Roughly a year ago, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel made a splash in the press after she brought charges against anti-Israel protesters at the University of Michigan. The move followed a refusal of liberal local district attorneys to prosecute the cases despite clear criminal conduct. Now, as violent and disruptive protests are again rising on our campuses, Nessel has followed her local counterparts and dropped all charges in a bizarre, convoluted rationalization.
The Michigan protests involved a variety of crimes as students disrupted classes, trespassed on property, caused property damage, and assaulted law enforcement. However, Washtenaw County prosecutor Eli Savit would only charge about ten percent of those arrested and later dropped all those charges. Wayne County prosecutor Kym Worthy dropped all five Gaza protest cases forwarded to her office by Wayne State University police in Detroit. The University of Michigan regents pressed Nessel to charge those protesters involved in illegal conduct. She did so last September, bringing charges against 11 individuals, including seven felony prosecutions.
That move was not popular with the left as figures like Rep. Rashida Tlaib lashed out at Nessel, who declared, “You would expect that from a Republican, but not a Democrat, and it’s really unfortunate.”
After those criticisms, the cases seem to have gone nowhere. The lack of action led this week to the dropping of all charges against the seven protesters facing felonies.
Nessel, however, offered little more justification than the cases were causing her criticism and controversy:
When my office made the decision to issue charges of Trespassing and Resisting and Obstructing a Police Officer in this matter, we did so based on the evidence and facts of the case. I stand by those charges and that determination.
Despite months and months of court hearings, the Court has yet to make a determination on whether probable cause was demonstrated that the defendants committed these crimes, and if so, to bind the case over to circuit court for trial, which is the primary obligation of the district court for any felony offense. During this time, the case has become a lightning rod of contention.
Baseless and absurd allegations of bias have only furthered this divide. The motion for recusal has been a diversionary tactic which has only served to further delay the proceedings. And now, we have learned that a public statement in support of my office from a local non-profit has been directly communicated to the Court. The impropriety of this action has led us to the difficult decision to drop these charges.
These distractions and ongoing delays have created a circus-like atmosphere to these proceedings. While I stand by my charging decisions, and believe, based on the evidence, a reasonable jury would find the defendants guilty of the crimes alleged, I no longer believe these cases to be a prudent use of my department’s resources, and, as such, I have decided to dismiss the cases.
So she “stands by” the original charges and she believes that a jury would convict. She also said that a claim of bias against her was baseless. However, she wants to get rid of them because they have “become a lightning rod of contention.” In other words, she is getting criticism from the left.
There was this quaint notion that prosecutors are not supposed to yield to such political pressure. Her solution to the “circus-like atmosphere” is to release the dangerous attractions.
If she hoped to bolster her standing on the left, it does not appear to have worked.
Samantha Lewis, one of the protesters, called AG Nessel the “top pig” and said she was a coward.
So, as more violent protests have erupted on campuses, Nessel is shrugging and walking away. The campaign against her worked, and, as with earlier violent protests, prosecutors are yielding to the demands of the far left. We saw the same pattern with the riots in states like Washington and Oregon. Even federal prosecutors under the Biden Administration dropped or significantly reduced charges in major cases. That includes the absurd handling of two Molotov-cocktail-throwing lawyers.
In the meantime, Rep. Dan Goldman (D., N.Y.) has called even the investigation of violent protesters and arsonists on the left “political weaponization” of our legal system.
At the same time, many have fueled the rage. It has given both students and non-students a sense of license. Across the country, liberals are destroying Tesla cars, torching dealerships and charging stations, and even allegedly hitting political dissenters with their cars.
In Minnesota, Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty (D) declined to charge state employee Dylan Adams for vandalizing Tesla cars and causing more than $20,000 in damages despite surveillance footage of Adams vandalizing the vehicles.
Recently, affluent liberal shoppers admitted that they are shoplifting from Whole Foods to strike back at Jeff Bezos for working with the Trump administration and moving the Washington Post back to the political center. They are also enraged at Mark Zuckerberg for restoring free speech protections at Meta.
