Friday Talking Points -- Out-Of-Control Eggflation!
In just about every presidential election, the political punditry tries to frame what happened in it in the easiest possible way, sometimes pinning a win or loss on a certain demographic slice of the electorate (remember "soccer moms" and "NASCAR dads"?) and sometimes putting the focus on a single oversimplified issue. One of the big themes in this regard for the last election was the price of eggs. True to form, they even slapped a cutesy label on it: voters were angry about "eggflation."
Which is why we sincerely hope that Donald Trump is asked about it as often as possible -- say, once a week, at a minimum -- now that he is president again. Because for all his promises, eggflation is going to be a very tough problem for him to solve.
During Trump's first term, the average national price of a dozen large eggs mostly hovered around a dollar. There were two upward spikes which rose above $2.50 per dozen (but stayed below $3.00), one of which happened at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Joe Biden saw things get worse. When inflation spiked to nine percent, the price of eggs also spiked, to over $5.00 per dozen. This did fall right back down again (to once again hover around a single dollar per dozen), but then it started rising again at the end of 2023.
This month, eggs hit an all-time high. The average price of a dozen large eggs is now $6.55. And over $2 of this spike happened after Trump's election. That's where we are, at the start of his second term. And the current spike could go even higher quite soon, which would mean consumers would continue paying many multiples of the dollar-a-dozen prices they had previously been used to, for the foreseeable future. That's if they can even find eggs to buy, as it has become a rather common sight to see supermarkets with empty egg shelves and signs saying: "Sorry, no eggs today."
Democrats would do well to prod the media into asking Trump about this as often as possible: "Why haven't egg prices come down like you promised?" Because it is currently the best example of the difference between what he promised on the campaign trail and what he is actually focused on now that he's in office. For all the populist talk, Trump is much more interested in keeping his billionaire buddies happy. He really does not care how much eggs cost average Americans.
Of course, there's a reason for this spike in egg prices (and decline in availability). It's called "bird flu" (H1N1), and although it is not all that well-known to the public (as of now), it is already decimating the flocks of laying hens that produce America's eggs. It's basic economics: fewer birds laying eggs means a drop in supply, which means higher prices. And when farmers are being forced to kill their entire flocks because of infection, it doesn't seem likely to get better any time soon.
Trump has already exacerbated the problem, by bringing a halt to meetings of doctors and scientists (for no particular reason), and by naming R.F.K. Jr. to head the federal department that deals with diseases and pandemics. Sooner or later the anti-science moves of the Trump administration are going to make things harder for those fighting bird flu, which is only going to make everything worse (and make the price of eggs go up even further). The only real question is whether both Democrats and the media make a big deal of it or not, really.
So far, Democrats are pretty demoralized, which is completely understandable at this point. There are plenty of people outside Washington who are demoralized as well. The "Resistance" is exhausted, to put it bluntly. And there simply is no clear leader of the Democratic Party out there fighting back against Trump's actions. In fact, the biggest public pushback Trump has so far gotten has come from a bishop during a sermon and a federal judge appointed by Ronald Reagan.
Here's how the New York Times summed things up:
As President Trump pushes aggressively to reshape the federal government, Democrats have retreated into a political crouch that reflects their powerlessness in Washington.
Far from rising up in outrage, the opposition party's lawmakers have taken a muted wait-and-see approach as Mr. Trump tries to end birthright citizenship, halt diversity programs in the federal government, undo foreign policy alliances and seek retribution against his perceived political enemies.
In some cases, Democrats are even making a show of working with Republicans.
The article goes on to report on what the Democrats have come up with:
A group of 70 progressive House Democrats and six Senate Democrats gathered at the Capitol on Thursday to try to settle on a single message of opposition to Mr. Trump as he takes aim at myriad liberal constituencies and priorities. The assembled Democrats concluded that their best course of action was to focus on economic concerns, which they believe led to the party's November defeats.
Representative Greg Casar, chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, was the one to call the meeting. He put this message in starker language: "It's going to be really critical for Democrats to point out what Trump's real intentions are, which is to screw people over on pocketbook issues in service of the mega-rich."
Perhaps two wings of the Democratic Party can come together on this message. After all, it is merely a restatement of the old Clinton-era "It's the economy, stupid" slogan, as well as exactly what Bernie Sanders has been saying for decades now. And it can all be wrapped into one easy question, really: "Why haven't egg prices come down like Trump promised?"
As mentioned, the best news of the week came from a federal judge, who immediately put a hold on Trump's executive order to deny the birthright citizenship (to all babies born within the United States) that is actually guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment. To say that the judge "laughed the Trump administration out of court" is a slight exaggeration, but not by much. Here's the story:
In a hearing held three days after Mr. Trump issued his executive order, a Federal District Court judge, John C. Coughenour, sided with Washington, Arizona, Illinois and Oregon, the four states that sued, signing a restraining order that blocks Mr. Trump's executive order for 14 days, renewable upon expiration. "This is a blatantly unconstitutional order," he said.
