Open Thread

What’s on your mind?

Comments

[Kazinski]

The War Powers Resolution in the Senate failed, with Hawley (MO) and Young (IN) changing their votes .

Young had a statement:

“After numerous conversations with senior national security officials, I have received assurances that there are no American troops in Venezuela. I’ve also received a commitment that if President Trump were to determine American forces are needed in major military operations in Venezuela, the Administration will come to Congress in advance to ask for an authorization of force."

Of course that does not rule out another "minor incursion'.

JD Vance cast the deciding vote to kill it 51-50, but of course 50-50 wasn't enough to pass it either.

[santamonica811]

Ha, ha, ha. Hawley is such a whore. Anyone here surprised that he caved and changed his vote? No hands? No one? Not even one person?!?!???

Yeah, I'm not surprised either.

[grb]

santamonica811 : "Hawley is such a whore."

I dunno. Whenever I see him, he reminds me of Gumby. There just seems something rubbery about him. Mind, body, & soul : Rubbery.

[Frank Drackman]

He's got those creepy long fingers, should have gone into Urology.

[Kazinski]

The 1st qtr FY 2026 Treasury MTS statement came out, showing the 1st qtr deficit was 15% lower than than FY 2025 Q1, at 602,376 billion, compared to 710,935 billion last year.

That of course does not mean that the deficit is going to be 15% lower this year, because Joe Biden blew out the deficit in his last 4 months of office, so we can't expect to continue to have that much improvement this year.

The figures are nominal, and not adjusted for inflation, adjusted for inflation they would be even better than 15%.

[grb]

I kinda admire your whistling-by-the-graveyard dedication. That makes my spoiler alert to you even more heartless.

See, we've all seen this story before. Throughout the last presidential election campaign, people of my ilk kept insisting all the bad vibes on the economy weren't justified. "Not fair", we cried and didn't change a single mind doing so. Now, you'll argue rightwing voters are much more docile and ovine - which is true. On the other hand, Biden's economy was better than Trump's squandered mess, so I wouldn't count on the Right's zombie sheep tendencies to save ya....

[Kazinski]

I wonder if there was any data to support that premise?

Real Personal Income Percent increase by year:
2017 3.39%
2018 3.98%
2019 2.41%
2020 4.86%
Trump First term 14.64%

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/RPI

2021 0.99%
2022 1.22%
2023 3.30%
2024 2.29%
Full Biden term 7.80%

Trump 2:
2025 Jan-Sept 1.05%

[Michael P]

You should probably have your dementia checked by a doctor -- patient prognosis is pretty poor without appropriate care.

[Dr. Ed 2]

For those of you who missed it, the ICE guy was seriously injured when No-Good hit him. He has internal bleeding in his abdomen, which sounds to me like something inside got ripped loose or crushed when he fell..

This could need major surgery to repair, and may be worse than that.

The question I have is can he sue her wife, personally, for damages?
She clearly committed a crime - assault and battery the deadly weapon, motor vehicle — but being dead, can’t be currently charged.

[not guilty]

For those of you who missed it, the ICE guy was seriously injured when No-Good hit him. He has internal bleeding in his abdomen, which sounds to me like something inside got ripped loose or crushed when he fell..

This could need major surgery to repair, and may be worse than that.

"Internal bleeding" can be something as benign as a single bruise, or it could be something more serious. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/internal-bleeding

The ICE agent reportedly went to the emergency room after the incident, where he was treated and released. No surgery or hospital admission has been reported. If Agent Ross in fact was "seriously injured" to the extent that he "could need major surgery to repair, and may be worse than that", he may have a viable damages claim against the emergency room personnel who failed to detect his injuries. He has no claim, however, against Rebecca Good, who did nothing arguably tortious.

Renee Good's demise would not necessarily preclude an action against her estate, but I would think that the last place that Jonathan Ross would want to be is under oath, sworn to tell the truth about what happened before a Hennepin County, Missouri jury.*

Renee Good may have had a privilege to resist an unlawful arrest. At common law there was a privilege to use reasonable force to resist an unlawful arrest. Most jurisdictions have modified that rule by statute.

