413 private links
Democrats have set a precedent, and you better believe they should be made to live by it. //
The genie is out of the bottle, and it's not up to Republicans to unilaterally shove it back in. Make Democrats suffer under the new rules they set until they beg for mercy, and when Joe Biden walks out of the White House, he should be immediately prosecuted for illegally retaining classified documents, among other alleged crimes.
There is no option to play nice anymore. Republicans tried to keep things within the lines. Democrats stepped over them for what they feel will be cheap political gain. Forget the crying. That's not going to help anything. Make them pay, and make them pay hard. Any Republican not willing to do that doesn't deserve to be in office. //
Right now is the time to get up off the mat and do everything possible to make Democrats regret this for the good of the country and the credibility of the judicial system. //
bpbatch 24 minutes ago
The Democrats just implemented the judicial version of separate lunch counters and drinking fountains, and it's time for conservatives to move to the front of the bus. //
Weminuche45 9 minutes ago edited
i dont think there are very many Republicans who have any clue what they are dealing with on the left, at all.
"Counterrevolution and conservatism have little in common. In the struggle against Communism the conservative is all but helpless. For that struggle cannot be fought, much less won, or even understood, except in terms of total sacrifice. And the conservative is suspicious of sacrifice; he wishes first to conserve, above all what he is, and what he has. You cannot fight against revolutions so."
- Whittaker Chambers "Witness" (Cold War Classics)
Conservatives are all but helpless. They lack the discipline, the self-sacrifice, indeed the courage. It is hard even for conservatives to even remember Chamber's admonition that they face an enemy having no moral viewpoint in common with themselves whatsoever.
This is your wakeup call.
After deliberating for 11 hours, a New York jury found former President Donald Trump guilty on all 34 charges of falsifying business records to hide “hush money” payments in 2016 to former adult film performer Stormy Daniels.
Trump faces up to four years in prison.
Trump spoke about the verdict as he came out of the courthouse. He called it a “disgrace.” //
John Roberts @johnrobertsFox
·
Judge Merchan just told the jury that they do not need unanimity to convict. 4 could agree on one crime, 4 on a different one, and the other 4 on another. He said he would treat 4-4-4 as a unanimous verdict.
2:52 PM · May 29, 2024
DJ Judd
@DJJudd
·
Follow
Biden's campaign is holding a press conference outside the NYC Courthouse where former President Donald Trump's defense team is opening closing arguments in his hush money trial
1:43 PM · May 28, 2024 //
Natalie Allison
@natalie_allison
Biden campaign is about to hold their first press conference outside the courthouse where Trump’s trial is ongoing. Trump’s communications team is standing by, telling reporters they’re going to speak too.
2:26 PM · May 28, 2024 //
RNC Research
@RNCResearch
·
Follow
LIE OF THE YEAR: A Biden campaign spokesman claims they're not holding a press conference RIGHT OUTSIDE THE COURTHOUSE where the Biden-led witch hunt is taking place "because of what's going on over there"
2:36 PM · May 28, 2024 //
RNC Research
@RNCResearch
·
Follow
"Do you consider Trump a threat to all these wars Biden has gotten us into?"
BIDEN SPOX: "Any media questions?"
"Is this a weaponization of the Justice Department?"
BIDEN SPOX: "Any media questions?"
"You won't answer the real questions — only the fake news?"
2:58 PM · May 28, 2024 //
RNC Research
@RNCResearch
·
Follow
REPORTER: What's your response to people who say you're running on January 6th because you can't run on Biden's record?
BIDEN CAMPAIGN SPOX: "That's absolutely absurd because we are running on a historic record of accomplishments!" 🤡
3:01 PM · May 28, 2024
GBenton
15 hours ago edited
Vote like your life depends on it for Trump in November.
Dems are 1 or 2 moves from checkmate.
1) Vote to end the filibuster
2) Pack the Supreme Court and unleash every unconstitutional idea they have, including legalizing 30m migrants who could then turn Texas and or Florida blue.
We would still have elections to keep up appearances, but it would be like CA now where you just find out which Democrat won.
If it were not for illegals given Amnesty by Reagan, CA might still be a red state. It's only gotten worse since. We cannot risk repeating that mistake.
Illegals pad their House seats and EC votes. And that's just CA. How many states are blue now just because of the impact of illegals?
Raskin and Sheldon are telling you this is what they want to do. Believe them.
Vote Trump. He's the only one besides the Dem nominee who could win.
