The Frankish Reich

Find where I have posted a "soft on crime" or "soft on illegal immigration" item. Yes, I preferred the Democrat to win the presidency, but that has nothing to do with Biden's response to illegal immigration. I am not a single-issue voter. And unlike you, I do not conform my political opinions to whatever Donald John Trump happens to like/dislike this particular morning. Funny how quickly the cat eating craze ended. You would think the Haitian community would still be scouring the alleys of Springfield looking for their favorite delicacy.

It is the linked fate of Trump and Biden to be lumped together in the history books as the Trump-Biden-Trump Era, defined largely by COVID and its aftermath.

Well, I don't know, but I suspect that if the two polar opposites are (A) no illegal immigration whatsoever over the last 40 years (Reagan's amnesty) vs. (B) the real-life situation, then (B) would clearly win. But from that we can't infer that the huge numbers we've seen in the last 6 years (yes, that includes Trump years, when the big surge started), if continued indefinitely, would result in a net gain to the economy. I would like to think that we as a country and as a government can think critically and rationally, rather than a gut reaction that's "whatever the last guy did, let's do the opposite." With emphasis on the "would like to think" ...

National emergency declaration? You mean just like people said Biden would declare a "climate emergency" to seize more control over carbon emissions and mandate renewable energy? A faux "national emergency" is the enemy of the rule of law, whichever side it comes from.

I don't appreciate Trump's bluster on this. I know "mass deportations" is meant to be red meat for the base. I don't know for sure, but I hope he's saying this: We intend to enforce the immigration laws as written. If so, there are well over a million aliens who are here under final orders of deportation. They've had their due process and a judge/appeals board and/or court has said the judge was right. So there's a "mass" I guess right there. There's also obviously lots and lots of people here illegally who have criminal records. That's another mass that gets to go through whatever hearing process the law prescribes. Focus on those two groups of people and you are coming awfully close to Obama 2009-11, before he decided he couldn't stand to be called Deporter in Chief and started deciding which laws he liked enough to bother enforcing. There's another fantasy that to be honest Trump and his minions have encouraged: that every single illegal alien in the United States will be swept up by a Deportation Force that includes the military. Trump likes the shock and awe that that idea instills in people, but I sincerely hope he doesn't go there

The theme should be more about how it ended: "See, if the co-equal branches of government insist on following regular constitutional process, even a ruler with dictatorial ambitions may be overcome." I like that.

And you're suggesting all kinds of scenarios that the evidence doesn't support. Look, I've already said that while I believe the January 6 prosecutions of the rioters are a noble cause, I also have no problem with the president pardoning those who did not act violently or in an overtly threatening manner. That's probably a lot of them. The criminal prosecutions have, in many cases, served their purpose: ensuring accountability, deterring others who might think storming the houses of government is a good idea, etc.

OK, my serious thoughts on the Hunter pardon: 1. I don't like it. We have a process, and I believe in letting it play out. At a minimum, it involves a pardon review by the White House (obviously an odd thing here since the pardon seeker is a family member), but also input from the investigating and prosecuting agencies. We've seen this in last-day pardons issued by Clinton (Mark Rich) and obviously by Trump. But escalating these outside-the-process pardons is a bad thing. 2. There was a case to be made for Joe Biden reconsidering his statement that he wouldn't pardon Hunter. Since those statements, his party lost the election. His successor has nominated an AG and FBI Director who have committed to prosecuting Trump's political adversaries. The Hunter Special Counsel already initiated two prosecutions after a thorough review. Hunter was found guilty and given a slap on the wrist for one, the gun charge. I have never seen that charge used in that way, so it was certainly unusual. If Biden had pardoned Hunter for that, well, it's over and done with, fine. He pleaded guilty to the tax charges, however. Those are commonplace, to my mind not "political" in any way, and that should have gone to normal sentencing. After sentencing he could ask Biden/Trump to commute any sentence. But this "pardon" was far too sweeping. See below. 3. The special counsel having completed its task, there's a good case for Biden pardoning Hunter from additional prosecution for unrelated charges. This is political, but there is a good argument for it. I expect Republicans would always hate it, but put the shoe on the other foot and they might think it's o.k.

Thank you for weighing in on the Great Shedding Debate. It seems like you are a true believer. As for resveratrol: that was a big deal back in the days of the French Paradox/Red Wine Effect. But when your intended customer base is Fox News septuagenarians, it still sells that snake oil. Oh, sorry, Kash - you merely pitched the snake oil for profit, you didn't sell it directly for charity. That makes you a much better person I guess.

Enough to alter your DNA and your dog's DNA. I'm shedding like a Husky in mid-summer Raleigh.

One should never use "cross" and J. Edgar Hoover in the same sentence.

I just discovered Pam Bondi is divorced and childless. I have to wonder if she has a real stake in the future of this country. Next thing I'll learn that she has a cat. Ugh.

^^I'm gonna visit NC and shed like hell all over you guys.

https://www.salon.com/2024/12/03/pete-hegseths-mother-begged-him-to-get-some-help---he-joined-a-misogynist-church-instead/ Pete favors doggy.

Good for you, but you don't understand that simply refusing the vaccine won't protect you. Kash Patel - a lawyer who knows more about vaccines than a real immunologist* - warns us that vaxxed people "shed" altered DNA. So you literally can "catch" the vaccine by sitting next to me at a Bills game. Sorry. *but not than a fake vaccine scientist, like the one who posts all the time here

Trumpies: "O.K., so maybe it was 1,999 mules." It's a cult.

I think the comment above is an admission that Bills Fan NC has taken Kash's Special Anti-mRNA Shedding Supplement

What's going on? Anyone here have any insight into the issue/situation here?

Awesome. As bad as the Bengals season has been, they were the dark horse team I'd hate to face in the playoffs. As for the Jets, let the Shadeur (+ dad) Sanders Derby begin.

Hey, he played a helluva game. Last interception, whatever. Desperation time. But there was no reason for the killer pick-6 before that. They didn't need many yards to have a good shot at a high elevation FG to win it. Just lack of understanding the game situation.

Apparently you are not familiar with a team called The Raiders.

You are definitely not the only one who thinks that. He's been really bad since arriving in Denver. But a really athletic pick saved him there.

Jameis really didn't need to force that. Clock was not an issue and they really only needed 20 yards.

The PickMaster comes through!