LetMyPeopleVote
LetMyPeopleVote's JournalSupreme Court rejects Trump's bid to deploy National Guard in Illinois
The Trump administration says troops are needed to protect immigration agents in the Chicago area, a move that local officials strongly object to.
https://x.com/CagedChef457/status/2003563554595643630
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rejects-trump-bid-deploy-national-guard-illinois-rcna238630
The court in an unsigned order turned away an emergency request made by the administration, which said the troops are needed to protect federal agents involved in immigration enforcement in the Chicago area.
In doing so, the court at least provisionally rejected the Trump administration’s view that the situation on the ground is so chaotic that it justifies invoking a federal law that allows the president to call National Guard troops into federal service in extreme situations.
Those circumstances can include when “there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion” or “the president is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.”
Among the issues in the case is what the term “regular forces” means, something the Supreme Court focused on in an order issued on Oct. 29 asking for additional briefing. The question is whether the law only allows for the National Guard to be called up if regular military forces are unable to restore order, or whether the phrase refers to law enforcement.
Supreme Court rejects Trump's bid to deploy National Guard in Illinois
Source: NBC
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday rebuffed the Trump administration over its plan to deploy National Guard troops in Illinois over the strenuous objections of local officials.
The court in an unsigned order turned away an emergency request made by the administration, which said the troops are needed to protect federal agents involved in immigration enforcement in the Chicago area.
In doing so, the court at least provisionally rejected the Trump administration’s view that the situation on the ground is so chaotic that it justifies invoking a federal law that allows the president to call National Guard troops into federal service in extreme situations.
Those circumstances can include when “there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion” or “the president is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.”
Among the issues in the case is what the term “regular forces” means, something the Supreme Court focused on in an order issued on Oct. 29 asking for additional briefing. The question is whether the law only allows for the National Guard to be called up if regular military forces are unable to restore order, or whether the phrase refers to law enforcement.
Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rejects-trump-bid-deploy-national-guard-illinois-rcna238630
Epstein survivors are condemning the Trump Justice Department as having "violated the law"
https://x.com/kylegriffin1/status/2003209003082613110
Former President Bill Clinton is demanding full transparency from the Epstein files and accuses trump of coverup
trump is trying to use President Clinton to distract. This will not work
https://x.com/MAGALieTracker/status/2003189166595866681
MaddowBlog-Republicans confirm Trump's controversial choice for U.S. ambassador to South Africa
With GOP senators sending L. Brent Bozell III to Pretoria, it’s hard not to wonder whether the U.S. relationship with South Africa is poised to get worse.
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/republicans-confirm-trumps-controversial-choice-for-u-s-ambassador-to-south-africa
The Senate [on Thursday night] voted along party lines, 53-43, to confirm a third batch of Trump nominees all at one time using a new procedural tool it unlocked by nuking the Senate rules so it can confirm nominees en bloc instead of one by one.
Tonight’s batch consisted of 97 nominees, including former Rep. Anthony D’Esposito of New York to be inspector general of the Labor Department and Media Research Center founder Brent Bozell III to be U.S. ambassador to South Africa.
....There’s reason to believe they made the wrong choice. TPM reported in March that Bozell, in the 1980s, was critical of Black activists in South Africa who fought against their country’s racist apartheid government, and Media Matters has highlighted the conservative activist’s rhetorical record, which does not lend itself to a career in international diplomacy.
In recent months, the U.S.’ relationship with South Africa has deteriorated to levels unseen in recent memory, due in large part to Trump’s sustained offensive. With Senate Republicans sending Bozell to Pretoria, it’s hard not to wonder whether the relationship is poised to get worse.
What everyone wants for Christmas
https://x.com/lowtempo/status/2000317035553915370
: What do I want for Christmas?
— The Disaster Autist (@disaster-autist.bsky.social) 2024-12-14T19:20:43.720Z
For everyone in and associated with the incoming second Trump administration to suffer catastrophic aneurisms.
That includes all donors, lawyers, campaign advisers, and members of the press, too.
Take care of it all in one.
