Tuesday, December 30, 2025

Confederate Chump

Donald Chump is a racist who uses racism to keep any popularity he might have left.  Carlos Miller (ATLANTA BLACK STAR NEWS) reports:

Despite recent studies confirming that discrimination in the workplace against Black people continues to exist and the introduction of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 1964 as part of the Civil Rights Act, the Trump administration is now claiming that white people are the true victims of job discrimination.

“Are you a white male who has experienced discrimination at work based on your race and sex?” asked Andrea R. Lucas, the Trump-appointed attorney who chairs the EEOC, in a video posted on the social platform X.

“You may have a claim to recover money under civil rights laws.”

[. . .]

But multiple studies indicate it is Black people who are the real victims of systemic racism within the criminal justice system, the health care industry and the employment sector.

For starters, the unemployment rate for Black people continues to remain twice as high as that of white people, as it has been for several decades.

 

He won't be happy until we've returned to the Confederacy.  And that is his plan.  Layla A. Jones (TALKING POINTS MEMO) notes:

The thread of partisan power and control is stitched through America’s public education system. In the name of the revisionist Lost Cause history — which holds that the South fought the Civil War over states’ rights and not to maintain the institution of slavery — the United Daughters of the Confederacy (UDC) in the early 20th century leveraged the group’s considerable political influence and went after school curricula. The UDC lobbied for ahistorical, pro-South school materials, and its members joined Southern state textbook commissions where they helped control which books would be deemed suitable for children and which would not. For the next several decades, nearly 70 million Southern students were taught that the enslaved were actually servants and that the Confederates fought merely to preserve a Southern way of life.

In the 1950s, the American Legion partnered with the National Education Association to create anti-Communist curricula. Married couple and religious fundamentalists Norma and Mel Gabler imparted their brand of right-wing influence on childhood education through the Texas textbook committee circuit, suppressing science lessons on evolution and upholding “cultural heritage” and patriotism, beginning in the 1960s and continuing into the 70s.

By commandeering state-level commissions and capitalizing on early 20th century state law, reactionaries managed to control the historical curriculum for generations of students, particularly in the South. 

Under President Donald Trump, this blueprint is being adapted and disseminated directly from the White House. The president in September announced the Department of Education’s partnership with dozens of conservative and far-right organizations including Turning Point USA, Moms for Liberty, and PragerU. The group will lead the Trump administration’s 250th anniversary civic education efforts “in schools across the nation.” Among the administration’s priorities? “Renewing patriotism,” and “advancing a shared understanding of America’s founding principles in schools across the nation.”


We can't get to January 2029 fast enough for me.  Let's hope we're prepared. Carl Gibson reports:

Should Democrats retake the White House in 2028 and have majorities in both chambers of Congress, one legal expert is arguing there are numerous ways the six-member conservative majority on the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) could be brought to heel.

In a Monday essay for Slate, legal writer and attorney Mark Joseph Stern directly addressed a reader's concern that no matter what laws Democrats may try to pass under a potential new Democratic majority government, the Supreme Court could simply strike those laws down. Stern countered that there are several ways to re-establish Congress' powers and prevent SCOTUS from acting as an unelected super-legislature.

First, Stern argued that Congress should immediately grant statehood to both Puerto Rico and Washington D.C. as part of a "suite of structural reforms." He argued this was a necessary step to take in order to make sure that sparsely populated conservative states like South Dakota and Wyoming aren't over-represented in Congress (both territories have already passed statehood resolutions, meaning all Congress needs to do is pass a bill to admit them).

"Remember, the senators who voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court represented fewer people than the senators who voted to oppose him," Stern wrote. "That is a huge structural problem that Congress can fix."

Second, Stern proposed that Congress pass a law that would require the Supreme Court to have a 7-2 supermajority to strike down any legislation passed by Congress and signed into law by the president. He noted that the Nebraska and North Dakota state constitutions already have amendments requiring a supreme court supermajority in order to toss out any laws, and called on a potential future Democratic government to "put it in there that the law cannot be struck down unless seven justices agree that it’s unconstitutional."


A comment on the article:

Jim Winters 53 minutes ago
Congress has one other arrow in their quiver. Congress has authority over all inferior Courts. Should they desire, they can pass legislation to restructure the Federal Judiciary. They could in essence with the approval of the President restructure the courts and fire every sitting judge without resorting to Impeachment. The Supreme Court could not rule such an action as unconstitutional. The language is clear in Article 3, Section 1. Congress has legislative authority over all inferior courts.




"The Snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):

Tuesday, December 29, 2025.  Chump continued spreading hate and fear over the holidays because, well, that's all he's got.  It's becoming less and less as Americans stand up to him more often and in greater numbers

Elderly socialite Peter Thiel's got that itch.  The one that makes him look elsewhere. Jason Ma (FORTUNE) reports:

Sources told the New York Times that venture capitalist Peter Thiel has explored spending more time outside California and opening an office for his Los Angeles-based personal investment firm, Thiel Capital, in another state.

Meanwhile, Google cofounder Larry Page has discussed leaving the state by year’s end, sources told the Times, while three limited liability companies associated with him have filed documents to incorporate in Florida.


That's all it takes?  To get trash like that out?  Well, hell, make it a national law and the country can be so much better.

Thiel can return to his home of South Africa.  Or he go to New Zeeland or Germany since he holds citizenship in those countries. 

In other news, earlier this month MEDIA MATTERS wondered about the Epstein coverage?  John Knefel and Sophie Lawton explain:


Out of 102 print and 194 online articles, we found that just 8% and 6%, respectively, mentioned any connection between Epstein and Bannon. For broadcast news, not a single segment out of 67 covering Epstein (amounting to just over 3 hours) mentioned his connection to Bannon at all.

No shortage of material exists for these news outlets to draw from, though. Bannon and Epstein exchanged hundreds of emails and text messages, including a text exchange on the day of Epstein’s arrest on sex trafficking charges in 2019. Just 2 articles mentioned that Bannon and Epstein had been in regular communication in the months leading up to Epstein’s detainment. Bannon also recorded 15 hours of unaired interview footage of Epstein that year, reportedly to provide Epstein with media training and to help rehabilitate his image, which only a single New York Times article mentioned. (Bannon has denied that characterization and claimed he “never media-trained anyone.”)