Anyone who stays home or votes 3rd party better feel super confident that the rest of us are gonna save the country for you.
Saying you hate both candidates is childish. One of them is going to win.
Biden (or any Democrat) WILL support finishing what Joe Biden and Obama started.
Trump will fight to restore the republic. You may not like him or believe he can succeeed, but you best believe a fresh Democrat administration would believe they have a mandate to tell us all to sit down and shut up.
They've worked 100+ years to get here. This may be our last peaceful chance to reverse course.
I hope I'm wrong. But do you want to bet on it?
It’s a dry heat
9 hours ago edited
Just to be clear, including a provision in the direction for conducting the search warrant specifically authorizing heavily armed men to use deadly force is not deemed by Smith as creating "a significant, imminent, and foreseeable danger" to a former President and his family is perfectly okay; but for Trump to recite verbatim this authorization to use deadly force against him and his family somehow creates an intolerable risk to Smith and his goons? That's the argument? Oh please, someone play some tiny violin music while Smith cowers against the possibility that the FBI threat to kill Trump might make some people mad.
Smith should include in his request that Trump not make mention of the fact the FBI staged that infamous photo of the so-called classified material that it recovered. When I read that it made me really mad.
Donald Trump didn't tell citizens of the Bronx that he would be giving them never-ending government handouts or redistributing wealth to them to tackle the borough's problems. What he did say was that he knew how to repair an economy that Joe Biden and the Democrats have ravaged, so that Bronx residents could pick themselves up by creating jobs, businesses, and education. He didn't offer them serfdom; he offered empowerment. It is that declaration — that the residents of the Bronx are not victims in any way, that they can tackle their borough's issues, the same ones many other places in America have, like crime and poverty, by themselves in a way that helps them all succeed.
In his commencement speech at Morehouse College, Joe Biden told the graduates that America hates them because it is racist. He told them they "have to be 10 times better than anyone else to get a fair shot," that "black men are being killed in the streets," and black communities are left behind. Many of those graduates turned their back on Joe Biden and his worn-out scare tactics and his and the Democrats' every-four-years promises that are designed to get votes but not designed to be kept. //
brookie
3 hours ago
When President Trump paused because someone in the crowd was having a medical event and asked if there was a doctor in the house and then waited until the incident had resolved itself is why so many folks love him.
FBI documents included in the unsealed filings also revealed that shortly before the raid was authorized and executed, Trump was cooperating with the FBI. //
Julie Kelly 🇺🇸
@julie_kelly2
·
Follow
I believe the redacted name is Trump's attorney.
He advised Trump not to permit the feds into another area of MAL. Trump overruled that counsel and let Bratt and FBI into the basement storage area where boxes were located.
Two months later, Bratt initiated the armed,… Show more
7:17 PM · May 23, 2024. //
In August 2022, the FBI did not believe that it was necessary to raid Mar-a-Lago. See Ex. 1 at USA-00940268.
I observed one of the most remarkable wrong-headed biases I have ever seen. The judge actually threatened to strike all of Costello’s testimony if he raised his eyebrows again.
That of course would have been unconstitutional because it would have denied the defendant his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses and to raise a defense.
It would have punished the defendant for something a witness was accused of doing.
Even if what Costello did was wrong, and it was not, it would be utterly improper and unlawful to strike his testimony — testimony that undercut and contradicted the government’s star witness.
The judge’s threat was absolutely outrageous, unethical, unlawful and petty.
Moreover, his affect while issuing that unconstitutional threat revealed his utter contempt for the defense and anyone who testified for the defendant.
The public should have been able to see the judge in action, but because the case is not being televised, the public has to rely on the biased reporting of partisan journalists.
But the public was even denied the opportunity to hear from journalists who saw the judge in action because he cleared the courtroom. //
There is absolutely no good reason why a trial of this importance, or any trial, should not be televised live and in real time. Allowing the public to see their courts in action is the best guarantee of fairness. As Justice Louis Brandeis wisely said a century ago, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”
UpLateAgain Lightning47
5 hours ago
The raid should NEVER have been authorized. It was total BS. But should the language restricting the use of deadly force have been removed from the op order? Absolutely NOT. The Deadly Force Policy RESTRICTS the use of deadly force. It's not a green light to use it. It specifies the only conditions under which it can be used. Police at every level (including the FBI) are commonly reminded of the department's shooting policy before an action. To remove it would be LEGALLY seen as inviting gun play. //
GBenton Lex Naturae
4 hours ago
As in War Games, the only way to win this is not to play.
