Fridays with Nicole Sandler

/83 Comments/in /by

Listen on Spotify (transcripts available)

Listen on Apple (transcripts available)

Share this entry
83 replies
    • ernesto1581 says:

      yeah, quisling? that’s a bit much.

      fwiw, repeated calls to Schumer & Gillibrand offices, to DC and local NYS offices last couple days, met with polite dismissal of the Father/Mother Knows Best variety. (my home is in Vermont but I spend maybe 4-5 months a year in western NY so I feel free to hector Congress animals of both states.)

      It irks me somehow that 5/6’s of the support for the CR came from NY, NH & ME senators. Shaheen (NH)is not running again, so I can imagine she might think she is making straight the highway for whomever might run for her seat against Sununu Jr. Hasaan (also NH)? not sure — til now she has been pretty good on standing up for VA and veterans’ care. King (ME)? I’ve never had him figured out. He sometimes strikes me as an intelligent (and fully dressed) version of Fetterman.

      pleased to report Joe Morelle (D- NY 125) has been suitably vocal about S&G’s various positions on CR this week and ditto for a feisty Becca Balint VT- at large). two cheers!

      • allan_in_upstate says:

        I’m in the same boat. I only contacted Schumer and Gillibrand’s office through their web sites, and their email replies were completely irrelevant and deceitful. Schumer’s office, at the same time he was submitting his Op-Ed to the NYT defending his cloture vote, was sending this off-topic, disingenuous cr*p to constituents (apologies for its length):

        ” Thank you for contacting me to express your support for a fully funded federal budget that meets the needs of communities across our nation. I agree that Congress must enact bold legislation that provides investments in American families and communities, not the ultra-wealthy.

        I believe we should fight to protect accessible and affordable housing and healthcare options, as well as fund education. Our children are the future of this great nation, and I completely agree that we must take innovative steps to ensure children today are positioned to succeed. Senate Democrats know the prosperity of America relies on hardworking individuals and families across the country and Congress needs to show Americans their support by passing a budget that meets the needs of the middle class and helps lift people out of poverty. I was proud to champion the American Rescue Plan (H.R. 1319). This bill became law on March 11, 2021, and it provided $1400 direct checks to low- and middle-income Americans, $400 a week in unemployment compensation through September of that year, $25 billion in rental assistance, $350 billion to state, local, and tribal governments, $15 billion to create a new grant program specifically for small business owners, and increases to the Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Tax Credit through December of 2021. The Senate also passed the overwhelmingly bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (H.R. 3684), which will revitalize America’s dilapidated infrastructure system and give our workers, businesses, and economy the tools to succeed in the 21st century. I will continue working with my colleagues to ensure that all Americans can benefit from a more prosperous, sustainable economy.

        Throughout my career, I have worked tirelessly to help hardworking Americans. Most recently, I championed the Inflation Reduction Act which delivered on former President Biden and Senate Democrats’ promise to build an economy that works for working families. The legislation is the most aggressive action on tackling the climate crisis in American history, reducing carbon emissions by roughly 40 percent by 2030, and lifting up American workers and creating good-paying, union jobs across the country. The bill also allows Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices and extend the expanded Affordable Care Act program for three years, through 2025. The bill also makes a historic down payment on deficit reduction to fight inflation and ensure the ultra-wealthy and corporations pay their fair share. I am proud of this legislation and it serves as a testament to Democrats’ persistence and hard work to deliver on our promise to the American people.”

  3. whocansay says:

    Re: remarks that Trump people are not polling Musk.

    Anyone know how to hire or poke reputable polling companies to do this? Is that a thing?

    I’d happily contribute.. anyone know any groups who fund this kind of thing?

    PS excellent work Marcy & Nicole!

  7. wa_rickf says:

    Trump slashes Voice of America with executive order, employees put on leave
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2025/03/15/trump-executive-order-voice-of-america/82443203007/

    “…I was complaining about their activism in 2005 when I saw the UN VOA correspondent embarrassed to push US government policy despite being paid by US taxpayers…”
    – Richard Grenell, U.S. State Department spokesperson to the United Nations during the George W. Bush administration

    Journalists are not supposed to be paid to push “weapons of mass destruction” propaganda.