According to the released files, Bannon requested to film Epstein at his private island, which Epstein agreed to. Epstein also invited Bannon to his other residences, which was mentioned in just 3 articles. Epstein appears to have offered to arrange a charter flight for Bannon, leading him to joke that he was Bannon’s “travel agent.” Just 2 articles mentioned that Epstein had arranged travel for Bannon. Epstein apparently also helped connect Bannon with far-right European politicians, which was alluded to in a single Washington Post article that discussed Epstein’s advice to Bannon for engaging with foreign leaders. Additionally, Bannon told Epstein that MAGA could help shield him for a “decade” from the social movements demanding accountability for sexual harassment and assaults committed by powerful men.  

In short, Bannon is all over the released Epstein files. Once a leading voice for their release, he has gone quiet on the topic since the files were made public in November.      


Steve certainly fits the profile -- a man so ugly he has to resort to coercion to get close to a woman.  

While the Dept of Journalism has looked the other way on Bannon, AG Pam da Bimbo Bondi and her saggy uterus have fixated on others.  Joe Sommerlad (INDEPENDENT) reports this morning:

Democrats on the House Oversight Committee have demanded answers from the Department of Justice after details of a flight taken by an investigative journalist well known for covering Jeffrey Epstein turned up in the pedophile’s files.

Miami Herald reporter Julie K Brown, author of the book Perversion of Justice, which was published in 2020, posted on X Sunday: “Does somebody at the DOJ want to tell me why my American Airlines booking information and flights in July 2019 are part of the Epstein files (attached to a grand jury subpoena)?

“As the flight itinerary includes my maiden name (and I did book this flight) why was the DOJ monitoring me?”

Brown also addressed the matter in a post on Substack in which she said she had “expected” to see her name in the Epstein files because of her reporting, but added: “What I didn’t expect to see was an American Airlines flight record from 2019 with my full name on them, including my maiden name, which I don’t use professionally. It’s an unusual name, so it’s clear it’s me.”

Her X message was reposted by the official Oversight Dems account with the comment: “The Department of Justice needs to explain why travel information and booking itineraries for a journalist are in the Epstein files.”


Bannon was playing footsie -- dicksie? -- with Jeffrey Epstein.  The US government should have long ago demanded copies -- if not the originals of all those interviews Bannon did Epstein.  

Victoria Bekiempis (THE GUARDIAN) notes:

By the mid-2000s, Jeffrey Epstein’s sexual abuse of teen girls was routine. From 2002 to 2005 alone, the late financier victimized “dozens” of underage teens by luring them into sex acts for payment under the auspices of massage work, some as young as 14, prosecutors said.

Epstein leaned on a coterie of employees and associates – including British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell – to secure a “steady supply of minor victims”. He also enlisted his victims to recruit other girls under the false pretense of providing massages, prosecutors said.

While the breadth of Epstein’s crimes is well-documented, papers in recently unveiled investigative files from the Department of Justice have put into sharper relief how he and his associates had an almost assembly line-like process for procuring victims.

These documents – released over the past week by a Trump administration under intense political pressure from both Democrats and Republicans – also make clearer how girls and young women were perceived as commodities: mere bodies meant to serve a predator’s twisted predilections – and possibly those of his associates.

One document from 2001 described how Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year prison sentence for aiding Epstein’s crimes, accosted three female students on a Palm Beach, Florida, college campus.

“Maxwell said she needed young, beautiful unmarried women to answer phones and do office work at her home on Palm Beach,” a police report stated. At least one of the students went to the house on several occasions and “described the telephone calls as men call[ing] in saying when they were going to drop of[f] particular girls”.

“All three girls said Maxwell and Epstein were secretive about what was going on at the house, and at least two of the girls complained about Epstein touching them inappropriately. They said Maxwell asked for a list of other girls who she could call to work on short notice,” the report continued. Maxwell “said she needed a large pool of girls to call as she did not know how many she would need at any given time”.

Investigative notes from 2019 describe what seemed to be a crisis for Epstein: his supply of girls to abuse was running low.


THE TIMES OF LONDON's Jim Armitage coveres one of Epstein's friends that Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell provided females to:


fter a summer when his stellar banking career spectacularly crashed and burned in a London courtroom, Jes Staley might have hoped for a quiet Christmas.

Instead, the former chief executive of Barclays has once again endured unwelcome headlines, along with, among others, Donald Trump, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor and Bill Clinton, over his close friendship with the late paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

Staley had been trying to overturn a lifetime ban from working in finance over that relationship, but it proved a disaster.

Not only did the judge rule in June that the ban should stand, declaring his evidence “lacked credibility”, but the married father, famously devoted to his two daughters, was forced to admit under questioning that he had had sex with one of Epstein’s staff in the financier’s notorious Manhattan apartment on East 66th Street.

Comprehensively defeated, Staley returned to his native United States to lick his wounds, his career destroyed.

Yet, after years of his attempts to claim he and Epstein had a “close business relationship” and nothing more, last week’s trove of evidence from the US Department of Justice hammered a final nail in his reputation.

Epstein, the documents revealed, had felt their friendship was so strong, so trusting, that he gave Staley the honoured position of executor to his will.

“It’s really significant,” a source close to the Barclays case said. “We knew that they were closer than Jes had claimed. But executor to the will? Come on.”

Staley was not the only high-profile financier Epstein had brought so close into his circle, the documents revealed.

The former Harvard University president Lawrence “Larry” Summers, a former US Treasury secretary under President Clinton, had also been named as his executor. Likewise, Jimmy Cayne, the late chief executive of one-time Wall Street giant investment bank Bear Stearns. 



“I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy,” Trump told New York magazine in 2002. “He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”

Later, the two had a public falling out, and Trump has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing. Great. But denial after the fact is only one side of this story. The other is harder to digest: Either the self-proclaimed “very stable genius” spent nearly two decades around Epstein without recognizing what was happening in plain sight — or he recognized it and chose silence. Neither explanation reflects on intelligence as much as it does on character. No wonder Trump’s defenders keep raising the most overused word in American politics today: hoax.


As people try to sort this out, at this point they have to utilize speculation.  Ryan Mancini (THE HILL) notes:

Attorney Gloria Allred on Friday speculated on why the friendship between President Trump and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein ended, and what the files released by the Justice Department (DOJ) could reveal about the falling out.

