Podcasts about article ii

All @TheBrancaShow mugs! https://tinyurl.com/k778wj2kBONUS SHOW STARTS IMMEDIATELY AFTER MAIN SHOW, FOR MEMBERS ONLY! Schedule start time is just a placeholder!JOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! YouTube:  https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kfFOUNDING FATHERS SPEED DIAL: Founding Fathers SPEED DIAL: https://tinyurl.com/3f7pc8nzOK, let's talk about why ICE doesn't need an article III judicial warrant to detain someone for deportation. Yeah, you heard that right. The outrage machine is already in overdrive after an illegal migrant working as a Nashville reporter—one who often criticized US immigration policies and enforcement!—was arrested for deportation, supposedly “without a warrant.” Of course, Estefany Rodriguez-Flores WAS detained for deportation on a warrant, but it was an entirely appropriate Article II administrative warrant, rather than an Article III judicial warrant. The anti-American, pro-migrant screamers need to relax and stop lying to the American people. Immigration law treats illegal presence as a civil violation, not a crime—unless you're talking re-entry after deportation, which is criminal, but that's the exception. Congress set this up decades ago: 8 U.S.C. § 1226, § 1357 allow for immigration detentions without need of a judicial warrant. ICE officers get the power to arrest and detain aliens they have reason to believe are removable. Oh, the pearl-clutching! "Administrative warrants aren't real warrants!" cry the lawyers in their safe spaces. True—they're not signed by a "neutral and detached magistrate." That's the point! Immigration isn't criminal prosecution; it's removal. The "warrant" is basically an internal green light saying, "Yeah, this guy's deportable—go get him." For folks with final removal orders? Even easier—I-205 says the immigration judge (who's executive branch, not Article III) already ruled. Due process? Check. They've had their day in immigration court.Liberals act like this is some Trump-era power grab. Nah, it's been the law forever. Biden's ICE used the same tools—just slower and with more apologies. Now with mass deportations ramping up, suddenly it's "tyranny." Funny how the Constitution only matters when your side's losing.Bottom line: Judicial warrants are for criminal stuff—searches, probable cause for felonies. Deportation detentions? Administrative all the way. It's efficient, it's legal, and it's exactly what keeps the system from grinding to a halt. If we required judges for every ICE pickup, we'd need a thousand more federal benches and a budget the size of Ukraine aid. No thanks.In other news, I'll also cover the insane decision out of the DC Court of Appeals affirming a lower court's preliminary injunction that strips out the word “Temporary” from “Temporary Protected Status,” and forces Trump to keep hundreds of thousands of Haitian barbarians in our nation, as unelected federal judges prove once again that they have zero respect for our Constitution's separation of powers. Join me LIVE right after the open-access show. I also invite each of YOU to join me in our desperate but worthy mission to save our great nation. The easiest way to do that? SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! YouTube:  https://tinyurl.com/hn32rfz9 Locals: https://tinyurl.com/yck4w9kfEpisode #M1242.

Article II allows the president to grant pardons for any offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment. The presidential pardon power is among the most absolute authorities granted in the Constitution, and President Donald Trump has abused it. The pardons Trump issued to the 1500 people who took part in the January 6th insurrection have rightfully generated outrage. Those pardons are unprecedented and deeply troubling—particularly in light of the injuries suffered by more than 140 Capitol Hill police officers during the insurrection. Some have argued the pardons were warranted due to supposed unfair prosecution by the Biden administration. But the Department of Justice handled the cases appropriately: charges were brought, trials were held before judges and juries, and juries found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. There is no evidence federal prosecutors fabricated or suppressed evidence or lied; claims of unfair treatment have not been substantiated.Even though the videos we have all seen of the insurrection show lawless violence, the White House has stated the insurrectionists were actually “peaceful patriotic protesters.”By pardoning the insurrectionists, Trump shamelessly abandoned and showed no concern for the Capitol police officers.Beyond the January 6th cases, over half of the other pardons granted were for white-collar crimes committed by business executives, politicians, and a few billionaires. Court-ordered restitution to victims was wiped out, leaving the victims to pursue civil action on their own.Examples include Trevor Milton, who defrauded investors of $675 million but contributed $1.8 million to Trump's campaign, and Paul Waze, who failed to pay millions in taxes and was pardoned, erasing court-ordered restitution. Other pardons involved individuals connected to Trump's business interests or political allies, raising concerns about the integrity of the process.The pardon of Juan Orlando Hernández, the former President of Honduras convicted of drug smuggling, is particularly perplexing given its contrast with U.S. actions against other foreign leaders. The underlying motivations remain unclear, and the transparency of the process is lacking.While questionable pardons are not new, what sets President Trump apart is the sheer volume. President Biden granted 80 pardons, Trump 144 in his first term, Barack Obama 212 over two terms, George W. Bush 189 over two terms, and Bill Clinton 396 over two terms. Trump surpassed all by granting 1500 pardons on his first day in office in his second term.Other presidents have also issued controversial pardons. Clinton pardoned Mark Rich, whose ex-wife donated sizable sums to Democratic causes, and George W. Bush commuted the sentence of Lewis “Scooter” Libby, convicted of perjury and obstruction of justice. Liz Oyer of the Department of Justice, who oversaw the pardon process, resigned in protest over controversial Trump's decisions and is now an outspoken critic of Trump

Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) joined us on the Guy Benson Show today to discuss the US and Israel's strikes against Iran and the Iranian regime. Sen. Cornyn discussed why Trump has the power to attack Iran under Article II of the Constitution, and Benson and Sen. Cornyn also discussed the importance of reopening the government and funding the Department of Homeland Security.  Sen. Cornyn also discussed today's Texas primaries on both the Democratic and Republican sides, as the Republican primary appears to be headed towards a runoff in May. Listen to the full interview below! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Tara breaks down why President Trump has full authority to strike Iran despite congressional objections. From historical precedents with Obama to the current War Powers debate, the episode unpacks AUMFs, constitutional powers, and the legal history behind presidential military action.

Tara covers two explosive topics today: South Carolina's vaccine legislation threatening parental rights, and why President Trump's strike on Iran was legally and strategically justified. From MMR debates to AUMFs and imminent threats, this episode breaks down the facts the mainstream media won't cover.

If you've ever wondered how the pardon process really works—or how figures like Maxwell play their cards—this episode is your guide through the fascinating world behind the headlines.Steve Palmer and Troy get into the complexities of presidential pardon power, straight from Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution. They break down the limits of the president's ability to pardon—explaining why state crimes aren't included—and unravel recent controversies around high-profile pardons, including the case of Ghislaine Maxwell.Along the way, Steve Palmer and Troy tackle big questions about whether pardons can be refused, how the Fifth Amendment works in real life, and what makes immunity deals so different from pardons. With candid conversation and tons of legal insight, they shine a light on how famous cases and political intrigue can reveal the nuts and bolts of our justice system.Here are 3 key takeaways from the discussion:Presidential Pardons Have Limits: The president can only pardon federal crimes—not state offenses. So, even with a pardon, state prosecutors can still charge someone for the same conduct under state law.You Don't Have to Accept a Pardon: Surprised? It turns out, as discussed by Steve Palmer, a pardon is like a gift—you can refuse it, especially if accepting it means losing your right to remain silent in court.Immunity vs. Pardons: If you want the truth from a witness, immunity grants (which can come from state and federal prosecutors) force testimony—a much more complex process than a simple pardon, and practically impossible in high-profile, multi-jurisdictional cases.Got a question you want answered on the podcast? Call 614-859-2119 and leave us a voicemail. Steve will answer your question on the next podcast!Submit your questions to www.lawyertalkpodcast.com.Recorded at Channel 511.Stephen E. Palmer, Esq. has been practicing criminal defense almost exclusively since 1995. He has represented people in federal, state, and local courts in Ohio and elsewhere.Though he focuses on all areas of criminal defense, he particularly enjoys complex cases in state and federal courts.He has unique experience handling and assembling top defense teams of attorneys and experts in cases involving allegations of child abuse (false sexual allegations, false physical abuse allegations), complex scientific cases involving allegations of DUI and vehicular homicide cases with blood alcohol tests, and any other criminal cases that demand jury trial experience.Steve has unique experience handling numerous high-publicity cases that have garnered national attention.For more information about Steve and his law firm, visit Palmer Legal Defense. Copyright 2026 Stephen E. Palmer - Attorney At LawMentioned in this episode:Circle 270 Media Podcast ConsultantsCircle 270 Media® is a podcast consulting firm based in Columbus, Ohio, specializing in helping businesses develop, launch, and optimize podcasts as part of their marketing strategy. The firm emphasizes the importance of storytelling through podcasting to differentiate businesses and engage with their audiences effectively. www.circle270media.com

Sons Of Liberty Radio with Bradlee Dean Another Unconstitutional War Without Congressional Approval The Erosion of Sovereignty: Unconstitutional Warfare and the Crisis of National Identity Sons of Liberty: Unconstitutional War Report Analysis of executive overreach, the "Uni-party" system, and the erosion of Constitutional mandates. Critical Alert Core Thesis: The War Racket "If it's a righteous war, why does the President call it for himself without asking Congress? Because the people would never have agreed to it." ⚖️Constitutional Violations Article I, Section 8: Only Congress holds the power to formally declare war. Article II, Section 3: Presidential duties are confined to enumerated laws. 4th Amendment: Violated by "pretended authorities" like the TSA and DHS. Article IV, Section 4: Failure to protect states against domestic invasion/illegal immigration. $34.5B Halliburton Iraq Profits 179,027 Illegal Felons Released Key Figures & Entities Bradley Dean Lindsey Graham Netanyahu Smedley Butler CIA/Mossad Epstein/Maxwell The "Uni-Party" Agenda War as a Racket: Military blood sold for corporate profit. Mentions "War is a Racket" by Smedley Butler. Information Warfare: Mainstream media (CNN) used to manufacture consent via "monster" creation (ISIS/Al-Qaeda). Spiritual Apathy: Critique of the modern church for "rapture-based" irresponsibility and silence. ⚠️ Warning:"No country can endure the continuous warfare created by unconstitutional scoundrels." #AntiWar #Constitutionalist #Liberty Source: Sons of Liberty Radio (2026-03-02) This broadcast of Sons of Liberty features Bradley Dean addressing the recurring theme of unconstitutional military actions undertaken without Congressional approval. The discussion critiques the "uni-party" system, the perceived compromise of the American church, and alleged deep-state conspiracies involving international interests and domestic decay. Detailed Summary of Key Themes The Constitutional Crisis and Unauthorized Warfare The central premise of the discussion is that the United States government has deviated from its founding documents, specifically regarding the power to declare war. Under Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, only Congress has the authority to formally declare war, yet the executive branch frequently initiates military actions as "Commander in Chief" without such declarations. The host argues that modern politicians use the War Powers Resolution of 1973 and authorizations for use of military force (AUMF) to bypass the "voice of the people," effectively gutting the laws they are sworn to uphold. This shift is characterized as a "war" by modern politicians against the framework established by the nation's forefathers. Constitutional Authority vs. Executive Practice Article I, Section 8 Only Congress holds the power to formally declare war. ➔ Modern Practice Executive military action via AUMF and Policy Resolutions. The host argues this transition undermines the "voice of the people" and violates the original intent of the Republic. The "War Racket" and Foreign Influence The broadcast contends that American wars are often "rackets" designed for profit rather than national security. Citing Smedley Butler, the host suggests that military personnel are used as tools for foreign policy and corporate gain, specifically mentioning Halliburton's profits during the Iraq War. Current military strikes against Iran are framed not as American defense, but as actions serving the interests of "Zionist" leaders like Benjamin Netanyahu. The host alleges that these conflicts are sold to the public through media lies and "straw men" created by intelligence agencies like the CIA to justify perpetual global destabilization. Domestic Decay and Religious Compromise The host links foreign interventionism to a perceived domestic collapse, citing the "indoctrination" of youth through global education schemes and the "treasonous" allure of illegal immigration into sanctuary cities. A significant portion of the discourse is directed at the American church, which is accused of being "compromised" and passive. Dean rejects "rapture" theology—the idea that Christians will be taken out of the world to avoid suffering—as unscriptural "nonsense" that encourages spiritual apathy. Instead, he calls for a "militant" Christianity that "occupies" and contends for justice and biblical morality within the government. Foundational Perspectives "Let men be good and the government cannot be bad, but if men be bad, the government will never be good." — William Penn "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and a religious people... It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." — John Adams Allegations of Deep-State Deception The latter half of the program focuses on claims of systemic deception by the government and media. This includes the assertion that high-profile criminals like Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell are not actually in prison or dead but are "assets" protected by intelligence agencies (such as the Mossad) using political decoys. The host argues that the public is being led to the "slaughter" by a corrupt political class that uses extortion and "pedophilia" to maintain control and advance a "New World Order". Key Data Illegal Immigration: Claims that 179,027 illegal felons were released onto American streets. Iraq War Profits: Halliburton allegedly made $34.5 billion following the invasion of Iraq. Abortion Statistics: Claims that 3,000 to 4,000 babies are murdered in the womb daily, totaling 55 to 60 million. War Frequency: The assertion that the United States has been at war for 93% of its history. To-Do / Next Steps The American people must read the Constitution for themselves to recognize where the government has deviated. Read the book War Is a Racket by Smedley Butler to understand the profit motives behind military conflict. Investigate and identify the publishers of school textbooks to understand the source of youth "indoctrination." Research the last words and testimony of James Traficant regarding government corruption. Conclusion The broadcast serves as a sharp critique of the current state of the American Republic, arguing that the abandonment of Constitutional limits and biblical morality has led to a state of perpetual unauthorized war and domestic subversion. The host concludes that only a "moral and religious people" who actively challenge corruption can restore the nation from its current trajectory toward "New World Order" destabilization.

Today's episode is as urgent as it gets — Chuck Todd breaks down the seismic events of February 28, 2026, as the United States and Israel launched "Operation Epic Fury," a massive joint military strike against Iran targeting nuclear facilities, missile infrastructure, and senior regime leadership, including attempts on Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei himself. Trump announced "major combat operations" in a prerecorded video, urging Iranians to "take over your government" — a sweeping regime-change ambition that stands in stunning contrast to his campaign promises to end foreign entanglements and never play the role of the world's police. Iran has already retaliated, firing missiles at U.S. military bases in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and the UAE, with Houthi rebels in Yemen threatening to resume Red Sea shipping strikes and Hezbollah calling for regional unity against the U.S. and Israel. While a free Iran could indeed be transformational, the hard, inconvenient questions are piling up fast: What happens when the next terror attack comes in response? Who pays to rebuild Iran after we've bombed it — the same taxpayers already on the hook for Gaza and Venezuela? How does Congress respond to a president who, legal scholars argue, went to war without authorization, relying on a constitutionally dubious Article II justification even thinner than the case for Iraq? The strikes came hours after Oman's foreign minister reported "significant progress" in nuclear negotiations, making this a war of choice that blindsided America's own diplomatic efforts. Today's bombs may be the easy part — the next six months, as the law of unintended consequences takes hold across a destabilized Middle East, will be the real reckoning for a country that was told, repeatedly, it was done doing exactly this. Timeline: 00:00 Chuck Todd’s introduction - Trump strikes Iran with help from Israel 00:30 Trump campaigned against being the world’s police & war with Iran 01:45 A free Iran would be great and transformational for the world 03:30 There will a terror attack somewhere in response 04:45 Good luck explaining to taxpayers that we’re rebuilding Iran 05:15 Rebuilding Gaza, Venezuela and now Iran are our responsibility? 06:30 How will congress respond? 07:30 Trump went to war with less evidence than Bush in Iraq 09:00 The law of unintended consequences is in full effect 10:30 The Iranian regime is horrible, but Trump owes Americans an explanation 12:30 Trump ignored the constitution here, but congress has been impotent 14:00 Today is the easy part, the hard part is the next 6 months 16:15 What we’re doing is exactly what Trump said he’d never do 18:15 The country is tired of intervention around the worldSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The State of the Union Address is one of the most anticipated political events of the year. Of course, it's surrounded by tradition and ceremony. All three branches of the federal government gather in the House Chamber, the galleries pack with guests from every walk of life, the pundits gather their audiences, and the cameras all focus on one carefully crafted message from the leader of the free world.  But it's not just custom or tradition that gives rise to this historic event every year. It actually goes all the way back to the American founding, to the Constitution itself. Article II, Section 3, Clause 1 of the constitution reads as follows:  The President “shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.” George Washington, then, was the first to give an address to congress. His eventual successor, Thomas Jefferson, submitted his remarks in writing, which set a precendent of written States of the Union. Over a century later, in 1913, Woodrow Wilson restored the practice of giving the speech in person. And that custom has stood to this day.  Last night, we heard President Donald Trump give the first State of the Union address of his second term. The speech covered many of his accomplishments over the first year of this administration. Here to walk us through it is Dan West, Government Relations Director at Heritage Action for America.  --- Thoughts? Questions? Email us at: heritageexplains@heritage.org.  --- More from Heritage Action for America: https://heritageaction.com/ Dan West on X: https://x.com/Dan_J_West 