Maddowblog-Trump flubs what 'separation of church and state' means in targeting Raphael Warnock
“Mr. President, my faith is not a weapon, it’s a bridge, and I invite you to Bible study,” the Georgia Democrat replied.
Trump’s attack on Raphael Warnock was tiresome and forgettable, except for one thing:
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2025-12-18T22:27:17.976Z
It showed Trump doesn’t understand the separation of church and state at a basic level. www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-flubs-what-separation-of-church-and-state-means-in-targeting-raphael-warnock
Raphael Warnock was on Meet the Fake Press with a one sided and very biased Kristen Welker as the Host(ess!). Warnock spent the entire show using Religion to try and divide the Country! If a Republican, in particular ME, made those statements, it would be FRONT PAGE NEWS. He ended by saying that he was going to his Church to preach now, and while I think that’s fine, I do say, ‘What ever happened to separation of Church and State?’
As part of the same online harangue, the Republican went on to smear the senator and attack NBC, before concluding, “The Public airwaves, which these Networks are using at no charge, should not be allowed to get away with this any longer!”
For now, let’s put aside the obvious fact that Warnock’s on-air message wasn’t the least bit divisive. What instead stuck me as notable is that the incumbent president, after nearly five years in the White House, still doesn’t appear to understand the basics of the constitutional principle of church-state separation......
If, however, Trump is looking for actual examples of officials crossing the church-state line that he’s suddenly taken an interest in, I’d refer him to the recent Christian prayer services sponsored by the Department of Labor, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Defense Department, each of which reflected an unsettling break with government neutrality on matters of faith.
As for Warnock, the Georgia Democrat apparently saw Trump’s online rant and took the time to respond.
“He’s got a lot of nerve,” the senator said in a statement. “Remember, this is the same president who literally had peaceful protesters gassed and beaten so he could stand in front of a church holding a Bible up. He ought to read that Bible that he was holding up on that day. That Bible says that Jesus came to preach good news to the poor. He came to heal the sick. He never billed them for his services. He stood up for the weak, the marginalized, average, ordinary people.”
Warnock concluded, “Mr. President, my faith is not a weapon, it’s a bridge, and I invite you to Bible study. Maybe you can meet the Jesus I know. In the meantime, I’m going to keep fighting for the people.”
MaddowBlog-Nearly five years later, the ranks of the GOP's Impeachment 10 are nearly gone
Of the 10 House Republicans who voted to impeach Trump after Jan. 6, only two remain in Congress. One is retiring — and the other is very likely to lose.
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/nearly-five-years-later-the-ranks-of-the-gops-impeachment-10-are-nearly-gone
Rep. Dan Newhouse of Washington, who has beaten challengers backed by Donald Trump in the past two election cycles, is the latest House Republican to announce his retirement.
Newhouse said in a statement Wednesday that he had ‘no reservations or remorse’ as he ends his tenure representing central Washington’s deep-red 4th District, which includes Yakima.
While Newhouse may not have an especially high national profile, his retirement announcement is notable in large part because of his membership in a very small GOP club......
Ahead of Election Day 2022, four members of the contingent — Ohio’s Anthony Gonzalez, New York’s John Katko, Illinois’ Adam Kinzinger and Michigan’s Fred Upton — announced their retirements before the 2022 primary season even began in earnest. Four more thought they could maintain the trust of the voters who’d elected them in the first place, though they quickly learned otherwise:
In South Carolina, then-Rep. Tom Rice was crushed in a primary, losing by more than 26 points to a Republican primary rival who insisted that the 2020 election was “rigged.” (It was not rigged.)
In Michigan, then-Rep. Peter Meijer suffered a relatively narrow loss in a GOP primary to John Gibbs, perhaps best known for his “inflammatory, conspiratorial tweets.”
In the state of Washington, then-Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler lost her primary race to Joe Kent, who, according to an Associated Press report, has “connections to right-wing extremists, including a campaign consultant who was a member of the Proud Boys.”
In Wyoming, then-Rep. Liz Cheney suffered a lopsided defeat to a Trump-backed lawyer who embraced Trump’s election conspiracy
theories.
(It’s worth emphasizing for context that two of the four primary victors — Gibbs and Kent — ended up losing in the 2022 general elections, allowing Democrats to flip the seats from “red” to “blue.”)...
