!

What would it take for you to acknowledge it's a rebellion?

[wreckinball]

It would have to be rebellion of folks he disagrees with politically.

He's a partisan hack,

[Sarcastr0]

The federal government isn't under threat. The state government isn't under threat.

Compare and contrast with January 06.

But I note you didn't address my main point:

"“Orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors of the States.”
This isn't my area of the law, but that doesn't seem to be what's going on.

[wreckinball]

So the protests are by people who are legally in the country and they have permits that allow them to block public access and ICE officers? LOL

BTW they are arresting these folks in NY

The Capitol is generally open to the public and there were permits for speakers on the Capitol lawn on J6. Yet folks were arrested and detained. I was there were and there were definitely some folks who should have known better.

But years pf prison time, held without bail for trespassing is BS. But you are a partisan clown so?

Original post stands.

[Sarcastr0]

I’m not sure what you’re arguing against, but it doesn’t seem to be my post.

It's not a rebellion != there are no crimes happening.

[Don Nico]

"there are no crimes happening."
Lies and more lies on a Sunday morning.

[Magister]

You appear to have misread that comment; Sarcastr0 has said it's not a rebellion, and points out that is not equivalent to saying no crimes are happening. Obviously, plenty of crimes happen but rebellions are few.

Similarly, the assertion that governments (federal and state, specifically) are not under threat does not imply that the protesters are "legally in the country and they have permits that allow them to block public access and ICE officers". It does appear that wreckinball has even more trouble with logic than Don Nico.

[David Nieporent]

But years pf prison time, held without bail for trespassing is BS. But you are a partisan clown so?

Nobody got years of prison time, or was held without bail, merely for trespassing.

[tylertusta]

By trying to gerrymander a definition to suit your priors, you turned the Whiskey Rebellion into not-a-rebellion.

[Don Nico]

"Compare and contrast with January 06."
Sure, Mayor Bass and Governor Newsom are open opposition to legitimate federal authority and are refusing to obey their oaths of office to uphold the law.
The make excuses for "protestors" who physically attack federal officers carrying out lawful (try to understand that word) orders.
Your SarcLaw doesn't hack it.
Nameste.

[ReaderY]

Exactly. The President lacks the power to use armed force to enforce general federal law against the will of the governor of a state. That’s the point.

[ThePublius]

That is not so.

"Insurrection Act:
This Act, passed in 1807, grants the President the authority to use the military, including the National Guard, to address insurrections, rebellions, or domestic violence within a state. This can be invoked when a state requests federal assistance or when the President determines that the state is unable or unwilling to enforce federal laws or protect civil rights.
Other Statutory Provisions:
Beyond the Insurrection Act, specific laws like 10 U.S.C. 12406 allow the President to federalize the National Guard in certain circumstances, such as when the US is invaded or is in danger of invasion, or when there is a rebellion." [emphasis mine]

[Sarcastr0]

You are citing the wrong law, Mr. Want state killings.

[TextFirst]

Foreign occupiers, while waving a foreign flag, are attempting to thwart the enforcement of federal laws in Los Angeles. Regardless of whether you like this or that politician, this is base line "Do you have a country?" stuff-- if they get away with this, then Los Angeles can not meaningfully said to still be American territory, it's run by the foreign occupation forces. I hope this has a rally around the flag effect and we use any means necessary to defeat these enemies. Once we do, we can get back to squabbling amongst ourselves.

[Sarcastr0]

Your evidence they're foreign is that you saw a Mexican flag?

Your evidence they're occupiers is...?

use any means necessary to defeat these enemies
Aaaand there's the psycho bloodlust.

[TextFirst]

If they're indeed here illegally, then they're invaders and should be shot. If they're not foreign or are otherwise here legally, then they're rebels and should be captured if possible and only shot if necessary. Rebels and invaders having violent veto power over the lawful execution of federal authority is, of course, facially unacceptable. It's not psycho bloodlust; it's an interest in the people ultimately retaining a monopoly of violence through their elected representatives. This is basic PolySci 101 stuff that you're apparently unfamiliar with.

[Sarcastr0]

So you've pivoted from 'foreign occupiers' to 'If they’re indeed here illegally.'

But you didn't pivot away from wanting there to be deaths.

Yeah, you're a psycho. See also your idea of criminal justice.

