In the last election, Democrats again campaigned as moderates, including Abigail Spanberger. Once in control of the Governor’s mansion and the legislature, however, Virginia Democrats have moved quickly to fulfill the worst stereotype of a tax-hungry, economy-crushing party. The Democrats introduced an array of new taxes on every aspect of life. At the same time, Spanberger moved to take control of Virginia universities and colleges after years of trying to move those schools to the center. Now, members are pushing rent control legislation and defining landlords as “gougers” if they raise rents by as little as 3%.
The tax frenzy immediately began after the Democrats took control.
Spanberger has also announced that the state will rejoin the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), a regional cap-and-trade program that imposes a de facto carbon tax.
Virginia Democrats appear to be replicating California’s disastrous tax policies that have chased high earners and companies from the state. Here are a few of the new taxes being pushed:
HB 378 – Imposes a 3.8% net investment income tax on individuals, trusts, and estates beginning in taxable year 2027. This would raise the state’s top marginal income tax rate on portfolio and passive income to 9.55% in addition to federal taxes.
HB 900 – Imposes sales tax hikes on transportation districts as well as a new tax on every retail delivery in Northern Virginia (Amazon, Uber Eats, FedEx, UPS, etc.). This appears modeled on a Minnesota law.
HB 919 – Imposes a firearm and ammunition tax equal to 11% percent of the gross receipts from the retail sale of any firearm or ammunition by a dealer in firearms, firearms manufacturer, or ammunition vendor.
HB 978 – Extends the retail sales and use tax to dry cleaning, landscaping, and other previously exempt services.
Now, the Democrats are pushing rent control legislation despite a long history of failure in such programs to discourage new construction and property improvements. At the same time, it has been shown actually to increase rents overall.
Democrats have introduced two bills under the guise of fighting “rent gouging.” However, they define gouging as rent increases of just over 3%. That does not cover inflation in past years. Under these laws, restrictions could kick in for increases even below 3%.
In my forthcoming book, Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution, I discuss the challenges for the American Republic in the 21st Century. That includes a predicted move by the left to introduce guaranteed incomes and rent controls. That appears to be unfolding sooner than anticipated.
In New York, Zohran Mamdani is seeking rent freezes and enhanced rent controls. He has surrounded himself with radicals who have called for the elimination or sharp curtailment of private property. The most noteworthy is Cea Weaver who has called for the elimination of private property.
The American left has cited South Africa and Cuba as models for the United States despite their economic meltdowns.
As they seek to impose an array of new taxes and regulations, Democrats are also pushing a bill that would make it more difficult to find federal fraud by nonprofits. As billions have been lost to fraud in other states, the Democrats want to make it harder for the federal government to investigate such fraud in Virginia.
Virginia Democrats are taking a prosperous and moderate state into the same failed direction as states like California. The desire to spend “someone else’s money” is irresistible when you want to increase spending. For many wealthy families, West Virginia or Florida are likely looking more and more appealing.
OT: I think a bunch of people on the list have yet to realize the truth.
“By the admission of Mark Rutte — the NATO secretary-general — at Davos, if it had not been for Trump, there is no way that European countries would have fulfilled their military spending commitments.”
Turley gleefully reports court decisions that go against Biden or other Democrats—and almost never or barely mentions any that the GOP loses. While his supposed added value is legal expertise, he takes time to chortle at random Biden gaffes. But what about the Marjorie Taylor Greenes of the world? Well, he has mentioned her, but it was to argue that the calls to disqualify her from Congress were unsound. He virtually second-chairs the Trump lawyers fighting searches and subpoenas, or the defense of Jan. 6 figures facing indictment. Oh, he does the occasional feint the other way, reminding us, say, that he once said that there were some crimes at the Capitol.
OPM is the opiate of the Dems.