There should have been no raid. The language, per se, is not the real issue. Every raid has the language for a reason. But it IS a very big freaking reason why they never, ever should have done this. //
GBenton mikwcas
5 hours ago
yeah, we're witnessing fascism, Communism, and tyranny. And we're parsing whether the use of force order was extraordinary.
We need to make them live by their own rules. They hype up nonsense into crimes. Well, turn around is fair play. They create a scenario for an illegitimate raid that included potential for use of deadly force, they gotta own it.
Tone it down? No. Wrong answer. Shout it from the rooftops. Biden tried to kill Trump if the circumstances allowed. And Jack Smith tried to frame him and set up the hit.
Oh, it's not unique to Trump. SO WHAT?
The entire raid shouldn't have been used in the first place. And this only makes that a zillion times more true. //
GBenton bk
5 hours ago
Good people project their good nature on others. It's hard for some to see that evil is being done intentionally on our soil by our government. Conservatives want to have faith in law enforcement and the legal system. But it's all been perverted.
The bottom line is they are manufacturing fake crimes to persecute Trump and those around him, not to mention Christians, parents, etc.
We should not ever again give these filth the benefit of the doubt. When our side gets back in power, and it will happen some day, odds are, the game needs to change: They need to be prosecuted for their actual crimes and abuse of power.
The Bush/McCain/Romney doctrine of let bygones be bygones is suicide. Only one said plays by the rules so the game is rigged against us.
Or, we could keep taking the high road, not pushing every advantage, and let them basically win by default over time. //
GBenton Susie Moore
4 hours ago
Agree 100% Characterizing it as a "hit" is over stepping.
But that the order made it possible use of force could have resulted in death underscores how wildly irresponsible this raid was in the full context.
There should never have been a raid if that inherently involved a risk of loss of life over documents, etc.
The FBI was authorized to use “deadly force” against former President Donald Trump when the Biden administration agency raided Mar-a-Lago in search of classified documents, according to newly unsealed court documents shared on X by independent journalist Julie Kelly.
Attorney General Merrick Garland personally approved the unprecedented raid on Trump’s Florida home in the summer of 2022, after which special counsel Jack Smith indicted Trump for allegedly mishandling classified documents. Notably, President Joe Biden also retained classified documents following his tenure as vice president but was not charged by his own Justice Department because prosecutors said he would likely “present himself to the jury, as he did during our interview with him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”
A newly unsealed operations order reveals the FBI was authorized to use deadly force against the former president if need be, Kelly reported.
Alvin Bragg's Case in Shambles After Michael Cohen Admits to Stealing From Trump and More – RedState
Jonathan Turley
·
9h
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
Blanche just got Cohen to say that he handed over $20,000 in a paper bag to close end a financial dispute. There is something quintessentially Cohen about the scene...
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
...Weisselberg later paid Cohen for $60,000 rather than $20,000. Cohen admits that he stole from the Trump organization. He also told federal prosecutors about stealing the money but was never charged with larceny...
2:12 PM · May 20, 2024
Jonathan Turley
·
9h
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
Replying to @JonathanTurley
...These are hits below the waterline for Cohen but also the prosecutors. They had a man admitting to a major larceny but never charged Cohen. That made Cohen not only their man, but allowed him to keep stolen money...
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
...Blanche is now going in for the kill. He was that he lied to Weisselberg and "to this day you have never fixed that" and disclosed this to the District Attorney...
2:14 PM · May 20, 2024 //
I can say with some certainty that in any normal situation, having the prosecution's star witness admit to being a dishonest thief would be a death blow to the case's credibility. Remember, everything revolves around Cohen, who is now claiming to be a patsy who was just doing the bidding of Trump in cutting the check to Stormy Daniels. //
FloridaTransplant
8 hours ago
Hey wait up. If the DA knew about the theft, didn't fix it, didn't inform the trump organization, and didn't prosecute, doesn't that make everyone involved in the DAs office and accessory to grand larceny? Arguably even conspiracy to the crime? //
FloridaTransplant DKnight
8 hours ago
Yes. Prosecutorial discretion is a thing. If for example the Trump organization discovered the fraud and reported it. Here however it seems that the DA discovered the fraud in the trial prep and DID NOT REPORT IT to the Trump organization. That is what should make them an accessory.