“Well, I‘ve heard different explanations from the White House about why he dropped him,” Allred told CNN’s Phil Mattingly. “One explanation was that he was a pervert, Jeffrey Epstein. But if he was a pervert, in the view of the president — not the president at the time — then why did he believe he was a pervert?”

“And was he — did he investigate?” Allred continued. “Did he look into what actions or misconduct he knew that perhaps Jeffrey Epstein was inflicting on underage girls, children, or adults?”

The attorney said she also heard that Epstein bid against Trump in purchasing a property in Palm Beach, Fla., which stirred “bad will” between them.

“So we don‘t know whether, what‘s the truth,” she said. “We‘ll just have to wait and see why he and Jeffrey Epstein were no longer friends. We‘ll look at the, all the files when they‘re released to see when the last communications may have existed between the two of them.”


As part of his efforts to spread hate, Chump is targeting Democrats regarding Epstein.

Now late week, a detail emerged that should have resulted in mass speculation.  I let it pass assuming numerous others would grab it.  If anyone did grab it, I didn't notice -- but, like most of you, I was trying to grab some holiday peace. 

But since Chump wants to speculate, let's take a moment to go there, in the words of The Staple Singers, "I'll Take You There."



Many reported last week on a letter.  MEIDASTOUCH NEWS did several reports on it, in fact.  Here's CNN on the letter Jeffrey Epstein allegedly wrote to disgraced friend Larry Nassar:

The letter does not explicitly name Trump, but instead refers to “our president.” The message appears to have been sent in August 2019, the same month Epstein died by suicide. Trump was president at the time. 
[. . .]

             “Dear L.N.,” the letters reads, “As you know by now, I have taken the ‘short route’ home. Good luck! We shared one thing … our love and caring for young ladies and the hope they’d reach their full potential. Our President also shares our love of young, nubile girls.” The letter makes another lewd reference to Trump’s treatment of women.

“Life is unfair,” the letter reads.     



The Justice Dept, which released the letter, immediately began stating it wasn't real and that they were investigating it.  A cruious waste of resouces since they're not verifing anything else they're releasing unless it cover Chump. Covers.  Covers up for.  That's our damn Justice Dept.  It's not Chump's.  He has personal lawyers and he can have them try to vet that letter.

Epstein's family doesn't believe he committed suicide.  However he died, he died in prison while Chump was president.  And Jeffrey's efforts to reach out to his former roll dog were shot down.

If you and I were in prison and were former friends of Chump, it he wasn't speaking to us, how might we try to get in touch with him?

Knowing that a letter would be read by authorities before it was released for mailing and knowing that Nasser's prison would alos read the letter before releasing it to Nasser, we could mention the sitting president in our letter and float an embarrassing claim.  That would get a response.

And didn't it?  Didn't Ghislaine get a meeting with Todd Blanche back in July, the Deputry Attorney General of the United States, when what she might say became a huge question mark?

So that could be why Epstein wrote the letter and it could also be why he's dead.



How did you spend your holiday?  Hopefully, at peace and surrounded by love.  Not everyone's so fortunate and, of course, some people make their own hell.  Such was the case for our Convicted Felon Donald Chump.  Katie Herchenroeder (MOTHER JONES) reports:

 As the clock struck midnight on Christmas morning at one Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, at least one someone was stirring. 

Starting in the early hours of December 25 and ending in the evening, President Donald Trump posted over 100 times on Truth Social. 

Hours before Trump sat alongside first lady Melania Trump to answer the calls of children dialing into the North American Aerospace Defense Command, during which he told kids from Oklahoma that “we’re not infiltrating into our country a bad Santa,” the president shared posts attacking Rep. Nancy Pelosi, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, and former President Joe Biden, amongst several others. 

At 12:01, Trump began the spree by sharing an over-eight-minute video by someone explaining “The DEMOCRAT FRAUD PYRAMID.” 

Throughout the day, concluding around 7 o’clock, the president repeated many times that the 2020 election was stolen. He also shared a post that praised White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt’s handling of the “fake news,” another of someone who called Democrats a “criminal organization,” and one where Trump said, of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), “Throw her out of the U.S., Now!”

Hate was the message Chump chose to send.  He's evil and he has hate on the mind.  That's all he has to offer.  He's probably creating hell on earth to prepare himself for being damned eternally in the pits of hell.  There will be no pardon for Chump, no clemency.  Just a lifetime in the pits of hell -- a sentence he deserves and a sentence he's earned. He has destroyed so many lives this year alone.  There is no repentance from him, no acknowledgement of the harm he's done, no awareness.  Just the desire to spread more hate.  


He feeds on it and then he pukes it back up all over this still great country which will survive him.  He will not survive his own presidency.  All that hate churning in him?  The idiots around him encourage it.  They ignore the fact that he's morbidly obese.  They ignore the fact that he eats garbage.  They ignore the fact that golfing isn't exercise -- especially when you lean so heavily on the cart as Chump does.  His already poor health is only getting worse and that will continue.  Will a stroke result in a President JD Vance?  That's highly likely as his health continues to deteriorate.


And, again, he invites cardiac problems with his weight, his eating habits and his inability to get off his fat ass and exercise.  He can't even manage walking.  All the footage of him in the last weeks, when he's trying to walk, it's a huge effort.  And, yes, he's morbidly obese so that's a lot of weight to carry around but it's more than just his weight.  His balance is off.  His feet drag.  A family that cared wouldn't have let it get this far.  His family either is in denial or they're paying him back for the asshole he's always been.  The monster who used to make Don Jr. cry.  Don Jr. tries to play like their best friends, but there's not a woman that Don Jr.'s slept with who can't tell you the way he was damaged by his own father.


There will be no heartfelt tributes for Chump when he passes.  There will be relief and there will be celebration.  But no one outside of his dwindlilng cult is going to mourn him.

He's losing his hold on his cult and he's losing his hold on Republicans in Congress and on Republicans in this country.  Why?  Because you can't "Make America Great Again" by destroying democracy.  And he hates democracy.  It's a built-in for a number of trashy people who get wealthy.  Look at Zuckerberg.  Look at Bezos.  They're garbage trash.  Both know better and, during Chump's first term, did better.  They weren't huge defenders of freedom (though Bezos pretended he was and cheap whores like Meryl Streep lied to make him come off like one).  But they didn't join him in attacking our country.  Now they have.  Political conversion?


