Podcasts about article ii

Adam White, Jace Lington, and Bennett Nuss analyze the recent Supreme Court decisions in Trump v. Slaughter and Trump v. Cook, focusing on the implications for executive power, administrative agency independence, and the future of administrative law. Adam White in SCOTUSblog Aditya Bamzai & Aaron Nielson on the Fed and Article II at The Cornell […]

Adam White, Jace Lington, and Bennett Nuss analyze the recent Supreme Court decisions in Trump v. Slaughter and Trump v. Cook, focusing on the implications for executive power, administrative agency independence, and the future of administrative law.Adam White in SCOTUSblogAditya Bamzai & Aaron Nielson on the Fed and Article II at The Cornell Law Review

This spring, Virginia joined eighteen other states and DC in the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, an agreement among participating jurisdictions to award their presidential electors to the winner of the national popular vote once they collectively hold 270 electoral votes. Virginia's thirteen electoral votes bring the compact to 222, leaving it 48 short of the threshold at which it would take effect. Is participation in the compact a legitimate exercise of state power under Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution, or does it require congressional consent under the Compact Clause or even a constitutional amendment under Article V? Join us for a discussion of Virginia’s entry, the constitutional arguments on both sides, and what the compact could mean for the future of the Electoral College.Featuring: Chad Ennis, Vice President, Honest Elections ProjectMichael Williams, Solicitor General, West Virginia[Moderator] Hon. Allen J. Dickerson, Partner, BakerHostetler; Former Chairman, Federal Election Commission

Two constitutional battles dropped in the last 72 hours that go to the exact same question: Who runs the executive branch of the United States government? Is it the President that the American people elected — or is it unelected bureaucrats and Democrat governors who've decided they know better?SPONSOR: Alliance Defending FreedomAlliance Defending Freedom is challenging a Colorado law that forces business owners to use pronouns that violate their religious beliefs, defending a Christian bookstore and a sports apparel company after a court ruled against them. Your support helps protect free speech in cases like this across the country, and for a limited time your first gift is doubled while matching funds last.Have your gift doubled. Text NICK to 83848 or go to https://www.JoinADF.com/Nick-----GET YOUR MERCH HERE: https://shop.nickjfreitas.com/BECOME A MEMBER OF THE IC: https://NickJFreitas.comInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/nickjfreitas/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NickFreitasVATwitter: https://twitter.com/NickJFreitasYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@NickjfreitasTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@nickjfreitas3.000:00:00 – Trump fires the Election Assistance Commission00:02:00 – What the commission actually does (and doesn't do)00:03:54 – Who got the grant money? Calls for congressional oversight00:10:29 – Pritzker invokes the 25th Amendment — what it actually says00:14:46 – Is the president "unable to discharge" his duties?00:16:39 – Can Trump legally fire commissioners? Humphrey's Executor (1935)00:18:53 – Seila Law and Collins v. Yellen: the Supreme Court changes course00:20:47 – Article II: executive power and faithful execution of the laws00:24:37 – The verdict00:27:21 – Being honest about Trump too: Iran and the War Powers Act00:28:32 – Final ruling for the president — and shrinking the bureaucracy

We picked two immigration decisions from the same day over the transgender-sports case because — Dan's protests notwithstanding — that's where the interesting law is. In Mullin v. Doe the Court lets the administration terminate temporary protected status for Haiti and Syria, holding the statute's no-judicial-review bar swallows the procedural challenges and that the equal-protection claim fails on the merits — with a genuinely odd move: skipping the jurisdictional question the way Steel Co. says you can't. In Mullin v. Al Otro Lado a fight about asylum-metering collapses onto a single preposition — whether a migrant stopped at the border “arrives in” the United States — and the majority says no. Along the way: brown M&Ms and Van Halen riders, whether Congress can strip review of constitutional claims without turning in a circle and sprinkling salt on the ground, Bolling v. Sharpe as a candidate for the worst decision ever, and why there's no White Somalia to run a controlled experiment.Highlights[00:00:28] Opening: hype music, and listening to your own podcast to get in the mood[00:01:42] Building a live-show rider with Claude Code, and the Van Halen brown-M&Ms test as a safety checklist[00:03:18] Blogging origin stories — GeoCities, Movable Type, the death of Google Reader, a ransomed domain[00:06:26] Why we date-stamp episodes; the “too many episodes” complaint[00:07:27] Today's slate: two June 25 immigration decisions, Mullin v. Doe and Mullin v. Al Otro Lado, chosen over the trans-sports case[00:10:37] A digression on the opinion's broken line spacing on page 1[00:12:11] Mullin v. Doe setup: TPS, the consultation-and-review procedures, and the “no judicial review of any determination” bar[00:19:07] Does the bar reach the procedures or just the bottom line? The Court says the whole thing[00:24:32] Can Congress strip review of constitutional claims — or must it first “turn in a circle and sprinkle salt on the ground”?[00:25:01] Dan on his and Alan Trammell's The False Promise of Jurisdiction Stripping[00:31:42] Steel Co. and jurisdiction-first — and the Court's strange skip of it on the interim docket, which costs it Gorsuch and Barrett on that Part[00:38:54] Why leave a hard jurisdictional question unwritten — the stare-decisis dodge and the “do you write on the shadow docket” dilemma[00:42:17] The multiply-the-probabilities problem (70% × 70%), by way of the Section 3 disqualification argument[00:44:04] The merits: Trump v. Hawaii redux, and Alito's very ginger, sanitized recounting of the President's statements about Haitians[00:48:21] Arlington Heights, race as a motivating factor, and the burden-shift the Court blends into one step[00:52:32] The Thomas concurrence: equal protection doesn't bind the federal government — Bolling v. Sharpe and Primus's Bolling Alone[00:59:27] The Kagan dissent: the review bar reaches only the bottom line, so the failure-to-consult claim survives[01:03:34] Why there's no perfect test case — no White Somalia — so the burden of proof is the ballgame[01:04:42] Mullin v. Al Otro Lado: metering, and whether a migrant stopped at the border “arrives in” the United States[01:08:31] IIRIRA swapped “arrives at” for “arrives in” — did changing the preposition change the meaning?[01:12:16] Dueling everyday-language examples: the running back, the mailbox, and Sotomayor's Penn Station / DCA / Golden Gate / movie-theater hypos[01:15:44] The Chicago Skyway's “Now arriving in Indiana” signs — “we say no thanks”[01:18:28] The dissent's practical stakes: perverse incentives to cross illegally, the SS St. Louis, and the Footnote 5 vs. Footnote 4 spat[01:20:51] Mootness and the voluntary-cessation exception; Jackson's advisory-opinion dissent and the Chatrie citation she just missed[01:24:13] The second Thomas concurrence: the § 1252 injunction bar (Garland v. Aleman Gonzalez) and an inherent Article II power to expel — “milling around”[01:26:18] The “an uniform rule” indefinite-article tangent; Conor Clarke on how we can't pronounce anything[01:28:06] Sign-off: Dan's two-week vacation, and thanks to the Constitutional Law Institute and SCOTUSblogRelevant linksCasesMullin v. Doe — slip opinion (No. 25-1083, consolidated with Trump v. Miot; TPS termination for Haiti and Syria)Mullin v. Al Otro Lado — slip opinion (No. 25-5; asylum metering and “arrives in the United States”)Commentary & articlesDaniel Epps & Alan M. Trammell, “The False Promise of Jurisdiction Stripping” (Columbia L. Rev. 2023) — the argument that jurisdiction stripping is a far weaker tool than advertisedRichard Primus, “Bolling Alone” (Columbia L. Rev. 2004) — after Bolling v. Sharpe, the Court has never actually invalidated federal discrimination against Black plaintiffs at the CourtHenry Monaghan, “Marbury and the Administrative State” (1983) — how a court “says what the law is” when the law tells it to defer

