All it took was the will to do so. But accountability? Please, NTers will say you’re targeting poor bureaucrats, and tell you that’s bad, because they don’t like Trump’s delivery.
“@elonmusk: “The fraud we’re seeing is overwhelmingly on the left … The single biggest thing that they’re worried about is that DOGE is going to turn off fraudulent payments of entitlements … to illegals … This is why they really hate my guts and want me to die.”
“President Trump’s legal team has just told D.C. Judge Boasberg that they will not be providing any information to him on deportation flights due to national security concerns.”
“For the past two weeks, @SocialSecurity has begun a major cleanup of their records. Approximately 3.2 million numberholders, all listed age 120+, have now been marked as deceased. More work still to be done.”
“Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill @pulte: “There was about 2,900 people that were supposed to work in the building. Turns out, only 49 were showing up full-time.”
“The repulsive irony of these Bush/Cheney neocons pretending to be so alarmed by radical Article II theories:
They’re the ones who invented and implemented these theories as part of the War on Terror: the president is unlimited in his powers, even by Congressional statutes.”
“So we’re hitting a crisis point, with the apparent evasion of court orders on deportations and immigration, plus shutting down agencies, canceling grants, and firing civil servants contrary to law. And claims from DOJ that Article II of the Constitution enables autocracy.”
“Here is a true story about how the fake news operates 🧵”
“The @WSJ reached out to us Friday with a series of vague allegations they claimed they needed VA’s help “fact checking” to make sure we “didn’t see any errors” in their reporting. 2/”
“Despite repeated requests, reporter @lindsayaellis, Deputy Coverage Chief @janetadamy and Washington Coverage Chief @damianpaletta refused to provide VA the basic information required to look into their allegations. 3/”
“For instance, @WSJ alleges that veterans are “waiting longer to get treatment in North Texas.” They provided zero evidence of this claim other than hearsay. When we asked WSJ to name the specific VA facility & the specific wait-time data they were referencing so we could look into it, WSJ could not provide the info. 4/”
“Additionally, @WSJ alleges that “Fewer VA staff are handling veterans’ claims that will get them treatment for military-service injuries & mental health conditions.” Again, zero evidence of this claim other than hearsay, & when we asked WSJ for specifics, such as the job titles & locations affected by these alleged cuts, the WSJ could not provide it.5/”
“Given the conduct of @lindsayaellis, @janetadamy and @damianpaletta, it seems clear the @WSJ is not interested in determining whether the info it prints is even true. This is the definition of fake news. Please hold your team to a higher standard, @emmatuckerWSJ!”
“If you weren’t outraged that the law and due process weren’t followed when Biden let 10+ million people into the country, don’t expect voters to be outraged by accusations Trump isn’t following due process when he deports them.”
“Judge Boasberg’s daughter and sister are both non-profit grifters, an investigation into this entire family would be appropriate @FBIDirectorKash @FBIDDBongino IMPEACH!”
“No, these people are likely not receiving checks. The cleanup of the Social Security database is about something much more important. It is about establishing a ground truth.
There is a reason that DC is panicking about establishing a truly accurate Social Security database, and it is because much of federal government revolves around having no true ground truth. If your average person understood the scope and scale of the problem of having this data scattered across various agencies, how it hurts normal citizens, they would revolt.
I link to @heminator article below. But here’s a summary: up to 75% of illegal aliens are using stolen Social Security numbers. Chances are, your Social Security number is being used by an illegal immigrant and you don’t even know it.
The Treasury Department permits it, because it empowers them to receive more revenue. But they are not incentivized to care about the incidental effects, such as illegal aliens fraudulent benefits.
HHS permits it, because it grows their scope and scale of influence as they get more financing, get more beneficiaries, and so on. The lack of ground truth, rationalized to help undocumented migrants, is what creates a collusion of decentralized incentives all aimed at growing the power of each individual department in the federal government.
But it is not a victimless crime. It directly impacts people who try to file for Social Security Disability and can’t, because someone is working under their number. Or, it causes people to fail background checks.
If we pulled together all those fragmented datasets, and constructed a truly accurate Social Security database – one SSN per person – not only would the federal government be greatly reduced in power, we would also be able to document exactly who and where all the illegal aliens are. That’s right – we already have all the information required to deport illegal immigrants in our system, we just don’t want to look at it.
As it stands, the current system relies on the ground truth being scattered in fragmented pieces throughout the federal government. And that’s the real reason why politicians are in such a panic about cleaning up this data.”
“Roberts does not appreciate how close to the ledge he is dancing right now.
Once a president is forced by judicial insurrectionists to ignore their diktats and finally realizes the only power they ever had was a common belief they were legitimate, it’s over. And let me tell you: the fuel gauge needle on that legitimacy tank is starting to point at E due to the ongoing insanity of unelected tyrants in robes. Once that tank is dry, it’s over, because no president or Congress would ever again have any reason to defer to the whims of a cabal viewed as lawless and illegitimate by the people of this country.
John Roberts can do the right thing and end this nonsense forthwith, or he can continue to indulge his inner coward and go down in history as the man who killed off the American experiment in democratic rule of law on the eve of its 250th birthday.”
“Here are the cold hard facts for Chief Justice John Roberts and his toady Barrett. Judicial legitimacy was on the ballot. Those media outlets JR and ACB watch all promoted the view that J6 was an insurrection. Trump was guilty of every crime from keeping classified documents to exaggerating the value of real estate. I can’t even keep track of all of the cases against Trump.
7 or 7 swing states.
Popular vote win.
Voters no longer trust the judiciary on matters involving Trump and his supporters. For good reason. Against long standing constitutional law doctrine on the Speedy Trial Clause, DC trial court judges denied change of venue motions for J6 defendants. There was no legitimate reason to delay trials due to a “backlog,” where there were multiple nearby venues to hear their case.