      • CaptainCondorcet says:

        Even Vladeck argues their first claim is slimy but holds. That said, if this doesn’t lead to as complete a rejection of the presumption of regularity as permitted, then I truly don’t know what would.

  10. Drewsill says:

    Thanks to both of you for your insightful reporting, observations and comments. A couple of responses:

    1. Messaging: I could not agree with you more, Dems definitely need more messaging on appropriate topics. I seem to recall seeing on NPR a study done post Covid showing that regular Fox News viewers who agreed to switch to Mainstream News (broadcast networks) for 30 days became much more accepting of and reasonable about reality. That implies there’s some hope for reaching conservatives with reasonable messaging.

    But right now, we’re not doing that. Instead, it feels like the grade school bully has knocked the smart kid to the ground and is kicking him repeatedly and gloating while nobody’s doing anything but watch in stunned silence.

    I’m not saying the court proceedings don’t matter. But I am saying I think we need something like a Ministry of “STFU” headed by someone like Pete Buttigieg who constantly responds with the reality in a straightforward, matter of fact way that undermines the constant talking points narrative that conservatives spout as reality. If these need to drop as commercials on conservative stations, so be it (we’re treated to in Kristi Noem infomercials about ICE coming to get you during national news broadcasts).

    We also need proponents to explain things like DEI (what it is, why it was proposed and adopted, how it’s used globally, not just in the US, what the R’s have distorted it to mean and how T’s entire administration fits that distorted meaning). A matter of fact primer on how the appropriate medical societies (e.g., Endocrine Society, American Psychological Association) determined the applicable standards of care for transgendered wouldn’t hurt to dispel the idea that Dems are trying to change your kid’s gender because Dems are perverted. I don’t know if this is just anecdotal or there have been actual studies refuting the whole “gays are grooming your kids for abuse” lie by pointing out the number of children “targeted” by gays is close to zero while the number of kids abused in churches (youth ministers) is both enormous and growing.

    2. Control over politicians / other public figures. I’ve been reading EW for a few years now especially since January 6th and following Nichole Sandler Fridays from the start. Like many, I’ve felt the need to ease up on news since the election for the sake of the limited sanity I manage to retain. But in this time, I don’t think I’ve ever seen any focus on the basis for T’s power over others – granted, I could have missed it along the line somewhere so someone please correct me if I’m mistaken.

    I understand threatening to primary any R showing the slightest modicum of rationality is one frequently used lever. But if you ask “how does T get that power,” I’d have to say that it ain’t his award-winning personality. I’ve generally assumed a carrot / stick sort of thing but have periodically wondered where he gets his sticks from.

    An episode of Frontline 2 I saw on PBS within the last year or so on the Pegasus Spyware and its likely role in the death of Washington Post’s Jamal Khashoggi (it was found on the cell phones of both his wife and girlfriend) led me to wonder whether it doesn’t serve some function here. That would be a way to gain control over pretty much anyone and as Frontline pointed out, all it takes is the money to obtain a copy. If brought to the light of day and proven, this could conceivably undermine T’s efforts at control (i.e., he’s a serial extortionist using the kinds of things we all keep secret to intimidate others into favorable actions).

    To be clear, I am only wondering – not breaking news but admittedly speculating –if T’s strategic people might have access to / be dropping a copy of Pegasus on the devices of unsuspecting members of Congress / politicians to locate some sort of kompromat and then using that to extort favorable actions. It might well explain some of the crazy seeming behavior we’ve seen from politicians (not expressing any opinion on Schumer here) and it might be worth factoring into the analysis of a given politician’s decisions. Lindsey Graham springs to mind. There are many others have mysteriously experienced similar mind changing epiphanies.

