Open Thread

What’s on your mind?

Comments

[Kazinski]

Did anyone post anything about the en banc non decision in JGG v Trump?

The DC Court of Appeals left alone the 3 judge panel decision dismissing the appeal by the Trump administration of Boasberg's finding of probable cause, but then issued a mandamus vacating Boasberg's finding.

But bizarrely one of the judges on the circuit dissented saying that a majority of the circuit court of appeals thought Boasberg was right, even though they let the mandamus shut the circus down, for now:

"Despite that, as Judge Florence Pan, a Biden appointee, wrote in dissent, “a majority of the full court does not believe that the district court was in the wrong.” This is so, Pan explained, because, in addition to three dissenting judges on Friday, an opinion from three judges who voted against rehearing the case en banc nonetheless agreed on that point. With those six votes on the 11-judge court, “a majority of the en banc court believes that the panel majority erred when it issued the writ of mandamus.“
https://www.lawdork.com/p/dc-circuit-wont-review-contempt-appeal

I am not a law dork reader but he seems to be reading Boasberg right.

So I guess the question is will Boasberg read that as a sign to try to revive his probable cause order, or let it die its timely death?

According to the law dork yes Boasberg hasn't given up yet:
"Update, 10:00 a.m. November 17: Moving quickly, Chief Judge James Boasberg on Monday morning ordered the Trump administration and challengers in the Alien Enemies Act case before him to be ready “to discuss next steps in this Court’s contempt inquiry” in two days, at a hearing in the broader case already set for Wednesday.]"

And did the circuit majority just decide it wasn't worth risking this case going to the next court if they decided to throw Boasberg a life preserver?

https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/orders/docs/2025/11/25-5124LDEN2.FINAL.pdf

[Armchair]

"So I guess the question is will Boasberg read that as a sign to try to revive his probable cause order, or let it die its timely death?"

Yes. Or some variant of that.

"And did the circuit majority just decide it wasn't worth risking this case going to the next court if they decided to throw Boasberg a life preserver?"

Absolutely. DC circuit has a heavy Democratic bias, with 7 Dem nominees to 4 GOP nominees. The "majority" here was 6 of the 7 Dem nominees. Overturning the decision in that way is just asking for the SCOTUS to hear it and reverse.

[wvattorney13]

I don't think this is the right way to view it. The Marks rule states that "the holding of the Court may be viewed as that position taken by those members who concurred in the judgments on the narrowest grounds"

Who concurred in the judgments. You cannot cobble together concurring and dissenting opinions to pick out your favorite one liner.

[David Nieporent]

The legal issue with Boasberg's contempt procedure in this case was that he made it a quasi-civil contempt proceeding by providing that the administration could purge its contempt by complying with his original order. But the appellate court found that since that order was no longer in effect, Boasberg could not use contempt to try to enforce it. The appellate court did not hold that the administration's behavior wasn't contumacious and couldn't be punished.

[Michael P]

But did the appellate court hold that the moon is not made of green cheese? If not, that means something!

[Kazinski]

Katsas did come to that conclusion, that the administration complied with the most plausible plain meaning of the TRO, and in any case when there were two plausible meanings Boasberg couldn't find contempt based on just his preferred reading.

"In contrast, the competing arguments for a custody-based
interpretation rest on generalized appeals to the purpose of the
TRO, as well as fine parsing of the court’s statements at an oral
hearing—the transcript for which was unavailable until after
the assertedly contemptuous acts had already occurred, and the
substance of which the district court never reduced to writing
and later disclaimed in significant part.
For purposes of criminal contempt, this more than suffices
to show that the TRO was ambiguous."

"Given this analysis, I concur in the order granting the
petition for mandamus and vacating the probable-cause order.
And because no prosecution could overcome the fatal
ambiguity explained above, I would also terminate the
criminal-contempt proceeding

But of course Katsas was speaking for himself, not the court.

[Mark N.]

Looks like Trump finally lost in his attempt to suppress the Epstein files. Might even lose in a unanimous vote at this point, after months of barely holding on to 51% against release.

[Kazinski]

How can he lose if he told the House GOP to release the files?

Still has to get through the Senate. Be interesting to see that vote.

And after all that, Trump could veto it, which is not likely.

There is only one way for him to lose, and that is if there is some unambiguous information implicating him. I give that maybe a 5% chance.

[Mark N.]

He told the House GOP not to release the files! That's why they've blocked the release for so many months. And has said that it would be a personal affront to him to release the files, because they are a Democrat Hoax that is trying to frame him.

[Kazinski]

That's old news.

Day old news:
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgv653v1vjo

[Mark N.]

Capitulation news by a loser who lost the fight. He tried to stop the release and failed.

[Commenter_XY]

One way or the other, those files will be made public. The GJ transcripts must be released, next. And the predators that molested teens will be identified. Let the chips fall where they may.

The victims who later committed suicide over the psychological trauma of their victimization deserve justice.

[David Nieporent]

The grand jury transcripts cannot legally be released.

[Mr. Bumble]

Under any circumstances?

[David Nieporent]

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 6(e)(3) provides the exclusive list of reasons grand jury transcripts can be disclosed. (In the past some courts had held that they had the inherent power to order the release of such documents when it was in the public interest to do so; this came up several times when historians wanted decades-old proceedings as part of their academic work. But appellate courts have ruled that out, saying that there is no such additional exception. Fed R. Crim. Pro 6 is it.

"Politicians want to know" isn't one of those permissible reasons; neither is "the public wants to know."

[Harvey Mosley]

Congress could subpoena the grand jury files and they could then "mysteriously" appear in the media. Kind of like Trump's tax returns.

[Mr. Bumble]

Thanks.

[not guilty]

"Congress could subpoena the grand jury files and they could then 'mysteriously' appear in the media. Kind of like Trump's tax returns."

Whom would Congress subpoena there? I can foresee separation of powers problems with such a subpoena.

[Commenter_XY]

I am not so sure about that, NG.

Congress could subpoena the GJ transcripts for the purpose of crafting legislation to help identify predators and assist victims. This is plausible.

[not guilty]

"Congress could subpoena the GJ transcripts for the purpose of crafting legislation to help identify predators and assist victims. This is plausible."

No, it is not plausible. Congress could subpoena witnesses who testified before the grand jury and ask them about their testimony. The witness has a First Amendment right to discuss his/her testimony after the grand jury term has ended. Butterworth v. Smith, 494 U.S. 624 (1990).

But anyone listed in Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e)(2)(B), that is, a grand juror, an interpreter, a court reporter, an operator of a recording device, a person who transcribes recorded testimony, an attorney for the government; or a person to whom disclosure is made under Rule 6(e)(3)(A)(ii) or (iii), is prohibited from disclosing proceedings occurring before the grand jury in the absence of an exception created by Rule 6(e)(3).

Compliance with a Congressional subpoena is not listed among such exceptions. Rule 6(e)(3)(E) permits a court to authorize disclosure—at a time, in a manner, and subject to any other conditions that it directs—of a grand-jury matter in a limited number of circumstances not relevant here.

[David Nieporent]

Congress could subpoena the GJ transcripts for the purpose of crafting legislation to help identify predators and assist victims. This is plausible.

Not legally plausible, it isn't. A congressional subpoena is not a lawful reason to disclose grand jury transcripts, regardless of Congress's motives.

[Riva]

The Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure are fucking irrelevant in this context you abysmally stupid asshole.

Now, it is honestly not my preference to use such language, but since your history is marked with bad faith shit head comments, and you're unquestionably an idiot, I really have no option here.

[not guilty]

"The Federal Rule [sic] of Criminal Procedure are fucking irrelevant in this context you abysmally stupid asshole."

Is that as true as everything else you have said, Riva?

[Riva]

100% true. Why on earth would you even suggest the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure controlled in this context? By context, I mean of course what was passed in the House.

[not guilty]

"100% true. Why on earth would you even suggest the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure controlled in this context? By context, I mean of course what was passed in the House."

Uh, Congress has no authority to negate the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure regarding grand jury secrecy, Riva.

There is no substitute for original source materials. The bill passed by the House does not require production of grand jury transcripts or materials. https://www.congress.gov/119/bills/hr4405/BILLS-119hr4405ih.pdf

[Riva]

Uh, Congress most certainly has that authority. Congress provided the statutory authority to promulgate the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and Congress can provide an exception to grand jury secrecy rules through the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Are you clowns really that f’ing ignorant? There is no substitute for thinking, give it a try sometime.

[Riva]

Put another way, because you really don’t seem to understand, Not Guilty, the Federal Rules do not override a statute. It’s the other way around actually. The bill is sufficient to authorize disclosure. If you believe otherwise, you’re welcome to your views. There’s no point in exchanging further comments with someone so uninformed. And, like I noted, I don’t give a shit about the Epstein files anyway.

[not guilty]

XY, what exception(s) to the rule of grand jury secrecy do you believe apply here?

[Commenter_XY]

see above.

[not guilty]

What subsection of Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e) do you claim is potentially applicable, XY?

[Riva]

Are you joking? Do you have any understanding of what the House passed today? Now, I personally don't give a shit about the Epstein files but Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e) is IRRELEVANT.

[Kazinski]

He could stop the release if he wanted by vetoing the bill, he doesn't think its worth it.

You can't fail if you don't try.

[Martinned]

Not if Congressional Republicans and Democrats agree he can't.

[Mr. Bumble]

Get back to us when 2/3's of Congress can agree on anything.

[Martinned]

MTG agreeing with AOC is usually a start...

[Dr. Ed 2]

The release could start WW-III.

Imagine the implications if FOREIGN folk went to Orgy Island.

LBJ was worried about the Warren Commission doing this.

[Zarniwoop]

Isn't it a bit early in the day to be drinking so hard?

[Mr. Bumble]

Super strong gummies?

[wvattorney13]

He was worried that Arlen Specter and Earl Warren were going to an orgy?

[David Nieporent]

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheSimpsons/comments/dk9awd/earl_warren_wasnt_a_stripper/

[David Nieporent]

The release could not start WWIII. HTH.

[Josh R]

Why did Trump change his mind? Why didn't he release the files earlier? Why doesn't he release them now (he needs no permission from Congress)?

[Michael P]

"they are a Democrat Hoax that is trying to frame him."

Democrat behavior has been proving this theory.

[Armchair]

"There is only one way for him to lose, and that is if there is some unambiguous information implicating him. I give that maybe a 5% chance."

I give that a 0% chance. Biden's Democratic followers had all this information for years. If there was something unambiguous implicating him...they would've used it in 2024. There's nothing.

[Estragon]

He’s already implicated.

He knew what Epstein was up to, looked the other way until Maxwell and Epstein tried to steal away the daughter of some member at Mar A Lago who had enough juice to make Don do something about it. No need to see the files to figure that out. As you said: what’s the big deal?

[Jmaie]

This is what is so tedious about the whole conversation. Both pro and anti Trumper’s have made up their minds and will happily make grand statements based on anything and nothing.

[Bob from Ohio]

"He knew what Epstein was up to, looked the other way"

A fantasy.

You just got vibes, as your fellow delusionist would say, not evidence.

[Michael P]

But Jeffrey Epstein himself wrote that Donald Trump must have known "about the girls", and Democrats #BelieveAllEpsteins. More than that, they have a ouija board that lets them read Epstein's mind and know exactly what Epstein knew that Donald Trump knew.

Just admit already that Republicans don't have that information because they weren't in bed with Epstein.

[Joe_dallas]

Did trump know about Epsteins under age girl activity?

Most likely everyone in eptsein's circle know about Epsteins underage girl activity. Probably an open secret. The super rich is a very small community, and everyone inside that very small community, same schools, kids in same private schools, etc.

Just as the Clintons most likely knew, so did Trump likely know.

[wvattorney13]

I would guess that everyone knew that Epstein liked young but still legal women. The truly underage and illegal ones he would have kept to himself. That's really not something you share with people.

[Sarcastr0]

I would guess that everyone knew that Epstein liked young but still legal women

This is a level of naivete I find hard to believe is real.

The trafficking? The island? Have you just heard of this guy for the first time?

[Estragon]

Are you really going to make me dig up the video of him speaking about Guiffre on the plane from July?

The currently operative story is that Maxwell stole Guiffre from the spa, Don told her and Epstein not to do it again, and then when he tried to do the same thing again, Don kicked him out of Mar A Lago. That is the story they themselves have been telling for months.

[Michael P]

How would Bob "make" you do that? You're the one choosing to not identify any good evidence for whatever hypothesis you hold.

[Estragon]

It was widely publicized at the time and commented upon in this very hellhole. As I said— this is the story that they themselves have been telling.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aymOs5wRYGI&pp=0gcJCR4Bo7VqN5tD

Starts around 24:00

[Bob from Ohio]

That story does not say anything about what he "knew" before that particular incident. You still don't have evidence, just vibes.

