MSNBC analyst and former Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill has long been criticized for unhinged rhetoric. That was evident on “Morning Joe” recently when McCaskill said that the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members was akin to Putin “disappearing” people. It is not the first such analogy by McCaskill, who has called those opposing the censorship under the Biden Administration “Putin lovers.” However, just for the record, Putin does not generally disappear people by putting them on flights back to their countries. He tends more toward nerve agents than immigration agents to remove people.
McCaskill’s comments have been echoed by others on the left, even before the election. On ABC’s “The View,” Whoopi Goldberg told viewers how Trump is already committed to being a dictator who will “put you people away … take all the journalists … take all the gay folks … move you all around and disappear you.”
I have expressed concerns over the alleged failure to comply with the order of U.S. District Judge James “Jeb” Boasberg in his order to stop such flights and return those in transit. To the extent that the White House is arguing that this is a non-justiciable matter, that is an argument to raise on appeal. I have criticized some judges for intrusion into areas of presidential discretion. However, the Trump Administration would only undermine such cases by defying court orders.
Trump struck the perfect tone after coming into office by pledging to comply with opposing court orders while appealing them. That is what he did in his first term with considerable success.
Nevertheless, the analogy of McCaskill is the latest example of the rising hysteria on the left. She stated on MSNBC:
“We’ve got to make sure that people cannot be picked up and disappeared like his buddy Putin does. Like his buddy. He does like his buddy Xi does, like his biddy Kim Jong Un does. They do this? They disappear people and many times murder them. So we’re not going to go down that road. I don’t care how much the president screams irresponsibly about impeachment, there’s no way.”
McCaskill tends to paint those with opposing views as Nazis or Putin sympathizers. After one hearing (where I also testified against the censorship system under the Biden Administration), McCaskill appeared on MSNBC to denounce the witnesses (Sen. Chuck Grassley, Sen. Ron Johnson, and former Rep. Gabbard) as “Putin apologists” and Putin lovers. She exclaimed, “I mean, look at this, I mean, all three of those politicians are Putin apologists. I mean, Tulsi Gabbard loves Putin.”
She has also said that Trump is “more dangerous than Hitler” — a person who committed the genocide of millions and triggered a war killing tens of millions. Yeah, that Hitler.
The problem with the escalating rhetoric is that there is nowhere to go from here. You jumped the shark. What is left after saying that Trump is more dangerous than Hitler and is disappearing people like Putin? That leaves only Ebola and cholera.
There is a danger to such “rage rhetoric” when it gives a license to others to take violent action, including attempting to assassinate a justice or a president. Indeed, once the left hit the maximal level of panic politics, you cannot ratchet down without being yourself subject to attack from the mob. You have to keep the rhetoric at a DEFCON 1 level.
There is another possibility worth considering. Every administration has come into power with sweeping changes. They are hashed out in the courts. If history is any guide, it is likely that Trump will win many but also lose some of these cases. That includes challenges to the authority of courts.
You can criticize these moves without reaching for the Hitler and Putin analogies. We have the most stable, most successful constitutional system in the history of the world. This is no constitutional crisis. We have this. Our constitution and courts will resolve any conflicts and we will continue as a free people. The only thing likely to “disappear” are the ratings and viewers of networks who traffic in rage rhetoric and panic politics.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
Judge Boasberg should win this week’s award. He seems to be on an unlimited fishing expedition in the absence of any direct evidence of denials of due process by the State Department or DHS. His ordering planes to turn back was as comical as Claire McCaskill’s likening the challenged deportation to Putin’s “disappearing” of people. Trump’s “call” for the judge to be impeached was a bad goof at the wrong time, as he should have been advocating the continuation of the appeal process. The complainants who hired lawyers for the deported Tren de Aragua and MS-13 people are entitled get to their day in court, but not to bring all law enforcement to a complete halt on mere suspicion of error.
Please vote for your favourite corrupt, scumbag, weasel, anti-America, pro-criminal fake-law judge below. The competition is fierce.
1. John Robert (RINO)
2. Amy Coney Barrett (RINO)
3. Amy Berman Jackson (D)
4. James Boasberg (D)
5. Ray Epps (D)
6. Amit Mehta (D)
7. Arthur Engoron (D)
8. Beryl Howell (D)
9. Roger Taney (D)
10. Ana Reyes (D)
Post your top selection below. Winners will be announced in a forthcoming post.
#74. They really don’t know anything better. McCaskill just reads a script of fear and hysteria. Deeply dysfunctional, it appears a group of thugs have been using the poor and abusing them. IMO
“Putin does not generally disappear people by putting them on flights back to their countries. He tends more toward nerve agents than immigration agents to remove people.”
********************************
Given the EU’s record of Russia hate and suppression of information it deosn’t like, I might wonder aloud why the German government refused to provide the Russian government a sample of the alleged nerve agent for their own analysis. The OPCW also confirmed the conclusion but would not provide either a sample of the toxin or the methodology employed. Confirming Sweedish and Finnish labs likewise refused to cooperate. Pursuant to two separate treaties requring same, the Germans finally agreed to the exchange AFTER they reached their conclusion of poisoning of Navalny but somehow releasing the sample was later denied as security threat. Amazing we take the word of our twice-born enemy over our ally in defeating Hitler. The best propaganda is the one where you don’t know its propaganda.
https://www.mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/1414880/
There is not a scrap of hard evidence ‘Putin’ poisoned Navalny. .. and overwhelming evidence he received funding/training from USAID/NED.
