Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Politics
Eugene Volokh | 10.20.2025 3:00 AM
Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.
NEXT: The First Citation of the Heritage Guide in a SCOTUS Brief
Hide Comments (247)
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
The New York Times reports:
The U.S. military has killed three men and destroyed another boat it suspected of running drugs in the Caribbean Sea, this one alleged to have been affiliated with a Colombian insurgency group, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced on Sunday. It was the seventh boat known to have been attacked since early September as part of the Trump administration’s use of the military to kill people suspected of smuggling drugs as if they were enemy soldiers in a war, rather than arresting them as criminals. The latest strike took place on Friday, and Mr. Hegseth said in a social media post on Sunday that it had targeted a vessel associated with the National Liberation Army, a Colombian rebel group known as the E.L.N. So far, the Trump administration has acknowledged killing 32 people in the strikes, whose legality has been widely disputed by outside legal specialists.
The U.S. military has killed three men and destroyed another boat it suspected of running drugs in the Caribbean Sea, this one alleged to have been affiliated with a Colombian insurgency group, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth announced on Sunday.
It was the seventh boat known to have been attacked since early September as part of the Trump administration’s use of the military to kill people suspected of smuggling drugs as if they were enemy soldiers in a war, rather than arresting them as criminals. The latest strike took place on Friday, and Mr. Hegseth said in a social media post on Sunday that it had targeted a vessel associated with the National Liberation Army, a Colombian rebel group known as the E.L.N.
So far, the Trump administration has acknowledged killing 32 people in the strikes, whose legality has been widely disputed by outside legal specialists.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/19/us/politics/trump-military-boat-strike-colombia.html
Maritime law enforcement and drug interdiction is a function of the Coast Guard. Per 18 U.S.C. § 1385:
Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army, the Navy, the Marine Corps, the Air Force, or the Space Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
Murder is prohibited by Article 118 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 918. What has become of the duty to disobey an unlawful order?
Isn't that in the territorial waters of the US?
The applicability of the UCMJ includes, per 10 U.S.C. § 10 U.S. Code § 802(a)(1):
Members of a regular component of the armed forces, and members of the Space Force on active duty under section 20105 of this title, including those awaiting discharge after expiration of their terms of enlistment; volunteers from the time of their muster or acceptance into the armed forces; inductees from the time of their actual induction into the armed forces; and other persons lawfully called or ordered into, or to duty in or for training in, the armed forces, from the dates when they are required by the terms of the call or order to obey it.
The territorial application thereof is governed by 10 U.S.C. § 805: "This chapter applies in all places."
This seems pertinent:
https://www.npr.org/2025/10/18/nx-s1-5577941/adm-alvin-holsey-who-was-overseeing-the-venezuelan-boat-strikes-steps-down
Summary: An admiral in the chain of command directing the boat strikes resigned.
Good Riddance
Haven't you hayseeds been making a stink for years about presidents bombing civilians?
Wow! this might be a record for "Earliest invection of "Hayseed" not even 8am Eastern. Well I might start "Making a Stink" (trust me, I can "Make it Stink") about a certain Hobie conspirator Hobie who Hobie claimed Hobie to Hobie have Hobie served Hobie in Hobie the Hobie Military. Oh, you didn't steal Valor? Well you can tell your story, and I can tell mine, and we'll let the VFW Chapter of the Hell's Angels decide who's they believe. Quick Frankie Tip, Don't call "Razor Blade" and "Demented" "Hayseeds"
Frank
And properly so. We as a country are much, much too casual about this sort of thing.
If it was actually illegal smuggling, they should have been arrested and brought to trial.
Is there any compelling evidence the military is crossing its is and dotting its ts in its investigation of making sure the targets are what they think they are, any less than the all the previous people previous presidents droned in the middle of whatthefuckistan?
If not. I don't see what makes these suspected narco traffickers are any more special than all the past suspected targets who also didn't get a full 10 year appeal process.
I always wondered what made the Taliban an enemy of the United States. Seemed to me we just made them a stand-in to soak up the retaliation earned by Bin Laden.
That said, the Taliban were armed, and carried out armed attacks against American troops. That's the difference. If the narco traffickers initiate armed hostilities against the American military, then you will have a relevant argument. You do not have one now.
Proper id is my barometer. If its found that the military is cutting corners in the investigation compared to what they did for previous targets. Or if all drone striking Presidents up to trump have not been using reasonable standards in general. Then yeah they should up their game. If not than I don't find real life breaking bad villains pushing poison on to American kids much more worthy of sympathy than foreign fighters. Many of which were droned much much farther from American territory in conflicts and doing actions of much more uncertain relevance to America.
So tens of thousand dead Americans from drug ODs for years is not enough for you, lathrop? Do they not count?
C'mon Man!! they're just "Hayseeds" (HT Hobie-Stank) Spicks, or stupid Jig-a-boos. The "Beautiful People" are still into the Powder Cocaine, like Hunter B.
American dead definitely count - but not to justify shortcutting legal norms. In war, a different set of rules apply. But this isn’t a war; the boats are operated by civilians as far as we know.
If we can find these boats, we can intercept, arrest, and try the crew, or flip them to hook bigger fish.
Or perhaps move on to more critical “targets.”
Not surprising, since you never served, but despite all the DOD Touchy-Feely-ness of the last quarter century. In the Military you don't really get to decide which orders you carry out and which ones you don't, or you'll get orders, usually to Leavenworth.
What is the authority for the orders in question?
Someone walking into a bank is???
Only drug smugglers have powerful speedboats like these,
Oh come the fuck on. As a boater myself; from the Florida Keys to Bahamas etc...and most anywhere there is an ocean and a coast there are plenty of cigarette boat enthusiasts who just love to put multiple big block engines in a boat and haul balls.
Many modern ocean sportfishing boats have like 3 or more 400hp+ outboards on them. Sometimes you need to go 80miles off shore to find your quarry and you need to go there, fish for hours and get back before the sun goes down. Speed is the only way to do it.
Someone walking into a bank with a shotgun is???
I wish Dems got 1/1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000th as indignant over the millions of death of completely verified completely innocent people as they do over (probable) narco traffickers too stupid to stop trafficking when they see their buddies lit up.
Lets just assume you are fairly sure that Trump got it wrong and blew up some random fisherman. (Which doesn't make sense since where is your evidence and why would they target someone without being fairly sure and risk the fallout when there are almost certainly tons of actual targets around?). Well thats a few dozen fishermen you're 90% sure are innocent vs hundreds to thousands we're 100% sure are innocent dead due to Defund the Police or millions a year death due to abortion you don't give a crap about.
Math is hard...
and you're soft, Hey, I heard your Kingie-Wingie was arrested for propositioning little boys at the "Anne Frank" House, can you confirm or deny??
"completely verified completely innocent people"
Your comment above made a great point. So here you are shifting the burden to stay mad at the left.
So you go back to the abortion well. A sure sign you saw glimpses of a legit critique of your side and needed some refuge from rationality.
Going back to the abortion well, it's almost as bad as going back to the fiery furnace of Moloch. Killing innocent babies, how dare anybody compare that to something that's actually wrong?
Yeah, beg the question and then get super hyperbolic.
It’s useless except for internal validation.
I’m all for safe legal and rare. I and most Americans of polling is to be believed have no time for this over the top wank wank wank.
You know, if we can't agree on killing babies being evil, we occupy different moral universes, and there's not much to discuss.
Now, maybe our views aren't that totally disjoint, because of that 'rare', if you actually mean it. Because if you didn't think killing babies was a moral wrong, why would you want it to be rare?
I've seen the polls. A majority accept elective abortion at an early stage of development, but support for medically unnecessary abortions absolutely tanks after the first three months.