Epstein is just QAnon for libs.

[Estragon]

Well, in the video linked above he claims it was about “hiring” away spa girls. But he is clearly equating the two incidents— Guiffre and the later, unnamed, daughter of a member. But even in 2007, he knew it wasn’t about “hiring.”

https://pagesix.com/2007/10/15/sex-case-victims-lining-up/

Again. I would be surprised if this moved the needle for anyone.

[Bob from Ohio]

Estrogen in 2015: The pee tape is real!

[Estragon]

Ok, I think we’re done here.

[wvattorney13]

"But even in 2007, he knew it wasn’t about “hiring.”"

That might be the case if it could be shown that EVERY female hired by Epstein was a sex worker. And if that was true, how would Trump know about it? It seems rather straightforward that he was upset by Epstein poaching employees.

[Estragon]

It wasn’t a hiring attempt. That is Trump’s spin now in 2025. Back in 2007 they knew Epstein was trying to get these girls to “do things.” The problem was that it was the daughter of a member and that guy had enough suction to make Trump do something about it. Not so for Guiffre— her dad merely worked for Don.

[Bob from Ohio]

knew!

Vibes, only vibes

[Estragon]

Yes, Bob. Knew.

“Meanwhile, the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach last night confirmed a Web site report that Epstein has been banned there. “He would use the spa to try to procure girls. But one of them, a masseuse about 18 years old, he tried to get her to do things,” a source told us. “Her father found out about it and went absolutely ape-[bleep]. Epstein’s not allowed back.”

[David Nieporent]

If it were innocent, why would Trump care whether a random teenage girl changed jobs? It's not like Epstein was poaching senior executives at the Trump Organization.

[wvattorney13]

"It's not like Epstein was poaching senior executives at the Trump Organization."

Every employee at a prestigious club is highly trained to provide exceptional service. It isn't like hiring some ditzy teenager to work at Old Navy.

[Estragon]

“highly trained to provide exceptional service”

OMG ok that was exceptionally well played. Almost spit out my drink. When Maxwell and Epstein asked an 18 year old daughter of a member to “do things” what training do you imagine she received to be able to fulfill that request? And what exactly was being requested, do you figure? And if she was “highly trained” to do such things why was dad so mad?

[Estragon]

And I just gotta say— I’d like to give this particular persona the benefit of the doubt— but we are talking about young women ending up in sex slavery. So “highly trained to provide exceptional service” comes off as… well, callous

[Estragon]

“Epstein is over.”

[Joe_dallas]

That would be consistent with Trump knowing Epsteins reputation and Trump stepping in to prevent Epstein from abusing another girl.

As I noted above, most likely everyone in Epsteins circle knew Epsteins abuse of under age girls ie an open secret.

[Estragon]

“Trump knowing Epsteins reputation and Trump stepping in”

Uh, no. That is not what the 2007 article says. It says the Dad went apeshit and forced Trump’s hand.

[wvattorney13]

That doesn't make sense. Why would dad me mad at Trump because Epstein was luring his daughter away from Mar-a-Lago? If dad had that much juice it would have been much easier taking down Epstein than going up against Trump, even 2007 Trump.

[Estragon]

Take down Epstein! With what? His angry words?

Dad had enough juice to make life miserable for Trump and Mar A Lago for letting Epstein roam around and “procure” girls. Dad did not have enough juice to get Epstein in trouble directly. How could he? Epstein skated on the original legal trouble thanks to Alex Acosta and others and his own juice. But he could get noisy about how Trump was letting this skeezeball Epstein roam around and try to “steal” girls.

[Sarcastr0]

wvattorney, I beg you to learn about Epstein and what he did to 'his' girls.

[windycityattorney]

And the reverse is true. Trump has directed DOJ to use the files to go after implicated democrats. So if all these democrats were in the files, Trump & GOP could have used it against them from 2016>>>>forward. But they also didn't do that.

[Armchair]

"And the reverse is true"

Yes...and no. That assumes the DoJ during the first Trump administration was actually sharing Trump's desires. Past evidence seems to suggest that wasn't true

[hobie]

2018 - In an email exchange, Epstein’s brother, Mark Epstein, asks Epstein how he’s doing. When Epstein responds that he’s with Steve Bannon—Trump’s former White House chief of staff—Mark Epstein follows up with: “Ask him if Putin has the photos of Trump blowing Bubba?”

Mark Epstein has clarified that Bubba is NOT BIll Clinton and that he has no further comments about that email. So who is Bubba?

[Brett Bellmore]

Some imaginary character, I assume.

[Sarcastr0]

Your selective conspiracy brain continues to deliver.

[Life of Brian]

Good man. Gotta keep hope alive for Pee Tape 2.0!

[Malika la Maize]

Bob from Ohio 51 minutes ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Estrogen in 2015: The pee tape is real!

Reply

Marching orders!

[Life of Brian]

Not sure why you're attaching this to the earlier of the two comments.

Regardless, come on: it's the uber-obvious parallel to this latest "ha -- you can't prove this completely over the top breathless rumor DIDN'T happen" garbage.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Marching orders!"

More like "great minds think alike"!

[TwelveInchPianist]

"Your selective conspiracy brain continues to deliver."

I know, I can't believe that Brett fell for the deranged conspiracy theory that [checks notes] Trump didn't blow some dude named Bubba.

[hobie]

Yet another Dem hoax™, Brett?

[Martinned]

So who is Bubba?

Several hypotheses seem to be out there. One of them is a horse, the other one is this guy: https://www.timesnownews.com/world/us/us-news/who-is-bubba-saulsbury-the-odessa-oilman-behind-major-donations-to-trump-victory-and-gop-pacs-article-153163361

[wvattorney13]

Seriously? That sounds like an obvious joke.

Let's take a couple of unsupported steps. Let's assume that Trump was having homosexual relations with some dude named Bubba. Let's also assume that he allowed himself to be photographed doing it.

We should also assume that Epstein had the foresight to save them to blackmail Trump in the hopes that he would one day be President, and he sat down at his email software and sent the pictures to [e-mail].

After doing all of that, Epstein's brother, in a bid to determine if Putin received the photographs, would have his brother ask Steve Bannon if Putin received the email?

Have I got it right? Is there anything you guys won't fall for when it comes to Trump?

[Michael P]

Evidence suggests the answer to your last question is "no".

[hobie]

Why would the Epsteins and Maxwell make up a bunch of things to each other in private emails?

[wvattorney13]

What are you talking about? I'm talking about the "Bubba" thing.

It is clear that Epstein's brother heard he was talking to Bannon and wanted to needle Bannon.

Or, maybe you are right. Maybe instead of using read receipts on his email, Epstein's brother wanted to confirm--through Bannon---that the blackmail had reached its target.

[windycityattorney]

Jean-Luc Brunel - who owned a separate modeling agency for a time and who, coincidentally, also apparently hung himself in a jail cell.

There are rumors that his nickname was 'bubba.' And of course one of Maxwell's horses was apparently nicknamed bubba.

I cannot 100% confirm either of these rumors. But they are interesting. I personally think Trump blowing a horse is way funnier than some frenchman (and Bill Clinton would be funnier than the horse). But apparently Epstein's brother has come out to clear up that he is not talking about Bill Clinton so that rules him out. Still leaves the horse though.

[Life of Brian]

Man, there's keeping hope alive, and then there's... whatever this is.

[Bob from Ohio]

Yet they think they are different from QAnon.

[windycityattorney]

They are just internet rumors. I do not take them very seriously.

Unless the photo in question pops up all we have is speculation. If some hapless Washington correspondent is forced to ask Trump if he ever blew a horse - it could be the funniest thing on t.v. in the last 10yrs.

Are you not entertained?

[Life of Brian]

I am entertained, actually. It's amusing, albeit in a really sad sort of way, that Le Resistance is so tapped out of made-up but at least halfway plausible sounding problems that they're down to stuff like this.

[wvattorney13]

I, for one, think that you have exposed yourself as part of the Trump fellating a horse and Putin knowing about it cover up. Frankly, there is no alternative rationale that makes any sense.

Have you no shame, sir?

[Bob from Ohio]

"they're down to stuff like this."

They've been insane from the jump. They actually believed Trump peed in his bed in Moscow and there was a tape of it!

[Sarcastr0]

I've seen QAnon posts, and I've seen posts about the piss tape.

They're not really in the same...register.

Ironic meme-y shitposting is not the same as utterly sincere frantic delusions.

No one is gonna take a gun into a pizza shop over the piss tape.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"They're not really in the same...register."

Whatever you say, Vibrator.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"So who is Bubba?"

Your mom.

[Riva]

I guess we do this again. Remember the 20,000 Epstein emails? Be careful what you wish for Democrats. Hat tip John Hinderaker, powerlineblog.com:

Jeffrey Epstein was a Democrat, and his friends and associates were overwhelmingly Democrats. He was prominent in academic circles, and was an insider at both Harvard and MIT. The only politician with whom he is known to have had a relatively significant relationship was Bill Clinton

Yet, the Democrats, in their ceaseless search for issues to distract from their own performance in office, have tried to link Epstein to President Trump. Last week, the House Oversight Committee cooperated by releasing 20,000 Epstein emails. Democrats greeted the release joyfully, only to find that out of 20,000 there are zero emails from Donald Trump, and zero emails to Donald Trump. Epstein name-dropped Trump, as he did Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, except that in Trump’s case he was mostly expressing antagonism.

And it turns out that in 2019, after Epstein was a convicted sex offender, Epstein texted a Democratic member of Congress in the middle of a hearing, advising her on ways the Democrats could "get" President Trump. Of course it didn’t work, because Epstein knew nothing about Trump that was of use.

The point is that Epstein hated Donald Trump, probably because Trump had told him, years before, never to darken the door of Mar-a-Lago again. So the Democrats’ glee over the 20,000 emails comes down to this: Epstein had no relationship with President Trump, and hated him.

Now President Trump has asked the Department of Justice to investigate Epstein’s relationships with Bill Clinton, Larry Summers–who, like Clinton, visited Epstein’s island–LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman, and Epstein’s banks. Attorney General Pam Bondi has said that DOJ will do so. The New York Times is outraged, of course...

[Sarcastr0]

As has been pointed out to you previously: Dems don’t care.

We don't have a cult figure we gotta protect. You do.

Epstein was bad, and if Dems are among those who knew he was bad and were still cool with him, they can go down.

This isn’t a political trick. We aren’t playing some game.
You can’t understand that it seems. Maybe less Powerline reading; it has your priories pretty screwed up.

[Brett Bellmore]

No, you have an anti-cult going on, not a cult.

[Magister]

Cult is a pejorative because cults are generally bad; opposing cults seems like a good thing. Either deny that what you're supporting is a cult or explain what specifically is bad about opposing that cult.

[Michael P]

You first.

[Magister]

Nothing that I support is a cult. Now it's the Trump apologists' turn.

[Michael P]

The first step to recovering from cult indoctrination is admitting that you've been indoctrinated into a cult.

[Magister]

Waiting for you to take that step.

[not guilty]

Brett, is an anti-cult somehow a bad thing?

[Riva]

Nope. Leftists, be they fascists, communists or whatever, are the ones obsessed with "cult figures." The voters support President Trump because they support his policies. Those are the things Democrats don't have, at least not any a sane voter would support. Hence, the distraction.

[Sarcastr0]

You have no idea why your ‘this will effect some Dems so you will regret it’ doesn’t play do you?

I hope you aren’t so blindly transactional in real life. That’s just sad.

[Riva]

I hope you actually argue some things honestly in real life instead of resorting to distractions and insults. That’s just sad.

[Sarcastr0]

It really is a lot like you can't parse what I'm talking about because it's outside your training set.

[Riva]

Not sure about real life but you’re determined to double down on stupid here. More insults and distractions. Not just sad, but tedious.

[David Nieporent]

Weird, then, that many more voters cast votes for Trump's Democratic opponents than they did for Trump over the three cycles he was on the ballot.

[Riva]

If that’s what you really believe asshole, then I guess democrats should double down on open borders; and DEI; and the trans insanity, and the climate change fraud; and defunding the police; and, in honor of NY’s new islamo-communist mayor, let’s toss in government run grocery stores and globalizing the intifada. Oh and don’t forget taxing the living shit out of everything. Good luck.

[David Nieporent]

If that’s what you really believe

I mean, it's math, not an issue of belief.

[Riva]

Elections depend on many factors in multiple jurisdictions, my stupid asshole friend. By all means, put forward candidates as offensive as you across the country. We'll see how those numbers add up. Maybe democrats can lie cheat and steal some wins? They've certainly done that before.