Everyone knows why DC judges kept those cases in DC. Juries voted to convicted in 100% of cases. This is IMPOSSIBLE in any other context. John Roberts worked for years in private practice, and every lawyers knows this to be true, “Juries do crazy things.”
There will always be a runaway jury that convicts an innocent man and frees a guilty one. This is human nature.
Yet this well-worn rule of human nature and litigation experience found one exception. Our nation’s capital.Had J6 cases been tried in other venues, there would have been some acquittals.
Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Paper No 78 that the judiciary, unlike the Executive and Legislative branches, has “no influence over either the sword or the purse.” Hence judges must not exceed their appointed role, nor legislative from the branch.
Americans are watching DC judges appoint themselves as Head of HR, by demanding fired employees be reinstated. Now a judge, who cooperated with FISA court fraud, and himself should have been impeached and removed from office, has proclaimed he has the power to determine how Trump may use his power in matters of removing illegal immigrants who belong to terrorist gangs.
Trump can say, No. Courts can issue contempt findings. Who is going to serve the arrest warrants? US Marshals? The Marshalls fall under Executive authority.
Congress, of course, has the power to impeach and remove Trump from office. Judges lack any such authority, and it would be unfathomable to our Founders to see this vulgar power grab and use of show trials in DC.”
“Because Trump’s actions are popular at the 80-20 or even 90-10 level, there is no appetite for the democratic remedy of impeachment.
In this conflict between activist judges, some of whom sleep in the same beds (literally) of people who represent the opposing side and work for Trump-hater groups, Trump will win.
This is not my opinion. This was proven this last November.
Judges must conduct themselves appropriately, which is to say, they must admit Trump has the power to deport illegal criminals, fire employees, and interpret the full use of his Article 2 powers independently.
Hyper-partisan judges drunk on stolen power haven’t thought this through. They will lose the standoff.
For the sake of the country, Roberts must bring these lower courts to heel.
Otherwise judges will be in the position of issuing orders Trump is not obliged to follow, and as is his prerogative, he will not obey them.”
“WATCH IN FULL: White House Deputy Chief of Staff @StephenM schools Fake News CNN’s @kasie on the Constitution, the separation of powers, and the rule of law.”
He is correct. The President’s authority to expel alien combatants is not subject to a Court. The law explicitly states they can be removed in the President’s order and WITHOUT ANY HEARING.
Tychicus (re: your comment at the end of yesterday’s thread) – I really don’t have the emotional or mental bandwidth right now to get into much detail and debate, but I also didn’t want to merely ignore you. So my reply, which I’m sure will be inadequate, will be that although much of the weeding out being done by DOGE is probably necessary, I think it has been done too quickly, with a scythe instead of a more manageable instrument.
Chief Justice Roberts Speaks Up for the Judiciary — The Chief rejects Republican calls to impeach judges, including from President Trump.
~ Democrats in the Biden years tried to politicize the judiciary, even proposing legislation to pack the Supreme Court. Now Republicans are getting into this disreputable racket, calling for the impeachment of judges who rule against President Trump. On Tuesday Chief Justice John Roberts rightly rejected such calls.
The Trump wing of the GOP is upset that Democrats are doing what Republicans did in the Biden era by challenging policies in court. This is now the American way, for better or worse. Recall the successful lawsuits to stop President Biden’s lawless student-loan forgiveness, among other transgressions.
Now progressives are turning to the courts to stop Mr. Trump’s actions, and sometimes they are winning. This infuriates Mr. Trump’s supporters, who go directly from criticizing the rulings to impeaching the judges.
Mr. Trump, as usual, piled on. On Tuesday he assailed federal Judge James Boasberg, who issued a temporary restraining order Saturday to block the Administration from deporting Venezuelans it identified as members of the Tren de Aragua gang. …
… Mr. Trump will win some cases and lose others on the legal merits in the next four years, as he did in the first term. The best defense against losing is to act within the law. ~
This morning, Donald Trump himself entered the fray, using the instruments of politics. “This Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge, a troublemaker and agitator who was sadly appointed by Barack Hussein Obama, was not elected President,” he posted on Truth Social. “This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!”
That was enough to provoke a reply from Chief Justice John Roberts, who seldom makes public comments. …
The big controversy today is about the Trump administration deporting members of the Tren de Aragua gang to El Salvador to be imprisoned there.
Democrats are in a frenzy, claiming Trump is ignoring the law and trampling over lower court judges, painting him as a tyrant. But the reality is that the precedent for ignoring the judiciary was already set by the Biden administration, which repeatedly ignored Supreme Court rulings on student loans and affirmative action.
Despite what the left claims, Trump’s administration is actually enforcing the law, not defying it.
The real question is why Democrats are so determined to protect members of a violent Venezuelan gang from deportation. The Trump administration is simply doing what’s necessary to keep dangerous criminals out of the United States. No district court judge can expect a plane over international waters to just turn around mid-flight. But somehow, the left thinks protecting these gang members is more important than ensuring American safety. Why do they want so many bad people to stay in the country?
I would be interested to know how the WSJ is considered ‘conservative’. They seem to be more of an advocacy paper for Wall Street, banking and consumerism. If they were conservative would they not have opposed one of the most radical and un-conservative projects of my generation: the offshoring of an entire nation’s manufacturing—in a word, globalization? Isn’t conservatism about conserving christian and family values, not consumerism? The values the WSJ promote seem to be more in line with materialism than conservatism.
I think the WSJ is very much an ‘establishment’ paper. But to call it conservative is a very big stretch, and any similarity to conservatism a mere happenstance.