"Frankly," he continued, challenging Trump administration lawyers, "I have difficulty understanding how a member of the bar would state unequivocally that this is a constitutional order. It just boggles my mind."
. . .
To that, Judge Coughenour's decision was emphatic: "I've been on the bench for over four decades," he said. "This is a blatantly unconstitutional order. Where were the lawyers when this decision was being made?"
This isn't the only case challenging the order either -- 18 other states have sued in a different lawsuit and other lawsuits have also been filed, so there's plenty of time for other judges to weigh in as well. After all, they have a previous Supreme Court decision and over 100 years of precedent to back them up.
Sadly, there's no guarantee as to what the current Supreme Court will do when one of these cases winds up before them (which seems pretty inevitable, at this point). They have shown a remarkable ability to just flat-out ignore parts of the Constitution they don't approve of, after all.
That's about it for the positive news for Democrats, really. Just for this week, though, we're not even going to attempt to cover the firehose of negative events from the past week -- we're just as exhausted as everyone else, sorry.
We will close by pointing out one sterling example of journalism from HuffPost this week, who ran their inauguration story under the headline: "Trump Makes History: First Convicted Felon To Take Oath As President." Here are the first three and the final paragraphs of the article, which pulls no punches:
Donald Trump made twofold history Monday, becoming the first to take the oath of office despite having tried to end American democracy, as well as becoming the first presidential convicted felon.
Administering the oath was Chief Justice John Roberts, whose Supreme Court conservative majority paved the way for Trump's return by sidetracking a criminal prosecution based on his Jan. 6, 2021, attempt to remain in power.
The ceremony took place in the rotunda of the U.S. Capitol, where four years and two weeks earlier, a mob of Trump's supporters -- inflamed by his lies that the 2020 election had been stolen from him -- rampaged through the building, searching for and threatening to murder Trump's own vice president at the time, Mike Pence, for refusing his demand to award him a second term.
. . .
Trump is only the second president in U.S. history to have won two nonconsecutive terms. The first was Grover Cleveland, who won the elections in 1884 and 1892. Cleveland, however, did not try to overturn democracy after losing to Benjamin Harrison in 1888. Nor was he a convicted criminal.
We have to give at least an Honorable Mention for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for taking Elon Musk to task for giving what clearly appears to be a Nazi salute during a speech in the midst of all the inauguration frenzy. Musk denied this, and went on to crack some Nazi-infused jokes on social media, showing how clueless he truly can be at times.
A.O.C. wasn't having any of it. She shot back:
This is the United States of America. And I don't care what Elon Musk is doing behind a presidential seal. In this country, we hate Nazis. Kind of like a foundational, defining thing.
Of course, she's right. Condemning Nazis and anything associated with them used to be a "foundational, defining thing" in this country.
But our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week goes out to all 22 of the state-level attorneys general who immediately challenged Trump trying to change the U.S. Constitution's clear text with an executive order. We wrote earlier this week at length on the subject of birthright citizenship (and the idiocy of interpreting the Fourteenth Amendment in any other way), but suffice it to say that the judge who has already put a hold on the order got it right -- it is "blatantly unconstitutional" on the face of it.
Here's how just one of those attorneys general put it, after filing a lawsuit:
Mr. Trump's attempt to limit birthright citizenship was "extraordinary and extreme," said New Jersey's attorney general, Matthew J. Platkin, who led one of the legal efforts along with the attorneys general from California and Massachusetts.
"Presidents are powerful," he said, "but he is not a king. He cannot rewrite the Constitution with a stroke of the pen."
For the next four years, these same state attorneys general are going to be the Democrats' front line of defense against Trump's reign. It'll be up to them to sue the Trump administration to prevent clearly unconstitutional orders and actions from taking effect.
Of course, many (if not most) of these cases will wind up before the Supreme Court, which is not exactly a comforting thought, but perhaps they'll surprise everyone by not going along with Trump's worst impulses. Trump actually had a historically-terrible record during his first term, when it came to Supreme Court decisions on his policies. So perhaps (just perhaps...) the same thing might be true now. It's impossible to say, really.
But no matter what the outcome, at least the state attorneys general can (at the very least) delay things, to some extent or another. So for entering the fray almost immediately (the order was signed on Monday, the 22 states sued, and by the end of the week the order was put on hold -- which is lightning speed, when it comes to federal courts), and for clearly winning the first round, the Democratic state attorneys general who filed the various suits are all our Most Impressive Democrats Of The Week.
[There are too many state attorneys general to list contact information for each of them, but this PBS article (at the very bottom) has a handy list of them all, if you'd like to let them know you appreciate their efforts.]
We understand the bind President Joe Biden was in. We really do. If he had decided not to issue pre-emptive pardons to many of those on Trump's "enemies list," it could have resulted in them being harassed by the very thing Trump is facetiously promising to end (while in reality, putting it on steroids): the "weaponization" of the Justice Department.
