Champion of women
Yesterday, which happened to be National Girls & Women in Sports Day, was the day the nightmare of men in women's sports & locker rooms finally came to an end. President Trump fulfilled another of his promises and signed an Executive Order which keeps biological men out of women’s sports. Trump was joined by Independent Women ambassadors Riley Gaines, Payton McNabb, Paula Scanlan, Sia Liilii, Lauren Miller, Kim Russell, Kaitlynn Wheeler, Linnea Saltz and Lily Mullens and many female athletes. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a briefing before Trump signed the executive order that it "upholds the promise of Title IX." Joe Biden tried to change the meaning of Title IX, but now it has been restored to its original meaning
Leavitt said Trump expected the NCAA and the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee to comply. K-12 schools and colleges that violate it would risk losing federal money.
A sudden announcement:
To the shock of even his closest advisors Trump floated an idea of the US taking a hand in the rebuilding of Gaza and the resettlement of the Palestinian people. No details were given, but last night Prime Minister Netanyahu was asked about it by Sean Hannity and Netanyahu said that Trump didn't intend to send US troops there, which the Prime Minister said was Isreal's job nor did he think Trump intended to send US funds. It seemed more like Trump was thinking of getting middle east nations more involved.
Pam Bondi sworn in as Attorney General and proceeds to issue a flurry of orders:
Bondi immediately ordered the Department of Justice to pause the distribution of all funds to "sanctuary cities and jurisdictions" until a review has been completed. She ordered the Department to submit a report by March 15 confirming the elimination of DEI and “environmental justice” programs, as well as identifying any federal contractors who have provided DEI training or materials to any department employees since Trump took office. DOJ lawyers will have to follow the Departments new policy directives. She also directed the Justice Department to put its full weight behind Trump’s effort to crack down on illegal immigration, using “all available criminal statutes.” A special task force has been set up to look into the past weaponization of the Department.
Democrats take to the streets:
Frustrated democrats are now trying to ignite a nationwide protest against Trump's policies. It is the thing that democrats usually turn to when they are out of power. This time their main target seems to be Elon Musk, whom their constituents complain about most especially since Musk has exposed USAID to be a taxpayer funded leftist slush fund. We have the usual filing of the Articles of Impeachment from the ugly House Rep from Texas (this time only 16 days into the new administration.)
In other news:
The Red Cross has begun mass burials as f ighting between Rwandan-backed forces and Congolese soldiers left 3,000 dead in a matter of days.
Ukraine leader Zelensky said that if the Ukraine cannot be admitted into NATO that it should be allowed nuclear weapons.
In New York democrats intend to delay Stefanik replacement. NY State law now requires Hochul to act within 10 days after Stefanik resigns her House seat, by calling a special election to fill it within 80 days, or no later than mid-May, but the drive is on in the Legislature to drag it out until at least late June. So much for "democracy."
The F.C.C. released the transcript of a "60 Minutes" interview with Kamala Harris. Trump has sued the show, claiming it deceptively edited her responses. CBS is expected to settle with Trump.
Trump also withdrew the U.S. from the U.N. Human Rights Council and stopped funding UNRWA, the agency that aids Palestinians.
Tags
Who is online
104 visitors
Good morning.
The embattled US Agency for International Development has engaged in “willful sabotage of congressional oversight” over recent years while doling out taxpayer dollars to groups that overbilled the US and possibly gave funds to terrorists, Sen. Joni Ernst alleged .
The Republican Hawkeye State senator and Senate DOGE Caucus chair, listed a slew of examples on social media this week on why “USAID is one of the worst offenders of waste in Washington.”
This includes $2 million in funding related to Moroccan pottery classes, some $2 million backing trips to Lebanon, over $1 million to fund research in the Wuhan lab, $20 million to make a Sesame Street in Iraq and $9 million in humanitarian aid that “ended up in the hands of violent terrorists.”
The White House has similarly outlined “waste and abuse” in USAID as the Trump administration eyes a dramatic overhaul of the agency and has explored folding it into the State Department.
The administration pointed to USAID spending $2 million to fund LBTQ activism and sex changes in Guatemala, $6 million for tourism in Egypt, $32,000 on a “transgender comic book” in Peru, $2.5 million backing electric vehicles in Vietnam, money that backed “personalized” contraceptives in developing countries and more.
Sen. Joni Ernst warns of 'willful sabotage' at USAID, cites millions in funding for Wuhan lab and terrorists
I added up the "worst abuses" you listed. They represent around one tenth of one percent of the USAID budget.
That isn't the full list. Hannity showed them last night.
See ya later
John
I get your point - but a question "How much abuse and wasted money is ok?"
Ever heard of pork in Congressional bills ? We arent shutting down Congress are we ? At least not yet.
If it's going to any leftist sacred cow it is okay, if one penny went to conversion therapy or right to life organizations they would have lost their ever loving minds.
Has anyone notice that the abuse dollars never seem go to organizations that you would typically consider right leaning? there might be a couple but the majority always seems to go to the lefts social engineering programs.
That is the point.
And they hid it well!
Lets be extremely generous and say that these "abuses" amount to one or two percent of the budget. That is worth throwing out the other 99% that saves lives and promotes America in the third world?
If you can't answer the question, just admit it. Nobody will look down on you for that.
The Secretary of State said that maybe USAID can be moved to the State Department, where it can get its marching orders. USAID was allowed to run itself. It was a rogue entity answerable to nobody.
They appropriate between $40 and $50 billion annually, not including their internal admin costs.
You could increase food stamps by over 50% for that.
You could give every elementary school kid in the US a school supply allowance of about $1400/yr.
Alternatively, you could establish a trust fund of $13,000 for every single newborn in America and invest it. That would compound to about $72k by age 18 to be used for higher education or trade school, or if left unused it would be just shy of $4,000,000 by the time they turn 60.
John
The question which as usual you ignored was
"How much abuse and wasted money is ok?"