Just like the pro-life movement pushes to entirely outlaw elective abortion, not just restrict it to early pregnancy, the pro-abortion movement pushes to entirely legalize elective abortion, not just in early pregnancy. Which is why multiple states have de facto elective abortion right up to the moment of birth, by adopting extremely lenient definitions of medical "necessity", despite public opinion even in those states not really supporting such an extreme policy.
You know, if you have decided the question of when personhood attaches is an easy one, you're not thinking about things very hard.
The partisanization of the issue has caused bad policy choices all over the place. I think the effect of rhetoric is overblown a lot of the time, but I think the rhetoric manges to be a big part of the problem here.
So I'd urge you next time not to focus only on one side of the ledger, avoid invoking Moloch, don't call them 'babies.' I am not one to call them zygotes myself. But I'm sick and tired of the bloviating lack of engagement of the pro life people here, and those who use it (and trans stuff) as a deflection whenever things get sticky.
"You know, if you have decided the question of when personhood attaches is an easy one, you're not thinking about things very hard."
If you think it's not easy in some cases, you're not thinking about things very hard.
You sure know a lot about wanking
I was wondering who was going to strain themselves silly and bring in abortion. And the winner is Amos 'Whatabouit' Arch
Abortion's why you have your house in the hood.
Cheap mansions don't make themselves, Frankie. You gotta break a few eggs (fetuses) to get them.
"why would they target someone without being fairly sure and risk the fallout"
What fallout? Trump's fans (including a few in this thread!) will support him and his decisions literally no matter what they are. He could blow up dozens of boats, with no evidence (beyond his say-so) that they were carrying drugs, and his cheerleaders will continue cheering. He doesn't care about anyone else, so I'm not sure what "fallout" there could possibly be.
Also, this might be hard to believe, but occasionally the US military makes mistakes. See, for example, weddings getting bombed in Afghanistan during the Obama administration. So it's not exactly beyond plausibility that they could have targeted an actual fishing boat (not that we'll ever know for sure, because the only evidence is their say-so)
Also, how about you try to stay on the topic of this specific thing, instead of trying to tu quoque your way to making a point about... abortion? What does that have to do with this?
One problem NG: This is in international waters. Different rules apply when the NatSec card is played.
You have to wonder about the druggies themselves. They have to know they're taking an enormous risk, yet they continue to try. I personally don't waste a lot of mental energy worrying about druggies carrying poison to the US to kill our people. We have tens of thousands of ODs annually.
Sooner or later, the cartels will respond. They have billions.
Commenter_XY, what lawful authority do you contend authorizes the U.S. military's killing of suspected drug traffickers here?
NG, the POTUS (under the constitution) has wide latitude to determine a) what is a national security threat, and, b) what to do about it. Understand, I am not wild about plinking boats in intl waters. I would like the administration to be more forthcoming on how they knew these boats were druggies.
Suppose VEN or COL decide to plink boats themselves in intl waters, or inside their territorial waters. There are plenty of US flagged yachts out in the Caribbean.
I worry greatly about the blowback. The cartels have billions, and they will respond. For instance, if some yahoo built a hunting stand in sight of AF-1 in Palm Beach, what do you think a well organized and funded group like the cartels could do?
Tl;dr, Trump can do whatever he wants.
I would not say that. Rather, I would say the POTUS gets a grace period until Congress asks questions.
It appears that any U.S. President can get away with pretty much anything that doesn't piss off too many constituents at once. For all the alleged concerns about laws and civil rights and due process and historical conventions, in the theater of public opinion, you're defending drug traffickers. So your position, quite effectively, is, "[Blah] [blah] [blah]. I support the drug traffickers."
Good luck with all that [blah] [blah] [blah].
I credit the USSS for finding it, but that hunting stand most likely was a poacher using the noise of (any) aircraft overhead to mask a gunshot.
No shot heard, no shot reported, warden doesn't know poacher was there.
Besides, what would a .308 bullet -- or a dozen -- into the belly of a 747 actually do? I'm not encouraging this, but is there anything vulnerable there to hit?
POTUS (under the constitution) has wide latitude to determine a) what is a national security threat,
What section of the Constitution specifically gives him that latitude?
Section 2
Be specific. What actual words?
The President's constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed contains no international waters exception.
The President of Columbia has claimed the United States killed a fisherman, not a drug boat.
In response, the United States has cut off all aid to Columbia.
And, apparently, changed the name of the country. (I'm not criticising you. But it would be nice if Trump knew how to spell.)
and Lee Harvey Oswald spelled his name wrong when he ordered his Mannlincher-Carcano
Trump said US intelligence confirmed the vessel was "loaded up with mostly Fentanyl, and other illegal narcotics."
I'm no expert, that doesn't track; Fentanyl is made in Mexico and China, and both sources come across the Mexican border.
They just say shit, and MAGA enthusiastically takes them at their word and gets mad anyone would question a bare assertion from government.
Oh, are you an expert on fentanyl production worldwide, too?
So when I said I'm no expert, that wasn't me saying I was an expert!
Here are some people writing about it:
https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/IF10400
Or
https://www.dea.gov/sites/default/files/2020-03/DEA_GOV_DIR-008-20%20Fentanyl%20Flow%20in%20the%20United%20States_0.pdf
Don’t forget our northern neighbors! Production has shifted there as Mexico and China come under increasing scrutiny and pressure.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/fentanyl-produced-in-canada-1.7275200
Fishing in a go-fast boat is like cropdusting in a F-15.
The wake alone would scare away the fish.
Ask Obama you blithering idiot.
Ask Obama what?
I gather that the survivors of these attacks have already been put on a plane to Colombia or Ecuador. Wouldn't want them sticking around so that people might ask them inconvenient questions, would we?
Apparently we now know the content of every boat and the character of every man. I now expect a 100% interdiction rate at every drug crossing in America. Daily explosions and executions all across our southern border.
Carry a shotgun into a bank. Tell me how it ends.
No one is surprised that executions thrill Ed.
Get shot in a bank and the cops say he had a shotgun - with no evidence. Dr Ed "but he was carrying a shotgun! The police said so! Trust the police!"
hobie, that raises an important point: has anyone read about how we’re identifying and selecting targets?
If the intel is accurate, it can probably be used for law enforcement purposes, depending on provenance, and we can be more effective without the “shock and awe.”
as anyone read about how we’re identifying and selecting targets?
Here you go
HaHa!
Thanks, but I’m guessing the administration isn’t even looking that closely at the boat crews to discern hue of skin.
House Speaker Mike Johnson continues his election denial in the case of newly elected Arizona Representative Adelita Grijalva. I have yet to see any journalist pose the question to Johnson whether he is breaking his oath of office. Nothing in the Constitution empowers Johnson—or even the full House—to effectually nullfy a new representative’s election for even a day, let alone for weeks, and to do it with transparent intent to effect a political outcome Johnson prefers. Doing that is not part of American Constitutionalism. Johnson is in violation of his oath.
I am surprised Grijalva puts up with Johnson’s antics. She should collect a few prestigious witnesses, go before some properly constituted federal magistrate in Arizona, present her election certification, and have the oath administered then and there. Then give Johnson the proof that she is a duly sworn member of Congress.
If the House wants to insist its power to make its own rules extends to barring for political effect a newly elected member’s admission, then take the case immediately to court in the federal DC Circuit. There the case will be reviewed under standards the Supreme Court laid down in the case Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969). Grijalva should win easily.
If the Supreme Court is willing to reverse that precedent, then the American people need to know about that immediately.
When Grijalva goes to court in DC, she should ask the court for a writ of mandamus against the House, if she is not granted an outright victory because being sworn by someone other than Johnson or the full House is ruled impermissible.
I would think the appropriate remedy would be a mandatory injunction directing the Speaker to swear her in. If that relief is denied, a direct appeal is available as of right pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292, so mandamus relief would not be available.