Minnesota Statutes § 609.06 appears to be the statute applicable here. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.06
This statute specifies that an individual may use reasonable force when they believe it is necessary to resist or prevent an offense against their person. This belief must be both honest and reasonable, meaning the individual genuinely perceived a threat and that a reasonable person in the same situation would have perceived the same threat.

Subdivision 2 of this statute states:

Deadly force used against peace officers. Deadly force may not be used against peace officers who have announced their presence and are performing official duties at a location where a person is committing a crime or an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult.

Statutes in derogation of the common law are to be strictly construed. A statute will be construed to alter the common law only when that disposition is clear. A Scalia and B. Garner, Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts § 52, 318-319 (2012). The maxim expressio unius est exclusio alterius holds that the expression of one thing implies the exclusion of others. Id., at § 10, 107-111.

Applying these maxims to Minnesota's § 609.06, subdivision 2 would indicate that deadly force may be used against peace officers who have not announced their presence or who are not performing official duties or who are not at a location where a person is committing a crime or an act that would be a crime if committed by an adult.

___________________________
* I don't know what of state Mr. Ross is a citizen. If he is a citizen of a state other than Minnesota, and if his claimed damages exceed $75,000, he could sue in federal district court under diversity jurisdiction.

[Brett Bellmore]

Dude, I'll assure you that emergency rooms will release you with some really nasty injuries, if they think you're at least stable. I know that from personal experience.

Like, my leg was shattered from halfway up my shin to my ankle, with my foot flopping around loose, and once they'd reduced the dislocated ankle ("Oh, good, you have circulation again, you might keep this foot.") and put me in an air splint, they sent me home with an appointment a week later to actually do something about it.

They're not going to hospitalize you over a hematoma, if it's stable.

[Michael P]

Yeah, "not guilty" doesn't seem to understand when one would be formally admitted to a hospital (in addition to his familiarity with geography and other basic facts of the case). An awful lot of cases are only formally checked in for observation, rather than admitted to the hospital.

[Frank Drackman]

Hennepin County isn't in Missouri

[Kazinski]

For.purposes.of.justifying deadly force, it more than suffices that he was struck by the car pretty much simultaneously as when he fired.

As for lawfully resisting arrest, Ross was not trying to arrest her, he was 6-8' away in front of her car, another officer was attempting the arrest.

Resisting his attempt at arrest couldn't justify running Ross down.

[grb]

Dr. Ed 2 : "For those of you who missed it, the ICE guy was seriously injured"

Well, there are six issues with that story:

1. It's told by anonymous people saying anonymous things.

2. And those people are the biggest liars on the planet.

3. As news, it's suspiciously late.

4. As news, it's suspiciously timely, given mass resignations in the prosecutor office over the murder coverup and the overall PR debacle.

5. As news, it's no substitution for true, real, & actual facts like the missing autopsy findings. And where are those findings?

Lastly, I supposed you heard mention of the "immaculate conception" over the holidays? Well, this would be the "immaculate internal bleeding". Because go to any of the comprehensive/synchronized video analyses and you'll find that Good's car did not hit Ross. Most of analyses don't even think it touched the officer. Again, he was on the outside edge of the front bumper when Good started moving forward with the wheels hard right. Every inch the car moved ahead, it was veering away from Ross. Physics-wise, that doesn't leave much room for your fantasies to take hold, does it Ed?

I also noted this : There was a shooting incident in Minneapolis today and the City-State authorities are on the scene conducting the investigation as anyone would expect. Strange that, since ICE locked-up every scintilla of evidence in the Ross murder case to ensure nobody else can sees it. Care to wonder why?

[bloocow2]

Only in America could an unarmed middle-aged woman get shot three times in the head by a cop, and have people lining up not only to defend the guy who shot her, but to say that she deserved it. If that happened in any other civilised country, there would be an investigation at the very least. We'd be having a damned Royal Commission!

Christ, even if you do support all this deportation stuff, you should want everything to be transparent and above board, right? That doesn't have to be a partisan thing, right?