No, trashy greed.  They're his partners in crime because one hand greases the other.  


Chump will be out of office by January 2029.   

Donald Chump made Florida his base because NYC society never welcomed him and never will.  But he could find a home in all the other trash that moved from New York to Florida.  Most of them, like him, that moved in disgrace.  They're 'eccentrics' and 'oddballs.'  They're Donald's people -- people who are so disgusting that all the money in the world can't wash the stink off him.


And history won't let Chump shake off his own stink.  David Smith (GUARDIAN) explains:

 Wendy Schiller, a political scientist at Brown University in Providence, Rhode Island, said: “He promised to secure the border but the deportations have gone too far. City after city, community after community has expressed frustration and dismay at the tactics.”

Trump had also promised to fix the economy but his signature legislation, the “one big, beautiful bill” – rebranded as the Working Families Tax Cut Act – will, critics say, transfer wealth from the poor to the rich and strips healthcare from millions of people. Meanwhile the president’s disruptive policy centred on aggressive tariffs that caused market volatility and fuelled higher prices for consumers.

Schiller added: “The greatest self-inflicted wound that the president has brought on himself and the Republicans are the tariffs. In the first administration, they were primarily directed at China and you can make an argument about that.

“In this administration they are so much broader and more sweeping and it’s showing in supply chains, in consumer purchasing, in pricing, in every corner of people’s lives. Whether it’s a supermarket or it’s holiday gifting or whatever it is, they’re feeling it.”

Trump’s appointment of Robert F Kennedy Jr helped fan anti-vaccine sentiment, leading to a resurgence of preventable diseases and a politicisation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. He withdrew the US from the Paris agreement and systematically dismantled climate science infrastructure.

At his political zenith, Trump’s embrace of authoritarianism appeared unstoppable. He quickly fired 17 independent inspectors general in apparent violation of federal law. He ordered the justice department to investigate perceived enemies including James Comey, the former director of the FBI, and Letitia James, the New York attorney general.

The administration targeted law firms that represented adversaries, stripping contracts and security clearances to extract multimillion-dollar settlements. Billions in federal funding were frozen for universities including Harvard and Columbia, leveraging antisemitism and DEI policies to force changes in curricula and leadership.

Trump also pursued an aggressive campaign against mainstream media, suing news organisations such as CBS/Paramount, the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times, pushing the Federal Communications Commission to revoke broadcast licences and restricting access for some outlets while promoting “Maga media”.


It reads like a rap sheet -- and it reads like that because he is a convicted crook and because he truly is enemy of democracy.  And that's why his popularity fades just as his health does.  Before our eyes, the braggart lose his hold and that's one thing we can all be grateful for as 2025 draws to a close. 


Again, how did you spend your holiday because there was nothing peace & joy about how Chump spend his.  He continued his attacks on immigrants and those mistaken for them.  It's part of his campaign to spread hate all over the country.  And his hate campaign was not put on hold for Christmas.  Malcolm Ferguson (THE NEW REPUBLIC) reports:


Immigrations and Customs Enforcement officers in Yakima, Washington, spent Christmas Eve arresting a man in a Walmart parking lot—even taking his already purchased groceries for themselves.

Four ICE officers in masks and tactical gear can be seen in a video surrounding a man with a car full of food while he loads it into his car. A woman watching the arrest asked ICE if she could take down the phone number of the man’s wife to let her know her husband had been detained. The ICE agents refused. 

“No, guess he should’ve complied,” an agent said.

The agents then start to divvy up the man’s groceries, as the bystander tells them they had previously detained and deported her husband.

 Having kidnapped the man at Walmart, they then divvy up the man's groceries?  Guess that's how the knuckle dragging gestapo decides who to harass -- based on who leaves the store with the most groceries.  That's disgusting and a real world of justice would find those ICE agents behind bars for a long time.  It's theft, don't pretend it's anything else.


And the American people are rejecting Chump's hate.   Joe Kohut (ABC NEWS 16) reports from Pennsylvania:


Dozens of tiny points of light illuminated a street corner in downtown Danville.

Friends and strangers held candles in solidarity for Sergio Chavez Jimenez, a business owner detained this weekend by agents of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. 

Jimenez, 46, wasn't born in Danville, but they made him their own.

"What we were promised is that immigration enforcement would go after criminals...hardened criminals, murderers and rapists and drug dealers," said Trevor Finn, a Montour County commissioner who has been in contact with members of Jimenez's family. "What has happened instead is that they're picking up somebody like Sergio, (who) doesn't make this a worse place but makes this a better place for us."

"He's the type of person we really, really need to keep around here."

Jimenez is the proprietor of Amigos Pizzeria & Mexican Restaurant, a Mill Street eatery he opened around five years ago. Brought to the country from Mexico as a young boy, he's worked to try to get legal status. Now nearing 50, he's married, a father and a business owner, Finn said.


And they are rejecting it across the country.  In New Haven?  Richard Chumney (NEW HAVEN REGISTER) notes:


Billboards protesting Avelo Airline's contract with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to deport people who enter the U.S. illegally have returned to Interstate 95 after a legal battle. 


The signs are located near Tweed New Haven Airport and urge travelers to reconsider flying with Avelo while the airline operates ICE deportation charter flights for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

The signs are part of a larger nationwide campaign protesting deportation flights and the airlines that participate in the ongoing effort. On Sunday, demonstrators gathered at Tweed to protest Avelo’s contract with ICE. 

The billboards were created earlier this month by Seth Miller, an aviation journalist and state lawmaker from New Hampshire. Miller said he funded the signs with his own money and through public donations. 

“U.S. government agencies are snatching people off the street, moving them multiple times to evade the judicial process and putting them on planes before they can appeal,” Miller said in a statement. “Avelo is actively complicit in this process, placing detainees in dangerous environments."

People are outraged by what's happening and "people" include judges who know the law.  One example there, Maxine Bernstein (THE OREGONIAN) reports:

A federal judge earlier this month ordered the immediate release of a Beaverton man who had been detained by federal officers when he was leaving his apartment to go to work.

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers were targeting another man they believed was in the country illegally based on a nearly two decade-old photo and had staked out the Beaverton apartment for hours when Fernando Pichardo Medina emerged from the complex. Pichardo Medina got into his work van, went back to his apartment to grab his coffee and breakfast, returned to his truck, then realized he forgot his headphones.