✅ Victories 1. Expansion of Presidential Power Case: Trump v. Slaughter Outcome: The Court overturned Humphrey’s Executor (a long-standing precedent). Meaning: The President now has broader authority to fire officials in independent agencies (like the FTC). Seen as strengthening Article II executive power. A related case (Trump v. Cook) ruled the opposite for the Federal Reserve, limiting presidential removal power there. This creates a partial exception, showing the Court did not fully embrace unlimited executive control. 2. Transgender Athletes in Women’s Sports Case: West Virginia v. BPJ Outcome: States can restrict participation in women’s sports based on biological sex. Impact: Laws in 27 states are upheld. The Court ruled such restrictions do not violate the Equal Protection Clause or federal law. 3. Campaign Finance / Free Speech Case: NRSC v. FEC Outcome: Political parties can spend unlimited money in coordination with candidates. Impact: Expands political speech rights. Removes restrictions on party-candidate coordination. ❌ Losses 1. Birthright Citizenship Key points: The Court affirmed that such a major change cannot be done via executive action. Leaves open: Constitutional amendment Possible congressional legislation 2. Mail-in Ballots / Election Law Case: Watson v. RNC Outcome: States may count ballots received after Election Day if postmarked on time. Impact: Election rules remain state-controlled. Some states can allow extended ballot receipt windows. 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.

The big opinions are coming fast and furious as the Term ends. This episode, we take on two related cases from the penultimate opinion drop day: Trump v. Slaughter, which overrules Humphrey's Executor and clears away for-cause protection for the independent agencies, alongside its interim-docket companion Trump v. Cook, where the very same logic somehow spares the Federal Reserve. The big question: if the President can fire an FTC commissioner at will, what actually makes the Fed different — is "history" doing the work, or is the Court just saving the bond markets? Along the way: Heidegger's "always already," whether the metaphor of a living tree is consistent with originalism, a Goldilocks definition of "cause," the Chief leaning on his own unworkable precedents, the Ex parte Young mystery that keeps escaping the Court's grasp, and the first appearance of "the interim docket" in the U.S. Reports.Highlights[00:00:18] The penultimate opinion day — four down, four to go[00:00:50] The last-day pileup, and the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance case still pending[00:03:25] A confession: staircase wit, and the metaphor Will wishes he'd used[00:04:27] The living tree as an originalist — and the petrified-tree rejoinder[00:06:01] The new custom-cover workflow, and what Claude still isn't allowed to write[00:07:00] The day's four opinions: Cook, Slaughter, Chatrie, and Watson v. RNC[00:09:50] Is the Court strategic about opinion timing? A walk back through OT21's last days[00:13:55] Slaughter before Cook: the general rule before the exception[00:15:08] "Humphrey's Executor has always already been overruled" — by way of continental philosophy[00:17:36] Slaughter: the question, Humphrey's Executor, and the road from Morrison v. Olson through Seila Law[00:22:12] Why presidents mostly haven't tested removal — and whether this shifts the equilibrium[00:25:29] Walking the opinion: Roberts for the Court, the Thomas non-join, a Sotomayor (not Kagan) dissent[00:27:30] The Decision of 1789, the history fight, and the "good arguments on both sides" that made Will a "witless hack"[00:33:19] Part III-B's reserved questions and the Gorsuch concurrence's non-delegation wish list[00:43:06] Cook: procedurally on the interim docket, and why it comes out the other way[00:46:00] The Chief's history tour — the Bank of North America, Hamilton, and an accomplished yachtsman[00:49:00] The Fed as the "third bank"; Bamzai & Nielson and the monetary-vs-regulatory problem[00:50:25] The chain of moves: reviewability, a Goldilocks "cause," and the equity remedy[00:53:11] Footnote 2 and the Ex parte Young mystery — Armstrong, CASA, and Bivens[00:58:41] Process not received: a Truth Social post isn't enough, and what Cook gets next[01:00:54] "The interim docket" enters the U.S. Reports[01:01:52] The separate writings: Kavanaugh (save the economy), Jackson (equities), Thomas's solo dissent[01:04:45] Alito-Gorsuch and Barrett: hard questions, and skepticism of a carve-out defended "for secret reasons"[01:11:26] Sign-off: if there's a long delay before the next episode, it's because we've lost removal protectionRelevant linksCasesTrump v. Slaughter — slip opinion · SCOTUSblog analysisTrump v. Cook — slip opinion · SCOTUSblog analysisChatrie v. United States — slip opinion · SCOTUSblog analysisWatson v. Republican National Committee — slip opinion · SCOTUSblog analysisCommentary & articlesAditya Bamzai & Aaron L. Nielson, "Article II and the Federal Reserve" — the leading qualified defense of Fed independence (Cornell L. Rev.)Samuel L. Bray, "Remedies in the Officer Removal Cases" — relied on by the Cook majority on the equity-remedy question (Journal of Legal Analysis); draft/announcement on the Divided Argument blogWilliam Baude, "How To Save The Federal Reserve" — Will's prior take on preserving Fed independence under the removal cases

»