    Drewsill

  11. BRUCE F COLE says:

    Regarding the Dems messaging concerning Musk’s toxicity being anemic (46 minute time stamp et seq.), I’m gonna, again, leave a video of Don Larson nailing the Ways and Means chair for failing to get Musk to testify in that bedrock Committee in the House (the longest extant in Congress):
    https://youtu.be/4WmWZ0pZpyQ

    Larson was ripping the Chairman Jason Smith a new one, ripping Musk’s asshole only by proxy, if you will, but it was worthy of praise and emulation, imo, and exactly the kind of rhetoric we need at this point from our side. He starts out low key, and then just before the 1:00 mark, he lets it fly. Note the staffer behind him who just about jumps out of her chair.

    • Matt Foley says:

      Today he posted:
      “After years of being held captive by Environmental Extremists, Lunatics, Radicals, and Thugs, allowing other Countries, in particular China, to gain tremendous Economic advantage over us by opening up hundreds of all Coal Fire Power Plants, I am authorizing my Administration to immediately begin producing Energy with BEAUTIFUL, CLEAN COAL.”

      I lack the words to express my hatred for him.

      • P J Evans says:

        We shut down most of our coal plants, and acid rain stopped. So did killing smog from the some and other pollutants.
        The Felon Guy hasn’t learned *anything* in the last 60 years – and he’s proud of it.

  13. harpie says:

    Live posting HEARING in DEPORTATION case:

    https://bsky.app/profile/reichlinmelnick.bsky.social/post/3lkm2kyyhoc2r
    March 17, 2025 at 5:04 PM

    Judge Boasberg begins by saying today’s hearing is not about the merits of his TROs issued on Saturday. He says the sole reason he’s here is fact-finding about the government’s compliance with his orders. He notes the government asked the DC Circuit to stay this hearing and asked that he be removed. […]

    5:05 PM Judge Boasberg says he wants to focus on the timelines involved. He says, again, “I just want to obtain some facts here, I’m not planning to issue any rulings about the government’s conduct today, it’s just to get information.” He says the ACLU can raise any objections to the facts if they have them

    • harpie says:

      ALSO:
      https://bsky.app/profile/joshuajfriedman.com/post/3lklzvhdqhc27
      March 17, 2025 at 4:52 PM

      HEARING STARTING SOON (5 p.m. ET). Listen on the public line: 833-990-9400. Meeting ID: 049550816 (then press the pound sign).

      […]
      5:10 PM Boasberg: Plaintiffs identify two flights—are you saying there were more than two?
      US: I’m not at liberty to say, also don’t know
      Boasberg: You don’t *have* the information?
      US: OK, what’s the basis for not disclosing it to *me*
      Boasberg: Are you saying it’s *classified*?

    • harpie says:

      AR-M

      5:10 PM Boasberg is now questioning the government about the other two flights, which the government itself somewhat mentioned in its orders.

      The government continues to refuse to disclose any information. Boasberg asks why it can’t be said outside of the public, and the DOJ attorney refuses to say why.

    • harpie says:

      AR-M:

      5:21 PM Now we’re on to the meat of the situation; did the government violate the order. The DOJ is now arguing that the written order issued 40 minutes later supersedes anything said orally, and says that the DOJ “on good faith” only viewed the written order as binding, not what Boasberg said in court.

      [EXCUSE ME but, LOL!]

      JF:

      5:22 PM US: I would direct the court to page 42 of the transcript. The big issue is that this is a fast-moving case where there’s a lot of operational natsec etc. at stake. “Oral statements are not injunctions.” We do believe this is a good-faith interpretation of the court’s written order.

      5:25 PM Boasberg: You knew in the *morning* that there would be a hearing at 5 p.m., so any planes you were putting in the air, you knew you had that hearing coming! So you’re saying that because my minute order was *pithier* … That’s a heck of a stretch, I think.

      Boasberg: So, I hear you make the argument that we were outside US airspace and therefore the court did not have jurisdiction to order the planes to turn around. Is that your argument?

      US: Your honor, that’s what the statute says. Def’n of “removal”

      • harpie says:

        AR-M:

        5:29 PM Boasberg: The point is that even if the enjoined acts are outside territory of the US, you can’t violate the injunction. If you don’t like it, you can appeal it or seek to modify it. What argument do you have in equity to ignore court’s orders?