Sons Of Liberty Radio with Bradlee Dean Restoring the Standard: Impeachment, Accountability, and the Rule of Law Sons of Liberty: The Impeachment Doctrine Analysis of Constitutional Justice, Political Accountability, and the Minnesota Impeachment Movement. Broadcast: 55min Core Philosophy "No man is above the law, and no man is below it... Resignation is not justice; it is permission to live above the law." 3 Purposes of Gov • Maintain righteous cause • Preserve social order • Condemn the wicked The "Divide" Trap The "Right vs. Left" narrative is a created language designed to make lies sound truthful and ensure "Divide and Conquer." Historical Precedents 1868 A. Johnson: 11 Articles 1974 Nixon: Resigned (Watergate) 1998 Clinton: Impeached (Chinagate) Key Participants Bradley Dean (Host) Sen. Eric Lucero (MN Senate) Pam Altendorf (Voter Integrity) Current Targets Tim WalzImpeachment Keith EllisonInvestigation Illegal Aid$66M Fund Keywords #Constitution #Treason #MNLeg #BiblicalWorldview Source: Sons of Liberty Radio (2026-02-24) Target Audience: Constitutionalists & Patriots This broadcast examines the constitutional necessity of holding public officials accountable, asserting that no individual is above the law. Host Bradley Dean and Senator Eric Lucero discuss the mechanics of impeachment and the current legislative battles in Minnesota regarding the prioritization of citizens over non-citizens. The program emphasizes the role of "We the People" in maintaining a just society through active civic engagement and adherence to a moral, constitutional framework. The Constitutional Mandate for Accountability The foundational principle of American governance is that the law serves as a master rather than a servant to those in power. Drawing on Article II, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, the broadcast highlights that the President, Vice President, and all civil officers must be removed from office upon impeachment for and conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. Historical precedents, such as the impeachment of Andrew Johnson in 1868 and the resignation of Richard Nixon, serve as reminders that resignation is often insufficient when criminal conduct has occurred; true justice requires prosecution to prevent the law from being treated as a suggestion. The host argues that the current political climate often replaces this standard with a "resign and forget" culture that insults the very laws officials are sworn to uphold. The Impeachment Framework The Charge The House of Representatives files charges of misconduct (Impeachment). The Trial The Senate acts as a court to try the case; conviction requires a 2/3 vote. The Result Removal from office and potential disqualification from future positions. Legislative Conflict and the "Lawful Status" Debate Senator Eric Lucero reports on recent developments within the Minnesota Housing Committee regarding a $66 million appropriation for rental assistance. Lucero introduced an amendment seeking to restrict these funds to individuals with "lawful status" within the United States, a proposal that was ultimately rejected by the committee. This legislative friction underscores a broader concern presented in the broadcast: that current administrations are prioritizing special interest groups and non-citizens over the taxpayers they are sworn to represent. The host characterizes this as a form of "aiding and abetting" that undermines the security and financial integrity of the state. The Moral Duty and the Legacy of Sacrifice The program bridges the gap between modern politics and historical sacrifice, referencing the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery and the "gratitude" owed to those who died for American freedoms. The host argues that tolerating corruption in government is a desecration of the blood shed by veterans. By invoking the "English Common Law" and the biblical purposes of government—to condemn the wicked and justify the righteous—the broadcast calls for a rejection of the "right vs. left" paradigm. Instead, it advocates for a return to a "righteous order" where the law is applied equally to all, regardless of political affiliation or status. Three Purposes of Government Based on Deuteronomy 25:1 and Common Law principles: 1Maintain Order: To restrain men from violating moral laws. 2Condemn the Wicked: To ensure criminals face consequences. 3Justify the Righteous: To protect and uphold those who obey the law. Key Data $66 Million: The amount proposed for the general fund appropriation for rental assistance in Minnesota. $19 Billion: The upper estimate of alleged fraud mentioned in relation to current administrative oversight. 1868: The year of President Andrew Johnson's impeachment. 11 Articles: The number of articles of impeachment adapted against Andrew Johnson. To-Do / Next Steps Support the ongoing efforts to draw up and advance articles of impeachment against Tim Walz and Keith Ellison. Volunteer for active community advocacy, including door knocking and phone calling, to persuade hearts and minds before the November elections. Attend or stream the Sunday morning service at 9:00 AM Central Time focusing on fasting, prayer, and spiritual discipline. Consider partnering financially with the organization to sustain the broadcast and its outreach efforts. Conclusion The broadcast serves as a clarion call for constitutional literacy and moral courage. It posits that the survival of the Republic depends not on political parties, but on a citizenry that demands justice, honors the sacrifices of the past, and refuses to allow its representatives to live above the laws they were elected to uphold.

Sons Of Liberty Radio with Bradlee Dean Restoration of Justice: Constitutional Accountability and the Minnesota Impeachment Movement Introduction This document summarizes the February 23, 2026, broadcast of Sons of Liberty Radio, featuring host Bradley Dean and Minnesota State Representatives Pam Altendorf and Ben Davis. The discussion centers on the constitutional mandate for holding public officials accountable, specifically focusing on allegations of financial fraud, voter roll irregularities, and the formal filing of impeachment articles against high-ranking Minnesota officials. Detailed Summary of Key Themes 1. The Constitutional Framework for Impeachment The broadcast emphasizes that the U.S. Constitution provides specific mechanisms to ensure no public official remains above the law. Citing Article II, Section 4, the host argues that removal from office is mandatory upon conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. The narrative rejects the idea that resignation is a sufficient substitute for prosecution, comparing a politician's resignation to a criminal being allowed to quit their "job" rather than facing trial. Historical precedents, including the impeachments of Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, are used to illustrate that the House of Representatives holds the "God-given right" to charge misconduct, while the Senate serves as the court for trial. Constitutional Basis for Removal Under Article II, Section 4, the President, Vice President, and all civil officers shall be removed from office on impeachment for and conviction of: Treason Bribery High Crimes 2. Voter Integrity and the Hennepin County Dispute Representative Pam Altendorf details her efforts to verify Minnesota's voter rolls, noting that Secretary of State Steve Simon has allegedly denied access to these rolls to both federal authorities and elected state officials. Despite this, Altendorf obtained the master list for Hennepin County, which represents 20% of the state's population. She reports discovering significant "abnormalities," such as 12 individuals registered at a single one-bedroom apartment. The discussion highlights a perceived lack of transparency, where private companies like ERIC receive data while public officials are blocked from verification. 3. Allegations of Systemic Fraud and Misconduct The broadcast brings forward claims of a $19 billion fraud within the state of Minnesota, which the host asserts is being treated as "make-believe" by Governor Tim Walz. Bradley Dean argues that over 1,000 eyewitnesses have pointed to administrative oversight in this fraud, yet no indictments have followed. The host further suggests that many influential figures in Minnesota's government are "transplants" from other states, contributing to a perceived infiltration of the local political system that runs antithetical to the interests of the 5.9 million residents. Minnesota Impeachment Status Gov. Tim Walz Articles in Hand / 5 Signers AG Keith Ellison 6 Articles Proposed 4. Legislative Action: Articles Against Walz and Ellison Representative Ben Davis provides an update on the formal impeachment process. Articles against Governor Tim Walz have been retrieved from the Revisor's Office with the maximum allowed five signatures for filing. Additionally, Davis announces six articles of impeachment against Attorney General Keith Ellison. These charges stem from an alleged "quid pro quo" involving campaign donors and Ellison's public defense of individuals who disrupted a church service, which Davis characterizes as a failure to uphold his oath to protect constitutional rights. Key Data & Indicators $19 Billion: The estimated amount of alleged fraud cited by the host regarding Minnesota state oversight. 12 People: The number of registered voters found at a single one-bedroom apartment during a roll audit. 20%: The portion of Minnesota's total population residing in Hennepin County. 5 Signatures: The legal limit for initial signers on impeachment articles in the Minnesota House. 81%: The cited percentage of Americans who reportedly do not trust mainstream media. To-Do / Next Steps Contact Representatives: Citizens are encouraged to email or call their state representatives and senators to demand support for the impeachment articles. Community Organization: Residents should organize and show up in large numbers at the state capitol to protest anti-Second Amendment legislation. Voter Roll Verification: Continued pressure must be applied to the Secretary of State to allow public verification of voter rolls. Support Independent Media: Listeners are asked to partner financially with the ministry to keep the broadcast on the air. Conclusion The broadcast serves as a call to action for what is described as the "silent majority" in Minnesota. By leveraging Article II, Section 4 and Article I of the Constitution, Representatives Altendorf and Davis aim to challenge the current administration's handling of state funds and election integrity. The core message remains that "liberty is the right to do what the law permits," and justice must be actively pursued by the people to hold perverted systems accountable.

“Free will” is not a phrase found in the Bible. The concept seems to have been brought into Christian theology by the church father Tertullian (160–240), who likely borrowed it from Stoic philosophy. Augustine (354–430) wrote a treatise called "On Free Choice of the Will" early in his career but altered some of his views later, which led to much debate and confusion on the issue throughout the Middle Ages. The Roman Catholic Desiderius Erasmus (1466–1536) wrote a treatise on free will against Martin Luther, to which Luther replied with his "Bondage of the Will" in 1525. The second article of the Formula of Concord upholds Luther's biblical teachings on free will but also clarifies misunderstandings about Luther's teachings that had persisted in the decades after 1525. The central question of this article is: After the fall, what are unregenerate human beings able to do, from their own will and intellect, toward their conversion and regeneration? (See FC SD II 2.) The answer logically follows from the preceding article on original sin, which exposes us as guilty, condemned sinners under God's wrath. Until the Holy Spirit converts us to Christ, we are powerless to enter a saving relationship with God or even prepare ourselves to receive God's grace. This teaching also safeguards the truth of the Gospel: God does everything necessary to save us and we, by faith, receive His salvation totally as a gift. Rev. Carl Roth, pastor of Grace Lutheran Church in Elgin, TX, joins Andy and Sarah to talk about the “Searching Scripture” feature in the February 2026 issue of the Lutheran Witness titled “Article II: Free Will” on Article II in the Formula of Concord. This year, “Searching Scripture” is themed “Following the Formula” and will walk through the Formula of Concord in the Augsburg Confession. Follow along every month! Before starting this study, it may be helpful to read FC Ep II on Free Will (p. 477–479 in Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions, CPH 2005). Or follow along with the full Formula of Concord monthly reading plan at witness.lcms.org/reading-plan. Listen to the Coffee Hour episode with Rev. Brady Finnern on Article II at kfuo.org/2025/02/03/coffee-hour-020425-free-will-in-the-formula-of-concord, and find correlating Concord Matters episodes at kfuo.org/formulaofconcord. Find online exclusives of the Lutheran Witness at witness.lcms.org and subscribe to the Lutheran Witness at cph.org/witness.

“Free will” is not a phrase found in the Bible. The concept seems to have been brought into Christian theology by the church father Tertullian (160–240), who likely borrowed it from Stoic philosophy. Augustine (354–430) wrote a treatise called "On Free Choice of the Will" early in his career but altered some of his views later, which led to much debate and confusion on the issue throughout the Middle Ages. The Roman Catholic Desiderius Erasmus (1466–1536) wrote a treatise on free will against Martin Luther, to which Luther replied with his "Bondage of the Will" in 1525. The second article of the Formula of Concord upholds Luther's biblical teachings on free will but also clarifies misunderstandings about Luther's teachings that had persisted in the decades after 1525. The central question of this article is: After the fall, what are unregenerate human beings able to do, from their own will and intellect, toward their conversion and regeneration? (See FC SD II 2.) The answer logically follows from the preceding article on original sin, which exposes us as guilty, condemned sinners under God's wrath. Until the Holy Spirit converts us to Christ, we are powerless to enter a saving relationship with God or even prepare ourselves to receive God's grace. This teaching also safeguards the truth of the Gospel: God does everything necessary to save us and we, by faith, receive His salvation totally as a gift. Rev. Carl Roth, pastor of Grace Lutheran Church in Elgin, TX, joins Andy and Sarah to talk about the “Searching Scripture” feature in the February 2026 issue of the Lutheran Witness titled “Article II: Free Will” on Article II in the Formula of Concord. This year, “Searching Scripture” is themed “Following the Formula” and will walk through the Formula of Concord in the Augsburg Confession. Follow along every month! Before starting this study, it may be helpful to read FC Ep II on Free Will (p. 477–479 in Concordia: The Lutheran Confessions, CPH 2005). Or follow along with the full Formula of Concord monthly reading plan at witness.lcms.org/reading-plan. Listen to the Coffee Hour episode with Rev. Brady Finnern on Article II at kfuo.org/2025/02/03/coffee-hour-020425-free-will-in-the-formula-of-concord, and find correlating Concord Matters episodes at kfuo.org/formulaofconcord. Find online exclusives of the Lutheran Witness at witness.lcms.org and subscribe to the Lutheran Witness at cph.org/witness. Have a topic you'd like to hear about on The Coffee Hour? Contact us at: listener@kfuo.org.

Is the world witnessing a historic global reset?In this explosive conversation, Michael and Gene break down the domino effect unfolding across the globe—from the collapse of Maduro's grip on Venezuela, to widespread unrest in Iran, to China and Russia being pushed onto their heels.The discussion explores how President Donald Trump's leadership style, strategic pressure, and willingness to enforce consequences have reshaped both international power dynamics and domestic governance. Topics include:Regime instability in Iran and VenezuelaTerror funding, Hezbollah, and Hamas implicationsChina and Russia's shifting postureU.S. authority under Article II and constitutional powerSanctuary cities, federal enforcement, and consequencesGovernment fraud, corruption, and accountabilityWhy leadership, consequences, and responsibility matter now more than everIs this the end of decades of unchecked globalist control?Is America finally responding after years of hesitation?This is a no-nonsense, hard-hitting discussion on power, accountability, and the future of the United States and the world.