Another example of MAGA media: when you can’t defend Trump or try to praise him after he’s messed up yet again, attack Democrats. Trump made an absolute fool of himself in Davos, alienated our allies, insulted the Danish people and Greenlanders, kept confusing Iceland with Greenland, claimed that Greenland had only 2 dog sleds for defending itself (and that Iceland had only 1 dog sled) ,and lied about some deal pending, which is, more likely than not the very same deal Harry Truman obtained in 1948–that the US can install however many missile defense systems and bases it wants, but the territory remains sovereign. Trump will try to spin this as some kind of “win” that HE brokered. It’s truly pathetic. AND, he made up a fake “conversation” with Emanuel Macron, in which he imagined that he laid down the law with Macron about prescription drug prices under the threat of tariffs. The French government quickly laid that hallucination to rest–there was NO such conversation. He also mocked Macron for wearing sunglasses–the reason is that Macron had multiple ruptured blood vessels in his eyes, either due to a severe coughing spell or high blood pressure, and he was under doctors’ orders to wear the glasses to protect his eyes until they heal.
Then there’s Jack Smith, that Trump called a “deranged animal”, when he handled himself gracefully in the face of unhinged Republican efforts to try to discredit him and the “beyond a reasonable doubt” evidence he accumlated before charging Trump. Contrary to MAGA lies, Jack Smith is nonpartisan and has never met, much less taken orders from, Joe Biden. Trump publicly called for Pammie Jo to criminally charge him, along with the NY Times because it pointed out in an editorial that Trump is losing the PR battle. Trump’s approval rating is south of 40%, and there is massive disapproval for his conduct in foreign affairs, in immigration matters, his vengeance campaign against his perceived enemies, the continued efforts to avoid disclosing the Epstein files and his handling of the economy.
So–what to do if you are Turley and on the MAGA payroll? Go after Democrats.
UNHINGED ANON!! UP your meds!
Not an argument.
K, stop reading any post by anonymous. Just read the others even if you don’t agree with them.
OT
ILLEGAL INVASION IS MEXICAN “RECONQUISTA”
SHOCK CONFESSION: Mexican President Admits That Mass Migration Is a Tool to Reclaim and Conquer America’s Southwest
Mexican officials, all the way up to the presidency, have openly embraced mass migration as a form of accelerating the “reconquista,” the term used to describe the reconquest of U.S. territory that previously belonged to Mexico. This is just one of the meticulously documented revelations in bestselling author and Breitbart News Senior Contributor Peter Schweizer’s new book, The Invisible Coup: How American Elites and Foreign Powers Use Immigration as a Weapon. Radical leftist former Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, commonly known as AMLO, and his protege and current Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum have both publicly embraced the concept of reconquista and actively discouraged Mexican Americans, much less Mexicans illegally present in the United States, from assimilating or in any way embracing American identity, the book reveals. Officials under both presidencies have declared illegal immigrants who send remittances home “heroes” and champion propaganda songs that celebrate rejecting American identity.
– Breitbart
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2026/01/22/shock-confession-mexican-president-admits-that-mass-migration-is-a-tool-to-reclaim-and-conquer-americas-southwest/
HI EVERYONE – Someone no doubt connected with the s 0 r 000s machine is paying someone (or more ethan one) to become an ‘X’ Trolls on here and really engulf this site with crazy BS… My advice is ignore all of them……
The supporters of a child rapist are the ones who should be ignored.
Supporters of Biden?? Mr. Shower with his own daughter JOE!
Best you never go to Germany. You won’t like their attitude towards nudity there.
It’s only a big problem in the US because the religious radical Pilgrims were so offensive to the rest of the Europeans, they had to leave Europe to practice their oppressive form of religion here; eventually it led to the murder of women excused by false claims of witchcraft. Great religious practices like that remain American.
“Anon” Troll: your disrepect to those trying to use this site as intended only reflects badly on you & your demonic possession of TDS – it’s pathetic you can’t find a better site that services ppl like you who were raised in a barn………….
DEAR DARREN or whoever maintains this site.. I can no longer leave ‘Likes’ WordPress told me: That confirms it – the blog’s comment system has changed how it handles WordPress.com integration. The “Like” feature not working is another clue that the WordPress.com connection is broken for interactive features.