Thanks for the correction. Expert legal help always appreciated.
US Constitution, Article I, Section 5: "Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members..."
That was my guess as well but something similar actually played out early this year and the SCOTUS did step in.
https://reason.com/volokh/2025/05/20/supreme-court-restores-maine-legislators-voting-rights-pending-outcome-of-appeal/?nab=0
Maine state representative Laurel Libby was barred from speaking and voting under the terms of a censure motion. She sued for violating her right to free speech and for depriving her constituents of their vote, seeking an injunction directing the state House to restore her voting and speakings. This was rejected at District and Circuit level, under legislative immunity. But the SCOTUS stepped in and granted the injunction.
We might speculate that speaking/voting rights of a sitting member are different from seating that member in the first place. And we might speculate that the Federal courts have more power to direct compliance of a State legislature over a Federal one.
But I think it is clear that the SCOTUS has made this a far more open question than it was in 2024.
"And we might speculate that the Federal courts have more power to direct compliance of a State legislature over a Federal one."
I'd think the opposite, but the federal courts certainly have far less inclination do do so at the federal level.
Baker v Carr applies to STATE senates, but not to the US Senate.
Dr. Ed 2, have you read Powell v. McCormack 395 U.S. 486 (1969)? SCOTUS there opined:
In order to determine the scope of any "textual commitment" under Art. I, 5, we necessarily must determine the meaning of the phrase to "be the Judge of the Qualifications of its own Members." Petitioners argue that the records of the debates during the Constitutional Convention; available commentary from the post-Convention, pre-ratification period; and early congressional applications of Art. I, 5, support their construction of the section. Respondents insist, however, that a careful examination of the pre-Convention practices of the English Parliament and American colonial assemblies demonstrates that by 1787, a legislature's power to judge the qualifications of its members was generally understood [395 U.S. 486, 522] to encompass exclusion or expulsion on the ground that an individual's character or past conduct rendered him unfit to serve. When the Constitution and the debates over its adoption are thus viewed in historical perspective, argue respondents, it becomes clear that the "qualifications" expressly set forth in the Constitution were not meant to limit the long-recognized legislative power to exclude or expel at will, but merely to establish "standing incapacities," which could be altered only by a constitutional amendment. Our examination of the relevant historical materials leads us to the conclusion that petitioners are correct and that the Constitution leaves the House without authority to exclude any person, duly elected by his constituents, who meets all the requirements for membership expressly prescribed in the Constitution.
395 U.S. at 521 [Footnote omitted.}
The Supreme Court was right that Powell had been duly elected and was qualified to serve until expelled - or replaced by his constituents.
I disagree with the Supreme Court insofar as it allows federal courts to meddle in the matter at all.
Each house has the power to "judge" the qualifications of its own members. This is an exception to Article III and allows each House of Congress, in qualification cases, to exercise judicial power.
The remaining question is whether there can be an appeal to the Art. III courts when a house of Congress exercises its judicial power to rule on its own members' qualifications. I doubt it, but apparently the Supreme Court doesn't follow my lead and allows an appeal to the regular courts.
I thought the same, Dr Ed. Each House is responsible for their own rules.
Grijalva has to wait until the dust settles from the shutdown. Once the shutdown is resolved, she can get sworn in. That is how it looks to me.
I personally think the shutdown ought to extend for some time. It will force more layoffs of non-essential fed bureau-critters.
It does seem likely to drag on, since the absence of Washington Monument syndrome means the pain isn't mounting very fast outside of the bureaucracy.
The Administrative State Beast will be tamed, once and for all, Brett.
Yes, we've gotten very good at disfunction.
Ignoring research funding being subborned or delayed. Ignoring paychecks to real military and civilians people being delayed.
The end of WIC is coming; The holiday glut of air travel is coming; ACA enrollment is coming Nov. 1 with rates currently set to skyrocket.
You're just bothered that we're sorting out the stuff the federal government does that's actually needed, from the stuff that's optional.
I can understand that makes you nervous, because given the huge deficits we're running, we might actually stop doing the stuff that's optional.
You and Commenter and the rest of the MAGA cheerleading corp have it abundantly clear you don’t want to know what government does or how to do things well.
It’s just resentment and you like to pretend it’s statescraft.
It’s the opposite but you are comfy so why not indulge your spite? Not like you will be effected.
I don't CARE if the government does well things we can't AFFORD to have it doing!
We have limited resources, we're going deeper into debt at an ever accelerating pace, we need the federal government to do less, much less, even if you want to pretend everything it does is worthwhile!
Pretending that nothing that has an immediate impact is an essential government function is stupid, period.
Your crisis yelling has always been false, Brett. You don't mind spending a ton of money on shit you like, you are not at all mad about giving billions to Venezuela because your man Trump is doing it. And you will never ever think about raising taxes.
It's a slippery slope argument, and it's only sincere because you're a master at fooling yourself.
You're the only person buying your bullshit at this point.
Actually Sarcastr0, Brett is not the only one buying the BS (your term). It would appear that POTUS Trump (and Congress majority) bought it too. And so did 77MM people who elected them.
Keep crying, it is amusing. Cry a little harder.
Oh, the horror. Will cats and dogs start getting it on too, b/c of the shutdown?
The bad news for people like you is this POTUS has three more years to chop and hack away non-essential bureaucritters. I would call 2025 a good start; three more years to go to finish the job of taming the Administrative State Beast.
It will get interesting if the EBT cards don't refill on Nov 1st.
The shutdown has no actual bearing on whether the House can be gaveled in.
This is all about Epstein.
Maybe about Epstein, certainly about clinging to a slightly larger majority as long as possible.
I think it's illegitimate, that she should be sworn in ASAP.
"Grijalva has to wait until the dust settles from the shutdown. Once the shutdown is resolved, she can get sworn in. That is how it looks to me."
Do you have any authority for that proposition, XY?
If she has a case, let her file something. Weird how the party of lawfare seems so litigation shy.
Her case is strong as horseradish. But why should the Speaker of the House act so lawlessly as to require he to do that?
Stephen, You know full well that Johnson is not denying the results of the election. Why lie about it. You make a reasonable suggestion that Ms Grijalva go before a magistrate with the appropriate certification papers and asks to be sworn in.
He's denying the result of the election the opportunity to take effect, though.
Watching "No Kings", I can't help but wonder what they could/would do if Trump actually did do something worthy of protest.
They will have "cried 'wolf'" so often that no one would believe them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Boy_Who_Cried_Wolf
It was more like a 'Yes Kooks' rally.
You are beyond helping.
Why? because he's not "Divine" like your Pediofile Kingie-Wingie??
Can POTUS Trump send troops to gaza to enforce the 'ceasefire' without Congressional authorization? Presumably, it would be to join the international stabilization force of phase 2, if we ever get there.
To no one's surprise, hamas has violated the agreement...again.
"Can POTUS Trump send troops to gaza to enforce the 'ceasefire' without Congressional authorization? Presumably, it would be to join the international stabilization force of phase 2, if we ever get there."
What provision of the War Powers Act of 193, https://www.congress.gov/bill/93rd-congress/house-bill/454 , would authorize that without Congressional authorization?
Well, the POTUS has 60 days where s/he doesn't have to say diddly squat, under WPA (whose constitutionality has never been litigated). However, if Congress becomes 'incurious' and never asks wtf is going on here, what then?
Personally, I do NOT want US troops in gaza. This is a regional issue, the regional players need to solve that problem. We can facilitate intl stabilization force, but not participate. The palestinians of gaza, who strongly support hamas, are not worth a single American life, not one.
The Cauliflower already demonstrated how stupid the idea of inserting US troops into gaza with the loading dock fiasco of 2024.
Do you wonder why the constitutionality of the War Powers Act has not been litigated?