So Biden went ahead and issued the pardons. But by doing so, he set a rather horrible precedent which is undoubtedly going to be copied by other presidents leaving office as well. It will give all the "whataboutism" enthusiasts in the Republican Party cover for when Trump does exactly the same thing at the end of his term, in fact.
Which is why we have to give Biden one last Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award. As we stated, we do sympathize with the impossible position Trump put Biden in, with his talk of second-term "retribution" on his perceived enemies. But it is going to tarnish Biden's legacy nonetheless, and it is now a precedent which others will use for far less understandable reasons.
[Joe Biden is now merely a private citizen, and it is our blanket policy not to provide contact information for such persons, sorry.]
Volume 780 (1/24/25)
As always, we present these offerings to all Democrats to use in order to focus people on the man behind the curtain rather than the explosions and fire and smoke that is center stage right now. It's only Day Five of a very long four years, so we're going to assume we'll have time to get to every bit of Trumpian idiocy eventually, but for now here's what we've got.
Out-of-control eggflation
Lean on this one. It is easy for people to understand, and it's not likely to get better any time soon.
"We were all told that Donald Trump got elected because the price of eggs was too high. But since the week he got elected, the price of a dozen eggs has gone up another fifty percent! It is now at an all-time high of $6.55 per dozen. This is nothing short of out-of-control 'eggflation.' And that's when you can even find them in the grocery stores. So when is Trump going to solve this problem -- the same problem that he supposedly got elected to fix? Well, I'm not exactly holding my breath, because it's pretty obvious that Trump is only interested in standing up for his billionaire buddies -- he does not care what the price of eggs is for you."
Inject the hens with bleach, maybe?
If anyone brings up the fact that egg prices are high because of the growing spread of bird flu, then answer them back thusly:
"OK, so then what is Trump's plan to combat and defeat bird flu? Because as we've seen, when it comes to fighting pandemics, Trump is absolutely clueless and ineffective -- and that's when the disease was killing thousands upon thousands of Americans. And putting R.F.K. Jr. and a bunch of anti-science people in charge of running the federal government's response doesn't exactly fill me with confidence that Trump has any sort of plan to combat bird flu. Unless maybe you count 'inject all the hens with bleach,' of course. Because that was the only answer he had for COVID."
How many? And what did they offer her?
This is from a bombshell story the Washington Post published yesterday (which we wrote about as well).
"So exactly how many Republican House members tried to have sex with Cassidy Hutchinson? We already know it was more than one, from the report which exposed this sordid fact. When did these attempts to get 'sexual favors' from Hutchinson begin? Before she testified to the January 6th Committee about what Trump was doing that day? Or after? And what exactly were all these Republican House members offering Hutchinson in exchange for these sexual favors? Because inquiring minds want to know."
I am woman, hear me roar!
This one's from Helen Reddy.
"Donald Trump signed an executive order which mandated that all babies born in the United States be considered one sex or the other, quote, 'at conception.' Actual biologists are pretty confused by this designation, since 'at conception' everyone is essentially just a single cell - the 'reproductive cells' the order talks about don't develop until far later in the process. And at the earliest stage of this process, everyone is female. So did Donald Trump just classify every person in this country as female? I guess everyone should start learning the words to Helen Reddy's classic song 'I Am Woman,' huh? She even included a verse that seems particularly appropriate right about now:"
I am woman, watch me grow
See me standing toe to toe
As I spread my lovin' arms across the land
But I'm still a little embryo
With such a long, long way to go
Until I make my brother understand
Have these people ever actually read any of it?
This one never ceases to amaze.
"At a prayer service Donald Trump attended, the bishop giving the sermon called on Trump to show some 'mercy' to the least-powerful among us. Trump, true to form, later called her a 'Radical Left hard line Trump hater,' and ripped into her for supposedly bringing politics into church. Some Fox News personalities had an absolute meltdown on-air, calling the sermon 'the rantings of a lunatic,' and 'discarded propaganda,' while singling out the bishop as a 'heretic.' These are all self-professed Christians, one assumes. They are all shocked to hear such sentiments -- because it's not like anyone else in history spoke in defense of the helpless, right? I mean... have any of these so-called Christians ever actually read the words of Jesus in the Bible?!? If they ever manage to do so, one assumes they will be equally as shocked! Might I suggest the Sermon on the Mount, to begin with? Just trying to be helpful...."
Ratings way down
Just threw this one in to taunt him, because we all know it means so much to him.
"Did you see that the ratings for Trump's inauguration were way, way down? In fact, over nine million fewer people tuned in to see it than tuned in to watch Joe Biden getting sworn in. The numbers were even far worse than Trump's first inauguration, which drew six million more viewers. And for Trump, you just know that's gotta hurt."
How long? Any bets?
To us, this seems almost inevitable.
