mark
Raw Story
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 8:35pm
The Wall Street Journal's conservative editorial board laid into the Trump administration again Monday night as it actively fights against efforts to return a wrongfully deported man from a notoriously brutal Salvadoran prison to the United States.Kilmar Abrego Garcia of Maryland was mistakenly sent to a mega-prison last month, and the Trump administration acknowledged his deportation was due to an "administrative error." Garcia was deported on March 15, even though an immigration judge in 2019 barred his removal due to risks of persecution and torture by gangs. But the Trump administration invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1789 to mass deport alleged gang members, including Garcia, even though no evidence has emerged tying him to criminal activities. ALSO READ: 'Promoted our tormenter': MAGA fans vent disgust at Trump official's latest moveThe administration has said Garcia is no longer under the United States' jurisdiction since he is detained by Salvadoran authorities.And the Journal editors weren't having it, writing that the Trump Administration is fighting to "keep a man falsely expelled in a Salvadoran hellhole.""The Trump Administration’s never-back-down style is becoming a governance problem with overtones of cruelty," the editorial said.The administration said in its filing that the Constitution "charges the President, not federal district courts, with the conduct of foreign diplomacy and protecting the Nation against foreign terrorists." Solicitor General John Sauer, meanwhile, said the judge's ruling dictated to the U.S. “that it must not only negotiate with a foreign country to return an enemy alien on foreign soil, but also succeed by 11:59 p.m. tonight." That could, said Sauer, set a terrible precedent of “district court diplomacy.”"Not quite," the Journal retorted, pointing to another judge's rationale for denying the Trump administration's demand for a pause, which noted the facts of the case "present the potential for a disturbing loophole: namely that the government could whisk individuals to foreign prisons in violation of court orders and then contend, invoking its Article II powers, that it is no longer their custodian, and there is nothing that can be done.” That, the judge said, is a path to “perfect lawlessness.”"The Trump Administration hates to admit an error, but its obstinance here serves no purpose. Mistakes happen. Why not ask the Salvadoran government to send Mr. Abrego Garcia back to unite with his family?" the Journal concluded.
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 8:15pm
If President Donald Trump truly wants U.S. District Judge James Boasberg off the bench, he risks upsetting a pillar of the judicial establishment — particularly the conservative one.The New York Times reported Monday on the extensive ties between Judge Boasberg and Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, who was Trump's second appointment to the nation's highest court during his first term. Both men are graduates of Yale University's law school, and both are deeply respected by longtime conservative voices in the legal world. 17 of Boasberg's former clerks have gone on to work for the Supreme Court, and five of those clerks worked for Republican-appointed justices. Boasberg and Kavanaugh were also roommates at 61 Lake Place in New Haven, Connecticut.ALSO READ: 'Promoted our tormenter': MAGA fans vent disgust at Trump official's latest moveTrump has called for Boasberg's ouster after he ruled against him regarding the deportation of a Maryland resident to El Salvador, and Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) has already authored articles of impeachment against the judge first appointed to the Washington D.C. Superior Court by George W. Bush and elevated by Barack Obama. That man — Kilmar Abrego Garcia — had a court order in his favor specifically prohibiting him from being deported to El Salvador due to likely persecution from the current regime.Tim Fitton, who is president of the conservative Judicial Watch organization, told the Times that Boasberg is a "personable" jurist who is "excellent on the bench.""Some may view his opinions as conservative, and others may view them as liberal, but they’re all faithful applications of the law to the case before him," said former judge David Tatel, who was appointed to the Washington D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals by former President Bill Clinton.Even stalwart Trump ally Mike Davis of the conservative Article III Project admitted that Boasberg — who he derisively referred to as a "political actor," has well-connected "buddies" in high places. Davis told the Times that he was "way out over his skis" in ruling against Trump, and that it was an open question about whether his friends would "protect him."In addition to the deportation case, Boasberg is also presiding over another Trump-related case later this month. The veteran judge will be overseeing the case brought against several top national security officials within the Trump administration regarding their use of the Signal messaging app to discuss highly sensitive attack plans in Yemen last month.Click here to read the Times' full report (subscription required).
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 8:00pm
As President Donald Trump moves ahead with his plan to impose sweeping tariffs on imported goods from the rest of the world, one typically vocal pro-Trump figure has remained largely absent from the cheerleading — tech billionaire Elon Musk, who, according to The Washington Post, has fruitlessly tried to lobby Trump against his scheme.Musk, the de facto leader of the Department of Government Efficiency task force, has enthusiastically moved to lay off huge swathes of the civil service and suspend government agencies and programs across the board — but he and his businesses stand to lose billions from a shutdown of world trade."The attempted intervention, confirmed by two people familiar with the matter who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private talks, has not brought success so far; Trump threatened Monday to add new 50 percent tariffs on imports from China to go along with the 34 percent taxes he announced last week," reported Elizabeth Dwoskin, Faiz Siddiqui, Pranshu Verma, and Trisha Thadani. And insofar as Musk has spoken publicly about this matter at all, noted the report, he "posted a video to X in which the late conservative economist Milton Friedman touted the benefits of international trade cooperation — 'the impersonal operation of prices,' as he put it — breaking down the sources of the materials that go into a simple wooden pencil."ALSO READ: 'Promoted our tormenter': MAGA fans vent disgust at Trump official's latest move"Musk’s break with Trump over a signature administration priority marks the most high-profile disagreement between the president and one of his key advisers, who poured nearly $290 million into backing him and other Republicans in last year’s elections and has been leading the U.S. DOGE Service’s cost-cutting efforts since January," noted the report. "Musk has also disagreed with other members of Trump’s coalition on issues such as H1-B visas for skilled immigrants and on DOGE’s approach to government spending," which led to a brief revolt against Musk by some longtime MAGA activists.Trump's tariff plan imposes 10 to 49 percent import duties on goods from around the globe, including on uninhabited Antarctic islands that were singled out despite not having any trade or even people. The move has sent stocks into freefall and has economists concerned that America could slip into a recession within the year.Meanwhile, Musk is more publicly taking aim at White House officials who are bolstering Trump's trade policies, said the report. "Musk took aim at the administration official who has been key to developing the tariff plans, White House trade adviser Peter Navarro, lighting into his credentials. 'A PhD in Econ from Harvard is a bad thing, not a good thing,' Musk wrote."