        US: Court lost jurisdiction outside US airspace

        JF:

        5:30 PM Boasberg: Isn’t the response to what you perceive as an unconstitutional or improper order to appeal it? Isn’t the better course to return the plane to the US and figure out the answer rather than going forward and saying, we’ll do what we want?

        US: That isn’t what we did, but also Article II

        PS: I’ll stop now, but consolidate afterwards. ACCKKK! [Out of practice]

        • harpie says:

          JF:

          5:39 PM Boasberg: Two more questions for Mr. Kambli (US) that don’t relate to contempt / disobeying court orders. 1. Was Trump’s Tren de Aragua proclamation signed in secret on Friday? Or on Saturday? Need to know timing and when US thinks it went into effect.

        • harpie says:

          A little out of order, from JF THREAD:

          5:24 PM Boasberg: So when I said, Mr. Ensign, you should inform your clients immediately, however that’s accomplished, whether it means turning around a plane, etc., you need to make sure this is complied with immediately. You’re telling me, your first argument is that when I said those things, because it wasn’t in a minute order, you didn’t have to comply. That’s your argument? You’re telling me that that very clear point, you’re saying that you felt that you could disregard it because it wasn’t in the written order. That’s your first argument?

          US: I’m stating what the position of the United States is.

    • harpie says:

      OM[fvcking]G!
      [Good thing it’s St. Patty’s Day. ]

      5:41 PM [harpie] THESE ARE NOT SERIOUS PEOPLE

      • harpie says:

        [ALSO] 5:41 PM AR-M:

        [ACLU] Lee then says they’re going to argue that the government should be required to give anyone subject to the AEA a hearing before finding that they’re covered, and they’ll be seeking that later.

        Boasberg orders DOJ to say how many people are designated under the AEA. DOJ says again they may refuse. [emphasis added]

        You fvcking bethcha! ACLU,

      • harpie says:

        Lind is referring to this:

        https://bsky.app/profile/joshuajfriedman.com/post/3lkm4jz3cbs2e
        March 17, 2025 at 5:39 PM [emphasis added]

        5:39 PM Boasberg: Two more questions for Mr. Kambli (US) that don’t relate to contempt / disobeying court orders. 1. Was Trump’s Tren de Aragua proclamation signed in secret on Friday? Or on Saturday? Need to know timing and when US thinks it went into effect.

        I think the “in secret” part is interesting too.

    • harpie says:

      Anna Bower also has a THREAD beginning here:

      https://bsky.app/profile/annabower.bsky.social/post/3lkm2s6vgjk2d
      March 17, 2025 at 5:08 PM

      HAPPENING NOW: Judge Boasberg is presiding over a hearing regarding whether the Trump administration violated court order temporarily barring removal of Venezuelan migrants.

      He kicks off by questioning DOJ about the timeline re: when flights took off on Saturday.

      DOJ attorney keeps saying that he’s not authorized to answer questions bc of national security concerns.

      Bosberg: Can you go find out if that’s bc it’s classified and come back here tomorrow and tell me? If it’s not classified, you’re going to have to make showing as to why you can’t tell me
      […]

      5:19 PM Plaintiff’s counsel says they think government should have to file sworn declarations, not just represent things in unsworn pleadings.

      • P J Evans says:

        Sworn declarations, hell yes. And show up in court to explain their statements *and actions*, right up to the top.