“He sounds like me on most mornings,” U.S. District Judge Michael J. McShane said.


 Ashleigh Fields (THE HILL) notes:

Former Republican Rep. Joe Walsh (Ill.) on Friday decried the Trump administration’s immigration raids that were carried out throughout the Christmas holiday. 

“I did my best yesterday to turn off the news from Christmas Eve on and not think about anything and not tweet anything,” Walsh, a frequent critic of President Trump who became a Democrat earlier this year, said on “The Social Contract” podcast. 

“But I scrolled a few times and ICE, those masked federal agents, were out on Christmas Day detaining immigrants. They were out on Christmas Eve detaining immigrants. What the f—?” he added.


Exactly     Jacob Crosse (WSWS) reports:


The claim that the operation targets “criminals” is a lie. ICE has shifted away from jail-based arrests to mass workplace raids at car washes, construction sites and food processing plants. Immigrants are targeted whose only “crime” is seeking work.

Political opposition is also being criminalized. Yaa’kub Vijandre, a longtime Dallas resident and DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) recipient, has been detained for nearly three months and faces deportation to a country he has not lived in since childhood. His “crime” is refusing to become an FBI informant and continuing to speak out against US imperialism and the genocide in Gaza. If this is grounds for detention, it is grounds for the persecution of anyone.

Those seized are routinely denied basic constitutional rights. The recent CBS 60 Minutes investigation, which was pulled from airing, documented the illegal rendition of nearly 300 immigrants to El Salvador’s CECOT mega-prison under the Alien Enemies Act. They were held for months without lawyers under conditions amounting to torture. Similar conditions have been documented at detention facilities across Florida, Texas, Arizona, California, New Jersey and Louisiana.

What is being built is a nationwide deportation machine. ICE acting director Todd Lyons has openly stated that the goal of the Trump administration is to become the “Amazon” of deportations: “Like Prime, but with human beings.”

Overcrowding and neglect have already produced a surge in detainee deaths. At least 30 immigrants have died in ICE custody this year, several under highly suspicious circumstances. Earlier this month over a 4-day span, four immigrants died in ICE for-profit prisons.


The following sites updated:

Friday, December 26, 2025

And who is served by this Chump decision?

Trashy Donald Chump's at it again.  Trying to destroy everything he can get his hands on of course includes him destroying the environment.  Oliver Milman (MOTHER JONES) reports:

This story was originally published by the Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

The Trump administration has said it is immediately pausing all leases for offshore wind farms already under construction, in the heaviest blow yet to an industry that the administration has relentlessly targeted throughout the year.

Trump’s Department of the Interior said that it was halting the building of five wind projects due to “national security risks”. The department said it would work with the US Department of Defense to mitigate the risk of the wind turbine towers creating radar interference called “clutter” that could, in some way, hamper the US military.

“The prime duty of the United States government is to protect the American people,” said Doug Burgum, Secretary of the Interior. “Today’s action addresses emerging national security risks, including the rapid evolution of the relevant adversary technologies, and the vulnerabilities created by large-scale offshore wind projects with proximity near our east coast population centers.”

The halt will affect the Vineyard Wind 1 project off the coast of Massachusetts, Sunrise Wind and Empire Wind in New York, Revolution Wind off Rhode Island, and Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind in Virginia.

So the wealthy who summer on Martha's Vineyard will get what they want at the expense of We The People.  Never forget that every decision Chump makes requires that a palm be greased first.


"The Snapshot" (THE COMMON ILLS):

Wednesday, December 24, 2025.  ICE prepares to ramp up for 2026, courts grow increasingly doubtful of statements made on behalf of ICE, the Supreme Court rebukes Chump, and much more.


Big news. 




Ana Faguy (BBC NEWS) reports on the big story of the week:

The US Supreme Court has rejected the Trump administration's bid to deploy National Guard troops in the Chicago area, over the objections of local and state officials.

In an unsigned order, the top court said the president's ability to federalise the National Guard likely only applies in "exceptional" circumstances.

The National Guard consists of primarily state-based troops that typically respond to major issues like natural disasters or large protests.

The ruling marks a rare departure for the conservative-majority court which has largely sided with the Trump administration in recent months. Illinois Governor JB Pritzker called it "a big win for Illinois and American democracy".


I say the big story of the week.  Under a Barack Obama presidency or a George HW Bush presidency, I could make that statement.  With the Convicted Felon in the White House, I really can't.  Yes, it's Wednesday, the middle of the week.  Yes, tomorrow is Christmas and that should also mean it's less likely that big news is emerging.  But we have an apparently dementia plagued crook -- a convicted on several felonies crook -- in the White House so who knows?

But this verdict is a big news.

First off, the verdict was not at all expected -- not from a Court whose image is they grant Chump everything he wants.  As William Brangham (PBS NEWSHOUR) noted, "The court's conservative majority has frequently sided with the administration on previous tests of presidential power. "  Leila Fadel (NPR's MORNING EDITION) pointed out earlier today, "It was an interim ruling, the sort of preliminary case in which the court majority has deferred to the Trump administration again and again. This time, the court said the president failed to cite any law that would justify using the Guard under federal control to enforce the law." :Second, it's news because it is based on and it backs the Constitution -- something that cannot be said of many of the Court's decisions in this decade.  Third, it overturns a nightmare Chump has put into play.  Fourth, it has impact beyond Illinois.  Kate Riga (TAKING POINTS MEMO) explains, "The brief ruling radically changes the landscape for Trump’s Guard deployments, likely meaning the end of similar occupations in other blue cities. It also all but goads Trump to invoke the Insurrection Act, something he’s been talking about doing since his first term." 

How did it happen?