David French — New York Times columnist, veteran constitutional attorney, and one of the sharpest legal thinkers writing today — joins the Chuck Toddcast for a riveting conversation about how the legal system is straining to handle a world being remade by AI, an out-of-control executive branch, and the slow erosion of America's basic constitutional architecture. French opens with the chilling case the Florida Attorney General has now brought against OpenAI in connection with the Florida State University shooter, who asked ChatGPT how to disengage his weapon's safety just three minutes before opening fire. French argues that if ChatGPT had been a human person, it would unquestionably have been charged as a co-conspirator — humans get prosecuted for encouraging suicide all the time — and that when ChatGPT is speaking, OpenAI is legally speaking, full stop. He walks through the murky liability questions the law is now scrambling to answer: Google Search has never been held to the same standard as ChatGPT, but ChatGPT actively generates new speech rather than just pointing users to existing content, and French argues that litigation needs to function as a meaningful deterrent rather than mere compensation — though ultimately Congress is going to have to actually legislate AI regulation rather than leave the entire field to civil lawsuits. The conversation turns to what French sees as a more immediate constitutional crisis: Trump's blanket immunity for tax violations and the "anti-weaponization" slush fund scheme, both of which French argues are flatly indefensible on legal grounds. He explains the deeper problem — Trump suing his own government creates a fiction of an adversarial proceeding when there isn't actually one, and Trump cares far more about the liability shield than the slush fund itself, because he's trying to remove himself from the operation of the law in essentially the same way a king would. The pardon power only covers federal crimes, not civil offenses, and Congress has clear authority to stop this if it had the will. French offers several concrete reforms: require congressional approval for legal settlements above a certain dollar threshold, force members of Congress to obtain a certification in the Constitution itself, and that political parties should perform comprehensive background checks for their candidates, On the question of whether the Founders intended a Christian nation, French is unequivocal: they didn't, and Madison rebuked Christian nationalism explicitly. The deeper structural problem behind the DOJ's loss of credibility is the unitary executive theory itself — Article II of the Constitution is dangerously vague, the executive was never meant to be a co-equal branch (Congress was supposed to be most powerful), and the only durable fix may require constitutional reform to formally remove the DOJ from executive control. French closes on a hopeful note: after every dark period in American history, the country has entered a major era of reform — and he believes one is coming again. Link in bio or go to https://getsoul.com & enter code TODDCAST for 30% off your first order. Protect your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get up to $3 million in coverage in as little as 10 minutes at https://ethos.com/chuck. Application times may vary. Rates may vary. Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 David French joins the Chuck ToddCast 01:30 Insurance companies & gambling companies have opposite incentives 04:00 States liberalized sports gambling and the public hasn’t liked it 05:45 Trying to regulate after the fact can be difficult 07:00 Common law concepts are starting to come into regulating AI 07:30 Florida AG has brought criminal case against OpenAI over FSU shooter 09:00 There has to always be human liability in AI cases 11:00 If ChatGPT was a human in FSU case, it would have be charged as co-conspirator 12:00 Shooter asked ChatGPT how to disengage the safety 3 mins before shooting 14:00 In Canadian school shooting, ChatGPT’s participation was overt 16:30 Determining liability is murky. Google search isn’t held to same standard as ChatGPT 18:00 Humans can be prosecuted for encouraging someone to commit suicide 19:15 There are circumstances where criminal liability could apply to AI 19:45 When ChatGPT is speaking, OpenAI is speaking 21:00 Litigation needs to be a deterrent, not just compensation for victims 23:30 We need to pass laws regulating AI, not just pressure via civil lawsuits 24:45 How is blanket immunity for Trump tax violations remotely legal? 25:45 Congress’s job to stop weaponization fund & Trump IRS immunity 26:45 Legal system rests on an adversarial relationship in court cases 27:45 There’s no adversarial proceeding when Trump sues his own government 28:30 Trump cares more about liability shield than the slush fund 29:30 Pardon power only applies to federal crimes, not civil offenses. Can be sued 30:15 Trump is trying to remove himself from the operation of the law like a king 31:00 How can congress stop Trump’s DOJ from issuing these settlements? 32:45 Congress should have to approve settlements above a certain amount of $ 34:30 Member of congress should have to get a certification in the constitution 35:45 Parties should force candidates to pass a comprehensive background check 37:00 Why aren’t state funded partisan primaries a violation of equal protection? 40:15 Partisan primaries are killing the political system 41:00 States can say that they’ll only fund open primaries 42:15 Campaign finance reforms and PACs have weakened party control 44:00 Did the founders intend for America to be a christian nation? 45:00 Founders were biblically literate, but not particularly devout 45:30 Founders intentionally did not create a christian nation 46:30 Madison argued against paying clergy with tax dollars 47:15 Madison rebuked christian nationalism and immigration restriction 49:45 DOJ has lost credibility, how can we separate the DOJ from the executive? 50:30 Problems with DOJ are downstream from the unitary executive theory 51:30 Article II of the constitution is vague and inexplicit 52:45 After dark period, America enters periods of reform, which we badly need 54:45 Never supposed to be co-equal branches. Congress should have most power 55:30 Have to remove executive’s ability to claw power to the top 56:30 Would likely need constitutional reform to pull DOJ out of executive branch 59:00 Past congressional leaders wouldn’t voluntarily cede power 1:00:45 In late 80’s - early 90’s, congress was incentivized to compromise 1:01:30 Changes to college basketball in one-and-done and NIL era 1:03:00 Transfer portal has created a new form of one-and-done 1:04:45 NBA can only improve regular season by reducing the 82 games 1:06:15 Regular season NBA games are more intense than 30 years agoSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Chuck Todd opens with an uncomfortable truth Republicans are doing everything possible to avoid acknowledging: Trump turns 80 next week, his physical and mental decline is increasingly visible to anyone paying attention, and the GOP is now repeating exactly the same mistake Democrats made by ignoring Joe Biden's obvious deterioration. The cruelest irony: Trump literally built his entire 2024 campaign on the premise that his opponent was too old and too sleepy to do the job, but Biden's catastrophic debate finally broke the Democratic silence in a way the GOP shows no signs of replicating. Chuck argues Trump's behavior isn't unusual for an 80-year-old — it's deeply unusual for an American president. He warns that Senate Republicans made an enormous mistake by not killing the weaponization fund, that every GOP incumbent up for reelection is now vulnerable to extremely effective attack ads, and that acting DNI Bill Pulte is almost certainly holding that position illegally — the courts will probably step in to declare him ineligible. He previews Tuesday's primaries in Maine and South Carolina, where Lindsey Graham looks genuinely vulnerable, and notes that if Graham gets forced into a runoff, history says he's in real trouble. He's watching how much protest vote Janet Mills picks up in Maine, and on Graham Platner — who has been saying that the war "messed him up" — Chuck offers a pointed observation: just because behavior is explainable doesn't always make it excusable.He closes with a sharp analysis of the Scott Pelley firing at 60 Minutes, arguing the real story isn't Pelley at all — it's the Ellisons, who are using 60 Minutes as a bargaining chip with Trump to get their Paramount merger approved. He believes 60 Minutes is a symbol with massive brand equity, and Trump wants to bring it to heel or topple it altogether. Then, David French — New York Times columnist, veteran constitutional attorney, and one of the sharpest legal thinkers writing today — joins the Chuck Toddcast for a riveting conversation about how the legal system is straining to handle a world being remade by AI, an out-of-control executive branch, and the slow erosion of America's basic constitutional architecture. French opens with the chilling case the Florida Attorney General has now brought against OpenAI in connection with the Florida State University shooter, who asked ChatGPT how to disengage his weapon's safety just three minutes before opening fire. French argues that if ChatGPT had been a human person, it would unquestionably have been charged as a co-conspirator — humans get prosecuted for encouraging suicide all the time — and that when ChatGPT is speaking, OpenAI is legally speaking, full stop. He walks through the murky liability questions the law is now scrambling to answer: Google Search has never been held to the same standard as ChatGPT, but ChatGPT actively generates new speech rather than just pointing users to existing content, and French argues that litigation needs to function as a meaningful deterrent rather than mere compensation — though ultimately Congress is going to have to actually legislate AI regulation rather than leave the entire field to civil lawsuits. The conversation turns to what French sees as a more immediate constitutional crisis: Trump's blanket immunity for tax violations and the "anti-weaponization" slush fund scheme, both of which French argues are flatly indefensible on legal grounds. He explains the deeper problem — Trump suing his own government creates a fiction of an adversarial proceeding when there isn't actually one, and Trump cares far more about the liability shield than the slush fund itself, because he's trying to remove himself from the operation of the law in essentially the same way a king would. The pardon power only covers federal crimes, not civil offenses, and Congress has clear authority to stop this if it had the will. French offers several concrete reforms: require congressional approval for legal settlements above a certain dollar threshold, force members of Congress to obtain a certification in the Constitution itself, and that political parties should perform comprehensive background checks for their candidates, On the question of whether the Founders intended a Christian nation, French is unequivocal: they didn't, and Madison rebuked Christian nationalism explicitly. The deeper structural problem behind the DOJ's loss of credibility is the unitary executive theory itself — Article II of the Constitution is dangerously vague, the executive was never meant to be a co-equal branch (Congress was supposed to be most powerful), and the only durable fix may require constitutional reform to formally remove the DOJ from executive control. French closes on a hopeful note: after every dark period in American history, the country has entered a major era of reform — and he believes one is coming again. Finally, Chuck hops into the ToddCast Time Machine to revisit the infamous quote “Have you no sense of decency” from the Army/McCarthy hearings, why McCarthy was one of the first American politicians to master the attention economy, and why that famous quote precipitated the decline of McCarthy’s influence. He also answers listeners’ questions in the “Ask Chuck” segment. Predict the action all the way through the finals. Sign up now for your twenty-five dollar bonus on https://fanduel.com/predicts Link in bio or go to https://getsoul.com & enter code TODDCAST for 30% off your first order. Protect your family with life insurance from Ethos. Get up to $3 million in coverage in as little as 10 minutes at https://ethos.com/chuck. Application times may vary. Rates may vary. Timeline: (Timestamps may vary based on advertisements) 00:00 Chuck Todd’s introduction 05:30 Trump turns 80 in a week. Plans on celebrating himself with UFC fight 06:30 You can tell that Trump is not doing well physically/mentally 07:30 Republicans ignoring Trump’s decline like Dems did with Biden 10:00 Trump won’t do events where he has to stand, he sits now 11:30 Trump’s staff has been padding his schedule with private meetings 12:30 Trump built his campaign on premise his opponent was too old & sleepy 13:15 Biden’s debate broke the Dems silence, GOP hasn’t done same with Trump 14:30 Trump has influence and pull over his party that Biden didn’t 15:15 Trump’s behavior isn’t unusual for an 80 year, is unusual for a POTUS 16:00 Reinforces public perception that parties will say/defend anything for power 19:00 This will add to the credibility problems for the Republican party 19:30 Senate Republicans made huge mistake not killing the weaponization fund 20:15 Every Republican up for reelection is now vulnerable to easy attack ads 21:15 It’s probably illegal for Bill Pulte to hold the acting DNI position 23:00 Courts will likely step in to declare Pulte ineligible for position 25:30 Major primaries coming up on Tuesday including ME & SC 26:45 Lindsey Graham is vulnerable in South Carolina 27:45 Christian conservative right has always been skeptical of Graham 28:45 Outsiders have been ousting incumbents across the country 30:15 Since the Tea Party, GOP base has gone against the establishment 32:30 The anti-war vote will have qualms with Trump & Graham 33:15 Graham’s career is defined by being a political weathervane 35:00 If Graham is forced into a runoff, history says he’s in trouble 35:30 Will be interesting to see how much protest vote Janet Mills gets in ME 36:15 Platner says war messed him up… does he have the temperament for the job? 37:45 Just because behavior is explainable, doesn’t always make it excusable 38:15 Platner is in “save his campaign” mode 39:30 Bad actors will exploit California’s slow ballot counting process 40:30 Counting process requires people have faith in it, slowness hurts credibility 42:00 California has a duty to make citizens confident in the election 44:00 Thoughts on changes at 60 Minutes and Scott Pelley’s firing 44:30 Too much focus on Pelley and not enough on the Ellisons 45:00 Publicly traded media companies have all folded to & appeased Trump 47:30 Companies have a responsibility to shareholders, bad for news integrity 48:30 60 Minutes is a symbol, and Trump wants to bring it to heel/topple it 49:30 We don’t know the politics of the Ellisons, but they want their merger approved 50:30 Ellison’s know one 60 Minutes piece Trump dislikes could blow up merger 51:45 Bari Weiss is being used… is she comfortable being used? 53:00 Scott Pelley has the money to speak out and fight back 54:00 Journalists that stayed hoping to weather the storm & wait for new management 55:15 60 Minutes has incredible brand equity and is being gutted for the merger 56:45 The story is the Ellisons using 60 Minutes as a bargaining chip 1:04:00 David French joins the Chuck ToddCast 1:05:30 Insurance companies & gambling companies have opposite incentives 1:08:00 States liberalized sports gambling and the public hasn’t liked it 1:09:45 Trying to regulate after the fact can be difficult 1:11:00 Common law concepts are starting to come into regulating AI 1:11:30 Florida AG has brought criminal case against OpenAI over FSU shooter 1:13:00 There has to always be human liability in AI cases 1:15:00 If ChatGPT was a human in FSU case, it would have be charged as co-conspirator 1:16:00 Shooter asked ChatGPT how to disengage the safety 3 mins before shooting 1:18:00 In Canadian school shooting, ChatGPT’s participation was overt 1:20:30 Determining liability is murky. Google search isn’t held to same standard as ChatGPT 1:22:00 Humans can be prosecuted for encouraging someone to commit suicide 1:23:15 There are circumstances where criminal liability could apply to AI 1:23:45 When ChatGPT is speaking, OpenAI is speaking 1:25:00 Litigation needs to be a deterrent, not just compensation for victims 1:27:30 We need to pass laws regulating AI, not just pressure via civil lawsuits 1:28:45 How is blanket immunity for Trump tax violations remotely legal? 