Open Thread

What’s on your mind?

Comments

[AmosArch]

Well, not that I care all that much about narcotraffickers are getting justice but apparently the second strike was not ordered by Hegseth and it was on the boat not on poor narcotraffickers clinging to planks of wreckage ala Leo Dicaprio in Titanic. Now unless people think that simply firing a second shot at a target is a war crime I think we can just wrap this up as more nonsense lies by the usual suspects parroted by the usual suspects predicted. Or was there something else, like maybe we forgot to powder the narcotraffickers butts and sing them to sleep?

[gVOR08]

Remember all the criticism of Obama for sitting quietly in the corner during the bin Laden raid? The reality was that he was not in tactical command. His job was to order the strike, not to micromanage it from thousands of miles away.

Did anybody really think Hegseth was in tactical command and directly ordered the second strike, as opposed to issuing general instructions that the strikes be lethal?

And we just wanted to blow up the boat again. we didn’t mean to kill the two guys clinging to the wreckage. Seriously?

[AmosArch]

So do you think we should put all living war veterans from Iraq, Vietnam, WWII etc who ordered or fired more than one shot at any target vehicle or plane through a polygraph test and imprison them for warcrimes if they did so with the intention to kill instead of just disable?

[Martinned]

LOL, polygraph!

[Mr. Bumble]

Fun fact:
Polygraph = original name of auto pen.
The first signature duplicating machines were developed by British American inventor John Isaac Hawkins, who received a United States patent for his device in 1803, called a polygraph (an abstracted version of the pantograph) in which the user may write with one pen and have their writing simultaneously reproduced by an attached second pen. Thomas Jefferson used the device extensively during his presidency.[1] This device bears little resemblance to today's autopens in design or operation.[5]

[Krayt]

It looks like it used to be a signature cloner, where the real person signed, and the mechanical arm signed, too. If that were still the case, I don't think we'd be having these discussions.

Currrent is a computerized device with a signature stored in memory, you push the button. The actual person need not even be in the room.

I would like to think of a solution to potential abuse, but requiring the president to sign a paper saying that's ok in each particular instance defeats the purpose.

Perhaps a sheet with pointers to the day's take of pardons, executive orders, and the like, all on one, that he signs. Then he's on the hook for them, and has acknowledged, however briefly and theoretically, he pondered and consents to them and the autopen signature.

Real laws, though, nope. Must actually sign. If you want people thrown into jail over the latest and greatest Perfecting of Mankind, or paying huge fines in service to that glib, sorry if your hand is a bit sore. Maybe there shouldn't be such an insane pace of it.

[Dr. Ed 2]

"Remember all the criticism of Obama for sitting quietly in the corner during the bin Laden raid? The reality was that he was not in tactical command. His job was to order the strike, not to micromanage it from thousands of miles away."

Anyone remember the criticism of Lyndon Johnson personally approving bombing targets from thousands of miles away?

3000 years ago, kings used to watch battles from distant hilltops, this is the same thing. We wouldn't need O7s (or even officers) if civilians in DC could make all the tactical decisions. Heck we might not even need NCOs.

Didn't we learn ANYTHING from Vietnam?!?

Did anybody really think Hegseth was in tactical command and directly ordered the second strike, as opposed to issuing general instructions that the strikes be lethal?

And we just wanted to blow up the boat again. we didn’t mean to kill the two guys clinging to the wreckage. Seriously?

[Martinned]

Didn't we learn ANYTHING from Vietnam?!?

Not as far as I can tell, no. Not even the difference between a legitimate target (e.g. Vietnam) and a place you're not allowed to bomb (e.g. every other country).

[Sarcastr0]

Exactly the people you expect have a stab-in-the-back myth about the Vietnam War.

[Krayt]

Release the video!

[Swede425]

Um, yes.
Everybody knows HegsDEATH has a guy following him around carrying the SECOND STRIKE football, just waiting for him to push the shiny, red button!

[hobie]

I absolutely think Hegseth was involved. This little push-button video game called war is right up his alley.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"Did anybody really think Hegseth was in tactical command and directly ordered the second strike, as opposed to issuing general instructions that the strikes be lethal?"

Well, Loki13 thought that, and apparently many of the pundits who claimed that Hegseth's comments that he supported Bradley's decisions meant that he was throwing Bradley under the bus thought that.

[Bob from Ohio]

"clinging to the wreckage"

Holding a puppy too?

[David Nieporent]

but apparently the second strike was not ordered by Hegseth

Is that the second strike that they first claimed didn't happen at all?

unless people think that simply firing a second shot at a target is a war crime

Again: simply firing a first shot is a crime. Not a war crime — a regular ordinary crime.

[DDHarriman]

>Again: simply firing a first shot is a crime. Not a war crime — a regular ordinary crime.

lmao talk about goalpost moving.

[not guilty]

No goalpost moving. The first strike violated 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 1111(b). The second additionally violated 18 U.S.C. § 2441. Both are capital offenses.

[Bob from Ohio]

Oh, a court has ruled that so?

[David Nieporent]

I'm pretty sure the U.S. code expressly specifies that those are capital offenses; a court doesn't need to rule that "punishable by death" means "punishable by death."

[Bob from Ohio]

I was referring to "first strike violated" and "additionally violated".

[not guilty]

I was talking about what can reasonably be inferred from information that has been made public, Bob. Even if the task is above your pay grade, some of us actually know how to parse federal criminal statutes.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"Is that the second strike that they first claimed didn't happen at all?"

When did they do that? The only place I've seen that is in the fake Rasmussen quote.

[Commenter_XY]

Bullshit = Again: simply firing a first shot is a crime. Not a war crime — a regular ordinary crime.

Only in your fevered fantasies.

How did Trump v Anderson work out for you? You were certain then, too.

[David Nieporent]

How did Trump v Anderson work out for you? You were certain then, too.

Why do you keep lying about this? I was certain it was going to come out the way it did.

[Bob from Ohio]

"simply firing a first shot is a crime"

Only your opinion no matter how many times you and your herd say it. No court has said so, or likely ever will.

Mr. Arrests Are Not A Criminal Record sure seems eager to convict here.

[Riva]

The entire WP narrative is false. They published a hit piece based on lies from anonymous “sources,” using a fake quote to imply that Hegseth ordered “kill everyone” regardless of their status in the actual context of the operation.

The real question is the timing of the fabricated narrative. Was it a primarily a distraction from the seditious six color revolution messaging and the real political violence this country is experiencing due to the policies of Biden and the democrats?

Or was it intended to change the topic from the billion dollar industrial level welfare fraud committed pretty exclusively by Somali immigrants in Minnesota enabled by democrat misfeasance/ malfeasance?

Maybe a little of both? Whatever. The fake news is already collapsing on itself, like it always does. And soon we’ll have more bullshit. They might even circle back to more Russian collusion fraud. Actually re-circle. They’ve done that more than once already. Democrats and their media adjuncts are not too bright, but they are determined.

[Sarcastr0]

The administration is on its 4th version of events (no double tap, yes but boat was intact and the target, yes but the wording of the order was different, yes but Hegseth knew nothing.)

WaPo hasn't changed its story.

Meanwhile you're doing your usual pivot to programmed talking points.
First you push a color revolution talking point that Russia's been using to explain why it can't hold onto its satellites which was picked up by Stephen Miller.
And anti-Somalia racism that's been Trump's go-to when he gets confused.

Riva, for actual humans it doesn't take a lot of effort to act less like a bot.

[Life of Brian]

no double tap

Cite? I may have missed that, but suspect you're just overreading the initial general denial of the overall story.

yes but boat was intact and the target, yes but the wording of the order was different, yes but Hegseth knew nothing

Of course none of those are mutually exclusive, so regular folk might just view those as providing additional layers of detail as they became available.

[Life of Brian]

And, radio silence. It's almost like he's incapable of conceding obvious things.

[Riva]

Yeah and the parrot troll shit Sarcastr0 chimes in with nothing has really changed, the WP is, what, just reaffirming its essential lies? (shades of Planned Parenthood-esque integrity in the world of journalism, well yellow journalism at least)

But one prime idiocy of note is an insinuation of Russian influence. That bullshit circle, (re-)circle back stupidity didn't take long at all. It was just one dehumanizing insult response away. As noted before, I know they're bastards, but do they have to be such stupid bastards?

[Sarcastr0]

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

"The colour revolutions (also spelt color revolutions)[1] were a series of often non-violent protests and accompanying (attempted or successful) changes of government and society that took place in post-Soviet states (particularly Georgia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan) and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia during the early 21st century"

[David Nieporent]

I guess under Trump, the U.S. is sort of a Soviet client state.

[mulched]

51 former intelligence officials agree!

[Riva]

I wonder when (or if, because, let’s be honest, they’re not the sharpest trolls in the shed) it will dawn on certain clowns here that it is precisely the use of color revolution tactics by the democrat seditious six shits directed at and seeking to undermine the administration and the military chain of command that is grossly offensive and troubling.

[Josh R]

I think we can just wrap this up as more nonsense lies by the usual suspects parroted by the usual suspects.

Or perhaps the liars are Hegseth and company? Congress should get the transcripts of all interactions and perhaps put Hegseth and the admiral under oath depending on what those transcripts show.

[Life of Brian]

Congress should get the transcripts of all interactions

Do you have reason to believe those are all recorded as a matter of course?

[Josh R]

Schumer claimed there were tapes. I may have mistook that for recordings of conversations rather than video of the strikes. But there may be audio over the video from the command center?

[Life of Brian]

Yeah, I could see there being an audio track with the video, though it's not clear if that was coming from the attack plane itself or a separate surveillance craft so it might not be very interesting. It would surprise me a bit, though, if all the other comms were recorded.

[Riva]

And we could also compare the credibility of the WP anonymous “sources” with the administration officials….hold on…my mistake again, we can’t actually do that.

[bloocow2]

Anyone else think that Pete Hegseth should be fired at this point? Or do the honourable thing and resign? I was looking through the latest reports of this drug boat fiasco, and he just... doesn't seem to know what on earth he is doing. First he denies the media reports (while not being specific about exactly what was incorrect). Then he says that even if they're true, it's justified because he's defending America.

If he stopped there, I could almost respect it. Like, I think it's wrong, but at least he's standing behind some kind of opinion.

But then he said that he didn't give the order to kill the survivors. And then that he wasn't in the room when that order was given. And now that he didn't even see the survivors, that the decision was all the responsibility of this Bradley guy.

Even if he's not just throwing his commander under the bus to protect himself... guess what? Your subordinate giving a possibly-illegal command without your authorisation still reflects badly on you! It means you're out of touch, and probably a bad leader!

Alongside the Signal chat stuff, the pointless feuding with the media, and all the rest of it... I feel like, even if you approve of what the administration is doing with regards to defence, you should get rid of this guy. Nobody seems to respect him, and he's an absolutely incompetent clown show.

[bloocow2]

Get rid of Kash too, the guy is a complete idiot who shouldn't be running anything.

[Frank Drackman]

Takes one to know one.

[bloocow2]

I can't work out if you're joking, or you actually are dense enough to be defending the unserious, clout-chasing podcaster that is Kash Patel.

Which I guess is the point, so... bravo! You successfully confused me!

[grb]

bloocow2 : "the unserious, clout-chasing podcaster that is Kash Patel."

But that's exactly the sort of person Trump would pick. Even more to the point, before Patel was elevated to run the FBI he was engaged in two-bit petty hustles such as hawking "mRNA Vaccine Detoxifivation" pills. Here are quotes from Patel to all the suckers and rubes with too much money in their pockets:

“Mrna detox, reverse the vaxx n get healthy,” he wrote in one post. “Spike the Vax, order this homerun kit to rid your body of the harms of the vax,” he wrote in another. Could anything endear Patel to Trump more? Separating nobodies from for their nothing money for laughably worthless products is pure religion to him. A petty scam artist like Patel is exactly who he'd want running the nation's premier law enforcement agency.

Trump had already missed out on having a druggie & pedophile as Attorney General. I'm sure that made him treasure Patel's selection even more.

[AmosArch]

Its not anymore illegal than the rest of the strikes if it was on the boat which hadn't yet sunk according to the latest reports.

[Commenter_XY]

He is eurotrash 2.

[Martinned]

Yes, they're all illegal. If you want to summarily execute criminals, at least do it in your own country. (And even then it might still land you here in The Hague, like your friend Duterte.)

[Mr. Bumble]

Feel that way about summary executions of a daughter and sister?
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/europe/honour-killing-18-year-old-dutch-girl-drowned-for-western-behaviour-father-two-brothers-on-trial/articleshow/125688663.cms

[Martinned]

Yes. Note the part about "father and two brothers on trial". This is not a difficult question. They will go to prison for decades, as murderers should.

[Mr. Bumble]

Was the Netherlands previously known for honor killings?
Will the sentence really be decades (the father fled to Syria and will be tried in absentia)?

[Martinned]

What are you talking about? The Netherlands is still not known for honour killings.

And yes, absentia trials are a thing.

[Krayt]

I lived in the NL for a year. You've been on my shitlist since you got rid of the red light district.

[Martinned]

There are still plenty of red light districts around, including the most famous one in the centre of Amsterdam

[grb]

Treasured memories! When the Ex and myself visited Amsterdam, we were trying to navigate between Points A & B. But we got kinda lost and ended-up circling thru the red-light district twice by accident. She accused me of doing it on purpose, but I was totally innocent of the charge.

(gorgeous city, btw)

On the other hand, we made a conscious decision to walk thru Hamburg's red light district. Unfortunately, this was around noon and the whole thing looked kind of shabby in daylight's harsh glare.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"...circling thru the red-light district ... by accident."

Accidents happen.

"...twice..."

I see.

"I was totally innocent of the charge."

Of course you were.

And she didn't even believe your story about having to pop into one of the places to use the restroom!

[Brett Bellmore]

"But we got kinda lost and ended-up circling thru the red-light district twice by accident."

I could actually kind of believe that; Some of those European cities are so badly laid out it's easy to get lost. First time I visited Germany I passed my hotel (The Stadt Kassel; Nice place to stay!) 3 times circling around Rinteln, because the main street through town is closed to vehicular traffic, and the darned parking lot was at the end of an unmarked alley. No sign in the parking lot, either! I only found it because I stopped in the parking lot the second time to ask directions.

[grb]

Brett Bellmore : "Some of those European cities are so badly laid out it's easy to get lost"

I don't know if you've ever been to Venice, but it must have been laid out by Daedalus himself. Back at the beginning of October I spent five wonderful days there, but navigation was continually a nightmare. I first tried to find my way by map, but that was a joke. I then tried to work off of Google Maps on my phone, but that proved little better. I finally had to put in earbuds and follow spoken directions, but even that was hard as the personable young women's voice would often tell me to turn into a blank wall or jump in a canal.

My Airbnb was in a campo "five minutes" walk from the Rialto Bridge, but that five minutes involved 12-15 twists and turns. And many went down calli barely-lit and no more than 4ft wide. Up and down bridges, back and forth across canals, and down these ancient alleyways worn by centuries of use.

That said, it was exhilaratingly charming. And though I'm mostly immune to irrational middle-class terror of Crime! Crime! Crime!, I could be doubly-so there because it's mostly nonexistent. I've taken to reading Donna Leon's Venice-based mysteries on my return, and police Commissario Guido Brunetti frequently complains about having nothing to do. The one exception is pickpockets. I wasn't a victim but a fellow Yank was. While on a vaporetto he suddenly discovered his wallet had been lifted on the boat between stops.

[hobie]

I think Bumble is reaching for some event 30,000 years ago in a cave outside of Utrecht...and rightly so!

[Martinned]

Well, the case he originally mentioned was heard in court this week. So it's not old news. And yes, the country was outraged. Because we don't have very many murders.

[hobie]

You don't shoot up schools there?! Savages

[grb]

hobie : "You don't shoot up schools there?! Savages"

I agree that's a loss. Think of all the "thoughts & prayers" you're missing out on.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Will the sentence really be decades"

The sentence may be but actual prison time won't be. A major political assassin spent 11, some obscure girl getting murdered will be less.

[Frank Drackman]

Newsflash Eurotrash, (hey that rhymes, might be my new "Trendy Catch Phrase, umm, I mean "meme")
We're Amuricans, we don't give a fuck what you Snail-Eating-Poor-Hygiene-Green-Teeth-Clove-Smoking Fags say, you attack us, we drop Atomic Bombs with funny names on your Industrial Areas (if you're Asian, for Europeans we'll settle for Bombing your country back to the Stone Age, splitting it in 2, giving 1/2 over to a murderous Dictatorship and executing all of your Military leaders)
Oh, and for both we'll rebuild your Economy and buy all your stuff.
So go smoke a Clove, Frenchie.

Frank

[not guilty]

"Its not anymore illegal than the rest of the strikes if it was on the boat which hadn't yet sunk according to the latest reports."

Au contraire. https://www.justsecurity.org/125948/illegal-orders-shipwrecked-boat-strike-survivors/

This was a war crime, (im)pure and simple. Punishable by death according to 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 2441

[Mr. Bumble]

From your link:
"In this article, we do not engage with the political discussion, but rather examine the law that applies to the alleged facts of the operation and Hegseth’s reported order."
"Alleged" and "reported" are doing some heavy lifting.

[Krayt]

Which is a big part of this discussion, as just two days ago, the press secretary, while neither confirming nor denying the second shot, flat out stated it was in the rules of war and was for defending innocent Americans quickly move on. Oh I gotta post something I noticed yesterday. Scroll down in anticipation!

[Dr. Ed 2]

NG, let's start with the trials for whoever released what inherently will be classified information. THEY can be punished by death....

[Martinned]

That tracks. Arrest the people trying to stop evil instead of the people doing evil.

https://edition.cnn.com/2025/11/04/middleeast/major-general-tomer-yerushalmi-israel-intl

[David Nieporent]

THEY can be punished by death....

They cannot, but why should Dr. Ed ever get anything correct? And again: either the story is classified or untrue; it can't be both.

[Dr. Ed 2]

"Its not anymore illegal than the rest of the strikes if it was on the boat which hadn't yet sunk according to the latest reports."

WHAT as the order?

It's not going to be "have drone tail number 123 fire missile serial number 456 at 12:34 Zulu, aiming for an impact point on the starboard side and three meters back from the bow, and fire it with the drone at an altitude of 1550 feet, 3500 meters away from the vessel, and at a 2 0'clock position relative to it. And when the boat is at a exact GPS position.

You do understand that there is delegation of authority -- the decision of which unit to use will be made by the O7, the decision of which weapon platform to use probably by an O5 or O6, which crew to fly it by an O4, and the decision as to when to release the weapon by the O2 or O3 actually piloting the aircraft.

"Sink the vessel" and/or "destroy the (visible) drug cargo" would be a legitimate delegation of authority. The presumption is that one of our multi-million dollar missiles would accomplish either mission. And when it didn't, someone has to make the decision if a second one should be fired or not. And that's not the Sec of War.

If the order was to destroy the drugs, and someone was hanging onto a couple hundred pounds of plastic-wrapped cocaine (which would float), so sorry...

[ThePublius]

Nit: "one of our multi-million dollar missiles"

The cost of an AGM-114 Hellfire missile is approximately $150,000.

[David Nieporent]

hadn't yet sunk according to the latest reports

Story #4

not anymore illegal than the rest of the strikes

Which are also fully illegal.

[not guilty]

Defense Secretary Hegseth is throwing Admiral Bradley under the bus, or perhaps making him walk the plank from the ship. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/12/01/white-house-second-boat-strike-00671488?nid=0000018f-3124-de07-a98f-3be4d1400000&nname=politico-toplines&nrid=1d57e675-1c74-4b33-b474-1abbc22168f5

Unless President "Bone Spurs" Trump issues preemptive pardons, the next administration should indict them both for murder under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 1111 and for conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. § 956(a)(1) (making 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”). Tie their tails together, string them over a clothesline, let them fight it out and let twelve men and women good and true sort out who should go to prison or face hang­ing, elec­tro­cu­tion, the gas cham­ber, fir­ing squad, or lethal injec­tion as the Court may designate pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3596(1).

[AmosArch]

Thus started the tit for tat retaliatory and counterretaliatory prosecutions of successive Administrations all because out of all the problems in the world the Dems chose to settle up battle lines to protect some suicidally dumb narcotraffickers who went ahead with attempting to poison American kids anyways even though they knew they'd likely be blown up. The history books will write. Sounds good I think you guys should do it.

[not guilty]

". . . out of all the problems in the world the Dems chose to settle up battle lines to protect some suicidally dumb narcotraffickers who went ahead with attempting to poison American kids anyways even though they knew they'd likely be blown up."

"[T]o protect some suicidally dumb narcotraffickers . . ."???

AmosArch, the decedents are just as dead whether their killers are brought to justice or not. There is no "protect[ion]" for the deceased there. But the rule of law will be much better off if the scofflaws are prosecuted.