Anonymous, you seem to have forgotten that Boasberg has ruled in Trump’s favor most if the time. He was also confirmed by both republicans and Democrats.
“George, do you hope we’ve forgotten that Boasberg, who you’re lying in defense of, refused to haul a single one of his fellow Democrat lawyers and perjurers who lied to him back into his courtroom where they committed their felonies to criminally sentence them for those felonies?”
Who committed perjury? Who are you referring to? What case?
Bzzt Wrong.
Boasberg participated in the decisions allowing the FBI to Spy on Trump and his campaign.
Boasberg was one of the Worst judges dealing with J6 cases – he has the largest number of cases thrown out by Scotus.
There are many many other bad Boasberg rullings.
Did someone say that all judges confirmed by Republicans were good ?
While the poster is incorrect in that judges are not police or prosecutors.
He is correct that lots of people lied to Boasberg and he knows it, and it has not effected his biases in anyway.
Reportedly, the illegal criminals that were sent to Salvo are there for a one year term. In prison talk, that’s a bullet. These criminals entered our country fraudulently while engaging in a organized criminal gang. The ICE folks know their criminal history and activities. I don’t care what process they got as long as they’re gone. Phase 2, deport every illegal that entered fraudulently and/or under Biden’s collusion.
Roberts is getting into Chief Justice Taney territory for reputation.
Ben Weingarten:
“the chief justice revealed not only that he suffers from the very self-aggrandizement plaguing the lower court judges but that he is either willfully blind to the brewing fire or lacks the will to put it out. Apparently, he is content to let it spread — digging in, defending courts acting lawlessly, and deferring to the “process.” At the same time, he attacks those who would dare notice the judiciary is self-immolating by subverting representative government and demand that something be done about it.”
https://thefederalist.com/2025/03/20/john-roberts-obsession-with-scotus-legitimacy-has-severely-delegitimized-it
In Taney’s defense, Taney was the Constitution in context. The Constitution was legislation by vote. Legislation approved slavery. Immigration legislation did not admit freed slaves but allowed for compassionate repatriation. Reprehensible slavery was begun by legislation. Reprehensible slavery must have been ended by legislation. Immigration law must have been enforced and resolved appropriately. Secession is not prohibited. The Confederate States of America were a sovereign nation. A positive expectation for an outcome would have been the ultimate economic demise of the CSA, compassionate repatriation, and reunification.
Anon– Agreed. Taney had more sense and courage than Roberts but his reputation still suffered.
Jonathan: On to a different subject. DJT and Elon Musk claimed that by firing thousands of federal workers in 18 different agencies they were going to save taxpayers billions of dollars. Now federal judges have ruled those firings were illegal and ordered the various agencies to rehire them. The federal agencies involved are now in the process of doing that.
Now I am not an economist. I am not good with number crunching. But a sixth grader can easily tell you that having to reinstate 25,000 federal workers and give them back pay for the month they sat at home is going to cost the DJT regime a ton of money. And who is going to pay that bill? You, me and every taxpayer in the country. So I ask you. Is DJT and Musk saving or WASTING our money?
Everyone on this blog knows John Say. John is not a lawyer but he plays one on this blog. This is what John had to say about the judges ordering the reinstatement of the fired workers: “No judge in any case has the authority to order a worker ‘rehired’, under any circumstances–even if the law was broken” [your “Eat and Get Out” column, 3/18 @ 10:25 pm]. John seems to think money damages is the only remedy. As usual John doesn’t know what he is talking about. As a retired attorney I can tell you that judges frequently order an employer to reinstate an illegally fired employee and give them back pay. It’s an equitable remedy to ensure the employee is “made whole”.
So for those on this blog who think John knows something about the law–he doesn’t! If John thinks DJT only has to pay money damages why are the federal agencies now in the process of rehiring those same workers? Keep that in mind when you read one of John’s next pseudo-legal idiotic rants!
because of the massive left wing bias of the judiciary we have lots of conflicting rullings.
We have new cases with new judges doing exactly the same things that prior judges with essentially the same cases were overruled on a few weeks ago.
Social Security access was already decided in Trump’s favor a week ago.
The fact that a different judge has blocked it is both evidence of how biased this all is and how tone deaf and desparate those on the left are.
And you wonder why Roberts is on the worng side of the issue and tone deaf ?
And you wonder why there is a GOWING movement to impeach these judges.
Impeachment is the last resort. The RIGHT answer is for the courts to get their act together ASAP befor this gets worse.
and it WILL get worse.
You are ranting about DOGE auditing Social securtity – in exactly what world do you think that the president is not going to be allowed to audit the spending of the executive branch ?
In what world do you think that the president will not be able to appoint the outsider of his choice to audit executive spending ?
No one is as stupid as you and these judges. Ordinary people on the street understand this and recognize it for what it is – efforts to hide YOUR corruption.