Congressional authority "To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces" is clear and unmistakable under Article I, § 8 of the Constitution.
NG, I think the answer is that neither Congress nor the POTUS want SCOTUS to decide the issue. They are afraid of the consequences if SCOTUS wades into the WPA thicket.
If Congress (or POTUS) thought it was a slam dunk, it would have been litigated long ago.
I thought Israel was already enforcing the ceasefire? (By shooting at Palestinians.)
Ham-Ass is, by shooting and killing Palestinians (I'm not complaining)
If Hamas really wants to continue the ceasefire, they should probably cease firing.
hamas won't change; their covenant to which they swear calls for the destruction of Israel, and the slaughter of all Jews. They promised to return the bodies of dead hostages, and are now reneging. They promised to stop the fighting, and are now reneging. They signed an agreement to disarm, and are now reneging.
The only good hamas animal is a dead one.
"Can POTUS Trump send troops to gaza ..." No and he won't.
Continuing the conversation.
David Nieporent
"Asking people who aren't just out-and-out racists: what is this obsession with "assimilation"? In concrete terms, what do the people who say that sort of thing even mean by it? Presumably it's not so crude as the notion that, e.g., people should eat hamburgers and hot dogs rather than Indian or Mexican food, but what does it mean? And why is it important?
I can understand the notion that speaking English is important, except that it has been the case throughout American history that non-Anglo immigrants' English is spotty at best but that their kids speak perfect English."
It's actually pretty simple: What it's like to live in a country is a function of the culture of the people living there, as much or more than the climate or geography.
People who grew up in America, and like living in America, want to continue living in America, not a third world hellhole of a country that happens to occupy the same location, with the same geography and weather, but otherwise is Honduras or Venezuela or some place even more failed.
I mean, if we wanted to live in Somalia, we could move to Somalia, we don't need to import everything that makes it Somalia.
"Magic dirt" theorists like Somin think that you can take random people from places that are failed and poor, drop them on America's soil, and suddenly they're fit to be part of a successful society. Because the magic dirt got on them.
Doesn't work that way, and every time we bring somebody here from a failed culture, yeah, our culture becomes more failed.
Now, to some extent, at LOW rates of immigration, we can cope with that, to the extent our culture is self-sustaining. But at high rates of immigration?
You are what you eat.
"You are what you eat."
Brett, do you eat pussy?
You're confusing him with hobie who enjoys BBQ'd pussy along with his Hatian hood rats.
Oral sex is probably not a topic you want to weigh in on Mr “Clinton got a blow job on his knees” Bumble.
You've been called out on this and yet you continue to lie. Dr. Goebbels would be so proud his legacy lives on.
You said he got a blow job on his knees. You might not want to opine on subjects you have no familiarity with.
Women here are way, way too fat for me, Bumble.
Finally something we can agree on Hobie-Stank (doesn't excuse the Stolen Valor) Of course when you see a skinny Black Woman, it's not from diet and exercise.
Who wrote this yesterday NG? “Invective is no substitute for reasoned argument”? The left certainly have standards, or something.
Riva 23 minutes ago Flag Comment Mute User Ask your parents to define “Judeo-Christian” for you. They might be impressed that you’re actually trying to learn something, instead of surfing for porn.
Bot is not self aware.
Well, we could point out that I wasn't the one who wrote "Invective is no substitute for reasoned argument,” so your response makes no sense. We could also note that my comment was funny because it contained some truth. (stop using porn)
Some might also point out your parrot trolling insult above as somewhat suggestive of hypocrisy, and just being a fucking idiot. But I'll leave that to others.
Bot thinks it was citing the maxim it broke because it didn’t mean it? Well, true bots don’t mean anything, they just follow programming for responses, which they make contradictory, non-sentient ones.
America is a shared set of ideas, rooted in Judeo-Christian values. Those ideas and values have made us the greatest country on the face of the Earth, in just 250 years. No other country in history has done as much, given as much, sacrificed as much as the USA for the betterment of humanity. It is not even close.
Assimilation is acceptance of those shared ideas and values, not hostility and rejection of them. Foreigners who come here must first understand those shared ideas and values, and accept them. And govern themselves accordingly (meaning, obey our laws, respect our culture).
Otherwise, they can go back to their shithole country they left. No hard feelings. America isn't for everybody.
The US is far more Christian than Judeo, by your logic should we ask Jews to assimilate to Christianity or dissuade their immigration here?
Are you deliberately obtuse? Go away.
No answer?
He certainly didn't answer, didn't he. What to REALLY do about Jews is always a sore subject with Christian Nationalists.
“Judeo-Christian” is often used to elide the fact that if you’re talking about culture historically and sociologically Jews and Christians in the US had some pretty distinct ones. Christians accept the Old Testament (though often in a different sense than Jews) but the New Testament is kind of important to them, not so much for Jews.
Many Jews have and do, starting with the Apostles. But to accept Christ as the Messiah means one becomes Christian. Many in this world have yet to accept that, just so you know.
You really are badly in need of some basics. At least you’re asking. I doubt you’re sincerely interested in learning but one never knows.
“Many in this world have yet to accept that, just so you know.”
Riva-bot can’t get the point (which is if you’re going to castigate groups for not sharing American culture then you can easily say non-Christians don’t share American culture) so it just repeats irrelevant programmed response.
No more doubt remains for me on that sincerely wanting to learn thing.
See? Just repeats.
Speaking of "Basics" Google "Messianic Judaism" if you can navigate a Keypad
This is as dumb as your deranged limited English, Messianic Jews are a small group and of course quite different than most Jews. You might as well say Christians are very secular, look at the Unitarians!
Ask your parents to define “Judeo-Christian” for you. They might be impressed that you’re actually trying to learn something, instead of surfing for porn. Hint: it refers to a shared religious scripture and values derived from a common moral and theological heritage. Here’s another fun fact for you: Jesus was a Jew.
Riva bot thinks Jews say the Lord’s Prayer! Faulty programming again.
No, Christians do. Because they acknowledge Christ as the Messiah and become Christians. Christ means Messiah.
So much for sincerely wanting to learn something. But why do that when you can make an ass of yourself putting your ignorance on display?
Because Christian culture is different than Jewish culture? Riva-bot accidentally stumbled on the point, but not self-aware so doesn’t know.
Having shared values and scripture doesn’t mean that Christians and Jews have no differences, just so you understand. Which apparently you don’t. And you don’t actually want to understand. Because you’re just a parrot troll.
So the lesson is over. You can get back to your porn now.
“doesn’t mean that Christians and Jews have no differences”
Again, bot can say things but not understand them and their relevance to the discussion.
America is a shared set of ideas, rooted in Judeo-Christian values.
Rooted in the Enlightenment, and tarnished by the use of traditional Christian values to hold it back. Not surprising that the religious fellow-traveller XY doesn't seem aware of this.
Pretty much every beneficial aspect of US progress lies outside traditional values.
This Pretty much every beneficial aspect of US progress lies outside traditional values is simply not true.
Give an example to the contrary.
The Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution.
Judeo-Christian values? Does that include a hearty embrace of genocide, which the Hebrew Bible is chock full of? All quotations here are from the Revised Standard Version.
