Below is my column in the Hill on how the next round of post-Roe litigation is coming into sharper focus. At the center of this fight will be the question of who controls doctors in any given state.
Here is the column:
Throughout its history, the Supreme Court has overturned long-standing precedents, as it did recently in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Such changes are like the shifting of tectonic plates, triggering earthquakes and volcanic eruptions in the legal lithosphere. In the law, the adjustment can take years, as collateral doctrines and applications shake out along new fault lines.
That process has begun with new litigation in the post-Roe period bringing these conflicts into sharper focus, including a fight over who ultimately controls the doctors and health providers in the United States.
As intended by the court, much of the debate over abortion will now fall on citizens to decide in the democratic process. However, there also will be legal challenges — and, roughly a month after the Dobbs ruling, the legal “ring of fire” is taking shape with a major eruption in Texas this past week.
Texas is suing the Biden administration over new guidance issued after the Dobbs decision. President Biden declared that the “only way we can secure a woman’s right to choose … is for Congress to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade as federal law.” He then announced unilateral actions designed to blunt the decision’s impact. That mandate was carried out by Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, who stated that “we have no right to do ‘mild.’ And so we’re going to be aggressive and go all the way.”
The “aggressive” move included requiring doctors and hospitals to continue to supply abortion services in emergency situations under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). The Act was created to prevent “patient dumping,” by which hospitals would turn away patients who could not pay for treatment. It does not mention abortion.
The change only deals with a provision on “emergency medical care” and “stabilizing treatments” concerning abortion, though the former category can cover any “medical condition manifesting itself by acute symptoms of sufficient severity (including severe pain)” that could “reasonably be expected to result in — (i) placing the health of the individual (or, with respect to a pregnant woman, the health of the woman or her unborn child) in serious jeopardy, (ii) serious impairment to bodily functions, or (iii) serious dysfunction of any bodily function or part.”
Putting aside the possible scope of that provision, the Texas lawsuit represents the first major test of who controls doctors and health providers in a given state.
The Biden administration declared that when “a state law prohibits abortion and does not include an exception for the life of the pregnant person — or draws the exception more narrowly than EMTALA’s emergency medical condition definition — that state law is preempted.”
That last line may give Texas and other states the strongest claims for legal standing to challenge the law. It also raises a possible conflict with the law itself, which specifies that EMTALA does “not preempt any State or local law requirement, except to the extent that the requirement directly conflicts with a requirement of [EMTALA].”
That sets up a new challenge over whether the Biden administration has exceeded its authority after the court struck down climate-control regulations. The administration is not only accused of exceeding its authority again but also failing to comply with federal notice and comment requirements under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
The administration may have undermined its own case by heralding the new policy as part of an aggressive campaign. While dismissing “mild” steps outside of the court, the administration will argue in court that this is part of a preexisting policy — not a major new change requiring congressional approval or notice and comment procedures. Yet Biden’s and Becerra’s words already are being cited in the litigation by the challengers.
The most significant fight brewing among the states is referenced in a different part of the guidelines. The Biden administration warned retail pharmacies that they must fill prescriptions for pills that can induce abortion under federal law; a majority of abortions are performed at home with the use of those pills.
That could set up a challenge with sweeping implications. Doctors are subject to both federal and state laws, including state licensing rules. In 2000, the Food and Drug Administration approved the abortion medication Mifepristone and, six years later, approved the drug for use in combination with another widely used drug, Misoprostol. By 2018, more than 3.7 million women had used the medications to end early pregnancies.
Soon after the Dobbs decision, some of us flagged the availability of these pills as the most significant issue going forward. Since most women will likely live in states with available abortion services, the pill could be used by women in states with abortion bans. Indeed, Attorney General Merrick Garland moved quickly after the opinion to declare that “States may not ban Mifepristone based on disagreement with the FDA’s expert judgment about its safety and efficacy.”
Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) has called upon President Biden to make the pills available over-the-counter.
The problem is that states could prohibit doctors from prescribing the pills and ban their import. For example, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R) announced that she will seek a ban on mail-order abortion pills. Conversely, the federal government may rely on telemedicine to allow women to obtain prescriptions.
Since states generally do not want to prosecute pregnant women, they will focus on state licensing and practice laws for doctors. That will pit the federal interstate authority over medications against the state authority over doctors. The Biden administration again will be in largely uncharted territory; just as the court rejected sweeping agency action in the area of climate control, it could do the same in the area of abortion rights.
This is just part of the litigation movement on the federal level, in which pro-choice advocates will try to reestablish federal protection for abortion.
On the state level, pro-life and pro-choice groups will flip in orientation. Pro-life attorneys general, who spent 50 years on the offensive, now must play defense to hold the ground they gained in Dobbs.
On the pro-choice side, some still seek Biden’s “Hail Mary” approach to federalized abortion. This week, the House passed the Women’s Health Protection Act of 2022 to codify the decision, but the Senate does not appear likely to pass the law — and, if it did, it would be challenged in light of Dobbs, sending the question back to the states. (The House also passed the Ensuring Access to Abortion Act to protect a patient’s right to travel for legal abortions, a right already protected under the Constitution and not endangered by the Dobbs decision.)
On offense, pro-choice advocates may be left with pursuing the prior pro-life strategy of chipping away at the edges of these laws.
One thing is clear: In announcing his “aggressive” measures, Secretary Becerra insisted that the country “can no longer trust” the Supreme Court. Yet, in this first round of major litigation, that is precisely where we seem to be heading.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.
I would say that money and greed control the doctors. Its name is Big Pharma. And heck, if a few baby parts are needed for their “products”, then what’s the big deal?
Just think if all of those protesting, because we want a pro life existence, were aborted by their mothers. Problem solved. So let them abort themselves into extinction.
No that is not an appropriate answer. The only product worth anything that humans produce is offspring. Having an abortion because she gets tipsy and has a 1 night stand with a stranger is no excuse. Use birth control. wanting an abortion because you decided you now don’t want a baby is nonsense. There are options. Adoption is number one. Now there are many reasons to legally get an abortion. Not going to name them but we all know several reasons.
Reading this blog renews my hope that Turley (or whomever maintains this site) will ban the use of the name “Anonymous” as a handle, or at a minimum make each respondent choose a unique moniker. Either there are several “Anonymous”es, or there’s one with a serious multiple personalities disorder…
Great suggestion.