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 7:45pm
A key Cabinet member for President Donald Trump has confused the business community and even gotten under the MAGA leader's own skin, according to a report.Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has played a key role in shaping Trump's economic policy — including helping craft the president's market-plunging tariff policy. But Lutnick is "frustrating" executives and senior White House officials, who have come away from encounters with Lutnick "exasperated," the Wall Street Journal reported late Monday, citing roughly a dozen people.Lutnick has "browbeaten" executives as he's pushed tariffs, taken often "contradictory" stances — including whether some imports ought to be exempted from tariffs — and now "frustration with him is "spilling into public view" as financial markets nosedive, according to the report.ALSO READ: 'Came as a surprise to me': Senators 'troubled' by one aspect of government funding billAnd Trump himself may be showing signs of wearing thin."Trump has asked why Lutnick is at the White House so often, and he has grown frustrated with his commerce secretary at times, advisers said, particularly when Lutnick grows emotional in White House meetings. White House officials said he is at the White House more than any other cabinet secretary," the Journal wrote.White House officials, meanwhile, complained he has a penchant for floating unvetted ideas to Trump, such as eliminating income tax for people making under $150,000 a year."White House staffers were also stunned when Lutnick went on Fox News in February and said the administration wanted to abolish the Internal Revenue Service. Several Trump aides said Lutnick hadn’t seemed to think through how the public might interpret the commerce secretary calling for the closing of the IRS in the middle of tax season," the report said.While the White House may be souring on Lutnick behind closed doors, publicly, officials are sticking by the Commerce secretary.“Secretary Lutnick has always been a staunch defender of President Trump’s America First agenda, and his immensely successful private-sector career makes him an integral member of and communicator for the President’s trade and economic team,” White House spokesman Kush Desai told the Journal. “The entire Trump administration is playing from the same playbook—President Trump’s playbook—to restore American Greatness from Main Street to Wall Street.”
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 7:30pm
President Donald Trump is pursuing a sweeping new economic order and shows no signs of retreating from his aggressive tariff policies, according to a CNBC host. Meanwhile, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent—calling it a “reordering” of trade and a “re-levering” of the private sector—says the administration expects thousands of fired federal workers will transition into the manufacturing jobs Trump aims to restore from overseas.In an interview published by RealClearPolitics over the weekend, Secretary Bessent was asked if he thinks there are enough people in the U.S. workforce to fuel Trump’s goal of dramatically increasing manufacturing in the U.S.Bessent explained that he believes factories will be automated and run by artificial intelligence, while the thousands of federal workers fired by the Trump administration will fill the manufacturing jobs.ALSO READ: 'Promoted our tormenter': MAGA fans vent disgust at Trump official's latest move“I think we do,” have the labor force to transition the U.S, from a mostly service economy to one with massively increased production, Bessent said.“I think with AI, with automation, with so many of these factories are going to be new. They’re going to be smart factories that I think, we’ve got all the labor force we need,” the Secretary said.“So what we are doing on one side, the president is reordering trade,” the Secretary continued. “On the other side, we are shedding excess labor in the federal government and bringing down federal borrowings? And then on the other side, that will give us the labor that we need for the new manufacturing.”“And we’re going to relever the private sector. So the private sector, in essence, has been in recession during the Biden years,” he said — a claim disputed by experts and data. “And this is an opportunity to right-size the federal government and unleash the private sector again, because it’s been hemmed down by excessive regulation, and it’s been crowded out by the government.”Political and investigative reporter Roger Sollenberger remarked that he thinks it’s “insane” that Bessent is “saying here is federal workers — the same people Trump et al describe as useless freeloading administrative bloat — are the people who will form the backbone of the new factory labor market.”Others have noted that many of the fired federal workers held office and “white collar” jobs, whereas manufacturing jobs often require different skill sets.Secretary Bessent, in fact, has been promoting the claim that the private sector has been in recession during the Biden years, for months.Back in February, reporting that “Bessent has a gloomy economic view,” Axios noted that “Bessent said … the private sector has been in a recession, but official economic data shows ongoing growth and hiring among private businesses.”In a “reality check,” Axios added that a “private sector recession is a regular recession by another name.” There was no recession during the Biden years.“‘The secretary’s comment flies in the face of productivity, GDP, and jobs data,’ Jared Bernstein, the former Biden-era chair of the Council of Economic Advisors, told Axios.”Bernstein also warned that it is “very important that the economics team sticks to the actual facts.”CNBC’s Kelly Evans on Monday wrote, “I don’t think this White House is looking for opportunities to back down. I think they view this as a one-time shot to remake the entire U.S. economic order, with high tariffs being a necessary catalyst for that.”“‘I believe that this is going to work,’ Bessent said,” Evans continued. “‘What I do know is that the old system wasn’t working. And if you look at a system that’s not working, you’ve got to be brave to change it.’ Does that sound like language from an administration looking for an exit route? Especially from Bessent, who has the most Wall Street experience of the bunch.”