There are other intelligent opinions about the Chief Justice’s response to calls (by Trump and members of Congress) for impeachment. This one is by Sean Davis, co-founder of the Federalist.
“For more than two centuries, the question of whether to impeach judges has been left solely to the elected representatives of the American people. John Roberts has no say in the matter, regardless of how much he wishes otherwise. Our Constitution gives John Roberts no power whatsoever when it comes to judicial impeachment, and it certainly doesn’t give him the power to “reject” congressional impeachment when and if it comes.
In fact, this unbridled arrogance from Roberts is the precise reason judicial impeachment is now being demanded for rogue judges. Had Roberts done his job and restrained inferior judges from overstepping their bounds and claiming for themselves authority and power which does not belong to them, we would not find himself in this predicament. These calls are happening precisely because of John Roberts, not in spite of him.
What John Roberts needs to understand right now is that his continued cowardice in the face of lawless judicial insurrection against the elected government of the people—not rightful criticism of judges—is the fatal threat to the legitimacy of the judiciary he idolizes.
The more he acts like a craven politician, the more we are going to treat him like one. A smarter man than him would understand that the moment the Chief Justice is viewed more as a slimy politician than a fair judge, it’s over for him and his precious judiciary.”
I guess my followup question would be how do you define conservative? Has the definition changed and become something else in the Trump era? (It seems so to me, but I wouldn’t call that “conservative” anymore, it’s something else altogether, based on a personality and on more extremist ideas.)
The conclusion at the end of the World article. Janice I could read the article without a subscription. It astounds me that we live amongst those who will fight for “rights” of illegal criminals when they have no “rights”. Activist judges who state “I believe” that this administration has violated some law yet “believing” does not constitute an actual violation! Trump haters will stop at nothing to attempt to subvert this country of laws. Shameful!
Western Civilization has enemies, and plenty of them are found among students and professors on our elite campuses. That civilization will either defend itself or surrender. Any civilization that encourages its enemies to populate its elite institutions is just announcing its surrender, and will deserve its defeat.
We have a president who basks in adoration, and in the power that provides him. These personalities have appeared throughout history and it typically doesn’t end well for the people over which they have so much power.
Everything Trump says or does is vindicated by his more hard-core followers, it seems to me. I find that trend concerning.
But it’s “only” 4 years, barring another similar personality appearing on the horizon — from the left or right.
We have a form of government that is aimed at preventing these kinds of personalities getting too much control for too long. Praying our founders’ recipe holds firm in these turbulent times. Even strong nations can become fragile in times like these. Prayer is needed.
~ For all the noise of negotiations, what matters are the terms of a peace deal. Mr. Trump might want to keep a note card reminding him that roughly seven in 10 Americans wanted out of Afghanistan in 2021. President Biden thought he’d be a hero for wrapping up that war. We know how that turned out. (WSJ) ~
Again, what about globalism (which the WSJ certainly seems to have supported) is conservative in any way?. Globalism seems to have been a very radical move. Is that now considered conservative? Is not the traditional way of nations dealing with each other more conservative than the idea of there being producer nations and consumer nations, with those being basically determined by the financial markets? How exactly is the WSJ conservative? What values does it conserve other than materialistic ones?
And what is more concerning to many is the vitriol against a President attempting to protect and benefit legal hard working tax paying citizens. Some cannot get past his personality quirks yet some totally dismissed the compromised mental health and self benefiting president of recent days. Unbelievable but here we are….
Debra, WSJ has been conservative for a long time, is considered even a “Murdoch rag” by some. And Trump’s foreign policy — which is very recent but also a throwback to early eras — is an isolationist one (I think? It can be hard to tell).
Modern-conservatism is what I’d equate with the Reagan administration.
Trump has gone backwards to a pre-WWII isolationist philosophy, though how consistent he will be in executing that (which is very hard to predict, frankly, tariffs anyone?) will be for voters and history to judge. Many conservatives see it as a mistake and even folly (in its intent) but we shall see.
Liberalism went into the extreme reaches probably somewhere around the ’70s and hasn’t found its way out yet. Is the same future in store for conservatism? Maybe. But I don’t think the nation is made better or more resilient (remember nations don’t typically survive much longer than a few hundred years, we’re somewhat on borrowed time here) for either of those drifts to the more extreme ends of the 2 parties.
WSJ news pages tend to be pretty much right down the middle – which I still argue is what we all should seek out in terms of actual “news” coverage.
Editorial pages are different, they reflect view points.
“X” and some of the other more populist sites online reflect the current “populism” and flavor of the era, whether far left or (as is the case currently) far right, though I’d put those partisan tendencies in the somewhat (very) far reaches of the country’s political thought.
Here is a human face on things as to why this nation under the guidance of a caring administration is taking measures to ensure legal residence/permission to be here. In your trusted news source The Guardian this young woman cites many women admitting they overstayed their legal permission to do so. I don’t know if this young woman wrote this piece herself but if she did she should consider becoming a writer.
It would seem to me by her own words that the Lord God guided her through a scary situation…by His grace she made it through.
I believe what is commonly thought of as the modern conservative movement must be the neo conservative. They became dominant shortly after Reagan, I think. That would explain the ready acceptance of globalism in conservative circles. As I have said elsewhere I do not hold to any ideology in particular though I have an affinity to the old fashioned conservatism that seemed to have a greater respect for borders and boundaries.
Although we did not have a fence beween yards, my neighbor, many years ago, was impressed to overhear me teaching our son about the borders of our yard and where he was free to run and romp around.
When Son was grown, we had new neighbors, young parents with a child the age he had been when he had received the borders instruction. That girl child built a pile of pinecones structure in our yard. She received no teaching about borders. It was awkward when it was time for me to mow the yard. I mowed around it, but I felt a bit irritated about the younger generation’s lack of respect for borders.