No amount of abuse or wasted money is 'okay'. There is an amount that is inevitable in a complex system like the federal government. Not sure there is an easy way to calculate what this threshold should be. My gut says that it should be probably around 5-10% for the federal government.
I trust that your intuition is that we are well beyond that.
What’s the next 80/20 issue democrats will hand to trump?
My guess is that Musk will uncover it.
"It seemed more like Trump was thinking of getting Middle Eastern nations more involved."
Obviously, he has learned a lot about how Trump operates.......... too bad some, or it seems a majority, of our left-leaning friends can't take the time to reflect on past "throw it at the wall and see if it sticks" way of getting things done. He does it to get people he feels needs a kick to do something...........or we will.
The two-state solution was never really accepted by the Palestinians. It seems that they wanted a one state solution minus Isreal.
The two state solution was never accepted by Israel.
They are getting what they seek. A one state solution with no Palestinians.
Trump is allowing them to say the quiet parts out loud now.
Think Israel will ever allow Palestinians back into Gaza once they are out?
Think they will ever stop their illegal settlement expansion in the West Bank?
Americans need to quit acting like Israel ever really wanted peace with the Palestinians. Hamas is stupid enough to do Israel's work for them- by giving Israel excuses to attack Gaza. The PA is corrupt and stupid enough to go along with Israel taking of the West Bank- so long as the aid keeps flowing to them.
When Americans can't tell the difference between Hezbollah, Hamas, and the PA- and don't know the three would kill each other off if given the chance. When they don't know that the West Bank and Gaza aren't physically connected in any way; and Israel doesn't allow free travel between the two. When they are too stupid to find out Israel controls the borders, air space, water, and mineral resources of both the West Bank and Gaza. When they think rockets are being fired from the West Bank- because of Hezbollah is firing them from Lebanon, and Hamas is from Gaza- then the US is too damn stupid to be a broker for peace in the ME.
It doesn't matter who is in the White House. Brandon was just as bad; he just played lip service to the Palestinians- and wasted tax payer dollars in literally dropping aid packages on their heads; and his worthless temporary port that didn't survive the first storm- and didn't deliver one damn piece of aid to the Gazans because there is no distribution system with all of the aid workers gone.
Fast or slow it doesn't matter. Trump is opting for fast. But he is as dumb as Brandon and the rest.
No country is going to take in the Palestinians. Jordan has already suffered one coup attempt; and had countless riots by Palestinians over the conditions of refugee camps. Lebanon, Syria (civil war still ongoing), Jordan, and Egypt are all poor countries- think they can handle the influx of over 2 million more Palestinians. Iran will be loving it- they won't be able to sign new recruits for Hezbollah and whatever replaces Hamas fast enough.
I am all for the US cutting all aid to the ME- so long as that includes Israel. I am sure China will be more than happy to move into those countries we abandon- and their puppet strings will be far more subtle than the ones the US uses. They will love to get their hands on US tech- even if it is the base Abrams tanks that Egypt has.
Trump needs to STFU when it comes to forcing the Palestinians on anyone. When the US refuses to grant amnesty to 3 teenage Palestinian teenage girls here on student VISAs who are not being allowed by Israel to return to Gaza or the West Bank. Who pose no threat to this country. With family who are US citizens willing to care of them. Then we have no say in forcing any country taking Palestinians.
One thing hasn't change with Trump- we are still stuck on stupid when it comes to foreign policy. Israel, like NATO, will always be the tail that wags the US dog. Trump had better damn well follow through on getting the US out of Ukraine- and remove our troops protecting NATO Ukraine border states- or I will start to regret voting for him. If I wanted this shit I would have voted for a Democrat.
Its definitely a shot across Hamas's bow. They seem to believe they have a right to billions in aid no matter what they do, that they will be rewarded for terrorism. This is a message that everything is now on the table.
Trump is actually offering the entire middle east a chance.
As far as the Palestinians go, there is something I took note of when the hostages were released. It was Hamas terrorist members who protected them when they were marched through crowds of Palestinians who were jeering at the soon to be transferred hostages. It told me a lot.
And a lot of people are saying it's a horrible idea and will never amount to anything. I believe those are the same who said that the Abraham Accords would never lead to a single country signing on.
The Abraham Accords stalled three years ago failing to add any new members and the recent Trump suggestions have resulted in unifying the entire ME against the idea with Jordan, Egypt and the Saudi's firmly opposed and the Saudi's saying the normalization of relations with Israel is off the table without the Palestinians remaining in Gaza.
Like the Paris Agreement and contract's with the UN, they are just words and promises for the current Administration to ignore or renege on, again.
Don't forget your tomahawk!
She's just pissed the overspending was caught and made public.
Other democrats have warned Liz about defending USAID. Many Americans are angry about the way that money was used.
Things like birthright citizenship might be easier.
And this all come to light in what could be considered a cursory look. I'd love to know which politicians received kickbacks in any of this.
Imagine how they'll scream if that gets investigated.
Imagine how they'll scream if indictments are handed out.
If Elizabeth Warren becomes the public face of the Democratic Party - they are in big trouble in 2028
It almost has to go there. The radical left seems to control that party.
Harvard law faculty’s first woman of color sure is mad for some reason
Probably for the trap she set up for Hegseth, which backfired.
And the process has begun to remove any and all titles men have cheated women out of.
That is essential.
Thanks for posting that.
Where do we look today?
Right up his asshole. I wonder if that is why he is smiling?
I know of an exterminator who had the same smile after catching rats.
Newly released data from ground-based radar came out Tuesday suggesting an Army helicopter was flying higher than it was supposed to be when it collided with American Airlines Flight 5342 a week ago, killing all 67 people aboard both aircraft.
According to the “best quality flight track data” available, the helicopter was flying at about 300 feet at the time of the midair collision with the plane on its approach to Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport outside Washington, DC, according to a statement Tuesday evening from the National Transportation Safety Board. “This data is rounded to the nearest 100 feet,” the agency said.
The Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk, based at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, was flying a training mission in a dedicated helicopter route where it was not allowed to fly above 200 feet, according to a published FAA chart . Since the accident above the Potomac River, the Federal Aviation Administration has indefinitely suspended the use of most of those routes.
DC plane crash: Latest radar evidence suggests Black Hawk was flying too high, but NTSB wants more proof | CNN
Still no answer as to why the helicopter was flying higher than it was supposed to.
My guess is someone made a mistake. You know like all the times a MALE pilot has crashed a helicopter? Same thing.
We can't afford that kind of "mistake."
You know like all the times a MALE pilot has crashed a helicopter?
Why did they hide the fact that there was a female on the helicopter team?
There is now a national conversation about DEI and we can thank one person for raising the question.
Because prejudice exists. For some people, hundreds of men can crash helicopters and there is no crisis, but one woman crashes a helicopter and we can’t ever have any women flying helicopters ever again.
Why would you think ‘they’ were trying to hide this? I knew this soon after it happened. Why is gender even a factor to you?
You're comment is ridiculous. The vast vast majority of mistakes that have crashed helicopters have been made by men
Why do you think women are incapable of flying a helicopter? , it seems like such an odd thing to say
My understanding is that it was the families request.
It was deliberately vague.
There are pending lawsuits vs the FAA for discriminating against valid air traffic controller applicants. On the other hand Trump immediately pointed out that the helicopter was above the altitude that it was supposed to be.
It was reported that way. That made it very convenient.
We always go through this when things are withheld. Whenever a cop shoots someone resisting arrest his/her name is immediately splashed all over the media. When Ashli Babbitt was shot the cop's name was withheld. Many correctly guessed that he was a DEI hire. Some even figured out that it was the same cop who left a loaded gun in a rest room.
Especially considering I never said it.
Do slander on.
That's not an answer.
In other words, you can't answer that question.
That is nonsense.
If the all the information was released right away, nobody would have thought anything about it.
You see, Tacos, when someone obviously tries to conceal something, people logically begin to ask why. Instead of diffusing controversy, they create it.
No, I rather clearly told you that you were wrong. That I for one knew this and I have no special ways to get information that is not available to you.
Is this all you are going to do now, play these ridiculous games with people?
Speaking of not answering questions, you are the one who did not answer a question:
Although I suspect most could accurately predict your honest answer if it ever appeared.
Hmmm, kind of reminds me of someone orange
I challenge you to support that claim. We have a Secretary of Defense who has previously falsely claimed that standards were lowered to allow women in combat roles.
Our president was citing DEI as the culprit before relevant facts were even known. In fact, there is still no evidence that DEI has any connection to the accident.
So, the prejudice I referenced is real.
Reporting indicates her parents asked that her name be withheld for her protection from that prejudice.
The prejudice is created by DEI. I suspect that most minorities wish it would end, so that people wouldn't be wondering if they genuinely achieved something or were given something.
Yes, some people just assume that a female in a position of responsibility is a product of DEI rather than merit.
By definition only racists, sexists and homophobes would give it a thought as to why minorities, women and gays are hired...
By far the greatest beneficiaries of the greater opportunities created by DEI policies have been white women!
So you give a thought to why women are hired? by your own definition, only racists, sexists and homophobes would give it a thought as to why minorities, women and gays are hired...
I would assume they were the best candidate for the job...
But you just said white women were the beneficiaries of DEI, and only racists, sexists and homophobes would even give a thought why they are hired. So you are obviously thinking about it. That's a tough look.
Oh dear lord, no. The prejudice existed before DEI. DEI was created in response to prejudice. Not the other way around.
Not before DEI.
Btw TiG what does the constitution say about promoting one group over another?
No, it didn't.
You mean those who created DEI?
You may have something.
DEI was created when Affirmative Action was shut down. It's just another "program" telling minorities that they cannot get along with out some assistance.
Actually, it was CRT that took the place of Affirmative Action.
When that scam failed, they changed it to DEI.
THAT scam has also failed., I can assure you the race baiters on the left will find a new name to further their discriminatory ways.
I forgot about CRT. There have been so many failures pushed by the left it's getting hard to keep track.
That's a given.
Why does the existence of DEI make you presume that a woman in a position of responsibility is not competent?
It isn't about me.
What justifies turning away qualified people if favor of group quotas?
That is the question.
You are the one making the comments so I am asking you why you think DEI is involved.
If you see a woman in a position of responsibility, do you assume she was a DEI hire?
If a man and a woman are equally qualified, do you have a problem with the woman being hired given women are historically passed over based on their sex?
Answer the question.
You need to stop demanding people answer your questions when you refuse to answer ours.
To the contrary, I spent the other day answering all your "Trump" questions.
After years of torching Trump, things have turned around nicely. I await your response on DEI.
Wait forever, I routinely answer your questions but this one-sided dialogue is ending.
BTW Vic, when I asked you about turning away a woman, that question also included an answer on why some support DEI.
DEI, like most programs, is flawed. It is improperly applied because we tend to always go to the extreme.
But that does not mean that people like you should simply presume that a minority or a woman or ... is not qualified.
[deleted][✘]
So, we never had sexual or racial prejudice in this country until liberals came along and created policy to address this nonexistent problem? Is that your position?
That seems to be what he is claiming. And from what he's saying not just 'active discrimination' didn't exist but apparently not even 'prejudice' existed until DEI.
The position he seems to be taking is that even if it's monumentally obvious that prejudice exists and has been admitted to and active discrimination especially when it came to gender in the military that was openly discussed and common for decades, until DEI was invented by some bleeding hearts (aka Americans who actually care about their fellow Americans regardless of gender or race) it wasn't a problem because anyone who had a problem with prejudice had no way to fight it thus, according to some bigoted meatheads, it didn't exist.