Now we're done. Fuck off.

[David Nieporent]

From "The voters support President Trump because they support his policies" to "Elections depend on many factors" in under 12 hours.

[Riva]

Post script. Only a true idiot would see a contradiction here. Only a world class asshole would put it in writing for everyone to see. Primary among those factors are policy matters. That is not to say that other factors may not also be in play over the ridiculously long voting period democrats exploit to steal what they can.

Do yourself a favor and just stop posting. Are you a masochistic asshole?

[JohnSmith97]

"Dems don't care."

They just endlessly claim to be the protectors of.. truth, justice, and there must be a Trump pee tape in the Epstein files. Now. Just not during the previous administration. Now.

And who can doubt their sincerity when they release redacted letters that had already been released in unredacted form?

I'm sure there was no malice intended, just an honest mistake, right?

In other news, the VI delegate wasn't texting Epstein during a house hearing, she was just talking with an (unnamed) constituent. We know this because Raskin and Plaskett herself say so.

I'm sure the (D) faithful will eat it right up.

[SRG2]

Yet, the Democrats, in their ceaseless search for issues to distract from their own performance in office, have tried to link Epstein to President Trump.

Are you aware that there is, in fact, a link?

[loki13]

Look, other than the pictures of them together, what link?

I mean, other than the pictures of them together and the videos of them together, what link?

I mean, other than the pictures of them together and the videos of them together and the numerous documents like birthday cards, what link?

I mean, other than the pictures of them together and the videos of them together and the numerous documents like birthday cards and the emails, what link?

I mean, other than the pictures of them together and the videos of them together and the numerous documents like birthday cards and the emails and the numerous contemporaneous stories talking about how they were neighbors and friends, what link?

I could keep going for so long with this bit. It's like saying, "I've heard of Resse's, but I'm shocked to here people say that there is any connection between chocolate and peanut butter!"

[windycityattorney]

Aye - and Trump was a big city democrat back then as well. So what? Let em all burn.

[Commenter_XY]

When will Larry Summers, close confidante of Epstein, be removed from any role that involves Harvard students?

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/larry-summers-goes-hiding-messages-sought-epsteins-advice-cheating-daughter-ccp-official

The man belongs in prison, general population.

[Frank Drackman]

I thought the Federal Death Penalty was by Lethal Injection.

[Kazinski]

I'm going to pull a notguilty here and ask you what the crime was.

[Mr. Bumble]

Being a friend of Epstein?

[Commenter_XY]

You think emails are the only thing Summers did with Epstein? You are not naive.

Let's see the data, and the GJ testimony under oath by the victims themselves. How many young women are dead, by their own hand, victimized and traumatized by reprobates like him? This is not complicated. Anyone who sexually abuses teenaged girls (or boys) should be put in a cage. That predator should be in prison, general population.

Summers should not be teaching anyone, let alone young adults. Unless he is a prisoner in the 'Scared Straight' program.

[Sarcastr0]

This is the histrionics no one posted with respect to Trump but which Trump’s defenders like to pretend everyone is.

[RedheadedPharoh]

Wha wha wha wha wha wHaTAbouT tRuMP

Wheeeeeeee

[Dr. Ed 2]

Those young women likely were more sexually experienced than you are. They'd already had their innocence taken long before...

[not guilty]

"Let's see the data, and the GJ testimony under oath by the victims themselves."

What exception(s) to the rule of grand jury secrecy do you believe apply here?

[wvattorney13]

And ask you to attach the evidence to your post.

[Martinned]

Excellent question.

(Minus the implicit assumption that someone being raped and/or murdered in prison is a good thing.)

[Michael P]

If you dislike like assumptions that your mind injects, you should improve your mind rather than blaming other people for them.

[hobie]

I suppose if Summers knows some things about Trump, he'll just get the Club Fed treatment. Or, failing that, it appears that a $1M pledge to the Trump family is the minimum required for the pardon.

[Estragon]

“prison, general population”

What crimes— other than those against decency and propriety— do you think were committed based on these emails? I anticipate him being removed from his Harvard positions forthwith.

I assume the ‘general population’ add on here is an endorsement of prison rape? I really encourage people not to do this— it is extremely bad.

Why shouldn’t Larry get the Maxwell treatment in the alternative? A puppy to play with, unsupervised visitation, access to a laptop, outside catering… just to name a few potential perks. ITSM his imagined crimes are less worse than the ones she was convicted of.

No, I think the appropriate punishment is the one he will receive and richly deserve. Maybe some social shunning, but most importantly— nobody will ever feel obliged to listen to what Larry has to say or take him seriously ever again. And I suspect from his perspective that is just about the harshest punishment imaginable.

[not guilty]

Commenter_XY, the article that you link to reflects quite badly on Larry Summers's judgment, but where is the crime? (What Harvard chooses to do is up to its Board of Overseers. I wouldn't shed a tear if they choose to dismiss him.)

Suppose you were an Assistant United States Attorney drafting an indictment of Larry Summers based on the conduct reported in the article that you link to. What offense(s) would you charge? Which federal grand jury would you present to (as in which district)? How would any such indictment (for conduct occurring in 2018 and 2019) not be barred by 18 U.S.C. § 3238?

(I am aware of 18 U.S.C. § 3283, but the linked article does not even remotely suggest the sexual or physical abuse, or kidnaping, of a child under the age of 18 years.)

And how would any criminal prosecution based merely upon an exchange of emails, even between horndogs, not be precluded by the First Amendment?

[David Nieporent]

(I am aware of 18 U.S.C. § 3283, but the linked article does not even remotely suggest the sexual or physical abuse, or kidnaping, of a child under the age of 18 years.)

Note that the woman he was discussing with Epstein in the emails was in her mid-30s at the time.

[not guilty]

The article that XY links to doesn't specify her age, but it does recite that she earned her bachelor's degree and Ph.D. at Harvard between 2000 and 2009. That is why I was quite confident that she was well over the age of consent.

[David Nieporent]

There's an article in the Harvard Crimson that identifies her by name, and you can then google to find out her birthdate.

[not guilty]

Commenter_XY, if you've got bupkis, man up and say so.

[David Nieporent]

In prison for what?

[Kazinski]

This seems like a reasonable take:
"Larry Summers was texting Epstein up to July 5, 2019, the day before his arrest.

Summers wanted advice on leveraging into bed a Chinese economist whose father is a senior CCP official Summers supported & flattered

She was almost certainly playing Summers."

[Dr. Ed 2]

China could start WW-III over this.

[David Nieporent]

No, they could not.

[Mr. Bumble]

Epstein, Epstein, Epstein....
10,000 spiders on LSD could not have woven a more tangled web which is still growing.
I think I'll wait for the Ken Burns documentary for the full story.

[hobie]

It seems poetic that the Teflon Don's undoing is his deviant sexual acts.

[ThePublius]

What deviant sexual acts did Trump commit? Got receipts?

[hobie]

The one's Trump has personally bragged about, or all the others?

[ThePublius]

Like what?

[Michael P]

hobie doesn't have facts or evidence, he just has conspiracy theories that he complicates whenever part starts to looks falsified.

[Malika la Maize]

Mikie Q prefers fealty to evidence.

[Malika la Maize]

Iirc he was found in civil court to have sexually assaulted a woman. That’s deviant imho but ymmv.

[ThePublius]

You mean the E. Jeanne Carroll hoax?

[Mr. Bumble]

You mean the case funded by friend of Epstein Reid Hoffman?

[David Nieporent]

What relevance do you think it has who was paying Carroll's legal fees?

[Z Crazy]

Tell me more.

What date did the rape of E Jean Carol take place?

[Malika la Maize]

You mean jury trial conclusion?

[Bob from Ohio]

In 80% democrat Manhattan!

[Sarcastr0]

You know how jury trials work, so don't be a propagandist tool.

[Bob from Ohio]

Juries are usually drawn from voter lists. In NYC, that's just liberals, who, like you, are irrational about Trump.

[Malika la Maize]

Wasn’t the 9 person jury anonymous?

[David Nieporent]

It was a federal trial, so it drew from all five boroughs, not just Manhattan. And what is the relevance of that? Do you think there's no voir dire?

[not guilty]

Why would a federal trial draw from all five boroughs? I thought that some boroughs were in the Southern District and some in the Eastern District.

[David Nieporent]

Yes, you are correct. Brain fart of mine. It is five counties, but not the five boroughs. The SDNY Manhattan jury pool draws from New York, Bronx, Westchester, Putnam and Rockland.

[Mr. Bumble]

@ Malika:

Z Crazy 49 minutes ago
Flag Comment
Mute User

Tell me more.

What date did the rape of E Jean Carol take place?

Malika la Maize 33 minutes ago
Flag Comment
Mute User

You mean jury trial conclusion?

Didn't Fullofcrapadoplolis get in trouble for claiming the jury said "rape"?

[Malika la Maize]

lol, you dolt. I didn’t say rape.

Unlike you I’m careful with what I say.

[David Nieporent]

No. I mean, Trump sued for that, but the suit was frivolous.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Wow. Laughed out of court, eh?

How much was Trump sanctioned for filing a frivolous lawsuit?

[Frank Drackman]

Again with the Bill Clinton, guys been out of Orifice for nearly 25 years.

[TwelveInchPianist]

A little longer. He was out of orifice a couple years before he left office.

[hobie]

I think that Donald's strange reversal on the Epstein Files signals to me that he's been assured that his name was scrubbed from the files by Patel and Bondi. However, I've said from the beginning that the worst possible outcome for Trump is if he DOESN'T appear in the files. Because it will be a sure sign that the files were criminally tampered with.

[Malika la Maize]

Yes, given his sudden about face and his known propensity to threaten careerist who don’t show him what he wants to see I think we should assume there was very embarrassing to incriminating information in them that got scrubbed.

[Bob from Ohio]

"I think we should assume there was very embarrassing to incriminating information in them that got scrubbed."

Epstein is just QAnon for libs.

[Sarcastr0]

I noted it in response to Commenter's QAnon-ish post above - the main push here is not that Trump's a member of a sekret pedo cabal, it's that he knew Epstein's deal and didn't care.

The e-mails and Trump's own statements (and guest list signings) make a pretty strong case for that much.

Sorry Bob, QAnon level lunacy is still a right-wing thing. The left's got some delusional folks but the right's owned the apex since Obama.

[Bob from Ohio]

"QAnon level lunacy is still a right-wing thing"

Keep thinking that.

[Malika la Maize]

Trump has never brought himself to deny the QAnon nonsense.

[Bob from Ohio]

windycityattorney down post proving my QAnon theory about libs true.

[LawTalkingGuy]

Oh? Which QAnon theories have been endorsed by the Second Circuit after reviewing an extensive trial record on the matter?

[ThePublius]

So, if Trump's name appears in the files, he's guilty.
And if his name doesn't appear in the files, he's guilty.

See what you're doing here?

[Malika la Maize]

Just following established conspiracy theory thinking (though there’s more reason to support this than usual). This could have been easily falsified if he had released the files as he advocated instead of resisting for so long.

[ThePublius]

Who says it is he who resisted? I thought there was a bipartisan congressional committee in charge of this. Perhaps I am wrong.

But I am objecting to hobie's and others' "heads I win, tales you lose' narrative on this. No matter what happens Trump is guilty, according to you guys.

[RedheadedPharoh]

They must moonlight as judges...

[Malika la Maize]

How was the cave you’ve been living in lately? He’s been saying it’s a Democrat hoax and that any Republican who wants it released is a weak traitor.

[Malika la Maize]

“No matter what happens Trump is guilty, according to you guys.”

He’s absolutely guilty of trying to cover this up after calling for their release. I think that and his known history of bullying bureaucrats regarding information he doesn’t like makes everything that follows questionable.

[David Nieporent]

Who says it is he who resisted? I thought there was a bipartisan congressional committee in charge of this. Perhaps I am wrong.

You are. The congressional committee to which you refer is trying to force Trump to release the files. It's his DOJ, not Congress, that has them.

[Malika la Maize]

Paul Ingrassia, a conservative activist who withdrew his nomination to oversee a government watchdog agency last month after POLITICO reported he made racist comments in a group chat, said Thursday he is moving to a new job in the administration.

The 30-year-old lawyer had been serving since February as White House liaison to the Department of Homeland Security. But in an email obtained by POLITICO, he told colleagues that he is leaving to become deputy general counsel at the General Services Administration…

POLITICO also reported that Ingrassia made a number of racist remarks in a text message chain from 2023 and 2024. In one of them, he remarked, “I do have a Nazi streak in me from time to time, I will admit it,” according to the texts.