No matter – you will lose in the long run legally, and you lose in the long and short run politically.
“Now federal judges have ruled those firings were illegal and ordered the various agencies to rehire them. The federal agencies involved are now in the process of doing that.”
Nope the ruling does not take effect for 7 days – it is near certain that the appellate courts will stop this stupid TRO first.
” But a sixth grader can easily tell you that having to reinstate 25,000 federal workers and give them back pay for the month they sat at home is going to cost the DJT regime a ton of money.”
You are clueless – everyone who was fired was given significant severance – months not two weeks.
This will cost nothing. Trump’s savings for firing people would barely kick in before September.
There is no short term benefit to the firings, no short term benefit to rehirings – if they take place at all, and no cost to firing them again if they manage to get rehired.
All you are doing is putting these people on a yoyo and giving them false hope.
“And who is going to pay that bill?”
If there is a bill – the plantiffs in these cases as well as the federal judges should pay it when the cases get overruled.
Loading…
“John is not a lawyer but he plays one on this blog. ”
Never claimed to be a lawyer. But I was my wife study partner going through law school – University of Pensylvania Law School one of the top 5 in the country, where she garduated with homors and the order of the coif. She also clerked for a federal judge and very nearly clerked for a sumprem court feeder judge.
“As a retired attorney I can tell you that judges frequently order an employer to reinstate an illegally fired employee and give them back pay. It’s an equitable remedy to ensure the employee is “made whole”.”
Sorry Dennis – in the real world that almost never happens – for very good reason – bringing a fired worker back to the place they have been fired is a disaster waiting to happen – nowhere in this country is there a RIGHT to a job -in most states in the country you can fire a worker at any time for no reason at all. There are a few specific reasons that you can not fire a worker, but aside from that any reason of no reason at all is legitimate.
So if an employer fires a worker for an improper reason – you can pretty much bet if they are forced to take them back – they will be looking for a new reason to fire them. The left likes to talk about hostile work places – returning a fired worker pretty much guaranteed creates a hostile workplace. Something bad will happen if you bring them back. There are myriads of possibilities – all bad.
What will NOT happen is rainbows and unicorns will fart out of the ass of the employee and employer and everyone will get along.
When employees are fired for allegedly Bad reasons – there is ALWAYS other things going on. Further an employee who was fired for a bad reason and is reinstated has a tendancy to beleive they are now immune to firing – which wreaks havoc on their motivation to do their job,. while the employer is busy trying to document legitimate reasons to get rid of them.
There are occasions in which lawsuits are settled and employeers AGREE to take employees back.
But any judge that ORDERS an employer to rehire a fired worker is an idiot – and it is extremely rare to even request it.
Finally – even if what you claimed was comon place = it is not, it is rare and nearly always stupid, it would STILL be the case that this was an EQUITY settlement – and therefore not suitable for a TRO.
As YOU note – if the courts ULTIMATELY find for an employee – they can craft all kinds of remedies – ordering rehiring is avoided – not because it is something other than an equity settlement. It is avoided because it is a BAD IDEA.
I would ntoe that even in the Humphry’s executor case that Trump (and Carter and Biden and most every mopdern presidetn) is looking to reverse – the court specifically determined early on that the case was about money – Humprhrey’s was not getting rehired.
Of course he died before the case hit SCOTUS – hence the name “jumphrey’s exexcutor”.
“If John thinks DJT only has to pay money damages why are the federal agencies now in the process of rehiring those same workers?”
They aren’t – they were given 7 days to appeal – the apeal is almost certainly filed.
Surprisingly the DC court of appeals has been pretty hostile to these stupid remedies – I beleive only ONE case so far has made it to the supreme court – and roberts as is his norm tried to split the baby rather than resolving the case – Roberts/ACB told Ali he could order payments – but only after proof of work completed, proof of contract and proof of invoice – $2B turned into 200K.
I would note that the district court sided for Hampton Dellinger in the OSC firing – which BTW is a far better claim than USAID workers have and the DC appels court reversed so badly Dellinger dropped the case rather then appeal to SCOTUS.
Regardless the OCS case is PRECIDENT for the DC circuit right now – so do you really think that if the DC court of appeals ruled in favor of firing Delinger – who was the head of an office created by congress with a 5 year term, that congress made independent – that they are going to rule in favor of this stupid TRO ?
Dennis – your the tin man “If I only had a brain”.
It’s illegal for the President to exercise executive power over the executive branch.
Well, I’ll be damned.
Dennis – I have been making legal claims for a long time.
I do not make claims about what lower courts will do – they are too unpredictable and there is far too much political garbage especially among left wing judges.
Whiel I often predict what SCOTUS will do and loosly speaking Why. I am nearly always right about what they do, but off about what the WRITE about WHY?
As an example I was correct about the 18 USC 1512(c) decision. I was correct about the Presidential Immunity Decision, I was correct about the 14th amendment decision.
But in each of these cases SCOTUS ruled for the party I said they would – but used different reasoning.
This is because SCOTUS USUALLY tries to get rid of cases for small reasons rather than big ones.
As an example they rejected DOJ;’s reading of 18 US 1512(c) as overbroad. But barely mentioned was that had they found the DOJ reas was NOT overbroad – a small conclusion, they would then have had to find 18USC1512(c) unconstitutional on first amendment grounds.