Hyperbole much?
I don't give a shit who the pilot was; or what their sex is- they fucked up royally and it cost not just their crews lives; but the lives of the people on the passenger jet.
The fact that this nearly happened two nights a row means that rules and regulations for conducting operations in and around airports by military craft need to be reviewed, updated, and enforced. If that means grounding pilots permanently that violate them- then so be it.
Also, control towers need to be updated and fully staffed to handle the volume and traffic at the airport as needed.
An air force radar control tower operative tells me she has refused multiple offers to be a civilian air traffic controller because the working conditions, stress, and technology the towers use sucks; and is seeking to get her commercial pilots license instead. She is willing to take less money to be a commercial pilot; than she was offered to work in a tower. DEI wasn't standing in her way either. Military service, female, and black- DEI would have her at the top of every list.
Maybe we should stop arguing politics long enough to demand that the mighty mental midgets we put into office actually fix this. Before we end up with even more of these avoidable "accidents".
Ok, well my comment was not directed at you specifically or about you, so maybe relax a little.
You actually don’t know that because it’s still being investigated.
This exact thing didn’t happen two nights in a row, and even if it had, you wouldn’t yet know what it means.
I didn’t think I was arguing politics. I answered a question. People who know what they are doing will investigate this and then we can see if there are lessons to be learned. Sometimes, you can do everything right and still have a problem because of circumstances beyond your control. You’re never going to have zero accidents for all time. We do our best, of course.
Oh please. They are throwing another temper tantrum. Just like the one they started back when they lost the election in 2016.
Yup, the resistance is back.
They are trying to drag out the confirmation hearings. Last night they had to stay all night because Leader John Thune is forcing the Senate to remain in session until the process is over.
It's not a "resistance". It never was. It's a temper tantrum because everything they worked so hard for is being torn down to favor THIS country and it's citizens instead of other countries.
And they are doing it with some of the most pathetic things.
And that is why they hate that man.
I have never seen such a large group of people afraid of ONE person. It's comical.
I know of two who talk of nothing else.
It took longer than I thought but they are talking about impeachment. This time for "dastardly deeds".
16 days to be exact.
And by the same ugly bastard.
As you say, for "dastardly deeds."
Dastardly deeds was better than him breaking out a chores of "dirty deeds, done dirt cheap".
You would think that after trying and failing 3 previous times he'd figure it out.
I doubt he'd know the words.
Well, the nuns used to say 3 times for the normal mind.
I'm starting to miss them.
THAT is the key words. Additional times need to be added for the left and Democrats.
Is that idiot speak for "He's exposing fraud, waste, abuse and other shady shit we've done"?
The Trump haters whining is getting more and more shrill. It is hilarious.
As more waste and pet projects are exposed the smarter dems are saying this is not the hill to die on. Unfortunately they are in the minority
Saikat Chakrabarti said he would initiate a bid to challenge former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in the party primary for the seat she’s held for more than two decades, citing concerns with new government regulations.
In the post announcing his candidacy, he spoke about his time with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.).
Ex-AOC aide launches primary challenge to Pelosi
It was only a matter of time. The pressure always came from the radical left.
AOC for President!
It will happen one day
If either of you are serious, i weep for the party of the klan, it is time to dismantle it and start over.
Yeah, why not. The Democrats do have a habit of running the most incompetent women among them for POTUS.
If it does I will finally agree with you that the country is degraded.
Great idea! Then we wouldn't have all of this spending brew-ha-ha. In her immortal words, "You just pay for it"
We can only hope.
That should scare every decent voter right out to the polls.
Your personal opinion is noted and relegated to where it belongs. There it goes down the memory hole. Bye bye.
I happen to think that she is quite smart and perspicacious. I don't care the least that you think otherwise. Your commentary looks like it comes from a disgruntled old person who is set in their ways and will never ever change. Have fun jousting at those windmills.
This is the year 2025, not the year 1925. I am so glad though, that you weep for the party of the klan, because it shows your true colors.
I do not agree with AOC for PotUS, but I wholeheartedly endorse the balance of your comment.
I have no doubt that you do.
However she has said some undeniably, cataclysmically stupid things.
So have we all, from time to time.
On balance, I think that she is without a doubt far superior in character, demeanor, respect for the country and respect for what a Democracy is supposed to be than the charlatan and petty tyrant that holds the office currently. What is more is that she has a true appreciation for the common working person, whom Trump et al haven't the faintest idea or care about after they have cast their vote. We not only could do far worse, we are doing far worse as the nation finally realizes that Trump didn't care one iota for the common people beyond their money and their ballots. Groceries? Oopsie! Foreign entanglements?
Let's own Gaza! Pay no attention to the Musk behind the curtain, he's only after your money and identity and has been given no official purview or funding from Congress..... This is not the way democracy works, it is the way dictators work. But hell, I guess that since less than a third of eligible voters said so, we now have to put up with all of his stupid and detrimental to democracy and the stature of the United States of America bullshit? What a crock. It is going to take at least a decade to get past all of the harm that he is going to do to this country, if we can ever manage to actually get past it at all.
Of course. She tells you what you want to hear.
I doubt you'll find very many actual blue collar workers who would agree with that.
Y'know how you hear that and think that's one of the stupidest things you've ever heard. That's how the rest of us think about AOC.
He has that already. The last place he needs to look is the US Govt.
What power does Musk actually have? Do tell. Can he cancel programs? Can he authorize spending?
No. No he can't. All he can do is recommend those things to elected officials, who themselves are limited to the powers granted them by the Constitution. This is exactly how democracy works.
A dictatorship would be something like a senile puppet leader manipulated by an unelected official behind the scenes. Hmmmm......
When the elected officials rubber-stamp the wishes of a PotUS who is influenced by Musk, that is power.
Not gonna take the bait, no matter how many times you patronize me. Sorry.