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 7:08pm
President Donald Trump’s new trade threats targeting China prompted officials in Beijing to hit back with their own cryptic message on Monday – an escalation that CNN’s Erin Burnett demonstrated will have real-world effects on American consumers.“China punching back, aiming an ominous tweet moments ago at Trump,” Burnett said as she summed up Monday’s fast-moving events, which included the Chinese embassy’s official social media account simply tagging “@realDonaldTrump” in a post.“China responding to Trump's mind-boggling threat today,” she said, adding: “They posted it, though, just below a post they pinned moments before, which reads, ‘China will firmly safeguard its legitimate rights and interests. This is a typical move of unilateralism, protectionism and economic bullying.’”The primetime host used her Monday evening opening monologue to lay into the tariff war of words sparked by Trump’s Rose Garden “Liberation Day” announcement last week – which he followed up Monday with threats of even more tariffs on Chinese goods.“I said if that tariff isn’t removed by tomorrow at 12 o’clock, we’re putting a 50% tariff on above the tariffs that we’ve put on,” Trump told reporters Monday in response to China slapping retaliatory tariffs of 34%.“50% in a setting like that – I mean, it sounds deeply unserious,” Burnett chided. “It sounds made up, it sounds petulant. On what basis? another 50%.”ALSO READ: 'Not much I can do': GOP senator gives up fight against Trump's tariffs“So here's the situation,” Burnett said as she crunched the numbers for viewers.“Just going off the new tariffs in the past week, just those, buying something that was $10 from China a week ago – if you went online at Amazon, it came from China, it was 10 bucks – it would be $18.50 Wednesday. $10 a week ago, $18.50 on Wednesday,” she emphasized. “That's insane.”The CNN host reminded viewers that Trump has promised to slap 25% tariffs “on any country that imports Venezuelan oil.”“China is the largest importer of Venezuelan oil, so that would bring the total tariffs not to 104%, but 129%,” she concluded.Watch the video below via CNN or at the link here.
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 6:54pm
US President Donald Trump said Monday that he will undergo his "long scheduled Annual Physical Examination" on Friday at a military hospital near Washington. "I have never felt better, but nevertheless, these things must be done!" he wrote in a post on Truth Social.Trump, 78, is a prolific golfer who abstains from alcohol and cigarettes, but he is known to indulge in fast food and famously enjoys his steaks well-done.His earlier physical exams at Walter Reed Medical Center raised questions about the specifics of his health data and about the transparency of results.ALSO READ: 'We’ve made a mistake': Trump’s trade war sends GOP into frenzyA physical during his first term, in 2018, suggested the president should aim to lose 10 to 15 pounds but was generally in "excellent health." His doctor said there were no signs of "any cognitive issues," and that with a healthier diet, he could "live to be 200 years old."A year later, an exam found the 6-foot-3 (1.9 meter) Trump weighed 243 pounds (110 kilograms), up seven pounds since shortly before taking office, making him technically obese. It said he was taking medication to treat high cholesterol.In 2020, he told Fox News that he aced a test for cognitive impairment by repeating the phrase "person, woman, man, camera, TV." During Trump's presidential campaign in 2015, his doctor, Harold Bornstein, released a letter saying the candidate's blood pressure was "astonishingly excellent" and that if elected, "Mr. Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency."Bornstein later told CNN that Trump himself "dictated that whole letter. I didn't write that letter."
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 6:51pm
President Donald Trump has already perturbed markets and boosted the risk of a recession with his draconian worldwide tariff scheme — but there's another plan from his administration, less noticed by the media, that could also devastate U.S. markets, said Flexport CEO Ryan Petersen, and it concerns expensive new fees on container vessels bringing goods into America.Specifically, wrote Petersen, "On April 17th the U.S. Trade Representative's office is expected to impose fees of up to $1.5M per port call for ships made in China and for $500k to $1M if the ocean carrier owns a single ship made in China or even has one on order from a Chinese shipyard."This mandate, which comes as a controversial dockworkers' union just secured a promise, with Trump's blessing, to restrict automation at U.S. ports and reduce their competitiveness, is going to decimate U.S. trade and the local economies of second-tier coastal cities for a number of reasons, Petersen continued.ALSO READ: 'Not much I can do': GOP senator gives up fight against Trump's tariffs"Ocean carriers have announced that to reduce the fees they will skip the smaller ports like Seattle, Oakland, Boston, Mobile, Baltimore, New Orleans, etc. Some carriers have said they'll just move the capacity serving the U.S. to other trade lanes altogether," wrote Petersen. "This would be horrible for jobs in and around those ports, and really bad for companies, both importers and exporters, using those ports. Huge extra costs will be incurred as trucks and trains run hundreds of extra miles to the main ports on each cost."Meanwhile, he noted, large ports like New York, Los Angeles, and Houston, will be unable to handle all the extra traffic of ships skipping their old stops at smaller ports and delivering directly to them, with the result that they are "likely to become congested, similar to what we saw during Covid."But perhaps the "craziest" aspect of the proposal, wrote Petersen, is a mandate for 15 percent of all U.S. exports to travel on an American-made ship by 2032."There are only 23 of American made and crewed container ships in the world today, and they all service domestic ocean freight (Alaska, Hawaii, Guam, Puerto Rico, etc). They're all tiny compared to today's mega ships, and they're not even sailing to overseas ports," wrote Petersen. "The U.S. did not produce any container ships in 2024. And the number we produce in any given year rounds to zero. The reason is that American made container ships of 3,000 TEUs cost the same price as the modern container ships from China of 24,000 TEUs. One shipyard in China made more commercial ships last year than the total number the U.S. has produced since World War Two.""Given what just happened with the new tariffs tanking global equities markets, it would be crazy for the USTR to go through with this rule. If we want the U.S. to be competitive in global manufacturing, we need world-class port infrastructure and logistics connectivity," concluded Petersen. "In the meantime, U.S. manufacturers who have just had massive new tariffs placed on components and machinery sourced from abroad should brace themselves for impact because all indications are that this rule is coming on April 17th."