1:29:45 Congress’s job to stop weaponization fund & Trump IRS immunity 1:30:45 Legal system rests on an adversarial relationship in court cases 1:31:45 There’s no adversarial proceeding when Trump sues his own government 1:32:30 Trump cares more about liability shield than the slush fund 1:33:30 Pardon power only applies to federal crimes, not civil offenses. Can be sued 1:34:15 Trump is trying to remove himself from the operation of the law like a king 1:35:00 How can congress stop Trump’s DOJ from issuing these settlements? 1:36:45 Congress should have to approve settlements above a certain amount of $ 1:38:30 Member of congress should have to get a certification in the constitution 1:39:45 Parties should force candidates to pass a comprehensive background check 1:41:00 Why aren’t state funded partisan primaries a violation of equal protection? 1:44:15 Partisan primaries are killing the political system 1:45:00 States can say that they’ll only fund open primaries 1:46:15 Campaign finance reforms and PACs have weakened party control 1:48:00 Did the founders intend for America to be a christian nation? 1:49:00 Founders were biblically literate, but not particularly devout 1:49:30 Founders intentionally did not create a christian nation 1:50:30 Madison argued against paying clergy with tax dollars 1:51:15 Madison rebuked christian nationalism and immigration restriction 1:53:45 DOJ has lost credibility, how can we separate the DOJ from the executive? 1:54:30 Problems with DOJ are downstream from the unitary executive theory 1:55:30 Article II of the constitution is vague and inexplicit 1:56:45 After dark period, America enters periods of reform, which we badly need 1:58:45 Never supposed to be co-equal branches. Congress should have most power 1:59:30 Have to remove executive’s ability to claw power to the top 2:00:30 Would likely need constitutional reform to pull DOJ out of executive branch 2:03:00 Past congressional leaders wouldn’t voluntarily cede power 2:04:45 In late 80’s - early 90’s, congress was incentivized to compromise 2:05:30 Changes to college basketball in one-and-done and NIL era 2:07:00 Transfer portal has created a new form of one-and-done 2:08:45 NBA can only improve regular season by reducing the 82 games 2:10:15 Regular season NBA games are more intense than 30 years ago 2:13:45 ToddCast Time Machine - June 9th, 1954 2:14:15 “Have you no sense of decency?” quote becomes famous 2:15:00 Quote came during the Army/McCarthy hearings 2:15:30 The famous line didn’t end McCarthyism 2:16:15 The myth is that McCarthy created the Red Scare… he did not 2:17:00 The Cold War was not a distant abstraction, people were worried 2:17:30 McCarthy didn’t create the wave… he was surfing it 2:18:45 Mass media was growing in America and sped up the information wars 2:19:30 McCarthy understood media and how to create anticipation 2:21:00 McCarthy mastered the politics of attention, his and Trump’s mentor was Roy Cohn 2:23:00 The fear of communism still existed, but public confidence in McCarthy eroded 2:24:00 Television exposed McCarthy in a way quotes and newspapers couldn’t 2:25:30 Army/McCarthy hearings started as a personnel dispute for Roy Cohn ally 2:27:00 There were multiple institutions moving against McCarthy 2:28:00 Army chief counsel Joseph Welch spoke the infamous line 2:28:30 Welch gave words to a conclusion Americans were reaching on their own 2:31:15 Ask Chuck 2:31:30 When will congress actually hold cabinet members accountable? 2:38:15 Thoughts on DHS pulling CBP from sanctuary city airports? 2:42:15 Navigating the tension between voting for and against a candidate? 2:48:15 Thoughts on Democrats proposing a national gerrymandering ban?See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This Day in Legal History: The First Act of CongressOn this day in 1789, President George Washington signed the first statute ever enacted by Congress under the new Constitution — “An Act to Regulate the Time and Manner of Administering Certain Oaths,” codified at 1 Stat. 23. The substance was modest: the law prescribed the form of the oath that members of Congress, federal judges, and executive officers were to take to support the Constitution, and gave the states a window in which to swear in their own officials. But the symbolism was enormous. It was the first time the new federal government did the thing governments actually do, which is to pass a law and require people to obey it, and the choice of subject was telling.Before Congress regulated commerce, levied taxes, or built courts, it bound its own officers to the Constitution by oath. The oath clauses in Article II and Article VI have been doing quiet doctrinal work ever since: they ground the Supremacy Clause, they undergird Marbury's claim that judges are bound to follow the Constitution as supreme law, and they sit at the center of the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3 disqualification debate that the Supreme Court took up in Trump v. Anderson just two years ago. The Oath Act of 1789 is not the kind of statute that gets quoted on bar exams, but it is the original instance of Congress speaking in legal form, and everything the federal government has done since rests on top of it.Uber went after one of its own bellwether plaintiffs Friday in the sprawling multidistrict litigation over alleged passenger sexual assaults, asking U.S. Magistrate Judge Lisa J. Cisneros in the Northern District of California to impose sanctions on plaintiff B.L. and her counsel at Wagstaff Law Firm for what Uber called “pervasive bad faith” in discovery.The headline accusation, made by Kirkland & Ellis's Michael Vives for Uber, is that B.L.'s privilege log cites cases that don't exist — what Vives suggested may be “hallucinated case law” generated by an AI tool — and Vives floated that as an independent basis for sanctions on top of the alleged document withholding, redactions, and undisclosed witnesses Uber catalogued in its April motion.he legal vehicle here is Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37, which gives a federal court a tiered menu of sanctions for discovery misconduct — fees and costs at the low end, adverse-inference instructions and claim preclusion at the high end — and Uber is asking the court to throw B.L.'s case out of the next bellwether wave entirely. Judge Cisneros noticed during the hearing that what struck her about the briefing was the pattern, not any single incident; she pointed to one example where the plaintiff identified a person as a “friend” and only later produced a fuller set of text messages showing the person was actually a therapist.The judge ordered the plaintiff to file a sur-reply by Thursday before ruling, which means a sanctions order is now teed up. The case sits within In re Uber Technologies, Inc., Passenger Sexual Assault Litigation (MDL No. 3084) before Judge Charles R. Breyer, and any sanctions ruling will set the tone for how the rest of the bellwether pool conducts discovery. If the hallucinated-caselaw piece sticks, this also becomes one of the first real Rule 11 / Rule 37 hybrid sanctions vehicles for generative AI misuse in the MDL context — and the bar will be reading it closely.‘Pervasive Bad Faith': Uber Targets Sex Assault MDL Plaintiff | Law360The Seventh Circuit on Friday told the Northern District of Illinois that the now-standard practice of serving Chinese e-commerce defendants by email in “Schedule A” trademark cases doesn't fly under the Hague Service Convention — at least not when the convention applies, which is a question the district court has to actually answer first. The dispute came up in Kangol LLC v. Hangzhou Chuanyue Silk Import & Export Co., No. 25-2205, where the hat-maker Kangol sued more than twenty Chinese vendors for trademark infringement and identified them on a sealed “Schedule A” exhibit attached to the complaint — the same procedural pattern that drives the enormous Schedule A docket in Chicago's federal court.Kangol got a default judgment after serving the defendants by email, but one defendant, Hangzhou Chuanyue, appeared and moved to vacate, arguing that the Hague Convention prohibits email service in China and that the convention applies because Hangzhou's address is discoverable. The legal hook is Article 10(a) of the Hague Service Convention, which permits service “by postal channels” only when the destination state has not objected — and China has affirmatively objected to Article 10(a), full stop.The Seventh Circuit, citing the Supreme Court's 2017 decision in Water Splash, Inc. v. Menon, held that whether or not email counts as a “postal channel,” Article 10(a) is unavailable in China, so email service in this case was improper if the convention applied at all. The panel — Judges Thomas Kirsch, Candace Jackson-Akiwumi, and Doris Pryor — reversed the denial of Hangzhou's motion to vacate and sent the case back for the threshold question the district court skipped: did Kangol make reasonably diligent efforts to find Hangzhou's address, which would have triggered the convention.The practical fallout will reach hundreds, possibly thousands, of pending Schedule A cases in Chicago that rely on email service as a matter of course, and plaintiff firms in this space will be scrambling to redo their service strategy.7th Circ. Revives Chinese IP Defendants' Email Service Case | Law360The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on Thursday transferred Randall King's proposed class action — the vehicle for a proposed $7.25 billion Roundup settlement with Monsanto — into the Northern District of California MDL before Judge Vince Chhabria, despite vehement objections from absent class members who want the case to stay in Missouri state court.The case-within-a-case is unusual: the King action was filed and preliminarily settled in Missouri state court, then a group of objectors (represented by Keller Postman) removed it to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act, and the JPML then tagged it for transfer to the consolidated Roundup MDL. The legal hook here is 28 U.S.C. § 1407, the JPML's transfer authority — paired with CAFA's removal rules, which the settling plaintiffs argue were misused because the objectors aren't “defendants” within the meaning of § 1453 and so cannot remove.The objectors counter that the $7.25 billion deal “launders a liability-management scheme through the courts” by funneling claims of Roundup cancer victims through a Missouri state-court class that an MDL judge would never approve, and they want federal-court scrutiny under Rule 23 and the standards Judge Chhabria has spent years developing in the Roundup litigation. Monsanto, for its part, is on the objectors' side of the venue question — at least tactically — telling Law360 that the case should go back to Missouri state court and it will move to oppose the transfer order.The whole fight is also tied up with the Supreme Court's pending decision in a separate Monsanto case that will determine whether the deal survives at all, because the proposed $7.25 billion is structured around what the Court does there. Whichever way this remand/transfer fight comes out, it is going to be cited in every future class-settlement-jurisdiction tug-of-war for the rest of the decade.$7.25B Roundup Deal Sent To Calif. MDL | Law360A U.S. district judge in Florida said Saturday she will take a closer look at the settlement the Trump administration has reached with itself — or more precisely, with President Trump in his personal capacity — over a long-running IRS lawsuit, scheduling further proceedings to examine whether the deal can stand.The procedural posture is what makes this one interesting: the case involves a federal agency under the President's control settling claims with the President personally, which raises immediate questions about whether anyone is actually adverse to anyone, and whether the resulting consent decree or stipulation can carry the legal weight a normal settlement does. The legal mechanism the judge appears to be invoking is the federal court's inherent supervisory authority over consent decrees and settlements involving the federal government, an authority that runs through cases like Local No. 93 v. City of Cleveland and that the Tunney Act formalizes for antitrust settlements — though here there is no Tunney Act, just the general principle that a federal court doesn't have to rubber-stamp a settlement when there are serious questions about whether the United States was actually represented in the negotiation.The hearing on the issue was set for late May in Miami, with the judge reportedly skeptical that the deal can be approved without further factual development. The political stakes are obvious, but the legal stakes are arguably bigger: if the court can refuse to approve the settlement on the ground that the executive branch was not adverse to itself in any meaningful way, it would create a precedent that constrains every future administration's ability to make its own personal litigation go away through agency action. Expect this one to generate appellate motion practice within weeks.US judge orders review of Trump's IRS lawsuit settlement | 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