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/11/13/trump-ingrassia-gsa-texts-00651340

President Donald Trump on Sunday brushed aside concerns about conservative commentator Tucker Carlson’s recent interview with a far-right activist known for his antisemitic views, which has caused a schism within the Republican Party.

Trump defended Carlson, saying the former Fox News host has “said good things about me over the years.” He said if Carlson wants to interview Nick Fuentes, whose followers see themselves as working to preserve America’s white, Christian identity, then “people have to decide.” Trump did not criticize Carlson or Fuentes.

Fuentes appeared to appreciate Trump’s sentiment, posting “Thank you Mr. President!” along with video of his interaction with reporters.

https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-tucker-carlson-nick-fuentes-c48a9b61d2412f43d254b2fd472d410f

[Estragon]

More Ingrassia. Pals with Andrew Tate, I guess:

https://www.propublica.org/article/andrew-tate-investigation-dhs-paul-ingrassia

[loki13]

Also?

Ingrassia was a former attorney for the Tate Brothers.

Yeah, those guys. And ... when he was in the White House, as a liaison for DHS, he personally intervened in an official DHS investigation of those scumbags and ordered DHS to return their cell phones.

That's right- Nazis controlling the government interfering with investigations to help sex traffickers. Remember, pedos and rapists- if you can't stop the investigation, then you can always count on a pardon (some money required) or, at worst, a really really cushy "summer camp."

Nazis, pedos, and rapists. That's our Trump White House!

https://www.propublica.org/article/andrew-tate-investigation-dhs-paul-ingrassia

[Estragon]

We might see another Heritage post or two but the groypers have won. Just how many Trumpists will have their come to Jesus moment and head for the exits is unclear, but I imagine few. That young republican text chain shows where this is all heading. Earth to Blackman and Bernstein. The call is coming from inside the house.

[LawTalkingGuy]

TBF to David, he does admit there is a problem on the right.

[Estragon]

And the first step is admitting there is a problem. So that is fair. But his priorities strike me as woefully misplaced. Get back to me when he goes after Ingrassia like random Rutgers professors or CUNY law students. He’s whistling past the graveyard and still fighting the last battle. We’ve come to a dangerous place.

[Martinned]

The US Regime is now also murdering people in the Pacific: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/pentagon-says-it-struck-another-suspected-drug-boat-pacific-killing-three-2025-11-16/

[ThePublius]

You are your ilk throw around the term "murder" as if you don't understand that there's a very specific legal definition of murder. You know, but you're using it as a cudgel against Trump.

I view these killings as self defense. We don't want these guys smuggling these terrible 'murderous' drugs into our country anymore. If they don't want to be eliminated, they should stop doing it.

[Sarcastr0]

I view these killings as self defense

That's because you're looking for a way to excuse murder.

[ThePublius]

No I'm not. It's not even established that it's murder, by the way.

If you're driving a partially submerged speedboat with three huge outboards on it towards our shore, and refuse to respond to a hail, or heave to, you are going to get blown up. And that's how it should be.

Have you ever seen any videos of these interdictions? They are not innocent fishermen, in fishing boats, or civilians taking a recreational cruise.

This is very dangerous business for the CG and Navy.

Watch this video form one month ago:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/1_yQKGR8mmw

(Note: they didn't blow these guys up, because they stopped.)

[Malika la Maize]

Refusing to stop a boat=summary execution?

“They are not innocent fishermen, in fishing boats, or civilians taking a recreational cruise.”

How do we know what they are when they got blown up without trial?

[ThePublius]

Watch the fucking video! Is that a recreational boat or a fishing boat? Are you dumb, or just acting?

[Sarcastr0]

That video does not establish self defense. You can't justify these murders, but Trump cult so you did vibes plus outrage and pretend that's the same thing.

[Bob from Ohio]

It establishes they are not "fishermen". Good enough.

[Sarcastr0]

Doesn't make it less a murder.

[M L]

Democrats murder more than 1 million babies per year in the U.S.

[Sarcastr0]

Try to stay on subject.

This reads like a concession and attempt to deflect.

[M L]

The Democrat holocaust of American babies will be the moral and political issue of the century.

[Sarcastr0]

Amazing hot take coming from the Confederacy apologist.

[LawTalkingGuy]

Imagine believing that Republicans aren't a huge percentage of the people getting abortions.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Justifiable Homicide, Gaslighto

[Malika la Maize]

Bob is consistently bloodthirsty. And styles himself as pro life! Good for us pro-choicers, the disingenuousness is palpable.

[Bob from Ohio]

Not my fault you don't get the difference between killing innocent babies and killing drug smugglers.

[LawTalkingGuy]

You just said that so long as they weren’t fishermen that’s good enough? You’re not very consistent here.

I mean it’s okay to admit that these are just thrill kills for you guys.

[not guilty]

"Not my fault you don't get the difference between killing innocent babies and killing drug smugglers."

Bob, "pro-life except as to folks whom I want to see killed" is not pro-life at all.

[Malika la Maize]

This is as dumb as people saying a video of the Rodney King thing absolutely proves something.

[Kenneth Almquist]

The U.S. military does not claim that it attempted to contact the vessel before blowing it up. Nor does the video show them attempting to contact or intercept the vessel.

You link to a video showing an interdiction by the Coast Guard, not by the U.S. military. You write “Note: hey didn't blow these guys up, because they stopped.” That’s one reason the Coast Guard didn’t blow up the vessel. Another reason that the Coast Guard didn’t blow up the vessel is that the Coast Guard doesn’t have missiles so it couldn’t have blown up the vessel. If the vessel had refused to stop, I assume the Coast Guard would have opened fire. If the vessel still failed to stop, the Coast Guard would continue firing until the vessel sank.

I was going to write a parody in which we equip police cars with missiles so that if someone fails to pull over after a police officer turns on his siren, the police officer can blow up the offending car. Only I’m not sure whether you would recognize it as parody or treat it as a serious proposal.

P.S. Here is the complete text of the announcement that accompanied the video of the strike:

On Nov. 15, at the direction of Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, Joint Task Force Southern Spear conducted a lethal kinetic strike on a vessel operated by a Designated Terrorist Organization. Intelligence confirmed that the vessel was involved in illicit narcotics smuggling, transiting along a known narco-trafficking route, and carrying narcotics. Three male narco-terrorists aboard the vessel were killed. The vessel was trafficking narcotics in the Eastern Pacific and was struck in international waters.

[Malika la Maize]

If you saw a guy you think is dealing fentanyl in the park and you shoot and kill him that’s self-defense? Sarc’s right, you’re just justifying murder.

Absolutely get tough on fentanyl trafficking. But extra-judicial killings? Not defensible.

[ThePublius]

See my reply to Sarc, above, and watch the video.

[Bunny495]

Bad analogy. If a LEO sees a guy in the park dealing fentanyl and approaches and orders the guy to stop and the guy starts running and then gets in a vehicle and flees and after warning shots are fired the guy still refuses to stop is a better analogy. Even fleeing in a car is not the best analogy since a car normally stays on roads and roadblocks are a realistic option while in the open water there are fewer options to interdict a fast boat.

Not to mention the LOS treaty has jurisdiction, not American local, state, and federal jurisdiction.

[Ridgeway]

Police are not allowed to fire warning shots, and they cannot shoot fleeing drug dealers. There than that, good analogy!

[Malika la Maize]

As Ridgeway said you’re hoisted on your own petard. The question is there any integrity in you that would have you come back, acknowledge it and say “man, I should be more critical of this Trump policy maybe.”

[David Nieporent]

Absolutely get tough on fentanyl trafficking.

Which the administration has admitted it lied about! None of these ships were even suspected of carrying fentanyl.

[Martinned]

You are your ilk throw around the term "murder" as if you don't understand that there's a very specific legal definition of murder.

You mean killing someone intentionally, with malice aforethought? Yeah, that's totally different from what's happening here.

[Estragon]

The invocation of self defense is interesting here, given that you have told us that in your home state one has a duty to retreat even from an armed home invasion on your own property.

[windycityattorney]

The self defense angle is cut off by the administration's own legal rationale that the laws of war don't apply because the US Military is not at risk of being injured in the operations (as they are miles away or hundreds miles away using a drone.)

What we have here is a serious case of pretzel logic. We can kill them because self defense...but nobody is in harm's way because of how we are killing them. Query: does imminent harm or risk of deadly force usually factor into the right to lethal self defense? Just asking questions here.

[not guilty]

"I view these killings as self defense. We don't want these guys smuggling these terrible 'murderous' drugs into our country anymore. If they don't want to be eliminated, they should stop doing it."

Uh, use of deadly force in self defense is justifiable only in the case of imminent peril.

[not guilty]

"You are your ilk throw around the term 'murder' as if you don't understand that there's a very specific legal definition of murder. You know, but you're using it as a cudgel against Trump."

Think so? Here is a thorough treatment of the unlawfulness of the Caribbean shenanigans by Professor Marty Lederman at the Georgetown University Law Center, who served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General at the Office of Legal Counsel from 2021-2023 and 2009-2010, and as an Attorney Advisor at the Office of Legal Counsel from 1994-2002. He discusses how both 18 U.S.C. § 1111(b) and the Uniform Code of Military Justice (10 U.S.C. § 918). Furthermore, 18 U.S.C. § 956(a)(1) makes it a felony to conspire within the United States “to commit at any place outside the United States an act that would constitute the offense of murder … if committed in the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States” if “any of the conspirators commits an act within the jurisdiction of the United States to effect any object of the conspiracy”.

https://www.justsecurity.org/120296/many-ways-caribbean-strike-unlawful/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

[David Nieporent]

Weird how you talk about murder having "a very specific legal definition," but then you claim it's self-defense, which also has a very specific legal definition.

The difference is that the very specific legal definition of murder actually applies, and the very specific legal definition of self-defense does not.

Oh, and FTR, the people being murdered in the Caribbean — I don't know about the ones in the Pacific — were not in the process of smuggling anything into the U.S. at the time.

[Frank Drackman]

Good

[LawTalkingGuy]

Thrill kills. That’s the best way to understand all of this.

[Martinned]

Freedom of religion for me but not for thee:

Nearly two dozen people were arrested as faith leaders protested on Friday outside a federal immigration facility near Chicago, authorities said, the latest sign of tensions over the Trump administration’s aggressive enforcement push.

The Cook County Sheriff’s Office said in a press release that 21 people had been detained outside a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement processing center in Broadview, Illinois, but did not provide identities and charges. Michael Woolf, minister at Lake Street Church of Evanston, was among those arrested, a Reuters photo showed.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/nearly-two-dozen-arrested-faith-leaders-protest-chicago-area-ice-facility_n_6917c8d7e4b0781acfd648e3

[ThePublius]

That is a very thin story. It never says what these 'protesters' did to warrant being arrested or detained. And it has nothing to do with freedom of religion!

[Sarcastr0]

Guilty until proven otherwise!

TP trusts the integrity and inherent peacefulness of ICE.

I expect he will unless the beatings come for him personally. That's how it works for some people.

[RedheadedPharoh]

He should only trust gold hearted govies like you! Not those black hearted ICE government workers.

[ThePublius]

No, I'm saying the story - the article - has absolutely no detail about what happened. What happened? Do you know?

You're the one who declares ICE guilty, regardless.

[Mr. Bumble]

Il Douche has the ability to feel the vibes.

[Sarcastr0]

What facts do you want? Individualized charging documents?

The news story is fine, except for you since you feel the need to defend ICE.

[Z Crazy]

ICE is keeping us safe from illegalkind.

[Malika la Maize]

Trust the Feds!

[Bob from Ohio]

"ICE is keeping us safe from illegalkind."

Sarc doesn't mind things like this:

"Men from Honduras, El Salvador accused of repeatedly raping 12-year-old in Texas, authorities say."

https://www.kgns.tv/2025/11/17/men-honduras-el-salvador-accused-repeatedly-raping-12-year-old-texas-authorities-say/

[Bob from Ohio]

Or this:

"Venezuelan man indicted for allegedly helping jet ski operator flee after fatal Grapevine Lake crash that killed teen kayaker Ava Moore"
Updated on: September 2, 2025 / 4:01 PM CDT / CBS Texas

https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/grapevine-lake-jet-ski-indictment-maikel-coello-perozo-ava-moore-death/

Its ok so long as he gets his grass cut.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"Guilty until proven otherwise!"

Didn't you just yesterday make a similar assumption with respect to Woody Allen?

[Bunny495]

You need better sources. The charger were, Obstruction, Disorderly Conduct, and Walking on a Highway. One of the arrested individuals faced a charge of mob action.

None of these charges are related to freedom of religion

[Poxigah146]

I'm sure the people criticizing these arrests have no issue bringing felony FACE prosecutions against elderly women for praying outside of abortion clinics.