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 6:43pm
A former U.S. Department of Justice pardon attorney delivered sworn testimony before Congress on Monday, accusing her former agency—now under the leadership of Attorney General Pam Bondi—of “corruption and abuse of power.” She claimed that armed U.S. Marshals were sent to her home to deliver what she described as a “warning” from the DOJ, cautioning her about the risks of testifying.Liz Oyer “told U.S. media outlets that her firing came shortly after she declined to recommend restoring gun rights to actor Mel Gibson, a supporter of President Donald Trump,” Reuters reports. She reportedly was fired by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche on March 7.ALSO READ: 'We’ve made a mistake': Trump’s trade war sends GOP into frenzyCNN’s Kaitlan Collins last month reported that “Oyer says she was fired as the pardon attorney at the Justice Department within hours of saying she couldn’t add Mel Gibson to a list of individuals she recommended should have their gun rights restored.”“Within hours of my decision not to do that,” Oyer said, “I was escorted out of my office by DOJ security officers.”During her testimony, Oyer described the tense situation.“The letter was to be served at my home between 9 o’clock and 10 o’clock on Friday night,” she explained (video below). “I was in the car with my husband and my parents, who are sitting behind me today, when I got the news that the officers were on their way to my house, where my teenage child was home alone. Fortunately, due to the grace of a very decent person who understood how upsetting this would be to my family, I was able to confirm receipt of the letter to an email address, and the deputies were called off.”Oyer blasted the DOJ.“At no point did Mr. Blanche’s staff pick up the phone and call me before they sent armed deputies to my home,” she said in her testimony. “The letter was a warning to me about the risks of testifying here today. But I am here because I will not be bullied into concealing the ongoing corruption and abuse of power at the Department of Justice.”“DOJ is entrusted with keeping us safe, upholding the rule of law, and protecting our civil rights. It is not a personal favor bank for the President. Its career employees are not the president’s personal debt collectors.”“It should alarm all Americans that the leadership of the Department of Justice appears to value political loyalty above the fair and responsible administration of Justice. It should offend all Americans that our leaders are treating public servants with a lack of basic decency and humanity.”Attorney Michael Bromwich, who is representing Oyer, in a letter to DOJ called it an “unusual step” to direct “armed law enforcement officers to the home of a former Department of Justice employee who has engaged in no misconduct, let alone criminal conduct, simply to deliver a letter.” He characterized the act as “both unprecedented and completely inappropriate.”Bromwich also challenged the administration’s apparent claim of executive privilege over Oyer’s testimony, calling it”baseless,” and wrote “that she is entitled to certain legal protections for whistleblowers.”According to NBC News, Bromwich also accused Blanche of appearing “to be using the Department’s security resources to intimidate a former employee who is engaged in statutorily protected whistleblower conduct, an act that implicates criminal and civil statutes as well as Department policy and your ethical obligations as a member of the bar.”Former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance, a professor of law and popular MSNBC/NBC News legal analyst, remarked: “Sending two armed marshals to a former DOJ lawyers [sic] home at 9pm to ‘deliver a letter’ when they’re in email contact with her or could have just called smacks of an effort to intimidate.”CBS News justice correspondent Scott MacFarlane posted a copy of the letter Oyer was sent.Watch the video below or at this link.Oyer: Perhaps the most personally upsetting part of the story is the lengths to which the leadership of the department has gone to prevent me from testifying here today. On Friday night, I learned that the Deputy Attorney General’s office had directed the department’s Security… pic.twitter.com/Ah3wx9HD37— Acyn (@Acyn) April 7, 2025
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 6:26pm
Supporters of President Donald Trump’s hardline deportation policy took a victory lap on Monday following the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport Venezuelan migrants.The Monday legal win for Trump overturned U.S. District Judge James Boasberg’s ruling temporarily blocking administration officials from moving forward with deportations under the wartime act– which an appeals court left untouched last week.The Supreme Court’s decision was cheered as “a landmark victory for the rule of law” by Attorney General Pam Bondi, a position others in the MAGA world echoed throughout social media. “An activist judge in Washington, DC does not have the jurisdiction to seize control of President Trump’s authority to conduct foreign policy and keep the American people safe,” Bondi concluded in a post on X. “The Department of Justice will continue fighting in court to make America safe again.”“Another huge win,” Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) wrote in his own X post. “Woke activist judges have no business blocking the President from exercising his constitutional authority.”ALSO READ: 'Not much I can do': GOP senator gives up fight against Trump's tariffs“MAJOR VICTORY: SCOTUS ruled in favor of President Trump and will allow deportations under the Alien Enemies Act to continue,” Rep. Tom Tiffany (R-WI) posted on X. “Judge Boasberg ignored precedent and must be held accountable. Now let’s get these criminal illegal aliens out of our country.”Former Fox News and NBC News host Megyn Kelly told her X followers she was still reading through the ruling but added: “Bye Judge Boasberg!”“SCOTUS just handed Boasberg his a-- on a platter,” MAGA influencer Gunther Eagleman wrote on X. “They ruled against him and granted Trump the power to use The Alien Enemies Act of 1798. The Lawfare is crumbling!” He later added in a follow-up post: "This is HUGE! DEPORT THEM ALL! EXPEL THE INVADERS!"“HOLY S--- The Supreme Court handed Donald Trump a MASSIVE win against Judge Boasberg,” the right-wing X account MAGA Voice wrote. “All Rogue Judges should be disbarred. I LOVE ALL THIS WINNING.”