SCOTUS will usually throw cases out on small grounds rather than large ones – regardless I have been near universally correct about Who SCOTUS would rule in favor of.
While you have been universally wrong.
With respect to the case you are claiming that I am currently wrong about – AGAIN I am not predicting lower court rulings, But I AM predicting who SCOTUS will side with if the case makes it to them.
So let me be clear –
SCOTUS is not going to order Trump to rehire anyone he has fired, and will reverse any orders by lower courts that do.
There are many of these cases – and in SOME cases the employees/plantiffs MIGHT have some claims for additional severence
I am not predicting that – it is too case specific, and depends on law contracts and facts specific to the case.
I will also predict that ACB and Roberts are NOT punting again on the next TRO case they get – they are not going to repeat the Ali fiasco.
They will significantly restrain lower courts TRO’s and Injunctive releif. They may or may not use the equity reasoning I have offered – but they are not going to bless these stupid TROs.
Here are se more predictions.
Care to bet what little credibility you have that I am wrong ?
SCOTUS will NOT rule that Trump can not fire people.
SCOTUS will NOT rule that Trump must rehire people.
SCOTUS will NOT rule that Trump can not audit federal spending.
SCOTUS will NOT rule that Trump can not cut waste or fraud.
SCOTUS will NOT rule that Trump MUST spend budgeted money in ways that are NOT explicity required by congress.
SCOTUS will NOT rule that Trump can not deport Tren De ARugua.
SCOTUS will NOT rule that Trump can not deport illegal immigrants that are either criminasl in the country they came from or committed crimes in the US.
SCOTUS WILL rule that Trump can not redefine Birth right citizenship.
I expect to have a 100% track record on these predictions.
I will also predict that on SOME of these cases SCOTUS will use reasoning different than mine.
or that while the MAJOR thread will be as I stated above that plantiffs MIGHT win partical smaller issues.
SCOTUS could as an example rule that Trump can fire anyone, but that he must give many of them 60days notice and that since he did not they get 60days additional severance.
I am not getting into the weeds over details – and with little doubt various planitffs will when SOME details.
But the big results I claim above will 100% prove true.
Likely a correct list but I hope you’re wrong about the birthright citizenship thing
Dennis – Thank you.
You rant about Turley all the time – Turley is one ot the top first amendment and constitutional lawyers in the country.
I am glad that you have put me in the same company as Turley.
Just to be clear – I do not think that money damages are the only remedy.
Ultimately that is the real world.
Long ago I went to court because my wife – you know the UofP lawyer that clearked for a federal judge and is not one of the top appelate criminal defense attorney in the country – anyway she was at that time an organist for a local church on her way to church on sunday morning she was abducted off the street, drug into a building under renovation, and violently sexually assaulted for over 3 hours. My wife and I sued he construction company for failing to secure the building. Prior to filing the lawsuit our attorney told us
You can not get justice out of this. The courts can only award money.
That was a wonderful bit of legal wisdom. I and many others have on occasion sought from the courts something they can not give.
You say I am wrong because courts can order companies to rehire people who were fired.
They can. It almost never happens – outside of settlements, and it is pretty much always a bad idea.
If someone fired you – for a good reason or a bad one, it is highly unlikely that after a legal battle they are more favorably disposed to you
a resolution returning an employee back to a job is near certain to blow up in the future.
You say you were once a lawyer – if you were providing people advice like you do here – you were committing malpractice.
The lawyer who advised my wife and I told us the truth – we could get money. We could not get justice.
That is also part of a much bigger lesson that we learned over the next decade. Whatever is wrong with your life, whoever has wronged you,
only you can fix it. It would have been nice if we would have won our case against the construction company. But it would not have done anything for the damage done to us. The courts can not make you whole. Only you can do that.
Many not on the left talk about Trump Derangement Syndrome – that is where you lose rationality and you life is driven by Animus to Trump.
Whatever Trump does – its wrong. Democrats like Tulsi Gabbard, RFK Jr. Alan Derschowitz. Elon musk have gone from heros of the left to Fascist Nazi’s – because they do not ooze hatred of Trump.
I come here each day and post – because I enjoy it.
I hope I am wrong, but I get the sense that you are not happy, that Everything Trump consumes your life.
Most of the things I post about here – have no impact on my own life.
I do not bump into illegal immigrants all the time. I have very little interaction with the federal government
Neither I nor anyone I know is going to die in Ukraine or Gaza.
Absent a complete societal meltdown – which though still unlikely has been made more probable by the bad fical management of democrats,
It does not personally effect me that much who is president or who controls congress.
I am seriously concerned economically – because I beleive we have entered a debt bubble that if we do not deal with NOW, will be devastating to me and others I know.
And frankly I do not think Trump and republicans are doing near enough to fix that.
I doubt that the reality of YOUR life is much different from mine on all these issues.
yet you seem miserable about something you can not do anything about and that does not effect you personally at all.
That is Trump Derangement Syndrome.
My wife and I had to dig ourselves out of a deep dark hole 40 years ago.