"However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the LORD your God has commanded you." Deuteronomy 20:16-17. Samuel said to Saul, “I am the one the LORD sent to anoint you king over his people Israel; so listen now to the message from the LORD. This is what the LORD Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ ” I Samuel 15:1-3 "Sama'ria shall bear her guilt, because she has rebelled against her God; they shall fall by the sword, their little ones shall be dashed in pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open." Hosea 13:16 "Then they utterly destroyed all in the city [of Jericho,] both men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep, and asses, with the edge of the sword." Joshua 6:21 "And the LORD said to me, 'Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land over to you; begin to take possession, that you may occupy his land.' Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to battle at Jahaz. And the LORD our God gave him over to us; and we defeated him and his sons and all his people. And we captured all his cities at that time and utterly destroyed every city, men, women, and children; we left none remaining[.]" Deuteronomy 2:31-34 "So the LORD our God gave into our hand Og also, the king of Bashan, and all his people; and we smote him until no survivor was left to him. And we took all his cities at that time--there was not a city which we did not take from them--sixty cities, the whole region of Argob, the kingdom of Og in Bashan. All these were cities fortified with high walls, gates, and bars, besides very many unwalled villages. And we utterly destroyed them, as we did to Sihon the king of Heshbon, destroying every city, men, women, and children." Deuteronomy 3:3-6 "When the LORD your God brings you into the land which you are entering to take possession of it, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites, the Gir'gashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Per'izzites, the Hivites, and the Jeb'usites, seven nations greater and mightier than yourselves, and when the LORD your God gives them over to you, and you defeat them; then you must utterly destroy them; you shall make no covenant with them, and show no mercy to them. You shall not make marriages with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons." Deuteronomy 7:1-3. "And Joshua took Makke'dah on that day, and smote it and its king with the edge of the sword; he utterly destroyed every person in it, he left none remaining; and he did to the king of Makke'dah as he had done to the king of Jericho. Then Joshua passed on from Makke'dah, and all Israel with him, to Libnah, and fought against Libnah; and the LORD gave it also and its king into the hand of Israel; and he smote it with the edge of the sword, and every person in it; he left none remaining in it; and he did to its king as he had done to the king of Jericho. And Joshua passed on from Libnah, and all Israel with him, to Lachish, and laid siege to it, and assaulted it: and the LORD gave Lachish into the hand of Israel, and he took it on the second day, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and every person in it, as he had done to Libnah. Then Horam king of Gezer came up to help Lachish; and Joshua smote him and his people, until he left none remaining. And Joshua passed on with all Israel from Lachish to Eglon; and they laid siege to it, and assaulted it; and they took it on that day, and smote it with the edge of the sword; and every person in it he utterly destroyed that day, as he had done to Lachish. Then Joshua went up with all Israel from Eglon to Hebron; and they assaulted it, and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and its king and its towns, and every person in it; he left none remaining, as he had done to Eglon, and utterly destroyed it with every person in it. Then Joshua, with all Israel, turned back to Debir and assaulted it, and he took it with its king and all its towns; and they smote them with the edge of the sword, and utterly destroyed every person in it; he left none remaining; as he had done to Hebron and to Libnah and its king, so he did to Debir and to its king. So Joshua defeated the whole land, the hill country and the Negeb and the lowland and the slopes, and all their kings; he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the LORD God of Israel commanded. Joshua 10:28-40
"However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the LORD your God has commanded you." Deuteronomy 20:16-17.
Samuel said to Saul, “I am the one the LORD sent to anoint you king over his people Israel; so listen now to the message from the LORD. This is what the LORD Almighty says: ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’ ” I Samuel 15:1-3
"Sama'ria shall bear her guilt, because she has rebelled against her God; they shall fall by the sword, their little ones shall be dashed in pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open." Hosea 13:16
"Then they utterly destroyed all in the city [of Jericho,] both men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep, and asses, with the edge of the sword." Joshua 6:21
"And the LORD said to me, 'Behold, I have begun to give Sihon and his land over to you; begin to take possession, that you may occupy his land.' Then Sihon came out against us, he and all his people, to battle at Jahaz. And the LORD our God gave him over to us; and we defeated him and his sons and all his people. And we captured all his cities at that time and utterly destroyed every city, men, women, and children; we left none remaining[.]" Deuteronomy 2:31-34
"So the LORD our God gave into our hand Og also, the king of Bashan, and all his people; and we smote him until no survivor was left to him. And we took all his cities at that time--there was not a city which we did not take from them--sixty cities, the whole region of Argob, the kingdom of Og in Bashan. All these were cities fortified with high walls, gates, and bars, besides very many unwalled villages. And we utterly destroyed them, as we did to Sihon the king of Heshbon, destroying every city, men, women, and children." Deuteronomy 3:3-6
"When the LORD your God brings you into the land which you are entering to take possession of it, and clears away many nations before you, the Hittites, the Gir'gashites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Per'izzites, the Hivites, and the Jeb'usites, seven nations greater and mightier than yourselves, and when the LORD your God gives them over to you, and you defeat them; then you must utterly destroy them; you shall make no covenant with them, and show no mercy to them. You shall not make marriages with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons." Deuteronomy 7:1-3.
"And Joshua took Makke'dah on that day, and smote it and its king with the edge of the sword; he utterly destroyed every person in it, he left none remaining; and he did to the king of Makke'dah as he had done to the king of Jericho. Then Joshua passed on from Makke'dah, and all Israel with him, to Libnah, and fought against Libnah; and the LORD gave it also and its king into the hand of Israel; and he smote it with the edge of the sword, and every person in it; he left none remaining in it; and he did to its king as he had done to the king of Jericho. And Joshua passed on from Libnah, and all Israel with him, to Lachish, and laid siege to it, and assaulted it: and the LORD gave Lachish into the hand of Israel, and he took it on the second day, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and every person in it, as he had done to Libnah. Then Horam king of Gezer came up to help Lachish; and Joshua smote him and his people, until he left none remaining. And Joshua passed on with all Israel from Lachish to Eglon; and they laid siege to it, and assaulted it; and they took it on that day, and smote it with the edge of the sword; and every person in it he utterly destroyed that day, as he had done to Lachish. Then Joshua went up with all Israel from Eglon to Hebron; and they assaulted it, and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and its king and its towns, and every person in it; he left none remaining, as he had done to Eglon, and utterly destroyed it with every person in it. Then Joshua, with all Israel, turned back to Debir and assaulted it, and he took it with its king and all its towns; and they smote them with the edge of the sword, and utterly destroyed every person in it; he left none remaining; as he had done to Hebron and to Libnah and its king, so he did to Debir and to its king. So Joshua defeated the whole land, the hill country and the Negeb and the lowland and the slopes, and all their kings; he left none remaining, but utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the LORD God of Israel commanded. Joshua 10:28-40
In the case of Midian, as described in Numbers 31, the Hebrew army slew all the men and captured the women and children. (vv 7, 9) Moses was angered that they had let the women live. (vv 14-15) Moses ordered that all male children and every woman that had had sex be killed, sparing only the virgin females, whom the soldiers were to keep for themselves. (vv 17-18)
Do you think Muslims can assimilate into America?
Sure, why not?
In principle, yes. As I said above, assimilation works, at LOW rates of immigration.
At high rates of immigration you get self-reinforcing pockets of immigrants, who consequently retain their original cultures longer.
Like all those Germantowns and Little Italy’s that ruined our culture?
Generally it worked out, but there was an awkward interval when *some* German and Italian immigrants sympathized with National Socialists and fascists. The existence of hostile foreign powers with ethnic or religious ties to U. S. immigrants can be a real problem.
Fortunately, there were German-Americans and Italian-Americans who rejected the lure of National Socialism and fascism and helped fight these hateful ideologies instead.
Now do the Japanese.
Switching the nationality doesn't make the charge of dual loyalty any less an exercise in collective guilt
I'm not charging dual loyalty at all. If you think that's what I'm talking about, you're reading impaired again.
He was replying to Margrave.
There were “some” WASPs who did the same (the American First Committee was lead by people with names like Regenery, Wood, and Patterson not Rossi and Bukowski) so this is a pre pointless comment.
Despite some of the libertarians on here, it's a generally accepted to the point of being anodyne statement that there is a rate that's too high for immigration.
But it's a useless exercise to vibe out what groups counts as a 'good' demographic and who counts as a 'bad' one.