Send us Fan MailFederal judges just reminded America that the Constitution still exists.The Kilmar Abrego Garcia case is bigger than immigration politics — it's about whether executive power can ignore court orders, avoid accountability, and punish people after getting caught.Today's opening argument breaks down:Why this ruling matters for checks and balancesHow the courts pushed back against concentrated powerThe Article I vs. Article II fight nobody in corporate media is explainingWhy this is actually a win for constitutional accountability in AmericaThis isn't about parties.It's about whether power answers to law — or law answers to power.LIVE weekdays on The Tony Michaels Podcast.Become a paid supporter at The Coffman Chronicle for full episodes, deeper breakdowns, transcript analysis, and independent reporting focused on power, accountability, and working people.Rumble: https://rumble.com/v7agpp8-judge-torches-executive-power-in-kilmar-garcia-case-tmp-1058.htmlThe Coffman Chronicle: https://www.thecoffmanchronicle.com/ Pocket Constitution: https://thecoffmanchronicle.kit.com/pocket-constitutionYou're listening to today's Opening Argument from The Tony Michaels Podcast. The full show is free on Rumble, with clips, receipts, and the full breakdown. For the ad-free version and deeper breakdowns, subscribe to The Coffman Chronicle at TheCoffmanChronicle.com. Support the show