If what you say is true, it is because they have not taken the time to look at where she is from, how she grew up, or her path to elected official, and instead have relied on information fed to them through dubious sources.
I see that I was unclear. The dictator, tyrant, wanna-be-king is Trump, who has declared Musk the head of a fictional department, as well as making several other anti and unconstitutional EO's. It is good to see that democrats are finally stirring to slow the blitz. I wish the opposition luck.
America places a lot of confidence in the Constitution. The Constitution is just a document if the people pledged to follow it have little respect for it. I am pretty sure that Trump has no respect for it.
Bless your heart. I bet you believe this, too.
And as you said:
You haven't proven me right, wrong or otherwise.
Not disgruntled. Just disbelief. Disbelief that the Democrats and the left think she, Harris or Clinton are / were viable candidates. Those are some pretty low standards you all have.
The power belongs to the elected officials, which is exactly how democracy works.
Odd way to respond to polite discourse, but OK.
The "dubious source" for most of these conclusions is AOC herself.
But it is interesting how those who disagree with your assessment are presumed to be misinformed.
I think it is a good thing. The role of the party in opposition is to provide checks, balances and obstruction to the party in power. That's true no matter which party happens to be in which position at any given time. That's how the system is designed to work.
Justifiably so.
The Constitution is the thing that keeps tyrants in check. Trump's respect for it (or lack thereof) is of no significance whatsoever. It rules him, not vice versa.
Did you honestly not recognize that I was referring to a breakdown in the checks & balances and separation of powers?
⛬ Power for Musk
And Musk is not an elected official.
So now that my post is clear, what do you have to offer?
The Constitution is only as good as those who defend it.
The Constitution is words written on a piece of paper. It sets out three co-equal branches of government, with the supposition that each will try to maintain their authorities over their Constitutionally mandated spheres of influence. It also depends, to a somewhat lesser degree, on each of the three branches dealing in good faith. Congress has abrogated it's responsibility of maintenance of the separation of powers, and it doesn't look to me like either the congress or Trump believes in dealing in good faith. (Trump never has.) So where does that leave the country? All you people are putting the power of the constitution out there like it doesn't need the buy in of all our elected officials. I would say that beyond lip service, there are precious few people in elected Washington right now that even care what it says.
Getting back to the whole point of this side thread, AOC does respect the Constitution and the rights enshrined therein very much. She knows that those rights are there for a reason, and she knows how to make sure that those rights are not abused by a fat orange man and his surprisingly thick and awkward "genius". Most of all, she realizes that, as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be - about money.
Don't take your eye off the ball. It may not be there when you try to kick it.
And now, here is a word from our sponsor
Did you honestly not recognize that I was pointing out you have misidentified such a breakdown?
It was clear before. To the point of transparent.
You are describing a process that has gone on for centuries.
⛬ Power for private citizens
This is literally how the National Park Service came into being, BTW.
You are only now concerned as part of your ongoing campaign to condemn whatever Trump or Republicans happen to be doing today. You insinuate congress will "rubber stamp" whatever is put in front of them, despite very little evidence to suggest this will happen and apparently completely ignoring the slim Republican majority that would make it nearly impossible anyway.
Just because you don't like them does not render their approval of a measure to be a "rubber stamp".
Then you were simply wrong.
So you agree that Musk has power even though he is not an elected official. Why then are you trying to argue?
The perspective of a Trump apologist.
The pathetic, desperate ploy of pretending that my argument is based on emotion. Do you consider the Hegseth confirmation to be a rubber stamp or a thoughtful decision on the part of the Senators?
Just a side note as Presidents Trump and Musk announced condemnation of South Africa's eminent domain laws and making white South African farmers eligible as refugees to immigrate to the US.
Today's EO further condemned SA for joining 79 other countries who accused Israel of genocide to the ICC.
Today's EO stops all aid to SA due to it's "human rights violations against the white majority."
Of course, SA states that no land has ever been confiscated under the law in question yet and that Trump's
"information " is full of misinformation and distortions.
US Signs Executive Order To Classify Afrikaner Farmers As Refugees, SA Unimpressed - Briefly.co.za
Why is Trump punishing South Africa and who are the Afrikaners he wants to give refugee status to?
As is every law ever written.
The Constitution was written at a time when we had just divorced ourselves from what the early Americans viewed as a tyrannical system. It presumes the opposite of good faith. Everything about it is designed to keep a tyrant from rising to replace the one they overthrew.
It's important to remember that they understood tyranny 10,000 times better than we ever could. They experienced actual tyranny, not the imaginary bullshit people whine about today.
What have they passed to cause you to believe this?
They are professional politicians. They don't ever engage in good faith. The whole system is designed so that you send an absolute dirty bastard to represent your interests and I send another to represent mine. The Constitution defines the rules of that fight.
Exactly where it has always been.
Because it doesn't.
There are undoubtedly quite a few who don't even know what it says. That doesn't matter. They're still governed by it.
How about confirming Hegseth?
So let's follow your lead and go back to the framers. Do you believe they presumed predominantly dirty bastards as representatives or statesmen?
I'm sure you are positively desperate to think so.
That any such power is either unusual or untoward. All presidents have civilian advisors or consultants.
*eyeroll*
Your post history would indicate that I'm not the one pretending.
What about it?
With few exceptions, they've all viewed each other as dirty bastards. Rightfully so.
Why would it be different from today? Why would it be different from 100 years ago? Do you think Hamilton and Burr thought of each other as "statesmen"??
Get a grip, Jack.
Yes, Musk's power is unusual. When was the last time the richest guy in the world got this personally and financially involved with a PotUS? You do not see the influence Musk has on Trump?
Disgust.
Go figure out something thoughtful to say.
You think Hegseth is a responsible choice who should have been confirmed by a Senate following the spirit of the CotUS rather than politically kowtowing to Trump?
You think that our framers did not view their contemporaries as statesmen??