[Don Nico]

"psycho bloodlust."
You are being quite the drama queen this morning

[ThePublius]

People who entered the U.S. illegally are waving the Mexican flag and using violence, including hurling stones and Molotov cocktails, against federal law enforcement agents and their vehicles does constitute a rebellion. If it doesn't, I don't know what does.

Those who argue that it doesn't need to examine their consciences, or get their heads examined. Note that they say it isn't a rebellion but consistently fail to say what a rebellion is. Where is the line drawn? They are silent.

[Sarcastr0]

“People who entered the U.S. illegally” – no evidence of that. You're just trying to otherize these people so it's okay to murder them.

“waving the Mexican flag” – protected speech

“hurling stones and Molotov cocktails” – crimes, but not death-worthy, and nowhere near a rebellion.

“examine their consciences” – an insurrection means military violence against people for throwing rocks. You’re using your righteous indignation to push for state murder of groups who include American citizens.

You’re the one wishing for murders. You’re the one with a conscience problem.

[ThePublius]

You're a liar, Sarcastr0! I never called for murdering anyone, and I support ICE grabbing ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. I never said insurrection.

Pushing state murder! You friggin' liar. I never pushed or said any such thing!

You persist on attacking me rather than addressing the issue.

[Sarcastr0]

What does insisting it’s a rebellion allow, TP?

[ThePublius]

Using deadly physical force to put down a rebellion is not murder.

[ThePublius]

You untruthfully ascribe lots of motivations to me that aren't so. I support POTUS calling up the Nation Guard to protect the federal and other law enforcement officers who are doing their lawful duty. If you don't like illegal immigrants being removed, well, that's on you. But if you support violence to prevent it, then go to hell.

[ThePublius]

"“hurling stones and Molotov cocktails” – crimes, but not death-worthy"

Uh, yes, death worthy! One can generally use deadly physical force to stop an arson.

"In California, deadly force can be used to prevent arson if a person reasonably believes it's necessary to do so. This is under the principle of self-defense, which allows individuals to use force, including deadly force, to protect themselves or others from imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury."

[Sarcastr0]

Uh, yes, death worthy!

OK then, so your motives are as I said and you do lust for death.

GTFO.

[ThePublius]

I have no lust for death. I want to enforce the law. Arson is a very serious crime.

[Kazinski]

Certainly qualifies as an insurrection:

"a violent uprising against an authority or government."

I have heard those are bad.

[Sarcastr0]

The authorities are all still in place, just ICE & co. can't easily do these performative raids in LA.

These raids are not load-bearing for governmental authority.

So you're certainly wrong.

And, I note, wrong in a way that tries to legitimize state use of force to get your way.

[ThePublius]

https://i.abcnewsfe.com/a/6907009a-dfa5-49de-b648-bb1cc8ef5e0e/ice-la-16-rt-gmh-250607_1749346204161_hpMain.jpg?w=1500

Caption:
"A man waves a Mexican flag as smoke rises from a burning car during a standoff by protesters and law enforcement, following multiple detentions by ICE in the Los Angeles County city of Paramount, Calif. June 7, 2025."

[Magister]

OK, now do people who wave Confederate flags.

[Mr. Bumble]

…are they burning cars, and attacking law enforcement?

[Magister]

January 6th, Bumble. Charlottesville, Bumble. Charleston church shooting, Bumble.

[ThePublius]

How many Molotov cocktails on Jan. 6th?

[Magister]

11 Molotov cocktails that we know of.

[Kazinski]

Yes, I'm certainly not condoning it but one elderly man had all 11, and didn't even take them out of his vehicle, which of course was blocks away from Capitol Hill:

"A 72-year-old Army veteran who admitted he left loaded guns, machetes and 11 Molotov cocktails in a truck near the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, has been sentenced"

And yes I am fine with him, now 75, being pardoned.

[Magister]

That the January 6th insurrectionists and their instigator (Trump, in case you've chosen to erase that fact from your memory) envisioned a different unfolding of their insurrection in which they would make use of the weapon caches that they had nearby does not change things.

[ThePublius]

Number of folks with Molotov cocktails? One.
Lit and hurled? Zero.

[Mr. Bumble]

Magister is just upset he can't be in LA so thinks he's doing his part by continuing to tell fables.

[Magister]

Not upset at all; no interest in being in LA (either Los Angeles or Louisiana) now or really at any time; reporting things that are true. Typical Bumble average, 0 for 3.