One “20-something communications professional” in Washington explained, “If a billionaire can steal from me, I can scrape a little off the top, too.” These affluent shoplifters portrayed themselves as Robin Hoods.
Politicians and commentators have sought to excuse or explain the growing violence. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., said to Joy Reid on MSNBC why Luigi Mangione allegedly murdered UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. Warren offered a “warning ” that “you can only push people so far.”
Others like former Washington Post reporter Taylor Lorenz gushed over Mangione as homicidal but hunky: “Here’s this man who’s a revolutionary, who’s famous, who’s handsome, who’s young, who’s smart, he’s a person who seems like he’s this morally good man, which is hard to find.”
The combination of encouraging politicians and enabling prosecutors is fueling a rise in political violence that could quickly spin out of control.
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.”
The good professor kindly and politely makes mention, supra, that “In the meantime, Rep. Dan Goldman (D., N.Y.) has called even the investigation of violent protesters and arsonists on the left ‘political weaponization’ of our legal system.
Just Wednesday, Turley faced Goldman in one of the rudest, most disrespectful, and unprofessional examples of procedural conduct in Congressional House hearings…..
Please watch the attached clip carefully. Compare the demeanor and constitution of Turley with that of Democrat Dan Goldman, who is questioning him. Goldman (to me) quintessentially represents what the Democratic Party has become.
In-your-face posturing, histrionic confrontations, and out-of-order conduct is the New Soup du Jour in America, now penetrating our most honored and respected institutions.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/politics/government/all-hell-breaks-loose-when-andy-biggs-tells-dan-goldman-you-are-out-of-order-be-quiet/vi-AA1ElZY9
Lin,
Than you for bringing that to our attention. The man has no shame in his conduct.
Lin,
“In-your-face posturing, histrionic confrontations, and out-of-order conduct is the New Soup du Jour in America, now penetrating our most honored and respected institutions.”
Marjorie Taylor Greene, Laure Loomer, and Boabert don’t ring a bell?
When you have someone as disingeneous as Turley you gotta expect some harsh inquiry.
This is the third time you have misspelled disingenuous in just two days. A word you recently learned and were apparently impressed with, but cannot spell.
So? You know what I meant. Even Turley makes mistakes. BFD.
It doesn’t change my point.
Yes we know what you mean, but it does prove you are stupid.
George: Please go back and reread my sentence that you just copied.
Please note the clause, ” the New Soup du Jour in America.”
Did I say that today’s soup was limited to Democrats?
Does “in America” mean, or even imply, only in Democrats’ America?
Was there some conversation between Turley and “Marjorie Taylor Greene [or] Laure Loomer, [or] Boabert” that I missed?
Reading Comprehension. 101, George.
Thanks anyway. lin
Lin,
As always, what a concise, elegant way to own the slow and dumb one. Well done!
Lin, what’s the point about complaining about agressive questioning and theatrics if you wont complain when the crazies on the conservative side do it? Is it only convenient to point it out only when Democrats engage in such things?
Reading comprehension isn’t the issue. It’s the clear bias towards demcrats. If it’s such an issue why didn’t you complain when Republicans did it?
Just like Turley writing this piece to label Pro-Palestinian protesters as some sort of bullies for forcing a Jewish AG whose case was undermined by a ‘friendly’ Jewish non-profit sending a letter to the judge that made it appear they were trying to unfluence the judge in the name of the AG. Pretty stupid move and as a lawyer you should understand why the charges were dropped, right?
Maybe you should tell Turley that this was case of an Jewish AG and a Jewish non-profit screwing up and forcing the dismissal of the charges.
George: I have more than once, on this blog, expressed my disregard for MTG.
Have never read anything about Boebert’s House conduct.
Loomer is not even a member of Congress, so why would I mention her?
Take off your blinders, George.
Enough. thank you.
Have you really? Its seems quite far fetched. I don’t think amusing anecdotes count as criticism.