Debra, while there are central definitions of each political ‘wing,’ both liberal and conservative movements change with the times and with circumstances and issues, national and world crises that arise presenting new challenges. Both sides have been swayed into extremism but that generally isn’t a winning or long-term strategy with most voters.
Each side probably winds up melding it all together once the fever breaks, although I have to say the conservative movement has seen a hard split right now that I’m not sure gets mended all that soon (but the liberals went through this in the ’70s). I the ‘new’ movements within both parties eventually find their way back (generally) to one another, with changes perhaps but also with keeping many of the basic core beliefs and philosophy that defined them on the political spectrum. Generally speaking.
Our nation doesn’t tend to operate well under extremism and both liberals and conservatives have learned that in the past. We’ll see if it’s a lesson that can still be learned. How to keep what’s good and practical and lose the more wild-eyed fervor that tends to not play well (at least for long) with most U.S. voters.
We didn’t vote for drama per se, but we voted for a return to personal housekeeping as opposed to global dominance. I believe that is a righteous endeavor. The drama is just part of the process that most everyone could do without. Unfortunately, no one else emerged with the intestinal fortitude to make the hard decisions in the face of unhinged and irrational opposition that has come from both sides of the aisle. We take what God allows us to have and pray for grace to endure.
Trump plays a roll for sure, but the media refuses to admit that even his good policies aren’t the worst thing ever. Everything is a 3 alarm blaze to them. Americans see it for what it is, partisan democrats sabotaging everything.
Wandering Views 
“Trump closing our border in 48 hours is not being discussed enough…
We are now on pace for the fewest illegal border crossings in 50+ years, immediately after 4 years of record breaking illegal immigration.
Biden could have done this at any time.
Where is the accountability?”
https://x.com/Geiger_Capital/status/1901681032803262935?t=xHJf6OfAkh18P_Q2r-dwcw&s=19
All it took was the will to do so. But accountability? Please, NTers will say you’re targeting poor bureaucrats, and tell you that’s bad, because they don’t like Trump’s delivery.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Huh.
Well look at that. Right again, despite the assurances of some that Antifa was not there.
https://x.com/its_The_Dr/status/1901812534635557052?t=1NdtSmpeckBoz_Svd-bfVg&s=19
“Turns out ‘MAGA Hat dude’ BREAKING CAPITOL WINDOW on J6 and INJURING COPS with Pepper Spray IS ANTIFA like Trumpers In J6 video chanted ‘Antifa’!
Trumpers were right: Capitol Breechers were infiltrators posing as Trumpers! He voted Obama 2x, never Trump.”
LikeLiked by 3 people
“@elonmusk: “The fraud we’re seeing is overwhelmingly on the left … The single biggest thing that they’re worried about is that DOGE is going to turn off fraudulent payments of entitlements … to illegals … This is why they really hate my guts and want me to die.”
https://x.com/TheChiefNerd/status/1901676126746919191?t=RJsmK-VD7Xv0zWIrXVRO9Q&s=19
——
Well, that and you work for the Bad Orange Man…..
LikeLiked by 3 people
It’s all so grassrooty….
Not.
https://x.com/jacktronprime/status/1901638196930150729?t=bERy9c6NkpQdmlRTRFbsZw&s=19
“Yesterday I had an informant infiltrate one of the protests at Tesla dealerships and they told her a few things:
1. These protests are only happening in contested congressional districts
2. They’re being funded by 501c4 charities being given dark money from Democrat politicians of these districts
3. They’re organized through facebook groups since 𝕏 is monitored by pro Elon people
Here is a copy of their prepared anti-Elon chants:”
LikeLiked by 4 people
This is the way.
Never share info with a compromised official.
https://x.com/Rightanglenews/status/1901751609677271141?t=vPVVgcEzfqCTT7YRSu9dYQ&s=19
“President Trump’s legal team has just told D.C. Judge Boasberg that they will not be providing any information to him on deportation flights due to national security concerns.”
LikeLiked by 3 people
“For the past two weeks, @SocialSecurity has begun a major cleanup of their records. Approximately 3.2 million numberholders, all listed age 120+, have now been marked as deceased. More work still to be done.”
https://x.com/DOGE/status/1901882509463630073?t=9k7eVhqIRHJhms33BJn2bA&s=19
Good. Less fraud, less wasted taxpayer money sent to scammers.
LikeLiked by 4 people
“Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill @pulte: “There was about 2,900 people that were supposed to work in the building. Turns out, only 49 were showing up full-time.”
https://x.com/RapidResponse47/status/1901784725791904184?t=7jhjpqDrw4gRO5-clTwoZw&s=19
Time for another mass layoff.
LikeLiked by 3 people
“The repulsive irony of these Bush/Cheney neocons pretending to be so alarmed by radical Article II theories:
They’re the ones who invented and implemented these theories as part of the War on Terror: the president is unlimited in his powers, even by Congressional statutes.”
https://x.com/ggreenwald/status/1901654205011534196?t=qVvyHmLEq7yWKkgtaqIHvg&s=19
—-
Kristol and the NTers are clutching their pearls again…
Enjoy the fruits of your labor neocons.
https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1901388655408890179?t=H4VZ3wL0maonmGE2_mLsRg&s=19
“So we’re hitting a crisis point, with the apparent evasion of court orders on deportations and immigration, plus shutting down agencies, canceling grants, and firing civil servants contrary to law. And claims from DOJ that Article II of the Constitution enables autocracy.”
——
LikeLiked by 3 people
The WSJ is sooo principled…
And such fine journalists….