[ThePublius]

Or hurling rocks at law enforcement officers and their vehicles, and Molotov cocktails, and interfering with federal law enforcement?

You guys need to reset yourselves, not support rebellion becuase of the political tribe to which you belong.

[Magister]

Or hurling rocks at law enforcement officers and their vehicles, and Molotov cocktails, and interfering with federal law enforcement?

As with January 6th, those who commit crimes should be prosecuted. As with January 6th, the circumstances in which people are killed by law enforcement need to be closely examined.

[Sarcastr0]

TP: "Those who argue that it [isn't a rebellion] need to examine their consciences"
Also TP: "Using deadly physical force to put down a rebellion is not murder."

Anyone who doesn't advocate for state-sanctioned killings in LA needs to examine their consciences?

TP's conscience has some kind of polarity reversal issue. Like his Jiminy Cricket somehow is a red weasel baying for blood.

[ThePublius]

You're a terrible person. You argue for your "side" regardless of the circumstances.

[Sarcastr0]

Amazing that you're the one arguing for state killings and you think I'm the bad person, when I'm not arguing for any killings at all!

You've got your morality polarity reversed.

[ThePublius]

Who's arguing for "state killings?"

Man, you are becoming more unhinged as time goes on. I'm just saying don't riot, don't interfere with law enforcement, don't vandalize, don't fire bomb. Are you in favor of any of those things? And what's a reasonable approach to stop it? Geez!

[Don Nico]

"TP’s conscience has some kind of polarity reversal issue. Like his Jiminy Cricket somehow is a red weasel baying for blood."
Did your partner cut you off from sex this morning?
Take a tranquilizer or a shot of whiskey at least.

[Don Nico]

Don't get upset. He is stamping his feet as hard as he can because he must be sexually frustrated today.

[tylertusta]

There’s a decent chance that Newsom has accepted Trump’s offer of federalized National Guard troops. Someone pointed out to me that despite Newsom’s hemming and hawing in public, he actually hasn’t denied or claimed to have denied the Guard’s use under the governor’s orders or authority. The provision that is being used to activate the Guard puts them under the Governor's orders, not Trump's.

If true, that means that Newsom wants to let Trump take the heat without setting up an invocation of the Insurrection Act. If that were to happen, it probably would have disastrous consequences for Newsom’s presidential ambitions. The potential downside for him is that since the Guard is acting on the Governor’s orders, if there’s a confrontation then he’ll have some exposure once the media finds out exactly who was giving the orders.

[tylertusta]

Appears this is not the case. Gavin Newsom has now demanded that Trump de-federalize the National Guard.

Of course, we are now one step short of declaring an insurrection and Trump invoking 10 U.S. Code § 252 and 10 U.S. Code § 253.

[ThePublius]

Sous vide dinner. Filet mignon, 130º for two hours. Then quench and fridge 'til the sides ("garnish," as Chef Ramsey calls it) are ready. Butter poached yellow fingerling potatoes at 190º for one hour. Butter poached asparagus at 185º for 12 minutes. Then sear the steak on a super hot cast iron skillet while the sides sit in a warming oven; one minute or so on each side at about 500ºF. Rest. Slice. Share with one lucky dog.

I love red wine, and it goes so well with beef, but I've lost my sense of taste for it. I think it's related to either covid, or the covid vaccine. I've never been diagnosed with covid, though nothing tastes good anymore. 🙁 Quite the bummer. Especially so with red wine. I think it's the vaccine. Oh, well.

[Bwaaah]

"Mainly peaceful protests" have resumed in the U.S., in Los Angeles. Large numbers of people hailing from the political left are engaging in what apologists call "the time-honored practice of civil disobedience." Normal people, who are not Democratic cultists, see these angry masked miscreants (unsurprisingly including many keffiyahs and Palestinian flags) as political bullies who disrupt lawful order through unlawful (and ultimately violent) defiance.

Is it unfair to call those law-breaking people representatives of the Democratic party? I'll know when I hear either: 1) Democrats defend the causes of the bad actors, or 2) Democrats mumbling "yeah but" stuff about law and law enforcement, and...you know...HIM.

Of course they are the voices of Democrats, the differences being that all the most venomous stuff is said out loud, and the normally dripping contempt spills over into behavior.

[Bwaaah]

The Democratic mayor of L.A. endorsed the protests and encouraged others to join. Fuck the police. Free Palestine.