It's so far from being useless that it's actually essential, if you want to maintain a functioning country while having immigration.
So much for the liberal innovation of recognizing the individual.
It is an exercise in collective guilt, and ends in bigoted generalizations.
Last week you posited that Mohammed is violent and Jesus wasn’t so Muslims are inherently more violent. That’s silly in a number of ways but does show the inherent shallowness of the analysis you want.
English invaders never assimilated to teepee living
Moe-hammad Atta and his 18 Thieves certainly "Assimilated" into the Troposphere mostly.
Some do, many don’t.
Isn’t your wife a Filipino immigrant? Are the Philippines a failed culture?
GDP per capita Philippines 3,984.83 USD (2024) Honduras 3,426.43 USD (2024)
IIRC, the Phillippines were a US protectorate from 1898-1946. They are allies by treaty. There are extensive ties btwn the US and PHI.
And with all those ties their GDP matches Honduras, a hellhole according to Brett. Yikes!
Honduras was never a US protectorate.
Talk about obtuse. My point was even with these ties they still have the same gdp as the hellhole of Honduras. Failed nation?
Failed nation or failed culture? Are they the same?
How would a successful country be said to have a failed culture?
Qualika, proud graduate of the Humpty Dumpty School of words and their meanings.
You not getting my point is par for the course.
That's a fair question.
Yes, I'd say so. I *like* Filipinos, they're very friendly people, the scenery is nice, the food is good, but their are elements of their culture that feed into that endemic corruption that hurts their country.
My wife, of course, came here legally, and not as a refugee, which means she got thoroughly vetted for a lack of anything like a criminal record. And she was an English literate college graduate elementary school teacher.
Actually vetting immigrants solves a lot of these problems, if it's thorough, and not compromised by a "who are we to judge" approach.
I absolutely agree immigration should be vetted and controlled, but let’s be careful in judging who comes from a “failed culture” as a determiner of whether they will be a drag on ours
In that vein I absolutely agree with the administration doing this:
“ The Trump administration is making it harder to pass the oral exam required for immigrants seeking naturalization as U.S. citizens. The new test is also longer.
Green card holders who file for citizenship after Oct. 20 will have to answer twice as many questions correctly during the civics interview that tests their knowledge of U.S. history, politics and government and that is one of the final steps in the naturalization process. The list of possible questions will also get longer and include more difficult questions.”
https://www.npr.org/2025/10/16/nx-s1-5566732/the-trump-administration-is-rolling-out-changes-to-the-u-s-citizenship-test
Mine isn't but I wouldn't mind if she was. Some of the most drop-dead-gorgeous women anywhere (and if you cheat on one, you'll "drop-dead" with your Schlong in your (Redacted) Always wondered what an Israeli/Filipino Chick would look like....
""Magic dirt" theorists " A brilliant phrase that fits Somin to a tee
These are the skewed incentives that Mr. Trump’s crypto dropbox brings to the political scene. Take a look at two recent multibillion-dollar deals involving Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan, one of the most influential figures in the United Arab Emirates, and Steve Witkoff, Mr. Trump’s Middle East envoy.
In the first deal, the state-backed investment fund that Sheikh Tahnoon heads pledged $2 billion in USD1 tokens, a stablecoin issued by World Liberty Financial, to complete an investment in Binance, the world’s largest crypto exchange. (Stablecoins are supposed to remain at a stable value and operate as a kind of ersatz digital dollar, and thus are widely used in crypto transactions.) A Binance founder, Changpeng Zhao, is seeking a pardon from Mr. Trump after pleading guilty to money laundering.
In the second deal, Mr. Witkoff and David Sacks, a longtime venture capitalist and tech executive who was named Mr. Trump’s A.I. and crypto czar, secured a deal that allows the Emirates to buy hundreds of thousands of high-end chips needed for artificial intelligence data centers. These chips are highly coveted in the larger global A.I. race, and they are subject to stringent export regulations. In this case, experts expressed concern that the U.A.E. might share the chips with Chinese concerns…
Sheikh Tahnoon’s decision to use $2 billion worth of USD1 stablecoins is revealing. If his goal was to merely invest in Binance, he could have wired $2 billion directly to it. By using World Liberty Financial’s USD1 stablecoins as a kind of financial intermediary, Sheikh Tahnoon was also jump-starting a company that has financially benefited Mr. Witkoff and Mr. Trump.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/17/opinion/world-liberty-financial-crypto-trump.html
Some ICC news that I hadn't mentioned yet:
- On Friday the Appeals Chamber has refused to quash the arrest warrants issued against the Israeli defendants in the Palestine case. Simply put, the Chamber held that Israel was seeking to re-litigate something that it had already decided. https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/CourtRecords/0902ebd180ccfb3b.pdf
- On Wednesday the Appeals Chamber disqualified the Prosecutor from participating in the prosecution of former Phillipino president Duterte, on the grounds that he had previously acted as counsel for certain victims in this matter. https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/CourtRecords/0902ebd180cc2b03.pdf
Of course, the Prosecutor has been on a leave of absence since 16 May while accusations of sexual misconduct against him are being investigated. There was a recent reconstruction in a major Dutch newspaper which suggests that he probably did break the law. Unless that article has serious flaws, he should resign.
Rubio promised to betray U.S. informants to get Trump’s El Salvador prison deal
The deal between Rubio and Bukele granted the administration access to a sprawling foreign prison dubbed the Terrorism Confinement Center, or CECOT, that would be integral to Trump’s ongoing efforts to conduct the “largest deportation in American history.”
The deal would give Bukele possession of individuals who threatened to expose the alleged deals his government made with MS-13 to help achieve El Salvador’s historic drop in violence, officials said. For the Salvadoran president, a return of the informants was viewed as critical to preserving his tough-on-crime reputation. It was also a key step in hindering an ongoing U.S. investigation into his government’s relationship with MS-13, a gang famous for displays of excessive violence in the United States and elsewhere.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/10/19/rubio-el-salvador-prison-bukele-ms13-informants/
Washington Post? lol get real
Yes, some actual professional, investigative news. You should give it a try!
This story has been reported in by multiple outlets, btw.
https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/secret-bukele-trump-deal-grenas
WaPo used to be a news paper. it has been a propaganda rag for a dozens years or more.
Cool story, Don, not a great source like your favorites such as ManinPJs.com!
Hey, how are things going in the country where the President sends the armed forces into opposition-controlled cities, and leans on TV broadcasters to appoint regime-friendly leadership to their news divisions while censoring critics of the Regime entirely? Are you having trouble deciding whether I'm talking about Venezuela or the US? You're not the only one!
...and how are things going in a country with 27 political parties and an upcoming "snap" election on 29 Oct.?
Quite well. One of the great mysteries in life is why people who live in one of the greatest countries on earth complain so much. By most plausible metrics we have it better than we've ever had it before, and better than the inhabitants of almost every other country in the world.
Also, we still have a functioning democracy. So there's that.
Speaking of Colombia, it is objectively adorable that the president of Colombia thinks that Trump might read a book.
Petro responded to Trump later Sunday, and while he did not address the financial implications of a freeze of US assistance, he criticized the US president, invoking his country’s heralded Nobel Prize-winning author, Gabriel García Márquez. “You are rude and ignorant toward Colombia. Read, as your chargé d’affaires in Colombia did, ‘One Hundred Years of Solitude,’ and I assure you, you will learn something about solitude,” Petro said in a post to social media.
Petro responded to Trump later Sunday, and while he did not address the financial implications of a freeze of US assistance, he criticized the US president, invoking his country’s heralded Nobel Prize-winning author, Gabriel García Márquez.
“You are rude and ignorant toward Colombia. Read, as your chargé d’affaires in Colombia did, ‘One Hundred Years of Solitude,’ and I assure you, you will learn something about solitude,” Petro said in a post to social media.