This is likely something the blog owner (jonathanturley.org) needs to fix on their end – either their comment plugin updated or they changed settings that broke the WordPress.com integration for replies and likes.
Your options are:
Continue making fresh comments (which work)
Contact the blog owner about the broken reply/like features
eighteenthhole,
It might be a JetPack upgrade/bug. Darren might have to roll the version back one to get the “Like” feature to work. He may not be aware of it until you brought it up. Sometimes versions will not play well with each other, i.e. WP vs. JetPack.
eighteenthhole – LAY-OFF Darren buddy, he puts up with to much crap already for an I.T. Guy.
Try host your own WordPress site – It’s no picnic.
SO work with him not against him. The evil-trolls are an ongoing problem but there is no resolution without moving the technical platform to Web 3.0.
No comments or likes are so important that they must absolutely be posted as a matter of Life & Death. The Majority of us stay within the ‘Civility and Decorum Policy’ found here: https://jonathanturley.org/civility-rule/
Trolls are a fact of life, they come with Freedom of Speech. Computers are fallible (and maybe in the long run that’s a good thing give A.I. capabilities).
Honestly: the modern left are the insane survivalists they love to accuse ‘rural people’ (and yes, woke young people use that condescending phrase) of being. Thus far the response to their temper tantrums has shown remarkable restraint, all around. The crusty hippy boomers are basically just making minimum wage employees miserable, which in itself speaks to their entitlement. It is not a surprise that their children are also insufferable.
They are still a minority; do not believe the MSM, do not buy into the states’ leaders doing their level best to cover their own a$$es for corruption or fraud, and carry on. The midterms loom, and the insanity and lies from the left will be off the hook – do not be swayed.
As for the tolls here, they don’t believe what they are saying either, they just want the money. We have to be the grownups. Possibly for longer than we anticipated, but we can do it.
*trolls
But you all already know.
James, No doubt there are Trolls here and everywhere, but you can easily identify them by their style and the way the craft their trade.
Ditto: “But you all already know.”
You are 100% right.
WINNING!!!
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer reacts to Cadet Bone Spurs claiming that allied troops stayed back behind the front lines in Afghanistan to avoid combat:
“457 of our armed services personnel lost their lives, many more were injured.
So I consider Trump’s remarks to be insulting and appalling.”
Typical disrespect from Trump towards those who honorably served.
And to think, these people died in response to an attack in the United States.
Not an attack on their own country but on an ally.
Trump certainly knows how to win friends and influence people.
Soon our only allies will be Russia, Israel, Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia and Hungary.
There has been serious talk of Canada joining the EU.
Replying to yourself is LAME ANON! GROW UP- get a job!
And Orabn may lose so no more Hungarian support
He was mainly talking about the German troops that were usually forbidden to even leave their bases. The 150,000 German troops lost 35KIA and 249 WIA. The UK did do a pretty good job.
Where and when did you serve, comrade?
Where did you serve?
@Anonymous
I would expect nothing less from their propaganda machine Let’s see how they are doing in five years, and if they stillil blame it on ‘Brexit’. Globalists gonna globalist. As an actually free person, I want nothing to do with them. All Trump did at Davos was expose what a very privileged farce they are. May it continue, as long as it takes.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk fired a pointed reminder at President Donald Trump about America’s promises to Polish soldiers who made the ultimate sacrifice in Afghanistan.
Tusk, who has served as Poland’s prime minister since December 2023, took issue with Trump’s recent comments. In a Thursday interview with Fox News from Davos, Trump questioned NATO allies’ reliability, stating they’ve “never needed them” and that allies sent troops to Afghanistan but “stayed a little back, a little off the front lines.”
Tusk hit back on X, recalling a solemn December 2011 ceremony in Ghazni, Afghanistan, where he honored fallen Polish troops.