[bloocow2]

Again my original post wasn't even really about whether this thing was justified. My point is that the Secretary of Defence (War, whatever) either doesn't know about the high-level decisions being made on his behalf. Or he does know and isn't taking responsibility for them, instead making someone else take responsibility.

He's a leader, right? Shouldn't leaders own their decisions? He just feels like a coward to me, and should vacate the post to someone who isn't completely out of their depth.

[AmosArch]

If he wasn't in the room when the second strike was ordered he wasn't in the room. Do you want him to lie and take credit for it if its not true? I thought you guys were mad at him for being all bloodthirsty and personally pressing the button to send the narcotraffickers to davy jones's locker orgasming in its brutality and doing so when they were clinging on to wreckage helpless. And now you're enraged and he's a coward sissyboy since it wasn't exactly like it was first reported by WAPOO at all?

You saw it here folks, a VC prog finally admits he was wrong these last few weeks all along and wants shipwrecked helpless narcotraffickers all glassed personally by Hegseth.

Can you guys make up your mind?

[not guilty]

AmosArch, are you drunk?

[Frank Drackman]

Even if he is, eventually he won't be. You'll still be Stupid.

[David Nieporent]

Do you want him to lie and take credit for it if its not true?

I don't speak for bloocow, but I want him to man up like the warrior he falsely pretends to be — no, doing pushups and yelling about how he likes killing but not DEI doesn't make one a warrior — and say, "Yeah, I gave the order. Even if it was misinterpreted, I'm responsible; the buck stops with me."

[Bob from Ohio]

"falsely pretends to be"

He did serve in the military, including in Iraq. You?

[TwelveInchPianist]

"Yeah, I gave the order. Even if it was misinterpreted, I'm responsible; the buck stops with me."

Hasn't he basically said that? I mean, other than the part about the order potentially being misinterpreted, which would be dodging responsibility.

He said as a commander you want to own these things, so I watched the first strike, then I learned that Admiral Bradley ordered second strike, which he had the full authority to do, I support him, it was the correct decision, etc.

[Martinned]

So you're saying that forcing government officials to obey the law would be a bad thing???

[Brett Bellmore]

"The history books will write. Sounds good I think you guys should do it."

The history books will write whatever is needed to make the Democrats look good. Have you looked at the party composition of History faculty lately? The whole discipline is practically 100% Democrats now.

[Mr. Bumble]

"Across Yale’s 43 undergraduate departments and two of its graduate schools, the Buckley Institute’s research found that Democrats make up 82.3% of faculty while Republicans make up 2.3% and unaffiliated/third party faculty make up 15.4%. That is a more than 36 to 1 Democrat to Republican ratio and a 5 to 1 Democrat to independent ratio. 27 of the 43 (63%) undergraduate degree-granting departments have no Republicans at all. Three departments, East Asian Languages and Literature, French, and Italian, have neither independents nor Republicans."
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2025/12/gnawed-and-man-at-yale.php
More at the link.

[Brett Bellmore]

Admittedly, History is not the most polarized subject.

Homogenous: The Political Affiliations of Elite Liberal Arts College Faculty

In 2017 it was only 17.4-1 Democratic. Statistics show the trend has only continued since then.

[SRG2]

Perhaps if academia paid more and offered more opportunities for graft, you'd get more Republican academics.

[loki13]

It's so weird, isn't it, that in most areas Brett will apply his Big Brain and ignore actual discrimination and just say, "Market Forces. The market will correct everything!!!111!" And yet ... when it comes to anything he doesn't happen to like, he ignores actual economics incentives and personal preferences.

Imagine if we demanded affirmative action for Democratic-Socialists to be Finance Bros and CEOs. Or in Private Equity. That would be weird, right? It's almost like .... there's something about the whole path that leads someone to that profession that tends to ... weed out ... a whole set of other preferences.

It's not the case that there are no conservatives in academia- look at this blog, for crissakes. One of my favorite undergrad Econ Profs was a hardcore conservative/libertarian, who got tenure and then just taught (really well) and played the stock market. Another was a coveted "talking head" on a lot of business and right-wing programs (but he was a shite professor, although he knew his stuff).

But generally, the idea of paying a lot of money in tuition so that you can work really hard, for a very long time, at very low pay, for the chance to eventually have a secure middle-class job that will never make you rich (and if you fail, to be insecure for the rest of your life) ... well, that tends to select for people that also have other preferences.

None of this is rocket science, unless, I guess, you have a really really big brain.

[CountmontyC]

By graft do you mean pretending to be say native American to get a do nothing job?

[SRG2]

I was thinking graft that was so great that Trump would feel obliged to issue a pardon or commutation for the grifter.

[not guilty]

"Perhaps if academia paid more and offered more opportunities for graft, you'd get more Republican academics."

Possibly, but highly educated people in general are more likely to support Democrats, whether they formally affiliate or not.

[Sarcastr0]

History is just another conspiracy to Brett.

Because no one can have a political opinion without making it their whole life and suborning their vocation, integrity, and interest in facts to it.

[Brett Bellmore]

Typical Sarcastr0: Just because you don't like the implications of something, all the evidence that it's true magically goes away.

Why did you suppose Belesilles got the Bancroft award, despite all the warnings going off BEFORE he won? People pointing out that he was grossly misquoting historical sources?

Because the history faculty were already politically polarized that they ignored the warnings.

[Sarcastr0]

You're the one Internet poisoned; most folks are not like you.

I have no idea what went on with the Bancroft award, and neither do you.

[David Nieporent]

It was also a quarter century ago, and yet it's still Brett's go-to example, because it's literally the only thing he knows about the history profession. (Just like Walter Duranty is the only thing he knows about journalism.)

[jay.tee]

FIRE has a great database of anti First Amendment and academic freedom actions committed by universities and faculty.

It clearly shows the trend driven predominantly by left-wingers until more recent times, when it’s evened out somewhat.

Why would any conservative, independent, or right-leaning libertarian want to live and work in that kind of climate? But that’s the point, right?

[Brett Bellmore]

It demonstrates that partisanship in academia mattered a great deal even at lower levels than we see today.

But the left wing position, even as academia becomes ever more an ideological monoculture, is that it doesn't matter, because left-wingers are inhumanly even handed, and would never, ever act in a biased manner.

Even as polls show that even the left on college campuses self-censor in fear of the further left!

[Sarcastr0]

left-wingers are inhumanly even handed

No they are humanly even handed.

You don't believe that's a thing humans do, but that's a you problem not a general issue.

Another example of you being an outlier is how you think self censoring is a sign of malign influence. People self censor all the time. It's part of living with other humans. You might not, but again that's a you problem not a general issue.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"No they are humanly even handed."

Sounds like Sarcastro agrees that it's OK for academia to be a left-wing monoculture, because the left is immune to bias.

"Another example of you being an outlier is how you think self censoring is a sign of malign influence. People self censor all the time."

First it's not happening, then it's happening and it's good... Why do we want people we disagree with to self-censor during academic discussions?

[bernard11]

But the left wing position, even as academia becomes ever more an ideological monoculture, is that it doesn't matter, because left-wingers are inhumanly even handed, and would never, ever act in a biased manner.

Even as polls show that even the left on college campuses self-censor in fear of the further left!

Do realize that this is contradictory? It is possible to have differences of opinion on matters other than whatever the current D/R disagreements are.

Two people may agree that Trump is morally, mentally, and physically unfit to be President, and yet disagree sharply over any number of historical matters. Indeed, the nature of those disagreement may vary greatly, so they are much at odds with each other as with those who have Jr. High School view of history.

To take another field, economists generally agree that tariffs are a bad policy except in certain special cases. That does not make them an "ideological monoculture." They disagree on many questions of economic policy.

The problem is that you see everything through a very narrow set of blinders. Those who disagree with you on some issues are, in your mind, the monolithic "Left" of your nightmares. Except they are not monolithic. They merely occupy places on the ideological spectrum that differ from yours.

[Commenter_XY]

Are you as certain of your legal analysis as you were of your Trump v Anderson and Trump v CASA analyses? Both were a slam dunk for you.

But they weren't, were they?

Impeachment and removal from office is the tool you got. Use it.

[not guilty]

Impeachment and removal from office is the exclusive remedy for President Chickenhawk Bone Spurs, thanks to his handmaid John Roberts. But Hegseth and Bradley are fair game.

[Michael P]

How very reminiscent of Vladimir Lenin. And Pol Pot. Make sure you schedule struggle sessions for all the wrongthinkers.

[bloocow2]

So, firing people for being bad at their job is just like totalitarianism.

Do you want to try again? With a serious argument this time?

[DDHarriman]

The Democrats aren't just wanting people fired though.

Of course you know the rhetoric, you're doing what your kind always does. Lies.

[Michael P]

They took cues from the Seditious Six: talk about refusing to follow illegal orders from their political opponents, don't identify any actual illegal orders, and then work to prosecute and execute anyone who followed orders that later become politically disfavored. It's a very communist playbook.

[David Nieporent]

How fucking stupid are you? This stupid: you complain that no illegal orders were identified (even though their video was prospective, not retrospective, and thus didn't say there were any), and then complain when illegal orders are identified. Is it possible to be stupider than Michael P without being Dr Ed? No, it is not.

[Michael P]

It is trivially easy. You and all your other comrades in sedition have been busy complaining that Hegseth, and maybe Trump or Vance, issued illegal orders -- and then complained when he explained that he didn't. And some of you are drooling over the prospect of capital-punishment trials for the Trump administration.

[Life of Brian]

(even though their video was prospective, not retrospective, and thus didn't say there were any), and then complain when illegal orders are identified

If you sincerely believe this pitch-perfect hot take on events from September 2 wasn't already queued up and ready to go before that video was recorded in mid-November, I have some really amazing investment opportunities we should discuss right away.

[David Nieporent]

If you sincerely believe this pitch-perfect hot take on events from September 2 wasn't already queued up and ready to go before that video was recorded in mid-November, I have some really amazing investment opportunities we should discuss right away.

Why do you think your comment is relevant or responsive to anything I wrote?
​
​
As for what I think about this unrelated issue you raise: what I suspect happened, but it is purely speculation consistent with the timeline and I have no proof, is that a lot of people were very uneasy with what happened in this incident. (Indeed, at least one admiral announced his resignation shortly thereafter, without giving a reason; at the time people speculated it was about Trump's murder policy.) Because of the pushback, the administration decided not to engage in the second strike policy anymore, and started capturing (but then freeing, because they have no evidence to prosecute these people!) survivors. As a result of the changed policy, the people who were grumbling decided to let it pass.

Then the patriotic six released their video. And Trump and his MAGA loons flipped out and started ranting about sedition and braying that there were no illegal orders. And that pathetic display of sanctimony motivated people to come forward and say, "Um, yeah, there were in fact illegal orders, and everyone knows it."

But again, none of that has anything to do with what I wrote in calling out Michael P for his retarded take.

[Life of Brian]

I was responding to your labeling the video as "prospective," which IMHO requires suspension of disbelief that this too-perfect prelude to the WaPo story was really just an innocent coincidence and none of those six people had the slightest inkling that this latest hit piece was on the horizon. But anyway:

Because of the pushback, the administration decided not to engage in the second strike policy anymore, and started capturing (but then freeing, because they have no evidence to prosecute these people!) survivors.

From what I can see, there has been exactly one strike out of 22 from which survivors were recovered. That seems like exceedingly thin gruel from which to divine a policy pivot.

As a result of the changed policy, the people who were grumbling decided to let it pass.

Just a second. The acts about which the entire attack machinery is now screeching "WAR CRIMEZZZ!!!1!!1" just made people actually in the know "uneasy" and they ultimately "let it pass" after some "grumbling"? Something doesn't quite add up.

[David Nieporent]

I was responding to your labeling the video as "prospective," which IMHO requires suspension of disbelief that this too-perfect prelude to the WaPo story was really just an innocent coincidence and none of those six people had the slightest inkling that this latest hit piece was on the horizon. But anyway:

I can't see what possible difference it makes to anything if they did know this was coming, but

(a) their response to the "We demand you identify an illegal order or you're guilty of sedition!" does not seem consistent with foreknowledge of this article; and
(b) their video doesn't even appear to be about the sort of thing in the article. Rather, their video appears focused on domestic illegality, not war crimes. If you look at the actual text of the video, they seem more concerned about the possibility of Trump using troops against Americans, not Venezuelans. The relevant language:

KELLY: This administration is pitting our uniformed military.
SLOTKIN: And intelligence community professionals.
CROW: Against American citizens.
KELLY: Like us, you all swore an oath.
GOODLANDER: To protect and defend this Constitution.
DELUZIO: Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren't just coming from abroad.
CROW: But from right here at home.

I interpret that as references to Trump threatening to use the military in American cities.

[Life of Brian]

Huh -- so much for grumbling about war crimez, I guess. Anyhoo:

(a) their response to the "We demand you identify an illegal order or you're guilty of sedition!" does not seem consistent with foreknowledge of this article

You really think if they knew about it and specifically crafted the video as a teaser for it, that they would just give up and blow the surprise because Trump tweeted? Talk about suspending disbelief.

(b) their video doesn't even appear to be about the sort of thing in the article.

Dude, you literally just got through saying for the umpteenth time that the double-tap leak was a direct response to the administration denying the allegations in the video. Make up your mind!

[Magister]

You really think if they knew about it and specifically crafted the video as a teaser for it, that they would just give up and blow the surprise because Trump tweeted? Talk about suspending disbelief.

If they knew as much as was in this article, why wouldn't they have given that to reporters so that the article would come out sooner after their video?

Dude, you literally just got through saying for the umpteenth time that the double-tap leak was a direct response to the administration denying the allegations in the video. Make up your mind!

This is even more blatant illogic. The leakers could be motivated by a video that they misunderstood, or motivated by the administration claiming they never did anything illegal at all, or only held back because they didn't want to be the only ones (even anonymously) questioning the legality of the administration's actions.

[David Nieporent]

You really think if they knew about it and specifically crafted the video as a teaser for it, that they would just give up and blow the surprise because Trump tweeted? Talk about suspending disbelief.

I really think that nothing about the video sounds like a teaser for the story, and if they did know about the story, they'd have responded differently when asked about what illegal orders they knew about. (I don't know what "blow the surprise" even means. Why would they care about that at all? They're not Pepsi introducing a new Super Bowl commercial; they don't need dramatic effect.)

Dude, you literally just got through saying for the umpteenth time that the double-tap leak was a direct response to the administration denying the allegations in the video. Make up your mind!

Dude, there's no contradiction. I said that the leakers were motivated by the response to the video, not that the video was motivated by previewing the leak. Time only flows in one direction. The thing that happened first — the video (or, more precisely, the response to the video) — caused the thing that happened second — the leak. Not the other way around.

(And just to reiterate, I made clear that this was speculation on my part.)

[Life of Brian]

They're not Pepsi introducing a new Super Bowl commercial; they don't need dramatic effect.

Oh, come on. Let's all just watch the video again real quick -- it was scripted, professionally produced, and very much about dramatic effect. "Don't give up -- don't give up -- don't give up the ship." Try again.

Time only flows in one direction. The thing that happened first — the video (or, more precisely, the response to the video) — caused the thing that happened second — the leak. Not the other way around.

You're presuming the truth of a (not even directly claimed, to my knowledge, but whatever) sequence of events, when that sequence is exactly what is in dispute. What's that called again?

And in any event, you said it was the administration's denials that there were any illegal orders as referenced in the video, but then you said it didn't matter if the senators already knew about the strike story because they were talking about a different domain of illegal orders. That's the contradiction you haven't yet addressed.

[Magister]

More logic fails from Life of Brian. If the video does show dramatic effect in its scripting and production, that doesn't imply that they were looking for dramatic effect with a surprise reveal of something they didn't even hint at.

What's that called again?

David labelled it "speculation". I already suggested several ways in which a video that appears to be about misuse of the military domestically could cause people to come forward about other illegality.

[hobie]

You're charging at windmills again, bloocow. At this point, you could go up to any of these MAGA hayseeds and wave your hand up and down in front of their faces. Nary a blink.

[Joe_dallas]

not guilty 3 hours ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
Impeachment and removal from office is the exclusive remedy for President Chickenhawk Bone Spurs, thanks to his handmaid John Roberts. "

NG - you have been called out multiple times for your BS immunity crap. Trying to hide it with the "handmaid" comment doesnt fool anyone.

[David Nieporent]

bookkeeper_joe doesn't know the law. Film at 11. And 12. And 1. And 2. And 3. And 4. And 5. And 6. And 7. And 8. And 9. And 10.

[not guilty]

Commenter_XY, have you found the suspected narco-trafficker asterisk grafted onto the text of 18 U.S.C. § 1111 and/ir 10 U.S.C. § 918? Yes or no?

[not guilty]

Still waiting, XY. Yes or no?

[jay.tee]

I feel bad for feeding the troll, but apparently you’re not very self-aware.

Perhaps XY just doesn’t feel the need to engage with a virulent racist.

[loki13]

Oh, it's that guy that posts the administration lies to "rebut" people. Also, apparently, a racist. Love the self-identification, but I'm surprised I didn't already do it. Better late than never!

[jay.tee]

Huh? You’re either incoherent or have mistaken me for someone else.

[Life of Brian]

Probably both. Loki has been even further off the rails than usual lately.

[Commenter_XY]

Yeah, it is sad.

[not guilty]

"Perhaps XY just doesn’t feel the need to engage with a virulent racist."

IOW, jay.tee, you have nothing of substance to contribute, so you resort to name calling.

Why am I unsurprised?

[jay.tee]

IOW, jay.tee, you have nothing of substance to contribute, so you resort to name calling.

Even if we hold true that I have contributed nothing, the second part of your statement is a dodge: you are racist because you use racist language to denigrate people based on their race.

Nothing you post can erase that fact: you are a racist.

And your cronies, who themselves cry racism at imagined slights, ignore it because they agree with your ideology. Pathetic.

[bernard11]

Perhaps XY just doesn’t feel the need to engage with a virulent racist.

Perhaps, though NG doesn't seem to me to any kind of racist at all.

Still, it's all conjecture on our part. Why don't we just ask XY if the reason he hasn't responded is that he considers NG a "virulent racist."

Well, what about it?

[not guilty]

Several MAGAts call me racist because I am harshly critical of one of their heroes, Clarence Thomas.

I have called out Justice Toady's hypocrisy in his long history of pandering to Republicans on racial matters, despite his being the most prominent beneficiary of affirmative action in American history. My criticisms seem to discomfit the MAGAts who have no substantive response, so they reflexively call me racist for refusing to genuflect to their hero.

I have also called out the late Senator Strom Thurmond's hypocrisy in condemning miscegenation despite being a practitioner thereof. No one yet has accused me of being an anti-white racist, even though that would make exactly as much sense as the Clarence Toady fans' use of the "racist" epithet.

[jay.tee]

I see. So, if you’re not a “MAGAt,” you can be an actual racist without being an actual racist. As long as your intentions are pure, you can use racist terms and denigrate a man because he’s black and doesn’t think like a black man “should” in your mind.

News flash: that still means you’re a virulent racist despite your protestations.

[jay.tee]

bernard11:

When you use racist terms and denigrate people because of their race, you’re a racist. NG has repeatedly done so.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Patriotic Visionary Trump will be negligent if he doesn't give everyone including himself a blanket pardon for everything including the Lincoln Assassination.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"Defense Secretary Hegseth is throwing Admiral Bradley under the bus..."

How so? What Hegseth is claiming is no different than what the news is reporting.

Throwing Bradley under the bus (which Hegseth should be doing) would be to say that his orders didn't apply to hors de combat personnel.

[David Nieporent]

But then he said that he didn't give the order to kill the survivors. And then that he wasn't in the room when that order was given. And now that he didn't even see the survivors, that the decision was all the responsibility of this Bradley guy.

Right; the thing that most distinguishes MAGA is how big fucking cowards these people are. They will brag about the most vile things that they think make them popular even when they had nothing to do with it, but they will never ever ever man up and take responsibility for anything they do.

Mike Johnson — the man so scared of porn that he and his son check each other's phones to be sure that they're not looking at it — claims every single time he's asked about a Trump controversy that he hasn't been following the news and is unaware of it so he can't comment. Either he's a Speaker of the House who doesn't pay attention to current events, or he's such a pussy that he is scared to say anything that might be perceived as critical of Trump.

[bloocow2]

I know it's apparently impossible to say anything without it being thought as partisan. This is the disease of modern political life apparently.

But I think the federal government, regardless of what I think about their policies, should hire people who can do a good job of what they're being hired to do. I think Hegseth and Patel are epically, epically bad at their jobs. Not because I disagree with them politically, but because they

a) care more about loyalty than competency
b) care more about looking good on social media than delivering accurate information (see: Patel claiming publicly that they caught the Kirk killer when, whoops, they had not)
c) have no sense of information security (see: signalgate)
d) are terminally incapable of taking responsibility for anything, blaming others for their own failures
e) as a result of these things, are not taken seriously by anyone, including the departments they're supposed to be leading

Literally none of that has to do with politics; it's to do with competency. They are bad at their jobs, and should not have those jobs. If people's minds are poisoned to the point where they can't even see that... yeah, I don't know what it will take to break through.