As a lawyer maybe you should explain to readers why sending a letter to a judge is a big no-no. You should know that created a problem giving the appearance of ex parte communications which inject doubt on the impartiality of the judge and the AG’s past statements against Rep. Tlaib promising prosecution when the DA’s dropped charges because most protesters entered into diversion programs that are availble in Michigan. That’s why may charges were dropped after meeting the diversion requirements. Turley was being disingenious at best.
Anonymous 11:36 am-George is the penultimate example of the Democratic intellectual . He also has the new word to use.
Lin, thank you. What is seen in this video is always seen where Democrats are concerned. I became marginally involved with a free medical clinic for the needy, run by husband-and-wife doctors many years ago. The clinic was on the grounds of their church property. It was the only one I knew that refused all federal funding so they could do their work without government interference or charity from the hospital.
I was fascinated by what they did and how they did it. So was the federal government because the costs were so low compared to Medicaid. I listened to the Congressional hearing and was shocked that some of the Democrats’ questions were not geared to find out how to lower the cost of healthcare, but were geared to attack the ones providing their time and money. Indirectly, they kept accusing them of somehow pocketing money.
Democrats accuse others of what they are guilty of. Members like Goldman should be shunned and removed from office by their voters because of his heinous actions, not because of his politics.
S. Meyer,
Thank you for sharing that account. If Democrats cannot control something, then they have to destroy or ruin it.
S. Meyer: Thank you for the good work you do. I cannot add (because of absence of knowledge) to the remainder of your comment, but I know we share many sentiments in common.
“The Michigan protests involved a variety of crimes as students disrupted classes, trespassed on property, caused property damage, and assaulted law enforcement.” (JT)
*Now* is the time for Federal civil rights arrests and trials.
Start here:
“Conspiracy Against Rights (18 U.S.C. § 241): This law criminalizes conspiracies to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in the exercise or enjoyment of their constitutional rights.”
When parents let their children act however the hell they want in restaurants and libraries, then this is the next logical step in their development.
(Gone are the days when just a dirty look from my parents was enough to control us in public settings….)
Is Turley really a lawyer? I ask because he didn’t research this story very well, which is a common occurance it seems.
He’s clearly leaving out a HUGE chunk of information that shows exactly why the charges were dropped and it’s an embarrasing one too.
Turley left out these key bits of information. For example he cites local prosecutors “refusing to charge students” and noting that they are liberal to insinuate that they were ‘helping’ them in some way. Turley you little fibber you. The truth is the majority of these protesters were first time offenders and the charges against them were a majority of misdeamenors and a few felonies that were difficult to prove. What Turley leaves out is that in Michigan for first time offenders there is a diversion program that allows them to avoid the charges if they participate in it. The protesters plead guilty to attempted resisting and obstructing officers and under Michigans Holmes Youthful Trainee Act which allows defendants between the ages of 18 and 26 a chance to clear their record for first-time criminal offenses. After completing the diversion program the charges were dropped. Turley didn’t mention that, imagine that.
All of those ‘liberal’ district attorneys dropped charges because the protesters who were first time offenders pled guilty and chose the diversion option. Now here comes the part Turley “accidentally” left out. He “neglects” to mention that AG Nessel is Jewish. Ooops. If he knew the district attorneys were liberal, he should have mentioned the fact that the AG was Jewish. This is important because it will play a big role in the other bit of information Turley “neglected” to mention. After charges were dropped by the DA’s. Nessel sought these cases. Normally AG’s don’t handle misdemeanor cases but these were an exception. The AG really wanted to prosecute these.
The cases were indeed going to trial and the evidence against them was indeed going to find the protesters guilty after months of legal wrangling, which is a testament to very good defense lawyers, something Turley didn’t ahem…mention.
Turley neglected to mention that a Jewish non profit sent a letter to the judge in support of AG Nessel who is also Jewish.
https://www.scribd.com/document/857789893/Letter-to-judge-from-Jewish-Federation-of-Greater-Ann-Arbor#from_embed
The letter not only included references of Nessel hiring Muslims and supporting them but, it also included a statement that the AG criticized Rep. Tlaib for her support of Palestinian protesters. Big mistake. The letter sent by a Jewish group to the judge was meant to support AG Nessle’s arguments but instead it backfired and showed the bias that defendants claims. The judge having read the letter knew it was inappropriate and tainted the process. Nessel knew that the existance of the letter would prove very difficult to ignore in court that it showed Nessel wouldn’t be biased. She was forced to recuse because of a stupid move by a Jewish group. Oops.