Yes. Differences of opinion, rivalry, etc. to the point of hatred does not make someone a non-statesman. A statesman is defined by one's devotion to the nation and the CotUS, not by one's political / ideological views. Both Burr and Hamilton were statesmen.
This one is pretty clear. Do you have a different meaning for the word 'statesman'?:
So the Constitution can get up and enforce itself, without people to uphold it? And they call me pollyannaish. I am sure that you wish it were so, but only with the acceptance and buy-in of the people who are in power can the words of the Constitution manifest in the actual physical world. Throughout the limited history of the US we have been lucky to have, for the most part, people who are willing to respect, believe in, and care about the Constitution deeply and sincerely. There is no deep and sincere respect in the Trump camp for the Constitution. It is seen as something to be gotten around, not to be followed, much less revered. Since Congress is apparently abrogating its responsibility to check the powers of the President, that leaves it up to the Judicial branch of government. Let us hope that they can enforce their decisions, if they even decide to not play along with the powers that be.
Only if the politicians follow those rules. Your dismissal of this very real and present possibility does not make it less of a threat.
--
I hope every day that I am wrong about the direction that the current government is trying very hard to take the US in. So far, it looks as though I am absolutely correct.
It is wishful thinking at the very least.
Burr was widely, with good reason, considered a traitor.
Prior to that he was considered a demagogue, one of our first partisan machine politicians. I do not think anyone considered him a statesmen. Holding him up as one is laughable
And being well educated in history had a well founded skepticism of human nature and thus designed a system to thwart it as much as possible by diffusing what little power it gave the central government by diffusing it to seperate branches.
I'd point out yet again, that the same people so upset by Trump and company are the ones who so vociferously attack the Supreme Court when it tries to curb the executive's power on separation of powers doctrine. If they'd have had their way, Trump's powers would be even more encompassing.
Burr is complex with a history of mixed opinion ... and it is not the point.
The point was that our framers were by far statesmen. That they wrote the CotUS with the presumption that most of those elected to office would predominantly work for the good of the nation. They also, clearly, wrote the CotUS to account for human nature.
What they did not account for is what we have today — the vast majority of our politicians (and operatives) are partisan politicians pursuing their own interests well over that of the nation. They did not, for example, anticipate that the electorate would elect a scoundrel like Trump and that the Congress would essentially nullify its checks & balances by rubber-stamping most of what this scoundrel wants.
If the current crop of politicians —where finding a statesman is difficult— were in place during our founding, our CotUS would be quite different.
That has nothing to do with your presumption that congress is somehow going to "rubber stamp" something. You pretend congress isn't full of powerful, arrogant people. They didn't get there because they're agreeable.
Why. You've obviously given that up.
We're now into your ongoing campaign to condemn Trump, his supporters, and anyone neutral, indifferent, apathetic or otherwise failing to rise to your particular threshold of ideological zealotry. You have once again reframed your suppositions and opinions as though they are somehow irrefutable facts, no matter how obviously far fetched the underlying premises are.
You say this in light of Hegseth's confirmation. If that is not a rubber stamp then you are not going to recognize anything as a rubber stamp.
Emotional bullshit. Same old crap, Jack, when you run out of argument you make shit up and exaggerate.
Right. OK.
So.... what happened when Joe Biden tried to violate the Constitution by forgiving all the student loans? Do you remember?
How about when Congress themselves violated the Constitution with elements of the Affordable Care Act? Or the Patriot Act? Or the Defense of Marriage Act?
What about when Trump tried to rescind DACA? Or ban travelers from Muslim countries?
In every one of those instances, the politicians broke the rules. Opposing politicians squawked, sued, and the rules were enforced.
Do you see how this works?
In order for politicians to "stop following the rules", the ALL have to stop following them. There is too much power to be gained by holding the other guy's feet to the fire.
There is always a huge difference between what they promise they will do, what they actually intend to do, and what they actually can do.
It's going to be fine.
At least he came out and de facto admitted he's a trump supporter
Probably, but this condescending theme of yours of 'there is nothing to see' is clearly off-base. When Trump threatened his tariffs you tried to make fun of those of us who recognized that even the rhetoric is damaging. Now, given China's reaction, we have gone beyond that.
When Trump makes stupid moves (or illegal moves) it is perfectly rational to criticize those moves. Mere criticism is not emotional over-reaction, it is often analysis — especially when supported by an argument.
It is easy enough to dismiss events as 'nothing is going to happen, everything will be fine'. It is much harder to actually be correct.
Not sure you were around when the SCotUS was considering the immunity case, but I would not be surprised if you would have claimed that people were overreacting when the SCotUS decided to actually hear the case after delaying it. In the end the very unlikely did indeed occur. The SCotUS ruled in favor of Trump (and beyond). That coupled with their delay tactics which killed any chance for a trial prior to the election illustrated that we actually do have an activist SCotUS in place. Turns out there was indeed something to see and analysis was modest compared to what actually transpired.
Thank you.
Well then, by all means, lose as much sleep as you like over it.
When I make fun of you, I'll definitely succeed. As it turns out, the rhetoric was only damaging to people who had already decided to be damaged.
Sure. And you won't have to wait long. So why do you do this thing where you take whatever the story of the day is and try to convince yourself and everyone who will listen that it's automatically Trump being stupid or illegal?
I took a break for a while. But I don't even need to read the comments to know people over reacted. It's an automatic for some folks around here.
And there we are.
lol …. Attack mode engaged eh?
The rhetoric was Trump's rhetoric. The damage was to international relationships. You still trying to claim that Trump's rhetoric did not damage our international relationships?
Trump has been making stupid moves almost on a daily basis. Instead of recognizing this you defend Trump by pretending his critics are only critical because he is Trump. It is a pathetic game you, et.al. play but since defending Trump with truth is hard to do, it does not surprise me that dishonesty, exaggeration, misrepresentation ensues from his apologists.