"Anyone want to bet on how long it'll take before Elon Musk totally pisses off Trump and gets thrown under the MAGA bus? Vivek Ramaswamy didn't even last a full seven Scaramuccis before he was chucked out. And Musk is even more offensive (which, considering Ramaswamy in general, is pretty hard to do). I have no idea what will be the cause of it, but I'd be willing to bet that Musk won't make it more than a few months, tops. Sooner or later, he's going to eclipse Trump in the media, which to Trump is the one unforgivable sin. So any takers? Let's say 'by June'... anyone want to take that bet?"
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground
I am confused by your designation of Biden as Most Disappointing, etc., when you repeatedly express sympathy for and understanding of his choice to pre-emptively pardon those whom Trump has threatened to prosecute.
Well, which is it? Joe did the right thing? or Joe didn't do the right thing? You seem to want both, and then condemn him for not solving the contradiction.
I was glad he did it - and I didn't think of Biden as Most Disappointing Democrat, etc. What I thought was, not for the first time, that Trump is the Most Disappointing Everything, etc., for creating a political world where a president literally threatens to prosecute his political antagonists, absent any actual crimes, just because he hates them.
Blame Trump, not Biden, for Biden's choice to try to protect some brave Americans from Trump's, and Trump's "Justice" Department's, bilious venom.
I’m with John on this. Besides, hasn’t Biden left office? Why is he even eligible for any Democratic award?
I bet it’s way past June, if it ever happens. Remember, Trump needs Musk’s money.
Biden is usually Chris's MDDOTW, even when he isn't! :-)
I mean, speaking of contradictions, how many times was Biden both the MIDOTW AND the MDDOTW, in the same week! It must be some kind of record. I'm just sayin' ... ;)
We understand the bind President Joe Biden was in. We really do. If he had decided not to issue pre-emptive pardons to many of those on Trump's "enemies list," it could have resulted in them being harassed by the very thing Trump is facetiously promising to end (while in reality, putting it on steroids): the "weaponization" of the Justice Department.
So, ya'all are whining and crying because you are afraid that PRESIDENT Trump is going to do the exact same thing to Democrats that Democrats did to PRESIDENT Trump???
Hypocrisy. It's not a bug in Democrat programming. It's a feature.
But the funny thing is, Basement Biden not only DID NOT protect these criminals from being punished for their crimes...
Basement Biden took away the ONE WEAPON that WOULD have protected these criminals from being punished for their crimes..
Basement Biden took away their 5th Amendment Protections..
There is absolutely NOTHING stopping PRESIDENT Trump's DOJ from INVESTIGATING the crimes that the pardonees committed..
These criminals can be subpoenaed, hauled before endless PUBLICLY AIRED committees and questioned under oath..
If they tell the truth, then the entire world will know their crimes...
If they lie?? THEN they will be thrown in jail...
Basement Biden has totally screwed over these criminals...
And now the world will learn of ALL the crimes they have committed!!
And, in the case of Faux Fauchi and White Rage Millie, OTHER countries would SURELY be interesting in prosecuting them for their crimes... Rendition would be an AWESOME punishment for their crimes.. :D
Basement Biden not only totally slagged his legacy, he has also did the world a favor..
Because NOW all their crimes will come out and they CAN'T say "I am asserting my 5th Amendment Rights against self-incrimination"...
Awesome job, Basement Biden!!
Liz,
I mean, speaking of contradictions, how many times was Biden both the MIDOTW AND the MDDOTW, in the same week! It must be some kind of record. I'm just sayin' ... ;)
I am sure you might have read this before somewhere..
Hypocrisy. It's not a bug in Democrat programming. It's a feature.
:D
And what have we here....
Weigantia.... Allow me to introduce to you....
Secretary Of Defense Peter Hegseth...
PRESIDENT Trump wins!!! AGAIN!!!
America wins!!! AGAIN!!!
Democrats lose!!! AGAIN!!!
Life is good.. Iddn't it?? :D
And MORE Hamas hostages are freed thanks to the tireless efforts of PRESIDENT Trump and his team..
I mean, honestly...
With results like these, you would have to hate pretty deeply and pathetically to vote against PRESIDENT Trump...
The Democrat Party is such a sad and pathetic entity...
"Thank you first for being here. It means a great deal to all of us. We’re going to need your support. We’re going to need your help."
-Gavin Newsome
Gavin 'Hair Gel' Newsome groveling to PRESIDENT Trump..
It's funny...
Newsome is groveling and begging to Hitler 2.0....
I guess a Democrat doesn't MIND working with Hitler if it gets him what he wants...
:eyeroll:
As ya'all remember...
CBS edited a Headboard Harris interview to make it look like Headboard Harris actually answered the question properly..
This is election interference..
PRESIDENT Trump is suing CBS for election interference...
Word is out that CBS is caving because they know their dirty and they know that PRESIDENT Trump will win... AGAIN....
Just like ABC caved and paid PRESIDENT Trump hundreds of millions of dollars..