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureThe US is now withdrawing from the GCF, the entire plan of the [WEF]/[CB] is imploding. Housing is going to boom, Trump has all the pieces in place. Supreme Court is suppose to make a decision on tariffs, if they rule against Trump he has another card up his sleeve.US trade deficit dropped by 40%. Trump just gave the [WEF] the middle finger and shutdown their entire agenda. The [DS] is doing exactly what Trump wants, they are building the insurrection right in front of the countries eyes. Trump has now set the trap of all traps, never interfere with an enemy while in the process of destroying themselves. Trump has the military, he has the law on his side, everything has been planned for, playbook known. Economy https://twitter.com/SecScottBessent/status/2009264006083522849?s=20 (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); https://twitter.com/TKL_Adam/status/2009018778294927730?s=20 https://twitter.com/profstonge/status/2009298104764219475?s=20 The Supreme Court is expected to potentially rule on the legality of President Trump’s tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) as early as tomorrow, January 9, 2026, at around 10 a.m. ET.  The justices heard oral arguments in the consolidated cases (Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump and Trump v. V.O.S. Selections, Inc.) on November 5, 2025, where they appeared skeptical of the administration’s position that IEEPA grants the president authority to impose such sweeping tariffs during declared national emergencies.  Lower courts had previously ruled against the tariffs’ legality, but they remain in effect pending the Supreme Court’s decision.    These options are drawn from existing trade laws and have been used by past administrations. Here’s a breakdown of the key alternatives: Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962: This allows the president to impose tariffs on imports deemed a threat to national security after an investigation by the Department of Commerce. There’s no cap on duty levels or duration, making it flexible for broad application, such as on steel or autos.  Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974: Through the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), this permits tariffs in response to unfair or discriminatory foreign trade practices that violate international agreements or harm U.S. commerce. No rate limit exists, but it requires an investigation and findings, which could target specific countries like China.  Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974: This enables temporary import surcharges of up to 15% (or quotas) for up to 150 days to address “large and serious” balance-of-payments deficits. It’s seen as a quick interim option while longer-term measures are pursued, but extensions need congressional approval.  Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974: Known as “safeguard” measures, this authorizes tariffs if surging imports are causing or threatening serious injury to domestic industries. It requires a U.S. International Trade Commission investigation and recommendation, with tariffs potentially lasting up to four years (extendable to eight).  Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930: This allows duties up to 50% on imports from countries engaging in “unfair” practices that discriminate against U.S. exports. It’s less commonly used and could face immediate lawsuits due to its broad interpretation potential. The administration has signaled readiness to shift to these tools, potentially starting with Section 122 for rapid implementation. U.S. Trade Deficit Drops 40% in Latest Commerce Dept Report  As you review this latest data on trade, remember any drop in trade deficits has two big picture functions: First, lower trade deficits generally mean the accompanying GDP release will be stronger than anticipated because imported products are a deduction from the valuation of all goods and services created in the U.S. economy.  Lower imports mean less is deducted. Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, a drop in the trade deficit created by diminished imports means more wealth remains inside the USA. We are not spending, sending money overseas, to import foreign goods at the same rate, and that money stays inside the U.S. economy. More wealth inside the U.S. provides the fuel for expanded domestic growth, more investment gains in USA manufacturing and USA industry and the ability to pay higher USA wages. The Commerce Department is reporting today that the U.S. trade deficit for October 2025 dropped to the smallest amount in 16-years.  A significant amount of the deficit drop was because a high value of physical precious metals (gold/silver) was exported, simultaneous with big offshore pharmaceutical companies dropping the prices of imported products (policy and tariff pressure).   Some may question whether internal consumer demand has declined, causing the significant drop in imports.  However, the U.S productivity rate is still very high – which generally means domestic consumer demand is still high and all units produced have a lower overall cost per unit. Economic analysis can get weedy…. so, a simple way to look at productivity is to think about baking bread in your kitchen. If you were going to bake 4 loaves of bread it might take you 2 hrs. start to finish. However, if you were going to bake 8 loaves of bread it would not take you twice as long because most of the tasks can be accomplished with simple increases in batch size, and only minor increases in labor time. Your productivity measured in the last four loaves is higher. Economic Productivity is measured much the same way, within what's called a production probability equation. Additionally, if two hours of your time are worth $40, each of four loaves of bread costs $10 in labor; but if you make 8 loaves in the same amount of time the labor cost is only $5/per loaf.   When we see higher productivity in direct alignment with GDP increases, the increased production indicates sustainable GDP growth. Source: theconservativetreehouse.com https://twitter.com/RealEJAntoni/status/2009314808332734604?s=20 Political/Rights https://twitter.com/lizcollin/status/2009046198314008954?s=20 DOGE   Geopolitical https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/2009287108796575807?s=20 https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/2009306335087665208?s=20 These nine Republican lawmakers joined the Democrats: Fitzpatrick (PA), Bresnahan (PA), Mackenzie (PA), Lawler (NY), Salazar (FL), LaLota (NY), Valadao (CA), Kean (NJ), Miller (OH). Yes, for S.J. Res. 98 (the Venezuela war powers resolution referenced in the post) to become law and enforce limits on further U.S. military actions, it must pass the House of Representatives after its recent advancement in the Senate. If the House approves it, the bill would then go to President Trump, who has indicated he would likely veto it based on similar past actions.  If vetoed, Congress would need a two-thirds majority in both chambers to override.    Article II of the Constitution, as all Presidents, and their Departments of Justice, have determined before me. Nevertheless, a more important Senate Vote will be taking place next week on this very subject. https://twitter.com/DOGEai_tx/status/2009076665054277855?s=20  101’s 11-point democratization criteria – including releasing political prisoners and restoring National Assembly powers. The 2025 bill mandates strict oversight of any aid through Section 204’s safeguards against regime capture. Taxpayers deserve transparency: Will this embassy facilitate accountability for $150B in stolen oil revenues, or just greenlight more foreign aid slush funds? Strategic engagement only works if tied to verifiable reforms, not symbolic gestures. https://twitter.com/estrellainfant/status/2008948263916015793?s=20 Marco Rubio and Pete Hegseth continue to expose Delcy Rodríguez and, at the same time, prevent the internal fissures of the regime from spiraling into an uncontrolled collapse. That is no coincidence: it is strategy. Rubio is not acting to provoke an immediate implosion, but to manage the decomposition of power. By exposing contradictions, routes, false narratives, and opaque movements, he weakens Delcy in front of the Chavista leadership, but without pushing the system toward a violent break that generates a power vacuum, chaos, or an unpredictable military reaction. This achieves several objectives at once: First, it isolates Delcy. Every time she is exposed, her room to maneuver shrinks in front of her “external allies” and the regime’s hardline elements. She shifts from being an operator to becoming a risk. Second, it deepens internal distrust. When sensitive information starts to align with U.S. actions, within the regime no one knows who is leaking what. That paranoia is corrosive and weakens more than a direct strike. Third, it preserves the minimum governability necessary for a transition. An abrupt collapse favors criminal actors, armed dissidents, and foreign powers. Controlling the pace of the erosion allows maintaining channels, containing damage, and preparing the ground for a subsequent political process. In that context, Delcy is trapped. If she cooperates, she exposes herself. If she doesn’t cooperate, she becomes isolated. Any move weakens her. And Rubio, aware of that, pressures her without touching the final detonator. That’s why this deserves attention: we are not seeing improvisation or personal revenge, but a calibrated operation of attrition, where the goal is not to humiliate for spectacle, but to dismantle the regime piece by piece, avoiding Venezuela paying the cost of an uncontrolled collapse. https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2008967791966376081?s=20 https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/2009090766354960453?s=20 War/Peace Security Alert – U. S. Embassy Kyiv, Ukraine (January 8, 2026) Location: Ukraine, all districts Event: The U.S. embassy in Kyiv has received information concerning a potentially significant air attack that may occur at any time over the next several days. The embassy, as always, recommends U.S. citizens be prepared to immediately shelter in the event an air alert is announced. Actions to Take: Identify shelter locations before any air alert. Download a reliable air alert app to your mobile phone, like Air Raid Siren  or Alarm Map . Immediately take shelter if an air alert is announced. Check local media for breaking news. Be prepared to adjust your plans. Keep reserves of water, food, and medication. Follow the directions of Ukrainian officials and first responders in the event of an emergency. Review what the Department of State Can and Cannot Do in a Crisis . https://twitter.com/Geiger_Capital/status/2008991231507099730?s=20    tremendous numbers being produced by Tariffs from other Countries, many of which, in the past, have “ripped off” the United States at levels never seen before, I would stay at the $1 Trillion Dollar number but, because of Tariffs, and the tremendous Income that they bring, amounts being generated, that would have been unthinkable in the past (especially just one year ago during the Sleepy Joe Biden Administration, the Worst President in the History of our Country!), we are able to easily hit the $1.5 Trillion Dollar number while, at the same time, producing an unparalleled Military Force, and having the ability to, at the same time, pay down Debt, and likewise, pay a substantial Dividend to moderate income Patriots within our Country! 
PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP Medical/False Flags [DS] Agenda https://twitter.com/DerrickEvans4WV/status/2009097879106015609?s=20 https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/2009305173395415310?s=20 https://twitter.com/susancrabtree/status/2009271768121242054?s=20  years, which is happening this morning. This is the arrogant California corruption that has occurred under Newsom's watch and in this case —possibly his own direction or one of his top aide's —because the light was finally beginning to shine on why the Golden State has become so tarnished under his watch. https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/2009188335873302712?s=20   She warned that the intimidation is systemic, and basically if you speak up, expect your life to be dismantled. Whistleblowers are supposed to be protected by law, and if they're being hunted for telling the truth, the system is being weaponized. @MarionONeill1 : “Retaliation has been going on for quite some time and it's now escalated. You're going to lose your job. You're going to lose your home. They'll track your children. They'll make sure you can't get a job anywhere Democrats control.  https://twitter.com/Peoples_Pundit/status/2009099844506501431?s=20 https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2009087403575947648?s=20 DHS Sec. Kristi Noem Drops Facts, Cooks Walz and Frey During Presser on MN Anti-ICE Incident https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/2009046495262110138?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2009046495262110138%7Ctwgr%5Ec2c616dd05bfbbc6e3cd4613990f826fb989a6af%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Fsister-toldjah%2F2026%2F01%2F07%2Fkristi-noem-drops-facts-cooks-walz-and-frey-during-presser-on-mn-anti-ice-incident-n2197890   these federal law enforcement officers, they’ll say that when you call for back-up…it’s hit and miss.” https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/2009044827158007875?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2009044827158007875%7Ctwgr%5Ec2c616dd05bfbbc6e3cd4613990f826fb989a6af%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Fsister-toldjah%2F2026%2F01%2F07%2Fkristi-noem-drops-facts-cooks-walz-and-frey-during-presser-on-mn-anti-ice-incident-n2197890 Noem also shared that the woman in the SUV had been “stalking and impeding” the agents during the course of the day: https://twitter.com/realDailyWire/status/2009050638232244548?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2009050638232244548%7Ctwgr%5Ec2c616dd05bfbbc6e3cd4613990f826fb989a6af%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fredstate.com%2Fsister-toldjah%2F2026%2F01%2F07%2Fkristi-noem-drops-facts-cooks-walz-and-frey-during-presser-on-mn-anti-ice-incident-n2197890 Source: redstate.com Breaking: The same ICE agent appears to have been dragged roughly 300 feet while executing an arrest warrant on an illegal alien, resulting in 33 stitches just six months ago. Video and full details below. Thanks to @MWhitney93679 for bring this to my attention. @DataRepublican @elonmusk https://cbsnews.com/minnesota/video/shocking-footage-shows-driver-dragging-deportation-officer/?referrer=grok.com https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/2009292194406895696?s=20 https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/2009044298486948261?s=20 https://twitter.com/warriors_mom/status/2009038176627876188?s=20   force by an ICE agent becomes unavoidable. And the local Minneapolis politicians decide it's the perfect opportunity to declare war against the federal government? https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2009142447905882188?s=20   to the deadly incident, leftists are urging vengeance and riots in Minneapolis. Rioters earlier surged to a federal building and smashed up the entrance. The shooting incident occurred in the context of the far-left and Antifa urging violence against ICE for months. It has led to an Antifa cell carrying out an ambush shooting in Texas on the Prairieland facility. At least seven have pleaded guilty to a federal terrorism charge. Then, in Dallas, an ICE facility was shot up by an anti-ICE activist, killing people. https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/2009040818896830650?s=20 BREAKING: The wife of Renee Nicole Good—the 37-year-old Minneapolis shooting victim who attempted to run over an ICE officer—appears to have been outside the vehicle filming as her wife blocked ICE vehicles. She is seen wearing a flannel shirt, walking around the vehicle and recording ICE officers. She later runs back to the vehicle to check on Renee. Afterward, she tells a nearby man, “That's my wife.” When he asks if she knows any of her wife's relatives she could call, she responds, “We’re new here. I don’t have people… I can't even breathe right now.” Why was she outside the vehicle filming while her wife was blocking ICE officers? Terrible https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/2009143305075097679?s=20 https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/2009103459019002182?s=20 https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2009270499398893758?s=20 https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2009132509607677966?s=20 https://twitter.com/iAnonPatriot/status/2009087576402219051?s=20 https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/2008995871724355652?s=20 https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/2009297640555503770?s=20 https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/2009197905723216144?s=20   After about two minutes on scene, my security began wanting to bring me out of there due to the immediate threats of violence. I tried to shorten this video as much as possible but it's tough given all the BS that unfolded. As soon as I dialed 911, one of the leftist screamed “Minneapolis Police are on OUR side!” Turns out, he was right. – A vehicle began chasing us the wrong way down a one way and then threatened to kiII me (dispatch heard this and responded by asking for my last name?) – First dispatcher promised they'd respond, asked me if I was “White,” held me on the phone for the 10 mins, and then ended the call – Second one called back and gave me the runaround as the situation worsens – Third one calls me back and tells me to go fck myself, essentially We ended up being FOLLOWED out of town, and requested backup set to arrive in a few hours. We are NOT giving up. Leftists WILL NOT terrorize us into silence. See you in a few hours, Minneapolis. Stay tuned. Will Trump invoke the Insurrection Act? Before Jan 20, 2029 57% Before 2027 43% Before Jan 20, 2029 If the President of the United States has invoked the Insurrection Act to deploy the United States military and/or the federalized National Guard within the United States before Jan 20, 2029, then the market resolves to Yes. Sources from the White House, The New York Times, the Associated Press, Reuters, Axios, Politico, Semafor, The Information, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC. Minneapolis Public Schools Cancel Classes and Activities for Rest of Week  Minneapolis Public Schools announced Wednesday night that all classes and activities were canceled for the rest of the week and that students would not have to do ‘e-learning' at home while schools are closed. Protests are expected in the coming days after a woman driver was shot and killed by a federal officer when she allegedly tried to run him over during a protest against ICE in a Minneapolis residential neighborhood Wednesday morning. MPS statement: No school Jan. 8-9 due to safety concerns Source: thegatewaypundit.com Preplanned Riot patterns. https://twitter.com/TheSCIF/status/2009115663848362251?s=20 https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2009077478073979120?s=20 Do you think the criminals are trying to cover their tracks, with the riots are they going to burn down the many Somali daycares will they then file for insurance claims, loss of business revenue claims. https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/2009131575724625972?s=20 https://twitter.com/amuse/status/2009009290518872568?s=20 https://twitter.com/Cernovich/status/2009041195717284106?s=20 https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2009020845239533590?s=20 TAKE A LISTEN https://twitter.com/WarClandestine/status/2009117399300362278?s=20 DHS makes over 1500 immigration arrests in Minneapolis, Secretary Kristi Noem says  https://twitter.com/Sec_Noem/status/2008718230039450008?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2008718230039450008%7Ctwgr%5Ec51cd928497b686ddee7e7e639023089bf1f9b57%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fthenationaldesk.com%2Fnews%2Famericas-news-now%2Fdhs-makes-1500-arrests-in-minneapolis-secretary-kristi-noem-says source:  wgxa.tv/  https://twitter.com/JDVance/status/2009090255908130994?s=20 https://twitter.com/jsolomonReports/status/2009278938019688755?s=20 President Trump's Plan https://twitter.com/StephenM/status/2009059590726627814?s=20  https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/2009334017250996436?s=20 The saying “don’t fire until you see the whites of their eyes” (or similar variations) is most famously associated with the Battle of Bunker Hill on June 17, 1775, during the early stages of the American Revolutionary War. American colonial forces, low on ammunition and facing British regulars advancing uphill, were reportedly instructed to hold their fire until the enemy was close enough for shots to be effective—maximizing the impact of limited powder and musket balls, which were inaccurate at longer ranges. BREAKING: Obama Judge Disqualifies Trump-Appointed US Attorney Overseeing Letitia James Investigations, Tosses Subpoenas Issued to James A federal judge on Thursday disqualified the Trump-appointed US Attorney for the Northern District of New York overseeing investigations into New York Attorney General Letitia James. US District Judge Lorna Schofield, an Obama appointee, disqualified acting US Attorney John Sarcone and quashed two subpoenas issues to Letitia James. Sarcone is the fifth Trump-appointed US Attorney to be disqualified by a rogue judge Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/2009025328065466665?s=20 WITHDRAWING FROM INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum directing the withdrawal of the United States from 66 international organizations that no longer serve American interests. The Memorandum orders all Executive Departments and Agencies to cease participating in and funding 35 non-United Nations (UN) organizations and 31 UN entities that operate contrary to U.S. national interests, security, economic prosperity, or sovereignty. This follows a review ordered earlier this year of all international intergovernmental organizations, conventions, and treaties that the United States is a member of or party to, or that the United States funds or supports. These withdrawals will end American taxpayer funding and involvement in entities that advance globalist agendas over U.S. priorities, or that address important issues inefficiently or ineffectively such that U.S. taxpayer dollars are best allocated in other ways to support the relevant missions. RESTORING AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY: President Trump is ending U.S. participation in international organizations that undermine America's independence and waste taxpayer dollars on ineffective or hostile agendas. Many of these bodies promote radical climate policies, global governance, and ideological programs that conflict with U.S. sovereignty and economic strength. American taxpayers have spent billions on these organizations with little return, while they often criticize U.S. policies, advance agendas contrary to our values, or waste taxpayer dollars by purporting to address important issues but not achieving any real results. By exiting these entities, President Trump is saving taxpayer money and refocusing resources on America First priorities.  This is factually a much bigger deal, a bigger win, than most will initially appreciate. Each of the institutions carry “membership fees” or financial obligations each participating government pays into. Each organization consists of board members, stakeholders and other administrative offices which employ the friends and families of current and former politicians, world “leaders” and essentially well-connected and disconnected elites who run the agencies. It's like a massive network of NGOs, except the entities exist exclusively with government funding. Just like the United Nations itself, the USA always pays the dues, fees and largest portion of the operating expenses, which includes payrolls and travel benefits. Other countries participate, but it is the USA who picks up the largest portion of the financial obligations for the organization itself to exist. Like USAID, the designated “global” organizations (conventions, treaties, etc) operate as massive bureaucratic rule makers for global standards and practices. The organizations themselves employ a network of downstream entities, agencies, contractors, think-tanks, academic liaisons and internal government offices who collaborate with the goals and objectives of the parent organization.   Withdrawing the support of the U.S. means cutting that entire apparatus off from receiving funding from the USA. Europe and the USA are the largest funders of each of these World Economic Forum aligned agencies. It is not coincidental that President Trump and Secretary Rubio are making this move in advance of President Trump traveling to Davos, where the network associations congregate. President Trump is expected to deliver a bucket of ice water upon the heads of those who attend Davos annually. The GREAT RESET crew, who design the global government customs and norms, is being reset. Source: theconservativetreehouse.com (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

On today's special, we turn our full attention to Venezuela, exploring the need for intervention with four guests who offer varied firsthand experiences and perspectives on the country and President Trump's role. Our first guest is Santiago Vidal Calvo, a cities policy analyst focused on government accountability and transparency through the Manhattan Institute's Freedom of Information Law initiatives. Born in Caracas, Venezuela, Vidal Calvo immigrated to the United States in 2021. He explains why President Trump's actions were lawful under Article II of the U.S. Constitution and justified by national security concerns, noting that more than a century of precedent supports the president's authority to act in this manner. He also challenges claims of international law violations, questioning who defines and enforces international law—and where those protections were during the 27 years Venezuelans were killed, tortured, and kidnapped. Next we speak with Carrie Filipetti who currently serves as Executive Director of the Vandenberg Coalition. Previously, she held senior roles at the U.S. Department of State, including Deputy Assistant Secretary for Cuba and Venezuela in the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs and Deputy Special Representative for Venezuela—earning a Superior Honor Award for her service. Venezuela's collapse is a stark riches-to-rags story: once the wealthiest nation in Latin America, its decline began with the rise of socialism. In just the past few years, roughly 25 percent of the population has been forced to flee. Families have been torn apart, torture and human rights abuses are widespread, and nearly every Venezuelan has been affected—fueling strong domestic support for what is unfolding now. Carrie also examines what this moment means for Cuba, and how these developments will shape the broader Western Hemisphere, including implications for Cuba and Nicaragua. Our third guest is Doral Councilman Rafael Piñeyro, who was born in Caracas, Venezuela, and moved to Miami with his family at the age of 15, carrying hopes and dreams for his future. Today, roughly 40 percent of the Doral community is Venezuelan. This issue goes beyond political parties or ideology—it is about principle, accountability, and justice. What happens in Venezuela matters not only to its people, but to the entire region and the United States. After 26 years of suffering under these regimes, the impact has been felt both in Venezuela and here at home. Councilman Piñeyro believes the United States is now sending a clear and unmistakable message: these regimes will be held accountable, and it is time for a better future for Latin America—while signaling to the world that America is back. Alexa Lavoi, Chief Journalist for Rebel News in Quebec and Ottawa, recounts her on-the-ground reporting from Doral, Florida, where she interviewed Venezuelans who fled their homeland after facing persecution for opposing views or noncompliance with the regime. Through emotional, firsthand stories, Alexa witnessed both the pain and resilience within the community. While hope remains strong, there is also profound worry for the future of Venezuela and for family members still trapped under the regime.