Darren should do just that.
Abolish anonymity.
Compel, at least, noms de plume.
Ban Aninny Mouses for life.
George, we agree. He would need to have to stop them completely blocking email access as well by making people have a legitimate email address. This is not a matter of freedom of speech.
NO!!!!!!
Even the Supreme court found anonymous speech to be a right.
Possibly no one here points out the problems with anonymous speech more than I.
But the price of anonymous speech is credibility.
You have posted here for a long time under the name “George”.
You have developed a reputation, a brand,
People here know what to expect when a post is from “George”.
I often do not agree with you, but I trust your posts,
you are often wrong, but you do not lie.
When you post anonymously – you have no reputation, and no means to build one,
You have no credibility and no way to attain credibility.
There are good reasons for people to post anonymously. We should not restrict that.
All we need is to give anonymous posts the consideration they deserve.
To remember they are not and can not be trusted.
There are several Anonymouses, including one troll who also posts under the name S Meyer.
Yes, replying to Anonymous the Stupid I enter troll territory and post anonymously, but am easily recognizable. You too are recognizable and should be labeled Anonymous the Stupid.
SM
Sometime next year Joe Biden will have a health crisis and have to step down. Kamilla will laugh her way to 2024 and then we’ll see what happens.
OT: Does anti-drone technology keep pace?
I used to wonder if I was smart enough to ever be President. I feel overqualified at the moment.
It’s rather stunning that a career politician of 40 years has failed to learn the lesson about burning bridges. The diplomatic humiliation of a “fist bump” cannot be overstated. This placeholder presidency has become a national and international embarrassment.
It seems the First Lady, Dr. Jill Biden, is upset. At a fundraiser on Saturday with top Democratic Party donors in Nantucket, Massachusetts, she complained that her husband’s “hopes and plans” were interrupted by the “problems of the moment.”
How dare those annoying “problems” get in the way of the great dreams of President Joe Biden! These Biden dreams presumably include ending Second Amendment rights, packing the Supreme Court, federalizing elections, implementing full-blown socialism by passing a “Build Back Better” bill and destroying our domestic oil and gas industry. Thank goodness for the “problems of the moment.”
Even without those “problems,” the Biden agenda has been plenty disastrous. The nation is suffering through the worst inflation in over four decades. There are food shortages and supply chain difficulties. Our southern border is overrun with millions of illegal immigrants who are welcomed into our country by President Biden.
The needs of everyday Americans are being ignored by President Biden and his far-left administration. No wonder his approval rating is only 33% according to a New York Times/Siena College poll with a whopping 64% of the respondents who do not want him to seek a second term as President.
With such a lousy record, including the catastrophic withdrawal of our military from Afghanistan, along with the new revelations that crude oil from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve was sold to a company with ties to both Hunter Biden and the Chinese Communist Party, Dr. Jill should be grateful that her husband has not been impeached and removed from office.
Instead of acting like a churlish and entitled presidential spouse grousing about roadblocks in the way of their “hopes and plans,” Dr. Jill Biden should be showing nothing but appreciation and thanks to the American people for her role as First Lady.
In this position, Dr. Jill Biden enjoys tremendous rewards and benefits. She is allowed to travel first class, meet world leaders, and host glittering events at the White House. In addition, the First Lady has a large staff of aides who oversee her every need. It is also quite nice to spend time in Nantucket, even if she must endure answering questions from entitled and obnoxious Democratic Party donors.
At this event, which only included two dozen top contributors, the First Lady lamented that the obstacles were a major surprise to her husband. According to Dr. Biden, “Who would have ever thought about what happened?”
Problems CAUSED by her husband.
Explain to me, in detail, if you can, exactly HOW Biden CAUSED: inflation, fuel shortages and any other “problems” to which you refer. You claim it’s his fault. Defend your opinion. Citing Tucker and Hannity doesn’t count.
“Inflation Is Always And Everywhere A Monetary Phenomenon”
Milton Friedman
The fundimental mistakes that Biden, and democrats, and to a lessor extent Trump and republicans made that cause inflation was massive spending financed by the Fed printing money.
Inflation is always and only caused by increasing the amount of money without increasing the value produced.
The specific places that we are seeing inflation – fuel, and then other products that depend heavily on fuel – such as fertilizer and then food are driven by Biden and Democrats stupid policies. But those price increases are NOT themselves the direct causes of inflation.
So long as money supply is fixed – if some prices go up either others must go down or purchases must decline.
Free markets can not cause inflation.
Even govenrment spending can not cause inflation.
Inflation is caused SOLELY by the government flooding the country with money.
In this case that occured when the Fed monetized federal spending.
Does citing a nobel prize winning economist whose Nobel was specifically for monetary policy ? One of the top four economists in the world in the past century count ?
Here i an article on the causes and cures for inflation By F. A. Hayek in 1980
https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/114503
Hayek – Also a Nobel prize winner for his work on monetary Policy and Also one of the top four economists of the past century.
This is from BEFORE inflation started.
Another disciple repeating the diatribe he heard on Fox. TRUMP and his egotistical incompetency are the main causes of the inflation from which we suffer. He inherited a robust, thriving economy created by Obama from the ashes left behind by Bush, and turned it into the worst recession since the Great Depression. When Biden took office, unemployment was above 10%. When he couldn’t bully China, Trump started a trade war that is responsible for the supply-chain problems we still encounter. There is a shortage of consumer goods, especially those requring computer chips because of the tariffs your hero enacted. Biden turned around the 10% unemployment to less than 3.5%, and due to pent up demand, people went back to wok and now want to buy new cars, furniture and other consumer goods that are in short supply. When demand exceeds supply, the price goes up. That contributes to inflation. Your hero enacted a massive tax cut that mostly benefitted the wealthy, which resulted in an historic national debt. Interest on this debt alone is a major driver of inflation.
Thanks to Trump’s lying about what public health experts told him and virtual cluelessness about what to do, the pandemic was made far worse than it had to be. Americans died unnecessarily. The country was mostly shut down for about 2 years. Schools had to close to in-person learning, people who could worked from home, factories cut back or closed down, restaurants were closed to in-person dining and people stopped taking vacations. School kids are still behind in their studies. This created a glut of fuel because school buses weren’t running, people weren’t driving to work or going on vacation, and that artificially depressed the price of crude oil, so production was cut back. Some reifineries were closed down, and not all of them have reopened. Increased demand, plus Putin’s war in Ukraine, enabled by Trump’s weakness, attacks on NATO and the EU and his deference to a proven murderer, have driven the price of fuel to record levels. High fuel prices are a world-wide phenomenon, and are NOT Biden’s fault.