Maybe when Trump eventually leaves the political stage, we could all become normal again? It would be nice!

[SRG2]

But the cultists have redefined "competence" to mean "good at being loyal". Pretty much every cultist here has defended every appointment of an incompetent - because to them, just as for Trump, loyalty uber alles.

If people's minds are poisoned to the point where they can't even see that... yeah, I don't know what it will take to break through.

MAGA - the disease of which it purports to be the cure, as has previously been said of anti-Semitism.

[Brett Bellmore]

It's not so much that "competence" means "loyalty", as that competence without loyalty means that somebody will competently sabotage your administration from within.

[SRG2]

It's not so much that "competence" means "loyalty", as that competence without loyalty means that somebody will competently sabotage your administration from within.

It doesn't mean that, of course, but I understand why you feel the need to make that argument.

In civilised countries where the civil service hasn't been politicised, civil servants will competently implement and administer policies, etc. because that is their job and their loyalty is to the country. In the Soviet approach, adopted by Trump and supported by you cultists, where everything is political, this is incomprehensible.

[Bob from Ohio]

"civilised countries where the civil service hasn't been politicised"

Narnia?

Gondor?

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, that was my reaction.

[Commenter_XY]

In civilised countries where the civil service hasn't been politicised, civil servants will competently implement and administer policies, etc. because that is their job and their loyalty is to the country.

Yeah where, Fantasyland?

[CountmontyC]

The civil service's duty is implement the policies of the legally elected officials not their own policy preferences.

[David Nieporent]

No. The civil service's duty is to implement the law. Regardless of what elected officials want.

[Sarcastr0]

It's impossible to say anything without being branded a partisan *on political forums on the Internet*.

Don't mistake this place for real life.

[Joe_dallas]

bloocow2 46 minutes ago
Flag Comment
Mute User
I know it's apparently impossible to say anything without it being thought as partisan.

But But But - he claims he is a libertarian, though he cant hide his leftism with his comments

[David Nieporent]

a) care more about loyalty than competency

As this latest incident shows, that's entirely a one-way street. They demand loyalty from subordinates; they show none to subordinates.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Not because I disagree with them politically"

Oh no, certainly not that!

[bloocow2]

Sigh... like I said, it's basically impossible to break through. But let's try anyway...

Do you think they're doing a sterling job? Please, offer me a rebuttal of each of the non-political points I made, I would love to hear it.

Let's hear why, for example, someone who shared confidential information over a signal chat with a journalist should be able to keep his job. Why don't you start with that?

[Riva]

No. He and everyone involved in the operation should be commended. The WP parties involved in publishing the fabricated narrative and fake quote should be fired.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"But then he said that he didn't give the order to kill the survivors. And then that he wasn't in the room when that order was given. And now that he didn't even see the survivors, that the decision was all the responsibility of this Bradley guy."

I'm not sure what the complaint here is. None of the reporting ever claimed that Hegseth directly ordered the second strike. They quoted sources that said he gave an order to "kill everyone" prior to the strike, and characterized the order and an order to ensure that no one survived, which was probably the basis for the initial denial.

He didn't say the decision was "all the responsibility of the Bradly guy." The reporting consistently said that it was Bradley that made the decision, so there's nothing new with his comments. What Hegseth added was that Bradley's decision was fully within his authority, and that Hegseth supported and agreed with the decision.

[Gasman]

"Or do the honorable thing and resign?"
When in his life has he ever behaved as an honorable man? It is sad to see that government has come to the point where none can match Nixon's honor.

[not guilty]

United States District Court judge Beryl Howell in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday issued a preliminary injunction ordering federal immigration officers to stop making arrests there without a warrant unless they could show that a suspect was a flight risk. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.285268/gov.uscourts.dcd.285268.68.0.pdf

In an 88-page ruling, the Court raised doubt over whether immigration agents in the city had been complying with federal law. She barred the government from making arrests without a warrant or proof that a person could escape before a warrant is obtained. This is the latest in a series of decisions in lower courts that have challenged President Trump’s immigration tactics as he escalates his mass deportation agenda and expands his deployment of law enforcement officers to major urban centers across the country. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/03/us/politics/warrantless-immigration-arrests-dc.html

IOW, living in the United States while Latino doesn't support probable cause for a warrantless arrest.

[Mr. Bumble]

Now do Afghans and Somalis.

[Martinned]

Are you suggesting that the United States is the kind of country where people with a different religion than Christianity or a dark skin might suffer worse treatment than white Christians? Surely not?

[Mr. Bumble]

When their behavior is incompatible with civil society, then yes.
See linked article above regarding "honor" killing in your country.

[Estragon]

“behavior is incompatible”

Bumble, if you were writing the official policy for ICE— how would you define incompatible behavior? I’m genuinely curious. Try not to include anything that would already constitute a criminal offense:

[not guilty]

Now do what to Afghans and Somalis, Bumble?

[Commenter_XY]

Send them home.

[Sam Bankman-Fried]

Hegseth was the one flying Afghans into America after Trump surrendered to the Taliban and Biden wasn’t flying enough into America.

[hobie]

I see that Minnesota neegroes are this week's AM Talk marching orders neegroes.

[jay.tee]

You and NG form quite the clan of bigotry and racism. And in defense of overt corruption, nonetheless.

[hobie]

overt corruption

[Dr. Ed 2]

living in the United States while Latino doesn't support probable cause for a warrantless arrest

Actually, it does.

Same thing as with probable cause for OUI.

[Frank Drackman]

You PWS all the time

[John F. Carr]

Being in the wrong place while Latino may provide reasonable suspicion, not probable cause.

[Riva]

I think we’ve found the next candidate for impeachment, following Boasberg. We’re spoiled for choice among the deranged federal judiciary these days. Maybe no one has ever paid that much attention to their incompetence and bias before but it certainly seems to be unprecedented this year.

[John F. Carr]

In ancient times the agents could have been sued for false arrest.

In my opinion rather than throwing injunctions around the better solution is to allow monetary damages when federal employees misbehave. The Supreme Court would have to make this change. Give the government the choice of treating the Westfall Act as a waiver of sovereign immunity or making the employee liable.

[Zarniwoop]

Liability for egregious actions by Federal employees could be implemented by Congress.

I think there's a good argument it should be implemented by Congress (rather than the S.Ct.).

Whether Congress will actually do so is left as an exercise for the reader.

[Life of Brian]

She barred the government from making arrests without a warrant or proof that a person could escape before a warrant is obtained.

Feel free to supply whatever portions of the 88-page order you believe support that conclusion. Here's an excerpt from pages 67-68 that seems rather inconsistent with "barred from making arrests" and "proof that a person could escape":

Defendants’ second concern—that the injunction will subject defendants and their agents to a never-ending flurry of contempt proceedings and invite “micromanaging” by the Court—is well-taken. Defs.’ Opp’n at 32. As defendants note, “probable cause is a fact-specific, totality of the circumstances inquiry.” Id. at 29 (citing District of Columbia v. Wesby, 583 U.S. 48, 57 (2018)). Thus, plaintiffs’ original proposed relief, which would enjoin defendants and their agents “from making warrantless immigration arrests in this District unless, pre-arrest, the arresting agent has probable cause to believe that the person being arrested is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained,” see Pls.’ Original Proposed Order at 2, ECF No. 17-28, could be read to encompass individual mistaken or overzealous civil immigration arrests which, while perhaps unlawful, are not a consequence of defendants’ challenged policy. Although plaintiffs indicate that they “are not challenging the specific facts of every single arrest” and “whether the probable cause determination was erroneous,” Hr’g Tr. 47:23-25, the original proposed injunction posed the risk of allowing exactly such challenges via contempt proceedings.
* * *
Rather than enjoining the warrantless arrests themselves, the newly proposed injunction enjoins defendants from “enforcing their policy and practice of making warrantless civil immigration arrests” without a probable cause finding of escape risk. Pls.’ Revised Proposed Order ¶ 1 (emphasis added). This revision avoids the prospect of contempt proceedings for individual erroneous arrests, bolstered by plaintiffs’ inclusion of a requirement that parties meet and confer regarding any alleged noncompliance prior to initiating contempt proceedings.

Thus, she barred the government from having a policy of making warrantless arrests without probable cause of escape risk.

[not guilty]

The operative language appears at the first full paragraph of page 2 of the order granting the preliminary injunction (a separate document from the 88 page memorandum opinion):

[It is] ORDERED that defendants and their agents are PRELIMINARILY ENJOINED from enforcing their policy or practice of making warrantless civil immigration arrests in the District of Columbia without a pre-arrest individualized determination by the arresting agent of probable cause that the person being arrested is likely to escape before a warrant can be obtained, as required by 8 U.S.C. § 1357(a)(2) and 8 C.F.R. § 287.8(c)(2)(ii), which statute and regulation also require the same individualized determination of probable cause that the person being arrested is in the United States in violation of law or regulation regulating the admission, exclusion, expulsion or removal of aliens

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.285268/gov.uscourts.dcd.285268.67.0.pdf

[Mr. Bumble]

Now that Open Thread is a daily feature this seems to fit more than ever.

Welcome back my friends, to the show that never ends
We're so glad you could attend, come inside, come inside
There behind a glass stands a real blade of grass
Be careful as you pass, move along, move along

[Chorus]
Come inside, the show's about to start
Guaranteed to blow your head apart
Rest assured you'll get your money's worth
Greatest show in Heaven, Hell or Earth
You've got to see the show, it's a dynamo
You've got to see the show, it's rock and roll, oh

Karn Evil 9, Emerson, Lake and Palmer.

[Bwaaah]

Nice. Looking back, I'm not sure if it was the drugs or that track. Kind of like Pinball Wizard.

[Frank Drackman]

Father?
Yes Son?
I want to kill you,
Mother?
I want to (redacted) you, all night long, yeah!

I'm thinking that Jim Morrison had some "Father Issues"

Frank

[Malika la Maize]

President Donald Trump on Monday launched into a late-night meltdown on his social media platform that saw him promoting a conspiracy theory about former first lady Michelle Obama signing presidential pardons on former President Joe Biden’s behalf.

The president turned up the dial on his typical Truth Social posting spree, making over 160 posts and reshares from 7 p.m. to nearly midnight on the East Coast.

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/trump-launches-massive-deranged-night-074440175.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAD_jvMn0jtuZmHy4m6pWUSePlKt2fj3D378hdcljT4XHGVTjDRukPRyLTC_6nfMgKEIoMT6QXyuADYnOsUiWz4-9ov_FnHVAfpjdJQ13v7Wr-XRIGN6xLorO-LZBD8_Lep4rWNTye9Y_MGG-a-WNTc3ctPiCO2-XPqJUtqCyXbrw

[Michael P]

In other words, Trump accomplishes much more after working hours than Malicia accomplishes during a full shift at whatever succeeded the Internet Research Agency.

[Estragon]

“Accomplishes”

What is the accomplishment? Re-“truthing”? Talk about damning by faint praise.

Pop quiz hot shot: what’s the bigger accomplishment? Manic posting or being rested enough to stay awake in cabinet meetings?

[Bob from Ohio]

"What is the accomplishment? "

Stopping illegal immigration at the Mexican border.

Reducing the number of illegal immigrants living in the
US

Making the first term tax cuts permament.

Getting a ceasefire in Gaza, hostages returned and the peace plan endorsed by the UN security council

[Estragon]

That was all accomplished “after working hours” from 7 to midnight overnight Monday?

[Malika la Maize]

Sorry, JD Vance—while ridiculing a former vice presidential candidate Tuesday, President Donald Trump seemed to accidentally admit to having an “incompetent” number two.

After barely being able to keep his eyes open during an hours-long Cabinet meeting, Trump appeared to perk up long enough to deliver an incoherent rant about Minnesota Governor Tim Walz.

“I think the man’s a grossly incompetent man,” Trump said, referring to Walz. “I thought that from the day I watched JD destroy him in a debate. I was saying, ‘Who was more incompetent? That man or my man?’ I had a man, and he had a man—they were both incompetent.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/trump-accidentally-lets-slip-just-222829363.html

[Michael P]

You're terrible at reading.

Trump had a man, and Vance had a man. Both of their counterparts were incompetent. You just look pathetic for pretending otherwise -- on top of being a fool for having denied Biden's and Walz's incompetence in the first place.

[Brett Bellmore]

Motivated reading is a thing, after all. If you want to believe something strongly enough, it messes with your ability to parse language.

[Sarcastr0]

I wonder if Brett has no mirrors in his house, to reach this level of no self reflection.

[Commenter_XY]

You should not have mirrors in your home, Sarcastr0. Are you happy with the face that you see? I think not.

[Sarcastr0]

Oooh, swing and amiss.

[Life of Brian]

This only thing amiss appears to be the output of your dictation software that you're too damn lazy to edit.

[jb]

Wait, who's Trump's man in this reading of the quote?

[Michael P]

Trump's man was Biden. Vance's man was Walz. Trump only used "man" to refer to those two; "he" was Vance.

Malicia's incompetent reading would require Vance (as Trump's man) to have his own man in turn, with the third man not otherwise referenced in the quote.

[jb]

You know that Walz was Kamala's running mate, not Biden's, right? Or are you saying Trump didn't know that? Or that he thought she was a man?

[TwelveInchPianist]

He's saying that Trump debated Biden.

It's not shocking that you guys blocked that out.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, well, Trump debated both Biden AND Harris, but, yeah, Biden was Trump's 'guy' in this case.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Yup. I mean, the way Trump said it left room for ambiguity, but the mention of incompetence should clear up any doubt.

[Michael P]

In your imagination, when did Harris debate Vance? Or how do you read "I think the man’s a grossly incompetent man. I thought that from the day I watched JD destroy him in a debate"?

[jb]

Harris debated Trump, so she must be his man according to your interpretation of events in which Walz is Vance's man. But I get it: for all the mockery of KBJ not being able to define what a woman is, apparently Trump can't even figure out the gender of his opponent. Also possible I guess that he's the senile one now and he forgot she was the candidate.

[TwelveInchPianist]

This may come as a shock to you, but Trump has debated more than one opponent. And there was one that was both a man, and incompetent. It got quite a bit of coverage at the time.

[jay.tee]

Trump debated Biden first, so maybe that’s what he meant? Or because he largely ran against Biden, even after Biden dropped out, since Harris said she wouldn’t change anything? Or, this being Trump, he referred to Harris as “guy”?

Either way, it’s pretty clear Malika’s take required an extremely jaundiced reading of Trump’s statement.

Edit: erp, a little late to the party

[Martinned]

Some actual law. Because this one's fun:

Since late 2024, the Taiwan Constitutional Court (TCC) has been unable to issue merits-based decisions. (...)

On December 20, 2024, notwithstanding substantial public opposition, the KMT-TPP coalition passed a controversial amendment to the Constitutional Court Procedure Act (CCPA). The amendment imposed three interrelated constraints: a ten-justice quorum for constitutional adjudication irrespective of the number of judges actually sitting at the Court; a supermajority requirement of nine votes to invalidate legislation; and immediate implementation upon promulgation, bypassing the customary three-day grace period.

These newly enacted procedural constraints, combined with the expiration of seven justices’ terms at the end of October 2024, made filling the Court’s vacancies critical. However, the Legislative Yuan successively rejected all seven of President Lai Ching-te’s nominees in December 2024 and again in July 2025, leaving the Court with only eight justices. Unable to meet the new ten-justice quorum, the TCC became functionally paralyzed, unable to hold oral arguments, issue injunctions, or render decisions. To date, it has issued no merits-based ruling for over a year.

https://verfassungsblog.de/taiwan-constitutional-court/

[Mr. Bumble]

You have a strange sense of what's fun.

[Martinned]

Says the guy who spent months arguing about the Democrats' Supreme Court packing plan, even though it was never going to happen.

[Mr. Bumble]

Wrong guy.

[Riva]

I think the more interesting circumstance in Taiwan and also Japan is that both countries finally have heads of state with the guts to stand up to China. And they’re both women. It does seem that cowardly, ball less men seem to be a worldwide problem in political leadership.

[Sarcastr0]

Oh dear someone let an incel into Riva's source code.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Mean girl stuff.

[Riva]

I guess solidarity with other woman takes second seat to party solidarity for the little communist girl that never smiled. Communists have to stick together I guess.

[Brett Bellmore]

I don't know, maybe honeypot operations don't work as well on women? China seems fairly fond of running them.

[GreenLanternCorps]

Head of Government, not Head of State.

The Emperor of Japan is the Head of State of that country.
The Prime Minister is Head of Government.

The US is an Exception where the President is both Head of State (Ceremonial Leader) and Head of Government (sets policy and runs the government on a day to day basis).

[Bob from Ohio]

Um. Maybe we can eliminate judicial review in a similar way.

[John F. Carr]

Under American law, a single federal judge has the power to adjudicate most constitutional questions. Some voting cases require three judges. At least one state requires a supermajority of its Supreme Court to invalidate legislation.

[Brett Bellmore]

Well, this really sums up everything Somin has ever written on immigration, doesn't it?

Collapse of confidence, destruction of trust

"The idea that there is some economic phenomena such that marginal costs exceeds marginal benefits for all people over all ranges in all forms is not Economic thinking, it is magical thinking. (More precisely, it is class-signalling parading as Economics.)"

[Sarcastr0]

When has Prof. Somin made a claim about ‘ all people over all ranges in all forms?’

The ones with the black and white thinking seem more his weird hate groupies that show up on every thread of his insisting he hates America.

[Michael P]

Ilya the Lesser never admits that some immigrants are bad. He endlessly cites dishonest statistics to claim that even illegal immigrants -- breaking the law by their illegal entry to the US -- are more law-abiding than native-born Americans.

[jb]

Some immigrants can be bad even if on average immigrants are less bad than citizens. I'm not sure how you think your second sentence supports the first.

[Michael P]

Yes, some immigrants can be worse than others. Somin never admits that there is any way to predict this or to screen them before allowing them to enter the US. That's how he acts out the quote that Gaslight0 objected to. My second sentence elaborates that pattern.

[jb]

On the flip side, you like to post one off anecdotes and pretend they extend to all immigrants. At least Somin is working with actual data.

[Riva]

Some are bad? Putting it mildly. He never admits illegals costing billions in tax dollars to support even exists. The Somali fraudsters alone really outdid themselves in Minnesota.

[Sarcastr0]

Beep boop talking point deployed!

[jay.tee]

Beep boop vibes deployed!

Totally non responsive to Riva’s assertion. While I strongly disagree with his implication that most immigrants are bad, the Minneapolis Somalians appear to have a significant population of “bad” immigrants amongst themselves.

[Bob from Ohio]

The libs and their libertarian ally here tediously claim Riva is a "bot" without evidence.

[Riva]

I appreciate the defense but the dehumanizing “bot” insult is just a tired variation on a standard leftist tactic used to target/belittle any critics. It is giving these trolls far too much credit to even suggest there is any other basis for their sick parroted insults.

[David Nieporent]

There's certainly evidence. Posted comments that are word-for-word duplicates of other posted comments of his, that bear only a tenuous keyword relation to the comments to which they're purportedly responses. Which is not how an actual normal person talks, but is exactly what one would expect from a bot programmed to spit out responses based on keyword triggers. Has never posted a single original analysis of anything that couldn't have been found on social media the day before it was posted here.

[Bob from Ohio]

His response to my comment refutes your evidence free allegations.

[Riva]

Well, there's a shock, more ridiculous insults from the troll DM whose own comments invariably have, at best, a tenuous link to the truth. Or are just BS like the above. And I would also advise not taking his views on constitutional interpretation too seriously.

[David Nieporent]

QED.

Were there any "insults" in my comment? There were not. But a bot is programmed to use the same autoresponses regardless of content.

[Bob from Ohio]

Your entire comment was an insult.

[Life of Brian]

Were there any "insults" in my comment?

Under the definition of "insult" in David Nieporent's Super-Secret Self-Serving Dictionary? Or as a reasonable, well-adjusted person would define it?

[David Nieporent]

The Minneapolis Somalians appear to have a significant population of “bad” immigrants amongst themselves.

There are something like 100,000 people of Somali background in Minnesota. Less than 100 have been arrested in these fraud investigations.

[Life of Brian]

About 1 in 1000 were involved in just this one fraud scheme?

Yikes.

[jb]

White people in Kentucky are more than 3x as likely to be in prison right now as a Somali is to have participated in this one scam, to put these numbers into perspective.

[Life of Brian]

So the per capita rate of white Kentuckians in prison for any and all crimes whatsoever is only 3x that of Somalis who participated in just this one scam?

You're just reinforcing my point.