This Day in Legal History: George Washington Delivers First State of the Union AddressOn January 8, 1790, President George Washington delivered the first State of the Union address to a joint session of the U.S. Congress in New York City, the temporary capital of the United States. This moment marked the formal inauguration of a constitutional duty outlined in Article II, Section 3, which requires the president to periodically give Congress information on the “State of the Union.” Washington's address was brief—just over 1,000 words—but carried significant weight, as it was the first time a sitting president had spoken to the legislature under the newly ratified Constitution.In his remarks, Washington emphasized the need to build public credit, maintain national defense, and promote science and literature. He called on Congress to consider a system of uniform weights and measures and to establish a national post office. Notably, he stressed the importance of establishing laws that would encourage “a due respect for property” and “the security of liberty.” His recommendations helped shape the early legislative agenda and solidify the constitutional structure of government roles.The address was delivered in person, following British parliamentary tradition, but Thomas Jefferson would later abandon this practice in favor of written messages, considering in-person speeches too monarchical in tone. Washington's speech helped define the president's role not merely as an executive but as a constitutional communicator, responsible for setting national priorities in collaboration with Congress.The legal legacy of this event lies in the precedent it established: that the president would serve not only as head of state and government, but also as an active participant in shaping legislative goals through regular, formal communication. Over time, this annual message evolved into a major political and legal event, shaping policy narratives and underscoring the balance of powers between the branches of government.Tysen Duva, a long-serving federal prosecutor from Florida, was recently sworn in as head of the U.S. Justice Department's Criminal Division, a powerful role now seen as vulnerable to political pressure under President Trump's second term. Duva replaces acting chief Matthew Galeotti, who, despite not being a permanent appointee, had earned respect for shielding the division from direct political interference and maintaining operational independence, particularly in white-collar and public corruption cases. Duva, who has no prior managerial experience at this scale, will now oversee over 1,000 prosecutors amid ongoing departmental turmoil, internal resignations, and controversial Trump-driven interventions.His appointment follows internal conflict, including a recent case where Duva clashed with a Trump-aligned U.S. attorney who tried to fast-track charges against a Democratic congresswoman. While the charges ultimately proceeded, the case highlights the complex political dynamics Duva must now navigate. Though Duva has pledged impartiality and praised Galeotti's example, his lack of a close working relationship with Deputy AG Todd Blanche—unlike Galeotti—may limit his autonomy.Observers note that the Criminal Division has largely avoided the most contentious political directives of the Trump administration so far, including investigations into Trump's critics and cultural flashpoints like gender-affirming care. However, experts warn that Duva may face tighter constraints going forward, with limits placed on certain enforcement areas like overseas bribery and tariff violations. DOJ veterans emphasize that how Duva manages pressure from Attorney General Pam Bondi, Blanche, and the White House will determine the future direction of the department's criminal enforcement strategy.Political Tension Awaits DOJ's Unproven Criminal Division ChiefThe UK's Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has contacted Elon Musk's platform X and his AI company xAI, seeking clarification on how they are complying with UK data protection laws. The inquiry follows reports raising concerns about Grok, X's built-in AI chatbot, and its ability to generate images that may involve the use of personal data. The ICO emphasized that individuals have the right to expect lawful and respectful handling of their personal information on social media platforms. The regulator is requesting details on the safeguards X and xAI have in place to protect user privacy and uphold legal standards under UK data law.Reports have intensified regulatory concern by alleging that Grok has generated explicit images involving underage individuals. The claims raise serious legal and ethical questions under UK data protection and child‑safety laws. Such allegations heighten scrutiny of how training data is sourced, what safeguards are in place to prevent harmful outputs, and how quickly platforms respond when prohibited content is identified. The ICO's outreach suggests regulators are assessing whether existing controls are adequate to prevent the creation or dissemination (clearly not) of unlawful material and to protect minors' rights.UK data watchdog contacts Musk's X over Grok AI images | ReutersFord Motor Company has refiled a lawsuit accusing three California attorneys of orchestrating a fraudulent overbilling scheme to collect more than $100 million in legal fees under the state's Lemon Law. The amended complaint, allowed after a judge dismissed the original case in November, drops law firms as defendants and instead targets individual lawyers Steve Mikhov, Roger Kirnos, and Amy Morse, formerly of Knight Law Group. Ford alleges the attorneys operated a “Fee Motion Department” that submitted fake time entries, including implausible claims such as multiple 24-hour workdays and even a single day billed at 57.5 hours.The lawsuit claims these practices defrauded courts and automakers by inflating legal fees in warranty cases involving defective vehicles. California's Lemon Law allows recovery of attorney fees for reasonable legal work, but Ford argues the defendants manipulated this provision for profit. Ford's legal team says the amended filing includes new details drawn from testimony, reinforcing their claim that the lawyers exploited the court system. The accused attorneys have denied wrongdoing and previously argued the case is a retaliatory move by Ford meant to intimidate lawyers representing consumers. The case continues in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.Ford takes fresh aim at lawyers in lawsuit claiming overbilling scheme | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

A pre-dawn post, a capital in darkness, and a president in cuffs aboard a U.S. ship—what started as a “one-night raid” is already morphing into something far bigger. We unpack how the strike on Venezuela unfolded, why the official story leaves key gaps, and what it means when the White House says, without hesitation, that we'll “run the country” until a “judicious transition.” If that sounds like regime change and occupation, it's because that's exactly how it's being sold. We walk through the mechanics of the operation—air defenses knocked out, a citywide blackout, special operators intercepting Maduro before a reinforced bunker—and the uncomfortable questions that raises about access and complicity. Then we pull the legal thread: the Article II claim that troops were inserted first and then “defended” with airstrikes, the decision to bypass Congress entirely, and the attempt to rebrand a cross-border assault as “law enforcement.” War powers aren't a suggestion, and treating sovereignty like a paperwork issue invites blowback that won't stop at Venezuela's borders. The promises don't get sturdier from there. “Oil will pay for it” clashes with reality: a battered energy sector, massive capital needs, sabotage risks, and the legitimacy crisis that follows any U.S.-installed authority. We map potential power paths—opposition figures abruptly dismissed, Delcy Rodríguez floated for continuity—and ask the hard question: if negotiation was possible, why bomb first? Along the way, we hit the regional shockwaves, from casual warnings aimed at Cuba and Colombia to the mismatch between cocaine narratives and the fentanyl crisis that actually kills Americans. Expect migration pressure, market risk, and a new precedent great powers will cite when it suits them.

1.6.26 – VA pay increase and Venezuela – Veterans Air on Lone Star Community Radio VA Disability Rating Pay: https://www.va.gov/disability/compensation-rates/veteran- rates/ Article II of the U.S. Constitution: https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/article-2/ War Powers Act of 1973: https://www.congress.gov/bill/93rd-congress/house-joint- resolution/542 [...]

Event Summary (WATCH: PRESIDENT TRUMP PRESS CON HERE) The U.S. military executed a highly complex and precise operation in Caracas, Venezuela, to apprehend Maduro. The mission involved over 150 aircraft, advanced coordination across multiple military branches, and cyber and space operations. The operation was completed without any American casualties, which is emphasized as a major success. Geopolitical Context Venezuela’s significance stems from its vast oil reserves (largest in the world) and strategic location near the U.S. Maduro’s regime is portrayed as illegitimate, corrupt, and deeply involved in drug trafficking and alliances with U.S. adversaries (Russia, China, Iran, Hezbollah). The discussion highlights Venezuela’s decline from being one of the wealthiest nations in the 1950s to a failed state under socialist rule. Legal Justifications President Trump acted within his constitutional authority under Article II as Commander-in-Chief. References are made to historical precedents, notably the 1990 capture of Manuel Noriega in Panama. The legal basis includes: FBI’s extraterritorial arrest authority. Precedents like the Ker-Frisbie doctrine and United States v. Alvarez-Machain. DOJ opinions (including one by Bill Barr) affirming presidential power to authorize such actions. Anticipated legal challenges include head-of-state immunity and UN Charter arguments. Future Implications (WATCH HERE: Is Cuba Ready to Fall?) There will be geopolitical ripple effects in Latin America, especially Cuba and Colombia. Avoiding prolonged U.S. military occupation in Venezuela is key Discussion of possible democratic elections and leadership changes in Venezuela. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/verdictwithtedcruz X: https://x.com/tedcruz X: https://x.com/benfergusonshowYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode of The P.A.S. Report Podcast, Professor Nick Giordano breaks down the stunning takedown and arrest of Venezuela's Nicolás Maduro and why it may signal a major shift in U.S. power in the Western Hemisphere. Was this a smarter model than the failed regime-change disasters of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya, or the beginning of a dangerous new era of presidential authority? Professor Giordano examines what happens next as President Trump says the U.S. will run Venezuela until a safe, competent transition is possible, the strategic stakes tied to oil and hemispheric control, and the constitutional and international-law arguments now colliding in real time. He also exposes the domestic political hysteria as Venezuelans celebrate while America's activist left rushes to defend Maduro, revealing how Trump Derangement Syndrome continues to warp reality.   Episode Highlights Maduro captured, Venezuela in play: why this operation was different, what comes next, and the risk of repeating past postwar transition failures Monroe Doctrine 2.0: how oil, energy leverage, and strategic denial of Russia, China, Iran, Cuba, and proxy networks reshape geopolitics in the Americas Legality and backlash: Article II authority, Congress's war-powers abdication, "international law" myths, and the left's bizarre defense of Maduro driven by anti-Trump obsession

Maduro is in U.S. court, Trump says we're "running Venezuela," and the internet is screaming "Monroe Doctrine!" Today I break down what happened, what Trump/Rubio/Vance are claiming, and the real issue almost nobody wants to touch: constitutional authority. You can hate Maduro and still hate the precedent. Topics: Venezuela operation, Trump/Rubio/Vance clips, oil & expropriation debate, Monroe Doctrine myths, Article I vs Article II, War Powers Act reality, and why "ends justify the means" nukes liberty long-term. ➡️ Join the Fed Haters Club: joingml.com

Hello nerds.It's been a while since I sat down and did what Nerds for Humanity was originally built for. Not shorts. Not algorithms. Not rage bait. But long-form, structural analysis of how power actually works in this country, and why things that feel shocking in the moment are often the predictable outcome of rules written decades ago.This livestream was about Trump's military operation in Venezuela. But not in the way cable news framed it.I wasn't interested in relitigating whether Trump is reckless, authoritarian, or dangerous. If you're reading this Substack, you already know where you land on that. The more important question is this.How was he able to do it?How was a single president able to order a major military operation against a sovereign country, deploy massive air and naval assets, seize the country's leader from its capital, and then inform Congress afterward?The uncomfortable truth is that Trump didn't invent some new authoritarian power. He exploited one that has been sitting in plain sight for more than fifty years.And worse, he did so largely within the mechanics of existing law.The law that was supposed to stop thisIn 1973, in the shadow of Vietnam, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution. Its purpose was simple. Presidents were not supposed to be able to drag the country into war on their own.The law created two central guardrails.First, the president must notify Congress within 48 hours of introducing US forces into hostilities.Second, unless Congress authorizes the action, those hostilities must end within 60 days, with an additional 30-day period allowed for withdrawal.At the time, this seemed reasonable. Military action moved slowly. Wars took time to prepare. You could not overthrow a government in a weekend. The assumption was that Congress would have ample opportunity to intervene before anything irreversible happened.As I said on the livestream,“At that time in 1973 the thinking was well, surely no one can invade a country and capture the head of state inside of 48 hours. They would need weeks to prepare for it.”That assumption is now dangerously obsolete.We are using 1973 traffic laws for modern warfareOne analogy I used resonated with a lot of people.Trying to govern modern warfare with the War Powers Resolution is like applying 1970s traffic rules to autonomous flying cars.The law was written for an era of B-52 bombers, carrier groups, and weeks-long mobilizations. It was not written for drones, cyber operations, special forces insertions, precision strikes, and operations capable of destabilizing or decapitating a regime in days or even hours.Today, a president can dramatically alter another country's political reality before Congress has even finished debating whether the notification email landed in the right inbox.The time-based trigger is the flaw. It assumes time equals restraint. That is no longer true.As I put it during the stream,“This time-based system is flawed. It doesn't work for a world where you can basically destabilize and replace a regime in a few hours.”Trump didn't invent this powerIt is tempting to treat Trump as a unique aberration. He isn't.Modern presidents of both parties have steadily expanded executive war-making authority.George H. W. Bush built up a massive military force in the Gulf before Congress voted, and then received authorization shortly before the 1991 Gulf War began.George W. Bush secured a separate 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force to invade Iraq, and the post-9/11 era normalized expansive readings of both congressional authorizations and Article II authority.The Obama administration conducted extensive drone campaigns and the Libya intervention without a formal declaration of war, arguing that certain operations did not meet the War Powers Resolution's definition of “hostilities.”Every modern president has pushed the envelope. Trump simply sprinted through it.As I said on the livestream,“This has been a loophole that's been used by many presidents. We just relied on them to exercise judgment and honor the office. That honor code is clearly gone.”A system that relies on voluntary restraint is not a system. It is a gamble.Language laundering: from war to “kinetic action”One of the most revealing shifts has been linguistic.Presidents learned that if you do not call something a war, you do not need a declaration of war.So we get euphemisms.“Kinetic action.”“Law enforcement operation.”“Targeted strike.”As I pointed out,“They don't want to say we are conducting warfare. If you don't call it a war, then you don't need a declaration of war.”This is how large-scale military action against a sovereign state becomes a “police-like operation.”If another country flew dozens of military aircraft into Washington, DC and seized the US president, we would call it an act of war without hesitation. Euphemisms only work when we are the ones using them.The public justifications kept shiftingThe administration's public rationale for the Venezuela operation evolved quickly.Initial statements emphasized fentanyl and drug trafficking. Analysts and critics noted that available trafficking data does not identify Venezuela as a significant fentanyl source, which raised questions about that justification.Subsequent messaging emphasized cocaine trafficking and broader security threats, but those claims were also contested.What became clearer over time was that the operation was aimed at exerting decisive pressure on the Maduro regime itself.As I said during the livestream,“What some messaging from inside Trump's orbit suggested was that this was really about regime change.”Trump later publicly discussed American oil companies entering Venezuela, reclaiming seized assets, and modernizing infrastructure as part of a post-Maduro arrangement.If that sounds familiar, it should.“That sounds a little colonial to me.”Because it does.The moral high ground is not abstractEvery time the US violates the sovereignty of another nation under contested legal theories, it weakens the norms it relies on to restrain other powers.As one viewer put it during the livestream,“I'm afraid the US just gave a license to Russia to take Ukraine and China to take Taiwan.”You cannot argue that international law matters only when it constrains other countries. Either it restrains power, or it doesn't.Trump's actions did not just affect Venezuela. They further eroded America's standing in a world already drifting toward a more unstable multipolar order.This is bigger than TrumpOne of my core arguments, and the reason this livestream mattered, is simple.Trump will not be the last president to exploit this structure.Even if Trump disappears tomorrow, the authority remains.History shows that presidents, particularly lame ducks, often become more willing to take foreign risks once electoral constraints disappear.As I said,“We can't rely on Trump or any president. Every president eventually realizes how much power this office has.”This is not about stopping one man. It is about fixing a system that assumes good faith in an era where bad faith is a governing strategy.How the law could actually be fixedThe War Powers Resolution does not need cosmetic reform. It needs modernization aligned with modern warfare.I outlined several possible approaches.First, scale-based triggers. Certain actions should automatically require prior authorization, regardless of duration, such as the use of specific aircraft types, large troop deployments, or major munitions thresholds.Second, target-based triggers. Actions aimed at heads of state, national command infrastructure, or critical civilian systems should never fall under a post-hoc notification model.Third, funding enforcement. If authorization is not granted, funding freezes. No money, no mission.As I argued,“Sometimes the US will have to use force. But introducing liabilities for the whole country should not be determined by one branch alone.”In corporate governance, CEOs cannot acquire companies without board approval. Presidents should not be able to remake countries without congressional consent.A simple test for candidatesThe good news is that this is a fixable problem.Congress can change this law.And elections create leverage.As I said on the livestream,“Now is a great time to ask every candidate one simple question. Do you support updating the War Powers Resolution?”Not a detailed proposal. Not a legal dissertation. Just whether they believe the current system is acceptable.If a candidate believes any president should have a 60-day blank check to wage war, they should say so plainly.The uncomfortable truthI said this near the end of the stream, and it bears repeating.“This is a known vulnerability in the system. It's just time to patch the bug.”We like to tell ourselves that American democracy is protected by norms, traditions, and good people.But systems that rely on virtue instead of constraints always fail eventually.Trump did not invent this power. He stress-tested it.And it failed.Support the channelIf you found this analysis useful and want Nerds for Humanity to keep doing long-form work like this, consider supporting the channel directly.You can become a YouTube channel member to help cover operating costs and get a shout-out on every livestream.Thanks for sticking with the long version.Bye nerds. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit nerdsforhumanity.substack.com