Jonathan Turley
·
6h
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
Replying to @JonathanTurley
...Merchan is allowing the prosecutors to repeatedly illicit a statement from Cohen that it is not true when he said that there was no campaign violation. He is overruling defense objections. So the jury is hearing over and over again on the existence of a violation...
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
...Merchan just allowed Cohen to testify on the legality of payments to Daniels. He then overruled another objection to prosecutors saying that he pleaded guilty to campaign violations...
4:23 PM · May 20, 2024 //
In case you've a hankering for whiplash, the prosecution also introduced a waiver of attorney-client privilege between Cohen and Costello, in which Cohen indicated he never considered Costello his attorney, and contradicted his previous testimony that their (multiple) communications were privileged. //
here's an explainer from CNN regarding what the prosecution is attempting to prove:
Prosecutors need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump falsified business records with the intent to commit or conceal another crime, but they don’t have to prove that Trump committed that crime. The prosecution's theory is that the second crime could be in violation of federal and state election laws or state tax laws regarding how the reimbursements to Trump's ex-fixer and attorney Michael Cohen were handled.
In other words, the prosecution doesn't need to prove that Trump actually committed an underlying crime — just that he falsified the records with the intent to commit or conceal said crime (which could be election law violations or state tax law violations). Assuming that Merchan doesn't direct a verdict on this (and there's little indication that he's inclined to do such), the jury instructions here are going to be key. //
Claudius54
an hour ago edited
... a porn star, a lying thief and an eye roller take the witness stand ...
[fill in your punchline here] //
Claudius54
2 hours ago
"While Merchan's rulings throughout the trial have largely favored the prosecution (and questions regarding his bias are understandable), that comment hints at Merchan believing the jury won't find Cohen credible."
Um ... I thought that lying under oath was considered perjury. If I read above correctly, the judge knows that Cohen lied and is willing to roll the dice and hope the jury realises that Cohen was untruthful rather than applying a remedy as a "matter of law"?? I this the gold standard in jurisprudence these days?
What exactly has the prosecution credibly proven (and provided evidence) that warrants a felony conviction? I predict that the jury will find Trump guilty ... of being Trump. //
bk
2 hours ago
Merchan: "I don't see any probative value for impeachment."
Unlike the "probative value" of all the tawdry BS testimony from Stormy Daniels. //
RSB
22 minutes ago
So this was fun.
Cohen's admission of felony grand larceny was interesting and especially as he says the prosecutor was aware of it and that they did not tell Trump of the theft. This goes outside the usual plea deal routine where someone pleads to a crime and gets immunity or other consideration for testimony. If true Bragg is open to criminal charges as is Cohen.
Merchan holding the directed verdict motion for consideration was also interesting. He has to see all the legal issues in the case. For example, contrary to CNNs thinking (which is what Susie recounted not her own thoughts) the prosecution DOES have to specify the underlying offense and must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump intended to commit that exact offense AND that he was aware it was an offense. Add in the utter lack of credibility of Cohen (which he alluded to) and he may (unlikely true) be thinking about deep sixing this whole thing. //
AdeleInTexas 41 minutes ago edited
After several weeks of trial evidence of a crime, maybe multiple felonies, has finally been uncovered — and Cohen was the perpetrator. https://x.com/bennyjohnson/...
KENNEDY: Well...this trial I think says more about our politics than it says about an alleged crime. Mr. Bragg, I don't know him either. My observation is that if you want to hide something from him, you put it in a law book. He's bringing a felony criminal trial, but he hasn't proved a felony. //
Bragg is charging Trump with what are essentially paperwork violations. Those wouldn't be prosecutable, though, if they didn't occur in the process of committing another felony. What is that felony? We have no idea and neither does the jury. At this point, it's not even clear the judge is going to make the prosecution define it. What we do know is that the Department of Justice, far from a friend of the former president, looked at all this and deemed there was no case.
There are also issues revolving around how Bragg managed to upgrade the misdemeanors surrounding the accounting of the "hush money payment" to felonies, which allowed the prosecution to get around the statute of limitations. In short, we have two misdemeanors that require an underlying crime, yet they've been upgraded to felonies based on a supposed crime that hasn't been defined. It's so stupid that even left-wing sources have been questioning the wisdom of it.
Bill Maher came out following the Stormy court appearance to completely dispute her contentions. He explained how he interviewed the actress in 2018, and when he gave her the chance to take the victimhood path, she sternly refused.