Turley left out a lot and it shows why his narrative is nothing but false insinuations and omissions of facts. You don’t believe me, read it for yourself.
“ Another factor in her decision, Nessel said, was a letter from the Jewish Federation of Greater Ann Arbor, defending Nessel from accusations of bias. The letter was submitted to the court May 2. Nessel said the letter was inappropriate. The Free Press has asked her office to elaborate, but didn’t receive an immediate response.
“We have learned that a public statement in support of my office from a local nonprofit has been directly communicated to the court,” Nessel’s statement said. “The impropriety of this action has led us to the difficult decision to drop these charges.”
https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2025/05/05/michigan-attorney-general-dana-nessel-drops-all-charges-university-michigan-diag-protesters/83452242007/
From another article elaborating the letter’s attempt to influence the judge.
“”I had no idea that this letter was even a factor,” said Eileen Freed, CEO of Jewish Federation of Greater Ann Arbor.
While Freed says the letter wasn’t intended in any way to influence the Court, she still believes more needs to be done to protect Jews on campus.
…”Do you think the letter backfired?” Javed asked.
“I think so. The people can see who stands against justice,” Muller said.”
It was a Jewish group’s boneheaded idea to send a letter to the judge seen as an attempt to influence the outcome.
Turley should be ashamed of such sloppy research. The proof of bias was already set by the letter. It wasn’t because liberals were pressuring the AG to recuse. It was Jewish idiots who screwed it up by trying to be ‘helpful.’
What kind of idiot thinks that simply writing an unsolicited letter to a judge has any kind of influence over anything or anybody? That was the gist of Turley’s argument! What if someone at the courthouse cafeteria had given a sign to the judge that read “I hate Palestinkiakns”, and it was in her hands for the second before she threw it down? Proof of extreme Muslim bias and grounds for dismissal? According up your backwards logic OF COURSE! Little minds are destroying our legal system and our courts!
argument, its commentary.
That letter was inappropriate because Nessel is Jewish and the group sending the letter was Jewish and the very act of sending it to the judge created an appearance of inpropriety for the AG making it very difficult to prove he was NOT biased. That is in conjunction with statements the AG made against protesters before the case went to her. It was a very stupid mistake and Turley chose not to mention it and instead used false claims and insinuations to paint a very different picture meant to make protesters and prosecutors look bad. The reality is the case was going to succeed…until the group sent that letter. Turley should be blaming the Jews for sabotaging their own cause. Not the liberal prosecutors or the defense.
Research? This is not a legal analysis, its journalistic commentary.
You’re not a lawyer are you, just some old guy wasting his life.
So in other words you have no argument against what I posted. Turley left out a lot of facts that effectively undermine his narrative. The basic problem is the Jews screwed up. They made the case for the AG to recuse by trying to help.
Turley wants to make this about leftists getting their way when in fact it was the Jewish AG having bias and a Jewish group unadvertently proving it. They tried to unfluence the judge. Oops.
Are you really so moved to oppose in substance every single daily posting of Turley’s—–or are you just a lonely, jealous Nobody to whom Turley has given space and voice? And the funny thing about it is that Turley’s opinions are his own, both critical and complimentary as he sees it. You, au contraire, apparently spend the day with your self-admitted friend Mr. Google, seeking out Google’s (independently-rated) left-wing coverage, then lift or re-appropriate that as your own.
Can’t afford a blog of your own?
“Turley should be ashamed of such sloppy research.”
You should be ashamed of yourself
It’s called criticism. It’s a well established part of what we defend as free speech. Every time Turley writes something he’s fair game for any kind of criticism, ridicule, mockery, derision, and name calling. All part of free speech.
Pointing out Turley’s flaws and glaring omissions is fair game. Just as it is fair game to criticize me for what I post. You didn’t now that?