Not.
https://x.com/SecVetAffairs/status/1901775483231961292?t=oVoo0EqoAfNqbnio_tOovA&s=19
“Here is a true story about how the fake news operates 🧵”
“The @WSJ reached out to us Friday with a series of vague allegations they claimed they needed VA’s help “fact checking” to make sure we “didn’t see any errors” in their reporting. 2/”
“Despite repeated requests, reporter @lindsayaellis, Deputy Coverage Chief @janetadamy and Washington Coverage Chief @damianpaletta refused to provide VA the basic information required to look into their allegations. 3/”
“For instance, @WSJ alleges that veterans are “waiting longer to get treatment in North Texas.” They provided zero evidence of this claim other than hearsay. When we asked WSJ to name the specific VA facility & the specific wait-time data they were referencing so we could look into it, WSJ could not provide the info. 4/”
“Additionally, @WSJ alleges that “Fewer VA staff are handling veterans’ claims that will get them treatment for military-service injuries & mental health conditions.” Again, zero evidence of this claim other than hearsay, & when we asked WSJ for specifics, such as the job titles & locations affected by these alleged cuts, the WSJ could not provide it.5/”
“Given the conduct of @lindsayaellis, @janetadamy and @damianpaletta, it seems clear the @WSJ is not interested in determining whether the info it prints is even true. This is the definition of fake news. Please hold your team to a higher standard, @emmatuckerWSJ!”
——
But muh narrative….
LikeLiked by 2 people
But who ‘s gonna cut her lawn and sell her drugs now?
https://x.com/ThomasSowell/status/1901774963159224525?t=jFz3Ro0A2kxZAIz2Eu5DYA&s=19
“MSNBC host compares Trump deporting Tren de Aragua gang members to the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Truth.
https://x.com/Heminator/status/1901978334558323143?t=AccL6hSkTjoPNegbiwp-7w&s=19
“If you weren’t outraged that the law and due process weren’t followed when Biden let 10+ million people into the country, don’t expect voters to be outraged by accusations Trump isn’t following due process when he deports them.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
“The articles of impeachment are teed up and ready to go.”
https://x.com/RepEliCrane/status/1902010066649116893?t=YY54k0yqaU3NIJxK1HLPsw&s=19
—
Bring the pain. Time to rid the Judiciary of these activist frauds.
https://x.com/JG_CSTT/status/1902011003564384569?t=yEM1vRJ1ZS_45FNh1o6YHg&s=19
“Judge Boasberg’s daughter and sister are both non-profit grifters, an investigation into this entire family would be appropriate @FBIDirectorKash @FBIDDBongino IMPEACH!”
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Boasberg tried to extort government lawyers into disclosing classified national security information during a public hearing.
The man is a delusional megalomaniac and a massive national security threat given his behavior over not just the last week, but the last decade.
For the security of the nation, his security clearance needs to be revoked immediately.”
https://x.com/seanmdav/status/1901753952909361641?t=bGSYxHQL8u6sT_iRbzZuBw&s=19
LikeLiked by 2 people
“No, these people are likely not receiving checks. The cleanup of the Social Security database is about something much more important. It is about establishing a ground truth.
There is a reason that DC is panicking about establishing a truly accurate Social Security database, and it is because much of federal government revolves around having no true ground truth. If your average person understood the scope and scale of the problem of having this data scattered across various agencies, how it hurts normal citizens, they would revolt.
I link to @heminator article below. But here’s a summary: up to 75% of illegal aliens are using stolen Social Security numbers. Chances are, your Social Security number is being used by an illegal immigrant and you don’t even know it.
The Treasury Department permits it, because it empowers them to receive more revenue. But they are not incentivized to care about the incidental effects, such as illegal aliens fraudulent benefits.
HHS permits it, because it grows their scope and scale of influence as they get more financing, get more beneficiaries, and so on. The lack of ground truth, rationalized to help undocumented migrants, is what creates a collusion of decentralized incentives all aimed at growing the power of each individual department in the federal government.
But it is not a victimless crime. It directly impacts people who try to file for Social Security Disability and can’t, because someone is working under their number. Or, it causes people to fail background checks.
If we pulled together all those fragmented datasets, and constructed a truly accurate Social Security database – one SSN per person – not only would the federal government be greatly reduced in power, we would also be able to document exactly who and where all the illegal aliens are. That’s right – we already have all the information required to deport illegal immigrants in our system, we just don’t want to look at it.
As it stands, the current system relies on the ground truth being scattered in fragmented pieces throughout the federal government. And that’s the real reason why politicians are in such a panic about cleaning up this data.”
https://x.com/DataRepublican/status/1901999752549421288?t=UkAzWFT-uIjmK2oXz3Aqhg&s=19
—-
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2022/06/29/willful_blindness_feds_ignore_massive_illegal_alien_id_theft_plaguing_americans_as_us_coffers_fill_839815.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
“The White House Deputy Press Secretary hints at a major revelation with the release of the JFK files today.
He warns that the American people will be truly shocked by what they see.
The documents are set to be released this afternoon.”
https://x.com/ShadowofEzra/status/1901985200952775043?t=qX7rxWCBgRJsSiUoUPLWUg&s=19
But will we be…?
Doubt it, everyone knows our govt was involved.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Truth.
https://x.com/seanmdav/status/1901836652416520473?t=5KBfBOXrS5UKWMTKdyxklw&s=19
“Roberts does not appreciate how close to the ledge he is dancing right now.
Once a president is forced by judicial insurrectionists to ignore their diktats and finally realizes the only power they ever had was a common belief they were legitimate, it’s over. And let me tell you: the fuel gauge needle on that legitimacy tank is starting to point at E due to the ongoing insanity of unelected tyrants in robes. Once that tank is dry, it’s over, because no president or Congress would ever again have any reason to defer to the whims of a cabal viewed as lawless and illegitimate by the people of this country.
