zeke5123a
13d ago
Sure it’s possible. But given his general history not sure that’s the most reasonable interpretation
zeke5123a
13d ago
It was reckless. There should be some internal accounting. But the details aren’t as bad as what JG intimated and the timing was shortly before the mission started.
This is still a black eye but not as bad as some thought.
zeke5123a
13d ago
Your sneering aside, it does seem like Goldberg overstated what was on the chat (ie no specific details of where the launches would occur from, who they’d attack, where they’d attack). A war plan this was not.
But it did describe timing which is bad.
zeke5123a
13d ago
And it seems like Goldberg overstated what he was given but perhaps Trump’s team understated.
zeke5123a
13d ago
It doesn’t require detail. Pick any NFL WR. They don’t look like any women. It’s obvious.
zeke5123a
13d ago
Goldberg claims details about a military operation were disclosed. However the evidence he provided doesn’t to date confirm that. Goldberg also has a history of lying.
That is, it isn’t clear what has it has not been shared.
zeke5123a
13d ago
No true Scotsman! Or perhaps who watches the watchers (ie who gets to pick who is an expert)
zeke5123a
13d ago
Also his argument is silly. You can look at women top tier athletes. You can look at top tier male athletes. They don’t look the same. The men look bigger and stronger.
zeke5123a
15d ago
No the government complied with the order. The judge wrote an order different than what he wanted.
zeke5123a
15d ago
Young people in genera suck right now in the legal field. I am in an adjacent field and feel it. Friends in biglaw complain about it all the time.
zeke5123a
18d ago
I’m guessing in the American sense they’d be Dems but some might be attracted to Tory since that is more posh
zeke5123a
19d ago
But isn’t the problem magnified at the federal level? They too want to push off the decision to spend our money to someone else.
Why not take a chance on fifty laboratories instead of one despite both having a similar failure mode?
zeke5123a
19d ago
My concern is that many of these people are the reason their home countries are San Fran on steroids. Moreover, even if the first bunch are not they create linkages to future immigrants that might be.
zeke5123a
20d ago
I mentioned this up thread but Humphrey’s Executor has been pretty extremely narrowed over the years. It isn’t clear to me one needs to overrule it to conclude Trump’s actions were fine.
zeke5123a
20d ago
I’m not sure that is right if USIP is executing executive authority. See the caselaw re CFPB.
zeke5123a
21d ago
I know this is a troll but again the facts are that a fired president tried to keep people out of the building the acting president wanted in. That is, the only bad thing is that a crazy person illegally tried to seize a government building until the police came.
Another way of framing this is that a fired president illegally tried to bar people permitted to enter the building from entering the building and the police intervened to preclude the fired president from illegally barricading the building.
Here is DOGE post: https://x.com/doge/status/1901810390323048756?s=46
zeke5123a
21d ago
Not just here but see also some of the covid measures (I’m thinking of the rent moratorium where the government was far more abusive compared to here)
zeke5123a
21d ago
It really is funny to me. First there is a very real question about who is breaking what norm—namely there is a real core question as to whether the judge had any business doing anything here. He may be the one acting lawlessly.
Second, if the argument is “his policy is right and he is technically legally right but we think the spirit of legal process precludes him from acting in a way” then I don’t think you’ll find many takers.
zeke5123a
21d ago
I think that is a very pale reading of the case.
V-E day already occurred! There was a cease fire and surrender! Men kissed nurses on the streets of NY! The war was over. Nobody but nobody in 1949 was talking about the on going war effort. If you look at the history books, they will tell you the war ended in 1945.
There was a real question of whether the president could years after hostilities ended deport someone under the AEA. After all, the obvious reason for the act was to protect the homeland against a fifth column of sorts and in 1949 no one was concerned about that.
Despite all of that, the court said “we will not review the president’s claim.” That is very deferential.
Indeed Trump’s actions are clearly more within the ambit of what the AEA was worried about (ie foreign actor exerting physical control / damage to the homeland) compared to the post WWII fact pattern of precedent.
Could you point to the technicalities and say Ludecke is not controlling? Sure. But if you take that case seriously, then it is hard to argue the president doesn’t have the power to declare an invasion in this case.
I do agree the class question is trickier.
zeke5123a
21d ago
The argument isn’t that the auto pen per se invalidates the claims. Instead the claim is that Biden didn’t authorize the final batch of pardons and therefore was not an action of the executive.
zeke5123a
21d ago
The classic definition is that government has a monopoly on the use of force. I think it is fair to describe these gangs as having that monopoly in areas they control and trying to extend that into areas of the US.
Is it obvious? No but it isn’t crazy and again not sure justiciable.
Yeah I just don’t know how people can look at men and women and think “physically pretty similar.”
More options
Context Copy link