It’s no different than Turley lathering on criticism on Democrats and leftists every day. Right?
George 12:09 PM-There is criticism with thought, intelligence, research, wit and command of the language and then there is George.
GEB, I did more research than anyone here had done. That’s how I found out that the reason for dismissing the charges was becausee the AG’s past statements promising prosecution after the DA’s dropped charges, charges there dropped because the protesterd pled guilty and entered into a diversion program that when completed dropped the charges. Turley wrongly assumed the DA’s simply dropped the charges because they were liberal DA’s.
Then there is the letter to the judge from a Jewish group which Turley again “neglected to mention”. Sending a letter to the judge is a big no-no in legal circles because it can be used as proof of an appearance of influence and that is enough to cause problems for the judge and the AG. This forced the AG to drop the charges.
Of course you wouldn’t know because Turley doesn’t do much research and we now know why. Because his intent was to smear the AG and protesters as bullies and getting away with it. They were going to lose their case until the stupid move by the Jewish non-profit screwed it up.
It’s called criticism.
**************
Which you can’t handle.
I handle criticism just fine. I get it every day here. NBD.
@George
No, it’s called trolling, it goes back to the earliest days of internet forums, designed to foment FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt), and it really doesn’t work in 2025. Pfft. You are pathetic, and when in the future you are penniless, those of us that moved on will shake our heads. Didn’t have to be this way, but you are sick so. . . . 🤷🏻♂️
“Ooops.” something else georgie picked up from this blog.
@ George TI: Without agreeing to your facts in the case, you advocate that Jews do not have a voice because the AG is Jewish. You are the worst type of bigot there is.
S. Meyer. Nope. You didn’t understand the problem. As usual.
The Jews have all the voice the want regarding this case. The problem is it got them in trouble when they decided to send a letter to the judge in support of the AG. That’s a big no-no. In Michigan it poses a problem of giving the appearance of an ex parte communication which creates an appearance of impartiality once the judge reads the letter. There are strict rules for a reason.
The AG could not in any way proceed with that letter know to have been sent to the judge and not to mention the AG’s past comments about Rep. Tlaib and the protesters. She was forced to drop the charges because it would have been worse to have a mistrial on her record.
S. Meyer think about it. Jews seeking offering support of a jewish AG against Pro-Palestinian protesters. It gives a strong appearance of bias that is hard to disprove with the existance of the letter and the AG’s past comments. They screwed up and Turley doesn’t want to admit it.
There is never a surprise as to the Stupidity of George, The Idiot or GIT, like git out of here you git (British worthless and twisted.
“In Michigan it poses a problem of giving the appearance of an ex parte communication which creates an appearance of impartiality once the judge reads the letter. ”
How ignorant “ex parte doesn’t give the appearance of impartiality”. The concern is the appearance of partiality.
The letter was sent to the AG, not the judge.
Ex parte is concerned with legal fairness. If a letter is sent to the judge, it must be sent to both sides. If the letter is sent to the AG responsible for the adjudication it needs to be seen by the other side.
You are irresponsible and dumb without any shame.
Anonymous 10:19 AM- George gives old men a bad name and slanders the rest.
@George
Is George really either a paid or very bored troll? Yes.
What a crock. If I did it at a sale in Macy’s, I could be arrested. Shoving is assault. Arrest them and threaten to throw the book at them and maybe they will give up the names of the leaders and their funding.
There is something going on here. No one seems to care who is instigating the riots.
My read? They know. And they either need the disruption politically, or they are afraid of the fat cats funding it.
The whole thing smells of rancid politics.
“You would expect that from a Republican, but not a Democrat, and it’s really unfortunate.”
What? Like obeying the law? Enforcing the law per her job description? Things like law and order? Those kind of Republican expectations? Does not even have to be a Republican thing but a common sense thing. Common sense, rule of law, traits that seem to be missing from leftist Democrats.
Feel the beat on the tangerine!
The modern left has unequivocally shown they no longer believe the rule of law applies to them in any capacity, and I don’t think they have any intention of respecting it ever again. We are in quite a pickle.