What IS it about you Democrats that ya'all *ALWAYS* lose when going up against President Trump!!!???
:D
As far as all the Democrat lawsuits that are doomed to fail..
Ya'all just HAVE to realize this... That they are going to fail...
President Trump has an airtight case...
This SCOTUS is not afraid of stare decisis....
If something has been WRONG for 1 year or 50 years or 150 years, it's WRONG... END TRANS....
Birthright citizenship is toast... Just like Roe v Wade was toast..
Let's get more in depth on why you people AND Democrats are so WRONG on WONG...
Trump isn’t rewriting the 14th Amendment; he’s applying the law as it is, based on its plain language and the Supreme Court’s existing precedent.
By Matthew Raymer
REPRINTED WITH PERMISSION
If you were wondering how long it would take for Democrats to sue the Trump administration, we have an answer. With the ink barely dry, eighteen Democrat state attorneys general, four additional Democrat state AGs, and a collection of outside groups led by the American Civil Liberties Union all filed federal lawsuits over President Donald Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants. Their argument, that the U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that the 14th Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship for practically anyone born here, is flatly wrong as a matter of law. The courts should use this opportunity to get it right.
The 14th Amendment — ratified after the Civil War and ensuring that former slaves were U.S. citizens — provides that “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” The plaintiffs focus on the first part, but barely glance at the second, arguing that, with few exceptions (such as the children of foreign diplomats in the United States), anyone born in the United States is “subject to its jurisdiction,” simply by virtue of being within its borders.
They do this by relying almost entirely on United States v. Wong Kim Ark an 1898 U.S. Supreme Court opinion that the plaintiffs get hopelessly wrong. In Wong, the court held that a man born in San Francisco to Chinese immigrants was a U.S. citizen under the 14th Amendment. Omitting some key facts, the plaintiffs argue this means that all children born in the United States of all immigrant parents, with the aforementioned very rare exceptions, automatically are U.S. citizens. Even a cursory read of the opinion, however, shows that the Supreme Court ruled nothing of the sort.
Wong was born in California and lived his entire life in the United States, until he took two trips to China to visit family as an adult. The first time he returned to the United States, he was admitted through customs as a U.S. citizen. A few years later, after visiting China a second time, he was denied reentry after a customs official concluded that he was not a citizen, because his parents were not U.S. citizens when he was born here.
SCOTUS sided with Wong, but for a very important reason the plaintiffs fail to mention: Wong’s parents were legal immigrants to the United States. The entire foundation of the plaintiffs’ argument — that SCOTUS has already upheld birthright citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants by this decision — is therefore completely and obviously wrong.
In rendering its opinion, SCOTUS dove deep into the meaning of “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” What they found, tracing back hundreds of years through English common law, is that the phrase is rooted in a mutual relationship of “allegiance and protection” between the individual and the sovereign (historically a king, but the nation here). Children “born in the allegiance,” and therefore citizens entitled to “protection” at birth, included children born to subjects of the king, as well as children born to “aliens in amity” — that is, aliens lawfully “domiciled” there with the king’s consent. Notably, the court found that this did not extend to the children of aliens in “hostile occupation of part of our territory.”
Consent is the operative word. In ruling for Wong, the Supreme Court made clear that the United States has a say in who is subject to its jurisdiction, noting that noncitizens like Wong’s parents are “entitled to the protection of, and owe allegiance to, the United States so long as they are permitted by the United States to reside here” (emphasis added). In Wong’s case, this meant that the 14th Amendment granted him citizenship because he was: (1) born in the United States; and (2) subject to its jurisdiction, due to the fact that his parents were lawful immigrants permitted by the United States to reside here at the time he was born.
In clear and distinguishable contrast, children born to illegal immigrants are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, and therefore are not entitled to birthright citizenship under the 14th Amendment, for the simple reason that the United States has not permitted them to be here. In other words, the relationship is not mutual.
A harder question is whether the 14th Amendment grants birthright citizenship to children born to aliens here lawfully but on a temporary basis, such as tourists or individuals on a work visa. Wong Kim Ark doesn’t explicitly address this, but it does note that Wong’s parents were “domiciled” in the United States, and it concludes that “[e]very citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States” (emphasis added). This repeated reference to “domicile,” meaning a state of permanent, legal residence, suggests that birthright citizenship at a minimum requires an intent to live lawfully and permanently in the United States, even if that intent later changes.
In their lawsuit, the 18 Democrat state AGs declare that the president “has no authority to rewrite or nullify a constitutional amendment or duly enacted statute.” (Where were they a week ago, when President Biden tried to ratify a new, 28th Amendment by personal fiat?) But Trump isn’t rewriting the 14th Amendment; he’s applying the law as it is, based on its plain language and the Supreme Court’s existing precedent. That, at least, shouldn’t be controversial.
As ya'all can see... The FACTS and OBJECTIVE REALITY proves that PRESIDENT Trump will prevail in this matter..