[jb]

But of course, lots of people have been convicted of crimes that aren't currently in prison. In fact, most of the Somalis charged in Minnesota aren't currently in prison, even those who have been convicted.

And to get anywhere near 100 people (it seems like the total is more like 70) you need to count several different scams, not just the biggest one related to COVID food aid.

Now, is it possible that Somalis in Minnesota commit more crimes than white natives from Kentucky? Sure it is. But knowing that there were 70 people involved in various scams certainly doesn't come close to proving that.

[Commenter_XY]

Pathetic.

[Life of Brian]

Yes, just a snapshot on many levels. My original point was that David was (I thought) trumpeting those stats to show how low they are, and in reality they're not low at all.

Probably a far better apples-to-apples number would be benefit fraud charges per year, but that's not readily surfacing. However, 2024 data for total federal criminal defendants for any charges at all is shown in Table 1 here, and shows 65,325 defendants charged nationwide in 2024. That's a bit under 20 in 100,000. NYT tells me 59 Somalis have been convicted so far, so the conviction rate for just these scams is running about 3x the charge rate for all federal crimes of any type.

[Riva]

I guess I should add that the Somali fraud could not have achieved its heights of greatness without the great contributions of Walz and other prominent democrats. I wonder if Somali terrorists sent him any holiday "thank yous" for the infusion of cash he enabled?

[Sarcastr0]

Beep boop talking point deployed again.

Dems are making great contributions to Somali terrorists! You demand to be taken seriously!

[David Nieporent]

Note that there is zero evidence in any of the actual cases that any money was given to Somali terrorists. That's just a Christopher Rufo invention.

[Riva]

Actually, for any adults out there, I don't demand anything. A reasonable exchange of views would be a pleasant change but such an event is unlikely from the trolls wallowing here.

As for monies sent back to Somali terrorists, it will be interesting to see the results of the Treasury Department investigation into allegations that Minnesota tax dollars went to al-Shabaab terrorists in Somalia. Perhaps the fault for trolls is that the allegations are not through anonymous sources familiar with the matter. Trolls seem to like those.

[David Nieporent]

The allegations in fact were through anonymous sources familiar with the matter. One person is named — Glenn Kerns — but he doesn't have any firsthand knowledge; he's reporting what "[h]e determined, primarily through human sources," but none of those "human sources" are named, which makes them… anonymous. Otherwise, the report cites a "former official, who requested to remain anonymous," and "a third source, who spoke on condition of anonymity."

[Riva]

Given DM's history of lying, I'm not sure it would be advisable to take his word that the universe of allegations being investigated arises solely from anonymous sources. No on second thought, I'm sure.

Although, assuming it did, he must have some psychic power to determine that the so-called anonymous sources here are somehow less credible than the WP anonymous sources he likes. Frankly, the thought of DM with psychic powers is more frightening a thought than basing an investigation on anonymous sources.

[Brett Bellmore]

He's never made it as explicit as this essay, but he absolutely reasons in the manner this essay discusses. Have you EVER seen him concede that maybe, just maybe, we should limit immigration to just people who are educated? Already speak English? Don't have criminal records?

How Immigration Restrictions Harm U.S. Citizens, Too

"Perhaps we should let in migrants who seem likely to become valuable workers but keep out most others. This reasoning, however, assumes that government can do a good job allocating labor and predicting which people will make useful contributions. That assumption is unlikely to be true. If it were sound, the Soviet Union would have been a great economic success."

So, he doesn't literally claim that every last warm body arriving on our shores will be a positive contribution, but denies that it's possible to do even the most basic sorting among them to try to assure that. Even simple things like requiring that somebody actually speak our language.

In fact, he goes so far as to deny that it's even constitutional for the federal government to regulate immigration.

Does the Constitution Give the Federal Government Power Over Immigration?

He does here seem to concede that taking the immigration authority from the federal government would imply states have some power in this area. Elsewhere he takes that back, insisting that the 14th amendment overrides the 10th on this topic, and, no, states don't get any power in this area in the absence of federal power.

[Sarcastr0]

"He's never made it as explicit as this essay, but"

"he doesn't literally claim that every last warm body arriving on our shores will be a positive contribution, but"

So you're immediately conceding.
You bring up other issues with his immigration advocacy but this economic one from your OP is not actually anything he said, or even implied.
It's just something you latched onto for some reason.

[Michael P]

As usual, your unhinged and deranged assertions only reflect your mental state. Brett laid out explicitly how Ilya the Lesser implies the statement that you protested (too much).

Try reading what people actually write instead of accusing them of the motivated reading that you engage in.

[David Nieporent]

I am very not surprised that Brett endorses a column by a guy who just makes shit up that Brett happens to agree with.

[Mr. Bumble]

How Afghanistan deals with murderers:
"80,000 Afghans gather to watch a 13-year-old execute the killer of his family
A 13-year-old boy executed a man convicted of murdering 13 members of his family in Afghanistan's eastern province of Khost. Around 80,000 people watched the execution, which was ordered by the Afghan Supreme Court and sanctioned by the Taliban's supreme leader, Hibatullah Akhundzada. The public execution has been condemned by the UN Special Rapporteur on Afghanistan."
https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/afghanistan-khost-public-execution-80000-watch-13-year-old-public-stadium-executes-man-convicted-murdering-family-2829665-2025-12-02

[apedad]

I'm not 100% sure of YOUR point here since you didn't add a comment.

Are you saying we should adopt this type of victims imposing punishment?

Because that's not what we have in the US.

Our criminal justice system is not set up to be victim vs. the defendant but instead State vs. the defendant.

Criminals are found guilty for crimes against society and it is the the govt which prosecutes and punishes the guilty.

[Mr. Bumble]

"Submitted for your approval..."

[Bunny495]

"Our criminal justice system is not set up to be victim vs. the defendant but instead State vs. the defendant."

There is the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), enacted in 2004 which allows a victim's impact statement and nearly all states allow impact statements.

[Frank Drackman]

That guy sure won't be stealing any of his own Sports Memorabilia back.

[Bob from Ohio]

"condemned by the UN Special Rapporteur"

LOL

[John F. Carr]

"The public execution has been condemned by the UN Special Rapporteur on Afghanistan."

The UN was also concerned about the death of Gaddafi.

[Mr. Bumble]

Will the next Sport's Illustrated Swimsuit Edition include a former fat girls feature now that so many former fatties have slimmed down with the help of drugs?
Asking for a friend.

[Brett Bellmore]

Probably not, it's not like these drugs shrink your skin down, too. So you might look good fully clothed, but...

[Mr. Bumble]

There is a treatment for that.
https://www.sonobello.com/

[Brett Bellmore]

I think I saw that demonstrated on Philippine TV years ago.

Yes, it can be treated, within limits.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Am I the only person who notices that robots have more perfect bodies than real women?

[Mr. Bumble]

Been enjoying your sexbot?

[Frank Drackman]

Dr. Ed trying to look current, you know you've still got "Leisure Suit Larry" on your 386.

Frank

[Bunny495]

"Leisure Suit Larry" would run on the old 88s and a 286. Don't ask me how I know.

[Life of Brian]

Heck, it even ran on the lowly 6502!

[Michael P]

The Second Circuit reminds a third-rate hack that there is a First Amendment: https://ww3.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/e768e6c3-0bab-49eb-a0a7-6c845bda0917/1/doc/24-2481_opn.pdf

Specifically, we agree with the district court that the NIFLA plaintiffs have demonstrated, at this juncture and on this record, that they are likely to succeed on their First Amendment claim because their APR-related statements are noncommercial speech, and the Attorney General has not met her burden to demonstrate the State’s regulatory conduct can survive strict scrutiny.
The district court correctly determined that the speech at issue is noncommercial because, based on the uncontroverted evidence in the current record, the speech is religiously and morally motivated, the NIFLA plaintiffs receive no remuneration or other financial benefit for engaging in it, and, as the NIFLA plaintiffs do not provide APR themselves, the speech serves only to provide the public with information about APR and access to third-party providers that can offer APR.

[Armchair]

California has a new plan. a 5% Wealth tax on billionaires.

And best of all...it's retroactive. Might be passed in November 2026, but would apply to those in the state on January 1st 2026.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nathangoldman/2025/11/14/can-a-5-wealth-tax-on-200-billionaires-save-or-sink-california/

Just curious....is this potentially taxation without representation? You may not live in the state, may not be able to vote on the bill...but then get taxes?

[Martinned]

There is no right not to be taxed without representation. (At least not in the US, or in any other jurisdiction I'm familiar with.) Lots of state taxes also have effects on individuals and companies that are not located in the state.

Edit: And obviously non-citizens still have to pay taxes.

[Armchair]

While being taxed without being represented (especially on large budget items) is a big deal for Americans, the crux of the issue here is the the retroactive tax. It means that you potentially can't vote on the tax. Nor avoid the tax. Let's give an example for you to understand.

Imagine you're a Dutchman visiting California. Imagine California puts a $10,000 entry tax on all Dutchmen visiting. You might decide...eh, not worth visiting CA. The tax is too expensive. Now, imagine the same thing, except California makes the tax retroactive for a couple years. You visited CA a year ago. Had no idea of the tax. It didn't even exist. But now you "owe" CA $10,000 in tax, due to the retroactive tax.

What do you think now?

[Brett Bellmore]

Sure, it's obnoxious, and certainly OUGHT to be unconstitutional. Arguably is unconstitutional.

But you can't convince the Supreme court of that.

I suspect California might have to start worrying if they'd made it retroactive to a previous year, but the precedent in favor of retroactive application to the SAME year is, deplorably, clear and abundant.

[Martinned]

Retroactive taxation is a major no no in many/most jurisdictions. Even in the UK, where theoretically Parliament can do whatever it likes, there's a famous saga in the 1980s where Lord Denning made parliament re-enact a retroactive taxation law two times, because he held their first two attempts weren't clear enough to overcome the presumption against retroactive taxation. (Simplifying.)

[Commenter_XY]

Eurotrash 1, what a surprise you don't get it.

[Krayt]

And best of all...it's retroactive. Might be passed in November 2026, but would apply to those in the state on January 1st 2026.

Iirc there was an on point SC case, but at the federal level. As long as it's the same year, it's seen as ok. I guess taxing happens on an annual basis.

Probably not good, what if someone with large spot earnings spent everything except the taxes they already paid? How do they make up the unexpected shortfall.

Never been a fan of "wealth taxes". What's the point of the 5th Amendment if government can just seize it without compensation? Same issue for "unrealized gains".

At least California has a balanced budget amendment. The politicians still spend out of control, but at least there are theoretical limiters. The feds, not so much.

Feds are a chronic disease. Revenue increases are used to justify increasing borrowing, not decrease it, as borrowing is tied to GDP and a politician's nature to spend as much as possible. We saw this after the Internet boom. We saw this after the tobbacco settlements. I prognosticate this based on tarriff revenue increases, but, as with those, Congress has to get mad at themselves and ramp up the spending, which takes a few years.

[John F. Carr]

I remember Murphy Brown grumbling "Retroactive tax? How about a retroactive vote?" Probably circa 1991. I forget which law that was.

[Ska]

"I guess taxing happens on an annual basis."

It does except when it doesn't. Annualization allows you to, if you can demonstrate it, report income in specific non-calendar quarters and apply estimated taxes to match income earned by period. We do this to minimize or eliminate underpayment penalties - as long as you can definitively demonstrate that you earned your income at specific points of time.

[jb]

"Just curious....is this potentially taxation without representation? You may not live in the state, may not be able to vote on the bill...but then get taxes?"

This describes everyone that pays property taxes on property they own outside the jurisdiction they live and vote in.

[bernard11]

This describes everyone that pays property taxes on property they own outside the jurisdiction they live and vote in.

It also describes anyone who earns income in state they do not live in. Turns out to be a major headache for professional athletes, touring performers, etc.

[TwelveInchPianist]

There was, famously, a time during the pandemic when Massachusetts was collecting taxes on people that had no connection with the state at all.

I don't know what would happen if CA tried to make a tax retroactive on people who had no connection to the state when the tax was passed. But billionaires should probably start vacating now.

[Frank Drackman]

Turned on "Morning Schmo" they lead with a "Teaser" about the "Disturbing Erection results in Tennessee"
So I'm Ass-suming the DemoKKKrat Chick won,
Repubiclown won by 9%...
and 3 hours yesterday no mention of the murdered Guardsman, just
lots of Somber Talking Heads blathering about War Crimes.

Frank

[Krayt]

See my post re: Tennessee and Tucker, below, for a rebuttal.

[Bunny495]

All that is just a shiny new thing to burry the Epstein bullshit.

[Josh R]

A 9%-point GOP win in a 22%-point Red district is consistent with how much better Dems have done in all the elections since Trump was reelected. If the 2026 midterms have a 10%+-point swing towards the Dems, the Dems win the House even with redistricting.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, I can't say that I'm terribly impressed with the Republican Congress myself.

We're heading into the usual cycle: Democrats do things in power that get them voted out, Republicans don't do THOSE things, but fail to do much good, either. Voters start to forget how awful Democrats were, vote them back in. "Oh, yeah, THAT'S why we voted Republican!", and the cycle repeats.

The problem is that the Democrats have gotten really good at entrenching those awful things, so each cycle advances the Democratic agenda a bit more.

Trump is desperately trying to prove that you can actually roll back the Democratic tide, not just stall it for a few years before it resumes. And the GOP Congress is NOT giving him a lot of help in that.

[Josh R]

The swing towards the Dems is primarily based on the results in affordability. That and enough low-propensity Trump voters only show up when Trump is on the ballot.

[Michael P]

Yesterday in revealed preferences, English winters are officially less tolerable than Literally Worse Than Hitler Orange Man.

https://www.mercurynews.com/2025/12/02/cold-english-winter-driving-ellen-degeneres-trumps-america/

Maybe Ellen Degeneres and Portia de Rossi should try winter in Maine or Wisconsin one year.

[Martinned]

Because there seems to be widespread surprise on this blog that "they are criminals" isn't an acceptable legal defence to the crime of murder, I thought it might be useful to pull up the arrest warrant against former Phillipine president Duterte: https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/CourtRecords/0902ebd180aeb09d.pdf

You will note (at least) two things:

- He is being prosecuted for crimes against humanity, not war crimes. Despite some other non-international armed conflict that is ongoing in the Phillipenes, there was no attempt to suggest that his dispute with organised crime was somehow a war.

- As a result, the prosecution has to show that the defendant's crimes were "committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population". And at the arrest warrant stage the OTP failed to do that with respect to the torture and rape charges, which is why the arrest warrant is only for murder.

[Michael P]

Are we supposed to be impressed that the ICC wants to be in charge of everyone?

[Martinned]

No, you are supposed to understand that murder is bad. And for weeks now you seem to be struggling with that notion, even though it is literally the most basic norm of human decency. I mean it's arguably the first bad thing to be mentioned in the Bible, all the way in book 4 of Genesis.

[Michael P]

"Murder" is not defined by some ICC bureaucrat in The Hague, or some self-important bean counter in whatever city you work in. For years you seem to be struggling with that notion.

[Martinned]

No, it is defined (in this case) by the states who wrote, signed, and ratified the Rome Statute. There's 125 of them at the moment.

https://asp.icc-cpi.int/states-parties

Like any law, it is then interpreted by the court, in its published judgments.

No bureaucrats are involved. I'm not sure where that confusion came from. It must be that your head is so far up Trump's ass that you're having trouble thinking clearly.

[Frank Drackman]

Again about these stupid Rome Statues, we've got our own Statues, they're bigger, better, and not 2,000 years old.

[Michael P]

That joke was only funny the time he actually left out the third "t".

[hobie]

One thing about the Confederates, they were really prosemitic.

[Frank Drackman]

Confederate Secretary of State was a Hebrew (Judah Benjamin, not like he was trying to hide it)
He had also been Secretary of Wah, Attorney General, and previously a US Senator from Louisiana.
Yes, he owned Slaves, he was a Confederate fur Jehovah's sake.
Took the US almost 200 years to get one, (Henry Kissinger, I think Judah would have gotten fewer Amuricans killed)

Frank

[TwelveInchPianist]

How many divisions does Rome have?

[John F. Carr]

As many as the signatories of his statute have.

But since the Rome Statute is binding only on signatories, we won't see an invasion of the United States to bring Trump before the ICC.

[hobie]

The Ten Commandments is just another Dem Hoax perpetrated by woke-ass God.

[Commenter_XY]

Why are you so rude?

[Sarcastr0]

Shitty nickname dude who sometimes tells posters to kill themselves doesn't get to complain about manners.

[Bunny495]

I always like the Judge Roy Bean school of jurisprudence. "I seen plenty of men that needed killing, but I never saw any money that needed stealing"—is widely attributed to the legendary Judge Roy Bean, "The Only Law West of the Pecos."

Revised to ""I seen plenty of men that needed killing, but I never saw any drugs that needed smuggling".

[Frank Drackman]

I've got another Judge Roy Bean quote, applying to the current Kerfluggle over dead Drug Trafickers

"Justifiable Homicide"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Frank

[hobie]

The old Stand Your Ground/Stand Your Saltwater axiom.

Hegseth's attorney (Kyle Rittenhouse): 'Your Honor, after shooting some unarmed people, my client rightfully feared the legless survivor bobbing around would float several thousand miles to Miami, catch a bus to Philadelphia, and inject some fentanyl into some child walking the street."

[santamonica811]

My recollection from the 80s or 90s was that lots of medications were routinely smuggled in from Canada and/or Mexico, due to the high costs if purchased in the States. (Maybe also some medications that were available only in Canada/Mexico? Or ones that were OTC in Canada/Mexico, but needed a prescription here?)

A counter-argument to your revision. 🙂

[Bob from Ohio]

"might be useful to pull up the arrest warrant "

Its not.

[John F. Carr]

"widespread or systematic attack"

A few years ago I read about a prosecution of a couple who kept a captive household servant. Because the captivity was allegedly motivated by race, it was a crime against humanity rather than an ordinary unlawful servitude case.

Under American law, a pattern of unlawful activity can mean two incidents.

[santamonica811]

I vaguely recall a "Law & Order" episode that was based on your real-life example. I don't remembering the L/O episode having a racial component, though. (Not surprising...since the show always changed the fact patterns slightly, so it could say 'based on' and presumably avoid lawsuits later on.)

[BrotherMovesOn]

Like Fargo was based on a true story - "At the request of the survivors, the names have been changed" and "Out of respect for the dead, the rest has been told exactly as it occurred".
When the Washington Post pointed out during its theatrical run that the title card in the movie was false, the Coen Brothers promised a full investigation.

[Martinned]

Today the Dutch Council of State has given a principles judgment in a set of cases about protests outside abortion clinics. The basic conclusion is that yes, mayors can ban protests in order to safeguard public order, particularly at the immediate entrance to the clinic, but they cannot ban protests to such an extent that there is nowhere within sight and/or earshot of the clinic where the protestors can make their views known and potentially engage with people visiting the clinic.

https://www.raadvanstate.nl/actueel/nieuws/december/demonstreren-bij-abortuskliniek/

[Frank Drackman]

You guys could save alot of time by just becoming a Province of Iran.

[Michael P]

India has ordered smartphone makers to install undeleteable government spyware into every new smartphone; Apple has already refused.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cedxyvx74p4o

[John F. Carr]

India withdrew the demand.

[Brett Bellmore]

Next time they'll remember to make it illegal to tell anybody they did it.

[Michael P]

Lots of people here asserted that Trump's tariffs would just be taxes on American consumers. It turns out that's only 20% true ("Our estimated retail tariff pass-through is 20 percent"): https://www.pricinglab.org/files/TrackingTariffs_Cavallo_Llamas_Vazquez.pdf

So who pays for the other 80%? Apparently foreign sellers like Volkswagen, which massively cut prices for US-bound goods to maintain market share: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/10/30/volkswagen-skids-into-the-red-on-5-billion-euro-us-tariff-hit-porsche-woes.html

[Longtobefree]

Yet another reminder for the "its a tax!" fixated.
The purpose of a tariff is to change buying behavior.
Those who don't buy tariffed products don't pay the "tax".
Be patriotic, buy American.

[jb]

If the manufacturers (and, presumably, retailers in America since even Michael.P's article about one particular company doesn't make the case that VW is completely offsetting tariffs) are eating the cost, it's not going to change buying behavior.

Also, even if the tax is only 20% of the total, it's still a tax.

[gVOR08]

Trump has publicly said he wants tariffs to replace the income tax. Won't work in any case, but sure won't work if people "buy American".

[loki13]

But .... but .... but ... the Solicitor General told SCOTUS that these were not about raising revenue, but were merely REGULATORY.

Huh.

Wait ... are you saying that this administration, including its lawyers, lies?

The next thing you'll say is that they also present false facts in filings to SCOTUS!

Wait ... they just did that in the Chicago case? Repeatedly?