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 6:16pm
Legal experts unloaded Monday after the Supreme Court handed the Trump administration a win in its effort to deport migrants it suspects of being gang members by invoking a controversial 1700s law.The court said Trump's administration can invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which was part of the Alien and Sedition Acts passed by Congress amid heightened tensions with France. The law gives the president wartime powers to detain, relocate, or deport non-citizens from enemy nations.Trump invoked the act last month to deport migrants that his administration suspects are members of the violent Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. This marked the act's first use since World War II.The Supreme Court vacated Judge James Boasberg's orders that barred Trump's removals using the law — doing so largely over venue, Politico's Kyle Cheney noted — but emphasized the administration must give migrants being deported "reasonable notice" and allow them to appeal their removal orders in court.ALSO READ: 'Not much I can do': GOP senator gives up fight against Trump's tariffsThe ruling didn't sit well with legal experts, however.Civil rights lawyer Leslie Proll chided on X, "When the lower court holds but the highest court folds…"Anna Bower, senior editor at Lawfare, wrote on X, "ah, yes, the ole 'keep a habeas petition in your pocket just in case you get disappeared' theory of due process."Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, wrote on X after the ruling, "Five justices had the gall to suggest that they were somehow charting a middle ground by allowing the removals to restart but saying that people must be given a 'reasonable time' to file a habeas lawsuit. DO THEY THINK EVERYONE IN DETENTION CAN AFFORD A LAWYER?"Reichlin-Melnick added: "How the heck are people WITHOUT LAWYERS all going to file habeas lawsuits -- even with notice from ICE? Plus, how would a judge even ensure the government FOLLOWS the Court's decision if all people can challenge is the invocation of the law, not the procedures surrounding it?"Patrick Jaicomo, civil rights litigator at the Institute for Justice, wrote on X, "The decision is disappointing in its application to people the gov’t already renditioned without due process (and seems to encourages the gov’t to evade judicial review), but SCOTUS confirms, contrary to what demagogues like @StephenM and @mrddmia have been screaming, that illegal aliens get due process and that the Alien Enemies Act requires notice and an opportunity to be heard *before* removal. This means habeas in the district of confinement."
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 6:03pm
Former Rep. Denver Riggleman (R-VA), one of President Donald Trump's harshest center-right critics, had nothing but hair-on-fire warnings to offer MSNBC's Nicolle Wallace in response to reporting that the president forced out the National Security Agency's director on the advice of a conspiracy theorist."National security folks felt like the country could survive one Trump term, but not two, and that is a dire assessment of most folks I still talk to," said Wallace. "What does that mean that we can't survive two Trump terms?""I think the American public needs to know there's a reason that you're seeing what you're seeing right now, is that loyalty trumps competence," said Riggleman. "And when you have somebody like Laura Loomer, who's a 9/11 truther, an election denier, somebody who's a fantasist, and somebody who might, and I would humbly submit, need psychological help — when that person is actually assisting the president in decisions like [firing NSA Director] Tim Haugh, who I met when he was a colonel at Nellis Air Force Base, this is an incredible man."ALSO READ: 'Not much I can do': GOP senator gives up fight against Trump's tariffs"I think what you're seeing right now is you're seeing loyalty over competence, but you're seeing madness over facts," he continued. "And when those two things happen, that's why, I think, people are saying we can't survive a second term, because the crazies are running the asylum and the sane have been pushed out.""The whole post-9/11 construction to counterterrorism was staying left of boom, meaning doing everything to avoid an attack — is that gone? Is that over?" asked Wallace."I think it is," said Riggleman bluntly. "I mean, when you're looking at this ... the rise of AI and the rise of polymorphist threats going after our networks, because I have an AI company, right? When you see the rise of threats, why are we taking the locks off the doors ... with cyber command? Why are we? Because at this point, we have a company like DOGE, and you have people with a bunch of twentysomethings underneath sort of this mad billionaire who actually doesn't understand how the government works. So you're bringing in people from the outside who doesn't know the nuance of the security apparatus.""You have, really honestly, neophites and wet-behind-the-ear idiots that are making decisions for the United States of America, and we shouldn't have twentysomethings running this country," Riggleman added.Watch the video below or at the link here. - YouTube www.youtube.com
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 5:39pm
The Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a win Monday afternoon as it allowed his administration to — for now — use a 1700s-era law to deport migrants it alleges are gang members.The court said Trump's administration can invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which was part of the Alien and Sedition Acts passed by Congress amid heightened tensions with France. The law gives the president wartime powers to detain, relocate, or deport non-citizens from enemy nations. Trump invoked the act last month to deport migrants that authorities said were members of the violent Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua. This marked the act's first use since World War II.ALSO READ: 'Not much I can do': GOP senator gives up fight against Trump's tariffsCritics have said the deportations were illegal because it the act has traditionally been restricted to wartime scenarios or invasions by foreign governments. But in an unsigned decision in the case, the Supreme Court allowed in a 5-4 ruling that Trump to invoke the law to expedite deportations while litigation over its use proceeds through lower courts. The court said deported migrants now must be notified they are subject to the act and be given a chance to have their deportation reviewed.“AEA detainees must receive notice after the date of this order that they are subject to removal under the Act. The notice must be afforded within a reasonable time and in such a manner as will allow them to actually seek habeas relief in the proper venue before such removal occurs,” the court wrote, according to NBC News.The ruling lifted an order last month that gained national headlines handed down by Judge James Boasberg in Washington, D.C., who blocked the administration from carrying out deportations using the law. Boasberg has a hearing planned Tuesday on whether to impose a longer-term preliminary injunction.Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson spoke out against the ruling in her dissent.“I lament that the Court appears to have embarked on a new era of procedural variability, and that it has done so in such a casual, inequitable, and, in my view, inappropriate manner,” Jackson wrote.