That left just two members of the Impeachment 10: California’s David Valadao, who has won some close races, and Washington’s Newhouse, who has also held on despite Trump’s efforts to defeat him.
But with Newhouse retiring, this means the Impeachment 10 will soon dwindle to one, and very likely, none: California’s redistricting plan is adding Democratic voters to Valadao’s congressional district, suggesting his reelection prospects are in serious doubt.
It is sad that these courageous GOP reps will soon be extinct
Mddowblog-Why JD Vance's 'Christian nation' claim is more than just ahistorical nonsense
The vice president's rhetoric was absurd, but just as notable was the sentiment behind the rhetoric.
JD Vance’s insistence that the U.S. is a “Christian nation†was ahistorical nonsense.
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2025-12-22T13:02:33.177Z
But just as notable is the sentiment behind the rhetoric: He wants non-Christians to know they might be tolerated under his vision, but they’ll still be relegated to second-class status. www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/why-jd-vances-christian-nation-claim-is-more-than-just-ahistorical-nonsense
The vice president also said that ‘the only thing that has truly served as an anchor of the United States of America is that we have been, and by the grace of God we always will be, a Christian nation’ — a remark met with raucous applause.
Indeed, Vance received an exceedingly warm welcome from the far-right crowd, but his “Christian nation” comment appeared to be the rhetoric the audience liked the most.
JD Vance gets the biggest applause of his speech so far when he says "by the grace of God we always will be a Christian nation"
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2025-12-21T19:31:24.820Z
The obvious problem with the Ohio Republican’s assertion, which is popular within the Republican Party’s theocratic wing, is that the claim is offensive, ahistorical nonsense.
The United States is based on a secular Constitution — the nation’s actual “anchor” — which in turn created a secular government. Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1802 that our First Amendment built “a wall of separation between church and state.” In 1797, John Adams agreed: “The government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion.”
Americans unsure what to believe have a straightforward choice: They can listen to Vance, or they can read the Constitution and honor the declarations of actual Founding Fathers. This doesn’t seem like an especially tough call.
But just as notable is the sentiment behind the rhetoric: Those who espouse the idea that the United States is a “Christian nation” appear eager to those of minority faiths, as well as those who’ve chosen no religious path, “You’ll be tolerated, but you’re still The Other, relegated to second-class status.”.....
It’s no secret that Vance is positioning himself as Donald Trump’s heir apparent and the incoming leader of the so-called MAGA “movement.” We continue to learn how, exactly, the vice president intends to claim that mantle.
Maddowblog-As Trump touts 'warrior dividend' payments, be sure to read the fine print
The president said the payments for the troops were financed by tariff revenue. When the evidence proved otherwise, he doubled down on the falsehood.
Trump said he was using tariff revenue to finance “warrior dividend†payments to U.S. troops.
— Steve Benen (@stevebenen.com) 2025-12-18T21:14:49.964Z
Then the claim was discredited.
Then he said it again anyway. www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/as-trump-touts-warrior-dividend-payments-be-sure-to-read-the-fine-print
In a prime-time address Wednesday night, President Donald Trump announced the Christmastime bonuses ‘in honor of our nation’s founding in 1776.’
‘Nobody deserves it more than our military. And I say congratulations to everybody,’ Trump said.
....As Politico’s Leo Shane explained, “Trump’s new ‘warrior dividend’ for troops isn’t new — the money is coming from housing assistance funds approved in July as part of the reconciliation bill. He’s rebranding the stipend help as bonuses.”
Despite these facts, the president nevertheless doubled down on Thursday afternoon, insisting at a White House event that he’s using tariff revenue to reward U.S. service members, even though his initial claim had already been discredited.
Trump again suggests the "Warrior Dividends" are coming from tariffs even as other administration officials say otherwise
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2025-12-18T19:15:50.686Z
Let this be a lesson to all of us: The next time the president starts talking about some priority he’s financing through tariff revenue, it’s best not to believe him.
Profile Information
Member since: Mon Apr 5, 2004, 03:58 PMNumber of posts: 174,221