Daniels: "I have no idea. It is not a me too case. I wasn't assaulted. I wasn't raped. I wasn't attacked or raped, or coerced or blackmailed. They tried to shove me in to the #MeToo box to further their agenda. And first of all, I didn't want any part of that because it's not the truth, and I'm not a victim in that regard."
That is not only 180 degrees in opposition to her testimony, but on the stand, her account of the affair dropped many of the buzzwords and phrases heard from the movement. //
Steve Krakauer @SteveKrak
·
A journalism "tell" - look for what stories DON'T get covered.
On CBS' marquee Sunday show "Face the Nation," the NYC Trump trial didn't get mentioned at all. On CNN, only a passing reference. NBC relegated it to the final panel segment.
Doesn't bode well for the prosecution.
3:37 AM · May 13, 2024
It looks like the ‘strongest’ legal case against Trump is based on yet another set of lies from corrupt federal agencies. //
Recent court disclosures give two indications that federal employees could have planted the classified documents used to mire Trump and several aides into a sprawling investigation and an election-interfering court case. The first is the explosive evidence revealed Friday: For 11 months, the special counsel’s office hid that it misplaced some — we don’t know how many or which — of the same allegedly classified documents it claims Trump criminally possessed at Mar-a-Lago. //
Second, there’s the also newly uncovered fact that a federal agency sent “two pallets” of documents to Mar-a-Lago while the National Archives and Records Administration was setting up this documents case. It’s unknown who all had access to these document boxes during their packing, temporary storage in Virginia, and transit to Trump’s home. Were those boxes a setup too? Imagine if some boxes the feds sent amid NARA’s dispute with Trump were also boxes the DOJ can’t verify as being in their original state. //
We also learned just last week that the White House and Department of Justice lawyers colluded with NARA to develop what became the special counsel’s classified documents indictment, starting an entire year before the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago, according to documents reviewed by reporter Julie Kelly. Just the News reports the collusion between NARA and the White House could have begun as early as a few weeks into the Biden presidency, according to White House visitor logs.
So of course the classified documents case didn’t arise from concern over legal improprieties, as the complete lack of prosecution for the same conduct from Joe Biden, Mike Pence, Hillary Clinton, James Comey, and DOJ leakers also proves. It was a political hit from the beginning, using federal agencies and resources to strangle Democrats’ top political opponent and override the votes of half the country. Talk about an insurrection.
Simon Ateba
@simonateba
·
Follow
Ahead of Michael Cohen’s testimony against Trump Monday, @CNN legal analyst says, “I’ve never seen a witness who’s lied to Congress, who’s lied to court, who’s lied to the IRS, who’s lied to the Southern District of New York, who lied to his banker.” WATCH
3:49 PM · May 10, 2024 //
GBenton
10 hours ago
Alvin Bragg's running the biggest bluff in history and he's got nothing. I can see why they didn't want this case to go first. Between that lying harlot and Cohen and the judges disgraceful gag order and allowing reversable errors, they're boosting Trump's cred with the voters and possibly heading for an aquittal since at least two of the jurors are lawyers and know that this is a sh1tshow from top to bottom - not to mention there is no crime and Bragg has no jurisdiction to prosecute federal crimes.
I think Bonchie's hunch might be right. Hung jury or found not guilty since this case was NEVER ready for prime time and they just wanted to bloody up Trump with salacious nonsense like the Billy Bush tapes.
Florida case, toast. GA case, not likely to happen before the election. DC case - Gonna call it now, Supremes either send it back to the lower courts and it doesn't happen before the election or they rule he's got enough immunity to void that case outright.
And Trump is vindicated -- Jack Smith gets charged for his shenanigans and Biden destroys the Dem party by proving Trump right that the system is totally corrupt.
That's what it looks like right now. Far cry from what the Dems probably thought -- I think their goose was cooked when fatass James didn't bankrupt Trump with her fake fraud case and instead he's billions richer, lol.
One would think that the media would spend days, if not weeks reporting those details if they could verify that Trump was that president. But he wasn’t. That president was the mythical King of Camelot, the icon of the Democrat Party, and an equal to Lincoln in stature. John Fitzgerald Kennedy was that adulterous cad of a chief executive. //
A washed-up porn pin cushion and her story about blacking out and not remembering what happened should never have seen the light of day or the inside of a courtroom. Her new claims that it wasn’t “about the money” and her insistence that she was an apparent unwilling victim are equal parts garbage, legally irrelevant, and clearly intended to prejudice the 12-person jury. The scandalous testimony Judge Merchan allowed has been, without doubt, utterly irrelevant to the case at bar. Merchan is sheep-dogging a kangaroo court, a political show trial that the KGB’s Lavrenty Beria would be proud of.