[Brett Bellmore]

Depends; Is she praying while standing in the street?

[Michael P]

"You need better sources."

Of course he does. He reads the Huffington Post.

[Martinned]

The Swiss were shocked when they got banged up with some of the highest Trump tariffs in the world earlier this year. This made them re-evaluate their relationship with the EU, but it also made them rethink their strategy for dealing with Trump.

Switzerland and the US have agreed to cut President Donald Trump's steep 39% tariffs on Swiss imports to 15%, as part of a deal that involves a Swiss promise to invest $200bn (£150bn) in the US.

"It's a great relief for our economy," said Swiss Economics Minister Guy Parmelin, who said significant damage had been done since the additional tariffs had kicked in last August.

Parmelin said a move by Swiss business leaders to meet Trump in the White House last week had proved "decisive" in reaching a deal.

Industry chiefs visited the Oval Office, bearing gifts including a Rolex gold watch and a specially engraved gold bar from Swiss-based gold refining company MKS.

Initial attempts by Swiss President Karin Keller Sutter to change Trump's mind had fallen on deaf ears. Trump said she "was a nice woman, but she did not want to listen"

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce8zkrplpdyo

[Malika la Maize]

“bearing gifts including a Rolex gold watch and a specially engraved gold bar from Swiss-based gold refining company MKS.”

Tracks.

[loki13]

Trump said he would run America like one of his businesses!

...you know, into the ground, while he enriched himself.

Okay, that's not fair. I think it's better to say that he want to run America like he ran his charities. A personal piggy bank to enrich himself.

[Michael P]

You guys are still fucking that chicken, I see. Even while you were quoting some of Trump's twelve-digit trade policy wins, you ignore that gifts like those mentioned are treated as gifts to the country, not the person. And ignoring that these points were previously made in earlier open threads.

[Malika la Maize]

lol, like the Qatar jet!

[Michael P]

The country, not the president, owns Air Force One; so yes, like that.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/whatever-happened-to-qatar-air-force-one-jet

[David Nieporent]

Then why is Trump absconding with it when he leaves office?

[Malika la Maize]

Imagine being Mikie Q waking up and reading the news and thinking “JFC, I have to defend that today?”

The life of a toady.

[Malika la Maize]

On Monday, a man named Jonathan Braun was sentenced to 27 months in prison. The charges against him included sexually assaulting the live-in nanny for his own children and attacking a nurse with an IV pole. He was also accused of assaulting a 3-year-old child.

In October, a man named Christopher Moynihan was arrested and charged with threatening via text to “eliminate” Hakeem Jeffries, the House minority leader, at a speaking engagement in New York City on Oct. 20.

In March, a federal jury convicted a man named Eliyahu Weinstein of defrauding investors of $41 million. As Bloomberg reported, he had falsely promised “to invest their money in Covid-19 masks, scarce baby formula and first-aid kits bound for Ukraine.”

In January, an Indiana sheriff’s deputy shot and killed a man named Matthew Huttle when he reportedly raised a firearm during a traffic stop. Huttle was being arrested for a felony traffic violation when he resisted arrest. A special prosecutor charged with investigating the case said the deputy’s use of force was “legally justified.”

Four different men. Four very different crimes. But their common trait is that each of them had previously received a pardon, commutation or clemency from President Trump.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/13/opinion/trump-pardons-crimes.html

[RedheadedPharoh]

Woah! I can't believe Trump pardoned 4 people! That's so rare for presidents to do one, but a whopping whole 4?! Somethings afoot, Tonto!

[Malika la Maize]

He pardoned four that used connections and who went on to commit crimes.

[Bob from Ohio]

"used connections "

What "connections"? You might consider not using paywalled articles, especially from that rag.

[Poxigah146]

This is because he pardoned everyone from January 6. It's likely that some of them were bad candidates for pardoning, but there was no other way to do it given that the Biden DOJ acted so inappropriately.

[Glaucomatose]

He could have examined the cases and decided which ones merited a pardon or commutation. That would be one other way to do it.

[Michael P]

Which crystal ball and mind-reading gadget would allow that?

[Glaucomatose]

Why do you think pardons and commutations involve reading minds, as opposed to reviewing the record of the crime that someone was actually convicted of and their history prior to that?

Take the first of these cases. Braun "was originally indicted in 2010 on charges of smuggling and distributing marijuana. But while out on bail, he engaged in a predatory lending scheme, threatening small-business owners who had trouble repaying high-interest loans, according to suits filed by New York’s attorney general and the Federal Trade Commission." He was, and remains, a serial criminal. Why should he have been pardoned in the first place - other than the fact that he had ties to Jared Kushner's family?

[Malika la Maize]

Mikie Q doesn’t need records, he’s got fealty.

[Michael P]

Jonathan Braun was never pardoned, but don't let that stop your rant.

If you disagree with his commutation, how many years do you think we should jail people for selling marijuana?

[Glaucomatose]

He wasn't selling ounces on the street, he was running an international smuggling and money laundering operation; he allocuted to conspiring to smuggle 10,000 kg of marijuana, among other crimes. He was in jail for barely a year before Trump commuted his sentence. So let's just say: more than that.

[Malika la Maize]

Never pardoned just commuted!

I guess this kind of thing makes Mikie Q’s knees a little less sore?

[Michael P]

[moved]

[Z Crazy]

Did the Brandon DoJ prosecute anyone who was not even accused of violence that day?

[Michael P]

Who was the guy who claimed that leftists use data when arguing, but conservatives use anecdotes?

[Malika la Maize]

It wasn’t me, Mikie Q.

[Malika la Maize]

"NBC's Seth Meyers is suffering from an incurable case of Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS)," the president posted on Truth Social on Nov. 15. "He was viewed last night in an uncontrollable rage, likely due to the fact that his "show" is a Ratings DISASTER. Aside from everything else, Meyers has no talent, and NBC should fire him, IMMEDIATELY!"

Less than an hour later Trump's tirade was reposted on X by Brendan Carr, chairperson of the Federal Communications Commission, the independent agency that regulates radio, TV, wire, satellite and cable across the country.

https://www.npr.org/2025/11/17/nx-s1-5610501/trump-seth-meyers-fired

What a thin-skinned autocrat. Imagine the outrage if Obama or Biden called for, and their FCC chair seconded, a Fox talking head’s firing.

[Frank Drackman]

Seth Meyers isn't even as talented as Seth Curry, Seth Rogen, Seth Green, Seth McFarland, or even Barry Hussein Osama's Secretary of Labor Seth Harris (can anyone name the current Secretary? I'm thinking it's Linda McMahon, but don't hold me to that)

Frank

[Bob from Ohio]

Linda is Education Secretary, not Labor

[Estragon]

The current Labor Secretary is unfortunately Lori Chavez-Deremer. A prime target for Bill Pulte but somehow I think she’ll avoid the crosshairs.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Yes. Many tyrants are also losers.

The chair of the FCC (again) seems not to know his job.

[M L]

The idea of an "independent agency" is inherently unconstitutional and anti-democratic.

[Sarcastr0]

Inherently!

[apedad]

The Stock of Trump’s Tech Company Is Crashing So Hard It Isn’t Even Funny

President Donald Trump’s social network, Truth Social, is on life support.

Shares of the company that runs it, Trump Media and Technology Group (TMTG), hit a record low this week. Despite an initial surge of enthusiasm after its launch, the company has incurred massive losses, with the company showing increasingly blaring warning signs since Trump took office again in January.

Shares are down almost 70 percent since the beginning of the year, and down over 80 percent since hitting a record high following the merger last year during the runup to the election. The firm merged with blank check acquisition company Digital World Acquisition Corp. in March 2024, allowing it to be publicly traded under the ticker DJT.

https://futurism.com/future-society/stock-trump-media-crashing

#ETTD

[Poxigah146]

Who cares? The stock market is a joke anyway.

[Malika la Maize]

Guy in mom’s basement without retirement!

[Frank Drackman]

Sounds like a good time to buy.

[SRG2]

So buy

[Frank Drackman]

New York Jets player shot in Midtown Manhattan just a short walk from where Luigi Mangione murdered the Insurance Suit last year, and why hasn't Luigi been tried or at least Ass-Raped yet??

Frank

[Malika la Maize]

Like his mom Francis thinks a lot about ass rapes yet to come.

[Poxigah146]

https://nypost.com/2025/11/17/us-news/massive-drop-in-latino-support-for-trump-stuns-cnns-harry-enten/

So what's the takeaway here? That a group of low-skill, low-income, high criminality people won't support you unless you support legalizing more of their cucaracha cousins?

[Brett Bellmore]

No, I think the take away is that Latino citizens warmed to Trump, not the GOP as such. If he's not on the ballot, they go back to voting Democratic.

[Poxigah146]

How do you figure that?

[ducksalad]

The poll was about Trump personally.

The take away is that they were voting against Harris, not for Trump. Surely you can see how that might be the case.

[Life of Brian]

Yeah, it was a bit puzzling to me how someone as deep in the game as Harry Enten could fall into such an elementary fallacy of comparing absolute and relative performance. In theory, you could have gotten those results polling the same group on the same day.

[grb]

Brett Bellmore : " ...Latino citizens warmed to Trump..."

As often the case, Brett walks a long mile to detour around obvious truth. Trump has launched a full-scale war against people in this country with brown skin. It's carried out by masked goons who barely pretend to be following the law. People of Hispanic origins are nervous about walking the streets, whether they're citizens or not. They may be jumped by heavily-armed thugs and thrown in the back of a van, then released hours or days later when someone finally checks their status. It's not just illegals. People following the rules and obeying the law are disappeared as well, sometimes taken when they show for a scheduled immigration appointment. Pretty vindictive cruelty often seems the point.

And all those Latino voters? Many thought Trump's halfwit babble on the campaign trail was exaggeration. Many thought he'd go after the small minority of illegals engaging in active criminal activities. Some probably thought Trump had some respect for them as people, despite all evidence to the contrary.

And let's not forget they're simply Americans. Let non-Latino voters, they've soured on Trump after a year of his bungling, lies, and loathsome crudity. At this stage of his presidency, Trump is setting records in unpopularity. He's underwater on every single issue, immigration included. Why should Latino voters be any different? Why should they have any "warmth" left towards the sleazy lying clown?

[Poxigah146]

Again, the Hispanics are to blame here. The "legal" ones and "illegal" ones live in the same communities, often even in the same households, work at the same jobs, such that they're intertwined.

Chemotherapy kills cancer, but it also kills some healthy cells.

There's no way to get 20 million illegal mestizos out without catching some legal Hispanics in error.

Nearly everyone carrying illegal guns in New York City were black, so it was reasonable to frisk all black men for guns, even without individualized suspicion.

Likewise, it's reasonable to assume that every brown skinned Hispanic with an accent is illegal unless and until they demonstrate otherwise.

[Z Crazy]

Illegalkind is waging a full-scale war on white people.

Just ask Molie Tibbets, Kayla Hamilton, Rachel Morin, and Laken Riley.

Of course, they will mow down as many non-white people (Clarence Nelson, AJ Wise) as it takes just to commit violent crimes against whites, especially sex crimes against white girls.

[Malika la Maize]

There's no way to get 20 million illegal mestizos out without catching some legal Hispanics in error.

Nearly everyone carrying illegal guns in New York City were black, so it was reasonable to frisk all black men for guns, even without individualized suspicion.

Likewise, it's reasonable to assume that every brown skinned Hispanic with an accent is illegal unless and until they demonstrate otherwise.

Notice no pushback from Mikie Q, Bri Bri, etc.

Fellow travelers. No enemies to the right.

[jb]

Probably the lesson is that if you're going to try to harass a bunch of people predominantly based on how they look, people that look like that probably aren't going to like the policy very much.

[Poxigah146]

What if nearly all illegals "look" like them? There's no way to remove 20 million illegals without focusing on dark-skinned Hispanics.

[David Nieporent]

There is no way to remove 20 million illegals without first admitting millions more illegals so that there are 20 million illegals.

[Kazinski]

We'll worry about that when we run out of the ones we have.

[Estragon]

“cucaracha cousins”

One fun thing about the daily open threads is you get to see which comments the huckleberries think are so so clever that they post them twice.

[John 4]

"Why do they call us Nazis?"

[Estragon]

Not to belabor this point but once again I urge the community to take note of comments like these. Often times, the more extreme comments around here actually anticipate where MAGA is heading politically as a movement. Steven Miller is already there.

And for those of you hoping for some sort of Heritage crackup I have bad news— this guy’s side has already won. So it is important to listen carefully to what is being said here: comparing human beings to cancerous cells that must be excised from the body politic (at the cost of a few healthy cells I.e. citizens) and cockroaches. This language is evocative of… something— and intentionally so. They are telling us to our faces.