You are flat-out lying about Biden “welcoming” illegals. Kamala Harris went to Guatamala and told those thinking about migrating not to come.
So you want to talk about the disasterous withdrawal from Afghanistan? Before the withdrawal, TRUMP drew down our troops from 14,000 to 2,500, and he turned loose 5,000 Taliban. He didn’t involve our Afghan allies in talks with the Taliban so they just gave up, even though projections were that security for withdrawal would hold for at least 6 months, and he failed to arrange for any air or land base. Trump’s stupidity is the reason for the problems with the withdrawal that Republicans are trying to pin on Biden, who was handed an absolute mess.
Trump wanted to be president for the power and glory, all to feed that massive ego of his. Biden’s motives were altruistic: he IS an American patriot. He passed the largest infrastructure package in US history, which will create thousands of good-paying jobs. He has worked to get the US off of its addiction to fossil fuel, which will benefit us in the long-run so we won’t be depending on a dwindling resource for energy. He turned around the disasterous economic mess left behind by Trump. He got the pandemic under control. Thanks to Trump appointing 3 radicals onto the SCOTUS who lied about their opinions on abortion rights, women have lost the right to bodily autonomy and the rights to marriage equality, contraception and consensual sex between adults are being threatened. THAT’S what Dr. Biden was referring to. And, all of that manure you are repeating about Hunter Biden is pure bull. But, you are just another disiple, immune to facts.
The Bidens have spent virtually their entire adult lives in the world of politics and raised their family in the same environment. (They also went two for two on adult offspring with drug problems. Do Democrats want to compare that to former President Donald Trump’s accomplished family?)
Unlike most other political couples, they also spent eight years as the second bananas in the Obama administration, which theoretically would give them a cursory exposure to the pressures and responsibilities of the presidency itself. (And probably a hearty dislike of Barack and Michelle Obama.)
Instead, as Jill Biden herself admitted, they were utterly unprepared “for the moment,” and have proven themselves since of being utterly incapable of rising to it.
In other words, the speech proved that the criticisms flung at the Biden White House are true — that it’s ideologically driven in ways to not take into account actual reality; that it’s inept to point of being criminal; and, most important, that it’s incapable of changing or improving until American voters change it themselves (ending Democratic control of Congress with the November midterms would be a good start).
(To be fair, the first lady did not go so far as to prove that her husband is as corrupt as conservatives suspect, but, hey, Hunter’s doing pretty well at that.)
The fact that the speech was covered by CNN, one of the pillars of the legacy media outlets that prostituted their integrity for progressive politics is its own irony. Was CNN expecting the Jill Biden speech to come across as a defense of the disaster that is the Joe Biden presidency?
It was the exact opposite. The sharpest, most vicious brains of the Republican National Committee couldn’t come up with a more effective ad than the first lady’s own pathetic admission:
Joe Biden is doing his best. And this is it.
So Biden just had the Afghanistan debacle “thrown his way,” despite having months of fair warning from diplomats and intelligence personnel that the place was headed for an instant Taliban takeover?
So Biden was just standing there when he was hit by the inflation truck? It had nothing to do with his multi-trillion dollar spending, and his foiled plans for even bigger spending in “Build Back Better”?
So the high prices at the pump have nothing to do with his shutdown of the Keystone XL pipeline on Day One, and his thirty-some regulations designed to shut down American energy production and make the U.S. dependent on overseas petrotyrants?
So Joe’s corrupt dealings with Ukraine, his unspeakably failed Afghanistan pullout, and his desperation for a deal with Iran with Russia playing mediator had nothing to do with why Vladimir Putin felt comfortable invading Ukraine?
So Joe’s open invitation to border crossers that nothing would happen to them once they got in had nothing to do with the record current border surge?
So all the ongoing violent crime brought on by Soros-backed district attorneys had nothing to do with the intellectual backup from Joe’s wokester Department of Justice?
So the shambling state of the U.S. military with its failing readiness had nothing to do with Joe’s execrable leadership as commander in chief?
Seems all these things just fell into Joe’s lap and there’s no connection made between Joe’s terrible presidential policies and performance, and voter loathing of the results?
And more idiotic still, Joe apparently is the only president who’s been beset with crises, which is laughable in the extreme. Joe’s the only president who’s failed to handle his crises as well as triggered them. But Jill is busy saying ‘Look! Squirrel!’ to make us think he’s just a passive old man who had things thrown at him.
REGARDING ABOVE:
One can bet that JP and blue Anonymous are both The Blog Stooge.
The Stooge is furious that liberals keep finding flaws in the Dobbs decision. So he’s going to ‘blow up’ this comment thread as a show of power.
The reason for the Taliban take-over was Trump releasing 5,000 of them from prison, drawing down our troops from 14,000 to 2,500, all BEFORE everyone got out. Projections were that our Afghan allies could hold the fort for 6 months, but after Trump drew down our troops and let loose so many Taliban and didn’t even involve our allies in negotiations that would bind them, they just gave up. THESE ARE FACTS.
The Keystone Pipeline STILL wouldn’t be “up and running” right now. That has nothing to do with the higher INTERNATIONAL cost of crude oil, which is due to sanctions imposed against Russia and Putin’s war on Ukraine.. There are thousands of oil leases on government lands that aren’t being used.
There are no “corrupt dealings with Ukraine” except in the scripts read by Tucker and Hannity. Trump scotched the Iran nuclear deal which was a major blunder. The reason Putin felt comfortable invading Ukraine is Trump’s weakness due to his massive ego because projections were that he would lose to Hillary Clinton in 2016. His campaign enlisted the help of Russian hackers who spread lies about her on social media in targeted districts in certain swing states. They were directed to targeted areas by insider polling provided by Trump’s campaign. To pay them back, Trump publicly deferred to Putin over his own intelligence agencies at Helsinki, something that literally shocked the world. He also trash-talked the EU and NATO, and offended many of our allies. Putin believed that Trump had so alienated America’s allies that the NATO alllies couldn’t pull together a united front against him. Biden not only pulled together our allies, but Finland and Sweden have petitioned to join NATO, something that Trump never could have accomplished. If Trump had pulled off a second cheat, he would have withdrawn the US from NATO, Ukraine would be overrun by Russia, Zelenskyy would be in prison being tortured or dead and Poland, Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia would be under threat of invasion by Russia. Lest there be any dobut about Trump’s brown nosing of Putin, Trump actually praised Putin’s invasion of Ukraine as “genius” and “savvy”. This is nothing short of stunning.