It's almost like this administration just lies repeatedly. Weird.

[Brett Bellmore]

Well, it eventually won't work, if we end up totally buying American. It could potentially work for quite a while. Potentially indefinitely, if we scaled back the federal government to where it should be.

[loki13]

If we assume the current tariff amounts (which include all prior Tariffs plus the "Trump Tariffs") are held constant, then they would raise ... wait for it ... $2.1 trillion from 2025 through 2034.

That sounds like a lot, except for a few things.

We know how much the GOP loves dynamic scoring, and if you score tariffs using dynamic scoring, you actually find that the amount you would received is actually $1.6 trillion, because tariffs reduce economic activity. That's likely an overestimate, as dynamic scoring can't capture retaliatory tariffs.

And while you love shrinking the government, I have bad news for you. See, remember that Trump monstrosity? The Big Beautiful Bill? Well, it is going to reduce federal tax revenue during the same period by $4 trillion.

That's right- all the tariff revenue (not just the Trump tariffs) whether expressed in hopeful amounts or in dynamic scoring, isn't even half of the already accounted for shortfall in revenue that Trump caused.

People who write things like you do don't actually understand numbers, or economics. The "starve the beast" theory doesn't work, because we are now more than four decades in. And what have we learned from this stupidity?

This- if you reduce the cost of government by constantly lowering how much it costs (lowering taxes) you're not going to reduce the demand.

Instead, you get .... people with big brains ... who keep spouting the same nonsense, who don't understand the numbers, and repeat this type of magical thinking. It's why nothing gets done.

The GOP runs on magic promises and the belief that someone in the future will cure the problems that they create in the present. But it doesn't work that way, does it?

[Brett Bellmore]

To be clear, I don't expect the federal government to be scaled back to where it should be. I was just stating that as being enough to get by on just tariff revenues, as we largely did before the federal government's cancerous growth.

The problem isn't demand. The problem is that the normal weighing of cost and benefit has been (deliberately) circumvented by progressive taxation, which sees to it that most of the cost of government is born by a very small fraction of the population.

So that the average voter probably sees a net benefit even from spending that's economically destructive and would fail any rational cost/benefit analysis.

In order for markets to work the buying decisions have to be made by the people who foot the bills. We do not have a working market in government services.

As long as that's the case, we will "buy" hugely more government than makes economic sense. Well, we will until the whole house of cards collapses, anyway.

[loki13]

Brett,

It is impossible to take you as a serious person, because you insist on things that have no basis in reality when you just spitball.

Do you know what the world (and tariff rates) were like back when the Federal Government relied more heavily on tariff revenue? Go on, do the research. Try and understand what having tariffs at those rates would do. What would other countries do as well? What as the world like then? Then explain why we deliberately went away from that LONG BEFORE the federal government shifted in a way you don't like.

Next, look at the figures I just presented. Run some numbers and imagine what the tariff rates would need to be... not for the government that you want (and you are alone in this) ... but just to PAY THE INTEREST ON THE DEBT THAT WE HAVE.

Next year, interest payments alone will be $1 trillion. So what tariffs do you want to have just to make interest payments? This isn't anything else- not the courts. Not minimal FBI or border enforcement. JUST THE DEBT. We're not even going to discuss the military or other spending.

This is the point- it's why I say I'm a pragmatist. I deal with the world as it is, instead of spouting off meaningless "Big Brain" ideas that make the situation worse while assigning blame to everyone else. "Starve the beast" (which is what you are proposing) has been tried for more than four decades, and it's precisely the reason we have the massive and uncontrollable deficit. Because ... Econ 101, when you reduce the cost of something, demand for it grows.

When you "reduce" the current cost of government services (by reducing taxes while continuing to spend), you increase demand. That is where your ideology has gotten us, and instead of acknowledging it, you just retreat to, "But what if tariffs?"

Almost like this wasn't one of the most famous wrong answer is history. Smoot-Hawley, anyone?

I could keep going on, but the point has been made. You are not a serious person, and your objections about spending can't be taken seriously. As I repeatedly remind people, the last serious attempt to tackle the issue was when Obama went to Boehner with the Grand Bargain, but the GOP revolted. Since then, the GOP has repeatedly done the same song and dance- scream about the deficit for the rubes when out of power, and massively increasing it when they have full control.

It's almost like it's a pattern.

[David Nieporent]

The purpose of a tariff is to change buying behavior.

Sigh. No. Once again: Trump alone has identified three different purposes of a tariff. At most one of them is to change buying behavior. One of them involves the tariffs quickly going away so as not to change any behavior; the other involves people not changing buying behavior, and thus paying lots of tariffs and raising lots of tax revenue.

[Josh R]

The purpose of a tariff is to change buying behavior.

The prices of the American goods are higher than the pre-tariff foreign goods. People aren't happy with that effect on affordability.

[Brett Bellmore]

If you added something really bitter to the chocolate pie of a fat man, he wouldn't be happy with it.

But he'd probably eat less chocolate pie, and lose weight, anyway.

[Josh R]

In addition to the politics of affordability (tariffs are hurting the GOP), people buying fewer goods hurts the economy.

[jb]

Sure, but in the case of tariffs the end result is actually worse for the economy as well since it undermines the benefits of comparative advantage in trade and causes investment to shift to areas where US producers are naturally more competitive.

Put another way: why do we want to shift from a high margin service economy to a low margin manufacturing economy? The reason middle class manufacturing jobs paid better in the 50s than customer service jobs do today have nothing to do with the fact that one involved more physical labor and everything to do with who is capturing the value of that labor today. And with higher margin sectors, there's at least more money to go around.

[bernard11]

but in the case of tariffs the end result is actually worse for the economy as well since it undermines the benefits of comparative advantage in trade and causes investment to shift to areas where US producers are naturally more competitive.

I think you mean less competitive. In any case the point about comparative advantage is important.

It is smarter to buy something for a dollar than to make it at a cost of $1.50. In the latter case you not only pay more, you divert resources to less productive uses.

There is a case for tariffs on important strategic goods, since we don't want to depend on foreigners to provide them, but this argument is not based on economics but rather on defense strategy.

[Sarcastr0]

Brett, why in the world do we want to buy fewer foreign goods? Is buying fancy mustards a security risk?

Cheaper goods *fuels* our economy. Not taking advantage of them hobbles us ridiculously.

[Kenneth Almquist]

Neither of your links claim that foreign companies are paying any of the tariff. In particular, the second article you link to says the tariffs are one of the reasons that Volkswagen is losing money, but doesn’t say that Volkswagen has lowered prices. Prices of foreign imports overall have not fallen; see https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/how-we-lost-the-trade-war

[Krayt]

So yesterday I was watching the Tennessee results evening. As long as the Republican didn't actually lose, one side would declare huge victory, no matter how slim, the other side how dire the Republican straits, no matter how large.

So far so tedius. But one organization after another called it for the Republican. Finally, only Fox News hadn't. What??? They'd be one of the first to call it, one might think.

Switch to Fox News. It's Tucker. Sigh. Never a fan, truly loathed the guy after he ran around with cameras in Russian markets, see, life under Putin isn't so bad! Bread!

Anyway, he's on the election, too, but no decision by the Network. Then he abandons election coverage, remember this is the time with counties coming in, talking heads live for this moment, and starts on some diatribe about something else, some incident somewhere you can rage over, here!

I realized why Fox News was dragging ass on calling it. Once they do, the expanded election viewership moves on back to Stranger Things or Pluribus. But there's minds and souls to lock down for The Cause! And probably a few idiots like me, puzzled, looking to Fox News to see their profound drag ass wisdom their problem.

[Brett Bellmore]

You'll maybe recall that Murdock passed FOX on to his children in a trust. Then realizing they were going to run it into the ground to make their left-wing friends happy, he tried to claw it back, and failed.

I don't think Fox was ever actually genuinely conservative, more like they just didn't go out of their way to piss off conservatives, (Murdoch himself was no conservative, but thought conservative money spent just like anybody else's, and knew an underserved market when he saw one.) but it's now in the process of becoming part of the mainstream media, rather than an alternative to it. This process may slow down, though as a result of recent developments on that front.

[David Nieporent]

As always, Brett writes fanfic with no relation to reality. Fox was always very conservative, Murdoch never tried to take back Fox, and Murdoch of course has always been very conservative.

[Brett Bellmore]

I literally link to an account of his effort to take back Fox, and so of course you deny he attempted it.

[David Nieporent]

The account you linked to didn't say anything like your fanfic. Rupert didn’t try to take back Fox, and there was absolutely nothing to suggest that anyone was going to "run it into the ground to make their left-wing friends happy."

[bernard11]

Brett,

Did you read the article?

It clearly states that Murdoch's motive was to maintain the network's conservative bias.

It also notes that what you call "clawing it back" was characterized by the commissioner who decided the case, as a

“carefully crafted charade” to “permanently cement Lachlan Murdoch’s executive roles” inside the empire “regardless of the impacts such control would have over the companies or the beneficiaries” of the family trust.

And your claim that Fox is not conservative is just one more example of how you've locked yourself in a very small, quite strange, place politically.

[loki13]

So let's do a brief summary of just how terrible the "second strike" story is. H/T, as always, to Amos Arch for fully articulating how awful some people are! You can't make someone like that up, can you?

Anyway, before people start coming up with stupid hypotheticals, I want to remind everyone of three things-
1. I am going to discuss the "double tap" murders. This isn't about the lawfulness of first strikes in general.
2. Please remember that facts make differences- the rules for combat at sea are different for those at land; if you're going to make an analogy or a historical example, it has to be a maritime one. So if you instinctively reach for "WHADDABOUT {insert GWB, OBAMA, etc.}" it has to be at sea, involving survivors. KTHXBYE!
3. Reminder that I've already posted the legal framework for this. If "law stuff" is too hard, you can look DoD's Law of War Manual which has a section on clearly illegal orders and states, "For example, orders to fire upon the shipwrecked would be clearly illegal." There's more, but that's a succinct summary. Firing on survivors of a naval attack is the go-to example of a clearly illegal order.

Okay. Got it? Got it!

Timeline:
1. Right after the attack in September, Hegseth asserted to reporters that he knew were the boat was going, what the boat was carrying, and the exact identity of the people on the boat, and that he watched the full attack in real time.

2. Of course, we later find out that the DoD does not claim to know exactly what boats are carrying, who is on them, or where they are going.

3. Then the WaPo story comes out. It states that: (1) this September attack involved a second strike that killed two survivors, and (2) Hegseth specifically issued an order to "Kill them all." The story was sourced to individuals with direct knowledge.

4. In response to this story, the Administration (through various spokesmen) and Hegseth all deny the story in its entirety, claiming its "fake news" and made up. Various proxies of the administration make the rounds of media attacking the journalists and reiterating this, with a refrain of "fake news" and alternately saying that there is no way that Hegseth would do something so stupid (that was one of my favorites) so it must be fake news.

5. In response to increasing Congressional pressure and demands, the administration changes its story this week. They no longer deny the second strike. Instead, the administration now begins to pivot to acknowledging a second strike. But .... the lie ... sorry, story ... isn't fully coordinated yet. So we have Baghdad Leavitt claiming that it was Admiral Bradley acting in accordance with Hegseth's orders. But that isn't a big enough bus!

So we now have Hegseth saying, "Hey, look. Fog of war. I totally saw the attack, but left the room. I had no idea there was a second attack. That's all the Admiral. I love that guy - make sure you get the name right - BRADLEY - the guy who completely murdered those people while I was out of the room doing important drinking. I support him completely in his efforts to take the blame for me!"

Yeah, that's were we are at. So, the question is- what lie that the administration is telling do you believe? The first one? The second one? The third one? Or the next one?

Here's my take- if Hegseth had any honor ... well, he wouldn't be the sleazeball that he is. But if he did, he would resign and do everything he can so spare the people serving further problems by taking full responsibility for this atrocity.

But he has none. I believe Admiral Bradley will testify truthfully and we will get some answers. I don't know much about him, but I assume he would take responsibility for not disobeying a clearly unlawful order - because it's his responsibility to disobey it even if Hegseth issued it. And this is as unlawful an order as you will find.

And that's where we are at. As always, if the facts change, I will change my mind. But by facts, I mean actual facts, not the garbage that this administrations spews. Testimony, under oath, corroborated by evidence (video and contemporaneous documents).

Those of you who continue to give this administration the benefit of the doubt? Well, I have a Nigerian Prince I'd love to introduce you to.

[Mr. Bumble]

Thank God you did a "brief" summary.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Bumble — Get off your phone, to give your attention span a chance to heal. That comment is not as long even as a typical newspaper op ed.

Also, Loki needs encouragement, not heckling. He is conservative by temperament. He has been a long time waking up to what has been going on around him.

I cherish hope Loki's insight will continue to advance. He has always been among the most substantive commenters on this blog.

[loki13]

Just yesterday, I posted a link to something I found (I was actually pointed to it by another prominent conservative) from Zohran, discussing how he wants to cut red tape, regulations, fees, fines, and licensing costs for small businesses.

No one responded. Why? Assumedly because it goes against the "DERP COMMIE DERP" narrative.

Look, I think Zohran has a lot of bad ideas. But that? That's a really good one that should be supported.

Fundamentally, I'm economically conservative and socially liberal (what used to be called a Rockefeller Republican, I guess, because I am not a libertarian as much as I am a pragmatist).

But more than that, I'm for basic decency and honesty, which I believe are core American values. I abhor corruption and favoritism as well. I am usually a small-c (Burkean) conservative, believing in gradual change, and paying attention to reliance interests.

And I am appalled at everything that this administration is doing. If that makes me a "radical" so be it. You say radical, I say American.

[Michael P]

loki needs a grip, not encouragement.

It is funny that the notoriously effluent Lathrop thinks that logorrhea from loki needs to be encouraged.

[Bob from Ohio]

"brief" summary

Its literally an impossibility with him to be brief. Note Lathrop is defending him! The only dude who writes longer comments here.

I bet his wife has long ago stopped asking him what he wanted for dinner!

[Sarcastr0]

Mean girl stuff again.

A new front for you. Envious of Bumble's side of the street?

[Bob from Ohio]

Just tired of his many, many, many, long, long, long comments. Plus his arrogance, know it all attitude, patronizing tone, Last Reasonable Man shtick and his overall general attitude.

What's with the white knighting from you anyways?

[David Nieporent]

Mr. I'm Proud To Be An Asshole is whining about someone else's general attitude? That's chutzpah.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"In response to this story, the Administration (through various spokesmen) and Hegseth all deny the story in its entirety, claiming its "fake news" and made up."

In its entirety? No boat strike ever happened? That would be weird, since they had already held a press conference announcing that the boat strike had happened.

What they were denying, of course, was the fabricated claim that Hegseth gave an order to ensure that no one on the boat survived. You know, the claim that wasn't supported by any of the sources in the story.

Of course, one person's story has changed. Loki13 was claiming yesterday that Hegseth directly ordered the second strike after the first one left two survivors. That claim seems to have disappeared from Loki's narrative.

[David Nieporent]

That would be weird, since they had already held a press conference announcing that the boat strike had happened.

Have you been asleep for the last 9 years? That wouldn't be the 500th weirdest thing they've done. Repeatedly.

[TwelveInchPianist]

What, specifically, are you guys claiming that they denied?

[David Nieporent]

1. I am going to discuss the "double tap" murders. This isn't about the lawfulness of first strikes in general.

I understand what you're trying to do, but I feel like it almost plays into MAGA hands to limit the topic in this way. If they can get people to solely focus on the second strike, then (a) if they can muddy the waters (pun not intended) on the precise events of that day, they can create uncertainty about the existence of wrongdoing; (b) divert responsibility from themselves to the admiral by claiming they didn't give a specific second strike order; and (c) cause people to forget about the scores of other victims of their crimes.

Remember that version 6b of their story is that the second strike (which totally never happened and Hegseth didn't order it and didn't even know about it and was really about the U.S. being good global citizens by removing debris that could endanger other ships) was actually an attempt to destroy the drugs and the people (who were already dead and if they weren't Hegseth didn't know about them) were just collateral damage.

Pointing out that the attacks themselves were illegal short circuits that.

[loki13]

Well, all the strikes are illegal. I just posted below about the leaked OLC memo "justifying" them. As we should realize, everything the administration has said publicly to date about the justification for these strikes has been a total lie, and one eagerly adopted by the rubes here.

But the reason I want to concentrate on the second strike is because it is, quite literally, the canonical example of an unlawful order. It is, quite literally, THE EXAMPLE of an unlawful order.

At this point, if you are one of the rubes who supports blowing up survivors clinging to wreckage, you have nothing useful left to say.

[Josh R]

I support him completely in his efforts to take the blame for me!

Hegseth said:

Admiral Bradley made the correct decision to ultimately sink the boat and eliminate the threat. He sunk the boat, sunk the boat and eliminated the threat and it was the right call.

As I see it, Hegseth is now claiming the second strike was only to destroy the boat, not to kill the survivors (who the admiral might not have known about).

It's time for Congressional subpoenas of transcripts and people to how that claim holds up.

[loki13]

I agree (re: transcripts, sworn testimony, and unedited video).

The only constant to this administration is that they lie. They lie to the public. They lie when confronted with the truth. They send officers of the court to lie to judges. And they present false testimony under oath.

If you take a statement of the administration and assume that they are lying, you are going to be correct 95% of the time.

[David Nieporent]

If you take a statement of the administration and assume that they are lying, you are going to be correct 95% of the time.

Unless it's Trump, in which case it will be 300% — no, 400% — no, 1000% of the time.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

"Lying was his habit."

United States v. Alvarez

"Lying is their habit."

Trump Administration

[Commenter_XY]

You are all engaging in mental masturbation. Too bad there is no climax.

[bernard11]

Do you have a substantive response, for once?

[hobie]

Some selected excerpts from Drug Kingpin Hernandez to Trump October 28, 2025
https://www.axios.com/2025/12/02/trump-pardon-hernandez-honduras-former-president-letter

"Dear Excellency,

...Just as you, President Trump, I have suffered political persecution, targeted by the Biden-Harris administration not for any wrongdoing, but for political reasons...a clear weaponization of justice against me...

...I have found strength from you, Sir, your resilience to get back in that great office notwithstanding the persecution and prosecution you faced, all for what, because you wished to make your country Great Again. What you accomplished is unprecedented and truly historic...

... was recklessly attacked by radical leftist forces who could not tolerate change, who conspired with drug traffickers and resorted to false accusations, lawfare, and selective justice to destroy what we had achieved and clear the path for the Honduran radical left’s return to power...

...Mr. President, you and I also shared something deeper, a profound love for our countries. We are men of faith, patriots, willing to risk our lives for the safety of our people...

...As your opponents have done to you, I too was labeled a dictator, simply for creating the Military Police and deploying the Military Forces to restore public order...

...In light of these ongoing injustices and the clear case of lawfare by the Biden-Harris administration..."

[loki13]

Reminder- one of the prosecutors who helped put that utter piece of shit away was ... Emil Bove.

Yeah, that guy. A real tool of the Biden-Harris administration.

You can't make this stuff up.

The sad thing about what Trump is doing is that the country (both the President and the states) should be using pardons MORE. Seriously.

But Trump has so perverted the process that it will likely create a lasting backlash to the use of pardons. After all, when you're using it to enrich yourself and help your friends, it presents the nightmare scenario without any of benefits.

I think that all of this is what is most surprising to me- I always assumed that corruption had to be ... I dunno ... a source of shame that you kept secret in this country. Apparently, you just broadcast it out in the open and people line up to defend it.

[hobie]

I'm still searching if the kingpin gave a Trump Family quid like everyone else, or if the letter is all he submitted. This pardon is so sleazy and destructive to the MAGA movement that I cannot think a letter alone would suffice.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

I got annoyed at a certain criminal justice scholar who runs a blog about his single-minded citation of Trump's pardons over the years as if all usage of the power is fungible.

Trump's usage, and an early example is of Joe Arpaio, is counterproductive in respect to those who (quite reasonably) argue the pardon power is not used enough. He uses it recklessly and often in what amounts to be trollish ways.

There is a bias to be "tough on crime" and him being "soft on crime" in such an arbitrary way can make it harder because there will be pressure to be act sparingly and less inclination to temper justice with mercy.

There should be a careful process in place. The process over the years probably became too slow and ungenerous. I'm thinking of the writings of such people like Rachel Barkow.

https://www.npr.org/2025/06/02/nx-s1-5417885/the-history-of-presidential-pardons

[Brett Bellmore]

I don't necessarily like a lot of his pardons, but I at least appreciate his not saving them up for the last minute as he walks out the door.

[loki13]

Weird caveat (don't necessarily like...) ... at some point, can't you just man up and call out the corruption?

Still, I agree with your sentiment. But it's a societal issue. The reason that so many pardons are issued "going out the door" is because of the electoral "tough on crime" issue. Call it the "Willie Horton" problem.