John Roberts can do the right thing and end this nonsense forthwith, or he can continue to indulge his inner coward and go down in history as the man who killed off the American experiment in democratic rule of law on the eve of its 250th birthday.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
https://x.com/Cernovich/status/1901775256018428388?t=KSO7LvnRiOMLcBSmTgSg5Q&s=19
“Here are the cold hard facts for Chief Justice John Roberts and his toady Barrett. Judicial legitimacy was on the ballot. Those media outlets JR and ACB watch all promoted the view that J6 was an insurrection. Trump was guilty of every crime from keeping classified documents to exaggerating the value of real estate. I can’t even keep track of all of the cases against Trump.
7 or 7 swing states.
Popular vote win.
Voters no longer trust the judiciary on matters involving Trump and his supporters. For good reason. Against long standing constitutional law doctrine on the Speedy Trial Clause, DC trial court judges denied change of venue motions for J6 defendants. There was no legitimate reason to delay trials due to a “backlog,” where there were multiple nearby venues to hear their case.
Everyone knows why DC judges kept those cases in DC. Juries voted to convicted in 100% of cases. This is IMPOSSIBLE in any other context. John Roberts worked for years in private practice, and every lawyers knows this to be true, “Juries do crazy things.”
There will always be a runaway jury that convicts an innocent man and frees a guilty one. This is human nature.
Yet this well-worn rule of human nature and litigation experience found one exception. Our nation’s capital.Had J6 cases been tried in other venues, there would have been some acquittals.
Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Paper No 78 that the judiciary, unlike the Executive and Legislative branches, has “no influence over either the sword or the purse.” Hence judges must not exceed their appointed role, nor legislative from the branch.
Americans are watching DC judges appoint themselves as Head of HR, by demanding fired employees be reinstated. Now a judge, who cooperated with FISA court fraud, and himself should have been impeached and removed from office, has proclaimed he has the power to determine how Trump may use his power in matters of removing illegal immigrants who belong to terrorist gangs.
Trump can say, No. Courts can issue contempt findings. Who is going to serve the arrest warrants? US Marshals? The Marshalls fall under Executive authority.
Congress, of course, has the power to impeach and remove Trump from office. Judges lack any such authority, and it would be unfathomable to our Founders to see this vulgar power grab and use of show trials in DC.”
LikeLiked by 3 people
“Because Trump’s actions are popular at the 80-20 or even 90-10 level, there is no appetite for the democratic remedy of impeachment.
In this conflict between activist judges, some of whom sleep in the same beds (literally) of people who represent the opposing side and work for Trump-hater groups, Trump will win.
This is not my opinion. This was proven this last November.
Judges must conduct themselves appropriately, which is to say, they must admit Trump has the power to deport illegal criminals, fire employees, and interpret the full use of his Article 2 powers independently.
Hyper-partisan judges drunk on stolen power haven’t thought this through. They will lose the standoff.
For the sake of the country, Roberts must bring these lower courts to heel.
Otherwise judges will be in the position of issuing orders Trump is not obliged to follow, and as is his prerogative, he will not obey them.”
LikeLiked by 4 people
You’d think she’d do a little research….
But it appears not.
https://x.com/RapidResponse47/status/1901741630618489054?t=-K1ggIP9Nr4CAX9NFI2Vzw&s=19
“WATCH IN FULL: White House Deputy Chief of Staff @StephenM schools Fake News CNN’s @kasie on the Constitution, the separation of powers, and the rule of law.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
“This is not judicable”
-Stephen Miller
He is correct. The President’s authority to expel alien combatants is not subject to a Court. The law explicitly states they can be removed in the President’s order and WITHOUT ANY HEARING.
Case Closed.”
https://x.com/doctormalibu/status/1901763813604827254?t=q4sWYrqdqzWLsexocyhNfg&s=19
—-
https://x.com/Matt_Bracken48/status/1901949725844119911?t=TYdP0IrJb-oT_A01AMFXsg&s=19
LikeLiked by 3 people
Tychicus (re: your comment at the end of yesterday’s thread) – I really don’t have the emotional or mental bandwidth right now to get into much detail and debate, but I also didn’t want to merely ignore you. So my reply, which I’m sure will be inadequate, will be that although much of the weeding out being done by DOGE is probably necessary, I think it has been done too quickly, with a scythe instead of a more manageable instrument.
LikeLiked by 2 people
WSJ editorial board piece (not news pages):
Chief Justice Roberts Speaks Up for the Judiciary — The Chief rejects Republican calls to impeach judges, including from President Trump.
~ Democrats in the Biden years tried to politicize the judiciary, even proposing legislation to pack the Supreme Court. Now Republicans are getting into this disreputable racket, calling for the impeachment of judges who rule against President Trump. On Tuesday Chief Justice John Roberts rightly rejected such calls.
The Trump wing of the GOP is upset that Democrats are doing what Republicans did in the Biden era by challenging policies in court. This is now the American way, for better or worse. Recall the successful lawsuits to stop President Biden’s lawless student-loan forgiveness, among other transgressions.
Now progressives are turning to the courts to stop Mr. Trump’s actions, and sometimes they are winning. This infuriates Mr. Trump’s supporters, who go directly from criticizing the rulings to impeaching the judges.
Mr. Trump, as usual, piled on. On Tuesday he assailed federal Judge James Boasberg, who issued a temporary restraining order Saturday to block the Administration from deporting Venezuelans it identified as members of the Tren de Aragua gang. …
… Mr. Trump will win some cases and lose others on the legal merits in the next four years, as he did in the first term. The best defense against losing is to act within the law. ~
~
And so it goes.