Trump is the main cause of inflation He inherited a robust, thriving economy created by Obama from the ashes left behind by Bush, and turned it into the worst recession since the Great Depression. When Biden took office, unemployment was above 10%. When he couldn’t bully China, Trump started a trade war that is responsible for the supply-chain problems we still encounter. There is a shortage of consumer goods, especially those requring computer chips because of the tariffs your hero enacted. Biden turned around the 10% unemployment to less than 3.5%, and due to pent up demand, people went back to wok and now want to buy new cars, furniture and other consumer goods that are in short supply. When demand exceeds supply, the price goes up. That contributes to inflation. Your hero enacted a massive tax cut that mostly benefitted the wealthy, which resulted in an historic national debt. Interest on this debt alone is a major driver of inflation.
The “passive old man” got the biggest infrastructure package in US history passed which will create thousands of good-paying jobs. Unemployment went from 10% to less than 3.5%, the biggest drop in US history. He set a record for economic growth. He has restored confidence in America and has pulled together our foreign allies for a united front against Russian aggression. He got the pandemic under control. Schools are open once again to in-person learning, he’s paid down the national debt by several trillion dollars. America is back, but we still have lingering problems caused by Trump.
The Afghan government had a force of 285,000 US trained soldiers, $80B in US military equipment – and you think a tiny number of Taliban made the difference ?
Ukraine thwarted an invasion by Russia an enemy with forces and weapons that the Taliban would envy.
And they did so with a military smaller than the Afghan army.
The difference between Afghanistan and Ukraine is simple – it is the people.
The Ukrainians fought to preserve their freedom.
The Afghans did not.
Biden is responsible for the botched withdrawl.
He is not responsible for the collapse of the Afghan govenrment.
It is not our job to prop up governments and peoples that do not care about their own freedom enough to fight for it.
“Biden is responsible for the botched withdrawl.
He is not responsible for the collapse of the Afghan govenrment.”
We don’t know if with a proper withdrawal the Afghan government would have collapsed or not. Today, the Taliban might not be in charge, but for Biden.
Obviously we do not know about alternate histories.
But it is beyond self evident that Afghanistan was not sufficiently committed to deal with the Taliban.
There were many problems – but US support was far from the most significant.
I think it is possible that with better leadership the Afghan military could have dealt with the Taliban.
r
But much of the military and political leadership was corrupt.
And these were the people the Afghans chose to lead them.
The US withdrawl would likely have been different, but the Afghan Government was NOT going to survive our departure.
This was not even close.
This is a common problem with meddling in other nations.
The people of that nation must want what we offer them.
They must want it enough to fight and die and kill to get it.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure
“But it is beyond self evident that Afghanistan was not sufficiently committed to deal with the Taliban.”
We don’t know that. The Taliban is a minority. Had the withdrawal occured properly, power might have remained outside the Taliban.
We didn’t transfer power correctly. Biden screwed up badly, keeping his failure record intact.
““But it is beyond self evident that Afghanistan was not sufficiently committed to deal with the Taliban.”
We don’t know that.”
We do, they didn’t, it is that simple.
A “proper” withdraw is about US troops, and US civilians, and avoiding Chaos.
It is NOT about propping up the Afghan government.
Biden increased the odds that the Afghan’s would hold on by Staying longer.
As you note – the Taliban is a minority.
I have absolutely no doubt that they could have been easily defeated by the Afghan people – if enough afghans wanted that and were willing to kill and die for it.
Some were.
Not enough.
Even today the majority of Afghans could topple the Taliban.
That is not happening.
That is not Trump’s fault, that is not Biden’s fault, that is not Obama’s fault, that is not Bush’s fault.
But it is Bush and Obama’s fault that we stayed. It is Trump’s fault that we did not get out before he left.
And Biden or the children running the whitehouse get Credit for actually leaving – one of VERY few Trump accomplishments they have not pissed over and reveresed.
Absolutely the withdraw was botched and that is Biden’s fault. But it is small potatoes in the mess that is Afghanistan.
Though the botched withdraw made the US look weak and was one of many factors all linked to BIDEN that resulted in Russia invading Ukraine.
And we do have a mess in Ukraine of Biden (and Clinton’s) making. People are dying in Ukraine – because of the botched foreign policy and corruption of Democrats.
The US is stuck conductin a proxy war with Russia – that never should have been necescary, in a counry that is not in our national interests, and risking nuclear Holocaust, because it is in the US interest to Deter China from invading Tiawan.
I would once again Credit Biden (or the children running the whitehouse) I do not think the mixed messages from Biden on Tiawan are actually a mistake. I beleive he is trying to tell Xi we will defend Tiawan – without changing US policy.
And he is correct to do so, but would not have been necessary had he not made a mess of so many other things.
“We do, they didn’t, it is that simple.”
John, that is wrong. We don’t know what would have happened. Biden’s withdrawal provided additional power to the Taliban along with weapons and money. The Taliban is a minority.
The way we withdrew created how the government would act no matter who ran it.
Trump set the stage for withdrawal. Biden f..ed it up. In other words, Trump’s policy, though not completed, can be judged successful while Biden’s policy is a failure.
Yes, Biden’s failure in Afghanistan permitted Russia and China to consider expansion. Russia did so violently in Ukraine and almost every policy of Biden’s either promoted the war or promoted Russia’s ability to fight it. The Democrat political games with the Russia hoax also helped cause this war.
In the meantime, Ukraine is losing. I don’t think they will be left with access to the coast. How many people have to die. How much money must America spend? How many people worldwide will die because of food shortages involving Ukraine. Biden is a killer worldwide and a destroyer of the peace.
You compare him to Buchanan, but I don’t know how Buchanan can be worse than Biden. Biden is a worldwide disaster.
“We do not know.”
Sorry, you are buying into the same stuff that trapped us there in the first place.
We DO know. – The afghanni people would get what they were willing to fight for.
