The Frankish Reich

That is the idea. Do you think that if Trump had campaigned on "we need a weaker dollar" he would have won? His badgering of Jerome Powell is also part of this. Cheap money, lower interest rates, goose the economy today, blame the inflation that comes later on ... Joe Biden?

A fine and decent man who came to the Vatican at the right time. I didn't always agree with him when it comes to political issues. But when I disagreed his moral leadership caused me (and still causes me) to question where my political opinions are based more on convenience or poorly considered "necessity" rather than on Christ's teachings. I can only hope that the last days meeting with JD Vance has a profound impact.

We knew it was coming. In light of last night's 7-2 decision, even Trump's 3 Supreme Court appointees are officially Marxists.

I am disgusted by the attempts to reframe this as "mass immigration bad, therefore do whatever you want." We have a constitution that requires some form of due process. We have laws that we must follow. Do we allow lynchings again because, after all, that man is bad so who needs a trial?

Well, that's NY. And NYC. And probably Buffalo too; I haven't been paying attention. That seems to be what you get with one-party control of everything.

"Oilfield Rando" should study his constitutional rights before his next DUI stop. He can refuse to have his blood drawn. He may lose his driving privileges, but he can refuse.

Expect to be stunned by the revelation that Sirhan Sirhan killed RFK.

Yes, certainly ever since the Reagan Revolution tariffs have been considered counterproductive (and also contrary to any freedom agenda) by Republicans. The conservative economists eventually convinced Democrats of this wisdom, hence the free trade agreements negotiated by Clinton and Obama. Just another way in which today's so-called Republicans have revived the worst instincts and policies of old, forgotten Democrats. Bernie Sanders has morphed into Donald Trump.

Meanwhile, posting thousands of comments a year about how non-Trumpies are "communists" and probably groomers too is really, really effective from a rhetorical standpoint.

Absolutely right. It simply doesn't matter whether he's a good guy or a bad guy. Follow the law, fix your errors, get it right. Now I will say that from a political perspective, Trump has succeeded in reframing the question here, but only because the Democrats are so eager to make it about a poor "husband and father." The Democratic framing needs to be that Trump is thumbing his nose at court orders and the rule of law. The Democrats win that debate in the court of public opinion. They probably lose the debate on the "great guy" thing. They need to get smarter about not taking the Trump bait.

Not surprising. At least he knew the right continent.

I predicted this when Dobbs came out, repealing Roe v Wade. It will be the new Dredd Scott. It's on a slow simmer now, but the cases - prosecuting women and the people who assist them to travel out of state for abortions - are starting to percolate up the system.

Thanks for the question. As for Letitia James - she could be criminally prosecuted if the statute of limitations hasn't run. Since she's the NY AG, you'd probably be talking about appointing a special counsel if it's a state prosecution. It could also be a federal prosecution by the US Attorney. These are relatively minor things, but of course her critics are right: the whole Trump Organization case was also about a relatively minor thing, so maybe turnabout is fair play. As far as the fundraiser stuff: bad idea. Money and politics is now at it's absolute height. I'm not sure if it's allowed under the law, but as a former Fed employee I can say you should refrain from anything that gives the "appearance of impropriety." Yeah, this is the appearance of impropriety unless it is solely from anonymous donors. But who would donate anonymously? As for her law license: yes, there needs to be more of this. I am an equal opportunity old stuffed shirt here. We are taught that whether it involves representation in a case or your personal conduct, you are always a lawyer and owe everyone a duty of fair dealing. What she did should subject her to discipline. What Pam Bondi has done/said already should subject her to discipline, by which I mean an action by the applicable state bar to censure/suspend/disbar. As a sidebar, I had some dealings (more on the order of being on the email chain) with the DOJ attorney fired by Bondi for not being sufficiently combative. My impression: he was a young attorney at the time who set himself apart by being unusually willing to aggressively argue Administration (Obama, then Trump) policies. The kind of gunner who asks to be put onto the most controversial cases. And kind of a jackass to deal with. But even he reached his limit: he owed a duty of candor to the court, and when the court asked what efforts the Administration had made to bring people back, he frankly answered "I have not received a satisfactory answer." Thus ends his federal career. In general, she seems like a bad AG who has run afoul of all sorts of things that are sadly typical of someone with big political ambitions. State AG is often viewed as a stepping stone to Governor - you are a state-wide elected official who can hog a lot of headlines. Beware the type of person who wants that.

It used to be the right that would constantly remind us that we are a constitutional republic, not a pure democracy. This is about the Rule of Law, not about "democracy." Take a poll at various times and the majority would say that we need to eliminate free pro-Palestinian speech, or that we need to ban firearms, or that we shouldn't provide any kind of due process to people illegally here. That's why we have a constitution - a fear of pure democracy.

In this case, it was the position of the United States. And the order that he cannot be deported to El Salvador was issued under the authority of Attorney General William Barr. It's only very recently that the Trump Administration decided that we needn't follow the law when it protects bad guys. I think the drafters of the Bill of Rights would be more than a little surprised.

The opinion was by J. Harvie Wilkinson, a conservative judge who was seriously considered for the Supreme Court. Not a raving "lefty" or "commie." Just a patriotic American and constitutionalist who is disgusted by what's going on.

I just watched The Ten Commandments, as I do every Easter/Passover season. Yul Brynner looked pretty white to me.

Sounds like "from the river to the sea" in different words. And I can assure you that no Latin American gang member would ever ever ever have a tattoo in rainbow colors. But good enough for ICE agents trying to make a quota.

I have no idea where you live or shop. Meanwhile, I circle the Costco parking lot every weekend waiting for someone to leave ...

Umm, the average mortgage rate in the spring of 2000 was ... wait for it ... 8.5 percent. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make or what forgotten generation you belong to.

I'm sorry, were tariffs mentioned here?

Was bound to happen. Bessent is an old school Wall Street guy who made his career as George Soros' protege. He could bs his way into a place of supreme power by saying all the right Trumpy words, but he can't bring himself to take the next step in destroying our economy: exerting full political control over the Fed. Oh, you're gonna love the USA without an independent Fed ... Biden inflation will be looked at as the good old days.

Ignores the point that the poster in question is an unabashed one. No accusations needed.

Maybe A-1 (the sauce) will help you with the briefings? Moron and Sexual Harassment and Steroid Enabler.