On January 3, 2026, history was made.In this special episode of The Right Side, Doug Billings breaks down the capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro by U.S. forces — an operation that shocked the world and triggered immediate panic from the political Left and corporate media.This is not a rant. This is a step-by-step explanation of what actually happened.Doug explains:How the U.S. operation unfolded in CaracasWhat was happening behind the scenes long before the arrestWhy Maduro was a wanted criminal under U.S. lawThe federal indictments, narco-terrorism charges, and cartel connectionsAnd why this operation was legal, constitutional, and lawful under existing U.S. authorityMost importantly, this episode dismantles the false claims that the arrest was “illegal,” “imperialistic,” or “unauthorized,” and explains why those talking points collapse under even basic legal scrutiny.This is a defining moment — not just for Venezuela, but for the principle that criminal regimes do not get immunity when they poison nations and traffic terror.If you want facts, context, and constitutional clarity — not hysteria — this episode is for you.Subscribe to The Right Side on YouTube: @TheRightSideDougBillingsSupport the show

Another day, another federal appellate court victory for the great and powerful President Donald J. Trump, and another feckless ruling by an unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior, federal district trial court Biden judge who was raised to the federal bench only AFTER Trump's re-election but before he was sworn in has been hurled onto the rubbish heap of political history. Once again Trump's authority as the democratically elected Article II. Executive Branch President and Commander in Chief has been re-affirmed, after the unelected DC District trial court Judge Jia Cobb (Biden, Nov. 12, 2024) had taken upon herself to order Trump about as if he were a clerk in her court. A three judge DC Circuit court of appeals panel—consisting of two Trump judges and one Obama judge—UNANIMOUSLY found that Cobb's November 20 order enjoining Trump from deploying the National Guard to crime-torn Washington DC was a grotesque overreach of her limited Article III authority and stayed that order. 

A judge has been found guilty of felony obstruction of justice — and the implications go far beyond one courtroom.In this episode of WMXI we break down what this conviction says about judicial overreach, illegal immigration, and the growing tension between the courts, Congress, and the presidency. We discuss why many believe the judiciary has stepped outside its constitutional role, how immigration enforcement has been undermined, and why President Trump argues that executive power must be restored as written in Article II of the Constitution.Is the justice system enforcing the law — or rewriting it from the bench?Do we need constitutional amendments, term limits, and real accountability?This is a must-watch discussion on law, liberty, and the future of American governance. ▶️ Watch now and join the conversation

While earthly kings issued decrees for power, heaven wrote a decree of love. Into straw and shadow came the King who would bring peace, not by force, but by sacrifice. The manger is God's declaration that love moves first — love crosses the divide, love stoops low, love pays the cost. Here, wrapped in cloth, is the heart of God exposed: not distant affection, but embodied mercy. This is the Treaty of Bethlehem, inviting us to receive the peace that God came to give through His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ.Now, let's join Pastor Brian as he takes a look at Article 2 in our Advent Miniseries, The Treaty of Bethlehem: The King's Motive, from Luke 2, verses 1 through 7.

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> The layoff number show no signs of a weakening labor market. Jobs are coming back to the US. The fake news will not admit that the economy is improving, but the people will feel it. The Fed cannot control employment or inflation with QE, they use it to keep their system alive. Banks are getting message, crypto will be included in the future economy of the US. The [DS] attacks will intensify as we get closer to the midterms, they will use division tactics with the people and the military. The [DS] is trying to muddy the water with the Epstein files, this has already failed. The [DS] is pushing war to keep their crimes from being exposed. Trump has initiated the cyber attack offensive strategy. Trump and we the people have the leverage and control. Economy (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); Layoffs Show No Signs of a Weakening Labor Market If the labor market is weakening, it's on the job-creation side of the equation, maybe in part due to AI.     the four-week average, which largely irons out the week-to-week squiggles, and which ticked up to 216,750, seasonally adjusted, which is historically low, and in the same low range that it has been in for the past four years. This is administrative data, not survey-based data. Freshly laid-off people filed these applications for unemployment insurance at state unemployment agencies, which then reported them to the US Department of Labor by the weekly deadline, which then combined the data and published it today. In a longer timespan going back to the 1970s, initial claims are very low, despite the growth of nonfarm payrolls over the decades. They were lower only during the tight labor market of 2018 and 2019 and during the labor shortages coming out of the pandemic. Layoffs show no signs of a weakening labor market. If the labor market is weakening, it's on the job-creation side of the equation. So layoffs are low, but once laid off, it takes people longer to find a job as companies have slowed their hiring, but even that has improved since the summer. Source: wolfstreet.com   for having created, with No Inflation, perhaps the Greatest Economy in the History of our Country? When will people understand what is happening? When will Polls reflect the Greatness of America at this point in time, and how bad it was just one year ago? https://twitter.com/profstonge/status/1999141753442414645?s=20 https://twitter.com/TheCryptoLark/status/1999161790886711747?s=20 Political/Rights Tim Walz Vows to Bring More Somalis to Minnesota, Despite Growing Fraud Scandal Reaching Into the Billions Minnesota Governor Tim Walz is vowing to bring more Somali immigrants to his state, despite the massive fraud scandal that has unfolded in the Minnesota Somali community on his watch. The Washington Free Beacon reports: Tim Walz Pledges To ‘Welcome More' Somalis Into Minnesota as Evidence of Staggering Fraud Scheme Makes National Headlines CBS News reports: https://twitter.com/amuse/status/1999531988210909599?s=20 Source: thegatewaypundit.com Garcia. But immigration courts do not issue such a form, and Congress removed district courts from reviewing these cases nearly 30 years ago. By declaring the order “nonexistent,” she manufactured jurisdiction and granted release. Her six month obstruction of Garcia's removal shows exactly why Congress barred district judges from intervening in INA cases. Trump Admin Pulls 9,500 Truck Drivers Off The Road For Failing English Tests  https://twitter.com/SecDuffy/status/1998787357416501638?s=20 Source: zerohedge.com Democrat Rep. Attempts to Embarrass Kristi Noem by Introducing Her to a ‘Harmless' Veteran She Supposedly Deported – But the Move Backfires When the Actual Truth is Revealed (VIDEO) During the hearing, Rep. Seth Magaziner (D-MA) decided to ambush Noem, first by demanding how many US military veterans she had deported. When Noem responded that she had not, the congressman then pulled out his next nasty stunt. “We are joined on Zoom by a gentleman named Sae Joon Park. He is a United States combat veteran who was shot twice,” Magaziner announced. “Like many veterans, he struggled with PTSD, he was arrested in the 1990s for some minor drug offenses. “He never hurt anyone besides himself. He is a Purple Heart recipient; he has sacrificed more for this country than most people ever have,” he added. “Earlier this year, you deported him to Korea, a country he has not lived in since he was seven.” “Will you join me in thanking Mr. Park for his service?” Noem said she would, but reiterated that America's laws needed to be enforced, which displeased Magaziner. https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1999200511820763484?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1999200511820763484%7Ctwgr%5E71b314ce22abe6b529570dbbaed5501f8b066bd1%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2025%2F12%2Fdemocrat-rep-attempts-embarrass-kristi-noem-introducing-her%2F  Park had a removal order over felony drug charges and bail jumping – and was NOT a citizen, but a green card holder. Democrats lie, lie, LIE. https://twitter.com/TriciaOhio/status/1999207164603433210?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1999207164603433210%7Ctwgr%5E71b314ce22abe6b529570dbbaed5501f8b066bd1%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2025%2F12%2Fdemocrat-rep-attempts-embarrass-kristi-noem-introducing-her%2F  controlled substance In 2010 an immigration judge issued him an order of removal. Park's appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals that same month was dismissed by the Board in April 2011. With no legal basis to remain in the U.S. and a final order of removal, Park was allowed to self-deport to Korea. President Trump and Secretary Noem have been clear: criminal illegal aliens are not welcome in the U.S. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/RedWave_Press/status/1999451592903282965?s=20 2.5 Million Illegal Immigrants Deported Under Trump Admin: DHS More than 2.5 million illegal immigrants have left the United States under the Trump administration, a “record-breaking achievement” in a year, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said in a Dec. 10 statement. The 2.5 million figure includes more than 605,000 individuals deported as part of DHS enforcement operations and around 1.9 million illegal immigrants who have voluntarily self-deported since January. The rapid decline in the illegal immigrant population is showing effects nationwide, such as a “resurgence in local job markets,” DHS said. In October, 12,000 jobs were added to the U.S. economy, which followed 431,000 additions in September. Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/GOPoversight/status/1999506355548299518?s=20 DOGE    In other words, AI has far more Electricity than they will ever need because, they are building the facilities that produce it, themselves. We are leading the World in AI, BY FAR, because of a gentleman named DONALD J. TRUMP! Geopolitical Unelected EU Commissioner Ursula von Der Leyen Warns Trump To Keep Away From ‘European Democracy' – But the Patriotic Wave Is Upon Her https://twitter.com/SprinterPress/status/1999360985753174112?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1999360985753174112%7Ctwgr%5Ea460cf825346c02faf408dfdd2869c8b434de5e3%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2025%2F12%2Funelected-eu-commissioner-ursula-von-der-leyen-warns%2F Politico reported: “Donald Trump should not get involved in European democracy, Ursula von der Leyen said Thursday, days after the U.S. president launched a stinging attack on Europe. ‘It is not on us, when it comes to elections, to decide who the leader of the country will be, but on the people of this country. That's the sovereignty of the voters, and this must be protected', the European Commission president said in an interview at the POLITICO 28 gala event in Brussels.   https://twitter.com/JnglJourney/status/1999294487781326880?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1999294487781326880%7Ctwgr%5Ea460cf825346c02faf408dfdd2869c8b434de5e3%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2025%2F12%2Funelected-eu-commissioner-ursula-von-der-leyen-warns%2F Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/iAnonPatriot/status/1999198852717424957?s=20 https://twitter.com/Defence_Index/status/1999348521120698795?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1999348521120698795%7Ctwgr%5E4d8309aa196b50542667c5dfcee40655f2883cf0%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2025%2F12%2Fmad-maduro-after-declaring-christmas-october-embattled-venezuelan%2F War/Peace    accident, but Thailand nevertheless retaliated very strongly. Both Countries are ready for PEACE and continued Trade with the United States of America. It is my Honor to work with Anutin and Hun in resolving what could have evolved into a major War between two otherwise wonderful and prosperous Countries! I would also like to thank the Prime Minister of Malaysia, Anwar Ibrahim, for his assistance in this very important matter. Zelensky Floats Holding Referendum On Giving Up Land For Peace “I am definitely in favor of elections,” Ukraine’s President Zelensky said Thursday. “The most important thing is that they are held legitimately.” He’s presenting a position of willingness to compromise amid the increasing pressure from Trump. Is this but a ruse to buy time?  Ceding territory by vote? WSJ continues… Zelensky has long said that as president he can't unilaterally decide the fate of Ukrainian territories, which must be approved by the Ukrainian people. In early fall, 54% Ukrainians opposed ceding land, even if it meant continuing the war and risked the country's independence, compared with 38% who were open to some territorial concessions, in a poll conducted by Kyiv International Institute of Sociology. Source: zerohedge.com Zelenskyy: Holding Elections in Ukraine Requires Ceasefire  President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said  that holding elections in Ukraine during wartime would require a ceasefire. “There must be a ceasefire – at least for the duration of the election process and voting. This is what needs to be discussed. Frankly speaking, here in Ukraine, we believe that America should talk to the Russian side about this,” he told a meeting of the ‘Coalition of the Willing’ group of nations. Wartime elections are forbidden by law but Zelenskyy, whose term expired last year,  Source: newsmax.com NATO’s Rutte warns allies they are Russia’s next target  NATO chief Mark Rutte   urged allies to step up defence efforts to prevent a war waged by Russia that could be “on the scale of war our grandparents and great-grandparents endured”. FRANCE 24’s Dave Keating reports Source: france24.com NATO Secretary Rutte: “NATO Must Prepare for War Against Russia”  Source: theconservativetreehouse.com https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1999270361414729766?s=20   remarks: “Things like this end up in Third World Wars, and I told that the other day. I said, you know, everybody keeps playing games like this, you’ll end up in a Third World War, and we don’t want to see that happen.” Trump’s essentially telling NATO, Ukraine, and Russia to stop the brinksmanship before proxy war becomes direct conflict. When the U.S. president is publicly warning about World War III, that’s not hyperbole, that’s acknowledgment of how close we’ve gotten to catastrophe. https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1999499056133898497?s=20 The Trump administration is preparing to enlist private businesses and cybersecurity firms to conduct offensive cyberattacks against foreign adversaries, including criminal hackers and state-sponsored groups that target U.S. critical infrastructure, telecommunications, or engage in ransomware activities.  This approach, detailed in a draft national cyber strategy from the Office of the National Cyber Director, aims to expand U.S. cyber capabilities by leveraging private sector expertise, allowing government agencies to focus on unique tasks.  An upcoming executive order is expected to define roles for these firms and provide legal protections, though additional legislation may be needed to mitigate risks for companies traditionally focused on defense. Medical/False Flags https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1999176473723191554?s=20 [DS] Agenda BREAKING: Grand Jury *AGAIN* Declines to Indict Letitia James For Mortgage Fraud  A federal grand jury in Virginia declined to indict New York Attorney General Letitia James for mortgage fraud on Thursday. This is the second time federal prosecutors have failed to secure an indictment against Letitia James. “Federal prosecutors on Thursday failed to convince a majority of grand jurors to approve charges that James misled a bank to obtain favorable loan terms on a home mortgage, according to sources,” ABC News reported. Source: thegatewaypundit.com BREAKING: Executive Director of Black Lives Matter Oklahoma Charged with Wire Fraud and Money Laundering – 25 Counts Total – Facing DECADES in Prison  An executive director of Black Lives Matter Oklahoma was charged with wire fraud and money laundering. A federal grand jury on December 3 returned a 25-count indictment against Tashella Sheri Amore Dickerson, 52. Dickerson was charged with 20 counts of wire fraud and five counts of money laundering. “On December 3, 2025, a federal Grand Jury returned a 25-count Indictment, charging Dickerson with 20 counts of wire fraud and five counts of money laundering. For each count of wire fraud, Dickerson faces up to 20 years in federal prison, and a fine of up to $250,000. For each count of money laundering, Dickerson faces up to ten years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000 or twice the amount of the criminally derived property involved in the transaction,” the DOJ said. According to the charging documents, Dickerson, through BLMOKC, raised more than $5.6 million, but rather than using the money to bail out George Floyd rioters, she used millions to fund her lavish lifestyle. Federal prosecutors said Dickerson funneled over $3.5 million to her personal accounts and spent it on vacations, six properties in Oklahoma City, retail shopping, and food. Per the DOJ: https://twitter.com/FBIDirectorKash/status/1999235340620497058?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1999235340620497058%7Ctwgr%5E9f29cdaa88d5635542427963418842d100b04bdd%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2025%2F12%2Fblack-lives-matter-executive-charged-wire-fraud-money%2F Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/DataRepublican/status/1998944940865503255?s=20 https://twitter.com/Patri0tContr0l/status/1999164831652315320?s=20 JUST IN: House Overwhelmingly Rejects Al Green's Impeachment Effort Against Trump – 70 Democrats Kill Measure (VIDEO) The House of Representatives voted on a Motion to Table Texas Democrat Al Green's resolution to impeach President Trump on Thursday, effectively killing the resolution, with many Democrats even voting against impeachment. Green has already tried several times to impeach Trump since he took office in January. Green first introduced articles of impeachment against Trump in February, just weeks after he took office. Source: thegatewaypundit.com Schumer Erupts After Senate Blocks Democrat Bill to Extend Expiring Obamacare Subsidies — Desperately Blames Republicans for the Disaster Democrats Created  The Senate delivered a major blow to Democrat leadership Thursday night after rejecting Majority Leader Chuck Schumer's last-minute attempt to extend expiring Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies, subsidies Democrats themselves voted to terminate in Joe Biden's so-called “Inflation Reduction Act” of 2022. The subsidies are set to expire on December 31, 2025 because Democrats wrote the expiration date into their own bill. Yet now, as the political consequences close in, Schumer is scrambling to pin the blame on Republicans.  Democrats locked the subsidy expiration date into law in 2022. They knew this would happen. They planned for it to happen. They voted for it to happen. Now, in an election year—Schumer is trying to retroactively pretend Republicans created a crisis that Democrats engineered from the beginning. Recall that in 2014, Chuck Schumer himself admitted Obamacare was a mistake and confessed that Democrats sold out the middle class to get it passed. Source: thegatewaypundit.com https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1999178360082301396?s=20 The Dems who voted against this SUPPORT BIG INSURANCE. UNBELIEVABLE. One GOP “no”: Rand Paul (KY). Paul says he wants the ACA gutted even further. Needs 60. DEMOCRATS = PARTY OF BIG, RICH INSURANCE. https://twitter.com/ElectionWiz/status/1999233530694418762?s=20 President Trump's Plan   Elections. Democrats have been relentless in their targeting of TINA PETERS, a Patriot who simply wanted to make sure that our Elections were Fair and Honest. Tina is sitting in a Colorado prison for the “crime” of demanding Honest Elections. Today I am granting Tina a full Pardon for her attempts to expose Voter Fraud in the Rigged 2020 Presidential Election! https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/status/1999403926316069209?s=20   Ticktin’s nine-page letter dated December 7, 2025, accuses a “criminal conspiracy” involving Dominion Voting Systems, Colorado officials like Secretary of State Jena Griswold, and foreign influences, while arguing that Peters preserved election data in compliance with federal law (52 U.S.C. § 20701). He positions her as a key witness for future investigations into election integrity, leveraging her status as a 70-year-old Gold Star mother to evoke sympathy. A core (and controversial) element of Ticktin’s legal theory is the untested claim that the U.S. Constitution allows presidents to pardon state-level convictions—a position not supported by precedent, as presidential pardons are explicitly limited to federal offenses under Article II, Section 2. This strategy aims to challenge the boundaries of executive power, potentially setting up a court battle if pursued further, while amplifying the narrative through media and conservative outlets to build public pressure. , this pardon is largely symbolic and legally ineffective because Peters was convicted and sentenced in Colorado state court on charges like attempting to influence a public servant, conspiracy, and official misconduct—not federal crimes. It doesn’t vacate her nine-year prison sentence or require her release; only Colorado’s governor (currently Democrat Jared Polis) could grant clemency for state offenses, and there’s no indication he plans to do so.   the pardon could indirectly help Peters in several ways: Political and Public Pressure: It elevates her case nationally among Trump supporters and election skeptics, potentially leading to fundraising for her legal defense, public campaigns for her release, or even influencing her ongoing state appeals (e.g., by highlighting perceived bias in her trial). A federal magistrate recently denied her release pending appeal, but this symbolic gesture might bolster arguments about unfair prosecution. Narrative Framing: Ticktin can use it to reinforce claims of her innocence in the court of public opinion, portraying the pardon as validation from the president that her actions were justified. This aligns with broader Republican efforts to question 2020 election security. Potential Federal Angle: If any federal investigations arise from her case (e.g., related to Dominion or election data), the pardon could preemptively shield her from future federal charges. Ticktin’s strategy also includes pushing for a DOJ review of her conviction, which Trump directed earlier in 2025. https://twitter.com/CynicalPublius/status/1999284588955468129?s=20 This refers to the DOJ’s decision, under Bondi’s leadership, to rescind regulations enforcing disparate impact liability. This action implements an executive order signed by President Donald Trump in April 2025, eliminating the use of disparate impact metrics to prove discrimination against entities receiving federal funding. What is Disparate Impact Liability? It’s a legal doctrine originating from the 1971 Supreme Court case Griggs v. Duke Power Co., which interprets Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Under this theory, policies or practices that disproportionately harm protected groups (e.g., based on race, even without intentional bias) can be considered discriminatory. Over decades, it expanded into a regulatory tool that penalized unintentional disparities, often requiring institutions like employers, schools, or housing providers to track and adjust for racial outcomes to avoid lawsuits or loss of federal funds.  Critics (including the poster and the article) argue it incentivized racial quotas, DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) mandates, and “reverse discrimination,” straying from the Civil Rights Act’s original focus on intentional discrimination. Ending disparate impact liability is framed as restoring “equality under the law” by focusing DOJ enforcement solely on provable intent, rather than statistical outcomes. Bondi stated: “This Department of Justice is eliminating its regulations that for far too long required recipients of federal funding to make decisions based on race.” this is a blow against overreaching government coercion, promoting individual liberty and meritocracy over enforced equity. They suggest skeptics “pay closer attention” to appreciate its impact on freedom from such policies. Texas Showdown: GOP’s Wesley Hunt Now Dares Dem Crockett to Face-Off  The 2026 election cycle is working its way up through the gears. Candidates are announcing their intent to run for various seats; some are sure-wins, some are sure to be fights to the finish, and some are sure to be inexplicable. One of the latter is surely Democrat Representative Jasmine Crockett (TX-30) announcing for a Texas Senate seat, the same seat being sought by Republican Representative Wesley Hunt (TX-38). My money’s on Mr. Hunt. Even more so now, that the Republican Congressman has challenged Rep. Crockett to a duel – or, rather, a debate. She may wish she’d picked swords at sunrise instead of a verbal exchange with Wesley Hunt. Texas Senate candidate Rep. Wesley Hunt, R-Texas, challenged House colleague Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, to a debate after Crockett entered the race earlier this week. Hunt, who faces incumbent Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in a competitive Republican primary, was quick to challenge Crockett to a debate, saying that if the new contender agreed it would be “must-see TV.” Source: redstate.com https://twitter.com/mrddmia/status/1999519791527207239?s=20 https://twitter.com/TheStormRedux/status/1999143399631282641?s=20 get the right people in place. VANCE: “Eventually you are gonna see prosecutions. Not just Arctic Frost related, but on a whole host of other issues. Eventually we need certain subpoenas that have to be issued by a court. Eventually you need local prosecutors, US Attorneys to go after some of these people in a court of law. If you can't get a U.S. Attorney appointed because the Democrat wont give you a blue slip. Or you can't get a judge confirmed… Republicans have gotta open up their perspective a little bit.” Everyone can complain all they want, but the DOJ would be stupid to bring charges without the right people in place. Blame the worthless Republican Senators! Frustrating, but I am confident President Trump will figure it out because he is the best problem solver I've ever seen in my life. (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