That simple. It is not our job to pick sides. We justifiably deposed and killed alot of Taliban – but tif the afghans allow them back – that is their business.
The ONLY problem I have with our chaotic disorganized departure is harms to Our people.
That is the only obligation we had.
It is there country. They knew we were leaving – preparing was THEIR job. Not ours.
If I am going to defend Trump when he is right – I must do the same with Biden.
His errors were with regard to US people and creating the appearance of US weakness which has been a massive biden problem since day one.
The plight of the Afghani people is THEIR problem – and they blew that.
I am very sorry for those that hoped for something better. Either there were not enough or they were not willing to kill and die for their freedom.
Regardless, their problem.
We gave them lots of weapons. I would give them more.
It is their job to fight for their country.
The patriots at Lexington and concorde did not have some sugar daddy country at their back should things not work out as expected.
“Sorry, you are buying into the same stuff that trapped us there in the first place.”
Sorry, John, but you don’t know what I am buying. I think I have an idea behind Trump’s plans. I think his method was the best. Therefore ,Biden did the opposite and failed.
I can’t think of anything that Biden did right except we needed to get out of Afghanistan. However if the choice was to stay a bit longer than do it Biden’s way, staying a bit longer would have been a lot better. We needed to maintain complete control over Bagram airbase until it was time to close our operations down there as well.
It does not matter what Trump’s plan was.
Anything that does not involve US forces results in the Afghans not fighting and the Taliban moving in
Faster, Slower, but still in.
There are things that would have gone better with Trump as president.
But the outcome in afghanistan would have been the same.
The afghans did not want their freedom enough.
Neither Trump nor biden can fix that.
If they had – neither Trump nor Biden would have been needed.
You don’t know what the outcome would be. Things are too fluid there to make any predictions. The alignments can change over night. We firmed up the Taliban’s power and got nothing in return. It cost us dearly and showed weakness to our enemies.
One can not create democracies for others. They have to create the infrastructure first with a belief in a judicial system. .
In afghanistan ? Yes. After the fact lots of things are knowable.
There is no change of circumstances that is likely to have resulted in the Afghan people challenging the Taliban
We did not know that before. We do now.
John, your statement wasn’t clear. If Trump had a second term the evacuation from Afghanistan would have been different. We can’t say who would have had control, something that is not my concern. My concern is with the security of the US. I believe Trump would have afforded us greater security and we wouldn’t have left all that military equipment that will now be used against us.
I don’t care who leads the Afghans as long as US security in the long term is good. Trump would have taken more time to leave the country than Biden. I don’t care about that either, as long as we were withdrawing and used our military to effectuate changes needed to secure America.
“If Trump had a second term the evacuation from Afghanistan would have been different.”
Likely.
“We can’t say who would have had control, something that is not my concern.”
Absent a change in the Afghan people – the Taliban would have been in control.
“My concern is with the security of the US. I believe Trump would have afforded us greater security”
Likely.
“and we wouldn’t have left all that military equipment that will now be used against us.”
there may have been a small difference with respect to equipment, but not likely a large one.
“Trump would have taken more time to leave the country than Biden.”
False Trump was leaving by April and considered that a hard deadline.
It is likely that the collapse of Afghanistan would have occured sooner under Trump BUT would have been AFTER the US left.
“False Trump was leaving by April and considered that a hard deadline.”
John, you take political statements far too literally. I don’t know that Trump would have left Bagram airbase on time. Trump dealt a lot with the word if. He knows how to play his cards and one can never be sure how they will be played. I think he wanted out by April, but he also wanted America secure and to maintain the threat of hard power so that things’s like Ukraine didn’t occur.
For you to say, “false” means you are mind-reading.
It’s not America’s job to determine what type of government another country has. It is America’s job to make sure America is safe.
Trump is generally to be taken at his word.
It is one of the characteristics that is critical to his success – both in politics and elsewhere.
I doubt that Ukraine would have occurred under Trump.
But the Taliban would have taken over Afghanistan regardless.
Trump’s agreement with the Taliban delayed US departure by over a year.
That was at Trump’s assistance to give the Afghan government time to prepare, and/or time to negotiate a power sharing arrangement with the Taliban. The afghan government did not try. They assumed the US would not leave.
Trump was leaving – in April as scheduled.
I expected Biden was not. It it not like there are other Trump policies Biden kept.
John, based on strong opposing power, there are all different shades of gray that could occur after America’s departure from Afghanistan. Reading tea leaves doesn’t provide a definitive answer.
This is not tea leave reading.
There are good reasons to beleive that had Trump been president Putin would not have invaded Ukraine, and that China would not be threatening Tiawan.
There are no good reasons to beleive the Afghans would have stood up to the Taliban.
If anything Trump was less friendly to the Afghan government than Biden.
Trump negotiated our withdraw directly with the Taliban.
He delayed it for a year to give the Afghan government time to prepare and to negotiate a power sharing arrangement or something with the Taliban.
The Afghan government did nothing over than year.
Any chance the afghans were not going to be overrun by the Taliban required them to step up to the plate long BEFORE we left.
John, I have often said Putin would likely not have invaded Ukraine if Trump were President. That is our mutual opinion, not reading tea leaves.
“There are no good reasons to beleive the Afghans would have stood up to the Taliban.”
That is an opinion depending on surrounding circumstances and isn’t an all-or-none phenomenon.
“If anything Trump was less friendly to the Afghan government than Biden.”
People have all sorts of weird ideas of who Trump was friendly with. Trump is a pragmatist and a shrewd foreign policy actor. He negotiated but never showed anyone his cards. If you remember early on when the Taliban acted up, Trump hit them hard and the problem ceased. With Biden, it was the opposite.opposite.
It is more than an oppinion – there is no variable of consequence that was in play.
The Afghan govenrment and the afghan people were not going to get a spine.
And I would have opposed the use of US troops to prop them up – whether under Trump or Biden.
There is no magic wand to get a different outcome.
Absolutely the Afghans had all the resources and more to stand up to the Taliban.
But resourses are NOT will.
You set the debate up with Trump as the independent variable – your choice.
But The only things Trump was going to do differently is:
Leave faster
Not botch the withdraw.
Trump did not have a magic wand to cause the Afghans to grow a backbone.
If you keep all things the same – except those few things that would change with Trump as president.
The US leaves in April, not august, and the Afghan government still falls – likely still in august.