LikeLike
The best defense against losing is to act within the law.
Which is exactly what the President did. 😉
LikeLiked by 2 people
This morning, Donald Trump himself entered the fray, using the instruments of politics. “This Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge, a troublemaker and agitator who was sadly appointed by Barack Hussein Obama, was not elected President,” he posted on Truth Social. “This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!”
That was enough to provoke a reply from Chief Justice John Roberts, who seldom makes public comments. …
LikeLike
Ben Shapiro
The big controversy today is about the Trump administration deporting members of the Tren de Aragua gang to El Salvador to be imprisoned there.
Democrats are in a frenzy, claiming Trump is ignoring the law and trampling over lower court judges, painting him as a tyrant. But the reality is that the precedent for ignoring the judiciary was already set by the Biden administration, which repeatedly ignored Supreme Court rulings on student loans and affirmative action.
Despite what the left claims, Trump’s administration is actually enforcing the law, not defying it.
The real question is why Democrats are so determined to protect members of a violent Venezuelan gang from deportation. The Trump administration is simply doing what’s necessary to keep dangerous criminals out of the United States. No district court judge can expect a plane over international waters to just turn around mid-flight. But somehow, the left thinks protecting these gang members is more important than ensuring American safety. Why do they want so many bad people to stay in the country?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Was President Biden referred to as Mr. Biden? Just wondering.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I would be interested to know how the WSJ is considered ‘conservative’. They seem to be more of an advocacy paper for Wall Street, banking and consumerism. If they were conservative would they not have opposed one of the most radical and un-conservative projects of my generation: the offshoring of an entire nation’s manufacturing—in a word, globalization? Isn’t conservatism about conserving christian and family values, not consumerism? The values the WSJ promote seem to be more in line with materialism than conservatism.
I think the WSJ is very much an ‘establishment’ paper. But to call it conservative is a very big stretch, and any similarity to conservatism a mere happenstance.
LikeLiked by 4 people
A great Facebook post, IMO, of an observation about the break neck speed at which changes are being made by the current admin:
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/14beDyks72/
LikeLiked by 2 people
There are other intelligent opinions about the Chief Justice’s response to calls (by Trump and members of Congress) for impeachment. This one is by Sean Davis, co-founder of the Federalist.
“For more than two centuries, the question of whether to impeach judges has been left solely to the elected representatives of the American people. John Roberts has no say in the matter, regardless of how much he wishes otherwise. Our Constitution gives John Roberts no power whatsoever when it comes to judicial impeachment, and it certainly doesn’t give him the power to “reject” congressional impeachment when and if it comes.
In fact, this unbridled arrogance from Roberts is the precise reason judicial impeachment is now being demanded for rogue judges. Had Roberts done his job and restrained inferior judges from overstepping their bounds and claiming for themselves authority and power which does not belong to them, we would not find himself in this predicament. These calls are happening precisely because of John Roberts, not in spite of him.
What John Roberts needs to understand right now is that his continued cowardice in the face of lawless judicial insurrection against the elected government of the people—not rightful criticism of judges—is the fatal threat to the legitimacy of the judiciary he idolizes.
The more he acts like a craven politician, the more we are going to treat him like one. A smarter man than him would understand that the moment the Chief Justice is viewed more as a slimy politician than a fair judge, it’s over for him and his precious judiciary.”
https://x.com/seanmdav/status/1902036046180745300
LikeLiked by 3 people
I found this opinion piece interesting…
Will Western Civilization survive? | WORLD
LikeLiked by 3 people
Kathaleena, without a subscription, full access to the article is denied by World.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@9:29 – Conservative in its editorial views.
I guess my followup question would be how do you define conservative? Has the definition changed and become something else in the Trump era? (It seems so to me, but I wouldn’t call that “conservative” anymore, it’s something else altogether, based on a personality and on more extremist ideas.)
LikeLike
The conclusion at the end of the World article. Janice I could read the article without a subscription. It astounds me that we live amongst those who will fight for “rights” of illegal criminals when they have no “rights”. Activist judges who state “I believe” that this administration has violated some law yet “believing” does not constitute an actual violation! Trump haters will stop at nothing to attempt to subvert this country of laws. Shameful!
Western Civilization has enemies, and plenty of them are found among students and professors on our elite campuses. That civilization will either defend itself or surrender. Any civilization that encourages its enemies to populate its elite institutions is just announcing its surrender, and will deserve its defeat.
LikeLiked by 2 people
We have a president who basks in adoration, and in the power that provides him. These personalities have appeared throughout history and it typically doesn’t end well for the people over which they have so much power.
Everything Trump says or does is vindicated by his more hard-core followers, it seems to me. I find that trend concerning.
But it’s “only” 4 years, barring another similar personality appearing on the horizon — from the left or right.
We have a form of government that is aimed at preventing these kinds of personalities getting too much control for too long. Praying our founders’ recipe holds firm in these turbulent times. Even strong nations can become fragile in times like these. Prayer is needed.
We’ll see how it all goes providentially.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And I guess that “24 hours” to end the war promise just didn’t quite pan out.
~ Putin Rejects the Trump Cease-Fire – The Russian wants much bigger concessions that would cripple Ukraine ~
LikeLike
~ For all the noise of negotiations, what matters are the terms of a peace deal. Mr. Trump might want to keep a note card reminding him that roughly seven in 10 Americans wanted out of Afghanistan in 2021. President Biden thought he’d be a hero for wrapping up that war. We know how that turned out. (WSJ) ~
LikeLike
Again, what about globalism (which the WSJ certainly seems to have supported) is conservative in any way?. Globalism seems to have been a very radical move. Is that now considered conservative? Is not the traditional way of nations dealing with each other more conservative than the idea of there being producer nations and consumer nations, with those being basically determined by the financial markets? How exactly is the WSJ conservative? What values does it conserve other than materialistic ones?