That's how you win back those free billions from America's printing press!
All you foreigners can get fucked for all I'm concerned.
Yes, I had that impression. In fact, as far as I can tell you have the same attitude towards most of your compatriots.
A question for practicing appellate lawyers: How do you use AI in your daily work, separate from writing briefs?
We have read here at VC about many instances of hallucinated cases in briefs. But what other ways do you use AI in your daily work?
It’s helpful to write run of the mill emails, but you should of course look over them. They can just be useful for suggesting a turn of phrase you didn’t think of or a tone you want.
I only use them for marketing blurbs.
In what way, BL? Can you give an example?
I post updates and newsletters on LinkedIn. It has an AI function that makes suggestions about how to improve the writing. It's helpful about 50% of the time.
Ok, I am familiar with the AI function in LinkedIn. I understand why you say it is 'hit or miss' (50%).
Has anything ever gotten by you, using that functionality? Meaning, you posted something AI generated and it did not go over well.
A board of U.S. Air Force Academy graduates that was expected to vote Friday on whether to extend an honorary degree and honorary membership into the academy’s alumni association to slain conservative activist Charlie Kirk withdrew both of the motions.
In a statement late Friday, the Association of Graduates, which serves as the academy’s nonprofit alumni group, said its board of directors dropped the motions after hearing the past two days from “several hundred” Air Force Academy graduates, parents and other family members about the idea to recognize Kirk.
Some academy graduates spoke out publicly against the notion to honor Kirk with a posthumous degree and alumni membership. Retired Brig. Gen. Marty France, a former board member with the alumni group and the former head of the academy’s Department of Astronautics, told Military Times that people previously inducted as honorary members“each served USAFA for decades.”
“Whatever service [Kirk] provided to USAFA does not rise anywhere near what we should require as a minimum before even considering him for such mention,” France added.
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2025/10/17/air-force-academy-alumni-board-withdraws-motions-to-honor-charlie-kirk/
Seems reasonable. He just didn't have enough connection to justify it, this was not about whether you approved of him or not.
He flatly didn't deserve it. If he didn't deserve it in life, he doesn't deserve it in death.
Kirk never attended USAF Academy. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me. It is a kind gesture, but not appropriate.
What a GLORIOUS day! I woke up, free from kings! Unlike some people who frequent these threads. I join President Trump in congratulating those that made this possible. YOU DID IT!!
“I woke up, free from kings!”
Not for lack of you and your buddies trying!
These rubes seem to think that kings are an imaginary thing here in the US...kind a like ANTIFA.
LOL! Is His Majesty in the room with you right now?
Trump has referred to himself as a king and you guys are trying to make it so. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised by a Swedish Meatball like yourself having failed to assimilate to our culture, but not sure what so many others’ excuse is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_Sweden
Show us on this peasant doll, villein, where Trump touched you with his royal scepter (or sceptre for those stuck in the lands of powerless kings).
Is Swede trying to deny Trump has referred to himself as a king? Too much time making meatballs to keep up with the news, I guess.
LOL! What a great day. Who thought it would be this amusing this early? The spectacle of it all. "HE WANTS TO BE A KING! HE SAYS HE'S A KING! YOU WANT HIM TO BE A KING!" You need to pace yourself. There's no way you can keep this up for the next 3 (at least) years and not expect to have significant health issues added to your already apparent mental health crisis. If you don't get a hold of yourself now, how in the hell are you going to handle 8 years of President Vance? If you have friends, hopefully there's an intervention in your near future. Fingers crossed!
Commenters are noting that, despite all that hollering, Swede completely skirted the question.
So you think you’re going to be unsuccessful in making him a king as he’s referred to himself? I guess you’re used to being unsuccessful and all.
Noticed that the state of Maine is floating the idea of withholding federal tax payments and urging its citizens to do the same. The rationale being that since the feds are withholding services that Maine residents had paid previous taxes for, why pay for things they won't receive. This sound like a stick-it-to-the-gubmint kinda thing you hayseeds would approve of.
Another "Hayseed"?? So Hobie, did you know there's no Statue of Limitations for Stolen Valor? Just saying.
No one thinks Francis served as a doctor in Iraq. Like his English, it’s a deranged fantasy or pathetically weird act.
Hasn't Frankie been floating the story that he served as a REMF doctor? Which doesn't make sense because he hadn't yet gone to medical school. So is that stolen medical valor or malpractice or what?
I think it is a splendid idea, hobie. It is only 7 years in the slammer for the dopes that follow through.
In the event of restoration of constitutional government, Congress should radically revise the Militia Act, Insurrection Act, and War Powers Act to sharply curtail the President’s discretion and reclaim most of its constitutional power.
1. On domestic matters, the President is permitted to federalize a state militia or call in federal troops to quell rebellion or enforce federal law without a request from the state’s legislature (or if its legislature cannot be convened, its governor) only if a domestic disturbance both overwhelms law enforcement and either (1) causes widespread destruction to persons and property or (2) conducts an organized attack on law enforcement and causes enough casualties to significantly degrade law enforcements capabilities.
2. In foreign matters, the President may only use military force to repel an actual invasion of or predatory incursion into the territory of the United States, or in response to a request for aid from treaty allies under the terms of a duly ratified treaty. Military forces may return fire if actually attacked.
3. In all other cases, Congress reserves to itself the sole right and power to determine if military force should be used, and militias may not be federalized, federal military forces may not be deployed, and combat or a military attack may not be initiated absent a special Act of Congress addressing the situation.
4. The revised law should amend the rules of both Houses to establish an expedited procedure to enable the President to convene Congress if it is not in session, to limit debate, and to provide for a secret session if the President deems it warranted. It should also provide for special judicial rules such as a three-judge District Court and an expedited decision and appeal procedure to address disputes.
I would think any good libertarian would think that even if current law gives little to no check on the Executive in exercising Militia or Insurrection law powers that future reforms should. Having one person have the power to send troops into cities on any whim is about as un-libertarian as you can get.
Some of your ideas (not all bad) would require amending the Constitution. That is a high hurdle.
I sometimes think the main hurdle to amending the Constitution at this point is that they're doing so much janky constitutional 'interpretation' now that is premised on amendments being impossibly hard. If amendments are admitted to be possible, the excuse for what they're doing without one evaporates.
I agree in principle — and the scope should go well beyond this particular sphere. Some real tightening on delegation would be welcome, but it’s hard to see how factions that control both sides of the delegation would ever agree to limit themselves. Madison’s hope that Congress would jealously guard its powers hasn’t held up — party loyalty keeps winning out over institutional loyalty.
This isn’t even about the current moment. Policymaking should come from debate and consensus, not from a single mind. When major decisions hinge on one person’s judgment — and that person changes every few years — the system starts to swing with personality rather than principle. That’s exactly what the separation of powers was meant to prevent.
Everyone going to law school.
https://www.lsac.org/data-research/data/current-volume-summaries-region-raceethnicity-gender-identity-lsat-score
Kind of a bank shot, but as an economic indicator it’s not a great sign.
Britain is in the shitter
Two of the latest examples:
1. Jewish Man Arrested for ‘Antagonising’ Pro-Palestine Protesters by Wearing Star of David
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2025/10/19/jewish-man-arrested-accused-of-antagonising-pro-palestine-protesters-by-wearing-star-of-david-report/
No freedom of expression.
2. BREAKING: UK police stopped a woman from walking her dog, saying it could offend the local Muslim population — and ordered her off her own street.
https://x.com/EYakoby/status/1979726411071094953?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1979726411071094953%7Ctwgr%5E8e510677e843d41455849614ffed66db0ec8db1b%7Ctwcon%5Es1
No freedom of movement.