I got your attention by leading with a false suggestion. Misdirection. That’s what the prosecution is doing in Manhattan. Trump wasn’t “banging” interns. And this trial isn't about Daniels or her claims. It's [supposed to be] about business documents. But the prosecution got what it wanted. A false suggestion that Trump may have raped Daniels.
Orange Man bad.
Byron York explains:
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has charged Trump with falsifying bookkeeping records of a nondisclosure payment in order to commit or conceal another crime, Bragg still hasn’t revealed what that other crime is. It’s really the key to the whole case. Without the other crime, there would be no charges against Trump in this matter. The fact that we — and that includes the defendant — still don’t know what the other crime is is one of the great injustices of a felony prosecution that never should have happened...[Bragg's] theory is that if Michael Cohen paid Daniels $130,000 in the fall of 2016 to keep her from going public with her story that she and Trump had a sexual encounter and then Trump repaid Cohen in 2017, then that was a campaign contribution and should have been reported to the FEC. The payments were made “for the purpose of influencing any election,” the theory continues, and the Trump campaign should have filed a document with the FEC listing among its campaign contributions and expenditures that it received and spent $130,000 for “hush money.”
If you think that sounds a little odd for an FEC disclosure, you’re right. That’s where one of the critical witnesses to be called by the Trump defense comes in. Bradley Smith is a former chairman of the FEC, and on many occasions, including long before Trump, he has argued that there are all sorts of things a candidate can spend money on that are not legally classifiable as “for the purpose of influencing any election.” ... Smith, having headed the FEC, has many examples from the commission’s enforcement of federal election law that illustrate his point. He knows what he is talking about, and it seems clear that his expert opinion is that paying off Daniels, no matter what one might think of it, is not a campaign expenditure or donation that FECA requires a candidate to disclose. The Trump defense plans to call Smith as a witness. Not because he has any personal knowledge of the Trump transaction but because he understands, and has enforced, the campaign law that Bragg’s prosecutors appear to be planning to use against Trump. But Merchan has forbidden Smith from testifying about most of the issues involved in the case.
Donald Trump plans to use special operations forces assassination squads to wage war on Mexican drug cartels if he's elected president. //
About a quarter million US citizens die each year from overdoses of drugs brought into the US by Mexican cartels. This indirect cost is on top of the 30,000+ annual cartel-related murders. //
I think adopting a strategy the Romans used to defend the frontiers of the Empire makes a lot of sense.
When Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador took office in December 2018, the CIA concluded that drug groups controlled about 20 percent of Mexican territory. By 2022, the US Northern Command concluded that up to 35 percent of Mexico was under direct control of drug cartels. That does not seem like success. If that trend line continues, Mexico will be a narco-state within four years. The drug cartels directly employ about 170,000 people, making it that nation's fifth largest employer. If you consider people who make a living supplying goods and services to the cartels, they are probably the most significant economic engine in Mexico. //
With it becoming more evident by the day that the Chinese government is working hand-in-glove with the cartels to ensure fentanyl wreaks havoc in America, it has come time to recognize that we are facing a military problem, not a law enforcement problem. //
Our southern border is with a failed state. Its government can't enforce its laws, and it isn't a useful partner for keeping our border secure. Where the law ends, lawlessness flourishes. The situation here is no different from piracy in the 17th-century Caribbean ... //
... we can use the doctrine of Hostis humani generis to raise the cost of doing business for drug cartels and staunch the slaughter of millions of Americans in the process. //
ConservativeInMinnesota
12 hours ago
Drugs kill far more Americans than all of our wars ever have. We lost around 58,000 in Vietnam and 418,000 in WW2. We’ve been losing more than 100,000 Americans a year to just Fentanyl since 2021.
We went to war over 3000 deaths on 9/11 and 2400 in Pearl Harbor. How many Americans do we let drug cartels kill before we decide it’s time to shut them down?
Maximus Decimus Cassius writeofcenter
3 hours ago edited
For the left, the end justifies the means--any means. And the fact that the legal community writ large is not up in arms about this travesty of justice tells us all we need to know about the ethics, morals and integrity of the "legal community".