LikeLiked by 2 people
And what is more concerning to many is the vitriol against a President attempting to protect and benefit legal hard working tax paying citizens. Some cannot get past his personality quirks yet some totally dismissed the compromised mental health and self benefiting president of recent days. Unbelievable but here we are….
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thanks for your diplomacy and tactics in your remarks, DJ. It is an indicator of your heart.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I feel stabled, BTW
LikeLike
Thank you Janice.
Debra, WSJ has been conservative for a long time, is considered even a “Murdoch rag” by some. And Trump’s foreign policy — which is very recent but also a throwback to early eras — is an isolationist one (I think? It can be hard to tell).
Modern-conservatism is what I’d equate with the Reagan administration.
Trump has gone backwards to a pre-WWII isolationist philosophy, though how consistent he will be in executing that (which is very hard to predict, frankly, tariffs anyone?) will be for voters and history to judge. Many conservatives see it as a mistake and even folly (in its intent) but we shall see.
Liberalism went into the extreme reaches probably somewhere around the ’70s and hasn’t found its way out yet. Is the same future in store for conservatism? Maybe. But I don’t think the nation is made better or more resilient (remember nations don’t typically survive much longer than a few hundred years, we’re somewhat on borrowed time here) for either of those drifts to the more extreme ends of the 2 parties.
LikeLiked by 1 person
WSJ news pages tend to be pretty much right down the middle – which I still argue is what we all should seek out in terms of actual “news” coverage.
Editorial pages are different, they reflect view points.
“X” and some of the other more populist sites online reflect the current “populism” and flavor of the era, whether far left or (as is the case currently) far right, though I’d put those partisan tendencies in the somewhat (very) far reaches of the country’s political thought.
LikeLike
In other words, it is opinion and not news.
LikeLike
While the cat’s away, the mice will play 🙂 I remember the saying, Never waste an opportunity.
LikeLike
Thought this was worth a read — puts a human face on things
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/19/canadian-detained-us-immigration-jasmine-mooney
hrw
LikeLike
AJ needs a “Gone fishing” sign 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Laken Riley
Here is a human face on things as to why this nation under the guidance of a caring administration is taking measures to ensure legal residence/permission to be here. In your trusted news source The Guardian this young woman cites many women admitting they overstayed their legal permission to do so. I don’t know if this young woman wrote this piece herself but if she did she should consider becoming a writer.
It would seem to me by her own words that the Lord God guided her through a scary situation…by His grace she made it through.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I believe what is commonly thought of as the modern conservative movement must be the neo conservative. They became dominant shortly after Reagan, I think. That would explain the ready acceptance of globalism in conservative circles. As I have said elsewhere I do not hold to any ideology in particular though I have an affinity to the old fashioned conservatism that seemed to have a greater respect for borders and boundaries.
LikeLiked by 3 people
We aren’t the only ones dealing with entitled foreigners France is dealing with their own detractors
https://www.foxnews.com/world/french-legislators-pass-controversial-immigration-bill-aiming-strengthen-deportation-measures
LikeLiked by 2 people
Although we did not have a fence beween yards, my neighbor, many years ago, was impressed to overhear me teaching our son about the borders of our yard and where he was free to run and romp around.
When Son was grown, we had new neighbors, young parents with a child the age he had been when he had received the borders instruction. That girl child built a pile of pinecones structure in our yard. She received no teaching about borders. It was awkward when it was time for me to mow the yard. I mowed around it, but I felt a bit irritated about the younger generation’s lack of respect for borders.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Not fishing, but the flu.
And it sucks….
Aj
LikeLiked by 1 person
So sorry, AJ, take care –
LikeLiked by 1 person
(The fishing tale was all Janice’s fault.) …
LikeLiked by 1 person
Debra, while there are central definitions of each political ‘wing,’ both liberal and conservative movements change with the times and with circumstances and issues, national and world crises that arise presenting new challenges. Both sides have been swayed into extremism but that generally isn’t a winning or long-term strategy with most voters.
Each side probably winds up melding it all together once the fever breaks, although I have to say the conservative movement has seen a hard split right now that I’m not sure gets mended all that soon (but the liberals went through this in the ’70s). I the ‘new’ movements within both parties eventually find their way back (generally) to one another, with changes perhaps but also with keeping many of the basic core beliefs and philosophy that defined them on the political spectrum. Generally speaking.
Our nation doesn’t tend to operate well under extremism and both liberals and conservatives have learned that in the past. We’ll see if it’s a lesson that can still be learned. How to keep what’s good and practical and lose the more wild-eyed fervor that tends to not play well (at least for long) with most U.S. voters.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think most Americans don’t like a lot of ongoing high drama in their politics. It doesn’t wear well after a while.
LikeLike
dj: What is the extremism of the current Republican platform? When has it ever been more conservative?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Dj,
This exactly what most Americans voted for.
LikeLiked by 2 people
We didn’t vote for drama per se, but we voted for a return to personal housekeeping as opposed to global dominance. I believe that is a righteous endeavor. The drama is just part of the process that most everyone could do without. Unfortunately, no one else emerged with the intestinal fortitude to make the hard decisions in the face of unhinged and irrational opposition that has come from both sides of the aisle. We take what God allows us to have and pray for grace to endure.
LikeLike
Yes, and who causes most of the drama?
The media.
Trump plays a roll for sure, but the media refuses to admit that even his good policies aren’t the worst thing ever. Everything is a 3 alarm blaze to them. Americans see it for what it is, partisan democrats sabotaging everything.
LikeLiked by 1 person