[Poxigah146]

The low-skill mestizo population are in fact cockroaches. They take way more from America than they contribute, and they ruin every neighborhood where they move in. They shove 12 people into small houses and take up all the street parking. They play loud music into the night. They fill up our emergency rooms. Their low IQ children need all sorts of special ed services.

They don't belong here.

[Estragon]

Steve- is that you?

[Malika la Maize]

Notice no push back from Bri Bri, 12 centimeters, Mikie Q, etc.

If a liberal said anything like this they’d be all over it. But a fellow traveler? No enemies on the right. Remember that, disingenuous.

[Commenter_XY]

Were you around during the 60's? It was more politically violent than now, and we had constant war.

[Sarcastr0]

It's Commenter, waiving away open Nazis because they're MAGA. Again.

[M L]

Idk about that. There were a lot of polls showing latino citizens were actually very supportive of immigration enforcement. This could be an outlier.

[John F. Carr]

Legal immigrants may support enforcement of immigration laws. We came here legally. You should too.

Legal immigrants may not support the recent practice of detaining brown people for questioning.

[M L]

Non-immigrants wouldn't support the latter practice, either. Which I doubt is a real thing, I hang out with tons of "brown people" and none of them have been detained.

[John 4]

I refuse to believe this isn't part of a comedy routine or a bit of some sort.

[Mr. Bumble]

...and in Middle East news:
"In Major Breakthrough, U.N. Security Council Adopts U.S. Peace Plan for Gaza

Russia and China abstained in the vote, which provides a legal mandate for the Trump administration’s vision of how to move past the cease-fire to rebuild the war-ravaged enclave after two years of war."
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/17/world/middleeast/un-security-council-gaza-peace-plan.html?smid=url-share

(I guess avid NYT's reader Qualika missed this one)

[grb]

Mr. Bumble : "In Major Breakthrough..."

1. I'd bet Bumble usually writes off any UN news as meaningless.
2. As is the case here. What's the Vegas line on the U.S. Peace Plan for Gaza?
3. A look at the daily news from Gaza suggest an answer.

[Mr. Bumble]

"Mr. Bumble : "In Major Breakthrough..."
Not my words.
...and you're right that it probably is meaningless other than the fact that it passed 13-0.
Will it work? Probably not as long as Hamas exists.

[Michael P]

I look forward to the freaks and crazies claiming that the UN is perpetrating a genocide and famine while Palestinians continue to grow more obese.

[grb]

Trump's losing it. Epstein, the Midterms, the economy, his accelerating cognitive decay. What little self control he has left is slowly ebbing away. From a 14Nov press event:

"When asked if there was anything "incriminating" in Epstein's emails, Trump pointed a finger in a female reporter's face and snapped. 'Quiet. Quiet, Piggy.'"

[Mr. Bumble]

WOW! That's some insight.

The walls are closing in....

[grb]

Kinda amazing. If any other president had acted with such coarse misogynistic crudeness, it'd be big news. You'd see it reported on the front page. But Trump cheapens, coarsens, degrades, and defiles anywhere he goes. In the end, it's like the AI video showed: Trump shits on everything.

To a perfectly normal question, Trump flew off the handle. It's how he reacts to pressure these days. If that's the state of public discourse with a toxic two-year old in the Oval Office, I guess I'll have to accept it. Here's my only consolation: Around the country women will hear this story, grit their teeth, and the GOP loses more votes. Granted, the active coalition of MAGA, incels, and rightwing trolls will have the opposite reaction, but Republicans already have that bloc wrapped-up.

[Mr. Bumble]

Well, FWIW it did make the top of the Daily Mail feed.

[loki13]

Hey, they have the Nazi/Sex Trafficker vote in the bag!

See, e.g., the Ingrassia/Tate story, which would be a major scandal for any other administration that would dominate the news cycle for weeks, but is just a Tuesday for this administration. Not even sure it's in the top five scandals for this Tuesday, either.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Your first paragraph may well be correct, but I'm not sure what it has to do with your second graph.

Fortunately, to whatever extent Trump is experiencing a mental decline, the administration is much more transparent with regards to public access to Trump than the Biden administration was.

Hopefully this administration will do the right thing when/if it becomes necessary. All kidding aside, Trump can't run for a third term, so there's little chance that the Republicans will repeat the Democrats' mistake in that regard.

[Malika la Maize]

What’s the prior Presidents equivalent to that?

[SRG2]

Fortunately, to whatever extent Trump is experiencing a mental decline, the administration is much more transparent with regards to public access to Trump than the Biden administration was.

But no more open about his condition.

[Sarcastr0]

I don't think the Trump of even the recent election would have lacked the impulse control to pull that bit of weirdness from his Imp of the Perverse.

[Dr. Ed 2]

I would have said worse.

How many times is Trump supposed to answer the same question?

[TwelveInchPianist]

Appearantly teachers and other staff were spending large amounts of taxpayer money on fancy travel, like spending $945 a night to stay in Las Vegas for a conferences when there were similar conferences in Chicago.

This is why the government increasing spending on a particular good or service doesn't necessarily result in more quantity or better quality of the good or service. It might just result in more grift by the bureaucrats.

So keep in mind, increasing funding for education and other services doesn't result in more education. And cutting funding doesn't result in less.

[Dr. Ed 2]

A quick check showed hotel rooms from good chains (e.g. Hilton) with base prices in the $100-$110 range. Even $200, it is way less than $945...

It's not the city -- I'm sure you could pay $945 in Chicago if you wanted to.

[John F. Carr]

A conference room and amenities could double the rate.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Not for everyone attending, not at educational conferences.

I read the $945 as "each", not just the individual hosting it.

[wvattorney13]

They will have to book a conference room whether it is Quality Inn or The Four Seasons. I would guess that a conference room at the $945/room place is far more expensive then at the $150/night place.

[Malika la Maize]

As Trump makes mad dollars on, say, his properties as President 12 worries about teachers inflating hotel stays.

I guess if they were at Trump hotels he’d be cool with it!

[wvattorney13]

They do that in my state---one of the poorest in the nation. For whatever benefit that they get from these conferences, and I believe it is zero, they could do it at any hotel with a conference room. They could even do a Marriott or a Hilton, but they go to the single.most.expensive resort in the state: The Greenbrier.

This they do while telling people that if they don't vote for the excess property taxes for education that their kids won't have textbooks and their desks will fall apart.

Then people dutifully vote for these increased property taxes, and the education still sucks.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Check to see what they actually pay -- and is it off-peak, whatever that is in WVA.

Greenbriar isn't owned by the RR anymore, I believe it is corporate and they may be doing this at or below cost for goodwill. (That's not uncommon in the education field.) And they get a lot of good publicity out of it.

So check and see what they actually pay.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Somehow the link to the article didn't make it.

https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/chicago-public-schools-oig-questionable-exorbitant-sums-travel/

[Dr. Ed 2]

"One educator spent $945 per night on a hotel in Las Vegas for a conference booked last-minute, the report said."

That's a different story -- and arrogance.

[apedad]

MAGA governor loses war over replacing university president forced out by Trump

Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) lost a critical fight to hamstring his Democratic successor's ability to oversee the administration of the state's public universities.

According to the Richmond Times-Dispatch, the Virginia Supreme Court declined to lift an injunction by a lower court that blocks Youngkin from making 22 appointments to the boards that oversee the University of Virginia, George Mason University, and Virginia Military Institute.

"The court did not rule on the merits of Attorney General Jason Miyares' appeal of a July 29 ruling by Fairfax County Circuit Court Judge Jonathan Frieden," said the report. The order in question "upheld the Senate Privileges and Elections Committee's authority to refuse to confirm eight of Youngkin's appointments to the three boards of visitors. The committee then rejected an additional 14 of the governor's appointments to the three boards."

https://www.rawstory.com/glenn-youngkin-2674302746/

Alright for the Great State of Northern Virginia (and those lesser areas)!

[Poxigah146]

The Virginia Democrats are evil, but this seems like the right decision. The Senator's authority to consent (or not to consent) is injusticiable.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Apedad doesn't understand that this was the last hope of those institutions.

[Bob from Ohio]

Youngkin is not a "MAGA governor", just a regular GOP governor.

[Estragon]

You can tell by the fleece vests

[loki13]

More chronicles of District Courts realizing that ... you just can't trust a single word from this DOJ, including "and" and "the."

In the ongoing lie-athon that is the Abrego proceedings, DOJ stated suddenly that Costa Rica (which they said would totes take Abrego in order to get rid of the case) suddenly ... wouldn't. But Liberia would! And they have a fancy declaration, UNDER SEAL, to prove it, from an ICE Official.

The Judge just ordered that the declaration would be stricken, and that the official who wrote the affidavit would have to provide sworn testimony in court (subject to cross-x) on all the subject matter in the declaration. Also, the ICE Official has to have personal knowledge of the subjects (I mean ...) and be PREPARED ON ALL OF IT (this has been an ongoing issue, when the DOJ has proffered witnesses that don't, um, know what they are testifying about in this case), and that this testimony would bind respondents.

We've gotten to the point where District Courts are seeing affidavits and declarations submitted by the DOJ as completely unreliable, and, further, know that the DOJ will proffer witnesses that the DOJ knows won't testify about important issues. Seriously, I don't think I can remember an order requiring a party (let alone the DOJ) that tells them that the person who signed a declaration had to be prepared to testify about WHAT THEY AFFIRMED WAS TRUE in a declaration, but that's where we are at.

Remember- they lie. They lie. They lie.

[Zarniwoop]

Hey Loki13, a cite to courtlistener (or equiv) is always appreciated for something like this!

[loki13]

Docket: 8:25-cv-02780

ECF Doc #: 90

That's the order. You can also look back and pull the prior motion to strike.

[Life of Brian]

Order is here; Garcia's letter motion is here. The purportedly egregious quote from the dec is redacted, unfortunately.

Xinis went full-on adversarial to the DOJ months ago, so I'm not sure why it would be exactly shocking that she cheerfully gave Quinn their latest scorched-earth ask. We'll see what the dude says....

[Bob from Ohio]

"Xinis went full-on adversarial to the DOJ months ago"

All the "DOJ lies" judges are Resistance! fanatics like her.

[Zarniwoop]

Thanks folks. When I did a quick search before posting, I came up with a different Garcia v. Noem (8:25-cv-00951) that was obviously not the correct/current docket.

[Life of Brian]

Yeah, he's certainly consumed his share of judicial bandwidth.

[apedad]

The Internet Crashed So Hard This Morning That Downdetector Went Down

An outage affecting cybersecurity firm Cloudflare took down huge swathes of the internet with it on Tuesday, once again highlighting how a handful internet services allow the entire web to stay online.

Among the websites affected by the outage are gigantic services including X-formerly-Twitter, OpenAI’s ChatGPT, and Spotify.

https://futurism.com/future-society/internet-down-detector-cloudflare

I hope the internet is robust enough to withstand constant and increasingly effective attacks.

[Michael P]

apedad's mind is crashing so hard today that he continues to fall for headlines from clickbait garbage sites.

[John 4]

If you had an actual job, you would know the Cloudflare issue is actively affecting a lot of applications today.

[jb]

What a bizarre take. The outage wasn't long, but it was pretty significant while it lasted. I can't find an actual Fox News source but maybe here's a site you won't think is "clickbait garbage"?

https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/cloudflare-chatgpt-x-among-sites-affected-global-network-issues

[Michael P]

Just about any site that uses a more honest headline than one starting "The Internet Crashed So Hard This Morning That" would be an upgrade.

Especially considering that apedad just posted other clickbait from the same site, copying the headline "The Stock of Trump’s Tech Company Is Crashing So Hard It Isn’t Even Funny" from there.

Maybe you can detect a theme here.

[Mr. Bumble]

@ apedad:
"While we await a postmortem of what actually happened, a Cloudflare spokesperson told the outlet that it saw a “spike in unusual traffic” at around 6:20 am Tuesday morning."
Will we ever know?

[Bob from Ohio]

I have obtained a video of the cause.

https://x.com/DrClownPhD/status/1990804942236352871

[Life of Brian]

See, that's exactly the sort of thing AI was made for.

[Dr. Ed 2]

That's too early for sunrise -- satellites mess up at sunrise.

[Z Crazy]

Simping for illegalkind is rooted in anti-white animus.

I know this because the same people who excuse illegal immigration because whites are not indigeous to North America ALSO support mass migration into Europe where whites ARE indigenous, instead of saying that white Europeans get to gun down invaders en masse.

They believe in this colonizer-colonizee dynamics. They feel that whites are responsible for all the evil in the world, so they support violent criminals immigrating in and committing crimes against whites, especially sex crimes against white girls.