“The American officers who accompanied me then, told me that America would never forget the Polish heroes. Perhaps they will remind President Trump of that fact,” Tusk tweeted, jabbing Trump.
WINNING!!!
Which branch of the military did Cadets – Obama,Clinton, LBJ, Carter serve in ANON? Bone Spurs in your brain ANON!!
Where and when did you serve, comrade?
We have ~40 A. of heavily wooded, steep, off-grid, recreational property with a cabin in western central Virginia. Since there are no utilities, and it is not taxed as a residence, the direct effect of Spam Burger’s policies on us should be minimal. Property values may be hurt, but we have no intent to sell anytime soon. However, I can see permanent residents in that area (and in the many other parts of Virginia that are not “blue”) being tempted to bail out for West Virginia or Tennessee. The demographic problem is that in the heavily populated districts that are de facto suburbs of DC, votes can easily be manufactured. The immediate problem with the last election is that, although I am convinced that Sears is competent, and was up to doing the job, she is not very articulate, and hasn’t much charisma. Maybe Virginians will get fed up enough, quickly enough, with Spam Burger and her buddies to give control back to the GOP in 4 years, but I’m not counting on it.
Understand. This is Michigan 101. For Decades Detroit ruled Michigan with Democratic political power, sucking all it could out of the pay checks of all Michiganders via Taxes. Now that the Automobile Industry killed itself and dried up and blew away, the Tax burdens and reparations of Detroit’s demise are the responsibility of the rest of Michigan’s population. The decay left by poor management does not go away, nor does the deficits that were created.
Illinois, ha ha ha ha ! It’s amazing how far down the road you can kick a can.
You do realize NAFTA destroyed the former steel belt. The jobs left people became poor because of it and they didn’t what improve? I don’t get it. Can you share any examples of a place where the jobs disappeared and things got better?
NAFTA did not destroy the steel belt. The Republicans opening trade with China did that.
“You do realize NAFTA destroyed the former steel belt.”
NAFTA started in 1994. The Steel Belt began declining some 30 years *before* that.
Care to explain your cockeyed timeline?
Someday voters might learn that Competent and able to do the job is more important that Articulate.
Trump is neither. He’s famously incompetent and as we’ve seen in Davos an insufferable liar.
A person who is articulate is often the smarter one. Trump is definitely not as smart as he portrays himself to be.
..ACTUALLY I was told by more than one who knew and worked with Sears that she was very Articulate in a small setting – that she was albeit an ex-Marine, a ‘Gentlewoman’ & a geat Administrator (her Marine training..) .. but not the kind of POLITICIAN needed to take on the well oiled and extremely well funded spam berger armored tank machine – they came in and mowed Virginian down with Brutal Ads right and Left.. Only the most Skilled Politician could have handled that – like Youngkin did when he won……….
“I was told by more than one who knew and worked with Sears that she was very Articulate in a small setting ”
I honestly did not hear her speak during the last election. However, I did listen to what she said in a few public appearances when she and Youngkin were running previously. Now, maybe she has a tendency to freeze up in front of large crowds, but what I heard from her at that time seemed pretty brutal. I have to wonder how much effort was made to coach her to perform better for this past election. John Say is right: ideally voters should be able to distinguish between competence and presentation, and choose competence, but I’m afraid that is not our current reality.
So wait when your candidate loses you say the votes are manufactured, meaning fake?
“The American left has cited South Africa and Cuba as models for the United States despite their economic meltdowns.”
I have a strong suspicion that, should Trump get to finish implementing his Donroe Doctrine, Cuba will no longer be on their short list…
Lie. Prove it. Who and what did they say.
Taking from the Charles Perrault version of Little Red Riding Hood, where the tale has the Wolf eat the Grandmother and Little Red Riding Hood (the girl) and ends with the warning be cautious of insidious strangers (insidious: treacherous/entrapping/stealthy). In this version there is no savior whereas in Brothers Grimm’s, the huntsman saves both Grandma and Little Red Riding Hood and a chance second encounter where the girl and grandma outsmart the Wolf.