Send us Fan MailTrump went to China with CEOs, billionaires, and corporate power beside him — but where was Congress?This is not just a story about China. It is a story about concentrated power.When Article I weakens, Article II becomes the fast lane. And money always studies the room where decisions are really made.Today we break down:Trump's CEO delegation to ChinaWhy Congress matters in trade and oversightHow executive power concentrates accessWhy ordinary Americans feel farther from decision-makingThe constitutional fight between public representation and private accessThe question is simple:Who got in the room?And who got left outside paying for the decisions made there?Become a paid supporter at The Coffman Chronicle for full episodes, deeper breakdowns, transcript analysis, and independent reporting focused on power, accountability, and working people.Rumble: https://rumble.com/v7adduy-trump-took-billionaires-to-china-not-the-people-tmp-1056.htmlThe Coffman Chronicle: https://www.thecoffmanchronicle.com/Pocket Constitution: https://thecoffmanchronicle.kit.com/pocket-constitutionYou're listening to today's Opening Argument from The Tony Michaels Podcast. The full show is free on Rumble, with clips, receipts, and the full breakdown. For the ad-free version and deeper breakdowns, subscribe to The Coffman Chronicle at TheCoffmanChronicle.com. Support the show

Send us Fan MailMike Johnson abruptly canceled a scheduled House vote on Trump's Iran war powers just before lawmakers left Washington for Memorial Day recess. The vote appeared likely to pass after a previous War Powers Resolution failed in a 212–212 tie — meaning Congress was one vote away from reclaiming its constitutional role.This episode of The Tony Michaels Podcast breaks down the real story underneath the Iran headlines: Article I versus Article II, Congress versus the presidency, and how concentrated executive power grows when lawmakers refuse to act.Iran is the headline. War powers are the issue. The Constitution is the story.Read more at The Coffman Chronicle and get the full show for paid subscribers.Rumble: https://rumble.com/v7a8l5i-mike-johnson-hides-from-trumps-iran-war-vote-tmp-1055.htmlThe Coffman Chronicle: https://www.thecoffmanchronicle.com/s/the-tony-michaels-podcastPocket Constitution: https://thecoffmanchronicle.kit.com/pocket-constitutionYou're listening to today's Opening Argument from The Tony Michaels Podcast. The full show is free on Rumble, with clips, receipts, and the full breakdown. For the ad-free version and deeper breakdowns, subscribe to The Coffman Chronicle at TheCoffmanChronicle.com. Support the show

Send us Fan MailJD Vance keeps showing up like a man being tested for the chair.Tested in the briefing room.Tested in donor rooms.Tested on foreign policy.Tested in front of Trump.Tested by the machinery of power.But the real question is not whether JD Vance wants to be president. Of course he does.The real question is whether the power structure around Donald Trump believes Vance can operate the machine if Trump can't.This is not just a 2028 story. This is an Article I versus Article II story. It is about whether Congress still has the power to check the executive — or whether the presidency has become a throne that donors, loyalists, and political operatives prepare for the next man in line.Trump can name an heir.He cannot hand over the spell.Read more at The Coffman Chronicle and get the full show for paid subscribers.Rumble: https://rumble.com/v7a6ub8-jd-vance-is-auditioning-to-inherit-trumps-power-tmp-1054.htmlThe Coffman Chronicle: https://www.thecoffmanchronicle.com/Pocket Constitution: https://thecoffmanchronicle.kit.com/pocket-constitutionYou're listening to today's Opening Argument from The Tony Michaels Podcast. The full show is free on Rumble, with clips, receipts, and the full breakdown. For the ad-free version and deeper breakdowns, subscribe to The Coffman Chronicle at TheCoffmanChronicle.com. Support the show