They cheered the Colonge Sex Attacks.

Of course, if little black boys like AJ Wise are killed by illegals, they just consider it collateral damage!

White Girls Matter!

[Sarcastr0]

Z Crazy status: still crazy.

[Z Crazy]

So you deny the Colonge Sex Attacks happened, or that they were done by filthy migrants?

[John 4]

Cologne*

[grb]

Köln*

[loki13]

Why don't you have him on mute, Sarcastro? Like we need more evidence of bigotry.

[Sarcastr0]

Dunno how he fell off mute, but of course he's back on. Recent elections have wore down my 'so racist it's funny' bone.

[Malika la Maize]

Disagree. Let the bigots that flock to Trump speak, and watch the others fail to condemn.

[loki13]

They'll still going to speak, but it doesn't mean I have to listen to them.

Look, at a certain point it's just not worth my time or energy to read Nazis, bigots, or proven liars spewing hate and lies. YMMV.

[Malika la Maize]

That so many Trumpists say this, and so many others don’t contest them, is the story. Don’t ignore it, promote it and engage.

[loki13]

I'll leave it to you. For me? Life's too short. I don't need further evidence that MAGA and Trumpists spew it and enable it.

[loki13]

A few reminders of the Epstein saga-

1. Trump has always been able to release the files. He did not. Moreover, Trump has consistently pressured lawmakers in the GOP to keep them under wraps. Remember- he already had the FBI and DOJ review them (and flag his name) in the spring, and had Bondi state "Nothing to see, no investigations required, and we don't need to release." He has used every tactic possible to avoid the release, such as saying that the DOJ would seek permission to release the grand jury proceedings, knowing that they weren't the files, they were the only things that required permission, and that the courts wouldn't allow it.

2. Any statement that Trump now wants to see the release is utter BS. How do we know? As recently as last week, he was trying to strongarm the GOP members who signed the discharge petition, and even summoned Boebert to the situation room to try to get her to change her mind. Also? He could release them at any time.

3. Any statement by Speaker Johnson is total utter contemptuous BS. How do we know? The whole reason we needed a discharge petition is because Johnson spent months and months and months refusing to have any bill brought to the floor, requiring this maneuver. By the way, don't believe his crocodile tears about how the discharge petition needs to be amended and corrected and "held up" in the Senate, and what a shame it is that it couldn't be amended. It couldn't be amended because Johnson refused to allow a vote and therefore it had to be through a discharge petition. You can't complain about the way it was brought when you forced it to be brought that way to cover up for Trump. And don't believe his concerns- he just is hoping to procedurally tie it up in the Senate. What, now he cares? Give me a break.*

*Also, the BS about the "voice vote" or unanimous consent? Nope- it's going to pass, and everyone wants to see the record of how people vote.

I hope that this is the beginning of the bursting of Trump's reality distortion field grip on the GOP, because a sick cult of personality isn't good for the country. But we'll see.

[Malika la Maize]

The Trump Organization is in talks that could bring a Trump-branded property to one of Saudi Arabia’s largest government-owned real estate developments, according to the chief executive of the Saudi company leading the development.

President Trump said Monday that he will approve the sale of F-35s to Saudi Arabia, making the kingdom the first country in the Middle East other than Israel to obtain the advanced fighter jets.

https://www.axios.com/2025/11/17/saudi-f35-trump-mbs-meeting

[Malika la Maize]

The former quote source:

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/15/world/middleeast/trump-organization-saudi-development-deal.html

[JoeFromtheBronx]

The negotiations are the latest example of Mr. Trump blending governance and family business, particularly in Persian Gulf countries. Since returning to office, the president’s family and businesses have announced new ventures abroad involving billions of dollars, made hundreds of millions from cryptocurrency, and sold tickets to a private dinner hosted by Mr. Trump.

As to meeting Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, refenced in the NYT article, here's one back and forth with a reporter today:

Q: Why wait for Congress to release the Epstein files? Why not just do it now?

TRUMP: It's not the question that I mind. It's your attitude. I think you're a terrible reporter. It's the way you ask these questions. You start off with a man who's highly respected asking him an insubordinate question

Is killing a reporter to defend his administration an official act?

[David Nieporent]

Setting aside that nobody respects MbS except authoritarians like Trump, it is literally impossible for an American reporter to be "insubordinate" to either Trump or MbS because American reporters aren't subordinate to them. Trump is not a king. And MbS, though royalty, isn't our royalty.

[thesafesurfer]

Not one article on the judicial misrule in Illinois where Biden appointee LaShonda Hunt ordered a riot fence removed that was protecting an ICE facility, or the order by Biden appointee Jeffrey Cummings to release 600 illegal aliens and their criminally charged Democrat allies.

[loki13]

Well, I don't know about the first issue, but I doubt it's what you say simply because I do know about the second issue, and you're a lying liar on that. Which ... I know, I'm shocked!

To be clear- the government (probably knowingly, but with this administrations malevolence and incompetence are difficult to disentangle) violated a prior consent decree.

I know that this is hard for you to believe, but a party to a consent decree that violates it is the lawless party- not the Court that requires enforcement of it.

I assume you haven't actually read the order, because you haven't, and just spew nonsense you read elsewhere. But this is just another example of lawless action by the administration, and saying that judge holding a party to an agreement that the party entered into due to prior wrongdoing is somehow "judicial misrule" shows how far removed you are from the reality of what the rule of law actually means.

[John F. Carr]

Can you cite the specific case? Judge Hunt has hundreds of cases before her and I can not figure out which one you refer to.

[M L]

62 percent of Democrats have a favorable view of socialism.

16 percent unfavorable.

https://d3nkl3psvxxpe9.cloudfront.net/documents/econTabReport_EAdEA3C.pdf

[jb]

I'm reminded of this socialist's take:

Millenials don't hear socialism and think about the USSR or the Cold War.

We hear socialism & think about Canada, Switzerland, healthcare, social security, affordable college, & affordable housing.

Big generational difference.

Forgetting the generational divide, to a large extent the Democratic embrace of socialism parallels the Republican embrace of Trump and MAGA. Large swaths of society are feeling let down by the direction of the country. Trump proposes to fix this by somehow winding back the clock to the 50s; Mamdani and other Democratic Socialists propose to do this by rejecting the 80s embrace of capitalism at all costs. There's probably a surprising amount of economic common ground out there in the end, but it's all completely swallowed by culture war nonsense most of the time.

[Jmaie]

Folks REALLY needs to learn the difference between socialism and Democratic socialism.

[jb]

The thing is that Republicans have been calling everything left of Reagan either socialism or Communism for decades, and now they're shocked when the outcome is that people associate a bunch of popular ideas with those terms.

[wvattorney13]

It certainly wouldn't take long to learn.

[SRG2]

That's what happens when the GOP spends decades calling every popular measure that they don't like, "socialism".

[M L]

Off-topic, but what happens when Dems spend decades calling every popular measure that they don't like, "racism"?

[loki13]

Update on the Comey litigation-

After the Magistrate Judge's devastating ruling, the DOJ filed an emergency motion to stay to allow them to file exceptions and get a week. Comey's team filed a response within a few hours, saying, "Naw, but if you allow it, make it short."

Judge Nachmanoff entered an order yesterday (so there was the order, the motion, the response, and the Judge's order on the motion all in the same day...) allowing for a stay, but providing that the DOJ must file objections by 5pm Wednesday, and Comey would be allowed to file a response by 5pm Friday, and Nachmanoff would rule on the papers.

Analysis- this is worth what you're paying me for it, but I think this bodes VERY POORLY for the DOJ. The MJ's order was absolutely devastating. And it was caused because Nachmanoff remanded to the MJ to make detailed and specific factual findings ... on the DOJ's demand ... which was done. Also lurking in the background? Nachmanoff has also read that grand jury transcript.

Based on what we've see, every judge that has seen the transcript ... they've got major major major issues. Also? This is in the E.D. Va., which is one of the fastest rocket dockets in the nation. The judges seem to be struggling with the lack of competence and preparation of the DOJ in this case, and have repeatedly raised concerns about the DOJ not being up to snuff and delaying issues (and when the issues come out, it looks worse and worse for the DOJ).

I'm guessing that Nachmanoff granted the stay in order to allow the DOJ to file the objections, and will quickly allow the release of the proceedings to Comey's team. I would also not be shocked if Comey's team has their response filed no later than EOB Thursday.

...Now, it's possible that there might be some narrowing of tailoring of the original order. But ... I doubt it. Given the factual findings that would be material to Comey's defense that would need to be raised in motions to dismiss and/or suppress (and that as of the Currie hearing, lots of material discovery, including the declination memo, had still not been turned over by the DOJ), I think that the DOJ should expect a swift "turn it over already."

Any one else have thoughts on this? (And yes, DMN, I saw your earlier thought on standing and the materiality issue, but I lack sufficient 4th Am. knowledge to sufficiently opine on that ... this is a fact pattern that far exceeds anything covered in CrimPro!).

[John F. Carr]

I thought the parties could object as of right to a magistrate's recommendation and need not ask for permission.

[loki13]

The issue was timing; the particularized fact-finding to support the release of the grand jury transcripts was remanded back to the magistrate after the objection of the DOJ.

So that issue went back. The magistrate (after the DOJ volunteered to have the grand jury proceedings reviewed in camera, something that they ... misstated in the emergency motion) reviewed the proceedings, made the required findings of fact, and ordered it to be turned over.

But it was ordered to be turned over at 5pm that day (the files previously given) and 5pm the next day (audio recordings).

The DOJ filed an emergency motion to stay, asking for the chance to file objections to this order (the particularized facts) prior to the requirement to turn it over. That's what is at issue here.

Timing. But again, the DOJ isn't doing themselves any favors. It is increasingly obvious that the grand jury proceedings were so bad that the DOJ is doing everything possible to avoid producing them, in whole or in part, and the repeated declarations of some individuals regarding them may not have been a good idea.

[David Nieporent]

I thought the parties could object as of right to a magistrate's recommendation and need not ask for permission.

That is correct, but the standard rule is 14 days to object — unless set otherwise by the judge. In this case, though, the magistrate only gave them a few hours.

[wvattorney13]

It sounds like an abuse of discretion. What is the hurry in this case that requires a deviation from the normal timeframes?

[David Nieporent]

EDVA runs a rocket docket, and this case is scheduled to go to trial in the not too distant future (if it ever gets that far, which is highly unlikely), and the administration has already stalled this with procedural nitpicking, but it isn't the-planes-are-taking-off-with-Trump's-victims-on-board urgent, so the district judge did give them a bit more time. But only a bit.

[Zarniwoop]

I'm guessing that Nachmanoff granted the stay in order to allow the DOJ to file the objections, and will quickly allow the release of the proceedings to Comey's team. I would also not be shocked if Comey's team has their response filed no later than EOB Thursday.

When I posted the same yesterday afternoon, after Nachmanoff's order, my only different guess was that Comey's team will file in time for it to be on Nachmanoff's desk first thing Friday morning. So I agree Thursday is quite likely for the team of pros representing Comey ... but later than EOB Thurs is available if they want to dot i's and cross t's. They certainly don't need the ridonkulous stretch request of 7 days Halligan et al. asked for. (Read the room, Lindsey ...)

As a former clerk (albeit not in a rocket docket like EDVA) I'm skeptical that "EOB Thursday" would make much of a difference for the judge and clerks - Nachmanoff's "nope" order would go out Friday either way. But the clerks might want to have the coffee maker going a little earlier than usual on Friday morning.

[loki13]

Fair. Honestly, I assume that Comey's team has a lot of the response and law already pre-written, and are just waiting to see how bad the DOJ's objections are in order to plug it in.

[Zarniwoop]

Heh, also a good point. If Comey's team is really trying to twist the knife, they'll start work at 5:01pm tonight and have it on Nachmanoff's desk by 1pm tomorrow, so it's the first thing his clerks report after lunch ...

[John F. Carr]

USDA says if your poultry flock gets bird flu it's your fault for inadequate security. No need for a vaccine. Slaughter your birds and be more careful next time. Pro Publica says the virus spreads on the wind and has maps and weather analysis to back up the claim.

https://www.propublica.org/article/bird-flu-airborne-usda-pandemic

[Zarniwoop]

(wrong spot)

[JoeFromtheBronx]

TMI

[not guilty]

I haven't read the decision yet, but it appears that there is some good news out of Texas.

https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Texas-Gerrymandering.pdf

[wvattorney13]

No time to read. Tell me that Jasmine Crockett resigned.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

It’s challenging to unpack the DOJ Letter because it contains so many factual, legal, and typographical errors. Indeed, even attorneys employed by the Texas Attorney General—who professes to be a political ally of the Trump Administration54—describe the DOJ Letter as “legally[] unsound,”55 “baseless,”56 “erroneous,”57 “hamfisted,”58 and “a mess.”59"

There seems to be a theme forming here.