The Afghan’s had everything they needed to thwart the Taliban – they did not.
I would be happy to blame Biden for the collapse of the afghans. But his myriads of failures, were not of sufficient consequence.
You need to offer a compelling reason that Trump or Trump opolicies would have altered the Afghan people’s willingness to fight for their freedom.
There is none.
Absolutely this is an opinion – but all opinions are not of equal value.
I could claim the Afghans would defeat the Taliban with magic pixie dust – that is an opinion too, just not a credible one.
All opinions are not equal.
“It is more than an oppinion ”
John, it’s either a fact or an opinion. There is no such thing as more than an opinion. It might be an opinion you think is more likely than other opinions. I would find more agreement in that approach. Though I don’t think we are dealing with an all-or-none situation.
“But The only things Trump was going to do differently is:
Leave faster Not botch the withdraw.”
I am not sure of that. Trump might have left Afghanistan but remained in Bagram Airbase longer.
No everything is not either fact or opinion.
As I noted – “there is no variable of consequence that was in play.”
We can be incapable of predicting the future, while at the same time able to rule out many possiblities.
Trump has no magic wand that would make the Afghan people stand up for themselves,
and absent that the only question regarding the Taliban is WHEN they would take over.
Those who told us two years ago were were headed for significant inflation and then recession.
Were not stating a fact, but they were expressing more than a mere opinion.
They understood fundimentals of economics, and they understood of all the economic drivers present in 2021 – which were most important and given the laws of economics what factors would be the key drivers.
That is a combination of facts, opinion, the laws of economics, probability and intuition.
More than an opinion, and less than a fact.
Inflation an recession were not inevitable.
They were the consequences of the poor choices of OUR government.
“No everything is not either fact or opinion.”
John in the limited discussion we are having what else do you see that would not be categorized under fact or opinion?
I will use economics as an example.
The fundimental laws of economics are simple and they are pretty much immutable.
This is why it is nearly always possible to explain any economic events perfectly AFTER THE FACT.
The problem is that while the laws of economics are not complex the actual economy is.
The actual economy is trillions of transactions a day – ALL of which conform individually with the laws of economics.
But as each transaction is not identical and the laws do not impact that transaction identically – they agregate at best appears to closely match the laws that are reflected by the most common types of transactions.
This is why it is easy to see after the fact but not before.
So where am I going ?
There are many opinions as to what the economic future will be – but very few opinions that are correct.
Further those correct opinions are not merely correct – they are just facts that are not YET known to be true.
Is a fact not a fact – because we do not know it, or because we do not know it to be true yet ?
With respect to Afghanistan – We did not know for sure how the afghans would respond BEFORE the fact.
But we are past that now – how they did respond IS A FACT.
How they would have responded had Trump been president is as near a fact as we can get without repeating an alternate history.
There are many things Trump could have done that would have change aspects of the outcome.
There is nothing that was going to change whether the Afghans fought, and therefore nothintg that was changing the Taliban takeover – except the US staying – a Trump was not staying.
“But as each transaction is not identical and the laws do not impact that transaction identically – they agregate at best appears to closely match the laws that are reflected by the most common types of transactions.”
John, many of the economic realities are facts but what will happen in a specific piece of the whole is opinion. I am looking for a third entity that is neither fact nor opinion.
“With respect to Afghanistan – We did not know for sure how the afghans would respond BEFORE the fact.
But we are past that now – how they did respond IS A FACT.”
What happened in Afghanistan is a fact. What would have happened in Afghanistan if managed differently is an opinion. I am looking for a third entity that is neither fact nor opinion.
“How they would have responded had Trump been president is as near a fact “
In other words, it is a strongly held opinion by some or many, but it is not a fact.
“Trump was not staying.“
That is an opinion. Trump rightfully wanted out with good reason. He would have closed Bagram airbase on time, is an opinion. I think it likely he would, but I don’t know all the facts that Trump was dealing with, so I can’t be sure he would have left Bagram on time. That is why it is an opinion.
“John, many of the economic realities are facts but what will happen in a specific piece of the whole is opinion. I am looking for a third entity that is neither fact nor opinion.”
That is what I provided.
What will happen is MORE than opinion.
“What will happen is MORE than opinion.”
That is still opinion. People frequently make a strong case for their opinion, but we do not call those opinions fact. Sometimes facts are found to be wrong. They are no longer facts.
“I am looking for a third entity that is neither fact nor opinion.” What do you call that third entity? Opinion. MORE than opinion is still opinion.
Alisa Zinovyevna Rosenbaum had a following with their own dictionary. It’s an escape route.
It is a fact that government price controls will fail ALWAYS.
It is an opinion precisely how they will fail in each specific case.
That we are not always able to specifically determine the way that something will fail – or less frequently succeed, does not meant that predictions of failure based on the laws of economics are mere opinions.
If you are preparing to jump – I can with complete confidence say as a FACT that you will come back down.
A significant part of critical thinking is learning and developing the tools to get from false black and white understanding of most choices and issues, to being good at intuiting the probability that something is true or that it will have a good outcome.
I have said many times all opinions are not equal. That should be obvious, but surprisingly it is not.
Understanding that each and every opinion can be evaluated to reach a good estimate of the probability that it is correct, is a major step towards critical thinking.
An additional step is grasping that just because a specific outcome is not perfectly predictable, does not mean that we can not establish the odds or even certainty of a good or bad outcome.
Everytime you get into a car – it is possible that you will die. But it is highly unlikely.
NASA, SpaceX, …. have every intention of making certain that everytime they launch they will succeed.
But they do not know that as a fact before it has happened.
The fact that we do not know the outcome when we get into a car, does not mean we should assume we will die.
A significant part of critical thinking is being able to discard remote possibilities where appropriate, as well as being able to assess which possibilities are remote and which are not.
There is a philosophical debate over the existence of absolute truth.
But that debate is purely academic.
Even relative truth still gets us to the same place.
We are still able to know with a high degree of certainty what will and what will not work.
It is as an example certain that contradictory premises can not both be true.
Either one is wrong, or we do not understand the problem – because real contradictions do not exist.
John, I am still waiting to find out that third option. We have fact and opinion whether strong or weak. What is the third?
Trump promised to get out of Aghanistan.
He did not promise to prop up the afghan government.
Afghanistan is inconsequential to US interests. We invaded purly because the Taliban assisted Al Queda.