Note both of these incidents are police enforcing against U.K. citizens unwritten laws to defer to Muslim immigrants.
Musk, Breitbart, This new right wing twitter feed guy. Some notable commenters here.
What is with people being super into elevating one sided anecdotal complaints from British anti Muslim white nationalists these days?
You're such a liar. Are you saying these incidents didn't happen? Because they did. There's video in the link for the second case I cited.
I'm not anti Muslim, I'm anti police state protecting one class of citizen.
You're such a bad reader.
Though I would check on the context of a video shared by some random twitter account.
You may not be anti-Muslim (though how you probably also don't think you're anti-black, I wonder...), you're just uncritically buying the narrative of British anti-Muslim white nationalists.
Watch the friggin' video!
You know, this is typical of you and your cohort here, to just deny the existence of people or events or organizations that go counter to your preferred narrative or political views.
Why don't you, instead, look into it, evaluate it as objectively as you can, and then respond? Or not.
The Breitbart article has a link to the Telegraph, which has video of the police interrogating the man about his Star of David necklace.
Remember that movie 'London has fallen'? 🙂
When a guy like Farage comes out of retirement and forms a party overnight with growing support, it is time to pay attention. He may parley that into becoming the next PM. Leftist a-holes hate him because he successfully pulled off Brexit.
Is Tommy Robinson totally wrong? I don't think so.
You do know who white nationalists come after when they're done with whatever their first target is, yes?
It's a pretty common tale.
You do know that, of all the nationalists in history, only one of them was Hitler, right?
Not anymore! Hitler managed to pull off what nobody could do before: perpetuate himself forever and ever and ever. In the fertile imaginations of the perpetually oppressed.
So England targets people who badmouth Muslims and we target people who badmouth Jews. I doesn't seem consistent to be for one and not the other
In neither of these cases did anyone badmouth Muslims, you numbskull. One woman was just walking a dog, outside her house. The other guy was just wearing a 2cm star of David on his neck.
Yes, wearing a Star of David or walking one's dog down the street is "bad mouthing Muslims." Are you stupid or just play a stupid person on the internet?
Cite me a case in the US where someone was arrested for wearing a hijab, and you might have a point.
Let me pull up all the arrests of foreign students that made pro-Palestinian remarks. You got enough time today to read them all?
AFAICT the Regime was so confident that there would be violence at No Kings protests that they neglected to send in agents provocateurs
What on earth are you talking about? That appears to be an extremely deranged take on the events of this weekend.
First, you call the administration "the Regime."
Then you seem to be saying that if they thought there wasn't going to be violence they would have sent in agents provocateur?
What is the basis for this? You're just making shit up.
(The only agents provocateur that I am aware of in recent memory were the FBI agents undercover on Jan. 6, 2021. And while Trump was in office at the time, the FBI was acting counter to his administration.)
Wow. That really triggered you, bro.
First, you call the regime "the Regime."
FTFY.
It is an article of faith with the cultists that there were agents provocateurs amongst the J6 rioters, and Dear Leader himself suggested it. So why wouldn't he be prepared to use them himself?
LOL! For those of us who are parents, we understand that sometimes you just have to let the children act out their tantrums. You sound disappointed that His Majesty didn't send out the Horse Guards to trample the peasants. Oh, well.
I recently came across this excellent quote from Karl Popper:
“If I were to give a simple formula or recipe for distinguishing between what I consider to be admissible plans for social reform and inadmissible Utopian blueprints, I might say: Work for the elimination of concrete evils rather than for the realization of abstract goods. Do not aim at establishing happiness by political means. Rather aim at the elimination of concrete miseries.”
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Karl_Popper
Define 'concrete misery'.
White Christian Nationalism?
A fuckwit writes: "because I disagree with SRG2 on everything, when he posts something that superficially I cannot help but agree with because it makes sense even to me, I have to find something, anything, as a point of disagreement."
Any American Jew such as XY should have all their alarm bells going off at the antisemitism and, frankly, the pro-Naziism endemic in the MAGA movement. But owning the libs is a powerful drug. So I'm not surprised that XY has trouble recognizing 'concrete miseries'.
This is projection at its extreme. There is nothing antisemitic about the MAGA movement. ALL of the antisemitism is coming from the left, from the pro-Palestinian folks, pro-Hamas folks; university professors, teachers, leftist politicians (led by "the Squad"), and so forth.
Likewise, there is nothing Nazi-like about the MAGA movement. All of the behaviors associated with Nazis is coming from the left.
You realize, of course, that Trump's daughter converted to Judaism?
YouTube's ad generator has decided I care about the upcoming election in New York City, a place I have a longstanding policy of avoiding. (I did see Cats back in the 1990s.) Somebody wants me to vote for Cuomo because "he gets things done." And there is a vague ad about housing-related ballot questions. The questions would remove the Mayor and City Council from most small scale land development decisionmaking. If you want to build affordable housing you would have an expedited review process and would not need to pay off or otherwise buy support from your local city councillor. https://www.thecity.nyc/2025/10/06/ballot-questions-proposals-november-guide/
Once upon a time 2010 was the deadline for humanity to beat global warming before it was too late. The past decades have been like the cartoon with Bugs Bunny drawing a series of lines in the sand. Never admit defeat. Reset the deadline instead. Now I hear we've passed a climate tipping point. It's still not over. More tipping points will be offered to keep us alarmed. When we pass them all humanity will spend a few trillion on geoengineering.
This month the United States blocked a convention meant to make international shipping carbon neutral. I don't know if this matters on the large scale. If we collectively care, an extraction tax on fossil fuels will do a lot more good. But then the wrong people will have to pay the tax. If gas goes up from $4 to $6 and the carbon treaty signed by President Newsom is responsible, he's going to have angry mobs in the streets.
There is no firm evidence that there is a tipping point. Moreover the idea of net zero is rapidly disappearing. It is just not happening. Data centers in industrialized countries and the rapid growth of population in sub-Sharan Africa are making sure of that.
The idea of a tipping point is a handy excuse for why we absolutely had to act before anything bad could be proven to be happening.
But it does naturally fall out of the way they construct their climate models, which require the climate system to have enormous positive feedbacks that put it on the very edge of thermal runaway, in order to project disastrous heating from modest changes in atmospheric composition.
California banned sharing of contingent fees with non-lawyers in an attempt to keep private equity out of litigation decisions. Neighboring Arizona allows non-lawyers to own law firms and a litigation financing industry has popped up there. Some California lawyers evaded the state's ban on sharing contingent fees by contracting with out of state law firms not subject to the same ethical rules.
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/california-bans-contingent-fee-sharing-with-alternative-firms https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/california-law-sets-up-new-contingency-fee-sharing-roadblock-2025-10-16/
"Some California lawyers evaded the state's ban on sharing contingent fees by contracting with out of state law firms not subject to the same ethical rules."
How does that work? If you are a lawyer appearing in case in a California, I would think California rules apply.
BTW, some courts are now requiring disclosure of whether there is litigation funding when a case is filed.
"California banned sharing of contingent fees with non-lawyers in an attempt to keep private equity out of litigation decisions."
This would only keep non-lawyer private equity out, in any case.
Pertinent to Trump's inexplicable commutation of George Santos, some eyes are now trained on MTG. She has long championed his release, and she is one of the few MAGA who are voting to release the Epstein files. Will be interesting if she changes her vote.
Please log in to post comments
Mute this user?
Ban this user?
Un-ban this user?
Nuke this user?
Un-nuke this user?
Flag this comment?
Un-flag this comment?
Liz Wolfe | 10.20.2025 9:30 AM
J.D. Tuccille | 10.20.2025 7:00 AM
Charles Oliver | 10.20.2025 4:00 AM
Eric Boehm | From the November 2025 issue
Nick Gillespie | 10.18.2025 4:46 PM