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 5:24pm
A Republican senator from a key battleground state is increasingly desperate for President Donald Trump to find an exit strategy from his tariff plan."Sen. [Thom] Tillis sounding the alarm on tariffs," reported Max Cohen from Punchbowl News. "Says the administration needs to start publicizing 'specific negotiations' with trading partners.""The markets are not going to cease in voting no confidence until they begin to see that," Tillis stated.Tillis, who faces a potentially high-dollar re-election fight next year, is far from alone on the GOP side in voicing concerns about the tariff plan. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), normally an outspoken footsoldier for Trump's agenda, warned on his latest "Verdict" podcast episode that “virtually every trading partner of America is reeling right now,” and that while it would be "great" if they did what Trump is hoping for and capitulate on their own trade restrictions, "there’s another way this could play out, which is other countries get p----d off, and they jack up tariffs, and they impose retaliatory tariffs on American goods, and the tariffs Trump put in place remain in place.”ALSO READ: 'Came as a surprise to me': Senators 'troubled' by one aspect of government funding billTrump's tariffs, announced last week as part of an event he called "Liberation Day," charge 10 to 49 percent in import duties for virtually all foreign goods around the world. His plan directly singles out desolate Antarctic islands that have no people, let alone industry or trade with the United States.Markets have reacted to Trump enacting the strictest protectionist trade regime since the 1930s with panicked sell-offs, as major stock exchanges slip into a bear market after months of growth. Trump has responded with a series of tirades on his Truth Social platform, calling investors "stupid" for cashing out in response to his trade policy and demanding they hold their assets.
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 5:12pm
House Speaker Mike Johnson ended his weeklong stalemate with congressional Republicans, whose insistence that members of Congress on maternity leave should be able to vote from home sparked an internal civil war – and led him to cancel all floor votes for the remainder of the week.But the start of the new week brought a fresh agreement that effectively ended the bipartisan push to change House rules to allow proxy voting for new parents, The New York Times reported Monday. The “watered-down solution” came after Johnson talked Donald Trump into supporting his position after the president publicly broke with the House speaker last week, the Times said.“Mr. Johnson has committed to allowing a convoluted arrangement to give a narrow group of lawmakers — women who face medical complications after childbirth that prevent them from being present in Washington — a way of registering their position on some legislation in their absence without actually being able to vote,” according to the Monday report.It’s a maneuver known as “vote pairing” that doesn’t require a change to House rules, “and is a far cry from allowing new parents in Congress to fully participate in legislating,” the Times added. But the move will allow Johnson to end the fractious GOP rule fight that threatened Trump’s MAGA agenda in the House.ALSO READ: 'Not much I can do': GOP senator gives up fight against Trump's tariffsThe arrangement has been used in the Senate “for more than a century,” the report said. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL), who bucked her own party’s leadership in her attempt to force a rule change to allow proxy voting, spun the arrangement Monday as a victory.“This is becoming the most modern, pro-family Congress we’ve ever seen,” Luna wrote in a social media post.But not all saw it that way.“Our shared goal has been to support new parents so they can do their jobs and vote on behalf of their constituents while also taking care of themselves and their families,” Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA) told the Times. “This ‘deal’ falls short of that goal — silencing new parents and perpetuating the status quo and the notion that Congress is ineffective and obsolete.”
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 4:58pm
A Cabinet official jetted to Florida over the weekend to press President Donald Trump to hone his message on tariffs — and put anxious Americans at ease — or watch the financial markets continue to crater, according to a report.Scott Bessent flew Sunday and warned Trump that the markets would continue to spiral if he didn't emphasize his endgame when it comes to his trade war, Politico reported.“Bessent’s view was, ‘The markets will keep melting unless you shift,’” one person familiar with the conversations told the outlet. “You’re not going to abandon the policy, but you have to talk about negotiating and what the endgame is.”ALSO READ: 'Not much I can do': GOP senator gives up fight against Trump's tariffsBessent, the outlet noted, is the first known Trump adviser who has tried to persuade the president to change how he talks about trade, "albeit privately and gently." Bessent has kept his suggestions strictly to messaging, but Trump may now be open to allowing "more room publicly for negotiations — including the possibility of cutting back on some of the aggressive international trade barriers he announced last week."The report comes after Trump enacted a slew of tariffs and sent financial markets into a nosedive. Last week, he announced a baseline 10% tariff on all U.S. imports. Some countries saw rates ranging from 11% to 50%. Tariffs on Chinese imports were hiked to an effective rate of 54%, while a 25% tariff was imposed on most imports from Canada and Mexico, and improts from the European Union were hit with a 20% tariff.