Yeah, except that the SCotUS wound up doing worse than what was expected. So ... not an overreaction by definition. Your underreaction, by the way, accomplishes nothing of value. You wind up being wrong, but that is not valuable.
Of course, nothing to see here. The SCotUS did not implicitly amend and explicitly contradict the CotUS.
Doesn't seem like it or your left wing media would be harping on it 24/7. They are not.
How could you possibly not recognize that Trump has damaged international relationships?
Do you think that China imposing more tariffs on the USA is a positive or negative indication? News from today:
Have you paid any attention whatsoever to what Canadians are saying? News from today:
How could you possibly think that Trump's threats and then imposed tariffs coupled with insults (e.g. 51st state) do NOT damage our international relationships?
It is nothing but show from both sides, but you continue to opine that it is fact.
Once things go the way both sides want, the tariffs will go away. I presume you are old enough to understand this is not the first time this has happened.
"How could you possibly think that Trump's threats and then imposed tariffs coupled with insults (e.g. 51st state) do NOT damage our international relationships?"
It's Canada. They rely on us more than we rely on them. How can you possibly think anyone with a brain cell cares about what Cananda thinks of us.
What amazes me is how many “Americans” here seem to favor trade advantages for Canada/Mexico and not for America.
That must the liberal US patriots I’m always hearing about here.
Yep
Moving the goalpost; this is not whether or not you or anyone else cares but rather what Canadians think of the US.
You tacitly acknowledge that the relationship has been damaged while attempting to argue that it has not been damaged.
Your post is ridiculous.
And your post shows a sophomoric understanding of Trade negotiation tactics.
Another platitude from you. Just pull them off your list, Sparty. They have no justification, just more bullshit.
Well tig, this isn’t about me. So let’s see if someone in the back room will grow a pair and recognize that.
Not holding my breathe.
No this is about the bullshit platitudes you post.
You offer no rebuttal, just (in this case) a personal insult. Yet I wrote about what you post.
In which very few want to associate with.
Some people are lazier than others.
You just agreed with what I had posted. At least that is a start.
"You tacitly acknowledge that the relationship has been damaged while attempting to argue that it has not been damaged."
My post stands as originally posted.
There is no damage. Only the butthurt liberals believe it is.
"Your post is ridiculous."
Ironic
One persons platitude is another persons profundity. I rarely take your posts as the latter either so we have that in common.
As for the personal insult. You do worse here daily and rarely if ever get ticketed. Your accusation is as hollow as it gets.
I expect tickets for less. It’s the only way some here think they can win.
They are booing the US national anthem at hockey games in Canada. I doubt if hockey game crowds are hot beds of liberalism.
And some here just love the sound of their own voice.
So what?
That affects you how?
Never.
You beat me to it
Sparty and TG and anybody else; QUIT THE PETTY SLAP FIGHTING!
There has been a few token tickets.
Very few …..
Otay
thanks
Martha Stewart’s best-selling first book, “Entertaining,” has long been out of print. But two recent documentaries have made her popular with a younger generation, and many influencers have tried to buy vintage copies.
The publisher is now promising to reprint it in all its 1980s glory.
A testament to the woman of no emotion who tried to teach baby Boomers & their children how to entertain guests.
Musk operates at Trump's pleasure. The president told reporters on Monday that the billionaire had to seek approval from the White House for any of his actions.
"Elon can't do and won't do anything without our approval, and we'll give him the approval, where appropriate; where not appropriate, we won't. But he reports in."
Well, he is reporting in for duty.
And, to top it all off, like Trump, he's not taking a taxpayer funded salary.
Some on the left will probably complain if he is getting free coffee. If they were in charge of the congress there would probably be an investigation started. As it is all they can do is whine for the cameras and call for millions of people to go to Washington to whine with them. May be time to dust off the pussy hats except they are pretty much being ignored.
Satire? You would hope so.
https://babylonbee.com/news/trump-signs-executive-order-that-mediocre-male-athletes-have-to-try-harder?fbclid=IwY2xjawIRxalleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHUchmcweV9R1bF-HzqHTPxB7f8x1SNhIlBeZLmNtPSb542cX6ZucN7ZjSQ_aem_7n-yORdufSCD46zKH1eJTg
This is fine, and I think it’s better than the status quo. I wish two things about it.
First, I wish these things came from Congress, as opposed to EOs.
Second, I’d like to see some allowance for nuance and thoughtfulness on these issues from both sides. There are probably some trans-females out there who can play sports with cis-females in specific situations, and it’s not a problem. The Right’s need for an absolute ban is probably not necessary, but if we are going to choose one extreme over the other, I prefer this one. Additionally, while individual cases have been dramatic, this is actually super rare.
Much of the Left has vastly overreached on this issue, and really adopted an “anything goes” attitude. Many, rather than argue the merits, have taken to labeling anyone who wants to protect women’s and girls’ sports as “transphobic.” While that can be true, it often is used to accuse people unfairly.
We should be able to treat trans people with dignity and respect (for example, not assuming they are all sexual predators), but it also needs to be acknowledged that anyone who has gone through male puberty is going to have resulting physical advantages that can never be fully erased. Such advantages thwart a primary goal of women’s sports programs, which is to provide a fair playing field for women, which is necessary because of biology.
Insanity!
Today Trump declared sanctions on the International Criminal Court which deals with international sex trafficking.
Trump was on Epstein's flight log seven times that are confirmed. He said nice things about Epstein's girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell and said "he wished her well" after conviction.
He was named in the Epstein trial as a participant but the testimony of a teenage victim was excluded since in that case only Epstein was on trial.
His conviction in the E. Jean Carroll case and the existence of dozens of NDA's from other women who were also sexually assaulted doesn't go away just because Trump supporters block reality from their minds in order to live with putting him in office.
It also can't tell the difference between terrorists and the Prime Minister of Isreal.