    • harpie says:

      https://bsky.app/profile/joshuajfriedman.com/post/3lkmakpsrc22n
      March 17, 2025 at 6:51 PM

      MINUTE ORDER from Judge Boasberg being extremely explicit about what he’s asking from the government by noon tomorrow [screenshot]

      MINUTE ORDER: As discussed in today’s hearing, the Court ORDERS that by 12:00 p.m. on March 18, 2025, the Government shall file a Notice, which may, if necessary, be sealed in part, setting forth: 1) A sworn declaration that no one on any flight departing the United States after 7:25 p.m. on March 15, 2025, was removed solely on the basis of the Proclamation at issue; 2) A sworn declaration setting forth when the Proclamation at issue was signed, when it was made public, and when it went into effect; 3) The Government’s best estimate of the number of individuals subject to the Proclamation currently remaining in the United States and how many are currently in U.S. custody; and 4) The Government’s position on whether, and in what form, it will provide answers to the Court’s questions regarding the particulars of the flights. Such form could include in camera review or in a classified setting. If the Government takes the position that it will not provide that information to the Court under any circumstances, it must support such position, including with classified authorities if necessary. So ORDERED by Chief Judge James E. Boasberg on 3/17/2025. (lcjeb1)

  14. harpie says:

    Relatives of missing Venezuelan migrants desperate for answers after US deportations to El Salvador https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/relatives-missing-venezuelan-migrants-desperate-answers-after-us-deportations-el-2025-03-17/
    Sarah Kinosian and Kristina Cooke March 17, 2025 10:02 PM EDT

    Here’s a AR-M THREAD about the article:
    https://bsky.app/profile/reichlinmelnick.bsky.social/post/3lkmkse7pks2o
    March 17, 2025 at 9:54 PM

    This is horrifying! Family members of some of the people sent to do hard labor in a Salvadoran prison by Trump confirm their loved ones weren’t members of a gang.

    One woman said her brother got a tattoo of a rose in Dallas, and because of that they accused him of being a gang member. [THREAD]

    • harpie says:

      From the Hearing at 5:41 PM [see above for link]:

      [ACLU] Lee then says they’re going to argue that the government should be required to give anyone subject to the AEA a hearing before finding that they’re covered, and they’ll be seeking that later.

      Boasberg orders DOJ to say how many people are designated under the AEA. DOJ says again they may refuse.
      [emphasis added]

      The US Government says [AGAIN] they MAY REFUSE
      to give even the number, much less the names.

    • harpie says:

      https://bsky.app/profile/adamisacson.com/post/3lkmjuamjy22x
      March 17, 2025 at 9:38 PM [emphasis added]

      Francisco García Casique left Venezuela in 2017 and worked as a barber in Peru until 2023, when he came to the US via the Darién Gap.

      No gang ties, but he had a tattoo. ICE noticed.
      Now he’s in El Salvador’s dungeons.

      “We zoomed in and we could recognize him.
      A mother’s instinct never fails.” [Link to ElStimulo[dot]com]

      “ICE authorities link him to Tren de Aragua especially because of the rose tattoo, which they consider a symbol of the gang although there is no evidence that the criminal organization identifies itself that way.“

      I don’t give a FVCK what “ICE authorities CONSIDER” that rose tattoo to represent.

      PROVE IT. PROVE IT. PROVE IT.

    • harpie says:

      ALSO Dara LIND:
      https://bsky.app/profile/daralind.bsky.social/post/3lknqkukpzs2y
      March 18, 2025 at 9:10 AM [emphasis added]

      If any artists out there wanted to design a rose made out of the text of the Due Process Clause, suitable for use as a tattoo stencil, DM me with your rates.

      Corollary: if anyone sees this post and decides to work with their tattooist to create one for themselves, please send me the results.

      Remember — general principle here! — if you DM me saying you need my Signal I give it to you no questions asked!

    • harpie says:

      Yesterday’s Morning Memo from Talking Points Memo’s David Kurtz:

      Trump’s Open Defiance Of Federal Courts Is Now At Hand
      INSIDE: Todd Blanche … Pam Bondi … Elon Musk https://morningmemo.talkingpointsmemo.com/p/trumps-open-defiance-of-federal-courts David Kurtz Mar 17, 2025

      We Are Crossing The Rubicon
      The major news of the weekend was the rapid-fire series of events following President Trump’s invocation [link] of the Alien Enemies Act that culminated with the White House chortling [link] over its defiance of a federal court order blocking deportations under the act and ordering outbound flights to return to the United States. […]

    • harpie says:

      https://bsky.app/profile/rgoodlaw.bsky.social/post/3lknozaqq4c2z
      March 18, 2025 at 8:42 AM

      1/ Quite the admission in a government Declaration submitted late last night in the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) case:

      “It is true that many of the TdA members removed under the AEA do not have criminal records in the United States.” [Link to Doc][THREAD]

      2/ This does not instill confidence that the Government has accurately or properly identified individuals under the Alien Enemies Act:

      Government declaration:
      “[T]he lack of specific information about each individual actually highlights the risk they pose.”