On yesterday's ALL THINGS CONSIDERED, Kat Lonsdorf provided this walk through, "Yeah, so this case stems from back in September when President Trump federalized the National Guard against Illinois Governor JB Pritzker's wishes and sent them into Chicago for what Trump said was protection of federal immigration officers and facilities. Just a reminder, this all happened as the administration launched a new and increasingly aggressive immigration operation in the city. Two lower courts ruled against Trump's deployment of the Guard there, blocking troops from the streets. And in October, the administration issued an emergency appeal up to the Supreme Court."  Alex Nguyen (MOTHER JONES) picks up the baton there, "In October, Trump called 300 members of the Illinois National Guard into federal service to protect federal agents enforcing immigration policies in Chicago under a federal law that allows the president to federalize members of the Guard if they are “unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States” or if “there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion.” He federalized members of the Texas National Guard the next day.  The state of Illinois and the city of Chicago challenged the deployment in court, arguing that Trump abused that federal law to punish his political opponents." As for how the decision happened, Adam Liptak (NEW YORK TIMES) details one factor:


The Supreme Court’s refusal on Tuesday to let the Trump administration deploy National Guard troops in the Chicago area was in large part the result of a friend-of-the-court brief submitted by a Georgetown University law professor named Martin S. Lederman.

The argument Professor Lederman set out, and the court’s embrace of it, could help shape future rulings on any further efforts by President Trump to use the military to carry out his orders inside the United States.

Professor Lederman’s brief said that the government had misunderstood a key phrase in the law it had relied on, which allows deployment of the National Guard if “the president is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.”

The administration said “the regular forces” referred to civilian law enforcement like Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Professor Lederman argued that the great weight of historical evidence was to the contrary.

The regular forces, he wrote, was the U.S. military. And, he added, “there is no basis for concluding that the president would be ‘unable’ to enforce such laws with the assistance of those forces if it were legal for him to direct such a deployment.”

Professor Lederman wrote his brief over a weekend. “I hesitate to acknowledge that,” he said on a podcast last month, “but it’s really true that I didn’t have like some great background knowledge in this statute.”

A veteran of the Office of Legal Counsel, the elite Justice Department unit that advises the executive branch on the law, Professor Lederman identified what he called a glaring flaw in the administration’s argument. “None of the parties were paying attention to it,” he said.

But the justices were.


NPR's journalists Kat Lonsdorf  and Steve Inskeep addressed the verdict on MORNING EDITION:


INSKEEP: What did the decision say?

LONSDORF: So the court ruled 6-3 against Trump, which is rare. It's one of only a handful of times the conservative court has ruled against the president in the emergency docket this term. It was an unsigned opinion, and it was really technical, but basically, the court wrote that the president failed to explain why the situation in Chicago warranted an exception to what's called the Posse Comitatus Act. That's a law that prohibits using the military for domestic law enforcement.

Conservative Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch dissented, writing that they, quote, "strongly" disagreed with the way the court handled this case. They said the court should've remained focused on the narrow question in the administration's appeal, which they said was specifically around using troops to protect federal officers and facilities and not domestic law enforcement more generally.

INSKEEP: I guess we should remember the basic principle here is that federal troops shouldn't be used on civilians to enforce civilian laws except...

LONSDORF: Right.

INSKEEP: ...In certain cases. So how did this particular case end up before the court?

LONSDORF: Right, so this case stems from back in September when President Trump federalized the National Guard against Illinois Governor JB Pritzker's wishes and sent them into Chicago for what Trump said was protection of federal immigration officers and facilities. Remember, Steve, this all happened as the administration launched a new and increasingly aggressive immigration enforcement operation in the city and there were protests. But two lower courts blocked that deployment, so in October, the administration issued an emergency appeal up to the Supreme Court.


Also on MORNING EDITION today, Leila spoke with SCOTUSBLOG's Amy Howe regarding the decision:

 

HOWE: Not necessarily. You know, this case came to the court. The solicitor general, the government's top lawyer in the Supreme Court, was asking the justices to rule based on one question - whether the federal courts can decide whether the president can deploy the National Guard troops at all. And after a little bit, the Supreme Court asked the litigants on both sides for additional briefing on a question raised in a friend-of-the-court brief by a Georgetown law professor named Marty Lederman, who said, you don't need to get into really the question that the SG's office has asked you to decide. The real question at the center of this case is a technical question about whether or not the term, regular forces, in the statute on which the president relied refers to the regular forces of the U.S. military. And, you know, even if the president has the power to deploy, he said, the regular U.S. military forces to execute federal laws in Illinois, he hasn't tried to do that in this case. And so that's what they asked the litigants on both sides to brief, and that suggests that they were looking at this case skeptically.


FADEL: This ruling is part of the emergency docket. It's preliminary. It's temporary. But the justices did explain their reasoning. What do the opinion and the dissents tell us about the court's thinking on presidential authority here?


HOWE: So as Kat said, this was a rare loss. The justices had given the Trump administration another loss just a couple of days earlier on another temporary ruling. And the majority opinion didn't say a lot. But I think what this majority opinion and the decision signals is that the Supreme Court is certainly willing to give the president a lot of leeway, a lot of presidential power, but there are limits in how far they're going to let the Trump administration and the president go.


FADEL: How significant is the decision? I mean, we heard Kat say this isn't a precedent-making decision. Does it then have no impact on other cases involving the deployment of U.S. troops to U.S. cities where the governor doesn't ask for help?


HOWE: The cases that the Supreme Court decides on the emergency docket are sort of a weird animal because, on the one hand, they are preliminary, as Kat said, but they will still carry significant weight.


FADEL: OK.


HOWE: And we saw that over the summer when the Supreme Court decided a case involving the termination of National Institute of Health grants. And Justice Gorsuch's decision, joined by Justice Kavanaugh, actually chastised a lower-court judge for not following an earlier decision on the court's emergency docket. He said decisions by the Supreme Court on the emergency docket may not necessarily be conclusive on the merits, but they really do carry a lot of weight going forward. So I would expect that this would really carry a lot of weight in the litigation going forward, although not necessarily in the litigation regarding troops in the District of Columbia, where I live, because those are a slightly different animal.


FADEL: Would it have impact on the administration's decision-making right now? I mean, Trump said he'd like to send National Guard troops to San Francisco and other cities. Does this ruling stop him from ordering future guard deployments in these other cities or not?


HOWE: I think it's going to make it a lot more complicated because the Supreme Court, in ruling that the Trump administration hadn't shown that it was able to send the troops, in the case of Chicago, said that the president must determine that he's unable with the U.S. military to execute U.S. laws. And there really only are going to be exceptional circumstances in which he can legally call in the military to do so, so the Supreme Court is setting a really high bar.




That's not just a musical interlude.  Country music artist Frank Ray is in the news for speaking out. Yesterday on ALL THINGS CONSIDERED, Rose Gilbert reported:


GILBERT: Ray is Mexican American and has spoken publicly about the challenges immigrants face, including in his 2023 song, "Jesus At The Taco Truck."