[Brett Bellmore]

I assure you that in basically every country in the world, a middle aged women who got shot trying to run a cop over would have people lining up to defend the cop.

NOBODY wants to be run over.

[grb]

Uh huh. And I can very much assure you if any cop in any other country pumped three murder shots into a car when (a) he wasn't in the car's path with any of them, and (b) wasn't even touched by the car with any of them, then you'd have people lined-up to justly call that cop a murderer.

And that's not even counting the fact that two of those shots were execution-style through the driver side open window as the car passed well-clear of the killer.

Which is why you continue to flail the hopeless pointless meaningless lie that Good tried to run Ross over. Most of your cult buddies have abandoned that one as being too obviously false, yet you cling to it like a drowning man his life ring.

Because lies are all ya got. And where are those autopsy results?

[Frank Drackman]

Yeah right, the printer's gonna run out of paper printing out that Bee-otches Drug Screen.

[Michael P]

(b) wasn't even touched by the car with any of them

You should probably have your dementia checked by a doctor -- patient prognosis is pretty poor without appropriate care.

[TwelveInchPianist]

"Only in America could an unarmed middle-aged woman get shot three times in the head by a cop, and have people lining up not only to defend the guy who shot her, but to say that she deserved it."

Yeah, Ashli Babbit only got shot once.

[DDHarriman]

Weird how you never expressed similar concerns for woman who got killed by a Somali police officer. I don't think he got so much a as a reprimand from you or the State.

I don't think he got awarded with a new private, federally funded , daycare that raked in $500k/yr like Ashli Babbits murderer. But since he is Somali in MN, he probably already had his million dollar private daycare.

[Dr. Ed 2]

Rumor has it that ice is now heading into Boston. They’ve got an icehouse in Burlington, and reportedly a couple dozen unmarked SUVs have shown up out there. QED…

It could be fun…..

[not guilty]

NBC News reports:

Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., said she's being investigated by federal prosecutors after she participated in a video with other Democratic lawmakers urging members of the military and the intelligence community not to follow illegal orders.

Slotkin said in a video statement Wednesday that she found out about the probe last week from the office of “former Fox host” Jeanine Pirro, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, who asked to interview her “because of” the 90-second video.

“To be clear, this is the president’s playbook. Truth doesn’t matter, facts don’t matter, and anyone who disagrees with him becomes an enemy. And he then weaponizes the federal government against them,” Slotkin said. “It’s legal intimidation and physical intimidation meant to get you to shut up.”

“No, I’m not going to do that because this president does not represent the views of a majority of Americans. Even if you voted for him, I do not believe that his vision of America is shared by a majority of Americans,” she added. “This country is worth fighting for.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/elissa-slotkin-investigation-video-refusing-illegal-military-orders-rcna253939

Ms. Pirro has the right to ask to interview anyone, just as the subject of an investigation has the right to refuse such an interview request. The weaponization of the Department of Justice to harass and attempt to intimidate President Bone Spurs Chickenhawk's political enemies, however, is reprehensible.

The MAGA cult has not identified any federal statute which the video featuring Senators Slotkin, Mark Kelly and four House members violated. OTOH, it is a federal crime to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, according to 18 U.S.C. § 241.

Bringing a criminal prosecution without probable cause in retaliation for a citizen's exercise of First Amendment protected expression is itself a First Amendment violation, as SCOTUS has recognized in Hartman v. Moore, 547 U.S. 250 (2006):

Official reprisal for protected speech “offends the Constitution because it threatens to inhibit exercise of the protected right,” Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S. 574, 588, n.10 (1998), and the law is settled that as a general matter the First Amendment prohibits government officials from subjecting an individual to retaliatory actions, including criminal prosecutions, for speaking out, id., at 592; see also Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593, 597 (1972) (noting that the government may not punish a person or deprive him of a benefit on the basis of his “constitutionally protected speech”). Some official actions adverse to such a speaker might well be unexceptionable if taken on other grounds, but when nonretaliatory grounds are in fact insufficient to provoke the adverse consequences, we have held that retaliation is subject to recovery as the but-for cause of official action offending the Constitution. See Crawford-El, supra, at 593; Mt. Healthy City Bd. of Ed. v. Doyle, 429 U.S. 274, 283–284 (1977) (adverse action against government employee cannot be taken if it is in response to the employee’s “exercise of constitutionally protected First Amendment freedoms”). When the vengeful officer is federal, he is subject to an action for damages on the authority of Bivens [v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388,] 397 [(1971).]