Every politician is terrified that some pardon (or parole, or something similar) will go to a person who ends up committing more crimes, and it will be used against them in a future race. So they are incentivized to use any powers of clemency sparingly ... and when they no longer have to face the possibility of running again.

[hobie]

Funny you should mention old Willy. I heard Dems are mulling Willie-Horton-Style ads about all the savages, pedophiles, kingpins and crooks (many reoffending) Trump's put back on the streets of hillbilly towns across America

[loki13]

Whoda thunk that if he pardoned a bunch of violent insurrectionists who would attack LEOs and try to sack the Capitol ....

They might go on to do more crimes?

After all, they are all ... very fine people.

[hobie]

At least two of them have reoffended with child trafficking/pornography.

[Brett Bellmore]

When I look at the government, I see a sea of corruption. If I called out the corruption every time I saw it, I'd have time for little else. Thought I'd call out one of the flickering not so dark bits, instead.

"The reason that so many pardons are issued "going out the door" is because of the electoral "tough on crime" issue."

Frankly, a lot of the last minute pardons stink on ice, and not just because the voters want the government to be tougher on crime than you happen to like. Because they're part of that sea of corruption.

People didn't scream about the Mark Rich pardon because they wanted a tough on crime policy. It was because they didn't want pardons being bought and sold.

Well, the same here. While I don't like the war on drugs, and think this business of arresting foreign heads of state and trying them under US law for things that didn't happen in the US, is mucho dubious, Hernandez didn't get a pardon because Trump is having second thoughts about persecuting the war on drugs.

Frankly, the state of our government depresses me terribly, assuming that's not the 66 years of accumulated brain damage speaking, and I'm trying to think less about it. I might just give up entirely on voting, and devote more of my remaining years to fishing.

[loki13]

"While I don't like the war on drugs, and think this business of arresting foreign heads of state and trying them under US law for things that didn't happen in the US,"

For once, can you stop believing the lies that you are being spoonfed?

Let's start with some basic facts. The investigation of Hernandez started in 2015. The documents were unsealed by U.S. prosecutors in 2019 - UNDER THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION. Emil Bove (you might know the name) was one of the major people working on this prosecution.

He was never prosecuted while he was the President, because that is a problem. Instead (and after his brother was already sentenced to life in prison on drug trafficking charges in the US), after he was no longer President, we legally sought an extradition from Honduras when he was a regular citizen and it was granted. Honduras allowed it.

Unlike what you assert, this very much happened in the US. The main charge was conspiracy to import cocaine into the United States. That's right, he engaged in a far-reaching effort (with the Sinaloa Cartel) to smuggle cocaine into the United States.

He was given a fair trial, found guilty, and sentenced to 45 years in prison. FOR BEING ONE OF THE MAJOR PLAYERS WHO SMUGGLED COCAINE INTO THE UNITED STATES FOR YEARS.

We didn't try him for a lot of the bad acts he did- like ordering murders in Honduras. Just for that.

Other than that, you are batting 1.000. How do you keep posting such consistently wrong information.

By the way, do you know that he worked closely with El Chapo?

What, are you going to say that trying El Chapo in the United States is also Biden Lawfare and Trump should totes release him too? How much Qatari money should Trump get for that one?

[Sarcastr0]

When I look at the government, I see a sea of corruption.

Of course you do. You're a utopian who wants to bring back Lochner and kill Wickard. You have no idea how to govern anything.
And of course everyone disagreeing with you is doing so for malign reasons, so it's all corruption to you.

Your depression about the state of things is not some factual analysis, it's due to choices you make on what to believe.

Hiding behind delusional cynicism so you can apologize yet again for Trump has got to be getting tiresome.

[Sarcastr0]

"I don't necessarily like a lot of his pardons, but"

Yeah, we all know.

[Stephen Lathrop]

Folks who complain about how elite media distort the news ought to click on the link below, and read it all the way through. It examples excellent journalistic work taking a controversial topic right down the middle.

Without being earth-shaking, It is also an important story, in an everyday context. If you read it all, you will end up with useful information bearing on diverse aspects showing how America's consumer economy is headed off the rails, and how government policy is failing to cope.

This kind of story is the bread and butter of institutional journalism. Oppose doing this and you encourage societal breakdown. The US has thrived as a nation in part because it has always emphasized and protected a free flow of information about topics great and small. That thriving will end if we lose access to an elite institutional press capable to do an ordinary little investigation such as this one, and to present the results fairly. Read it:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/dec/03/customers-pay-more-rising-dollar-store-costs

[loki13]

Saw this today.

On the one hand, it's one of the happiest, yet simplest, graphs I have ever seen.

On the other hand, it also makes you really realize the value of small-c conservatism, and how people shouldn't tear down things that they don't understand the purpose of because they have become accustomed to the benefits.

https://kottke.org/25/12/an-astonishing-graph

If you're curious about some other dates which have nothing to do with this graph...
1796- First smallpox vaccine.
1885- First rabies vaccine.
1914- Pertussis.
1926- Diptheria.
1938- Tetanus.
1955- Polio
1963- Measles
1967- Mumps
1969- Rubella

Note- obviously, these aren't completely, responsible, although I'd love to just list the dates, say correlation is causation, and drop the mic. They obviously helped. But other public health measures - from the development of germ theory to access to clean water to antibiotics - as well as the Green Revolution and the impact on famines, also had major roles.

HOWEVER, when you look at that graph remember this-
In 1900, infectious diseases were all of the leading causes of child mortality in the United States. Now, it's only one (pneumonia/influenza) of the top ten.

In short, we no longer have the memory of what diseases did to the children. We've done from parents losing one out of every two kids to it being a vanishingly rare occurrence.

[Krayt]

The "Big Pharma bad!" crowd, who can quote Bible & verse on such patter, seem to readily throw in with profiteering snake oil salesmen. Clearly being ripped off isn't a real concern.

An anecdote and a sincere look outweighs science. This has literally also been studied.

[Brett Bellmore]

I love big pharma. I'd have died in my teens if not for big pharma. That strep throat was going to kill me, one dose of antibiotics and I was on my feet again.

Doesn't mean I want something shoved down my throat even if I decide it's not worth it. I want options, damn it, not commands.

[Bwaaah]

"I love big pharma."

LOL. I would never say it that way, but then, you've got some pretty good reasons. I'd just leave it at, "I am thankful for big pharma."

"Big pharma" is like "real estate developers." They produce a lot of what people want most, but can be expensively out of reach. For those reasons and the fact that they profit from their sales, they are conveniently cast as evil scapegoats. It's easy to set aside the fact that both operate in extremely competitive markets.

[Frank Drackman]

For 99.9% of Patients there's no reason to prescribe anything released in the last 25 years, the "Newest" Inhalational Anesthetic, Sevoflurane was released in 1996, and even then we used it sparingly as the Isoflurane released in 1981 was much cheaper.
And Nitrous Oxide?? came out in 1844.
Remember during Internship, 1988 (OK, I'm Old) Patient needed his BP Med "Ser-Ap-Es"(Combination of Reserpine, Hydralazine, and Hydrochlorothiazide) refilled, even back then it was out of style, but dirt cheap(Pharmacists joked the bottle cost more than the med).
Attending demanded I put him on something newer, so lets see,
Propanolol gave him ED, Verapamil gave him a Rash, Lisinopril made him cough, a larger dose of HCTZ gave him Gout, the $5 copay lightened his wallet.
After a month of ED, Rash, Coughing, and Gout, he asked
"Doc, can you just refill my Ser-Ap-Es??"

Frank

[not guilty]

Big Pharma? Satan called Rush Limbaugh home during February of 2021.

[gVOR08]

I recall reading someone making the same point talking about graveyards. In the older sections the majority of markers had dates indicating children. But after the mid fifties or so child markers virtually disappeared.

[Bunny495]

I know the prez has wide pardoning power. Guess the analysis is the prez did not do the pardoning, someone else did, not saying it holds water. In any case as this article says Hunter and Fauci could wind up living in a world of shit.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/breaking-trump-officially-invalidates-all-documents-signed-by-biden-autopen-including-pardons-fauci-hunter-biden-now-vulnerable/ar-AA1RAHc8?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=ASTS&cvid=693043a02067474bbafcd02f43192dcc&ei=38

[loki13]

The trouble with that "breaking news" is that it's mostly for the press. We have to remember that an EO is just .... the administration directing agencies (the executive branch).

It is not a law. It does not have the force of law. It does not invalidate anything, especially not prior pardons.

Now, to the extent that an agency in the executive branch will no longer follow a prior EO of Biden because Trump is directing them to disregard a certain EO, sure. Whatever, man.

But this has the same effect as Trump saying, "That duly passed law signed by Biden isn't actually a law because AUTOPEN or whatever." No, it doesn't. Anymore than if he shat the idea out on social media during toilet time.

TLDR; no, it has no effect on prior pardons. Well, it has the same effect as him verbally saying, "Pam, I want you to prosecute Hunter for something. I don't care if he was pardoned or whatever. Just say it was autopenned and do it Pam. Put Halligan on the case and make her the US Attorney of whatever to do it. DO IT PAM!"

Same thing. If the Trump administration wants to try out his theory in court, they are welcome to. It's not like this administration is a stranger to lying and ginning up meritless prosecutions, right?

[Sarcastr0]

Call me when Trump actually tries to go after one of the people Biden pardoned.

So far this is wind from an admin trying very hard to make the story not Epstein or our SecWar (rawr!) ordering murders on the high seas.

[David Nieporent]

Call me when Trump actually tries to go after one of the people Biden pardoned.

He's running out of personal lawyer/hacks to install at DOJ to do things like that. Plus, they'd have to identify actual crimes, and then they'd have to narrow those to crimes whose statutes of limitation haven't expired.

[Moderation4ever]

Basically Trump, a man who doesn't even know who he is pardoning, is saying that pardons can be rescinded. A good thing to remember for all the January 6th insurrectionists.

From the recent 60 Minute interview; Trump says "OK, are you ready? I don’t know who he (Changpeng Zhao) is. I know he got a four-month sentence or something like that and I heard it was a Biden witch hunt.”

[Brett Bellmore]

A man who doesn't even know who he's pardoning, despite personally signing the pardons with cameras rolling just so everybody knows it wasn't some flunky abusing the autopen.

[John 4]

A commenter, responding to a direct quote from the president saying he didn’t know who he is, tells us what the President really meant.

[Brett Bellmore]

Know the difference between, "I'm not up on the details of this specific guy, but I trust my subordinates, so I'm going to pardon this specific guy they recommended I pardon." and "I don't know who gets pardoned, somebody else is pressing the button and not bothering me about it."

[David Nieporent]

There might indeed be a legal difference, but there's no substantive difference between an aide pardoning someone by operating an autopen without telling the president why it is being signed and an aide pardoning someone by shoving a piece of paper under the president's pen without telling him why it is being signed.

[Moderation4ever]

Trump is senile and so is little different than an autopen.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Trump is senile"

Over compensating for backing Biden. Sad.

[Moderation4ever]

Except I did not back either of the two old goats for the Presidency. I pointed out that both Biden and Trump were unfit. Now we know that is true. The difference is that Democrats dumped their guy, although a bit too late, and the Republicans looked past many good candidates to pick the senile old incompetent.

[MoreCurious]

You missed a few applicable adjectives, e.g., immoral, corrupt, and hateful.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

shoving a piece of paper under the president's pen without telling him why it is being signed.

The Henry Blake Maneuver.

[Frank Drackman]

Don't see what the big deal is. The "Second Strike" was to drive away the Sharks.

Frank

[Estragon]

Everyone always talks about the second strike. What about the third and fourth?

[hobie]

One happy occurrence of the kingpin pardon is that I get to add another item to my MAGA Accusations/Confessions list. Check it out!

They steal election (steals election)
Neegroes riot violently (riots violently)
Dems pedophiles (likes 'em on the younger side)
Warrior ethos ('Mommy! It was Brad what pushed the button!')
Narco-state drug kingpin presidents bad (Narco-state drug kingpin presidents good)

[hobie]

Oooo! Almost forgot:

Antisemitism bad ('We love Hitler')

[Frank Drackman]

I-ANAL but why can't this Afghani Terrorist get the same treatment as the Germans in Operation Pastorius?
Who didn't succeed in killing anyone BTW.
Arrested late June 1942, tried by a Military Court that took most of July, executed August 8.
Even given a "Christian" burial in DC, free of charge.

Frank

[hobie]

I-ANAL

Yes, we are aware.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Trump — who’s said he’s never met Omar — has verbally attacked the 43-year old lawmaker on multiple occasions.

https://www.nydailynews.com/2025/12/02/ilhan-omar-response-to-trump-garbage-comment/

She replied:

“His obsession with me is creepy,” she posted on X. “I hope he gets the help he desperately needs.”

The article also notes:

Omar’s family fled Somalia to escape the civil war when she was 8 years old, according to her House of Representatives biography page. After spending four years in a Kenyan refugee camp, her family arrived in New York in 1995 before eventually settling in Minneapolis.

BTW, "double tap" is a dubious term, imho. Sounds like what I would say regarding taping my bank card at the supermarket.

[Moderation4ever]

Trump, and for that matter many Republicans, seem to be allowing Ilhan Omar to live rent free in their head. She is one lawmaker in a small district who is given an oversized importance.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Yes. I wonder why. He asks while knowing why.

[Bob from Ohio]

"Omar’s family fled Somalia to escape the civil war"

Oh, does it discuss what her dad did before that?

[hobie]

He was a soldier, then teacher, postal worker and taxi driver. Died from COVID.

[Frank Drackman]

First 4 seem like decent Careers. Not so much for the last one.

Frank "Dyin ain't much of a livin'"

[LawTalkingGuy]

Probably nothing you wouldn’t defend if you happened to like the leadership of that country.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Listening to the SCOTUS oral argument.

When did the usage of placing things in "buckets" become so popular? I have listened to these things for years, and the term seems to have become in vogue not that long ago.

[LawTalkingGuy]

Did they have a different metaphor before?

[JoeFromtheBronx]

I'm not aware. If they did, it probably wasn't used as often as "buckets" is these days.

[Moderation4ever]

I think the old metaphor was "box" and you put things in the correct box. I would say that bucket developed as an analogy for a wish list generally referring to our bucket list. The idea then transfers to more general usage. In the end it is part of animal nature, and humans are animals, to sort things whether they be physical or conceptional.

[Bunny495]

Buckets is an accounting term that has been around forever. I started doing forensic accounting in the 1980s and it was used then. I know accounting is hard for some but to a large extent it is why the national debt is so large.

[Moderation4ever]

After yesterdays cabinet meeting President Trump told reporters "at some point in the not too distant future you won’t even have income tax to pay,". Suggesting tariffs will replace the income tax. In doing so replacing a progressive tax good for all Americans with a regressive tax favoring the wealthiest.

[Brett Bellmore]

Replacing a tax on wealth creation with a consumption tax? I'm all in favor of that.

The 'progressive' tax was intended to separate voting from the tax burden as much as possible, so that spending would always be a political winner even if it made no sense, because the burden would always fall primarily on a tiny fraction of the population. It's a good deal of the reason federal spending is out of control.

[hobie]

I agree with Brett. We (well, MAGA) are currently using an income tax as a means to politically and financially enrich billionaires. A tax like VAT theoretically everyone pays equally.

[Brett Bellmore]

I'm more of a head tax guy, but a retail sales tax would be OK, too. I don't like the stealth aspect of the VAT, where most of it gets passed on through intermediate transactions, so that the end purchaser, the voter, doesn't realize how much of what they're paying is tax.

[Brett Bellmore]

Got news for you: Billionaires don't typically NEED the government enriching them. They need the government to refrain from anti-enriching them.

This is the usual left-wing inversion: Failing to TAKE from billionaires as much money as you would like to is construed to be GIVING billionaires money, because your baseline isn't just doing nothing, it is you getting exactly what you want.

You could cut a billionaire's tax bill to his per capita share of the federal budget, about $21K, and that wouldn't be enriching them at all, it would just be not robbing them blind.

[Sarcastr0]

What? Revealed preference is that a lot of rich people still spend a lot of effort to make even more fat sacks of cash money.

You do love to defend our wealthy genetic lottery winning aristocracy.

[TwelveInchPianist]

What does that have to do with Brett's comment?

[Bwaaah]

Nothing. But he gets to show his contempt for those who have too many "fat sacks of cash money," and his contempt for people who don't have contempt for those people.

And he's OK with capitalism. Just not the reality of it.

[DDHarriman]

Conceptually couldn't a tariff be considered a type of use tax or consumption tax?

What's wrong with tax burden being tied to actual use in commerce and not on income?

Don't rich people spend more and thus pay more?

It sounds like his tariffs are morphing into something akin to Forbes' Fair Tax. Which was pretty good.

[Moderation4ever]

Let the Bible tell why regressive taxes are bad. Mark 12:41. The poor pay out of money they need the rich from their surplus.

[Frank Drackman]

So stop buying lottery tickets.

[Moderation4ever]

Frank poor people buy lottery tickets. I don't and I consider myself a winner every drawing as I did not waste any money trying.

[Brett Bellmore]

By Biblical standards, we're ALL rich today.

[bernard11]

couldn't a tariff be considered a type of use tax or consumption tax?

A particularly lousy one.

[loki13]

In other news .... Trump get pwned by Putin .... AGAIN! I mean, you think he'd learn by this point. Or some point. What, the "Alaska Summit" wasn't enough of a self-pwn for Trump?

Do you think he's like Charlie Brown, and he thinks that this time Putin will let him kick the football?

Sorry, the news...

Remember how Russia conned us into presenting their peace plan as our own? In order to sow discord and discontent? And have the usual suspects here all crowing about how Trump is so great? While our allies were like, "Seriously, WTF?"

Well, the other shoe finally dropped. Our team of totally not in-the-bag negotiators, who completely were not looking to profit from Russia's deal ... presented the Russian ... sorry, our plan to Russia.

And Putin said ... NYET.

Let's recall- Trump was preparing to give Ukraine tomahawk missiles. Russia bamboozled Trump with a phone call (again) and their own peace plan to propose to them. Trump took it, because of course he did. This buys Russia more time, and makes us look like a bunch of morons and hayseeds to the rest of the world, alienating our allies and sowing dissension and discord. And what happens?

Russia gets to clown us again and reject their own plan.

Great work!

[hobie]

It's a pretty effective strategy so far. Whenever the fog in that golden dome lifts and he remembers that we are actual enemies with Russia, and a sanction or weapon is about to be dispatched, Russia dangles another 'peace plan'. 'VLADIMI STOP! with all them peace plans. You're just too peaceful, Vlad.'

[loki13]

I read your last sentence in the voice of Toto Wolff at the 2021 Abu Dhabi Grand Prix.

I can just see Trump plaintively saying, "No, Vladimir, no!" as he gets pantsed again.

[hobie]

VLADIMI STOP!' is from a Trump post earlier this year. Honestly, I think of Don Knott's voice when I vocalize it in my mind.

[Josh R]

Trump doesn't care who gets the better deal. He just wants a deal and the Nobel Peace Prize. Putin knows this and has played Trump beautifully.

It's good that our EU/UK/NATO allies have kept Putin from getting his "peace" deal. However, perhaps they should repeatedly be proactive and make Putin the bad guy (as he was at times) in Trump's eyes by putting forth plan after plan that Putin rejects instead of reacting to Putin's ploys.

[hobie]

Look at all the peace he's brought to America's criminal class. Shoe-in for the Peace Prize.

[apedad]

Audit claims Loudoun County Republican Committee accepts donations from illegal sources

The Loudoun County Republican Committee (LCRC), which exists to elect Republican candidates, is accepting donations from non-U.S. citizens, according to a new audit conducted by the Virginia Republican Party.

The Republican Party of Virginia’s audit said it has significant concerns that the LCRC, led by Scott Pio, may be violating federal campaign finance laws.

“Again, they're not doing a citizenship check, and we don't do a citizenship check either,” Pio said. “And no candidate in the entire country does a citizenship check.”

https://wjla.com/news/local/audit-claims-loudoun-county-republican-committee-accepts-donations-from-illegal-sources-virginia-lcrc-scott-pio-campaign-politics-elections

Nothing like a little Red-on-Red action after you lose bigly in an election.

[Brett Bellmore]

Nail them to the wall, then. I can't advocate treating this seriously when Democrats do it, and not agree to treat it seriously when Republicans do, too.

[Bob from Ohio]

The Associated Press@AP
A raccoon broke into a closed liquor store and hit the bottom shelf, where the scotch and whisky were stored. An employee at the Ashland, Virginia-area liquor store found the trash panda passed out on the bathroom floor at the end of his drunken escapade.

https://x.com/AP/status/1996119964441608406

[John F. Carr]

When you're wondering if the Internet was a good idea, remember it brings you stories like this.

[LawTalkingGuy]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/may/07/raccoon-chewy-meth-pipe-ohio#img-1

Still partial to Meth Raccoon.