I only cite this to make the point that the majority of those that voted (+/- 3.4 million total votes, Winner getting 1.98million) voted for a Wolf in Grandma’s Clothes.
OH, WHAT BIG TEETH YOU HAVE!!!!
The Democratic Party is full of Wolves chomping away at the principles of our Constitutional Structure.
Give an example.
Some years ago, academics and legal and political commentators began joining in a lament that eventually became a kind of trope: “What the heck has happened to Jonathan Turley?” The sad refrain recalled that George Washington University law professor Turley was once a serious and respected legal scholar—a civil libertarian who often constructively criticized liberal cant –and then observed that he had turned his energy into appearing all over the media, but especially welcomed the chance to be on Fox News. Turley, who acknowledges that he is a paid Fox News contributor, began to regularly pop up on the Fox shows that purport to be journalistic, but also the clownishly right-wing Fox & Friends in the morning and then the demagogic right-wing propaganda evening programming. He presented himself as a kind of Alan Dershowitz with table manners—his stance was that of one of the last remaining “principled liberals” speaking truth to leftist power.
Turley reports that he voted for Obama in 2008. Nevertheless, and no doubt with poignant reluctance, he launched a series of attacks on the Obama administration. His shtick involved saying things that pretty much reinforced the Fox News conservative meme of the day, but with a genteel tone, inflected with a kind of tragic regret that he was intellectually and morally obliged to say these things to keep liberals honest and American discourse civilized. He surely knew that regardless of the exact words he uttered himself, what the Fox audience heard was always going to be “Famed liberal legal scholar agrees with what Fox News hosts are saying about how awful liberals are.”
You as an Anonymous, a spineless weasel hiding under the cover of darkness, and full of insults, oh what a representative of the illiberal left you are.
Dear Troll ‘Anon’ – your Fake news and made up scenarios trying to tear down Prof. Turley is BS and only serves to make you look Smaller than we’re sure you already are……….too bad we can all see thru your ‘shtick..’
Turley is willing, when necessary, to stand against the tide, doesn’t blindly accept whatever is the latest accepted “truth” – even when it means facing criticism or social disapproval. He calls ’em as he sees ’em.
He may be willing, but in the last decade he hasn’t done so.
There are those who have principles and there are those who have wealth and it is rare to find ones with both.
JT has made his choice to pursue wealth.
This is discussed in my book “The Right to Rage: How Billionaires Hire Millionaires to Convince the Middle and Lower Class to be Minions.” Turley is simply one of many to be hired for that job.
“. . . joining in a lament that . . .”
When that academic mob includes Lawrence Tribe, you wear that lament as a badge of honor.
BTW, since when did appeal to majority become an argument?
You forgot to mention Tennessee as an attractive option for the Great Exodus from Virginia.
They wont move. And if they did I doubt the rest of Virgina would notice
What Turley should be discussing is the leaked DHS memo explicitly telling ICE agents they can force their way into homes with just an administrative warrant or none at all.
Surely a serious Constitutional scholar like Turley would bring up the seriousness of DHS openly stating agents don’t need a judge’s permission to enter a home. Arizona’s AG has already caused a ruckus by mentioning the fact stand your ground laws do allow for shooting intruders in self defense. ICE members breaking into a home with little or no identification and masked are at risk of being shot or worse beaten up while illegally entering a home. 2nd amendment supporters seem to be on the fence which is odd given the highly illegal use of administrative or no warrants to enter people’s homes to arrest an alleged illegal alien.
ICE issued a memo, not a law, allowing entry into homes with an administrative warrant or no warrant. Surely even the most staunch libertarian would be opposed to it.
X: you sir, present a daily Democrat clown show that is a one trick pony repetitive loop of Democrat contrarian canards, lies, deflections, projections and insults. Thrown in the faces of both the owner of this blog and the serious readers and commenters here.