Prosecuting attorneys enjoy absolute immunity from suit for money damages, see Imbler v. Pachtman, 424 U.S. 409, 429 (1976), but the judicially fashioned doctrine of official immunity does not reach "so far as to immunize criminal conduct proscribed by an Act of Congress." O'Shea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488, 503 (1974), quoting Gravel v. United States, 408 U.S. 606, 627 (1972).

Jeanine Pirro and her confederates should govern themselves accordingly.

[Brett Bellmore]

If you can infer air quotes and winking when Trump says he wants to find votes, you can infer air quotes and winking when Slotkin says "illegal orders".

[myself]

Give me a break.

It's beyond obvious that Trump was asking for the outcome of Georgia's election to be changed in his favour.

[Frank Drackman]

Since it was an obvious fraud then, and has been shown to be an even bigger one 5 years later, who gives a fuck?
Actually glad it worked out this way, we'll have 4 years of Prostatic Joe's Error sandwiched between the 8 greatest years of Amurican History.

Frank

[DDHarriman]

Under Biden we reached peak gay.

So gay that SCOTUS has to now decide something humans have known since the dawn of consciousness.

[grb]

When Justice Roberts placed a crown on Trump's head with near-total immunity, he took special care to insist the 27Dec White House meeting could never used as evidence. Which is hardly surprising given that meeting was pure criminality. Let's recall this sordid saga:

DOJ underling Jeffery Clark saw a chance to get ahead. He got Trump's ear and proposed a deal any crook would admire. If DJT ousted the acting Justice head and replaced him with Clark, then the latter would send letters to critical states saying an ongoing DOJ investigation had found voter fraud so the states should wait to certify their results. But no investigation existed. It was all a total fabrication.

Of course Trump loved the scheme, but summoned the acting DOJ head, Jeffery Rosen, to see if he could be threatened and/or suborned. As a hint of how things were going into the meeting, Clark was already being listed as head of the Justice Department in the White House call logs before it occurred.

So Trump pitched/threatened Rosen over the letters, but the latter told Trump (to his face) there was no fraud. Rosen would have no part of this sleazy con. And what was Trump's reaction per the notes/testimony of multiple attendees?

“Just say that the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican Congressmen”

See, Trump only wanted lies. He was never concerned about voting fraud. He didn’t care his claims were false. He only wanted enough noise to push election certification into legislatures where “his” Republicans would engineer a different result. That’s why his huckster pitch on “stolen elections” is never consistent from one crowd to the next.

And the scheme? Trump was told he'd face mass resignations if Clark replaced Rosen. Only that made him back-off.

[DDHarriman]

lol TDS fanfic

[not guilty]

"If you can infer air quotes and winking when Trump says he wants to find votes, you can infer air quotes and winking when Slotkin says 'illegal orders'."
Brett, do you contend that Senator Slotkin has committed any federal crime? If so, what statute(s) do you claim that she has violated?

To support criminal prosecution in federal court, "The legislative authority of the Union must first make an act a crime, affix a punishment to it, and declare the court that shall have jurisdiction of the offense." United States v. Hudson, 11 U.S. (7 Cranch) 32, 34 (1812).

[Brett Bellmore]

No, I don't think Slotkin committed any crime, given the speech and debate clause. But I do think she was trying to encourage military to disobey lawful orders.

[Michael P]

What speech or debate on the floor of Congress was Slotkin participating in at the time?

[DDHarriman]

BREAKING NEWS

Prisoner says he's the only one in prison not guilty!!