In this episode of Sisters Sidebar, Barb McQuade and Jill Wine-Banks answer your questions on everything from impeaching Trump, Vance, and the cabinet all at once to AI-generated political ads, and more. They discuss whether Article II, Section 4 allows mass removal of the entire executive branch, Congress's power to set mandatory minimum sentences, the legality of Trump's picture on U.S. passports, quarantine powers during outbreaks like the Hantavirus, the rights of retired military officers like Pete Hegseth to freely talk on politics, and the legality of Spencer Pratt's AI ad using the likeness of his political opponents.Freshen up your spring wardrobe!  Get the ReSIStance T-Shirt, Mini Tote, and other #SistersInLaw gear at politicon.com/merch! Additional #SistersInLaw Projects#SistersInLaw Main ShowJill's Politicon YouTube Show: Just The FactsKim's Newsletter: The GavelJoyce's new book, Giving Up Is Unforgivable, is now available, and for a limited time, you have the exclusive opportunity to order a signed copy here. Pre-order Barb's new book, The Fix, or her first book, Attack From Within, now in paperback. Add the #Sisters & your other favorite Politicon podcast hosts on BlueskyGet your #SistersInLaw MERCH at politicon.com/merchWEBSITE & TRANSCRIPTEmail: SISTERSINLAW@POLITICON.COM or Thread to @sistersInLaw.podcastGet text updates from #SistersInLaw and Politicon. Mentioned By The #SistersPre-order Barb's new book, The Fix, and get tickets for her upcoming book tour!Support This Week's Sponsors:OneSkin:Get 15% off OneSkin with the code SISTERS at https://www.oneskin.co/SISTERS #oneskinpodLola Blankets:Get 40% off select Lola Blankets products at Lolablankets.com by using code SISTERS at checkout. Experience the world's #1 blanket with Lola Blankets.Get More From The #SistersInLawJoyce Vance: Bluesky | Twitter | University of Alabama Law | Civil Discourse Substack | MSNBC | Author of “Giving Up Is Unforgiveable”Jill Wine-Banks: Bluesky | Twitter | Facebook | Website | Author of The Watergate Girl: My Fight For Truth & Justice Against A Criminal President | Just The Facts YouTubeKimberly Atkins Stohr: Bluesky | Twitter | Boston Globe | WBUR | The Gavel Newsletter | Justice By Design PodcastBarb McQuade: barbaramcquade.com | Bluesky | Twitter | University of Michigan Law | Just Security | MSNBC | Attack From Within: How Disinformation Is Sabotaging America

Send us Fan MailTrump just exposed the filibuster scam.When the filibuster blocks health care, wages, voting rights, immigration reform, or labor protections, Republicans call it Senate tradition. But when it blocks Trump's election agenda, suddenly he wants it gone.Today we're breaking down how selective procedural compliance moves power away from the people and toward the executive. This is not just about Senate rules. It is about Article I, Article II, concentrated power, and who gets the rule versus who gets the workaround.I'll also connect this to my conversation with Cliff Schecter about Democrats asking permission from people who are already weaponizing the rules.Main question: Who benefits when Congress cannot act?Read more at The Coffman Chronicle and get the full show for paid subscribers.Rumble: https://rumble.com/v7a37ks-trump-exposes-the-filibuster-scam-tmp-1052.htmlThe Coffman Chronicle: https://www.thecoffmanchronicle.com/Pocket Constitution: https://thecoffmanchronicle.kit.com/pocket-constitutionYou're listening to today's Opening Argument from The Tony Michaels Podcast. The full show is free on Rumble, with clips, receipts, and the full breakdown. For the ad-free version and deeper breakdowns, subscribe to The Coffman Chronicle at TheCoffmanChronicle.com. Support the show

Sai Prakash joins to discuss his new book, The Presidential Pardon: The Short Clause with a Long, Troubled History. The Constitution's Pardon Clause grants the president a power unmatched in scope and consequence. In The Presidential Pardon, Prakash explores how this brief clause has grown into the most expansive and controversial tool of the modern presidency. Thomas Donnelly, lead scholar at the National Constitution Center, moderates. Additional Resources  Sai Prakash, The Presidential Pardon: The Short Clause with a Long, Troubled History National Constitution Center, Article II and the Pardon Clause National Constitution Center, The Nixon pardon in constitutional retrospect National Constitution Center, 10 famous people who received presidential pardons Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr Explore the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠America at 250 Civic Toolkit⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate Subscribe, rate, and review wherever you listen Join us for an upcoming ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠live program⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Support our important work ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate

Send us Fan MailTrump's ballroom scam exposes the real problem: Congress keeps surrendering power to the executive branch, and working Americans keep getting the bill.Trump said private donors would pay for his White House ballroom. Now Senate Republicans are trying to pack $1 billion in taxpayer money into a reconciliation bill for Secret Service security upgrades tied to the ballroom project — while stuffing billions more into ICE, CBP, and federal enforcement power.But this is bigger than Trump's ballroom.In this episode of The Tony Michaels Podcast, Tony breaks down how Republicans are stuffing the bill, how Democrats helped clear the runway, and why the real fight is Article I versus Article II. Congress is supposed to control the purse. Congress is supposed to check the president. Instead, both parties keep helping the presidency become too powerful.Trump did not invent unilateral executive power. He exposed what happens when Congress lets presidents govern by signature instead of law.Watch the full show and get more independent political commentary:Rumble: https://rumble.com/v79hdgk-trump-wanted-donors-to-pay.-now-taxpayers-fund-the-ballroom.-tmp-1043.htmlThe Coffman Chronicle: https://www.thecoffmanchronicle.com/Pocket Constitution: https://thecoffmanchronicle.kit.com/pocket-constitutionTopics covered:Trump ballroom$1 billion Secret Service security fundingICE and CBP reconciliation spendingDemocrats and TSA fundingArticle I vs Article IIexecutive overreachCongressional accountabilityunilateral executive powerworking people paying the billSubscribe for daily political commentary from Tony Michaels.You're listening to today's Opening Argument from The Tony Michaels Podcast. The full show is free on Rumble, with clips, receipts, and the full breakdown. For the ad-free version and deeper breakdowns, subscribe to The Coffman Chronicle at TheCoffmanChronicle.com. Support the show

Send us Fan MailWatch Full Episode on Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/thetonymichaels Congress just extended the FISA Section 702 fight instead of fixing the real problem: warrantless searches of Americans' communications.This is not just a surveillance debate. This is a constitutional power fight.Article I says Congress is supposed to check the executive branch. Article II gives the president power to run national security agencies. But when Congress keeps handing surveillance authority to the executive without real warrant protections, the people lose.The government says, “Trust us.”The Constitution says: Get a warrant.Tony breaks down the current FISA fight in DC, why Section 702 matters, how Americans' communications can get swept into foreign surveillance databases, and why both parties need to stop treating the Fourth Amendment like a suggestion box.This is about executive overreach, congressional accountability, warrantless surveillance, the Fourth Amendment, and whether Congress will finally do its job.Watch the full show for the deeper breakdown.Watch Full Episode on Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/thetonymichaels

In this Federalist Society America250 series, experts analyze modern legal and policy debates through the lens of the Founding generation. The Founders gave us the tools to answer many contemporary questions; join us as we explore those answers.During the constitutional convention, Alexander Hamilton raised the idea of a presidential pardon power, borrowing from the British monarchy’s prerogative of mercy. Hamilton’s proposal ultimately resulted in Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, which gives the president the authority to pardon individuals convicted of a federal crime.The first presidential pardon was exercised by George Washington in 1795, when he granted amnesty to individuals who participated in Pennsylvania’s Whiskey Rebellion. Since then, there have been more than 14,000 instances of presidential pardons. From Andrew Johnson’s pardon of Jefferson Davis to Gerald Ford’s preemptive pardon of Richard Nixon to more recent instances including Joe Biden’s preemptive pardon of Hunter Biden and Donald Trump’s January 6th pardons, presidents’ use – and sometimes purported abuse – of the power has been a controversial and fiercely debated executive authority throughout our nation’s history.Join our panel of experts as they explore the Founders’ views of the pardon power and place recent use in context with the founding generation. Featuring:Paul J. Larkin, Senior Legal Fellow, Advancing American FreedomAndrew McCarthy, Senior Fellow, National Review Institute; Contributing Editor, National ReviewJames Trusty, Member, Ifrah Law(Moderator) Jeffrey DeSousa, Florida Office of the Attorney General