While having no responsibility for the damage inflicted on us We had to fix our lives ourselves – no one else could do that.
I feel sorry for you – because you are voluntarily digging yourself into a deep dark hole.
The total cost of federal government employees is less than 2% of the budget. This, of course, does not include DOD personnel.
Turns out “Joe Biden’s” reason for pausing LNG exports (thus harming American businesses) was based on a lie. They actually buried their own environmental impact study for political reasons.
https://dailycallernewsfoundation.org/2025/03/18/exclusive-biden-admin-intentionally-buried-inconvenient-study-to-justify-major-energy-crackdown-sources-say/
Except Biden didn’t do it, apparently.
That was President Autopen.
More likely the extreme left-wing cabal in the shadows pulling the puppet strings. That’s why I put the quotes around “Joe Biden”.
He pushed back against Schumer’s incendiary comments against Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. To me it seems more like he ignores little tiny pipsqueaks, but pushes back against bigger players. I could be wrong, but that’s how it seems to me.
Again, though, I wouldn’t read much into it. What counts is his rulings, which have been a mixed bag for the good guys. He’s been good on some issues like religious freedom, but unfortunately he forever ruined his reputation and legacy with the horrendous Obamacare decisions.
That was supposed to be attached to a thread on the previous page regarding CJ Roberts.
Prof. Turley
Lets presume that the use of AEA was overreach – I think the arguments for it are far better than Biden tried to use with the Heors act an laon forgiveness.
Lets presume that Trump has not dotted his eyes and crossed is T’s regarding DOGE and pausing spending while auditing or cancelling contracts and closing agencies.
All of this is STILL a huge problem for the courts, judges, Roberts, democrats and the left.
Is there anyone arguing that Trump can NOT deport Tren De Arugua members ?
The pi$$ing contest with Judge Boasberg is purely about how quickly can Trump deport these people – most of whom had final deportation orders.
Is there any argument that Trump can not cut wasteful or fraudulent spending ?
Is there any argument that Trump can not layoff or even fire Government employees ?
The entire fight going on right now is over whether Trump dotted his I’s and crossed his T’s.
This is entirely a delaying action – that is all.
Worse still it is an effort to delay the implementation of platform planks that were front and center in this election.
Trump FEATURED his intention to deport illegal immigrants – starting with Criminals.
That is exactly what he is trying to do.
We can debate the legal minutiae over whether Khalil can be deported – but that does not change the fact that
americans VOTED to deport Palestinian students who were disrupting our colleges.
And that government does have he power to do so.
It is my understanding that Carter Deported large numbers of iranians – including permanent residents in the midst of the iranian hostage crisis.
I have no idea if he invoked the AEA – but the circumstances are not much different. The Iranian governemnt allegedly did not control the group that took 400+ american hostage. But Iranians did take over a US ambassy including 400 staff as hostages.
And Carter did respond by kicking Iranians students out of the US – and I am not aware of a single lawsuit.
Pres. Maduro did open the doors of Venezeulan prisons on the condition those released went to the US.
That is an act of war by a foreign country.
The claim that the AEA requires a declaration of War is not supported by the language.
You have noted that Adam’s like Biden was one of the most anti-free speech presidents in US history.
This is a law enacted and used by President Adam’s – and it was used decades before the war of 1812.
It is also pretty clear that the 1950 SCOTUS decision if not perfectly supporting Trump – atleast creates a prima fascia case that Trump’s actions are legitimate. Plantiffs are free to challenge the fascial or as applied constitutionality of the AEA, but by all appearances Judge Boasberg – like the other judges that people are angry with, just knee jerk reacted without serious consideration of the law or constitution.
These judges are perfect reflections of Trump Derangement syndrome – presume whatever it is is wrong because it is Trump and then actually look at the law or constitution later.
Trump also appears to be far better prepared and far better represented this time.
While he is acting boldly – he is doing so within the platform that he was elected to fulfill and his claims of executive power to accomplish what he is doing are NOT all that excessive.
Is there anyone who even wants to keep Tren De Arugua or MS-13 members in the country ?
If there is a debate over due process – which constitutionally appears to be minimal for illegal aliens – much less violent criminal illegal aliens – then lets have that. Judge Boasberg is obligated to state what Due Process requirements Trump failed to accomplish so that these Tren De Arugua members can be deported.
If there is a debate over the mechanism’s by which Trump can cut audit federal spending – then these Judges are obligated – Not to order than Trump can NOT audit spending. but to specifiy exactly how he has unlewfully or unconstitutionally done so so that the audits can go forward as soon as possible.
If Trump has not followed the correct mechanism’s for terminating federal contracts – they these judges are obligated – Not to order Trump not to terminate contracts but to identify what provisions of the constitution or federal law has been violated so that the termination of contracts can continue.
The people are NOT stupid.
While I think most of these lawsuits are both unwise, frivoluous and lacking standing – I have no problem with suing the federal government.
The various parties that are doing so are free to do so. Though I would note that politically – rather than legally or constitutionally these lawsuits are all politically unwise and unpopular. But these judges are NOT supposed to be political. Judges have ZERO role in policy. Their job is to weigh in on the constitutionality and legality of actions – not the politics.