I’m concerned, too. I hope our institutions can survive 49% of the population wanting to terrorize the other 51%.
Diogenes, I wait for the midterms to see if that 49% is completely brain-dead. I find it hard to believe that people can be so ignorant, but then I listen to the left on this blog and can believe common sense has left the Democrat Party.
I’ll wait, too, Allen. Might as well.
Just keep your powder dry.
@Diogenes @Anonymous
Most definitely. Hope it never comes to that, but even in isolation Rashida’s comments reflect her mentality, and it is deeply troubling and all too common with these folks. I think they’ve gone beyond an end game for power and walked right into pure aggression and destruction being their only guiding principle and the only results they care about or expect. It is pure madness, and unfettered it will absolutely be the end of free and civilized society, and ultimately, a world that actually works for everybody. We are hanging by a thread. One cannot reason with a rabid, barking dog.
I thought they shoot rabid dogs.
Anonymous 12:31 PM-
Exactly. If you shoot enough then the % may drop from 49% to 47% and then to ?%.
James,
And that has become the modern Democrat party. The party of lawlessness. And we keep on obeying the law, following the rule of law because if we were to do even 1% of what they did, we would have the book thrown at us.
@Upstate
Oh, I have no doubt they’d do worse than throw the book if they thought they could. That line seems to blur with every passing day. I honestly thought briefly in 2022 after all covid restrictions had been lifted we’d crawl out of the rubble. Instead, we’ve been doubly stomped since.
So is the State of Michigan in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and various other federal statutes? Maybe the new DOJ should take a look
We built this city on sausage rolls!
Low IQ response.
Mob rule is alive and doing quite well…
Another low IQ resonse.
No one is above the law.
Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) May 31, 2024
No one is above the law.
Nancy Pelosi
No one is above the law.
Adam Schiff
No one is above the law.
Shiela Jackson Lee
No one is above the law.
Elizabeth Warren
No one is above the law.
Jerry Nadler
No matter how big, rich or powerful you think you are, no one is above the law.
New York state Attorney General Letitia James
I’m farting carrots.
“In the meantime, Rep. Dan Goldman (D., N.Y.) has called even the investigation of violent protesters and arsonists on the left “political weaponization” of our legal system.”
That’s a good example of Goldman using politicaliztion of an issue as a weapon of the Federal Government.
“All pigs are equal, but some are more equal”
“more equal than others.”
Watch WA state U and see if the anti-Jewish protestors go to trial?
Even after one million dollars of damage.
I’m betting no!
Here comes the loofah king!
There was a comedic movie made in the early 1960’s entitled “Hopeless, but not Serious.” The phrase applies to figures like Dana Nessel (and James Comey), who don’t want to be hard-core leftists, but who are unable to stand up to them. Unfortunately, many of such liberals are in our judicial system.
I would have to disagree with Cionnath. These demonstrations and lawbreaking are, for the most part, going on in Blue States or Blue Cities where Republicans do not rule. Where lawbreaking has become part of the political culture. There have been demonstrations in other states that are not Democratic and where lawbreaking has occurred they have been dealt with. Even in some purple states.. When a state has democrats from the Governor or Attorney General on down to the local Soros afflicted DA, then you have a real problem. In New York we see people get arrested for defending themselves while on the street murderers go free or are worshipped. Maybe that is why Florida has become so much richer and prosperous. Especially when the business people don’t have safe streets to walk down. Strangly they leave and take their trillions with them.
Maybe that is why Georgia is the new film capitol and Nashville explodes in Growth and Texas becomes a new space center.
The President wants to preserve and return more film making to the US. Gov Newsom thinks he means California but I would not bet on that since there are photogenic places anll over the country and the film industry in multicentric. There are plenty of scenes of beaches and the Sierra Madre mountains already in the can. You can reproduce downtown LA in Atlanta or Indianapolis with camera angles, blue screens and then people can walk how on safe streets.
When crime soars, business leaves, children are taken from you for “dead naming them”, then why stay in those locales.