[David Nieporent]

Link?

The author of the court decision was Trump appointee Jeffrey Brown, who is obviously a far left wing judge who only got appointed by Trump because of the blue slips controlled by Texas's Democratic senators Ted Cruz and John Cornyn.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1150387/gov.uscourts.txwd.1150387.1437.0.pdf

I thought it was given, but see NG provided another link.

[apedad]

Texas blocked from using new congressional map in 2026 midterms in huge blow to Trump

Three federal judges ruled on Tuesday that Texas cannot use a new congressional map drawn by Republicans in hopes of securing the party additional U.S. House seats in next year's midterm elections.

“The public perception of this case is that it’s about politics. To be sure, politics played a role in drawing the 2025 Map. But it was much more than just politics. Substantial evidence shows that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 Map,” the ruling states.

https://www.themirror.com/news/politics/breaking-texas-blocked-congressional-map-1512714

[Mr. Bumble]

Has the fat lady sung?

[jb]

Sounds like it must be written by one of those Democrat judges! Or at least one of those DEI judges.

[John F. Carr]

California is also being sued because the gerrymander is allegedly racist. It will be amusing if all the midterm redistricting efforts amount to nothing.

[LawTalkingGuy]

If it can't be banned outright, making it so that mid-decade redistricting simply isn't worth it due to litigation, would actually be a a great result for the country.

[David Nieporent]

I was thinking the same thing. It is a bad thing if every red state tries to eliminate every Democratic district and vice versa. One cannot stop all gerrymandering, but we don't need to encourage it, either.

[JohnSmith97]

Yes, we know how it works.

Texas loses, but California will be allowed to gerrymander at will.

Since you can't have a (D) run state without a house district map that looks like a toddler drew it.

[LawTalkingGuy]

So one thing that's always fascinated me about these redistricting cases is the large amount of work that a multi-member court (which includes a circuit judge and 2 district judges) need to do very quickly. Does anyone have any insight into the nuts and bolts of putting these opinions together from the court's side?

[Kenneth Almquist]

In a nutshell: Trump asked Texas to redistrict in order to favor Republicans. It looked like Texas wasn’t going to do that, so Trump switched to asking Texas to redistrict in order to favor whites, and Texas acceded to the latter request.

Neither type of gerrymander may be Constitutional, but the Supreme Court ruled in Rucho v. Common Cause that courts lack jurisdiction to rule on partisan gerrymanders. Once Texas decided to go for a racial gerrymander rather than a partisan one, that opened the door for the gerrymander to be blocked by the judiciary.

[grb]

A reporter asked Trump whether it was ethical for his company to do business with a foreign leader, adding the CIA concluded Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. After asking who was the reporter's employer, DJT delivered the below quote - a standard Trumpism of evasion, lies, smears, and the amorality we now expect from someone who's a hollow empty Nothing inside.

"ABC Fake news. I have nothing to do with the family business. You mentioned somebody extremely controversial—a lot of people didn’t like that gentleman. Whether you did or didn’t like him, things happen but he knew nothing about it. You don’t have to embarrass our guest."

[loki13]

I'm sure MBS is already regretting having his photo taken next to a known authoritarian like Trump.

It's going to be hard to rub that stink off.

[jb]

"Things happen". Party of free speech right there!

[Zarniwoop]

"The House voted 427-1 to advance the measure, with GOP Rep. Clay Higgins of Louisiana the only member voting against it. "

That's a lot more cowardly CYA than I expected from the House GOP.

Constituents should ask "why did it take you so long to support a bill that got nigh-unanimous support once a vote was allowed? Why was Trump trying to hard to stop the discharge petition and vote? Why did he TACO this time?"

[Mr. Bumble]

Who controlled the White House and Congress from Jan. 20, 2021?
If it was so important why wasn't there a vote for the four years they were in control?

[David Nieporent]

Sigh. Again, it was Republicans who claimed there was something there, not Democrats. So Democrats had no reason to suggest releasing files in 2021. Republicans, however, kept demanding that the files be released, and yet as soon as they had the opportunity to release them, suddenly got cold feet.

[David Nieporent]

I would also note that Ghislaine Maxwell's prosecution was still ongoing during the Biden administration (she was convicted at the end of 2021, but obviously the appeals process had not been exhausted), so it would have been inappropriate to do anything that might jeopardize the prosecution.

[Mr. Bumble]

What a system.
What bothers me about the legal system in general is what seems to be the inordinate amount of time it takes to reach final decisions.

[loki13]

Let's see what happens with the Senate.

This is the same Trump that previously tried to quench the fire by "trying" to get the grand jury proceedings released, knowing that this was the only thing he couldn't release, and that they wouldn't be released, while not releasing ALL THE REST OF IT that he could release at any time.

We can watch all of the fools pivoting from "DEM HOAX" to "TRUMP ALWAYS WANTED THE FILES (that he can release at any time all by himself) TO BE RELEASED! HE SAID SO, AND HE NEVER LIES!!11!!"

[Estragon]

I suspect they have at least concepts of a plan on how to deal with this, but I’m nearly certain whatever it is will be stupid and/or poorly executed. As has been commented upon around here before— one thing saving us from even greater misfortune is the utter incompetence of these people. My advice is to watch this space for what’s to come. The voltage handles, in particular, have predictive value.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

In his social media post suddenly declaring he didn’t care if the House Oversight Committee got the Epstein files, Trump caveated it by saying they “can have whatever they are legally entitled to.”

Precedent suggests that whenever anything is done to burden Trump, the general rule is that it is somehow being done illegally. At least in Trump's view.

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/morning-memo/trump-gives-himself-an-enormous-out-on-the-epstein-files

[LawTalkingGuy]

Clay Higgins was a former cop with credible allegations of misconduct including striking an already handcuffed suspect.

I suspect that burying files that place those tasked with executing the law in a negative light is a passion project that is deeply personal to him.

[loki13]

Ugh. So, apparently, the administration (through the administration's Pravda channel, Fox News) is now trying to tell us that the Saudis are going to invest $1 TRILLION DOLLARS in the United States.

Now, if you were a thinking person, you might have a bunch of questions.

First question- doesn't Trump announce these deals all the time, and isn't it true that all of these are non-binding and never actually happen? Yeah, that's the case. It happened during his first administration too, when he ended the first China trade war by having them agree to invest BILLIONS ... and we got bupkes.

Second question- isn't a trillion, like, a lot of money? Yeah. So much that it's as much as the entire GDP of Saudi Arabia. They are going to invest their entire GDP in the United States??!! I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd love to sell you!

Third question which I will let our resident "post graduate degree in economics" commenter answer: If Trump is so worried about the trade deficit, why does he always announce these deals that require massive foreign investment in the United States? Can someone who understands economics explain to me like I'm a slightly dumb golden retriever what the relationship is between a trade deficit and a capital surplus?

Of course, if you're not a thinking person, you wouldn't be asking these questions, and you're probably a Trump supporter anyway.

[grb]

Fourth Question: What happened the last time the Saudis gave Trump promises of zillions of zillions in new military purchases and investments? Answer: The same that happened when the Chinese made similar extravagant pledges post-photo op: A small fraction of the promises occurred.

Foreign leaders know all Trump wants is (a) a headline for that day's news, and (b) some personal graft om the side if that can be arranged. Given that, words come cheap while standing before the cameras. They all know they'll be no follow-up. They all know Trump really couldn't care less. Below is an attempt to untangle myth from reality on Saudi commitments and the record behind them.

https://agsi.org/analysis/distinguishing-myth-from-reality-saudi-arabias-trade-and-investment-with-the-united-states/

[JoeFromtheBronx]

The Model and the Marriage Broker was on this morning.

Charming film. Thelma Ritter plays the marriage broker. Jeanne Crain plays the model. The same year, Crain was in People Will Talk with Cary Grant, another good film.

Zero Mostel and Nancy Kulp (perhaps best known as "Jane Hathaway" in The Beverly Hillbillies) have supporting roles.

[Sarcastr0]

Stayed up too late last night watching Death by Lightning, the Netflix President Garfield story.

Stacked cast. Unrealistic hagiography, but I like an occasional pure hero story.

I ended up skipping the scenes with Guiteau. Well executed, but kind of by definition there isn't much of a unique character on the page to work with, I found.

The political machinations with Conklin and Blane et all were fun. One of those pieces you watch with wikipedia alongside.

Chester A Arthur as basically drunken Muttonchops Ron Swanson was super fun. And it pays off with civil service reform!
Though Arthur wasn't all cool. 1880 had the same knee-jerk nativism as today, and he passed a bunch of legislation about it. OTOH he elevated Justice Gray, who ended up writing Wong Kim Ark.

History, folks!

[LawTalkingGuy]

I was already intrigued because Offerman, but I’m totally down for Garfield Hagiography. Honestly,
we don’t valorize non-Lincoln 19th c. Republicans enough.

[Zarniwoop]

Unrealistic hagiography, but I like an occasional pure hero story.

Have you considered "Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Hunter"?

[Magister]

Abraham Lincoln seems to be the go-to president for appearing in science fiction and fantasy.

[LawTalkingGuy]

Ended up watching straight through. Absolutely fantastic series. A little too kind to Arthur at the end. Although that’s probably fair because they kind of did him a little too dirty for most of the series. Arthur was more your typical party hack than a corrupt thug. Offerman does a great portrayal of an affable asshole which makes the redemption arc inevitable and narratively satisfying!

I imagine that Blaine would be very pleased with his portrayal since the series didn’t really address his potential association with corruption and anti-Catholicism (Blaine amendment). Then again he should be grateful to be remembered at all.

[Sarcastr0]

Sausages!

[LawTalkingGuy]

An homage to Ron Swanson and his love of meat? Or perhaps Robbie Coltrane, another larger than life screen presence, as Dr Johnson in Blackadder?

[ThePublius]

Karen Read has filed a civil suit against multiple defendants with regard to her murder trial. (Sorry if I'm flubbing the language here.)

The document is 46 pages and a scathing indictment of those involved. It basically says she was framed, and details how that was done.

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
BRISTOL, SS SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 2573CV00914 A

"KAREN READ,
2573CV00914 A
Plaintiff,
V.
MICHAEL PROCTOR, in his personal
capacity; SGT. YURIY BUKHENIK, in his
personal capacity; LT. BRIAN TULLY, in his
personal capacity; BRIAN ALBERT;
NICOLE ALBERT; JENNIFER McCABE;
MATTHEW McCABE; and BRIAN
HIGGINS,
Defendants¹."

https://htv-prod-media.s3.amazonaws.com/files/kr-lawsuit-691ca01e8514a.pdf

It will be a really interesting case to follow.

[ThePublius]

Here's the Boston Herald article, which nicely sums up the complaint:

https://www.bostonherald.com/2025/11/18/karen-read-sues-witnesses-she-argues-framed-her-for-john-okeefes-murder/?share=ese1e2trerer11shoomr

[Zarniwoop]

Just gave it a fast read. With the usual caveat that it's a one-sided presentation of the plaintiff's story, I can see why she was acquitted in the criminal trial.

Maybe we should ask Grampa Ed for his enlightened and well-informed conclusions. Since it's New England, there are surely some Ed facts (existing only in his head) that will help us get to the real truth here.

[ThePublius]

I just finished reading the whole thing; I was distracted, and multi-tasking, but got through it. Wow.

Interesting, it was filed in Bristol County Superior Court in New Bedford, MA, about a mile from where I live. Maybe I can attend some sessions when it goes to trial.

I sincerely believe she was framed, just as described in the civil complaint. I don't know how this works, but is there any chance any of these conspirators will be criminally charged at this point?

[M L]

No Labor Shortage: Millions of Working-Age Americans Still Not in Workforce

“If the same share of U.S.-born men (16 to 64) were in the labor force in 2025 as in 1960, there would be 8.9 million more U.S.-born men in the labor force,” Camarota and Zeigler write. “Even if the share returned only to the 2000 level, it would still add 4.1 million U.S.-born men to the labor force.”

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2025/11/18/no-labor-shortage-millions-of-working-age-americans-still-not-in-workforce/

[Sarcastr0]

I mean first thing is you switch from Americans to men.

The far right is just so weird.

[ThePublius]

Chess Boxing.

Who knew?

https://www.breitbart.com/sports/2025/11/18/chess-boxing-gaining-popularity/

[Mr. Bumble]

Fischer vs. Spassky?

[SRG2]

I did. And a fair number of boxers are or were chess players, though not always of a high standard.