Roberts is correct that impeachment of Judges in the US is very rare, further it is also rarely political. But that is because judges in the US do NOT act like those in Brazil or other banana republics or Europe or Russia or … Judges in the US to a very large extent decide cases on the law and constitution – not politics. Or atleast they did so until judicial decisions have become increasingly political in the 21st century.
Judges acting with practically open political bias was rare for most of US history – absolutely political biases lurked beneath the surface of occasional judical decisions – but the courts were not brazen about it, and the politically directed decisions atleast attempted to cover themselves in a fig leaf of law and constitution.
Today – nearly the entire country agrees that judicial decisions are heavily driven by politics.
Neither the right nor the left has the slightest trust that the other parties judges are following the law or constitution.
Whether you are on the left or the right there is ZERO doubt that the courts are facing a crisis of legitimacy of their own making.
It is my OPINION that crisis is caused by the takeover of lawschools by the left and the unabashed view of the left that the courts have a role in determining public policy rather than determining the constituionality or legality of actions.
Whatever the cause – and we CLEARLY need a public debate over the cause. Trust and credibility of the courts has been severely damaged.
Roberts admonitions to people that impeachment is not the way to address judicial decisions we do not like is ONLY correct when the instances of courts being driven by political bias are RARE.
When the courts are political – impeachment is a valid remedy. The impeachment of Andrew Johnson was without any doubt political. While there was some legal basis for the impeachments of Nixon and Clinton, and atleast there was some bipartisan support for impeaching Nixon – his impeachment was still fundimentally political. The impeachment of Clinton also had a legal foundation – lying under oath and obstruction of justice are more serious crimes than anything Nixon was accused of. But the impeachment of Clinton was still political.
The two impeachments of Trump were political. Ultimately impeachment is a POLITICAL check and balance.
The remedy for politicized judges is politicized impeachments.
I do not beleive we are going to come to that or that we should. But I DO completely beleive the threat is perfectly legitimate.
Roberts is wrong – the appellate process is the proper way to resolve the problem of rare political or other judicial errors.
It is NOT sufficient to deal with a judicial system that has lost trust and credibility.
The threat of judicial impeachments is a message to Roberts and the courts to CLEAN THEIR OWN HOUSE, before it gets cleaned for them.
The courts MUST figure out how to restore their own credibiltiy – or Congress mustuse more blunt instruments to restore it for them.
The life tenure and appointment rather than election of federal judges is to remove them from the political process.
That has failed.
Some remedy MUST be found.
I would note that Trump is still strongly resisting pushes from the right to ignore bad judicial orders – that is correct
FOR NOW. Just as judicial impeachment is NOT something we should do lightly, Ignoring judicial orders is not something that should occur easily either.
Steven Miller noted that Judges can not order aircraft carriers to change course.
But what if a Judge did ? Should the president follow such an obviously illegal order ?
My point is that there is a point at which our system of deferring to judges and appealing FAILS – we are not there,
But the declining trustworthyness of the courts caused by their politicization is getting us perilously close.
This is exactly the same as the arguments regarding January 6th.
We were NOT at a poit in which an actual armed insurrection was justified.
But the nonsense that violence against government is never justified is disproven by our own Revolution.
The declaration of independence is a far more important legal document than it is credited with.
It establishes that the violent overthrow of a governemnt that has lost the trust of the people is legitimate.
But that we must not Jump there.
A proveably fraudulent election is probably not sufficient to justify a violent insurrection – but two ? Three ?
When the government loses the trust of the people – eventually the constitution and law are NOT sufficient
The law and constitution do not work when those in power are not trusted to follow them.
John Say,
Don’t know if you know this, but apparently, Chuck Schumer actually admitted, on Face the Nation, I believe, that under the Biden admin his Senate put in some 230 progressive judges, and further confessed that the goal was to thwart Trump at every turn, and he indicated he was pleased to report that they were ruling against him, every chance they could get.
This isn’t at all about Trump not dotting i’s and crossing t’s, it’s all about hatred for him, and attempting to totally paralyze the executive and the government he heads.
Judicial impeachments require 67 votes in the Senate, and that’s *NOT* going to happen. A better approach is to put riders on popular Dem legislation, designed to reign in the judiciary, so that they’re forced to decide whether or not to anger their constituents, or not.
If something isn’t done soon, we’ll lose our nation forever. As Earl Pitts American would say, “Wake up, America!”
Don’t know if you know this but impeachment does not occur in the Senate.
An impeachment trial with possible conviction occurs in the Senate.
Another bizarre overreach by a zany federal judge.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/03/breaking-obama-judge-bars-doge-accessing-social-security
DOGE can’t access Social Security for an audit.
More impeachments please.
And forget the Roberts court. Congress must act now.
If the President finally is forced to ignore these insane judges I think the people will support him.
Roberts might whine but he has already demonstrated he is a eunuch or, as some are alleging again, maybe compromised.
Why does the name Obama keep popping up?
Why does the name Obama keep popping up?
At this point I wouldn’t be surprised if he were the true chief justice and Roberts is just another Biden type puppet. Outlandish but Roberts has opened the door to that type of bizarre speculation and there will probably be more of it. His reputation is ruined.