The Attorney General of Michigan is a fool and she only propagates the lawlessness. Time to leave or move to the upper peninsula and blow up the bridge after you pass over it.
GEB,
Well said. But there is a ray of hope, In ‘Weird’ Austin, a Double Shot of Academic Counter-Revolution
https://realclearwire.com/articles/2025/05/07/in_weird_austin_a_double-shot_of_academic_counter-revolution_1108401.html
Jus dicere, et non jus dare.
Bet even you doesn’t know what it states.
The reason these things happen is that no one has any fear of Republicans. The Left will shoot you in the back and receive applause from other Leftists. If you give them the slightest offense, they will loot and burn your town, collect paychecks from their funders, and go home with a sense of job well done and not the least likelihood of consequences. They will steal from you and then brag about, to more applause. And of course they will scream about fictitious “death threats” and blame society’s ills on imaginary “white supremacists” and especially “fascists”, the Left’s favorite term for all non-Marxists. Republicans, on the other hand, will send you a strongly worded letter. The right is law-abiding and presents no threat, so they are easily ignored. Fortunately, the Left also eats their own. Hopefully they have a healthy appetite.
And they’re “protesting” also by refusing to procreate (incidentally, this jeopardizes the future of all the social programs they stridently demand be protected without their doing anything meaningful or responsible to do so themselves).
So, who’s having the babies? Mostly conservatives. Who will, hopefully, home school their children, raise independent-minded and competent children, who know how to think, value God’s blessings, their families, their nation and its founding documents and principles.
Which will mean that ultimately the leftists will have to reform themselves or go the way of dinosaurs. Either is okay with me.
I think one of the reasons why Democrats allowed the illegal invasion of tens of millions is because Medicare and Social Security are Ponzi schemes. They are Ponzis because money is confiscated from the working young to pay off the non-working old. Like all Ponzis, they require expanding the pool of new suckers. If Americans are not reproducing enough suckers, then young people have to be imported to keep the Ponzi from deflating.
Most Democrat policies: abortion; promoting birth control; feminism and female careerism; promoting and celebrating homosexuality and gender confusion; the environmental zealots running around falsely calling humans an invasive species who are killing the planet; are all anti-reproduction policies designed to prevent population expansion.
If the population is not expanding, the Ponzi collapses. Since Democrats oppose traditional family formation and reproduction, one temporary solution to sustain the Ponzi is to allow tens of millions of illegals to flood the system and then turn a blind eye to their use of fake and stolen SSNs. They pay into the system, but since the SSNs are stolen or fake, they will not be able to cash out. The politicians seem to believe that will delay the ultimate deflation of the Ponzi until after they are gone.
Soc sec and Medicare were well funded at one time and had such a surplus it was raided. I’m sorry I can’t recall which president….DJT was in the process of replacing the the stolen money.
Reagan famously said: If you want more of something, subsidize it; if you want less of something, tax it.
That basic principle certainly applies to our justice system. And consistent with The Ferguson Effect, if you want more crime, get rid of law enforcement. For those unlucky few that are caught, don’t prosecute.
what does your comment have to do with the article?
What’s your IQ? Does it have at least two digits?
You, single digits I assume.
“No-one is above the law”.
Oh, wait. . . . .
Wise old lawyer? That’s a non sequitur if ever there was one.
Oh, come, now. There must be one or two . . .
“Anonymous”?
No wonder.
All of these developments begin to look andsound eerily similar to those that took place in Germany in the late 1930s.
GY late 30’s? Your European history knowledge has earned you an F-
Darren, this comment board has become infected by a nasty, stupid, little troll. Could you get the Lamisil?
Diogenes-Diflucan is far more effective. Or you could go further back and use Amphotericin B which was effective and punitive.
Sort of like using an Ewald tube through the nose to lavage out a stomach in those that overdosed with oral medications. Brutal but effective.
Lamisil will at least prevent the Democrats from squealing like a pig. (squalene epoxidase inhibitor)
😀
GEB, whatever our little Lamisil monster hates, I’m for it 😉
“Cry ‘Havoc’!”