Film@11

[Martinned]

Yes, the US is an enemy of Europe as much as China and Russia are.

Germany will take the lead of European nations sending military personnel to Greenland after Denmark said its meeting with top US officials intent on controlling the world’s biggest island revealed that a “fundamental disagreement” remains.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-14/germany-leads-military-buildup-in-greenland-in-response-to-trump?srnd=homepage-europe

[Martinned]

I guess it's fortunate the US reduced its military presence on Greenland by more than 99% since the Cold War, otherwise we might have a real problem on our hands...

https://x.com/HthHans/status/2009915710688862703

[Frank Drackman]

You obviously haven't heard of this new invention. It's called the "Airplane"

[DDHarriman]

How many troops were sent?

13.

That must all they have left after Russia slaughtered them in UKR.

[Martinned]

No, that's all it takes to make sure that the US Regime can't invade Greenland while gaslighting its electorate and the rest of the world into believing that it's not attacking a NATO ally. One for all and all for one.

[Kazinski]

NASA and SpaceX (but mostly SpaceX) evacuated the ISS more than a month before scheduled because of an undisclosed. emergency medical issue.

To schedule and launch a mission this quickly, this much before the mission was scheduled to be launched, would be completely impossible before the SpaceX era.

[Martinned]

Once upon a time NASA had space shuttles...

[grb]

Unfortunately, the fastest turnaround time for the Shuttle was 54days, with six months being more typical. Yes, Musk may be a loathsome creep with the emotional maturity of an acne-scarred surly teen, but his company has revolutionized space travel (at least in terms of rocket launches).

But it raises an interesting question. When I go on (say) the space forum linked below, it's always chock-full of Space X fanboys who take "stan" behavior to dizzying heights. They don't see any problem with the difficulties Musk is having with his new Starship rocket and have a strong case. It has developed exceptionally quickly per industry standards, so they see it fulfilling all the promises Musk has made.

But the most likely scenario is neither the utopia of dirt-cheap launches with a turnaround of hours, or total failure. The most likely thing is something inbetween. And there, Starship might prove something like the Shuttle : More expensive to launch than anticipated, much slower refit time than foreseen, and with a higher risk factor than people can accept.

It won't be as bad as the Shuttle by those standards, but may well be a more cumbersome platform that all the wild promises wildly promise.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/

[Martinned]

Musk may be a loathsome creep with the emotional maturity of an acne-scarred surly teen, but his company has revolutionized space travel (at least in terms of rocket launches).

Funny what you can do with tens of billions of dollars in government subsidy...

[Michael P]

So much for your claim to know anything about economics. SpaceX hasn't gotten anything like that.

[Sarcastr0]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2025/elon-musk-business-government-contracts-funding/

Unless you think SpaceX has delivered value to the government, hard to see these development contracts as other than subsidies.

NASA and the Defense Department nurtured SpaceX in its earliest years with contracts that helped it build infrastructure, while the agency tolerated the company’s failure to meet required milestones on time, according to congressional investigators.

I'm all for government subsidizing commercialization of tech, and while I think commercial manned space is not where I'd spend development funds yet, SpaceX seems legit the best of the bunch. But market worshipers loving SpaceX is a silly thing.

[Martinned]

The best of the bunch? Well, they sure seem to have form raining debris down on foreign countries and their airspace: https://www.propublica.org/article/spacex-faa-launch-airlines-safety-explosions-florida-caribbean

Last year, three of Starship’s five launches exploded at unexpected points on their flight paths, twice raining flaming debris over congested commercial airways and disrupting flights. And while no aircraft collided with rocket parts, pilots were forced to scramble for safety.

[Kazinski]

Yeah, my former brother-in-law was Nasa's Mission director in charge of several space shuttle missions. I have a reasonable Idea of what it takes to plan and ramp up a mission. Turnaround for the Space Shuttle was generally about 6 months, they did it faster a few times but after the first one blew up they took a lot more time on safety checks.

And remember they landed the shuttle At Edwards AFB in California and then had to piggy back it on a 747 to Florida.