      Full context: [screenshot of section 9 of doc] […]

      Document is: “Declaration Of Acting Field Office Director Robert L. Cerna”

        • harpie says:

          https://bsky.app/profile/elmunc.bsky.social/post/3lkolxmyfbs2y
          March 18, 2025 at 5:21 PM

          Left: government declaration filed yesterday in the Alien Enemies Act case.

          Right: Lt General John DeWitt, Final Report: Japanese Evacuation from the West Coast 1942

          Sometimes history rhymes damn near *perfectly*. [screenshots]

          1] 2025: The lack of specific information about each individual actually highlights the risk they pose.

          2] 1942: The very fact that no sabotage has taken place to date is a disturbing and confirming indication that such action will be taken.

      • thequickbrownfox says:

        Answer to Judge Boasberg from Cerna, in TEXAS. I would expect a reply from D.C. The only reason that makes sense, to me, is that they are going to attempt to move jurisdiction to Texas if it doesn’t go well before Boasberg.

        “2. As the (A)FOD of the Harlingen Field Office, I am responsible for, among other
        things, the detention and enforcement operations of more than 350 employees, assigned to six
        ERO Harlingen offices. ERO Harlingen encompasses fifteen South Texas counties and is
        responsible for six detention facilities with a combined total of 3,790 detention beds”

    • harpie says:

      Josh Marshall:

      https://bsky.app/profile/joshtpm.bsky.social/post/3lknq4jehac2z
      March 18, 2025 at 9:02 AM [emphasis added]

      […] In previous cases the evidence has been a tattoo which in many cases are common designs that are by no means exclusive to any gang.

      This is not just being deported.
      It’s not even being sent to prison, as we understand it in the US.

      It [IS] sent to
      at least a year in a purposely brutal kind of incarceration
      in a country whose governments long notorious for human rights abuses, death squad and torture.

      Adam Serwer is unquestionably right in his immortal phrasing:
      the cruelty is the point.

      But it also has a specific purpose in this case. Trumps chosen deporters haven’t been able to raise the rate This was predicted consistently by immigration advocates. […] [THREAD]

      AND WE ARE PAYING EL SALVADOR TO DO THIS FOR US.

      • harpie says:

        What we know about the El Salvador ‘mega prison’ where Trump is sending alleged Venezuelan gang members https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/17/americas/el-salvador-prison-trump-deportations-gangs-intl-latam/index.html
        Published 5:04 PM EDT, Mon March 17, 2025

        […] El Salvador’s leader Nayib Bukele – a strongman president and self-styled “world’s coolest dictator” – offered to house the US deportees in Cecot as part of an unprecedented deal in which the US will pay $6 million dollars in return. The money will help sustain El Salvador’s penitentiary system, which currently costs $200 million a year. […]

        • harpie says:

          RUBIO thanks BUKELE:

          https://bsky.app/profile/nycsouthpaw.bsky.social/post/3lkjabspjzs2d
          March 16, 2025 at 2:08 PM

          Secretary of State Marco Rubio has announced the Trump administration’s defiance of an explicit court order, deporting Venezuelans to a concentration camp in a third country, El Salvador—which also happens to violate a lot of really good international laws. [screenshots]

          3/16/25 RUBIO: Thank you for your assistance and friendship, President Bukele.

          https://bsky.app/profile/ericcolumbus.bsky.social/post/3lkjawewerk2o
          March 16, 2025 at 2:20 PM

          Interestingly, Rubio says that El Salvador is holding them on behalf of the US. thus the judge still has jurisdiction to order Rubio to return them. [screenshot]

          The alttext from that screenshot:

          [7:59 AM [TZ???] 3/16/25] Secretary Marco Rubio // @SecRubio // We have sent 2 dangerous top MS-13 leaders plus 21 of its most wanted back to face justice in El Salvador. Also, as promised by @POTUS, we sent over 250 alien enemy members of Tren de Aragua which El Salvador has agreed to hold in their very good jails at a fair price that will also save our taxpayer dollars. President @nayibbukele is not only the strongest security leader in our region, he’s also a great friend of the U.S. Thank you! // 7:59 AM • 3/16/25 • 1.2M Views

        • harpie says:

          To reiterate:

          3/16/25 RUBIO to BUKELE:

          Also, as promised by @POTUS, we sent over 250 alien enemy members of Tren de Aragua which El Salvador has agreed to hold in their very good jails at a fair price that will also save our taxpayer dollars.

    • harpie says:

      The evil at your door
      The deportation action as regime change
      Timothy Snyder Mar 17, 2025

      […] 10. This deportation was planned as a political spectacle. The deportees were carefully chosen, as was the language used to describe them. The messaging was obviously coordinated in advance. And the entire humiliating procedure was carried out before cameras that were already in place. The videos that are being distributed are not some assemblage of footage caught haphazardly by cell phones. They are the result of fixed cameras, set in place in advance, with camera operators awaiting the action. The result is propaganda film worthy of the 1930s, in which the Leader determines what is true and what is false and who is human and who is not (“monsters”) through a procedure of charismatic violence. If you watch these films, please consider that they are meant to draw you in to a politics of us and them, to a world of lying and hatred beyond law, to a new regime that can come to replace our republic — but only with your assent.

    • harpie says:

      https://bsky.app/profile/reichlinmelnick.bsky.social/post/3lko2i4tcv22l
      March 18, 2025 at 12:08 PM

      NEW. The Trump admin files its notice, saying:

      1. Everyone on the third plane had a final order of removal, so was not deported under the AEA
      2. The Proclamation was signed Friday but didn’t go into effect until posted on the WH website
      3. ICE alleges there are 258 known TdA members in the US

      And the big one:
      4. DOJ says they will only give Judge Boasberg answers on compliance “through an in camera and ex parte declaration.” (that is, they say will file a non-public declaration that he alone can see).

      They still give zero specific reasons other than handwaving at national security. [THREAD with document links]

      • P J Evans says:

        I want Boasberg to tell DOJ to submit docs proving those claims. And that they have to go through a court of law before deporting ANYONE on anyone’s claim that they’re a gang member, because proof should be provided FIRST.

      • thequickbrownfox says:

        Judge Boasberg ordered, yesterday, that the government give him reasons, today, why the government cannot answer in open court. And he decides, not the government.

        It better be good, or he’ll hang ’em by the balls.

        If I was a government attorney, I would be handing in my resignation, like, right now.

    • harpie says:

      Joshua Friedman with Boasberg’s new Order:

      https://bsky.app/profile/joshuajfriedman.com/post/3lkocl44bos2m
      March 18, 2025 at 2:32 PM

      NEW: Judge Boasberg orders DOJ to file by noon tomorrow, under seal (and ex parte), more info about the two planes that were in the air when the judge issued his temporary restraining order, to assess whether DOJ violated his order. [screenshot]

      NOTE: This is a different set of questions from the ones the judge asked for by noon today. Today DOJ gave the judge info that they conceded wasn’t secret, plus told the judge how they could give him info they claim is secret. Now the judge is telling DOJ what info he wants privately by tomorrow.