[Stella Link's Ghost]

Or the cocaine bear.

The drunk raccoon (everybody is calling him Pete) is reported to be doing fine though might have a bit of a hangover. The cocaine bear, after ingesting several kilos (a lot of wuarter pounders), went to black bear heaven where the garbage cans are unlocked and always full.

[bernard11]

The cocaine bear, after ingesting several kilos (a lot of wuarter pounders), went to black bear heaven where the garbage cans are unlocked and always full.

"Where the zoos are made of tin,
And you can walk right out again
As soon as you are in."

[LawTalkingGuy]

When Karoline Leavitt announced that the second-strike was in “self-defense” I laughed because that’s something murder defendants often claim without much basis.

Really, my favorite(?) thing about the Trump admin, especially Trump himself, is how similar they sound to your typical criminal defendant.

[ducksalad]

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told an audience in a previously unreported 2016 video that the US military “won’t follow unlawful orders from their commander in chief,” and described the refusal of illegal commands as a part of the military’s ethos and standards
...
“I do think there have to be consequences for abject war crimes. If you’re doing something that is just completely unlawful and ruthless, then there is a consequence for that,” Hegseth said. “That’s why the military said it won’t follow unlawful orders from their commander in chief. There’s a standard, there’s an ethos. There’s a belief that we are above what so many things that our enemies or others would do.”

https://archive.is/BcqrH#selection-2551.13-2551.427

[loki13]

I expect Trump to his death due to this seditious language, and for the Rubes to jump on board immediately.

Oh, wait, that's not going to happen? Because saying that soldiers should not follow unlawful orders is par for the course? And because Hegseth said that in April 2016?

Who was President in April 2016? Oh yeah. I'm guessing that the Rubes were perfectly okay with the reminder back then.

[hobie]

MAGA to Military: Ignore Black man's orders
MAGA to Military: Ignore COVID orders
MAGA to Military: You fucked up following our orders. We've always told you not to follow orders.

[DDHarriman]

So?

[Krayt]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljaP2etvDc4

[ducksalad]

Wait, there's more:

In his comments to the group, Hegseth spoke critically of then-President Barack Obama, denouncing the administration’s foreign policy decisions and military rules of engagement, which he argued had weakened US military readiness and morale. Hegseth said he had often heard from veterans not wanting their children to join under Obama.
...
“I still want to believe and hope that there are plenty of Americans who understand what this country represents, that are willing to put their lives on the line, and families that understand the importance of that to encourage their son or daughter,” [Hegseth] added. “I just hope we get a commander in chief befitting of that loyalty.”

[DDHarriman]

So?

[loki13]

In yet more news on the scandal that all of us with morals have known is a scandal, and those of you who get your jollies from the pain and suffering of others don't ....

Looks like the OLC Memo "justifying" the boat strikes leaked!

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/dec/03/trump-officials-boat-strikes-legal-analysis

This is going to shock you ... but what the administration has said publicly.... they were lying. Remember what they told us? It is SELF DEFENSE against NARCO-TRAFFICKERS bringing FENTANYL TO 'MURKIUH!!!!!

Oh wait, I remember now. They lie. They lie. They lie.

Anyhoo, the actual "legal justification" (and it's a doozy) is this... bear with me, because it's a doozy.

Narco-traffickers are engaged in ... armed conflict with our allies like Mexico and Columbia. I mean, I guess Columbia was our ally when this was written.
So, because they are engaged in armed conflict with our allies, we can shoot at the boats carrying cocaine in order to choke off the money supply for these conflicts.
And the fact that someone on the boat ... might .... die does not mean that they are an improper target.

Did you follow all of that? Did you?

So before getting into any of the myriad legal issues, I just want to remind you of the following-
1. Every single thing the public was told about this operation, and the justification for it, HAS BEEN A LIE. ALL OF IT.
2. This is not self-defense of the US, it is defense of our allies. Who did not ask for our help. And in the case of Columbia, are pretty pissed off.
3. There is no evidence that non-state actors can be considered "at war" with our allies. (Look, this actually a legal distinction here, admittedly. I'm not going to softball what is going on in Mexico).
4. But this isn't about the drugs, it's about ... the money.

Anyway, I am going to point this out because the most interesting part is the last part. Are you wondering why the latest batch of lies from the administration about the second strike has started using language about targeting the boats?

That's right. Because this memo is about targeting boats, and incidentally says that if people die, it's going to be okay (which, again, wut). They're trying to get the fact that we targeted survivors within the legal language of this BS memo.

But just take a second.
"We targeted the boat and destroyed it. But there were two survivors clinging to the wreckage. We were supposed to kill them all. So we struck the wreckage again, which incidentally killed the two survivors."

See if you can spot the multiple logic fails.

[LawTalkingGuy]

Can’t wait until the person who wrote these memos has tenure at a T-14. Or is a judge on the 9th Circuit.

[John F. Carr]

"all of us with morals have known is a scandal"

Right and wrong determine what ought to be a scandal. Popular reaction determines what is a scandal.

There is enough attention from Republicans that it might become a scandal. At the outer limit, it might become the Kelly Amendment barring expenditure of appropriations for certain military operations off the coast of South America. Hegseth might be sacrificed if Trump does not think he will look weak by responding to political pressure. Nobody is going to prison or getting impeached. Not a value judgment here. A political forecast.

[loki13]

There was a time when it wasn't just the underlying conduct, but the coverup, that determined scandals as well.

But everything in this administration is a coverup, because everything is a lie. At this point, they have flooded the zone with so many lies about so many things that it's impossible for a normal person to be scandalized about any particular set of lies, because they are all lies.

Actually, coverup (in the Watergate sense) isn't actually accurate, either. Because most of it is just brazenly out in the open. The corruption. The BS (those of following the boat strikes haven't been fooled). It's more ... they conduct the illegality pretty openly, and then brazenly lie about it, and are happy to say, "What do you believe, you lying eyes or what we tell you?"

[Brett Bellmore]

"There was a time when it wasn't just the underlying conduct, but the coverup, that determined scandals as well."

Yeah, I'm not seeing the coverup here, either. Any tapes been burned or erased? A spate of phones being bricked by repeatedly entering the wrong password, or hard drives "failing" after an encounter with a hammer? Visitor and call logging systems been discontinued? Data preservation companies been changed, and a schedule of expedited destruction of backups implemented?
Anybody neglected to mention to their IT guy that there's a subpoena, don't bleachbit the email server after all?

Nope, none of that.

They're not covering anything up because, spoiler: They don't think they did anything wrong, and coverups are something guilty people do.

[David Nieporent]

Please! This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker and argue over who killed who.

[hobie]

Why should anyone expect anything different from a government run by Fox News. Hell, I've won more times in the appellate courts (five: two in the 9th; three in the 5th) than this entire administration has in two whole terms.

A child trafficked for sex could write a better excuse for war.

[Life of Brian]

Looks like the OLC Memo "justifying" the boat strikes leaked!

Do you read past the headlines? Your (ahem) Guardian piece only says: "According to three lawyers directly familiar with the matter, the OLC memo says . . ." No memo; just hearsay.

And that anonywhisper campaign is over a week old, as I craftily deduced from clicking on the link provided not once but twice in the article.

Your increasingly gleeful tendency to just gulp down and regurgitate abject rumormongering as God's honest truth, combined with your increasingly frenzied missives about what you've convinced yourself it all means, is genuinely getting concerning. We have another 3+ years of this to go at a minimum. If you're no longer able to critically filter your news feed, maybe try shutting it off from time to time.

[John 4]

I look forward to Trump shitting in Life of Brian’s mouth. I wonder if it will happen during tonight’s twitter sundowning or tomorrow’s?

[Sarcastr0]

Dude, you have egg on your face with your over the top skepticism of the original WaPO story, and before that thinking DDwhatever was a new poster.

Dunno if you want to open a new front in your battle against things that are credible but which you don't wanna waaaa.

[TwelveInchPianist]

Mean girl stuff.

[Life of Brian]

New troll tags in and, since there's no way to salvage the mess the first troll stepped in, just starts throwing confetti. Whee!

Dude, you have egg on your face with your over the top skepticism of the original WaPO story

My posts questioning the theatrical timing of the release of the story are right here. Paste the exact text that you believe has now been disproved, or just save us some time and slink away like you always ultimately do anyway.

and before that thinking DDwhatever was a new poster.

More of the same sort of crap you can't back -- bring it on if you think you have it. What I did say several times was that you jokers that just arbitrarily declared him and at least half a dozen other posters to be the same person were just wishcasting, and the actual posting timelines for all those accounts didn't support it.

[Sarcastr0]

You are incapable of conceding now obvious things.

Flounce harder, silly man, maybe that will cover for how all your effort is on Internet arguing and not on baseline reality.

[Life of Brian]

Ooooh, he tried to craft a middle ground: slinking away without even trying to support his original unsupportable claims, whilst throwing a new one over his shoulder for cover on the way out the door. Really top-shelf stuff.

[apedad]

Recent headlines....

Conservatives intervene in Wisconsin’s mid-decade redistricting push as House majority hangs in the balance (Fox News)

Texas GOP banks on new congressional map to keep the House majority (Washington Examiner)

Sheesh....

[hobie]

Websters should just change the definition of cognitive dissonance from words to a picture of a red MAGA cap

[DDHarriman]

So true! We all know journolists report just the facts and these spin-free, agenda-free headlines ARE PROOF of MAGA dissonance.

I love our trustworthy, non partisan, national news media!!! Hbu?

[grb]

Representative Henry Cuellar (D) of Texas is a corrupt convicted criminal. $600,000 in bribes from Azerbaijan and a Mexican commercial bank were laundered into shell companies owned by his wife, Imelda. In exchange, Cuellar advanced the interests of an Azerbaijan-controlled energy company, sought changes to legislation that favored Azerbaijan, and delivered pro-Azerbaijan speeches on the House floor.

The Mexican bank bought Cuellar to use against the Treasury Department, whose anti-money laundering policy threatened their profits. Those bribes were funneled through two of Cuellar's political aides, including his former campaign manager, Colin Strother. Strother and Florencio "Lencho" Rendon pled guilty to the corruption charges and face jail time and fines. Trump, of course, just pardoned Cuellar and his wife.

Three Points:

1. Trump loves criminals. They're his brothers & sisters in crime.
2. Trump really loves corrupt criminal pols. It's like admiring himself in a mirror.
3. But Trump doesn't care about nobody criminals. The two aides? They're on their own.

[loki13]

I'm almost impressed. It shows that Trump isn't always a partisan shill.

When it comes to corruption, Trump wants to reach across the aisle. Heck, when it comes to corruption, Trump loves him some narco-terrorists, amirite?

[apedad]

I called it last week . . . Trump is secretly a Democrat!!!

[Estragon]

“Trump was a democrat” is 1000% something we will hear in the future after he’s gone.

[LawTalkingGuy]

2045: “Trumpism is a leftist ideology” says guy who just loves red hats, orange spray tan, and demonizing immigrants.

[loki13]

...I mean, we are already being told that not supporting the Nazis in the Trump administration is the real anti-Semitism, so why not?

Actually .... oh, that's it, innit?

See, Trump is stocking the administration with Nazis.

And the rubes here love to tell us that Nazis are actually communists.

And communists are leftists.

And leftists are Democrats.

And since Democrats are (by the power of bad logic) Nazis, that means that Trump is a Democrat! LOGIC FTW!!!!!11!!!!

[grb]

From what we hear these days from MAGA, George W Bush was a squish and even Saint Ronnie is questionable as a RINO. In comparison with Trump's lib-owning cartoon theatrics, those two barely provided any entertainment at all. And that's what today's Right expects & demands. As with pro-wrestling, it's acceptable if the show is a complete sham.

Just as long as it gets their faces beet-red with excitement and their tiny hearts pound furiously as they lustily cheer the "heroes" and boo the "villains", they're happy little MAGA consumers.

But the demands of entertainment tend to be inflationary. I expect by 2045, that period's MAGA will look back upon Trump as a squish. By then their new political godling, Lucifer, will be giving them even more exciting thrills!

[Brett Bellmore]

I stopped thinking of Ronnie as saintly when Iran Contra broke. That was a while before Trump became a political figure.

[loki13]

I hear you. Ronnie didn't even take a cut of that money.

What a moron.

[hobie]

Suckers and Losers.

[hobie]

Sounds about right. There is no way MAGA can atone for the monstrous acts they've done. I think to avoid the guillotine there will be one gigantic bus-undering: Trump himself.

[ducksalad]

Trump isn't always a partisan shill

That is just one possible explanation.

[hobie]

I honestly cannot tell anymore whether he works for the Arabs, Putin or the drug lords.

Now I'm starting to wonder...a couple billion of untraceable narco dollars would get him to TACO out on the interdiction. Could also be the reason he won't - like with Russia - lay a finger on where 90% of our drugs actually come from: Mexico.

So I predict he'll bizarrely stop all the hostilities soon and declare he solved the drug war.

[ducksalad]

Representative Henry Cuellar (D) of Texas is a corrupt convicted criminal

grb, do you have a source for Henry Cuellar being convicted of anything? My understanding is that his trial hasn't happened yet.

[hobie]

Trump pardons Texas Democratic Rep. Cuellar in bribery and conspiracy case

He and the wife were indeed convicted

https://apnews.com/article/trump-pardon-cuellar-45a47bc329bec820cd19c087b20fca19

[ducksalad]

Still not seeing it. From the linked article:

"The couple’s trial had been set to begin next April."

[hobie]

Hmmm...I think you are correct. Never even made it to trial.

“Henry, I don’t know you, but you can sleep well tonight,” Trump wrote in his social media post announcing the pardon. “Your nightmare is finally over!”

[grb]

ducksalad : "do you have a source for Henry Cuellar being convicted of anything"

I do not because that assertion was my mistake. The pardon was pre-trial. The case was original to go to trial in September, but was postponed to April 2026.

[ducksalad]

Thanks.

[grb]

I spend a sec fruitlessly trying to find data on the prevalence of pre-charge pardons vs pre-trial pardons vs post-conviction pardons. All are legal (at least since the post-Civil War era), but I wonder if the first two are becoming more typical over recent history.

[David Nieporent]

grb, that is not how one handles errors in the age of Trump. Just say that everything you wrote was true, call ducksalad a hater and a liar, it's a hoax, fake news, and then deny you ever said it at all.

[hobie]

I completely forgot about this from 2017. It was one of the first scandals of his presidency. But it wasn't that interesting that everyone forgot about it.

The Ritz-Carlton Baku Hotel

"After Trump announced his candidacy for U.S. president in the 2016 election, several news organizations reported on his involvement with the project, which raised questions about possible corruption involving the Mammadov family. The building eventually opened in 2022 under the Ritz-Carlton brand."

Cuellar was accused of accepting bribes from SOCAR. SOCAR - Azerbaijan's national oil company - "is often associated with the widespread corruption in Azerbaijan. In a 2011 survey by Transparency International concerning the anti-corruption practices of 44 oil companies, SOCAR ranked last."

But these Cuellar accusations could potentially sully the names and plans of it and its General Director: Mahir Mammadov

Could this be, like, the fourth quid pro quo this week alone? You got the Trump hotel in Baku quid, and then the 'we'll make this investigation go away' quo?

[hobie]

Henry Cuellar will seek reelection as a Democrat after Trump pardon

Trump’s glowing praise of the veteran Texas lawmaker shocked Republicans who have tried to defeat him for years. [asked if he would now switch parties] "Nothing has changed — I’m a good old conservative Democrat,” Cuellar said Wednesday.

[jb]

Indeed. One of the primary features of Trump's pardons is that if you were convicted of corruption, Trump is probably going to pardon you. This is, of course, his attempt to normalize corruption by government officials which is way more important to him than any partisan political calculation.

[Kazinski]

That's defamatory GRB.

When was Cuellar convicted?

It should not be too much to get basic facts straight when you go on a screed.

[grb]

Says the person who spent week after week trying to make something out of the Hunter Biden-Viktor Shokin nonsense - easily the most ludicrous, counter-factual, and phony scandalette that ever existed.

You'd post a laborious long post and any one of several people would slap ya down with the facts. Then you'd be right back two days later as if all those facts never existed. (Those being the good old days of M,W,F. It's horrifying to imagine you on a Biden-Shokin-style screed under the new daily regime).

It shouldn't have been too much to get basic facts straight on the first day or week, but this went on seemingly forever. I guess you figured neither Hunter or Viktor would sue for defamation, so who cares?

[Sarcastr0]

That shooter was working for Waltz!

[grb]

Another golden oldie!

[Kazinski]

You may be unconcerned with the Biden's Grift, but I stand with George Kent, who was Obama's Deputy Secretary of State:

"During a closed-door deposition earlier this week, a senior State Department official told House impeachment investigators that he raised ethical concerns about Hunter Biden’s business ties in Ukraine with then-Vice President Joe Biden’s office in 2015, two sources familiar with the deposition confirmed Friday to ABC News, but was ultimately rebuffed.

Deputy Secretary of State George Kent told investigators that he grew so concerned about the appearance of a conflict of interest presented by Hunter Biden’s role on the board of a Ukrainian oil and gas company that he conveyed his misgivings to an aide to the then-vice president, the sources said."

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/diplomat-expressed-concern-hunter-bidens-foreign-work-2015/story?id=66369013

[bernard11]

Wait.

Someone "raised ethical concerns" about Hunter (not to be confused with Joe) Biden's business ties in Ukraine? To an aide to Joe Biden. Apparently, Kent was concerned about the

"appearance of a conflict of interest presented by Hunter Biden’s role on the board of a Ukrainian oil and gas company that he conveyed his misgivings to an aide to the then-vice president"

This was "according to "two sources familiar with the deposition."

And this is supposed to prove that Joe Biden was involved in some grift? (I notice "Biden's Grift," aside from the lame capitalization, carefully omits first names.)

Pretty weak, Kaz, And a short time ago you were deriding the boat story, because it came from seven anonymous sources.

I wonder how you decide which anonymous sources you believe. Maybe I can guess.

[hobie]

Time to make the turkey pot pies. https://photos.app.goo.gl/2Zm8yhqKLiqN8w8r5

I'm a scratch cooking kinda guy: I got the demi glace cubes in the freezer to prove it. But my favorite food of all time - Swanson's Turkey Pot Pie - has been my lifelong goal. And the only way to achieve it exactly is to use Walmart's $1 jars of turkey gravy. Which, like their beef and chicken ones, are excellent and give the pies that perfect freezer aisle flavor.

[Brett Bellmore]

Geeze. I'm making turkey pot pie myself today. But I'm using the leftover gravy from Thanksgiving, and topping it with the leftover stuffing instead of mashed potatoes.

Not Walmart gravy in a jar. Brrr!

Still, everybody's got their cruddy dish that they just love because of childhood memories, I suppose. I used to absolutely love Stehouwers Beef Sizzle steaks, charred on the outside and half raw in the middle, with a dash of Tiger sauce. Ribeye veneer over a hamburger core.

I'm sure I'd still love them. But at $11.66 a pound, no way I'm buying the meat equivalent of particle board. They used to be cheap!

I'm making it in a "Pyrex" baking dish Pyrex gave me in compensation for one of their pie pans exploding as I took it out of the oven. Because it was just tempered glass, not borosilicate glass of the sort they made their name famous with.

I should probably hit a flea market and see if I can get the real thing, that explosion makes me nervous every time I take it out of the oven now.

[ThePublius]

Try the thrift stoves for old Pyrex, cheap!

[DDHarriman]

Why didn't the Seditious Six name amd shame all the alleged illegal orders that Democrats are suing over and claiming are illegal?

When prodded for specifics, none of the Seditious Six could think up any examples of illegal orders. Do they not know what these Dem governors are saying or anything about their lawsuits?

[hobie]

Yep, them Hegseth Murders blew up the latest MAGA craze (Seditious Six) faster than most MAGA crazes get blown up. But you keep flogging it, Harriman, if it makes you feel better.

[loki13]

When the news is faster than the VOLTAGE!

[DDHarriman]

lol no it hasn't.

This is just more of same "We got'em this time" thats gonna end like all the others... with a bunch of morons getting their hopes crushed AGAIN.

[hobie]

[loki13]

Ah, hell. For what it's worth, this is a pretty good and succinct explainer of the boat strikes, with accompanying links for most of the relevant points. It goes through each of the issues (and helpfully explains why they aren't technically war crimes, but just crime crimes and violations of human rights law):

https://www.justsecurity.org/126156/expert-qa-on-the-u-s-boat-strikes/

I fully expect the usual suspects to not read it, and to ignore all the points, but to continue to conjure up fanciful hypotehticals about D-Day and whaddabout involving, I dunno, Hillary's emails maybe?

For serious people, it's yet another good resource.