Richard Epstein does a deep into the Supreme Court's latest showdown: Trump v. Slaughter, a case that could redefine presidential removal power and the future of independent agencies like the FTC. Epstein walks through the constitutional history — from the Founding to Humphrey's Executor to modern administrative courts — and explains how the Court's interpretation of Article II has evolved, splintered, and in some cases contradicted itself. The conversation covers everything from the steel-seizure precedent to the Federal Reserve, the structure of the administrative state, and the unresolved tension between originalism and the practical realities of modern governance. Epstein explains why this case could be one of the most consequential constitutional questions of our time.

Richard Epstein does a deep into the Supreme Court's latest showdown: Trump v. Slaughter, a case that could redefine presidential removal power and the future of independent agencies like the FTC. Epstein walks through the constitutional history — from the Founding to Humphrey's Executor to modern administrative courts — and explains how the Court's interpretation of Article II […]

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureThe [CB][DS] are trying to convince the world high electricity costs are coming from AI and Crypto mining, it is not, its coming from the green new scam. Gas prices are coming way down. The new system Trump is building is getting stronger and stronger. The [CB] will fight back against Trump’s tariff system. The [DS] is pushing back, they want war and they do not want the peace deal. Corruption is being exposed in Ukraine which is putting a lot of pressure on Zelensky, the EU is now funding Ukraine. Soon he will be pushed out or he will sign the peace deal. Trump says its time for election in Ukraine. The [DS] criminal syndicate that they setup in DC under threat by the SC. They will rule that Trump as the right to remove the agencies and people, they are not independent of the Executive Branch, game over. Economy https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1997946755116359938?s=20 thanks to bad energy policy, not data centers. He slammed subsidies for unreliable sources like offshore wind, saying some projects cost $11B for 1GW of intermittent power, versus $1–2B for 24/7 reliable supply. Burgum laid into what he called “climate extremists,” accusing them of prioritizing flashy green experiments over building energy systems that actually work. The result is sky-high bills for electricity that cuts out when the weather does, while lawmakers pat themselves on the back for feel-good “net zero” policies that don't add up. Burgum: “A lot of the higher prices that you’re seeing are not related to the AI data centers. The policy choices of the last 5 years, driven by sometimes climate extremists, were the ones that are driving up the prices you’re seeing.” (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");   That is why I have authorized documentation to impose a 5% Tariff on Mexico if this water isn't released, IMMEDIATELY. The longer Mexico takes to release the water, the more our Farmers are hurt. Mexico has an obligation to FIX THIS NOW. Thank you for your attention to this matter! Gas Prices Drop To Lowest Level In Nearly 5 Years Across US Gasoline prices have dropped to their lowest levels in nearly five years and stand at around $2.90 per gallon on average as of Monday, according to data from GasBuddy, a company that tracks gas prices. “The national average has just slipped below $2.90 per gallon for the first time since May 2, 2021,” GasBuddy analyst Patrick De Haan wrote in a Sunday post on X.   Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/RapidResponse47/status/1998037849539846303?s=20 ADP Weekly Employment Report Signals Rebound In Labor Market  the US labor market turned up for the four weeks ending Nov. 22, 2025, private employers added an average of 4,750 jobs a week., according to ADP’s new weekly employment data This week's positive number hints at an upswing in the labor market after four straight weeks of negative pulse estimates, after four straight weeks of losing jobs. This follows the almost unprecedented decline in initial jobless claims last week (which some have argued was impacted by Thanksgiving Week irregularities). Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/profstonge/status/1998369537851346975?s=20   “degraded” products that nobody wanted, a terrible idea that slowed Innovation, and hurt the American Worker. That Era is OVER! We will protect National Security, create American Jobs, and keep America's lead in AI. NVIDIA's U.S. Customers are already moving forward with their incredible, highly advanced Blackwell chips, and soon, Rubin, neither of which are part of this deal. My Administration will always put America FIRST. The Department of Commerce is finalizing the details, and the same approach will apply to AMD, Intel, and other GREAT American Companies. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!  Political/Rights https://twitter.com/DHSgov/status/1998069235734520159?s=20  putting American lives at risk. There are another 4,015 aliens in the custody of an Illinois jurisdiction that ICE is seeking to arrest. Criminal illegal aliens should not be released back onto our streets to terrorize more innocent Americans. https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1998407499884511706?s=20 https://twitter.com/FBIDirectorKash/status/1998416601050161442?s=20 https://twitter.com/FBIDDBongino/status/1998135848546746381?s=20  daily to dismantle the network and all those criminal actors associated with it. https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1998400657217257829?s=20 DOGE https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1998127452195852468?s=20   don’t see how they can do that!” “I’ll speak about it later. I’ll get a FULL report on it.” “Europe has to be VERY careful…Europe is going in some BAD directions.” @ElonMusk will win this! Geopolitical https://twitter.com/PM_ViktorOrban/status/1998044051203928212?s=20  Hungary will not implement the measures of the Migration Pact. The rebellion begins! War/Peace https://twitter.com/Rasmussen_Poll/status/1998163342465306883?s=20 https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1998082649425125715?s=20  amid uncertainty about future U.S. involvement. Zelensky met with Macron, Merz, and Starmer to align Europe's position on Ukraine peace talks. The message? If the U.S. steps back, Europe is ready to step up. Macron spoke of “convergence” between Europe, Ukraine, and the U.S., code for: we're not waiting for Trump. Starmer promised “a just and lasting settlement.” Merz framed Ukraine's future as “the destiny of Europe.” This isn't just about Ukraine anymore, it's about Europe's ability to act without Washington.aa the subtext is clear: Europe knows Trump may walk away, and they're preparing for it. Ukraine is only part of the equation, the real test is whether Europe can act without Washington. For the first time since 2022, the center of gravity on Ukraine is shifting eastward, to Paris, Berlin, and London. If Trump wins, the burden of leadership falls on Europe. Today may have been the first test of whether it’s ready https://twitter.com/BRICSinfo/status/1998299398456131611?s=20 What’s The Likelihood Of A NATO-Russian Non-Aggression Pact? Putin recently proposed providing Europe, the majority of whose countries are part of NATO, with formal guarantees that it won't attack. In connection with this, he also assessed that those who fearmonger about Russia are serving the interests of the military-industrial complex and/or trying to bolster their domestic image, which exposed their ulterior motives. In any case, his proposal could hypothetically lead to a NATO-Russian Non-Aggression Pact (NRNAP), but only if the political will exists on both sides Source: zerohedge.com  https://twitter.com/TheOtherSideRu/status/1998356606119981155?s=20   it's not a democracy anymore” https://twitter.com/visegrad24/status/1998356214384611652?s=20   hold an election, but I would think the Ukrainian people should have that choice. And maybe Zelensky would win. But they haven't had an election in a long time. They talk about a democracy, but it gets to a point where it's not a democracy anymore,” Donald Trump said. As of December 2025, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s approval (or trust) rating in Ukraine has reportedly plummeted due to a major corruption scandal involving leaked “Mindich tapes” tied to his inner circle and energy sector graft. Multiple sources, including Ukrainian media and lawmakers, indicate the rating has dropped by about 40 percentage points in a single week, now sitting at or below 20-25%. Medical/False Flags [DS] Agenda https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1998187351026348280?s=20 WATCH: Crockett Launches Senate Campaign By Posting Bizarre Compilation of Trump Repeatedly Calling Her ‘Low IQ' FBI Agents Sue Kash Patel After Being Fired Over BLM Support — Claim Kneeling ‘Saved American Lives'   The FBI agents who kneeled during the George Floyd BLM riots were fired on Friday by the FBI. A group of former FBI agents has filed a lawsuit against Director Kash Patel and the federal government after being fired for supporting the Black Lives Matter movement. The dozen agents complained that almost immediately upon becoming director of the bureau, Patel began working to terminate all agents who had kneeled in support of the movement. The lawsuit also claims the agents would not have been fired had they had the same perceived political affiliations as those involved in the January 6th protests. Source: thegatewaypundit.com The FBI, as a U.S. federal law enforcement agency under the Department of Justice (DOJ), is required to maintain political neutrality and impartiality in its operations and public actions. It does not take official political stands or engage in activism, as its mission focuses on enforcing federal laws without partisan bias. Individual FBI employees (including agents) are subject to strict restrictions under the Hatch Act, which prohibits most forms of partisan political activity to ensure a neutral federal workforce. FBI personnel are classified as “further restricted” employees, meaning they face additional limitations compared to most other federal workers. Key Prohibitions for FBI EmployeesThese apply at all times (on or off duty) unless otherwise noted, with the goal of preventing any appearance of political influence or coercion: Taking a partisan political stand: They may not endorse or oppose candidates for partisan office or political parties in advertisements, broadcasts, campaign literature, speeches at partisan events, or similar materials if done in coordination with a candidate, party, or partisan group.     Pushing partisan activism: Active participation in partisan political management or campaigns is banned, including organizing rallies/caucuses, promoting/selling tickets to fundraising events, addressing partisan gatherings in support of/opposition to candidates, or driving voters to polls in coordination with partisan entities. They cannot use their official authority to interfere with elections or solicit/discourage political activity from individuals with business before the DOJ/FBI. Permitted Activities for FBI EmployeesWhile heavily restricted, some non-active or non-partisan actions are allowed, primarily off-duty: . https://twitter.com/amuse/status/1998131089542713808?s=20   million in fees from Fani Willis's office after she was disqualified for an improper relationship with a special prosecutor. The Georgia Supreme Court removed her permanently in September, opening the door for all 19 defendants to file similar reimbursement claims. The total cost could dwarf Trump's alone and stands as a humiliating rebuke of Willis's partisan prosecution. The blowback is now financial as well as legal. https://twitter.com/MarioNawfal/status/1998354564790284308?s=20 notice. 18 of them are still actively covered. September 2025. Monthly payout: over $10,000. GAO’s just…monitoring them. Because apparently nobody at HHS has. No SSN? Fine. No proof of citizenship? Whatever. No income documentation? Come on in. GAO literally wrote in their report: “[We] did not provide documentation yet received coverage.” They’re not even hiding it – they got benefits with nothing. The system just said yes. Now check the real-world damage. In 2023, 29,000 Social Security numbers somehow got used for multiple full-year coverage plans. By 2024? That jumped to 68,000. Someone’s running the same number through the machine twice, three times, however many times it takes, and the alarms aren’t going off. Then there’s the $94 million that went to dead people in 2023. Not “accounts tied to people who died recently and the paperwork hasn’t caught up” – straight up deceased recipients. Death certificates filed, funerals held, checks still clearing. But here’s the really wild part: GAO tried to track $21 billion in subsidies from 2023 back to actual Social Security numbers. Couldn’t do it. 21 billion dollars just floating out there with no clear connection to who’s supposed to be getting it. The system allows multiple enrollments per SSN “to help ensure actual SSN-holder can enroll in cases of identity theft or data entry errors.” In other words: we built in workarounds so generous that fraud looks identical to legitimate use. Now Congress is fighting over whether to extend these enhanced COVID subsidies past December 31. Cost to keep them? $30 billion annually. 24 million people enrolled, over 90% getting subsidies. Without extension, premiums spike overnight and 22 million people might lose coverage. Republicans looking at GAO’s findings saying: this is exactly why we shouldn’t pour another $30B into a system that can’t tell fake accounts from real ones. Democrats saying: you’re going to kick 22 million people off insurance because less than 1% is fraud? Both sides kinda have a point. Yeah, the fraud’s under 1% of total enrollees. But when you’re burning $30B yearly and literally cannot verify where $21B went, “less than 1%” stops sounding so minor. Senate vote coming this week. Expected to fail. Which means scramble for short-term extension, fight continues into 2026 budget battles, and absolutely nothing changes about fraud controls. Because here’s what nobody wants to say out loud: the system isn’t designed to catch fraud. It’s designed to maximize enrollment. When your mandate is “get people covered,” asking too many questions becomes the enemy. Verification slows things down. Documentation creates barriers. Better to let a few fake accounts slip through than risk denying real people who need coverage. So GAO’s 18 fictional enrollees will keep collecting their $10K monthly until someone at HHS manually shuts them down. Which requires someone at HHS to actually read GAO reports. Which requires someone at HHS to care more about fraud than enrollment numbers. Don’t hold your breath. By next year, GAO will run the same test. Find the same results. Write the same warnings. And Congress will have the same fight about whether feeding money into a system that can’t track where it goes is compassionate policy or expensive theater. Meanwhile, somewhere in America, a completely imaginary person just got their subsidized premium renewed for 2026. https://twitter.com/chad_mizelle/status/1998194850324222006?s=20  clown show. Ignore him. In the meantime, Congress needs to start acting like a co-equal branch and initiate its own inquiry into Boasberg. President Trump's Plan Alina Habba Resigns as U.S. Attorney for New Jersey After Courts Rule Against Her Appointment Alina Habba, President Donald Trump's pick to serve as U.S. attorney for New Jersey, has resigned from her role following a federal court's ruling to uphold a lower court's decision that she was not “lawfully” appointed to the office. The news was announced Monday by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, who said she was “saddened to accept Alina's resignation”: https://twitter.com/AGPamBondi/status/1998102734680318084?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1998102734680318084%7Ctwgr%5E61a3e334e8e6099ea26f7cf5005134be5bf746cd%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.breitbart.com%2Ft%2Fassets%2Fhtml%2Ftweet-5.html1998102734680318084 Habba intends to return to the U.S. attorney's office if that occurs, Bondi added, noting that she will be continuing with the DOJ as a senior advisor. Source: breitbart.com Do Not Mistake Compliance For Surrender” – Alina Habba Steps Down As Acting US Attorney For New Jersey    Habba's statement Monday said “do not mistake compliance for surrender”. https://twitter.com/AlinaHabba/status/1998101999024550125?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1998101999024550125%7Ctwgr%5Ec3b83e0f57525961eabb9975a6e4dab69d0d73c0%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.zerohedge.com%2Fpolitical%2Fdo-not-mistake-compliance-surrender-alina-habba-steps-down-acting-us-attorney-new-jersey Source: zerohedge.com https://twitter.com/JoeLang51440671/status/1998202248636072142?s=20  Ketanji Brown Jackson claimed the president should have no power to fire expert bureaucrats. She said economists, PhDs, scientists, & transportation officials should operate beyond presidential reach. Such a view would carve the heart out of Article II & cement rule by permanent insiders rather than elected leadership. Jackson's theory elevates the deep state over the voters who choose a president. That is a constitutional revolution in plain sight. https://twitter.com/AwakenedOutlaw/status/1998116399190036973?s=20   Furthermore, the same logic would apply to the Federal Reserve, IMO. In fact, that’s almost certainly where this is going. Justice Kavanaugh: “I want to give you a chance to deal with the hard hypothetical. When both Houses of Congress and the President are controlled by the same party, they create a lot of these independent agencies or extend some of the current independent agencies into these kinds of situations so as to thwart future Presidents of the opposite party https://twitter.com/nayibbukele/status/1894547479367938142?s=20 https://twitter.com/Rothbard1776/status/1998162884455522528?s=20 https://twitter.com/MJTruthUltra/status/1998149963835191541?s=20 https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1998129151857848575?s=20   where you have Dem Senators, they won’t approve him! This gentlemen’s agreement [blue slip] has lasted TOO LONG. It means you can’t appoint a GOP US Attorney!” “In VA, NJ, CA, a US Attorney or judge…the only people you can get by are Democrats because they put a HOLD ON IT!” “It only takes one senator! If they are Democrat, they won’t approve it.” “All because GRASSLEY with his BLUE SLIP stuff won’t let anybody go by! And by the way, Democrats have violated blue slip!” Susie Wiles: Trump Will Campaign for 2026 Midterms ‘Like It's 2024 Again' White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles revealed that President Donald Trump will get out and “campaign like it's 2024 again” for the 2026 midterm elections. Wiles went on to explain that “in the midterms, it's not about who's sitting at the White House,” but about localizing the election and keeping “the federal officials out of it.” “We're actually going to turn that on its head,” Wiles shared. “And, put him on the ballot because so many of those low propensity voters are Trump voters. And, we saw, a week ago Tuesday, what happens when he's not on the ballot and not active. So, I haven't quite broken it to him yet, but he's going to campaign like it's 2024 again.” Source: breitbart.com (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:13499335648425062,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-7164-1323"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="//cdn2.customads.co/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");