As per the norm, ya'all AND Democrats are choosing the losing argument...
Just like ya'all have done since the 2024 Election started...
That was a good conversation there, for a while.
JMCT,
Jesus christ, dood!! Quit yer whining...
If you want to ignore me, then ignore me..
Why don't you try addressing the FACTS that PROVE ya'all wrong???
Of course, you won't do that cuz yer a Democrat..
All Democrats are good for is whining and crying because they are proven WRONG all the time..
@JMCT,
Blame Trump, not Biden, for Biden's choice to try to protect some brave Americans from Trump's, and Trump's "Justice" Department's, bilious venom.
PRESIDENT Trump's DOJ is simply going to do to Democrats what Basement Biden's DOJ did to PRESIDENT Trump...
Funny how you had absolutely ZERO problem with lawfare persecutions when it was Basement Biden and the Democrats doing it..
Why is that??
I'll tell you why.. Because HYPOCRISY is THE defining characteristic of a Democrat...
And PRESIDENT Trump wins again!!! :D
Kristi Noem beats Senate confirmation hurdle, advancing to final vote for DHS role
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem is expected to receive bipartisan Senate support for her confirmation as Homeland Security chief
What IS it about Democrats that they are ALWAYS losing?? :D
Democrats are in such disarray and confusion they don't even know which way is up!! :D
Better get used to that, Weigantians.. It's gonna be that way for the next 12 years at least.. :D
Here's a question I would LOVE to see CW tackle..
Since it's completely clear to even the most dullard and moronic Democrat that Basement Biden did not have the mental capability of being President..
This begs the question...
WHO was actually running the country??
The most likely candidate is Odumbo himself...
Others speculate it was Jill Biden, but I think that unlikely.. She's pretty much a moron as well so.....
Other possible candidates for the puppet master is Biden's Chief Of Staff Jeff Zeints and Biden's National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan.
Personally, given the size of Odumbo's ego, I honestly doubt that the Puppet Master could be anyone BUT Odumbo..
What you think, CW???
I mean, it's a given that senile dementia-riddled Basement Biden couldn't have been running the country..
So who was running the country??
@liz,
that's a good question. any major decision is bound to have both pros and cons, so maybe it's a bit of a cop out to regularly give someone most impressive and most disappointing in the same week. that said, cw is certainly entitled to take that route if he so desires.
JL
Caddy,
I bet it’s way past June, if it ever happens. Remember, Trump needs Musk’s money.
Any FACTS that prove your claim valid??
Any facts at all??
No???
I didn't think so.. :D
Peace out...
"I want to deport 11 million illegal immigrants and 2 puppies!!"
-PRESIDENT Donald Trump
"2 puppies!? Why!?"
-American people
"See!! No one cares about illegal immigrants!!"
-PRESIDENT Donald Trump
:D
And PRESIDENT Trump wins again!!! :D
Kristi Noem Confirmed to Lead Homeland Security in Rare Weekend Vote
South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem has cleared a confirmation vote in the Senate, becoming the next Director of Homeland Security and officially joining the new Trump administration.
Can Democrats do ANYTHING to stop PRESIDENT Trump!!!???
Apparently.... NOT!!!!! :D
Over A QUARTER MILLION babies were born to illegal immigrant criminals in 2024...
Research organization says that number will likely be higher if PRESIDENT Trump's Executive Order is not upheld..
The US welfare system simply cannot sustain these high numbers...
And WHO will pay for all these illegal immigrant criminals??
Yep... The US taxpayer...
It's a good thing PRESIDENT Trump's EO is a shoe in to be affirmed by the courts...
Illegal immigrants are some of the hardest working members of our society and beyond some of them committing a single misdemeanor, commit crimes at considerably lower rates than natural citizens. Their employers pay payroll taxes and they never get tax returns. Illegal immigrants use very little welfare.
With tariffs and other dumbfuckery, It will be interesting to see how fast Trump can take the strongest economy in the world in to a recession. I bet he breaks all records...
michale
21
It doesn’t matter — you can’t distinguish right-wing propaganda from reality and besides, have you EVER allowed ANY inconvenient fact to make the slightest difference whatsoever?
That’s why I’m sooo looking forward to a “block” function. It’s too bad — I’ve been searching for a coherent conservative for decades now. Someone to help me refine my Progressive beliefs.
26
Simply put, you don’t bring anything to the table. Which makes you a waste of time to engage with.
JL,
...cw is certainly entitled to take that route if he so desires.
Absolutely, positively, unequivocally. But that really goes without saying.
Besides, I'm still trying to get over a grudge when it comes to Chris's consistently ambiguous stance on Biden. Which will take a bit longer yet, to be sure.
SOME illegal immigrant criminals are hard workers..
But, they fail in the character and integrity department..
Is having SOME hard workers with questionable character/integrity worth all the dead and raped and robbed and terrorized American citizens??