[NvEric]

Ultrasounds during pregnancy disrupts the fetus to where several harmful conditions may cause heath problems after birth. The more extensive, the more the harm. Ultrasounds may be a great tool, but exposure to a fetus is causing todays uptick in childhood problems. Ultrasound damages the fetus and are very unnecessary. Nothing is gained by these ultrasounds. Low levels good do not outweigh high levels of harm. Where do you think the rise of autism comes from ?

[hobie]

So you're telling me that forcing all these redneck women in redneck states to have ultrasounds of their redneck phoetusi has actually been creating a MAGA population of super-retards?

[Frank Drackman]

So Jerry, what did Joe Paterno's Ass-Crack smell like??

[hobie]

You still haven't responded to my notice that Israel has the most permissive abortion regime in the entire world

[grb]

Cite? The very briefest of searches found zero instances agreeing with your statements. It will be interesting to see how far down the rabbit hole you have to go for support. Maybe not that far, but we'll wait and see.

It's not a good sign that you found yet another "cause" of autism. It seems at this point that anything anytime everywhere causes it.

[Bwaaah]

Basis for your claims?

[grb]

Re Trump's Bling Palace (disaster in the making edition) :

USA Today : "Architect James McCrery II, who was brought on board by Trump to serve as the lead architect with a splashy announcement and renderings of the gilded and cavernous ballroom in July “counseled restraint over concerns” that it could "dwarf" the 55,000-square-foot executive mansion, The Washington Post reported."

NYT : "In offering up his initial design, Mr. McCrery could not have known that Mr. Trump’s vision for the project was growing. What started as a 500-seat ballroom connected to the East Wing grew to 650 seats. Next, he wanted a 999-seat ballroom, then room for 1,350. Even as Mr. Trump assured the public in July that the ballroom would not touch the existing structure, he already had approved plans to demolish the East Wing to make way for something that could hold several thousand people, according to three people familiar with the timeline."

NYT : "The size of the project was not the only issue raising alarms. Mr. Trump also told people working on the ballroom that they did not need to follow permitting, zoning or code requirements because the structure is on White House grounds, according to three people familiar with his comments. (The firms involved have insisted on following industry standards.)"

NYT : "Aware of potential resistance to the project, Mr. Trump has pushed to remove any obstacle that could slow down his vision. He has installed his former personal lawyer as the chairman of the National Capital Planning Commission, which is supposed to review plans for the project. That lawyer, Will Scharf, has said there was no need to review Mr. Trump’s plans before he ordered the demolition of the East Wing. Mr. Trump has also fired the entire board of the Commission of Fine Arts, an independent federal agency that was established by Congress to advise the president on urban planning and historical preservation."

NYT : “I consider myself an important designer,” Mr. Trump has said."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/11/26/white-house-ballroom-architect-argument-trump/87486901007/

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/29/us/politics/trump-white-house-ballroom.html

[OpinionsVary]

I'm starting to think the Epstein Memorial Ballroom might not be a good idea.

[grb]

Though the parties in the Epstein Memorial Ballroom might have a certain "last days of Rome" abandonment & grandeur.

[Bunny495]

Problem is many big events were held in tents outside the White House because there was no room inside and guest had to use a PortaPottie. Not the best look for a first world country. There is definitely a need for a large indoor space for events with lots of guests. Not saying it needs to be gold plated, just that it needs to be.

[ducksalad]

It's ridiculous to suggest there is no place to hold indoor government events. They hold large meetings all the time. Dozens of large meetings, with meals, in elegant surroundings, all the time.

There are plenty of nice indoor venues in DC that can seat several hundred dinner guests. They even have restrooms. Some are even federal property under the control of the executive branch, e.g. various halls in the Smithsonian.

https://americanart.si.edu/about/event-spaces/renwick

If an event is held in tents it's because someone very intentionally decided it would be fun to have a picnic atmosphere, not because it's Gaza on the Potomac and we have no buildings.

[grb]

Bunny495 : "Not saying it needs to be gold plated, just that it needs to be"

In and of itself, that's not an unreasonable argument. My objections to the project number four:

1. It is WAY too big, dwarfing the main central White House structure that is an iconic image of America worldwide. Note above Trump has almost tripled the capacity of the new building since its planning began. Per the articles, his current thinking is inauguration balls can be held here. I for one would prefer a new ballroom that respects one of this country's most famous & treasured structures even at the cost of holding a ball elsewhere every four years.

2. It is evading all oversight. I don't worry about basic code requirements because McCrery will respect those even if Trump won't. But there is a reason historical buildings have special protections and this most special of building will have none. Because even if Trump decides to follow the "rules", he's made sure those rules are enforced by toadies, bootlickers, and hacks.

3. Given the client is a taste-free ignorant buffoon, we can expect the very coarsest result. You can see that now even in the project's earliest stage. One tell is the ballroom's classical order, which is Corinthian. In classical architecture, the three orders (ignoring Composite) have a ranking of preeminence - from Tuscan at the low end, to Ionic in the middle, to Corinthian on top. In a single building with all three, Corinthian is given the pride of place. In a collection of buildings, Corinthian goes on the most important. Well, the central White House structure is Ionic, yet the Bling Palace is shown as Corinthian. Trump just can't help himself. I blame his tiny little hands.

4. The way it's funded is ripe for corruption and our president is a lifelong criminal. Is it too much to ask that this important building project not be coated in Trump's slime and carry his cesspool stench?

[Life of Brian]

It is evading all oversight.

You somewhat misspelled "avoiding a dozen or so years of churn and turf wars amongst various overlapping agencies of coddled bureaucratic leeches, and actually building the damn thing." But it was close!

[David Nieporent]

Problem is many big events were held in tents outside the White House because there was no room inside and guest had to use a PortaPottie. Not the best look for a first world country.

The "they shouldn't have to use portapotties" argument has merit, but… they could've done a small renovation or extension to the East Wing and put some more bathrooms in. They did not need to tear the whole thing down and erect a monstrosity.

[loki13]

Huh. So I am going to offer a mea culpa, of sorts.

I know that I get more than a little frustrated with some of the commenters here. Admittedly, I have the worst of the worst on ignore. But still ... I allow my frustration to creep into my response, and it's pretty obvious at times.

I still think that a lot of you are way too gullible, and really need to (a) broaden your sources and (b) stop believing the constant lies, but ....

I happened to look at one of the threads on the "regular" Reason site and read what some of the people there were saying.

....wow. The sheer amount of stupidity there was ... I mean, impressive, honestly. I'd tell 'em to shut their mouths, but then they'd suffocate.

Anyway, I wanted to say that. As terrible as the threads here are (and they are much worse than they used to be ... it's hard to believe this is the same place as twenty years ago ... time, man) they are so much better than that.

I will try to do better to restrain my frustration. No guarantees.

[grb]

loki13 : "I happened to look at one of the threads on the "regular" Reason site...."

Yep. I gave up on the parent site a few years back. On that evidence alone, I decided "Libertarians" must all be pimply-faced boys forever giggling and/or performance-snarling with petulant spleen. At times it seemed like not a single Rightie there had successfully navigated puberty. Take a bunch of snot-faced surly boys in their early teens, put them in a small room together so their worst instincts get full vent, and then wait for the smell to get really, really bad. That's the main Reason site.

People say all Libertarians aren't like that. Maybe so, but it does appear to be their natural feral state.

[loki13]

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, I think that line's from "It Usually Begins With Ayn Rand", (At least there's a similar line in there.) which is hilarious and quite on target.

Personally, while I think Rand had some useful insights, (And in the world of philosophy, finding even a couple of those makes you one of the big hitters.) she made a real mistake trying to turn them into an entire moral system. That's a pretty common mistake in the business, though, isn't it?

I was lucky enough that being allergic to tobacco in effect immunized me against her. Though, frankly, my desire to slap some sense into John Galt when he started explaining how to fix the torture device would have been sufficient. That didn't strike me as principled, just stupid.

[Zarniwoop]

Use the Intarwebz, Luke!

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Rogers

[grb]

Re Ayn Rand:

1. I'm so oblivious to her influence that I've never seen or read The Fountainhead. A group of us in the Architecture Building during college were heading to the student center for a reprisal showing of the movie but - Gary Cooper notwithstanding - I bowed-out and never looked back. Both Megalopolis and The Brutalist from last year were said to be the film's heirs, but given both were pretty hideous, that's not saying much.

2. Frank Lloyd Wright designed a house for her, but the damn wench never built it. He despised the woman, growing particularly incensed at her incessant smoking. Of course I'd never take FLW's opinion on other people as gospel. Aside from his Mt Everest-sized ego, the man (bless his heart) was something of a complete weasel.

https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2022/02/ayn-rands-frank-lloyd-wright-cottage.html

[Sarcastr0]

I've been reading more about political moral philosophers. Most of the ones that make it to immorality were utopians. Philosophy does not lend itself to actual implementation.

Some used this to fuel tireless advocacy to incrementally move governments towards their ideal.

Some became bitter and at the end wanted to watch everything burn.

From my few clicks, Big Reason is writ a lot smaller. It's mostly utopians slapfighting one another and flexing how outside of reality their goals are. That hipster impulse to stand out does make their take on facts weird!
The ones that haven't gone full MAGA that is.

[ThePublius]

Lighter topic:

Have any of you tried paint by numbers? I think it's pretty cool, and a good way to get back into painting.

I bought a 'buy two, get one free' from Number Artist. Nice kits! I also got some better brushes. Lots of work, but not unlike the pastime of doing jigsaw puzzles.

Interested in hearing others' experiences.

[ducksalad]

Mom did both paint by numbers and marquetry by numbers. The marquetry was good enough that it's still on display 50 years later. The paint by numbers, well, I'm sure it's in a closet somewhere.

I'm thinking I could recreate this classic painting on display at the Tate Modern, but make it original by changing the color palette. Maybe Rustoleum green.

https://www.ronmertens.com/ski_lp/UK/BlueSquare.jpg

[ThePublius]

Ha, ha, that's funny. Yea. I wish I could get in on that gravy train.

[Paladin_44]

"Art", a play by an Iranian-born French playwright, has reopened in NYC recently to good reviews. I saw it in London back in the '90's - excellent play, with a wonderful monolog from George Wendt (think "Cheers"). Would like to see it again, but ticket prices for Broadway productions are out of sight. Not a blue square, just a plain white one.

[Brett Bellmore]

Not since I was a child. Though my wife was making noises about trying it out just the other day.

She did a bit of "diamond painting" a few years ago, the result is hanging in our hallway. It's nice looking, but frankly it doesn't result in a very durable product.

I'll be retiring in a couple of years, and while I primarily want to build myself a boat, I might do a bit of embroidery while waiting for epoxy to set up.

[ThePublius]

The paint by numbers kits I bought aren't mounted on a stretcher. I searched online for stretchers and it turned out that it was much, much cheaper to buy blank, primed canvases on stretchers, and just pull the staples and use the stretchers for the PBN canvases.

I also bought some clear gesso to coat the PNB canvasses, and also an acrylic white marker pen to cover the numbers and lines for the lighter colors. I also got some matte varnish to coat the painting when I'm done.

All of this is to work myself up to doing original oil paintings, like exercising, or working out in anticipation of a physical event.

I'm researching 'advanced' PBN techniques, too, which include feathering adjacent colors, etc.

I know artists and painting restorers look down their nose at PBN, but I don't care.

We'll see. There are some tiny areas on these 'advanced' PBN kits that will require a magnifier to paint. I think I can do it.

[JoeFromtheBronx]

Kimberly Robinson, previous of Bloomberg, is now listed as "Formerly Supreme Court reporter."

She didn't report anything for this term. Does anyone know if she has another beat or stepped down for another reason?

[Kazinski]

The National Average for gasoline prices has dropped below 3.00 a gallon for the first time since May 10, 2021,

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GASREGW

First Turkey's now Gas.

In somewhat related news, Trump has announced his administration will roll back CAFE Standards. Bloomberg's Auto Analyst says Detroit auto executives say that could lower the price of a new car by over $1000, especially for Trucks and SUVs.

"The Transportation Department said the proposal is projected to save American families $1,000 on the average cost of a new vehicle and a total of $109 billion over the next five years.

Mr. Trump was joined at Wednesday's event by senior auto industry executives. In a statement shared with CBS News, Stellantis CEO Antonioa Filosa expressed support for the proposed fuel efficiency rules, saying the initiative would realign the CAFE standards "with real-world market conditions as part of its wider vision for a growing U.S. automotive industry."

General Motors also backed the proposed fuel economy standards, which would need to undergo an official rulemaking process before being adopted. "

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-new-fuel-economy-standards-mpg-biden/

So that's what they mean by "Politics of Abundance".

[Brett Bellmore]

It's $2.39 around here at the moment. California must really be dragging the average up.

[Frank Drackman]

$4.09 for Regular Unleaded in Portland today, and if you want a bag for your Slim Jims it's extra.
BUT they have Jollibee's Fried Chicken, how can I describe it?? Remember the first time you tried Heroin?? Umm, forget that, seriously, a Filipino Fried Chicken place, way the cars are lined up you'd think they're handing out free Heroin (it's Portland).
Forget "In N Out" (Overrated, Whataburger's way better) Free Heroin, I mean, no Sales Tax on Food, States 2% Black (OK, in Portland YMMV) I'm thinking of pulling a Brooklyn Dodgers, packin' up my game and move out west.

Frank

[Kazinski]

A winter in Portland would change your mind. 6 straight months of gray.

However the skiing is pretty fantastic, Mount Hood is only about 90 minutes away and the sunshine and views there are usually fantastic when it isn't actually snowing.

[Frank Drackman]

4 days has been enough, I saw some people pointing at the sky this afternoon? what was it?? A Jet crashing?? Meteor?? Bald Eagle??
It was this big red object in the sky, hurt your eyes to try and look at it, I think it's called the "Sun"

Frank

[hobie]

Article in the NYTimes shows Erika Kirk sporting nails and jewels larger than a black lady's at a convenience store. She's starting to throw around the half billion dollar war chest (like all televangelists, Charlie got rich peddling fear and hatred to the rubes). I doubt the rumors of her making moves on Vance is true. But she definitely likes the power and the trappings.

It always amused me watching the hayseeds give every last dollar they had to a scumbag that parades in jewels and Lear Jets. Anything to avoid neegroes or biblical hell (each and all fear-based).

The reason I'm so clear-headed? The reason I can live in an all-black hood without a gun?..............I don't fear everything. And I've been rewarded with contentment

[Frank Drackman]

So Jerry, is it true they're calling SCI Laurel Highlands
"Jerry World"????

Frank

[hobie]

Although you've done everything you can to make the world against you. I can assure you the world is not out to get you, Frankie.

And I know a lot of you have watched me use psychology on Frankie to seduce him to the dark side. But that's not my game. He's gonna convert on his own volition.

[SRG2]

I am reminded of the story of Morrie, a Jewish businessman whose wife Rivki dies. When his friends come around for the second day of the shiva, they find Morrie on the sofa shtupping his blonde shiksa secretary. One of them says, "Morrie, your wife Rivki isn't yet cold in drerd, and we find you shtupping your secretary?" Replies Morrie, "look, in my grief do I know what I'm doing?"

[Frank Drackman]

Its funnier when you say it with a Yenta accent.

[Kazinski]

What's funny is the Blacks in a Black neighborhood are armed much more heavily than Whites.

But that's because Whites aren't often the target of driveby's and retaliation killings.

Way to flaunt your White Privilege Hobie.

Go ahead, I dare you to look up murders in Cleveland. Last year data is available Blacks were the victims in 85% of murders, but only 49% of the population.

Rub it in Hobie, tell your neighbors how safe you are because you are white.

[hobie]

Christ...I can tell you from experience, these neegroes here aren't armed and - surprisingly - they don't do drugs. Yes, everyone here smokes pot including the grandmas. It's their crutch, I suppose.

But they're all afraid. They all have blackout curtains on every window. I show up with no curtains and my neighbors freak out. From the day I moved in they ask: 'Ain't you afraid someone will know your business?!' In fact, six months after I moved in I was about 100 blocks away from my house in downtown Cleveland. I was in line at a convenience store and two teenage girls asked me: 'Ain't you that guy with no curtains?'

You see, all this hatred you rubes express towards black people. All the Confederate monuments you re-erect. It registers with black people. They're afraid. Yeah, some rappers may put on an arrogant front...but the rest?

Enjoy your racist utopia, hayseeds.

[Kazinski]

Hobie, I can't think of anything more callous and racist then you flaunting your "I'm safe because I'm White schtick", while your Black neighbors clearly do not feel safe, and the crime statistics certainly confirm why they are more worried than you are.

Why don't you ask your Black friends whether they disagree with this:

"In this deceitful American game of power politics, the Negroes (i.e., the race problem, the integration and civil rights issues) are nothing but tools, used by one group of whites called Liberals against another group of whites called Conservatives, either to get into power or to remain in power. Among whites here in America, the political teams are no longer divided into Democrats and Republicans. The whites who are now struggling for control of the American political throne are divided into "liberal" and "conservative" camps. The white liberals from both parties cross party lines to work together toward the same goal, and white conservatives from both parties do likewise.

The white liberal differs from the white conservative only in one way: the liberal is more deceitful than the conservative. The liberal is more hypocritical than the conservative. Both want power, but the white liberal is the one who has perfected the art of posing as the Negro's friend and benefactor; and by winning the friendship, allegiance, and support of the Negro, the white liberal is able to use the Negro as a pawn or tool in this political "football game" that is constantly raging between the white liberals and white conservatives.

Politically the American Negro is nothing but a football and the white liberals control this mentally dead ball through tricks of tokenism: false promises of integration and civil rights. In this profitable game of deceiving and exploiting the political politician of the American Negro, those white liberals have the willing cooperation of the Negro civil rights leaders. These "leaders" sell out our people for just a few crumbs of token recognition and token gains. These "leaders" are satisfied with token victories and token progress because they themselves are nothing but token leaders."

Malcolm X
1963

https://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/disp_textbook.cfm?smtID=3&psid=3619

[Bunny495]

I never understood the dual citizenship thing. A man can't serve two masters.

https://www.moreno.senate.gov/press-releases/new-moreno-bill-to-outlaw-dual-citizenship/

[ducksalad]

Master? That's how you view government, as your master?

[SRG2]

I never understood the dual citizenship thing. A man can't serve two masters

While I was only a British subject I didn't think in terms of serving a master, and neither did any other Briton I knew. Hence when I did become an American citizen - on Juneteenth 2014 - I didn't think in terms of now serving two masters. They're just countries.

[Frank Drackman]

Yes, one a large powerful one, the other a small weak one.
I mean we did kick their Ass in 2 Wahs, and saved their Asses in 2 others.
OK, UK still has Nuke-ular Weapons.
Why??
and what's the deal with this "Isle of Man"??

Frank

[SRG2]

Frank, did you fight in any of those wars? Did you do anything to make the US great - either the first time or again? Probably not, unless you account bigotry as a valuable national resource.

[Frank Drackman]

As I was a Primordial Follicle in one of my Mom's Ovaries in Eastern Germany during WW2 my contribution was negligible, I did serve in Gulf Wah 1 in which I incurred a life-long injury, (fractured Right Index Finger, No IED, Wilson Football) And in the words of the Immortal General Anthony McAuliffe, "Nuts!!!"
I'm a US "Fan", a "Casual", do all of these Jack-offs wearing Manchester United Jerseys ever play for Manchester United??
The other 1/2 of me was in one of my Dad's Nuts during the Wah, in Georgia, his Ancestors had the sense to get out of Scotland and then Ireland when even the Potatoes wouldn't grow. Maybe that's part of why I don't like you Pricks,
Frank

[SRG2]

do all of these Jack-offs wearing Manchester United Jerseys ever play for Manchester United??

Indeed not, which makes their past triumphalism karmantastic in the post-Fergie era

[Frank Drackman]

Anyone notice Representative Mullah Ill-hand Omar is getting Whiter??
I don't mean her Congressional District, I mean her, does she have Michael Jackson's disease???
And with a more stylish Turban, she looked almost Eff-able (keeping it clean EV!!)
There used to be an old Race-ist joke about why Blacks had White Palms/Soles of Feet (don't Google it, you're going to laugh) and in Arthur Ashe's great "Portrait in Motion" (OK with Frank Deford, they were playing Doubles) He talks about how Ilie Nastase had never seen a Black Person when he met Ashe, and was fascinated by his kinky hair, "Like Steel Wool" Nasty said, and how his (Hot White, hey, he was a rich Black Ath-uh-lete) Girlfriend freaked out the first time she saw the Soles of his Feet.
So how come a Race-ist like me is the only one who's read Ashe's book??

Frank

[hobie]

I noticed Ilhan Omar's biography today, Frankie. Her mother died when she was two years old. From then she and her father spent 4 years in a tent in a refugee camp in Kenya. Then they moved to America. I suppose you and Trump have had such a hardscrabble existence that you are authorized to comment. Or has she lived the extinction camp life you hide behind and use as privilege.