On Wednesday's Mark Levin Show, most of the media are criticizing U.S. attacks on Venezuelan drug boats as illegal with cherry picked experts who don't specify what law was violated or rely on vague arguments. It's an act of war when Venezuela sends in toxic drugs to America. It's odd that the Democrats and some RINO's first instinct is to attack Pete Hegseth and not the enemy. The more they hate you the more effective you are. Later, Rep Chip Roy calls in with an update on his race for Texas Attorney General. He also argues that the President of the United States has the constitutional authority under Article II powers to preemptively strike a boat carrying drugs operated by narco-terrorists from Venezuela. Afterward, Qatar is ramping up a charm offensive amid scrutiny over its ties to the Muslim Brotherhood following the October 7 attacks, hosting House Republicans and influencers. Also, Dinesh D'Souza calls in and reveals that Qataris view themselves as the true chosen people due to their effortless oil wealth, freeing the nation from labor. Instead, they pursue financial jihad by deploying resources to purchase influence. For decades, they've targeted American universities, funding entire departments like political science rather than isolated events. Recently, they've shifted to infiltrating the conservative movement to foster divisions within the right, achieving some success with substantial funding that many are yielding to, and people should recognize this as a paid influence operation. Finally,  there's a new Democrat Party confederacy, where sanctuary cities and states unconstitutionally nullify federal immigration laws under the Supremacy Clause, akin to secession since the Civil War. Democrats disregard the law and Constitution, destroying the country by supporting communities pushing Sharia law and Islamist enclaves to influence states like Texas, with figures like Zohran Mamdani embodying their power-driven ideology. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Notes: Constitution Law 2025 – Full Outline Understanding Executive Power: A Deep Dive into Constitutional LawThis conversation delves into the complexities of Article II of the U.S. Constitution, focusing on the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches. It explores the historical and judicial interpretations of presidential power, the role of the Supreme Court in checking executive overreach, and the implications of recent doctrines like the Major Questions Doctrine. The discussion emphasizes the ongoing struggle for power and the evolving nature of constitutional law in the context of American governance.In the realm of constitutional law, the separation of powers is a cornerstone principle that defines the boundaries and interactions between the branches of government. This blog post delves into the complexities of executive power, particularly focusing on Article II and the ongoing tension between presidential authority and congressional checks.The Maximalist vs. Narrow ViewAt the heart of the debate is the interpretation of the vesting clause in Article II, which grants executive power to the President. The maximalist view, rooted in the unitary executive theory, suggests a broad, inherent authority for the President, especially in foreign affairs. In contrast, the narrow view, inspired by James Madison, limits presidential power to explicitly enumerated duties, emphasizing the President's role as an enforcer of laws.Key Judicial InterpretationsThe Supreme Court has played a pivotal role in shaping the understanding of executive power. Landmark cases like United States v. Curtis Wright and Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer highlight the evolving judicial stance on presidential authority. Justice Jackson's tripartite framework from Youngstown remains a critical tool for analyzing executive power, categorizing presidential actions based on congressional support or opposition.Modern Challenges and DoctrinesIn recent years, the major questions doctrine (MQD) has emerged as a significant check on executive overreach. This doctrine demands clear congressional authorization for executive actions of vast economic and political significance, reinforcing the separation of powers. The MQD, alongside the non-delegation doctrine, underscores the judiciary's role in ensuring that executive actions align with legislative intent.The ongoing debate over executive power is not just a theoretical exercise but a living, evolving conflict that shapes American governance. As future constitutional lawyers, understanding these dynamics is crucial for navigating the legal landscape and ensuring the balance of power remains intact.Subscribe now to stay updated on the latest insights in constitutional law and governance.TakeawaysThe separation of powers is a living, evolving conflict.The maximalist view of presidential power suggests inherent authority.Youngstown's framework is essential for analyzing executive power disputes.The president's control over the bureaucracy is a contentious issue.The Appointments Clause distinguishes between principal and inferior officers.Foreign trade agreements often blur the lines of congressional and presidential powers.The Major Questions Doctrine serves as a check on executive overreach.Judicial tools are crucial for maintaining the balance of power.Article II, separation of powers, presidential power, constitutional law, executive orders, Supreme Court, Youngstown, Curtis Wright, major questions doctrine, federal bureaucracy

This is the fourth episode of our ongoing series breaking down the U.S. Constitution.This month, Roman and Elizabeth turn to Article Two, which establishes the executive branch, alongside former Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano. Elizabeth also explains why Trump administration's attacks on Venezuelan boats defy even the broadest interpretation of the president's war powers. Subscribe to SiriusXM Podcasts+ to listen to new episodes of 99% Invisible ad-free and a whole week early. Start a free trial now on Apple Podcasts or by visiting siriusxm.com/podcastsplus. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The Trump administration's attacks on Venezuelan boats defy even the broadest interpretation of the president's war powers. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The great and powerful President Donald J. Trump just scored two YUGE federal court wins.  The first was a body check of the rulings of the unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior, federal district court judge Sarah Ellis, who imposed insane restrictions on the ability of ICE officers to defend themselves against mob violence while carrying out their official duties. The second was a body check of the order of unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior, district trial court Judge Karin Immergut, who had denied the democratically elected Article II. Executive Branch President & Commander-in-Chief the authority to federalize the National Guard. I also have updates on yesterday's firestorm of a dissent in the 5th Circuit Texas redistricting case, Federal Magistrate shenanigans in the prosecution of disgraced and fired FBI Directo James Comey, more hilarity from the Democrats in Congress who continue to step on Epstein racks as well as find themselves charged with felony crimes, and more!

In one of the biggest cases of the Supreme Court term, the justices are weighing President Trump's sweeping global tariffs and the future of presidential power in trade policy.At issue is whether Trump can continue relying on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs without congressional approval. The core constitutional question: Are tariffs a “tax,” which fall under Congress' Article I powers — or, as a key foreign policy tool, are they best left to the President under Article II of the U.S. Constitution? The Court's answer will determine not only the fate of Trump's tariff policies but also the boundaries of presidential power for years to come. 

Political Scientists Jack Greenberg (Yale University) and John Dearborn (Vanderbilt University) have a new book that focuses on the idea of presidential self-restraint and the ways in which the U.S. Congress has tried to design Executive positions with an eye towards making real this dimension of presidential norms. The concept of presidential self-restraint is a component of how the president uses his/her executive powers: that the president has a certain expanse of power and chooses, based on a variety of reasons or outcomes, to husband some of that power, or restrain its use. Because presidential self-restraint is particularly hard to divine, especially in how presidents think about the execution of their powers, Greenberg and Dearborn turned to congressional considerations that essentially take into account this idea. Congress has spent quite a lot of time over the past fifty years (since Watergate) in designing appointed positions within the Executive branch in such a way as to flesh out a kind of restraint on the president's part. In so doing, Congress has attempted different means to insulate individuals/positions from potential abuse by a president. Congressional Expectations of Presidential Self-Restraint integrates a number of case studies of congressional action on presidential appointments to examine this push and pull between the legislative and executive branches. As the issue of self-restraint has become more pressing, Greenberg and Dearborn sketch out three foundational shifts that provides the framework for the way that Congress has tried to insulate executive positions, and the ways in which Congress has acknowledged the tension around depending on presidential self-restraint. The issues of political polarization, especially as demonstrated by congressional co-partisans with the president, the Supreme Court's growing commitment to constitutional formalism and unilateralism in the Executive, and Congress's unwillingness to defend its own powers and assert those powers all contribute to this conundrum of a reliance on presidential self-restraint that is often caught up in an expansion of the use of executive powers. The case studies provided demonstrate this conundrum and help us to see just how Congress tried to structure self-restraint into a number of different appointments and how presidents have tried to work around those constraints, some more successfully than others. This is a brief but complex analysis of the current dynamic between the president and Article II powers, the U.S. Congress's evaporating powers, and the Supreme Court's complicit role in fortifying an expansive understanding of presidential power. Lilly J. Goren is a professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-host of the New Books in Political Science channel at the New Books Network. She is co-editor of The Politics of the Marvel Cinematic Universe Volume I: The Infinity Saga (University Press of Kansas, 2022) and The Politics of the Marvel Cinematic Universe Volume II: Into the Multiverse (University Press of Kansas, 2025) as well as co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012). She can be reached @gorenlj.bsky.social Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Political Scientists Jack Greenberg (Yale University) and John Dearborn (Vanderbilt University) have a new book that focuses on the idea of presidential self-restraint and the ways in which the U.S. Congress has tried to design Executive positions with an eye towards making real this dimension of presidential norms. The concept of presidential self-restraint is a component of how the president uses his/her executive powers: that the president has a certain expanse of power and chooses, based on a variety of reasons or outcomes, to husband some of that power, or restrain its use. Because presidential self-restraint is particularly hard to divine, especially in how presidents think about the execution of their powers, Greenberg and Dearborn turned to congressional considerations that essentially take into account this idea. Congress has spent quite a lot of time over the past fifty years (since Watergate) in designing appointed positions within the Executive branch in such a way as to flesh out a kind of restraint on the president's part. In so doing, Congress has attempted different means to insulate individuals/positions from potential abuse by a president. Congressional Expectations of Presidential Self-Restraint integrates a number of case studies of congressional action on presidential appointments to examine this push and pull between the legislative and executive branches. As the issue of self-restraint has become more pressing, Greenberg and Dearborn sketch out three foundational shifts that provides the framework for the way that Congress has tried to insulate executive positions, and the ways in which Congress has acknowledged the tension around depending on presidential self-restraint. The issues of political polarization, especially as demonstrated by congressional co-partisans with the president, the Supreme Court's growing commitment to constitutional formalism and unilateralism in the Executive, and Congress's unwillingness to defend its own powers and assert those powers all contribute to this conundrum of a reliance on presidential self-restraint that is often caught up in an expansion of the use of executive powers. The case studies provided demonstrate this conundrum and help us to see just how Congress tried to structure self-restraint into a number of different appointments and how presidents have tried to work around those constraints, some more successfully than others. This is a brief but complex analysis of the current dynamic between the president and Article II powers, the U.S. Congress's evaporating powers, and the Supreme Court's complicit role in fortifying an expansive understanding of presidential power. Lilly J. Goren is a professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-host of the New Books in Political Science channel at the New Books Network. She is co-editor of The Politics of the Marvel Cinematic Universe Volume I: The Infinity Saga (University Press of Kansas, 2022) and The Politics of the Marvel Cinematic Universe Volume II: Into the Multiverse (University Press of Kansas, 2025) as well as co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012). She can be reached @gorenlj.bsky.social Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Political Scientists Jack Greenberg (Yale University) and John Dearborn (Vanderbilt University) have a new book that focuses on the idea of presidential self-restraint and the ways in which the U.S. Congress has tried to design Executive positions with an eye towards making real this dimension of presidential norms. The concept of presidential self-restraint is a component of how the president uses his/her executive powers: that the president has a certain expanse of power and chooses, based on a variety of reasons or outcomes, to husband some of that power, or restrain its use. Because presidential self-restraint is particularly hard to divine, especially in how presidents think about the execution of their powers, Greenberg and Dearborn turned to congressional considerations that essentially take into account this idea. Congress has spent quite a lot of time over the past fifty years (since Watergate) in designing appointed positions within the Executive branch in such a way as to flesh out a kind of restraint on the president's part. In so doing, Congress has attempted different means to insulate individuals/positions from potential abuse by a president. Congressional Expectations of Presidential Self-Restraint integrates a number of case studies of congressional action on presidential appointments to examine this push and pull between the legislative and executive branches. As the issue of self-restraint has become more pressing, Greenberg and Dearborn sketch out three foundational shifts that provides the framework for the way that Congress has tried to insulate executive positions, and the ways in which Congress has acknowledged the tension around depending on presidential self-restraint. The issues of political polarization, especially as demonstrated by congressional co-partisans with the president, the Supreme Court's growing commitment to constitutional formalism and unilateralism in the Executive, and Congress's unwillingness to defend its own powers and assert those powers all contribute to this conundrum of a reliance on presidential self-restraint that is often caught up in an expansion of the use of executive powers. The case studies provided demonstrate this conundrum and help us to see just how Congress tried to structure self-restraint into a number of different appointments and how presidents have tried to work around those constraints, some more successfully than others. This is a brief but complex analysis of the current dynamic between the president and Article II powers, the U.S. Congress's evaporating powers, and the Supreme Court's complicit role in fortifying an expansive understanding of presidential power. Lilly J. Goren is a professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-host of the New Books in Political Science channel at the New Books Network. She is co-editor of The Politics of the Marvel Cinematic Universe Volume I: The Infinity Saga (University Press of Kansas, 2022) and The Politics of the Marvel Cinematic Universe Volume II: Into the Multiverse (University Press of Kansas, 2025) as well as co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012). She can be reached @gorenlj.bsky.social Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Oregon-based Federal Judge Karen Immelgut, already ruled against once by her 9th Circuit Court of Appeals superiors, has once again ruled after a three day kangaroo court “trial,” that it is she, an unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior district court judge who has the constitutional authority to determine whether calling out the National Guard to defend federal personnel and property is warranted—rather than the US President, to whom Article II of the Constitution assigns the entirety of the Commander in Chief authority, and the Congress, which has delegated its own Article I Militia Powers to the President for precisely these purposes. Even as these National Guard cases from the 7th Circuit (Chicago) and 9th Circuit (Oregon) are being considered by the US Supreme Court, these insurrectionist unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior district trial court judges afflicted with rabid Trump Derangement Syndrome continue to act in “Bad behavior” in violation of their Article III obligations for employment on the federal bench.  In addition, their repeated partisan rulings are more than sufficient grounds for impeachment by the House—which should be happening TODAY—as well as the threat of conviction and removal by the Senate. 