      Yes, it’s like pulling teeth, but so far it’s producing results, in that DOJ gave the judge info today that they were unable or unwilling to give yesterday, and I expect the same will be true tomorrow

      The questions DOJ answered today are on the left. The questions DOJ must answer tomorrow (privately, to the judge only) are on the right. [screenshots]

    • harpie says:

      NEW DAY:

      https://bsky.app/profile/joshuajfriedman.com/post/3lkqc343ans2q
      March 19, 2025 at 9:29 AM

      NEW: DOJ files an emergency motion in the hopes of avoiding a noon deadline to provide more info to Judge Boasberg, in private, about deportation flights that appear to have violated the court’s orders. [[link] [screenshot]

      DOJ throws dpty asst AG Drew Ensign under the bus, saying he incorrectly suggested that the US had he ability to turn planes around: “The comment betrayed a complete misunderstanding of the serious national security, safety, regulatory, and logistical problems presented by a fiat from the Court …” [THREAD]

  16. harpie says:

    NEW DAY: [I’ll continue here from a comment that’s in the pokey]
    re: DOJ’s Motion to Stay the March 18 Minute Order:

    https://bsky.app/profile/reichlinmelnick.bsky.social/post/3lkqc5xzkxc2i
    March 19, 2025 at 9:30 AM

    This filing is, in my humble opinion, Rule 11 sanctionable. [screenshot][THREAD]
    […]
    It means sanctioning the lawyers for presenting frivolous arguments the lawyers know are not valid.

    And these arguments are *absurd.* Note in particular how they simply refuse to engage whatsoever with what he’s said about his own powers to enforce his court order. […]

    • harpie says:

      Popehat:

      https://bsky.app/profile/kenwhite.bsky.social/post/3lkqejwe2a22q
      March 19, 2025 at 10:13 AM [emphasis added]

      Under the Bush administration the demand was “we must have the unreviewable power to kill or secretly imprison any person on the face of the Earth based on undisclosed criteria that leads us to conclude the person is an enemy combatant.” We were invited to trust the government to make that call./1

      /2 Under Trump the demand is the more aggressive “we have, and will not be denied, the power to unperson and deport to slavery any person based on our unilateral, unreviewable claim they are a gang member. They’re not yet killing them directly, though that’s coming.

    • harpie says:

      And here’s Friedman with a THREAD about Boasberg’s response:

      https://bsky.app/profile/joshuajfriedman.com/post/3lkqk45fcdk2c
      March 19, 2025 at 11:53 AM

      NEW: Judge Boasberg says he’ll give DOJ one more day to produce the information he asked for by noon, “although their grounds for such request at first blush are not persuasive” [link][THREAD]
      […]
      Judge Boasberg notes that DOJ’s latest motion is the first time it has suggested that the requested information constituted “state secrets”—in fact, it hadn’t even previously claimed it was classified.

      Boasberg notes that Marco Rubio shared plenty of related info on X. […]

      So, he’s telling them he sees their RetCon.
      Also, he alludes to ROBERT’s message, yesterday.

      • harpie says:

        I thought Boasberg alluded to ROBERTS [and he might be], but he quotes:

        […] Walker v. City of Birmingham, 388 U.S. 307 (1967)
        [quoted section]
        That “rule of law,” the Supreme Court explained, “reflects a belief that in the fair administration of justice no man can be judge in his own case,” no matter how “exalted his station” or “righteous his motives.” […]

        That last bit might allude to ROBERTS’ most famous recent ruling in a way.

    • harpie says:

      Karoline LEAVITT today:

      https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lkqpoyrgx522
      March 19, 2025 at 1:33 PM

      Leavitt: “It’s incumbent on the Supreme Court to rein in these activist judges. These partisan activists are undermining the judicial branch.” [VIDEO]

      Transcript:

      Q: Do think it’s a good use of Congress’ time and the President’s political capitol to try to impeach and remove a Federal Judge which would take sixty-seven votes you’re unlikely to get in the Senate?

      [0:10] KL: Well, look, the President has made it clear that he believes this judge in this case should be impeached. Um, and he has also made it clear that he has great respect for the Chief Justice, John Roberts. Um, and it’s up incumbent upon the Supreme Court to reign in these activist judges. These partisan activists are undermining the Judicial Branch by doing so. We have co-equal branches of government for a reason, and the President feels very strongly about that.

  17. thequickbrownfox says:

    Are we getting to the point where the White House revokes Judge Boasberg’s security clearance and attempts to force a change of venue to Texas?

Comments are closed.