3 months notice of getting a launch together would have NASA shifting their pants.

[Brett Bellmore]

Yeah, but the Shuttle was an impressive Rube Goldberg rocket. Maybe if they'd built it as originally intended, with a titanium airframe and much less insulating but more durable heat shielding, it could have had a decent turn around time.

It wasn't so much reusable as refurbishable.

And the intent with Starship is not to have one or two of the rockets, but instead have dozens, so that you can literally have one ready to fly in the time it takes to fuel it.

[Frank Drackman]

During the investigation of the Challenger Explosion, (would you rather be in an Explosion or a Collison?) it came out that NASA had expected a "Catastrophic" Event every 75 missions, with 2 such Events in 135 missions, they weren't far off.

Frank

[Brett Bellmore]

The hell of it is that both catastrophes were avoidable even given the shuttle's compromised design.

Challenger blew up because Nasa management over-rode the actual engineers' judgment that it was too cold to launch.

Columbia burned up on reentry because Nasa management,
1. Flew it without an already designed and built drone intended to fly around the ship inspecting the heat shield for damage, just to save a few pounds.
2. Turned down an offer from the NSA to have one of their spysats take ultra high resolution photos of the damaged area so it could be assessed.

The latter because they were afraid that if they knew for an absolute fact that the shuttle would burn up on reentry, public opinion might force them to launch a hasty rescue mission. Whereas, so long as they didn't KNOW, they could order their reentry and cross their fingers, hoping like hell that they got lucky.

Seriously, depraved indifference on the part of management, especially in the second case.

[grb]

As an aside, news of the Challenger explosion came when I was on the grenade range in Basic. One of our Drill Sergeants told us. I asked if there were any survivors, but he just shook his head and said "it blew the fuck up".

The later memorial ceremony and Reagan's speech came when we were all lined-up for shearing at the Post barber. And that grenade range thing was only practice. The day our Company threw actual live grenades, I had KP.

The other day I spent washing dishes was when we practiced putting our gas masks on, over and over and over. Missing that proved problematic when we were later tear-gassed on a mock patrol. About 70% of us got our mask on. About 29% of us ran off. One person stood their coughing and hacking as he stubbornly tried to get the damn thing on. Guess who?

[Frank Drackman]

Was putting an IV in a Pediatric Patient, no TV in patients rooms back then, went to the waiting area to tell the Mother what a good job I'd done (OK, mostly that the Nurse did) People were freaking out as Dan Blather gave the benefit of his years of experience in Space Flight.

Frank

[Kazinski]

Originally SpaceX engineers wanted to use lighter exotic material for his reuseble boosters, he told them to use Stainless Steel, it was strong enough that they could make it thin enough to be light enough, and not end up being too fragile.

[Martinned]

I wonder why the US Regime prefers to put its Venezuelan oil money slush fund in a Qatar bank account instead of a domestic one...

Revenue from the oil sales is currently being held in bank accounts controlled by the US government, as indicated in Friday’s order, according to the administration official. The main account, according to a second senior administration official, is located in Qatar.

The second official described Qatar as a neutral location where money can flow freely with US approval and without risk of seizure. Trump’s order noted that at least some of the revenue would be held in US Treasury accounts.

https://www.semafor.com/article/01/14/2026/us-gets-first-500-million-venezuelan-oil-deal-holding-some-proceeds-in-qatar

[Martinned]

Speaking of which, this Executive Order seems to overstep at least a little bit:

Sec. 3. Preservation of Foreign Government Deposit Funds. (a) Unless licensed or otherwise authorized pursuant to this order, any attachment, judgment, decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other judicial process is prohibited, and shall be deemed null and void, with respect to the Foreign Government Deposit Funds.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/01/safeguarding-venezuelan-oil-revenue-for-the-good-of-the-american-and-venezuelan-people/

I'm sure there's a perfectly reasonable explanation for why the Regime thinks it can declare court judgments "null and void".

[grb]

Martinned : "US Regime .... slush fund .... Qatar bank account"

Sigh. I can still remember when the U.S. was the Leader of the Free World. That was before we became another gangster regime on the make.