(SOUNDBITE OF SONG, "JESUS AT THE TACO TRUCK")

RAY: (Singing) I met Jesus at the taco truck.

GILBERT: But this time, it's personal. On Thanksgiving Day, Ray woke up to a panicked call from his sister. Her husband, a Mexican national named Juan Nevarez, had been stopped by border patrol at the airport.

RAY: She's in tears. She's like, they just detained Juan at the El Paso airport, saying that his work visa no longer gives him legal status in the United States.

GILBERT: Nevarez has a five-year work permit, which he renewed just this spring. Still, he was detained and taken to an ICE processing facility in Otero County, New Mexico. That's where he's being held now, waiting for a hearing that will decide if he can stay in America with his wife and four children, all of whom are U.S. citizens.

ALYSSA NEVAREZ: We don't understand why this happened.

GILBERT: That's Alyssa Nevarez. She and Juan have been married since 2007. They grew up in neighboring border towns - one in Mexico, the other in the United States. Nevarez crossed the southern border illegally several times. And because those are still on his record, they've not applied for a green card.

NEVAREZ: He has that authorization to be here, to work, to provide for his family, you know? Why did they do this?


Why?


No answer to that.  But we do know why Juan and Alyssa's lives are being destroyed, like so many others across the country -- this once great country.  It's a two-word answer: Donald Chump.  Our modern day Hitler will be remembered historically but it will be for all the wrong reasons.  nd his children and their children will live with the shame that the Chump name will bring them.  


Jacob Crosse (WSWS) reports:

The US government has offered imprisoned Dallas resident Yaa’kub Ira Vijandre $3,000 to leave the country, a move that decisively exposes the fraudulent character of the Trump administration’s claim that he is a “terrorist.”

[. . .]

Vijandre was not an “illegal alien” when ICE abducted him in October, just as he was not a “terrorist” when the government revoked his Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) protections in December. He entered the United States as a 14-year-old child and lived in the US without documentation for over two decades. His DACA status was terminated only after federal agents targeted his social media posts opposing genocide and prison abuse.

Responding to an immigration judge who accused him of “endorsing or espousing terrorist activity,” in an interview with The Guardian earlier this month from inside the Folkston detention center, Vijandre said, “I never expected anything like that … being accused of ‘glorifying terrorism;’ they attacked my religion, my faith.”

He described degrading and abusive conditions inside the ICE facility. He said guards treated detainees “like animals” and recounted being denied basic human needs. While visiting the detention center’s library, Vijandre said he asked a guard for permission to use the bathroom. The guard responded by instructing the Filipino American photojournalist to “just piss on yourself.”


The stories pile up of the way Chump is destroying so many lives.  Dan Gooding (NEWSWEEK) reports:


A disabled U.S. veteran was reunited with his family on Monday after spending four months in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention in Washington state.  

Green-card holder Muhammad Zahid Chaudhry, originally from Pakistan, had been held at the Tacoma Processing Center since he went for a citizenship interview in August. On Monday, U.S. District Judge David G. Estudillo ordered his release and barred ICE from detaining him again until his case is fully heard in court.

“I am a patriotic American solider. I thought that it would never happen, that this kind of erroneous thing, that four months, two days in this kind of detention, would never happen, should never happen to any disabled decorated American veteran,” Chaudry told KCPQ in Tacoma outside the detention center.


I'm thrilled Muhammad is free and thankful for justices like Estudillo.  But let's not pretend for one moment that Muhammad's life wasn't destroyed with four months of being held, four months away from his friends and family. Kidnapped and imprisoned.  Lives are being destroyed.  Where's Chump's payout on that?  I mean try to overthrow our democracy on January 6th and Chump's leaving you pardons and payouts and probably chocolates on your pillow too.  But what about what he owes -- what we as a country -- owe these people we are wrongly imprisoning, these people we are kidnapping off the streets?  What do you think your life would e like if you had been kidnapped and imprisoned?  Let's say you were lucky enough to be released, what would you life be like after that?  How safe do you now feel on the streets of your own country?

And what about the trauma being inflicted as a result of what's taking place?  Especially if you are an immigrant or could be racially profiled as possibly one?  Billy Witz and Kevin Williams (NEW YORK TIMES) note today, "Naturalized citizens in Ohio’s capital, Columbus, have taken to carrying passports with them. Businesses and nonprofits that serve immigrants around the city are delivering goods to customers who are afraid to venture outside their homes. Churches in immigrant neighborhoods are all but empty."  How do you get over that trauma?

And make no mistake, this illegal operation is about inflicting trauma and terror. Tom Latchem (DAILY BEAST) notes, "Leaked internal chats show President Donald Trump’s team ordering ICE officials to 'flood the airwaves' with 'propaganda' videos of migrants being chased, shackled, and mocked—regardless of their veracity."

 And the plan for 2026 is not to stop this illegal program but instead to expand it.  This was addressed in two segments of MORNING EDITION today.  First:


LEILA FADEL, HOST:

The Trump administration says it wants to accelerate efforts to take away the citizenships of some naturalized Americans. As NPR's Lilly Quiroz reports, it's part of the administration's efforts to remove immigrants - Americans, in this case - they say should not be in the U.S.

LILLY QUIROZ, BYLINE: In a document circulated recently to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Department, the administration says it wants to denaturalize 100 to 200 people per month in 2026. It also says USCIS should work with the Department of Justice to meet that quota. NPR hasn't seen the document, which was first obtained by The New York Times. USCIS spokesman Matthew J. Tragesser told NPR that the goal is to prioritize the denaturalization of people who have been found lying or misrepresenting themselves in the naturalization process. Now, the Trump administration wanting to denaturalize people is not new. Establishing a quota is. Elizabeth Taufa is with the San Francisco-based Immigrant Legal Resource Center. She says denaturalization has historically been used in rare cases.

ELIZABETH TAUFA: The traditional example was, like, Nazis who had lied about their Nazi membership and come to the United States and assumed a different identity. And later on, it was found out that they were war criminals, and so they were denaturalized as a result of that.


Second:


STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:

We've called up Mariam Masumi Daud, who is an attorney who specializes in immigration law. She's based in Northern Virginia. Good morning.

MARIAM MASUMI DAUD: Good morning.