The jaw-dropping revelations about USAID and other departments brings almost every imaginable scandal into the realm of possibility.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/03/revealed-chief-justice-john-roberts-caught-secretive-invite
It almost seems as if there is a plot to surround Trump with so many bizarre rulings that he can’t do anything without violating some court order so they can say “Gotcha!”
If so, they may only get themselves because many are getting tired of their antics and will be happy to see them shamed and ignored and impeached.
Even if they can’t be convicted in the Senate the hearings and investigations should be good television. And the deserved ruin of the present judiciary.
Young,
I heard a sound byte on Mark Levin’s show today, where Chuck Schumer actually stated that’s precisely what is happening with all these judges. During Biden’s tenure, Schumer got over 230 progressive judges confirmed, and announced, in the byte, he was pleased to report that the judges are doing precisely that.
So, there ya go.
Ron J
Thanks for that. They want ugly and maybe they will get it.
Meanwhile, Schumer is the same canoe with the Republicans, surrounded by the gators sharks and piranhas he has been nurturing for decades thinking they loved him.
Just a thought, even judges can go to prison for criminal conspiracy. If that happens hold the trials in Texas, not DC.
“It almost seems as if there is a plot to surround Trump….”
“Whoomp! There It Is.”
And “It” is the ongoing Obama Coup D’etat in America with a cast of thousands, all of whom must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, after which America must be placed squarely back on the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
_________________________________________________________
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”
– Barack Obama
___________________
“We will stop him.”
– Peter Strzok to FBI paramour Lisa Page
_____________________________________________
“[Obama] wants to know everything we’re doing.”
– Lisa Page to FBI paramour Peter Strzok
_____________________________________________
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before 40.”
– Peter Strzok to FBI parmour Lisa Page
____________________________________________
“People on the 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this [Trump] server.”
– Bill Priestap
________________
“I had a discussion with the case team and we believe there to be predication to include former President of the United States Donald J. Trump as a predicated subject.”
– Timothy Thibault to John Crabb, U.S. Attorney’s Office, D.C.
_________________________________________________________________
The Obama Coup D’etat in America is the most egregious abuse of power and the most prodigious crime in American political history. The co-conspirators are:
Kevin Clinesmith, Bill Taylor, Eric Ciaramella, Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Andrew Weissmann,
James Comey, Christopher Wray, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Laycock, Kadzic, Sally Yates,
James Baker, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan, Campbell, Sir Richard Dearlove,
Christopher Steele, Simpson, Joseph Mifsud, Alexander Downer, Stefan “The Walrus” Halper,
Azra Turk, Kerry, Hillary, Huma, Mills, Brennan, Gina Haspel, Clapper, Lerner, Farkas, Power,
Lynch, Rice, Jarrett, Holder, Brazile, Sessions (patsy), Nadler, Schiff, Pelosi, Obama,
Joe Biden, James E. Boasberg, Emmet Sullivan, Gen. Milley, George Soros, John McCain,
Marc Elias, Igor Danchenko, Fiona Hill, Charles H. Dolan, Jake Sullivan, Strobe Talbot,
Cody Shear, Victoria Nuland, Ray “Red Hat” Epps, Don Berlin, Kathy Ruemmler, Rodney Joffe,
Paul Vixie, L. Jean Camp, Andrew Whitney, Lisa O. Monaco, Fani Willis, Alvin Bragg,
Matthew Colangelo, Merrick Garland, Juan Merchan, Timothy Thibault et al.
“Congress must act now.”
See Hawley’s proposed bill:
“Hawley to Introduce Legislation Restricting Lower Court Judges from Issuing Nationwide Injunctions”
https://www.hawley.senate.gov/hawley-to-introduce-legislation-restricting-lower-court-judges-from-issuing-nationwide-injunctions/
Lincoln was a great president, right?
In order to counter the “rebellion,” Lincoln deployed the military, declared martial law, suspended habeas corpus, smashed printing presses, threw opponents in prison, and generally and vigorously interdicted adversaries.
Opponents that are removed from Congress for uncivil, boorish, and abusive behavior, judges that wittingly and illicitly ignore and alter the clear text of Acts of Congress, and political agents that rage and threaten on public forums and detonate fire bombs on products and facilities of members of the administration must be similarly rebuffed and prosecuted.
And it begins. Bondi is bringing the heat against Tesla terrorists with federal charges that could land them up to 20 years in prison. Bravo Bondi! Let this be the first of many such prosecutions against these evil domestic terrorists.
https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/crime/tesla-arson-charges-pam-bondi-b2718922.html
Oldman,
Just heard Mark Levin suggest to Elon Musk that he should file tortious interference lawsuits against all these nutjobs fire-bombing, shooting at, etc, Tesla dealerships, cars, etc. Sounds like a fantastic idea to me, and I pray he does that in spades!
Ron – the civil causes of action against these domestic terrorists are probably legion. I agree that they should be filed. Destruction of property, assault (if anyone was near and put in fear for their safety), and the like. The tortious interference with prospective business relations claim is something the dealerships may be able to file. Or maybe Musk if the business relation in view is that between Tesla and the dealerships. But are the defendants judgment proof, and if so, will the dealerships spend money on lawyers for that purpose? Maybe Elon can set up a legal aid fund to help them (?)