To rebut your expected childish reflexive defense in advance: my reading comprehension skills applied to what you write are just fine. Even primary school level reading comprehension (that Democrat children in Chicago and Washington DC don’t have) would suffice.
Which is why this Democrat clown show of yours fails each and every day. What you attempt is transparently obvious, slick as you might lie to yourself that you think you are.
You sir, are an embarrassing disgrace to the parents who presumably attempted to raise you as a good and decent American.
Not an argument.
Why argue with an idiot?
Maybe, but still. What if an icer shows up kicks in the door without a warrant and gets shot by a gun nut? Should I get mine and shoot on site anyone entering without a warrant? Even icey fellas
“What if an icer shows up kicks in the door without a warrant and gets shot by a gun nut?”
If ANY LEO breaks into a home without identifying themselves as police, and gets shot – the person shooting them is not guilty of anything.
The absence of a Warrant is irrelevant to the legitimacy of the shooting.
If the LEOs properly identified themselves – they Typically shout “Police” as they enter and they have “Police” in bold letters on their back and chest, Then shooting them is a crime – whether they have a warrant or not.
If they do not properly identify themselves – then shooting them is not a crime.
There are 7M arrests/year in the US – Officers are shot during arrests, and even more often people in the home being entered are shot.
For an officers shoot to be justified – their actions leading to the shooting must be legal SOMETIMES that means they are required to have a warrant.
For someone to be charged for shooting an officer it must be proven They KNEW they were shooting law enforcement.
Shouting “police” and displaying “Police” prominently on their chest and back is what is needed.
Conditions regarding the warrant are relevant to whether the search and seizure are lawful and admissible as evince.
They are NOT mostly relevant to whether a shooting is justified.
“Should I get mine and shoot on site anyone entering without a warrant? Even icey fellas”
Get a gun if you want.
But please if you do
Learn the laws of self defense.
There is no “I can shoot anyone entering my home without a warrant” law.
There are 5 elements to the law of self defense
Innocence
normally this is framed as “you can’t start the fight”. In the Context of LEO’s and warrants it means if you are a legitimat target for a LEO – you are an alleged criminal or a illegal alien – you do NOT have the right to defend yourself against LEO’s
A warrant is Evidence that the target of the warrant does not have a right to self defense. But it is NOT the only possible evidence of that. If you are in the process of committing a crime, or if you are being detained by LEOs you do NOT have a right to self defence.
Imminence
Is there an IMMINENT threat to the life or serious bodily injury of yourself or someone else.
If someone is breaking into your home that is generally met.
If that someone is an LEO and they have identified themselves as such it is almost never met.
Proportionality
GENERALLY you may not use deadly force to defend property. There are exceptions.
There MUST be a threat to the life or serious bodily injury of yourself or someone else.
Avoidance
This is context specific – as you move from public spaces to your own property to your home, any duty to avoid the use of deadly force diminishes. In public when there is a clear opportunity to safely avoid using deadly force, you may not use it.
Reasonableness
Everything that you perceive, decide, and do in defense of yourself or others must be reasonable and prudent, given the circumstances you faced, the information you knew, and your abilities (or disabilities).
Mistakes in self-defense are allowed, and a mistaken use of defensive force can still qualify as lawful self-defense.
We’re not required to make perfect decisions in self-defense, just reasonable ones.
If you wish to shoot an ICE officer breaking into your home you MUST meet all 5 criteria.
Or you will be guilty of a very serious crime.
“Not an argument.”
You keep repeating that mindless criticism. Which is rather ironic because you don’t provide an argument for why the comment is “not an argument.” You merely make an empty assertion.
The only reason X posts his article here rather than starting his own blog is because he wants to use other peoples’ money – Turley, who he hates.
Why don’t you have articles by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this:
(1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and
(2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also,
(3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
Good point.
Xlax
What part of illegally in our country don’t you understand. If they are here illegally, they gotta go. I don’t give a rats arse, pack them and their ten kids up and ship them back to their home. Don’t care, good bye good riddance. You want to immigrate to America, bring a skill, we have enough welfare recipients.