Send us Fan MailWatch Full Episode on Rumble: https://rumble.com/v78y7q4-tillis-blocks-fed-pickdoj-suddenly-drops-powell-probe-tmp-1035.htmlThe Justice Department just dropped its criminal investigation into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell—and the timing is raising serious questions.After weeks of pressure, Sen. Thom Tillis tied his support for Trump's Fed nominee, Kevin Warsh, directly to the existence of the probe. Now the investigation is gone, the confirmation path is reopening, and the power struggle between Congress and the executive branch is suddenly front and center.According to Reuters and Axios, the DOJ shifted the case to the Fed's Inspector General, effectively ending the immediate threat of criminal charges. But a federal judge had already weakened the case, and Tillis had made it clear he would block movement until the situation changed.So was this routine legal timing—or political pressure working exactly as intended?In this breakdown, we connect the sequence, the leverage, and what it means for Federal Reserve independence, Article I vs Article II power, and the future of the Warsh nomination.

Mary and Andrew begin this week by welcoming former Assistant US Attorney Sunita Doddamani. A 20-year civil servant with an impeccable record of service, Sunita is one of the prosecutors who was recently fired as part of the DOJ's report about the prior administration's so-called “bias” against abortion protesters and religious rights in FACE Act cases. She talks openly about the "Article II" termination letter she received from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, with no warning and like many others, seemingly just for doing her job by taking the cases assigned to her. From there, Andrew and Mary look at the administration's moves to vacate the convictions of four Proud Boys who were convicted of multiple felonies related to the attack on January 6th. Then, on to a significant decision from Judge Mehta in a long-running civil lawsuit brought against Trump, finding that the president's January 6th speech was political rather than official in nature, which would rule out immunity for official acts. And before they wrap up, the co-hosts take up the latest ruling on Judge Boasberg's contempt inquiry into whether government officials violated his court orders around those deportation flights in March of 2025. This podcast is also available on YouTube at ms.now/mainjustice. Further reading: Here is the Just Security piece on the FACE Act report: Separating Fact from Fiction in FACE Act Enforcement Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Guy Gordon and Eric Lupher discuss Article II of the Michigan Constitution in the context of the upcoming November election on whether Michigan should hold a constitutional convention (aka: Con-Con). Lupher explains that although Article II historically drew little attention, it has become far more significant and contentious amid recent debates over voting rights, election security, and direct democracy. He notes that several provisions in the Constitution are outdated or inconsistent with federal law — such as the voting age still listed as 21 and unenforceable term limits for federal representatives — underscoring how infrequently the document has been updated. The conversation also explores how Michigan's voting rights landscape has expanded dramatically through the 2018 and 2022 “Promote the Vote” amendments, which added no-cause absentee voting, same-day registration, drop boxes, and other protections. These changes have expanded Section 4 of Article II from 111 words to more than 1,300, making it a likely focal point in any Constitutional Convention. Eric also points to growing partisanship on the Board of State Canvassers, tighter recall rules, and loopholes in Michigan's indirect initiative and referendum processes—such as using small appropriations to make laws referendum-proof—as areas delegates might seek to reform. Both Guy and Eric emphasize that Article II has evolved from a relatively quiet section of the state constitution into one of the most politically charged, addressing issues that voters care deeply about. Please consider supporting the Citizens Research Council as it celebrates its 110th anniversary of providing nonpartisan analysis, with this podcast series ahead of a Con-Con vote underscoring the importance of factual, unbiased information as Michigan voters consider whether to open the Constitution for revision.

“Much inferior to it” - That's how Alexander Hamilton described the commander in chief power in comparison to the crown. Yet today - most people who just yell ARTICLE II to support all kinds of unconstitutional acts don't have a clue what the Founders set up under the constitution. On this episode, we're setting the record straight. It's commander. Not king. The post Commander. Not King. appeared first on Tenth Amendment Center.

On the surface, the question of whether Donald Trump can actually force Congress back to Washington to deal with the DHS shutdown sounds simple and dramatic. The Senate is gone, the House is gone, and yet, the problem is sitting there unresolved. Trump, Mike Johnson, and some Republicans are saying they should come back and fix it. The reality is a lot less cinematic.Right now, the Senate is technically in session but only barely. They are holding what are called pro forma sessions, which is basically the minimum effort required to say they are still working. One senator shows up, gavels in, gavels out, and everyone else stays wherever they already are. That setup is not an accident. It is designed specifically so nobody has to come back and take uncomfortable votes, even if there is business that could be handled quickly.There is a constitutional argument floating around that Trump could intervene. Article II, Section 3 gives the president the authority to convene Congress on extraordinary occasions, and some legal interpretations say that power is fairly broad. At least on paper, that sounds like a path. If this is a crisis, then call them back and make them deal with it. But Congress has always pushed back hard on that idea because it cuts directly into their independence, and the courts have generally sided with Congress when it comes to controlling their own schedule.Politics Politics Politics is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.That is why, in practical terms, I don't think Trump can force anything here. Even if he tried, it would turn into a political and possibly legal fight that would take longer than the shutdown itself. The Senate is a body that moves when it wants to move, and it prides itself on being slow, deliberate, and resistant to pressure. That is a polite way of saying they are not going to be bullied into flying back to DC because the White House tells them to.What actually matters is not the Constitution, it is the pressure. If the situation gets bad enough, senators will come back because they have to, not because they are ordered to. The key variable here is not a legal memo, but TSA lines. If airports turn into a disaster heading into a major travel weekend — you know, like Easter — then the political heat spikes immediately. That is when you start to see movement, because now voters are directly affected in a way they cannot ignore.Trump seems to understand that, which is why he moved to get TSA agents paid through executive action. It's not a long term fix, but it might be enough to keep things from melting down. If the lines stay manageable, the urgency fades, and Congress can ride out the recess without much consequence. If the lines explode and people start missing flights in large numbers, then suddenly everyone has a reason to get back on a plane to Washington.So in the end, this is less about whether Trump can bring Congress back and more about whether circumstances will force Congress to bring itself back. My guess is that if the immediate pressure stays low, they will stay exactly where they are: in Disney World. If it doesn't, though — if the public starts feeling the pain in a visible way — then the same lawmakers who left town will find a way to suddenly return to town very quickly.Chapters* 00:00:00 - Intro* 00:03:32 - Can Trump Call Congress Back to DC?* 00:17:28 - Riley Blanton on Iran and the Military Community's Response* 00:43:50 - Update* 00:44:13 - Gas Prices* 00:47:21 - Trump's Poll Numbers* 00:51:57 - Birthright Citizenship* 00:57:30 - Interview with Riley Blanton, con't.* 01:35:38 - Wrap-up This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe

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

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 

“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.

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");

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.

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

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. 

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

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 “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.