Well, let's ask the family and friends of Laken Rielly, shall we??
:eyeroll:
Why are ya'all so AGAINST preventing illegal immigrant criminals from rampaging and killing AMERICANS??
If illegal immigrant criminals voted GOP, ya'all would be HYSTERICALLY in favor a completely secure border..
It's ALL about ya'all's political bigotry...
NOTHING else is in play here...
Well, let's ask the family and friends of Laken Rielly, shall we??
Are you going to show the same concern for Americans killed by Americans in similar ways and at higher numbers or is this just purely political?
Caddy,
It doesn’t matter — you can’t distinguish right-wing propaganda from reality and besides, have you EVER allowed ANY inconvenient fact to make the slightest difference whatsoever?
Assumes facts not in evidence..
Simply put, you don’t bring anything to the table. Which makes you a waste of time to engage with.
Not factually accurate..
I don't bring anything to the table that YOU are interested in..
But, as has been proven beyond ANY doubt, ya'all are NOT interested in a strong and fair America..
Ergo, it's mind over matter..
I don't mind, so you don't matter. :D
That’s why I’m sooo looking forward to a “block” function.
Of course you are.. Yer simply a mindless drone and can't handle FACTS that upset your mindless perspective..
You simply CAN'T handle being exposed to facts and reality that upset your bubble view..
But let's be real, Caddy.. Yer gonna get high one day (as you do every day) and your gonna be DYING to see what I have been posting and your gonna peek and yer gonna respond and then people who don't like what YOU say will block you..
And then Weigantia will be nothing but a Rush Limbaugh-esque echo chamber where NO ONE is seeing ANYTHING that upsets them..
Typical Democrat perspective.. Only seeing what's in yer bubble..
What a sad and pathetic existence that is.. :eyeroll:
Are you going to show the same concern for Americans killed by Americans in similar ways and at higher numbers or is this just purely political?
You mean, all the scumbags that your DEMOCRAT DAs let run free and victimized...
ABSO-FRAKIN-LOUTLY will I show the same concern...
What's hilarious is that you show ZERO concern for those Americans..
As your Pro-Criminal Cop-Hating stance proves beyond any doubt...
If illegal immigrant criminals voted GOP, ya'all would be HYSTERICALLY in favor a completely secure border..
No, I'd be investigating the GOP for voter fraud. Just like if you actually cared about illegal immigrants, you would be pushing to go after employers.
Liz,
Besides, I'm still trying to get over a grudge when it comes to Chris's consistently ambiguous stance on Biden. Which will take a bit longer yet, to be sure.
Since the onset of PTDS and Trump/America hate, CW seems to adopt what ever position will further the PTDS and Trump/America hate..
I miss the old CW and the old Weigantia which was REALITY based...
You mean, all the scumbags that your DEMOCRAT DAs let run free and victimized...
Considerably higher murder rates in southern red states. Mirror time...
Considerably higher murder rates in southern red states.
Which has NOTHING to do with the FACT that DEMOCRAT DAs let murderers and cop killers and rapists go free...
The decision by District Attorneys (DAs) not to prosecute certain crimes, particularly those committed by hardened criminals, can have significant and multifaceted impacts on American communities. Here are some key points to consider:
1. Public Safety Concerns
Increased Crime Rates: When DAs choose not to prosecute certain offenses, it may embolden criminals, leading to an increase in crime rates. If individuals believe they can commit crimes without facing legal consequences, they may be more likely to engage in criminal behavior.
Victimization: Communities may experience higher rates of victimization, particularly in neighborhoods where crime is already a concern. This can lead to a pervasive sense of fear and insecurity among residents.
2. Erosion of Trust in the Justice System
Public Perception: When DAs do not prosecute crimes, it can lead to a perception that the justice system is ineffective or biased. This can erode public trust in law enforcement and the legal system, making individuals less likely to report crimes or cooperate with authorities.
Community Relations: A lack of prosecution can strain relationships between law enforcement and the communities they serve, particularly if residents feel that their safety is not being prioritized.
3. Impact on Victims
Lack of Justice: Victims of crime may feel that they are not receiving justice if their cases are not prosecuted. This can lead to feelings of frustration, anger, and helplessness.
Psychological Effects: The psychological impact on victims can be profound, leading to anxiety, depression, and a diminished sense of safety in their own communities.
4. Long-Term Consequences
Recidivism: If hardened criminals are not held accountable for their actions, they may continue to commit crimes, leading to a cycle of recidivism. This can place additional strain on communities and law enforcement resources.
Economic Impact: Increased crime can have economic repercussions, including decreased property values, reduced business investment, and higher costs associated with law enforcement and community safety initiatives.
5. Policy and Reform Implications
Calls for Reform: The decision not to prosecute can lead to calls for criminal justice reform, including discussions about the effectiveness of current policies, the need for more resources for law enforcement, and the importance of addressing root causes of crime, such as poverty and lack of access to education.