We should have left 20 years ago.
Trump was pushed arround by “the generals” and he angrilly gave them ONE additional year to accomplish something.
They failed, and he negotiated our withdraw with the Taliban.
Unfortunately the delay caused by “the generals” delayed our departure until after the end of his term.
Otherwise we would have been out earilier.
The Taliban is close to inconsequential globally and not a US interest.
Trump was not going to act to save the Afghans.
Had he done so – I would have opposed him, as would many of his supporters.
“No everything is not either fact or opinion.”
OK John, you mentioned a bunch of things some are fact and some are opinion. What is the other category you refer to and which comment fits into it?
Separately, it is not our responsibility to protect the Afghan government from the Taliban.
We can hope for a different outcome, but it was never in our interests to nationbuild in afghanistan (or anywhere)
Neither Trump, nor Biden nor the rest of us owed the afghans anything.
I follow Ukraine on a daily basis.
Russia is losing ground at the Coast – not Ukraine.
Ukraine will likely retake Kerhson over the next months.
Ukraine is losing ground slowly in the Donbas.
This has generated to a war of attrition.
That heavily favors Ukraine.
Ukraine can not survive without continuous and massive amount of US weapons.
I would further note – the longer this goes on the worse Russian weapons will be and the better Ukraines will be.
Early on the US would only provide Ukraine soviet weapons they could scrounge.
As time passes and things settle the opportunity to train Ukrainians to ever better weapons arises.
We are now sending A10’s to Ukraine. It will take months of training for those to be useful.
But Ukraine has those months.
Russia does not have replacement weapons systems coming.
The Joke that Biden will fight Russia to the very last Ukrainian is coming true.
Ukraine is going to be obliterated by Russia – and we will pay to rebuild it.
Russia is losing assets they can not replace.
There are several very weird things about this war.
In alot of ways it resembles WWI.
It has devolved to an artillery duel.
We are probably seeing the end of the age of Tanks – they are just too vulnerable.
Right now Russia has far more and longer range artilery – but it is also obsolete.
Ukraine has far less but it is getting much newer and longer range artilery that is far better.
Russia is obliterating Cities.
Ukraine is obliterating tanks, and ammo depots and generals and Russian artilery.
In the long run that favors Ukraine.
Highly unusual for modern wars – this is NOT an air war.
Again it is WWI all over – the skies over Ukraine are too hostile for either side to fly much.
And neither side has good planes and pilots.
This also has significance to Tiawan.
The chinese airforce is now superior to Russia – though they have lots of equipment problems.
But they are not up to taking on a US aircraft carrier – or taiwan based US aircraft
China can not cross the straits of taiwan witrhout air superiority ‘
‘
And they can not acheive that today.
That is like WWII and the battle of britain. .
“Russia is losing ground at the Coast – not Ukraine.
Ukraine will likely retake Kerhson over the next months.”
This may be true, but Russia will be there when the war is over and in the interim might take the land back. It all depends on how long Putin lasts.
What we are talking about is power politics. Our job should be to promote peace. Discussing Ukraine’s entry into NATO threatens Russia. I think our attitude and then Biden’s mishandling of almost everything led to this unnecessary war.
Ukraine’s strength comes from fighting a defensive war
Russia’s problem is that it is fighting on offense. To attack, win and control they need massive support for the army.
However, the West is fickle so one can’t count on the West for the long term while Russia always has the option of using tactical nuclear weapons.
The war should never have occurred. It is too dangerous. Additionally, this war is now instrumental in telling China what we might or might not do in Taiwan. The dangers are great.
I don’t see this to be similar to the Battle of Britain. The West won that war. Hopefully, we are not going to get that far and have to go to war with Russia. If we did it would be more like the Battle of Britain, but all I can see is pure stupidity.
This is worse than Afghanistan for Russia.
Russia is on paper about 5 times the economy of Ukraine – and the military and material, and ….
But Ukraine has ONE enemy right now – Russia – they can focus all on Russia.
Russia conversly must keep most of its military elsewhere.
One of the things NATO has been doing is increasing activity at borders to force the Russians to keep troops deployed and to keep them at a high state of alert.
Currently Russia is cycling troops in an out of Ukraine, to avoid grinding them down completely.
But the high state of readiness that they have to maintain elsewhere is grinding them down too.
Ukraine can pull in up to 980,000 reserves that is almost twice the whole russian army.
About 1/4 of those are equivalent to our National Gaurd – they need little training.
The rest need 90 days to deploy.
Russia is trying to avoid conscription – which will be unpopular. And is trying to recruit people
They are not keeping up with losses. Ukraine is.
Ukraine does need to husband its human resources – in theory Russia has more people and could replace losses – but only by doing thins that are not popular. Ukraine must – that is just a given.
Material is almost reversed. Ukraine is a large producer of war material, And they are getting massive aide. And the aide is increasingly newer and better and time means they can learn much better western weapons.
Conversely Russia is burning through material it can not easily replace.
In a war of attrition Russia loses – so long as the west continues to provide massive supplies.
There are also very strong indications that there is a Ukraininan counter offensive in the works.
Russia has removed forces from Crimea and the area north of Crimea to focus on the Donbas where the Ukrainians have been able to take everything Russia dishes out fighting to near a standstill.
Meanwhile there are about equal ukrainian gains in the south and lots of indications Ukraine is preparing a large scale counter offensive against Russia’s stripped forces in the south.
Ukraine would not have happened but for Biden’s bad policies and weakness.
But Russia is not winning, and so long as we still support ukraine withe weapons things will slowly tip more towards ukraine.
The global impact will be horrid – but Russia has already agreed to allow grain exports,
The food should start flowing
That is not going to make things good.
Just not as bad as they could have been.
“But Russia is not winning,”
John, no one is winning, but Ukranians are being killed and displaced while the country is left in ruin. It is easy for us to talk about them, but we are giving relatively small amounts of money (large for the purpose). That money prolongs the war and increases the deaths.
In the end, neither country will be better off.
Mostly I do not disagree.
Fundimentally Putin’s goal is to Wreck Ukraine – other things like occupation are bonuses.
He is succeeding in wrecking the country. But he has also made them a poster child.
I fully expect Ukraine to get not just military aide but massive economic aide.
Dead is dead, the killed are not coming back.
But what Putin destroys will be rebuilt.