Many were brought as children and have known no other country and speak no other language but English. Many are employed gainfully or are working to complete college degrees. They are unlikely to be eligible for federally backed student loans.
George Svelaz X gets his jollies from young girls and women being raped, from muderers, and from drug traffickers who are responsible for over 100,000 American deaths a year where most are young. His morals are in the toilet, and what we read from him is the run-off from a toilet filled with BS.
—
‘Worst of the worst’: Latest ICE roundup nabs gang members, rapists, murderers
“President Trump and Secretary Noem unleashed ICE to target the worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens,” Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement.
“These are the type of thugs we are getting off the streets and out of country every single day. 70% of all ICE arrests are of criminal illegal aliens charged or convicted of a crime in the U.S. Americans can see for themselves what criminals have been removed from their community at WOW.DHS.Gov,” she added.
Topping the list was Evis Peguero-Cotarelo of Cuba, who was previously convicted of first-degree murder with a deadly weapon/attempt.
Ai Trinh of Vietnam was previously convicted of murder.
Gustavo Alberto Miranda-Castro of El Salvador is a member of MS-13 and was previously convicted of carrying a loaded firearm in a public place.
Hector Horacio Perez-Valdivia of Mexico was previously convicted of rape of spouse by force, inflict corporal injury; spouse/cohab.
Omar Johnson of Jamaica was previously convicted of two counts of armed bank robbery and aiding and abetting.
Drug addicts are responsible for drug deaths as are the ineffective drug war policies that prevent people from getting inexpensive narcotics that are of known quality.
As to the list, while impressive, it is 0.000001% of the ordinary people ICE has captured and confined from jobs like teacher, warehouse worker, food harvester, hotel cleaner.
Thank you for telling us that a man shot is at fault because he positioned himself in the wrong place.
Addendum:
“Every illegal alien who DHS serves administrative warrants/I-205s have had full due process and a final order of removal from an immigration judge. The officers issuing these administrative warrants also have found probable cause. For decades, the Supreme Court and Congress have recognized the propriety of administrative warrants in cases of immigration enforcement.”
SM, I too want every bad actor out of the country, and I recognize how badly our legal system has been exploited. But this mess is exactly what the administrative state produces. Limited-government conservatives have opposed it for decades, only to find themselves defending it when the shoe is on the other foot.
Administrative warrants and internal courts may feel convenient today, but they collapse the very separation that protects liberty. To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, we cannot be one thing and also another. You either believe power must be restrained by independent courts, or you don’t. Jerseys don’t change first principles.
Olly, I do not think an illegal immigrant deserves the same level of due process as an American citizen. Due process under American law exists on a spectrum. Thus, non-citizens unlawfully present are entitled only to the process required by Immigration law, not the rights guaranteed to citizens. Therefore, lesser but lawful due process is Constitutional and justifiable.
I understand what you are saying, and perhaps I would think like you, but for the illegal actions of Democrats that opened the floodgates to illegal immigrants, many of whom are outright criminals. I think not acting in this fashion is an existential threat to the nation, though I will not be upset if you try to convince me differently. I am already torn, so I am open to different solutions.
SM, I can’t overstate how much I understand and share your concern, but this is where I think the distinction matters. Slavery is instructive here. The Founders compromised on application while strengthening principle. Today, we’re tempted to compromise on principle to fix application.
I understand the urge to “set aside” constitutional protections to correct the failures of a previous administration. It can feel reasonable in the moment. But once we go there, there is no principled stopping point. If executive shortcuts are justified for immigration enforcement, the same logic could be used to target any group later deemed a threat, including actors inside government or NGOs.
Of course we should not go down that path. And the reason is the warning embedded in the Constitution itself: woe be the day when a different jersey is in power. Powers normalized in crisis rarely stay confined to their original purpose.