Trump was on Epstein's flight log seven times that are confirmed. He said nice things about Epstein's girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell and said "he wished her well" after conviction.
Then why is that Dick Durbin has kept the Epstein files secret? Let the people see it.
Bill Clinton has been confirmed as having flown on the Lolita Express. Can you provide evidence that Trump did?
Bubba Billy's sex crimes are well documented.
We know for a fact that Obama turned children over to sex traffickers, i remember the left being outraged about trump wanting to verify that children were going to actual family members, but don't remember them complaining about Obama trafficking them.
Press shift and click the fact checker and provide the following claim "Did the Obama Administration Place Children with Human Traffickers?"
I you look at the single Google fact checker response at the bottom, it will show the seed incident in 2014 which created the exaggerated claim that people like you repeat.
It is true that "Some immigrant children were placed with human traffickers during the Obama administration.". It is false that the Obama administration knowingly did this and it is most certainly false that "Obama [knowingly was] trafficking them" as you have claimed.
So, either through incompetence or outright stupidity he accidentally gave children to human traffickers.....That is so much better, thanks for clearing that up. I'm sure the children trafficked feel so much better.
It has to be incompetence or stupidity, eh? You do not recognize that in large initiatives human beings make mistakes ... that deception/fraud occurs ... ?
I am sure you will be the first to call Trump stupid and incompetent when one of his initiatives is not 100% perfect in execution. Right, George, if execution is not perfect in every detail then the PotUS is necessarily stupid / incompetent?
So if Trump's deportation initiative winds up deporting some legal migrants, you will call Trump stupid and incompetent because of that alone?
One thing I've noticed is that certain people avoid facts.
You keep using this as a mantra yet you fail to show the facts that are ignored. It is getting to be comical.
I strongly suspect this is an attempt to follow Trump's utterly dishonest lead of "say something [even if false] enough times and people will start to believe you".
[✘]
I have zero chance of being first with the resident TDS sufferers posting deflections to cover for the incompetence of democrats. It was never Obama's, Bidens or Harris's fault, but trump is all powerful and responsible for everything bad.
Or make them up when it comes to trump, when they are opinions, opinions not shared by a large portion of the American people.
Are you ready to answer a few questions?
Try this one: Does it make any sense to have a military training mission, at night in a busy civilian airport?
How about the control tower: Why would one controller be handling panes and helicopters using different frequencies?
Or this: Did a controller go home early that night?
Or this: Isn't the Federal Aviation Administration still fighting a class-action lawsuit alleging it denied 1,000 would-be air traffic controllers jobs because of diversity hiring targets?
I couldn'tr make up enough facts about Trump that you wouldn't dismiss without even checking, cause you and far too many of the "American people" choose not to see, and that is your choice, and more than just an opinion.
Trump raised the proper questions and got people thinking.
The crash was a disaster that could have been avoided.
Think about whoever it was that ordered that training mission at night in that busy civilian air corridor. Should whoever it was be somewhat responsible?
And, of course, you avoid the question.
Expecting complex operations to be 100% perfect is absurdly unrealistic. Thinking that a chief executive is incompetent or stupid when the execution of a complex operation by others is imperfect is unreasonable.
Here is an example of executive incompetence / stupidity: Trump spouting off about relocating 2 million Palestinians and have the USA take ownership interest in Gaza and rebuild it into a "Middle East Riviera ".
The hazards have been brought up before and many dismissed them. It wasn't a matter of if an crash was going to happen. It was a matter of WHEN it was going to happen.
Training is designed to be as realistic as possible. There have been a significant number of training missions launched in that area under the cover of darkness using night vision.
And yet there are now reports of Biden or trump or Clinton or anyone else making this catastrophic mistake, if this was trump we would all be subject to 500 paragraphs from you about defending trump and here you are defending slavery.
[deleted] [✘] your comments criticizing others about trump. Obama the buck stops here president, and he was in charge when they gave kids to traffickers, THIS IS A FACT! and you are complaining about something that hasn't happened, because trump pathetic and weak!
i am a sit down comedian evcery damn day have i personally insulted myself
what exactly are you comparing this to that Trump duid?
Not my area of expertise. Do you have some information that says this training mission was not authorized by military leaders or that it was unusual given its purpose was to transport VIPs? You know they need to practice night flights before they actually carry a VIP on one. Right?
Again, how would I know? I can only say that this has been reported as a controller doing the job of two people. Clearly this is a fundamental failure of control tower operations. Do you have some reporting that definitively answers the question you posed?
Do you know something? If so, provide the answer.
Ahh so you presume that the control tower was understaffed strictly because of diversity hiring. Are you going to wait for the facts or just gonna go with your hypothesis?
Is it your position that the key reason this accident happened was because the pilot was female?
Just another example of your ridiculous stereotype. You are literally making shit up which is contradicted by my comment history.
And for you to spin this as me defending slavery. Just amazing.
Do you not understand that the more outrageous your exaggeration the more people will simply shake their heads and dismiss the utter nonsense you are posting?
Get a grip, George.
You started this by implying Obama intentionally/knowingly handed over kids to traffickers.
I called you on it and now you are shouting and penning highly emotional posts.
I noted the mistake that took place yet you now restate it as if I had denied it. Totally dishonest. But it is NOT a fact that Obama knowingly handed kids to traffickers and it is NOT a fact that this was a routine event (as opposed to one of the many failures that will always occur in complex initiatives).
Bottom line, George, you state a fact that I had just stated and ignore the obvious fact that failures happen in complex initiatives and that 100% perfection is an unrealistic expectation.
Get a grip.
Well of course he could have been avoided. Most accidents could have been avoided. That statement is a platitude.
Do you have any facts that show that this is an unusual / wrong thing for the military to do? They will be flying VIPs at night so it seems to me that they should practice that maneuver. So if you have any facts, deliver them. Your speculation is pointless.
Correct!