JOIN US FOR THE MEMBERS-ONLY BONUS SHOW IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS MAIN SHOW: INSERT HERE:   https://youtube.com/live/lpiNTk7fEgMJOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~16 cents/day! $5/month! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join TRUMP WINS AGAIN IN FEDERAL COURT!  This time the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals—traditionally recognized as the MOST LIBERAL of the federal court circuits, has handed Trump a RESOUNDING VICTORY on his authority to call out the National Guard and deploy it to Portland OR.In a 2-1 vote this three-judge panel ruled to toss out the temporary restraining order issued against Trump by an unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior federal district trial court Judge Karin—not kidding, Karin—Immelgut, citing reasoning error after reasoning error in her TRO against Trump.  The two judges in the majority—Judge Bridget Bade and Judge Ryan Nelson—were both appointed by Trump. Even better, Judge Nelson wrote a concurrence not only supporting the reasonableness and lawfulness of Trump's deployment of the National Guard, he also argued strenuously that such this exercise of Article II authority by the President simply was not subject to judicial review AT ALL. There was also a histrionic dissent by 76-year-old Judge Susan Graber, a Clinton appointee, class of 1997. Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down into plain English!NOTE: I previously covered Judge Immelgut's unconstitutional TRO decision here:  "Lawless Democrat Rogue Judge VIOLATES Constitution AGAIN!" https://youtube.com/live/IrjYOD-gvSII also invite each of YOU to join me in our desperate but worthy mission to save our great nation. The easiest way to do that? SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! EVEN BETTER, BECOME A CHANNEL MEMBER! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join : -)Episode 1050

JOIN US FOR THE MEMBERS-ONLY BONUS SHOW IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS MAIN SHOW: INSERT HERE:   https://youtube.com/live/mZt0gAL-PowJOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~16 cents/day! $5/month! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join The great and powerful President Donald J. Trump has ordered the firing of Rebecca Slaughter from the Federal Trade Commission, and of course she has sued in federal court and received an injunction against her firing from an unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior federal district trial court judge.  The dispute over Trump's power to fire the heads of so-called independent agencies will now be argued to SCOTUS.As we all know, SCOTUS has so far tossed out ever injunction in every similar firing case involving Trump's exercise of his core and plenary Article II powers, and we have every reason to expect that will be the outcome here.To flesh out the arguments in support of Trump's firing authority, I'll be breaking down a friend-of-the-court (amicus) brief filed by America First Legal, the conservative public interest organization founded in 2021 by the great and powerful Stephen Miller, senior advisor to President Donald J. Trump himself. Join me LIVE at 4 PME T as I break it all down!I also invite each of YOU to join me in our desperate but worthy mission to save our great nation. The easiest way to do that? SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! EVEN BETTER, BECOME A CHANNEL MEMBER! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join : -)Episode 1051

In this episode, I chat with Tom Luongo, a well-known macro expert and a returning five-timer on the show, about the power games behind markets and politics. If you want a hard-hitting map of the current geopolitical and cultural battlefield, this one's for you. ––– Support My Work ––– Paypal: https://www.paypal.biz/BitcoinMatrix Strike/Bitcoin: BitcoinMatrix@strike.me Cash App: https://cash.app/$BitcoinMatrix Venmo: https://venmo.com/u/bitcoinmatrix PO Box: The Bitcoin Matrix, P.O. Box 18056, Sarasota, FL 34231 ––– Offers & Discounts ––– MicroSeed is redefining seed phrase security. Check out https://microseed.io/shop/ and use code MATRIX at checkout. Theya is the world's simplest Bitcoin self-custody solution. Download Theya Now at theya.us/cedric Get up to $100 in Bitcoin on River at river.com/matrix The best Team Bitcoin merch is at HodlersOfficial.com. Use the code Matrix for a discount on your order. Become a sponsor of the show: https://thebitcoinmatrix.com/sponsors/ ––– Get To Know Today's Guest ––– • Tom Luongo on X: https://x.com/TFL1728 ––– Socials ––– • Check out our new website at https://TheBitcoinMatrix.Com • Follow Cedric Youngelman on X: https://x.com/cedyoungelman • Follow The Bitcoin Matrix Podcast on X: https://x.com/_bitcoinmatrix • Follow Cedric Youngelman on Nostr: npub12tq9jxmt707gd5vnce3tqllpm67ktr0mqskcvy58qqa4d074pz9s4ukdcs ––– Chapters ––– 00:00 - Intro 03:10 - The “three strata” of power and the unseen high table 10:02 - War frame, funding flows, and Trump's multi-front strategy 24:56 - Is this a perpetual war? Systems vs. psychopaths  28:05 - Money is changing  33:35 - OMB cuts and the 60-day clock on federal firings 43:10 - Article II power, Chevron deference fallout, and dollar “plumbing”  45:04 - Gold & silver drains; Bitcoin as U.S. collateral asset  54:04 - Property taxes as “serfdom” and the DeSantis debate  56:05 - Why Fannie & Freddie matter; the 30-year mortgage explained   1:04:24 - 2008 redo: conservatorship, AIG, and Dodd-Frank hurdles  1:23:25 - Final rallying cry I want to take a moment to express my heartfelt gratitude to all of you for tuning in, supporting the show, and contributing. Thank you for listening! The information in all The Bitcoin Matrix Podcast episodes and content is based on hypothetical assumptions and is intended for illustrative purposes only. PAST PERFORMANCE DOES NOT GUARANTEE FUTURE RESULTS. This video is provided for entertainment purposes only. The information contained herein represents temporary, changing views and subjective impressions and opinions regarding the inherently uncertain and unpredictable issues discussed. The reader, user, and/or viewer must not assume that these contents are accurate, complete, timely, or up to date. Market conditions change rapidly and unpredictably. Nothing herein should be interpreted as any kind of offer, solicitation, commitment, promise, warranty, or guarantee whatsoever relating to any of the contents of these videos. DISCLAIMER: INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE BITCOIN MATRIX PODCAST IS PROVIDED “AS IS” WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND FREEDOM FROM INFRINGEMENT. The viewer of this video assumes the entire risk of any acting on any information contained herein. No representation is made that any regulatory authority has passed on the merits, adequacy or accuracy of this information. The viewer assumes all liability.

MEMBERS! JOIN US FOR THE BONUS SHOW IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS MAIN SHOW: INSERT HERE:  https://youtube.com/live/5O8bjulfflUJOIN OUR COMMUNITY! Exclusive Members-only content & perks! Only ~17 cents/day! $5/month! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join This week the unelected, black-robed, tyrannical, inferior district trial courts issued yet another feckless, sure-to-be-reserved, obstructionist Temporary Restraining Orders (TROs) against our great and powerful elected Article II Executive Branch President Donald J. Trump in the exercise of his core and plenary powers as Commander in Chief of US military forces.This time the feckless and obstructionist order was issued by Federal Judge April Perry, class of Biden 2024, and raised to the federal bench on November 22, 2024, after Trump's election as President on a 51-44 Senate vote.  As is common to Biden federal bench nominees, Perry has zero prior judicial experience, and her background consists mostly of working for various left-wing organizations.Perry is obliged to simultaneously apply a tortured reading to the relevant statute that authorizes Trump's activation and deployment of the national guard, as well as simply override the Commander in Chief's judgment on whether the circumstances warrant calling out the guard—the combination resulting in a grotesque overreach far beyond the legitimate Article III authority of a federal court judge as well as being an obvious violation of the Constitution's separation of powers and infringement of the core and plenary Commander in Chief powers of the Article II. Executive Branch president. Join me LIVE at 11 AM ET as I break it all down!I also invite each of YOU to join me in our desperate but worthy mission to save our great nation. The easiest way to do that? SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! SUBSCRIBE! EVEN BETTER, BECOME A CHANNEL MEMBER! https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-GqXHAdxVUVMw2F_7h_X3Q/join : -)Episode 1043

Leah is joined by guest co-host Skye Perryman, president & CEO of Democracy Forward, to discuss the week's news, including the continued pushback on the shadow docket from the lower courts and Trump's boundless abuse of Article II. Then Kate, Melissa, and Leah — along with special guest Sherrilyn Ifill — take a look at the impact of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, three years into her time on the Supreme Court.Favorite things:Skye: Sierra FerrellLeah: The Summer I Turned Pretty (Amazon); Charlie Kirk, Redeemed: A Political Class Finds Its Lost Cause, Ta-Nehisi Coates (Vanity Fair); Miolin Bakery, Brooklyn; L'Appartement 4F, Brooklyn & Manhattan Kate: Pennsylvania Supreme Court election (get involved at Vote Save America) Get tickets for STRICT SCRUTINY LIVE – The Bad Decisions Tour 2025! 10/4 – ChicagoLearn more: http://crooked.com/eventsOrder your copy of Leah's book, Lawless: How the Supreme Court Runs on Conservative Grievance, Fringe Theories, and Bad VibesGet tickets to CROOKED CON November 6-7 in Washington, D.C at http://crookedcon.comFollow us on Instagram, Threads, and Bluesky Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The “Autopen Pardon Scandal” House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer announced that the committee is wrapping up its investigation into President Joe Biden’s alleged use of the autopen to issue thousands of pardons. Records suggest Biden’s aides, including Chief of Staff Jeff Zients, authorized pardons using the autopen without Biden’s direct involvement. Critics, including Donald Trump and constitutional attorney Mark Smith (on Fox News), argue this raises questions about presidential authority, legitimacy of pardons, and executive power under Article II. Defenders claim the use of autopen is legal and Republicans are politicizing the issue. US Military Build-up in Puerto Rico Amid Venezuela Tensions Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chairman Dan Kane made an unannounced visit to Puerto Rico. The visit coincided with rising US-Venezuela tensions following a US military strike on a Venezuelan cartel vessel. The Pentagon is considering Puerto Rico as a hub for counter-narcotics operations, deploying F-35 jets, Marines, and multiple warships to the Caribbean. Officials emphasize the move is not for regime change but to combat narco-terrorism and drug trafficking networks. Puerto Rico’s strategic location is highlighted as key for intercepting drug routes. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast and Verdict with Ted Cruz Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening X: https://x.com/benfergusonshowYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Sam Harris speaks with David French about Trump's assault on American democracy. They discuss Trump's persecution of political opponents, abuse of the pardon power, Congress's ineffectiveness, David's proposed change to Article II of the Constitution, whether democracy in the U.S. has passed the point of no return, the future of election integrity, Trump's threats against Elon Musk, the weaponization of ICE, the dangers of deploying the National Guard in American cities, white evangelical support for Trump, Republican infighting and why only Trump can hold the MAGA coalition together, Trump's unique political talents, the prospect of him remaining in power beyond two terms, and other topics. If the Making Sense podcast logo in your player is BLACK, you can SUBSCRIBE to gain access to all full-length episodes at samharris.org/subscribe.

Watch The X22 Report On Video No videos found (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:17532056201798502,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-9437-3289"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs");pt> Click On Picture To See Larger PictureThe D's are panicking, they cannot lose control over the Fed or worse have the Fed shutdown, which is going to happen. Trump is setting the precedent and he wants the court to make the ruling so there is not question of what authority he has. The Fed is trapped, no inflation, Trump is forcing them into a position that they will not be able to get out of. The [DS] is battling evidence that is coming out against them, the evidence is getting worse and they need to distract from this and keep the news cycle clogged with other stories. Every time news breaks against the [DS]/[D's] some type of event occurs. Trump is now exposing Soros. Soros funds the riots and antifa. Antifa mapping started a long time ago.   Economy (function(w,d,s,i){w.ldAdInit=w.ldAdInit||[];w.ldAdInit.push({slot:18510697282300316,size:[0, 0],id:"ld-8599-9832"});if(!d.getElementById(i)){var j=d.createElement(s),p=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];j.async=true;j.src="https://cdn2.decide.dev/_js/ajs.js";j.id=i;p.parentNode.insertBefore(j,p);}})(window,document,"script","ld-ajs"); https://twitter.com/TrumpWarRoom/status/1960524710342746224 https://twitter.com/julie_kelly2/status/1960494829236052013 https://twitter.com/RepJasmine/status/1960343560756056539 Lisa Cook committed a crime and nobody is above the law You don't get special privileges based on the color of your skin   NEW: Lisa Cook to File Lawsuit After Trump Fires Her as Federal Reserve Governor….Fed Says It Will Abide by Court Decision Lisa Cook is preparing to file a lawsuit after President Trump fired her as Federal Reserve Governor. President Trump on Monday evening fired Biden-appointed Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook amid mortgage fraud allegations. “Pursuant to my authority under Article II of the Constitution of the United States and the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, as amended, you are hereby removed from your position on the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, effective immediately,” President Trump wrote in a letter to Lisa Cook. “I have determined that there is sufficient cause to remove you from your position,” Trump added as he cited housing regulator Bill Pulte's criminal referral on Lisa Cook for mortgage fraud – specifically occupancy fraud.   Source: thegatewaypundit.com What Fed must do now after Jerome Powell's Jackson Hole epiphany Last Friday in Jackson Hole, Federal Reserve Chairman Jay Powell finally – and grudgingly – admitted what the Trump team has been saying all along: tariffs don't fuel inflation. At most, tariffs create a one-time adjustment in prices, not the kind of runaway spiral that demands punishing rate hikes. And even that one-time bump may be negligible if, as we have long argued, foreign exporters – not American consumers – shoulder most or all of the burden. The implication is clear: whether the impact is zero or merely a one-time step-up in prices, there is absolutely no justification for the Fed to hide behind "tariff uncertainty" as an excuse for overly restrictive interest-rate policy.   Soure: foxnews.com Political/Rights  https://twitter.com/robbystarbuck/status/1960481691606376666 https://twitter.com/AsraNomani/status/1960407636446175597 https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1960714129783546232  FAILED promises. https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1960729811099308460 Obama Judge Says MS-13 Gang Member Kilmar Abrego Garcia Cannot be Deported Until At Least October 

From April 12, 2019: Julian Mortenson, Professor of Law at the University of Michigan, is the author of a remarkable new article entitled "Article II Vests Executive Power, Not the Royal Prerogative," forthcoming in the Columbia Law Review and available on SSRN.Recently, Benjamin Wittes spoke with the professor about the article, which Mortenson has been working on for years—as long as the two have known each other. The article explores the history of exactly three words of the U.S. Constitution—the first three words of Article II, to be precise: "the executive power."Huge claims about presidential power have rested on a conventional understanding of these three words. Julian argues that this conventional understanding is not just partially wrong, or mostly wrong, but completely wrong, as a matter of history. And, he tries to supplant it with a new understanding that he argues is actually a very old understanding of what those words mean.To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.