The decision by DAs not to prosecute hardened criminals can have serious implications for public safety, community trust, and the overall effectiveness of the justice system. It is a complex issue that requires careful consideration of the balance between ensuring accountability for criminal behavior and addressing the underlying factors that contribute to crime.
The assertion that illegal immigrants are primarily hardworking individuals who contribute positively to our society to be fundamentally flawed and misleading not to mention completely ludicrous and without ANY rational merit whatsoever. The reality is that illegal immigration poses significant challenges to our communities, particularly concerning crime rates and public safety.
First and foremost, the claim that illegal immigrants commit crimes at lower rates than natural citizens is not supported by the facts. Numerous studies and reports indicate that illegal immigrants are often involved in serious crimes, including brutal murders and rapes. For instance, a 2018 report from the Center for Immigration Studies found that illegal immigrants were responsible for a disproportionate number of violent crimes, including homicides. In fact, the report highlighted that in states like California, illegal immigrants were involved in a significant percentage of violent crime cases.
Moreover, the notion that illegal immigrants are merely "hardworking" individuals overlooks the harsh realities faced by many American families. According to the FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting Program, violent crime rates in areas with high illegal immigrant populations can be alarmingly high. For example, cities like Los Angeles and Chicago have seen spikes in gang-related violence, much of which is linked to illegal immigrant gangs. This is not just a matter of statistics; it is about the safety and security of our communities.
Additionally, the argument that illegal immigrants do not utilize welfare programs is misleading. While it is true that many illegal immigrants may not qualify for federal welfare benefits, they often rely on state and local resources, which can strain public services. This includes emergency healthcare, education, and housing assistance, all of which are funded by hardworking American taxpayers.
As for the economy, President Trump has consistently championed policies that prioritize American workers and businesses. His administration's focus on deregulation and tax cuts has led to unprecedented economic growth, with unemployment rates reaching record lows before the pandemic. The assertion that tariffs and other policies will lead to a recession ignores the positive impact of these measures on American manufacturing and job creation.
The narrative that illegal immigrants are primarily beneficial to our society is not only misleading but dangerous and utterly contemptible. We must prioritize the safety and well-being of American citizens and recognize the real consequences of illegal immigration. President Trump’s commitment to securing our borders and enforcing our laws is essential for maintaining the strength and integrity of our great nation.
Anyone who thinks otherwise simply hates America...
And in the IDDN'T THIS INTERESTING department.....
One of the liars who accused SecDef Pete Hegseth of domestic abuse now states, for the record, that she was "promised" that her statement would "make a difference in key votes"..
So, this begs the question...
WHO "promised" this liar that her statement would "make a difference in key votes" to confirm Pete Hegseth as SecDef??
This reeks of the bimbo Blasey Ford who lied about SCOTUS Justice Kavanaugh...
Which simply PROVES that Democrats are complete and utter scumbags who do NOT have the best interests of this country at heart..
What IS about your Democrats people that they are so dishonest and disgusting???
Hmmmm???
I mean, I can understand how the Weigantian trolls can support Democrats.. I can even understand how CW can, in the throes of PTDS and Trump/America hate can support these scumbag Democrats...
What just boggles my mind is that independent thinkers like Liz can support Democrats...
It's simply unconscionable...
So, I just finished watching the new "Trek" Movie SECTION 31...
Meh...
Until the very end, it's easy to forget that it's even Trek. At the end, the Trek music shined thru and reminded everyone... HAY!!! THIS IS STAR TREK!!!
It has it's woke aspects which was the downfall of STD....
I doubt we will see any continuation of SECTION 31.. Which is a shame because it has so much potential..
A nice cameo by Jamie Lee Curtis as Borg was likely it's only redeeming quality..
On a scale of 1-10, 10 being totally awsome, it's a 3... Maybe a 3.5 at the end there..
Michale
22
This is indeed a smile cracker! Two thumbs up, Mister lucked out and got to marry “divrlady” — woot!
What’s even funnier is that you’ve just said the quiet part out loud:
Trump throws a bunch of shit at the wall so the SEEMINGLY least bad decisions (either nominees or legislation or whatever) will pass through an exhausted Congress. You did a great job of creating a better talking point than the above selection (respectfully, CW, but you gotta admit that it’s short and to the point, eh?)
Which has NOTHING to do with the FACT that DEMOCRAT DAs let murderers and cop killers and rapists go free...
Aside from the fact you are just trying to distract that your single anecdotal example does not statistically represent the entire community of illegal immigrants, if what you say is true (and not grossly exaggerated as is highly likely), then why is the murder rate still lower in the blue states? You are not making the point you are trying too...
Donald Trump Faces Backlash Over Alleged Purge of Inspectors General
Oh, the corruption is going to be unprecedented. The US government for sale to the highest depositor in Trump's bank account...
Haha. The chief inspector general's reply to Trump's "you're fired": no I'm not.