I would think the DOJ is looking into RICO if there is any coordination. If Soros or any other foreign actor is involved in conspiring and/or funding this, they presumably can bee scooped in as defendants. Hopefully it will put an end to them.
I was wondering when people like Walz and Crockett get sued for their actions inciting and in the attacking of a private company. I would have to believe there is some legal justification for protection against these people.
In Florida I believe arson or causing property damage like witnessed justifies the use of lethal force by police and/or private citizens in the protection of their or others lives and/or private property.
FAFO
Warning: You better think good thoughts or Anthony will turn you into a Jack in the box.
♻️ The Democrats are Recycling the same old crap ♻️
I guess they really really want V.P. Vance to be President 🇺🇸
The Left will stop inciting violence when Americans take violence to their homes. Simple
Reagan conservatives will gladly teach MAGAs a lesson.
Reagan was “All Hat and No Cattle.” He implemented “globalization,” transferring wealth to China et al. He happily perpetuated the communist American welfare state. He created a holiday for a plagiarist, gross philanderer, communist, and familial and congregational fraud, etc.
Reagan’s Eleventh Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican.
Agreed! What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. the left should realize that violence begets violence. They’re unleashing the whirlwind and they might be the ones who don’t know what hit them.
Wow, that’s really circular logic.
That’s normally how a whirlwind spins!
Vance — has no support. The ONLY thing keeping Trump in his influencer position are about 30 million core morons who he can unleash in primaries on any Republican not willing to pucker up. When Trump’s approval ratings crater to below 30% old line conservatives will oppose him.
🤣🤣🤣🤪
U R A 🫏
Isn’t DeSantis preferable?
Professor will you address the case of Mahmoud Khalid?
There is no case.
He is a direct and mortal enemy of the United States and must be deported.
Jonathan, have you taken into account that the order to return planes in the air may have been dangerous? How much fuel did they have, when were the pilots supposed to time out? The judge couldn’t have possibly known the answer to these questions. And yet people are jumping up and down that he could do that, with the swipe of his pen.
Any judge who orders planes in the air to turn around suffers from grandiosity and is not mentally healthy.
“Jonathan, have you taken into account that the order to return planes in the air may have been dangerous? How much fuel did they have, when were the pilots supposed to time out?”
You obviously don’t know much about aviation. Flights have enough fuel to return if they are halfway to their destination plus extra if they have to go to an alternate airport. Turning around us not dangerous.
You can always tell when the leftists here can’t defend the subject of the column. They just ignore the topic of the column and go to the stuff they think is better for them.
Tesla announced that it is recalling every Cybertruck sold between Nov. 13, 2023, and the end of February because parts of the vehicles fell off.
Apparently, Elmo’s $150,000 Cybertruck is held together by GLUE!!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!!!
The body panels are made of stainless steel, which is difficult to weld, so they decided to glue the body panels to the frame. Under freezing weather conditions the glue becomes brittle and breaks, and the body panels fall off.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!!!!
But never fear, Elmo has a fix for this problem:
STRONGER GLUE !!!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
On top of that, accountants have been perusing Tesla’s SEC filings.
There is $1.4 billion that is unaccounted for.
According to Tesla’s cashflow statements, the firm spent $6.3 billion on “purchases of property and equipment excluding finance leases, net of sales” in the second half of 2024. However, its balance sheet claims the gross value of property, plant, and equipment rose by only $4.9 billion — leaving an eyebrow-raising $1.4 billion discrepancy.
Seems Elmo is playing fast and loose with the company’s assets.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!
Exactly. Musk is a crybaby retard loser troll.
And people wonder why Tesla stock is in the toilet…
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
If I reroof my house, its market value does not go up, even though I have spent thousands.
Jonathan, you have lost a lot of credibility with me, a fellow former Chicagoan (and U of C Law grad, where I became a libertarian) as you labor to justify Trump. Dare to take him on on these reckless comments about impeaching judges, please.
First of all, for a lawyer, that’s pretty bad grammar on your part: “Dare to take him on on these reckless comments
Second, and importantly, there are MULTIPLE lawyers (might say a majority) in the Senate (as well as the House) who STARTED the whole thing about impeaching activist judges. Trump, not a lawyer, tends to place trust in their comments and opinions. CJ Roberts ALSO did not mention Trump–he was critical of ALL persons who should know better (lawyers, especially administrative or legislative ones).
So you reveal yourself as a UC Law grad whose partisanship takes control here. good job pal.
Note that comrade Johnson fails to mention that Boasberg acted deliberately and unconstitutionally when he challenged the executive branch’s invocation of an act of Congress, An Act Concerning Aliens and An Act Respecting Alien Enemies.
“That it shall be lawful for the President of the United States at any time during the continuance of this act, to order all such aliens as he shall judge dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States, or shall have reasonable grounds to suspect are concerned in any treasonable or secret machinations against the government thereof, to depart out of the territory of the United States,….”
“That whenever there shall be…any invasion or predatory incursion…perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States, by any foreign nation or government…all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government…shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured and removed, as alien enemies.”
When you can’t defend the topic of the column pound the table.