Putin has a model that is based on what he did to Checknya and Georgia and a few other places.
He may succeed at the same carnage – though at a much higher cost to Russia.
But the big difference is that the west was not going to rebuild those other places.
I expect a great long term future for Ukraine. Little is as empowering as fighting for your freedom and winning.
Many economists I otherwise agree with say that the Great depression lasted THROUGH the war.
They are technically right. The depression ended when the soldiers came home. Not because the war boosted the economy.
But because in 1932 Americans no longer beleived in themselves – and Frankly FDR made that worse.
In 1945 Everyone returned to normal knowing that there was nothing they could not do.
Others here have pissed on Trump U. Trump hired motivational speakers for some courses instead of professors.
He promised his students the secret sauce – that is it That “can do” attitude.
Cultivate that an the rest will come.
There was no transfer of power.
Afghanistan had a government. All it needed to do was fight.
You focus too much on people and not enough on power.
Because people are ultimately what matters.
If you do not want it bad enough – the power you have is of little use.
The Afghans had everything they needed to defeat the taliban.
They did not try.
Republicans Won’t Consider ‘Freedom To Travel’
Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked a bill that would have both legally shielded the people who travel across states lines to receive an abortion and the providers who care for those patients.
Senate Democrats needed the support of at least 10 Republicans to stop a GOP filibuster of the bill, but no Republicans stood to support the measure.
The Freedom to Travel for Health Care Act of 2022, authored by a trio of Democratic female lawmakers, made an argument rooted in the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause that, among other things, essentially allows citizens freedom of travel to states while enjoying equal protection under the law.
The blocked bill would codify the ability of people to travel without repercussion from a state where abortion is restricted to another state where it is legal.
The bill would extend those same protections to people or groups who assist in abortion access across states as well as health care providers who offer abortion services to out-of-state patients if they are legally allowed to offer those same services to in-state residents.
A group of Democratic senators attempted to call up their bill for debate on Thursday, but Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., objected.
Senate rules require either the unanimous consent of all 100 senators to start debate on any bill or 60 votes to overcome any filibuster that seeks to block that debate.
Edited From:
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/republicans-block-bill-shield-people-travel-state-abortions/story?id=86821057
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
It’s hard to believe, but here, in the 21st Century, Republicans are essentially arguing that pregnant women lack the proper standing to travel freely across state lines.
The constitution and case law leaves no doubt to the freedom of travel between states. Needless laws are an infringment of our freedoms.
There once was a First Lady who went to Nantucket
where she whined about her and her husband’s bad luck-et
Burned by her Taco-gate speechwriters in San Antone
And her laughable effort to atone
She made even worse headlines by speaking off-the-cuff-it
to rich Dem donors in Nantucket.
BTW:
Most no one in the US gives a crap about the Marxist Dems/Rino’s abortion issue in regards to the Nov, 2022 election.
Tucker Carlson Tonight show, week- week 1/2 ago, had a main line poll up showing a list of the topics voters are most concerned about right now.
Top Voter Issues;
1. High Gas Prices 92%
2. Inflation 91% (Now around 20% inflation now, John Williams)
3. The Economy 89%
4 Violent Crime 88%
Corrupt Media, Climate change, abortion. Ukraine war, J6 were all towards the bottom among both parties & Indies.
Then, I mean, you take about a 1/3rd or more of the Voters are Boomers, we know the rhythm method. 😉
With any luck on our side, they will finally, FINALLY, move to Can-uh-duh as they have promised for decades
They would fit right in with the Dictator there!!
The Canadian lawyer Viva Frei I’ve been listen to along with Robert Barnes, he packed his family up & moved to Florida to get away from C. Dictator & their Rigged Voting System.
(Note everywhere are getting Buried by Rigged Voting Systems.)
Stooge, the latest Fox News poll found that 60% of Americans thinks Dobbs is a mistake.
Pull up the Tucker Carlson poll & we’ll Ch’k it.
I bet you’re pretty handy at pulling up all the recent results of the major pollsters.
Maybe Ck’ Mammoth or Tucker?
60% of Americans thinks Dobbs is a mistake.
And of those people, 98% could not identify a single flaw in the ruling
From what I’ve seen of I like the fact they sent it back to states to let them decide.
“the people are nothing but a great beast…
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value.”
– Alexander Hamilton
If Dobbs results in dramatic negative consequences for women – particularly affluent white women, there will be a steep political price to pay.
There is good reason to believe that will not be the case.
It is not just that there are so many other issues – issues of government FAILURE,
It is also that the likely impact of Dobb’s on our lives will be small.
Dobb’s is wrong. Roe was wrong. But we are not likely to get to what would be right, because it is not important enough.
I expect a significant decline in the number of abortions – particularly late ones.
But I do not expect a significant rise in the number of children.
Gutmacher has already demonstrated that more restrictive abortion laws result in women making better choices earlier.
Absent thousands of women dying from back alley abortions, there will be little political backlash.
That is NOT to say that for SOME people this issue will be critical.
Though even there – how many people will vote democrat because of Dobb’s who voted republican before.
OT
When it is known as common knowledge that communists (liberals, progressive, socialists, democrats, RINOs) occupy Washington D.C., and Americans and conservatives have no chance of receiving a fair trial or any semblance of justice, how and why does the “established-in-fairness” judicial branch continue to try Americans and conservatives in that venue?
John Dudham was and Steve Bannon is being denied a fair trail and true justice by way of venue.
How long must this criminal justice charade be endured?
And Stephen Colberts people who trespassed in the Capitol after they were told to leave just had their cases dropped. If not for double standards and all that….
No one has been prosecuted for failure to cow tow to congress since Gordon Liddy and Watergate.
It is self evident at this point that Comey, Rosenstein, much of the FBI and DOJ stonewalled Congress for several years to hide their involvement in what they KNEW was a HOAX.
Yet, no prosecutions.
Yet those that do not Kow Tow to the J6 star chamber will likely be jailed.
The Colbert Crew who was actually in the Capital and refused to leave – faces no consequences, but hundreds of J6 protestors who did NOT enter the capital have been jailed and often forced into heinous pleas.
I bet the Colbert producers would roll on their mothers to avoid jail.
Those on the left do not understand that they are undermining the already low Trust in government by this obviously political abuse of government power.
1984 was meant to be a warning – not a HOWTO guide.
“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,”