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 4:38pm
President Donald Trump sent House Republicans a stern message Monday afternoon — the Senate passed the GOP budget, now it's your turn.The Senate approved a budget resolution early Saturday after an overnight session. The resolution passed with a 51-48 vote along party lines and now awaits further action in the House of Representatives.Trump took to his Truth Social platform to firmly get his party in line.ALSO READ: 'Not much I can do': GOP senator gives up fight against Trump's tariffs"The Budget Plan just passed by the United States Senate has my Complete and Total Endorsement and Support. All of the elements we need to secure the Border, enact Historic Spending Cuts, and make Tax Cuts PERMANENT, and much more, are strongly covered and represented in the Bill," he wrote. Trump thanked Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) for their "hard work and attention to detail," and said there is "no better time than now to get this Deal DONE!" "The House, the Senate, and our Great Administration, are going to work tirelessly on creating 'THE ONE, BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL,' an appropriate name if Congress so likes," said Trump. "Everyone is going to be happy with the result. Passage will make, even the subject of World Trade, far easier and better for the U.S.A. THE HOUSE MUST PASS THIS BUDGET RESOLUTION, AND QUICKLY — MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"The Senate-amended budget resolution faces uncertainty in the House, where the plan has faced growing opposition among Republicans, including Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) and members of the House Freedom Caucus.Republican leaders have pushed for a vote as early as Wednesday. Should it fail in the narrowly divided House, GOP leaders may modify the plan or negotiate further with their Senate counterparts.The budget resolution includes several key provisions, namely making the 2017 tax cuts passed during Trump's first term permanent. It also authorizes an additional $1.5 trillion in tax cuts over 10 years, including measures like eliminating taxes on tips, and proposes raising the debt ceiling by $5 trillion.
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 4:15pm
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) delivered a biting preview of what Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg can look forward to as he prepares to face off against a Senate committee this week following bombshell whistleblower claims over the company’s associations with China.“These allegations are explosive,” Hawley said. “The public deserves to hear every single detail and they’re going to hear it on Wednesday.”The Missouri lawmaker – a staunch supporter of Donald Trump and his MAGA agenda – made the critical remarks about one of the president’s top billionaire supporters Monday during a Fox News appearance on “The Will Cain Show.” “I've had Mark Zuckerberg testify in front of me many times and he has said over and over that they never work with China, they've never made any concessions to Chinese Communist Party, they would never censor, etcetera, etcetera. By the way, we know all that's false,” Hawley said. "They've censored right here in the United States – the Hunter Biden laptop story, I mean hello – and now as it turns out, they were working hand in glove with the CCP.”Hawley, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism, also put Zuckerberg on notice that he could be slapped with criminal charges over the matter.“If he's committed perjury, Congress has access that we can take, we can hold him in contempt of Congress, we can refer him to the Department of Justice for investigation and prosecution – that I just want to emphasize – our investigation is just beginning,” Hawley said. ALSO READ: What happens when the people who once led the free world become the enemy of Democracy?He went on to tell host Will Cain that what was “really astounding” to him was Facebook’s reported work with Beijing to “build censorship tools” that he said could be used against American users. That includes facial recognition implementations, a “special kill switch” to suppress news, and other mechanisms that he said would allow the social media giant to “track dissidents,” according to Hawley.“This is incredible stuff,” he said. “All of it has been denied by Facebook, and that is what is so explosive here. It appears that Facebook has been lying to the public and lying to Congress for years now." “We’re going to get the truth on Wednesday,” Hawley concluded, adding that the whistleblower is cooperating fully with his committee. “We are going do a full scale investigation, and I can tell you, as a prosecutor, we will follow the facts wherever they go and we will give the truth and we will make it to available to the American people,” he said.
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 3:56pm
Former Justice Department prosecutor Liz Oyer appeared before a House and Senate "spotlight hearing" on Monday and spoke about the ways in which the department has operated under President Donald Trump's presidency. The hearing isn't an official one, as the Republicans are in power in the House and Senate, and only they can call an official congressional hearing. The lawmakers announced that they intended to focus on the attacks by President Trump and his allies against lawyers, law firms and the court, which includes bringing in some of the fired DOJ staffers. In her opening statement, Oyer told the Democrats, "Perhaps the most personally upsetting part of the story is the lengths to which the leadership of the department has gone to prevent me from testifying here today."ALSO READ: What Trump's unconstitutional executive orders are really meant to doShe explained that at approximately 9:15 p.m. on Friday night, she learned that the deputy attorney general's office directed the Department of Security and Emergency Planning Service to send two armed U.S. Marshals to her home to serve her with a letter. It was the same letter that had already been sent via email. The marshals, she was told, would arrive between 9 p.m. and 10 p.m. "I was in the car with my husband and my parents, who are sitting behind me today, when I got the news the officers were on their way to my house where my teenage child was home alone," she told lawmakers. "Fortunately, due to the grace of a very decent person who understood how upsetting this would be to my family, I was able to confirm receipt of the letter to an email address and the deputies were called off. The letter had been emailed to me just before 8:00 that night. At no point did Mr. [Todd] Blanche's staff pick up the phone and call me before they sent armed deputies to my home. The letter was a warning to me about the risks of testifying here today."She said she wouldn't "be bullied into concealing the ongoing corruption and abuse of power at the Department of Justice."The DOJ is entrusted with keeping Americans safe, she explained. That does not include being "a personal favor bank for the president.""Its career employees are not the president's personal debt collectors," she added. "I see only Democratic members here today, but this is not a partisan issue. It should alarm all Americans that the leadership of the Department of Justice appears to value political loyalty above the fair and responsible administration of justice." "I came because I don't want to be complicit in what is happening inside the Department of Justice, which is the misuse of the resources of the department to do political favors for friends of the president, for loyalists. And I just don't believe that that is right. I don't want to be part of it. So I feel I need to speak up," Oyer later said while answering questions. Oyer became well-known after she revealed that she was told to reinstate Mel Gibson's access to firearms despite his conviction of misdemeanor domestic violence in 2011. Anyone convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor or higher is prohibited by federal law from possessing firearms. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) walked through Oyer's story and how the request unfolded. "Now they are disputing your account, calling you a liar," Raskin said, noting that she submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for the documents that prove what she alleged. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) asked about whether the standard for Gibson applied to every other American. "You looked at the facts, whether you should recommend restoration of gun rights," Schiff said. "You did not consider friendship with the president or any other permissible consideration. You just looked at the facts. Is that right?"Oyer began by explaining that the matter wasn't one that they typically dealt with in her office. "This was very different, not the normal work of the office, but we jumped in and tried to do our best to support it because we understood it was a priority of the leadership of the department," said Oyer. "And in doing so, a primary concern was considerations of public safety. Would we be able to recommend someone could safely receive their firearm rights back? And that was my concern in the case that you discussed, that I did not have enough evidence in front of me to make the recommendation that it could be done safely."A stunned Schiff had her repeat the comment. See the two clips below or at the link here. - YouTube www.youtube.com - YouTube youtu.be
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 3:40pm
President Donald Trump held a news conference alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday, but an odd Holocaust-related analogy he offered about the hostages captured by Hamas caught the attention of many observers."I said to [the former hostages], was there any sign of love?" said Trump. "Did Hamas show any signs of, like, help or liking you? Did they give you a piece of bread extra? Did they give you a meal on the side? Like what happened in Germany, what happened elsewhere? People would try and help people that were in unbelievable distress. They said no."Trump's apparent implication that the Nazis "liked" some of their Jewish death camp inmates and "helped" the ones that were "in unbelievable distress" sparked confusion and fury from commenters on social media.ALSO READ: 'Not much I can do': GOP senator gives up fight against Trump's tariffs"Did he just casually imply Jews were treated more humanely in Nazi Germany?" wrote Justin Kanew, a former Democratic congressional candidate who now heads up The Tennessee Holler."Equating hostages held by Hamas to victims in Nazi Germany isn’t just offensive, it’s also a grotesque distortion of history," wrote Wall Street investment banker Evaristus Odinikaeze. "He’s always saying the first thing that pops into his head without understanding the weight of those words. And he’s sitting next to Israeli Prime Minister. Crazy stuff!""Did this m-----f----- just sit beside the Prime Minister of Israel and say the Nazis showed signs of 'liking' the Jews during the Holocaust?!?" wrote outspoken anti-Trump influencer @JoJoFromJerz."Did you get your unlimited breadsticks like in Dachau?" wrote conspiracy theory journalist Mike Rothschild."Wait ... like what happened in Germany?" wrote VoteVets podcaster Fred Wellman. "Is he saying the Germans were kind to the Jews? They killed 6 million but ... you know sometimes they gave them a piece of bread.""For those who might not pay that much attention to the increasing senility of this man, here he is suggesting that Nazis did nice things for their captives like give them extra food," wrote anti-Trump newsletter writer Justin Glawe.Watch the video below or at the link here. - YouTube www.youtube.com
[*] [-] [-] [x] [A+] [a-]  
[l] at 4/7/25 3:29pm
While the White House meeting between Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump on Monday touched on tariffs and talks over Iran and Gaza, it was the political optics of the encounter that made the rounds on social media.And the reactions weren’t too positive for either world leader.“Trump (again) pulls out a chair for Netanyahu in a show of partnership,” UK activist Howard Beckett posted on X. “Netanyahu is a wanted war criminal with the blood of 60,000 Palestinians stained on his monstrous hands. “Fascism in full view of the world.”“NETANYAHU IS A CROOK & A CRIMINAL,” University of California, Irvine political science lecturer Larry Tenney wrote on Bluesky. “That is all.”Political commentator Jackson Hinkle stated bluntly in an X post: “Trump is a terrorist. Netanyahu is a terrorist.”“God it must be so surreal to be conducting a genocide and have to fly to DC to talk Tariffs with Donald Trump,” economy writer Nathan Tankus wrote Monday on Bluesky. “Netanyahu tells reporters that he told Trump Israel 'will eliminate the trade deficit with the United States.' Netanyahu continued: “'We are going to eliminate the tariffs and rapidly.'”ALSO READ: 'We’ve made a mistake': Trump’s trade war sends GOP into frenzyTankus added in a follow-up post: “Good luck running balanced trade with the United States. Is this just going to be even more arms sales financed by U.S. government credit?”While some political observers criticized Trump and Netanyahu’s policies, actor Brian Guest questioned the timing of the meeting: “Obvious that this was the plan from Netanyahu and Trump from the get go on tariffs,” he wrote on BlueskyThe White House meeting prompted Illinois attorney Sheryl Weikal to openly wonder on Bluesky: “Can we have ICE deport Netanyahu and then itself?"This country won’t survive four more years of this chaos," Democratic activist Craig Schisel concluded of Trump cancelling a planned press conference before reversing course and moving forward with it. "Something needs to be done—and fast."

As of 4/8/25 12:57am. Last new 4/7/25 9:31pm.

Next feed in category: Open Democracy