[Frank Drackman]

Yes, 20 years of the Clinton Crime Family/Barry Hussein's Crew, and the Biden Foundation will take a while to clean up, in the mean time, You're free to leave.

[Frank Drackman]

"45/47/(48?)" signed a Bill allowing Schools to serve Whole and 2% Milk along with the Skim Versions foisted on us by Mee-Chelle Osama.
Did everyone notice how well Mee-Chelle's plan worked? Jeez, the Kids today, they look like they just left Treblinka....
Gotta say, I was never a big Milk fan, probably goes back to Infancy, more Nicotine coming out of my Mom's (Redacted) than a Carton of Luckys...
And those awful cardboard cartons the Milk came in???? I would always try to trade mine for some of that healthy Kool Aid (Red 40 was my favorite, had 100% of the RDA of Benzene)

Frank

[Malika la Maize]

Good on the administration for this.

I remember as a kid the kids first in line got the chocolate milks, then the whole milk and if you were unlucky and at the end you were stuck with that terrible pale blue carton of skim milk. Yuck.

[DDHarriman]

lol they didn't have that in Pakistan, pajeet. All pajeets do is lie.

[Malika la Maize]

The price of beef has risen 16.4 percent over the last year. The price of coffee is up a whopping 19.8 percent. The price of lettuce is up 7.3 percent and frozen fish 8.6 percent.

Yet Mr. Trump continues to falsely claim otherwise. “Grocery prices are starting to go rapidly down,” he said Tuesday afternoon during a speech in Detroit. It’s not the first time that he has said food prices are down, even when data show they’re not.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/14/business/food-prices-tariffs-trump.html

[not guilty]

Defense Secretary Prick Hegseth has announced:

[I]n response to Senator Mark Kelly’s seditious statements — and his pattern of reckless misconduct — the Department of War [sic] is taking administrative action against Captain Mark E. Kelly, USN (Ret). The department has initiated retirement grade determination proceedings under 10 U.S.C. § 1370(f), with reduction in his retired grade resulting in a corresponding reduction in retired pay.

* * *

These actions are based on Captain Kelly's public statements from June through December 2025 in which he characterized lawful military operations as illegal and counseled members of the Armed Forces to refuse lawful orders. This conduct was seditious in nature and violated Articles 133 and 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, to which Captain Kelly remains subject as a retired officer receiving pay.

https://x.com/SecWar/status/2008189258528665898?s=20 *

While the Secretary refers to 10 U.S.C. § 1370(f) relative tp a proposed reduction in Senator Kelly's retired grade resulting in a corresponding reduction in retired pay, I am doubtful that the statute can constitutionally be applied here.

The text of § 1370(f) reads:

(f) Finality of Retired Grade Determinations.—
(1)In general.—
Except for a conditional determination authorized by subsection (d), a determination of the retired grade of an officer pursuant to this section is administratively final on the day the officer is retired, and may not be reopened, except as provided in paragraph (2).
(2) Reopening.—A final determination of the retired grade of an officer may be reopened as follows:

(A) If the retirement or retired grade of the officer was procured by fraud.
(B) If substantial evidence comes to light after the retirement that could have led to determination of a different retired grade under this section if known by competent authority at the time of retirement.
(C) If a mistake of law or calculation was made in the determination of the retired grade.
(D) If the applicable Secretary determines, pursuant to regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense, that good cause exists to reopen the determination of retired grade.

Senator Kelly retired fifteen years ago from the Navy at the grade of Captain. That grade accordingly became administratively final on the day he retired.

None of the criteria of § 1370(f)(2), subsections (A), (B) or (C) would appear to arguably apply here. That leaves subsection (D), with the determination to be made by "the applicable Secretary", which here would be the Secretary of the Navy pursuant to § 1370(f)(3)(A).

In the context of civilian government employment, the Supreme Court has opined:

For at least a quarter-century, this Court has made clear that, even though a person has no "right" to a valuable governmental benefit, and even though the government may deny him the benefit for any number of reasons, there are some reasons upon which the government may not rely. It may not deny a benefit to a person on a basis that infringes his constitutionally protected interest, especially his interest in freedom of speech. For if the government could deny a benefit to a person because of his constitutionally protected speech or associations, his exercise of those freedoms would in effect be penalized and inhibited. This would allow the government to "produce a result which [it] could not command directly." Speiser v. Randall, 357 U. S. 513, 357 U.S. 526. Such interference with constitutional rights is impermissible.

To be sure, the First Amendment can be applied differently in the military context because of its distinctive character and purpose. Parker v. Levy, 417 U.S. 733 (1974):
While the members of the military are not excluded from the protection granted by the First Amendment, the different character of the military community and of the military mission requires a different application of those protections. The fundamental necessity for obedience, and the consequent necessity for imposition of discipline, may render permissible within the military that which would be constitutionally impermissible outside it.
Id., at 758.

The Supreme Court to date has not addressed the First Amendment rights of free speech and expression of military retirees. While "[t]here is a wide range of the conduct of military personnel to which Arts. 133 and 134 may be applied without infringement of the First Amendment", id., at 760, Senator Kelly's anodyne remarks in the subject video are not among them.

Senator Kelly has sought declaratory and injunctive relief in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, raising First Amendment concerns among multiple other claims. https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/mark-kelly-hegseth-demotion-lawsuit.pdf That should be an ideal vehicle for eventual SCOTUS review.
__________________________
* I regard it as noteworthy that Secretary Hegseth here is not threatening court martial proceedings -- whereby Senator Kelly would be entitled to procedural protections including the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses. See, e.g., United States v. Bench, 82 M.J. 388 (C.A.A.F. 2022):

The confrontation right is a procedural guarantee that ensures that any testimony presented to a jury be tested through “the crucible of cross-examination.” Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 61, 124 S.Ct. 1354, 158 L.Ed.2d 177 (2004). The essential elements of the confrontation right require that the accused have an opportunity to cross-examine the witness, that the witness take an oath to tell the truth, and that the jury be able to observe the witness's demeanor. Maryland v. Craig, 497 U.S. 836, 851, 110 S.Ct. 3157, 111 L.Ed.2d 666 (1990).

In the words of Dean John Henry Wigmore, cross-examination is “beyond any doubt the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth.” 3 Wigmore, Evidence §1367, p. 27 (2d ed. 1923). The last thing that President Bone Spurs Chickenhawk and Secretary Hegseth would want is for Captain/Senator Kelly to call them to the stand as adverse witnesses.

[Malika la Maize]

Among the many culture war policies Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has pursued, there is one goal that has so far officially eluded his grasp: changing the name of the Department of Defense to the “Department of War.”

Doing so, however, would cost taxpayers as much as $125 million, according to a new report released by the Congressional Budget Office on Wednesday.

To date, Congress has declined to take up the cause Mr. Hegseth has championed. That legislative body would need to write and pass a law making the name change official and legally binding.

The report noted that the Pentagon, which is led by Mr. Hegseth, refused to respond to the congressional office’s queries about how much money the department had already spent — and intended to spend in the future — pursuing the name change.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/14/us/defense-department-name-change.html

[grb]

Sure, but changing the name makes Petey feel much more secure about his man-parts. What's $125 million in comparison to that?

[DDHarriman]

So an interesting theory is brewing that has some real legs. The rise of AWFLs out there confronting bug burly masculine federal officers is due to some pyschosexual drama. Leftist men have become such limp wristed faggots that these women are driven to big husky handsome conservative law enforcement.

It makes sense. You can see it in their eyes.

Lesson for you? If you're a Democrat? Cut out the oat and soy milks, eat some beef and stopping being such sensitive queers.

[grb]

Get help.

[Sarcastr0]

H.H.S. Reverses Decision to Cut $2 Billion for Mental Health and Addiction Services
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/14/health/samhsa-funding-cuts.html

Better than if they kept the cuts, but this admin is so much of a chaos factory for no value-add.