INSKEEP: Well, what do you think about the idea of a quota?

MASUMI DAUD: I think a quota is something that's going to have a chilling effect, especially on eligible immigrants who may want to apply for citizenship. This really pulls away USCIS agency resources from its core functions. Giving this as a priority to the Immigration Service will essentially cause individuals to not only not apply for citizenship, but create backlogs for other types of immigration cases that people may want to pursue. And citizenship is something that's really supposed to be secure. And a policy that emphasizes denaturalization by having quotas and having this high volume really risks creating more of a two-tier system of citizenship, where naturalized Americans might feel...

INSKEEP: Yeah.

MASUMI DAUD: ...Conditionally American, and that's a problem.

INSKEEP: I do want to put this in the perspective of the numbers, however. There are tens of millions of Americans who are naturalized citizens. I just was looking it up. In fiscal 2024, 800,000 people were naturalized. And this quota would be between 1,200 and 2,400 people a year - a tiny fraction of the number of people who are actually out there as citizens, right?

MASUMI DAUD: It is a tiny number. But again, I think the problem here is that it's going to create fear in a lot of people. So although, you know, the numbers here are very small, the broader implications are that individuals will really feel anxiety and unsafe about whether or not their citizenship is going to be intact. And I think that's really the big problem here.

INSKEEP: When you have worked denaturalization cases in the past - defending someone, I presume - what sorts of violations or alleged violations have there been?

MASUMI DAUD: Those have involved cases where there have been serious problems with respect to an individual's identity and very strong allegations regarding fraud. And so as someone who has seen individuals go through the denaturalization process, I want to stress that it is traditionally something that's used in rare cases and in extreme situations. It is not something that has been meant to be used in a sweeping way. And that's where this policy becomes very concerning because when there are quotas given, that's where there is a concern for an abuse of the policy.


We have got to stand as a nation and oppose the illegal actions of ICE.  They run into people's cars and then lie that the car was surging towards them.  They break into homes, they break into cars.  They kidnap.  They beat up women in the halls of our courtrooms. They're now invading in use bathrooms -- Malcolm Ferguson (THE NEW REPUBLIC) notes, "A bunch of masked male Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in tactical gear broke into the women’s bathroom of Cato nutrition bar factory in New York, even forcing a stall open while a woman in there used the toilet. They can be heard telling her to pull her pants up." They threaten, they bully, they assault -- and on this one, I'm just talking about what they do to witnesses, not what they do to suspected immigrants.  Chump has created a Gestapo force that he presides over.  Remember that when the human rights lawsuits start coming in.


Lawsuits?  We've noted since the start of the year that ICE is forever lying and lying to the press, lying to the courts, lying to the American people. Back in October, Ava and I noted:

 

They terrorize pregnant womenThey terrorize the challenged and/or disabled.  Who is safe on the streets of America when ICE is let loose?  Children?  They're tear gassing children.  When they're not zip-tying them.

And there is no oversight.  

They're a department of liars led by the lying Homeland Secuirty Secretary Kristi Noem.

ICE rammed a car in Chicago -- ran into it -- and they lied in statements and false charges insisting that  Dayanne Figueroa, a US citizen, ran into them:

 

Footage obtained by Newsweek appears to show armed federal agents detaining Figueroa, dragging her by the legs to remove her from her vehicle. Some agents brandish guns, and bystanders can be heard shouting, “You hit her,” as the situation unfolds.

Additional video obtained by Figueroa’s family from another witness provides a different angle of the encounter. The bystander who is filming tells federal agents: “You hit her. We all saw it.”
“You guys are f*****g scumbags, f*****g Nazis. They hit her car. You guys hit her, and you f*****g know it,” the bystander is heard saying.

“As agents were departing, the driver, a U.S. citizen, struck an unmarked government vehicle,” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told Newsweek.
 

Tricia, like Kristi, is a repeat offender when it comes to lying to the American people. Nicole Charky-Chami (RAW STORY) notes:



A senior ICE official is under fire after publicly sharing a 13-year-old child's information — and an expert warns it "could lead to serious consequences."

DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin, 31, who is the most senior public affairs official under Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, revealed the identity, alleged criminal history and a photo of the child detained by ICE, The Daily Beast reported Monday.

McLaughlin is accused of sharing children's information not just once, but multiple times.

Her social media post and the DHS actions “could lead to serious consequences inside the government, such as an Inspector General investigation, disciplinary action, or even congressional scrutiny," Los Angeles-based criminal defense attorney Arash Hashemi told The Beast.
Public anger was rising after a Brazilian-born seventh-grader in Massachusetts was reportedly taken by federal agents to a juvenile detention center more than 500 miles away from his family.

In an attempt to stop the public criticism, McLaughlin and DHS tried to use social media.

"They claimed that the boy had an 'extensive rap sheet,' while listing some of his apparent past offenses. They also stated—falsely, it transpired—that he had been in possession of a firearm," The Beast reports.

It's illegal for DHS or law enforcement to share a child's information.


 And here's where the media keeps failing us.  Homeland Security officials have been caught in one lie after another.  It's so bad that judges can't really take their claims seriously at this point.  But the media too often repeats claims regarding ICE without noting the long pattern of lies from them this year.  

 

We were all taught about the little boy who cried wolf.  You don't lie because you'll be known as a liar and the time will come when you need to be believed but you're known as a liar.  

 

A lesson we're taught as children is too much for ICE and the officials over ICE to grasp. That might be shocking if we hadn't already addressed the relaxed 'standards' when it comes to hiring ICE agents.


The courts have grown increasingly tired of the lies and they are treating ICE reps and attorneys like anyone else who is caught lying while appearing before them.   Tom Latchem (DAILY BEAST) reports:

A Trump-appointed federal judge has accused Immigration and Customs Enforcement of brazenly lying in court filings and defying court orders in a lawsuit over conditions in a federal detention facility.

U.S. District Judge Gary R. Brown, who was commissioned to the Eastern District of New York in December 2019 during Donald Trump’s first term, is threatening the federal agency with contempt after ICE refused to provide photographs of a holding cell used for unlawful, days-long detention—and made claims to the court he said were “evasive and demonstrably false.”

Brown issued a 24-page order on Dec. 18 describing the hold-room at the federal courthouse in Central Islip as “putrid and cramped.” 


The following sites update