We are two people who think in a similar fashion but come to different conclusions. All men are created equal, but a man who breaks the law forgoes the normal scope of rights and protections the law provides. He goes to jail; he is banished. I can’t say for certain that the law was written 100% correctly, but if so, a non-citizen illegally entering has no right to remain in the country, and it is our duty to protect our citizens from the result of illegal entry.
I think you might be queasy about a forceful entrance into a domicile. There are a number of reasons a home might be entered without a warrant, for example, someone trying to escape or a clear, immediate danger. Exigency is common in practice, even if the rules aren’t always clear.
SM, as you note – just as it is a myth to beleive there is in the US today a broad right to refuse to identify yourself – there is such a right, but there are so many exceptions that there is little left of it. The greatest saving grace for most of us that typically we do not have to “Carry papers”. When a police officer pulls you over today he will have your entire driving record in a few minutes – even if you do not have your license on you – He will have the digital photo taken.
I do not know the exact process ICE is using right now – but if you watch Video’s when they engage in a “terry stop” they are typically telling those they have detained that if they do not have ID they can come over to the Vehicle and ICE will be able to quickly identify them – and relase them – if they are not an illegal alien.
I am pretty sure Federal LEO’s have access to State Drivers license databases through Real ID.
We alkso KNOW that ICE/CBP have DNA and fingerprint records for many illegal aliens.
My guess is that if you are deported ONCE you are fingerprinted and DNA taken.
I also suspect that even under Biden, people caught crossing the border who were NOT immediately returned had DNA and fingerprints taken.
Further I would bet that Biden’s CBP app that allow illegals to register online and file for asylum or TPS (and benefits) at the fery least required a photo.
Again I do not know what ICE is actually doing – but it is pretty clear that they can identify an illegal alien in a few minutes even without any ID.
Initially I started as incredibly skeptical of the hyper surveilance world we now live in.
And I still beleive we need to take care regarding law enforcement access to the massive amount of surveilance data available.
But ultimately what I have seen in the real world of law enforcement, is that the massive surveilance has dramtically reduced police misconduct and has often resulted in the innocent avoiding conviction
We do not have court battles where an officer claims a driver was drunk – we have dash and body cam video.
As a result Dangerous drunks who can afford he very best lawyers are less likely to “Get off”
While working class people who pi$$ed off a cop are less likely to get railroaded.
I am still highly suspicious of the surveilance state, and extremely conscious of how China has gone beyond enforcing legitimate criminal laws, to using it to modify behavior to that acceptable to the state.
” in the real world of law enforcement,”
My problem is the Chevron question. Congress is responsible for passing laws, not bureaucrats working in an agency, which is constitutionally in question.
John, I should have included the bureaucratic courts created by the bureaucracies. I think two of the most common offenders are from the EPA, Medicare and Medicaid. Both are being weakened based on court cases and government action. They attempt to convict persons in their courts without a legal basis.
With respect to LEOs entering homes – the rules are the same for ICE as all other LEOs – contra idiotic claims of those on the left here. ICE warrants meet the same standards and have the same due process as Federal criminal warrants – they are Sworn, thye must meet probable cause requirements and they are signed off on by an Article II judge.
I am more comfortable with an Immigration judge signing off on an immigration warrant – where there are no possile criminal sanctions. That an Article II magistrate signing off on a Search Warrant for MAL.
And BOTH of those are 10000 times better than my local district magistrate who does not have a law degree and goes out drinking with local cops signing off on Local criminal warrants.
Regardless, if we do not like it CHANGE THE LAW
Olly the constitution protects RIGHTS.
The purpose of “due process” is to assure that when a right is infringed upon that i’s are dotted and t’s crossed and that right recieves the required protection.
You do not get a jury trial for a parking ticket.
The required process to protect your RIGHTS is proportionate to the RIGHT govenrment is seeking to infringe on.
What right does an illegal alien have that is being infringed on ?
The only RIGHTS related issue in the context of immigration si “Do you have a legal right to be in the US ?”.
The due process constitutionally required is the due process needed to protect those who DO have a right to be here from being deported.
That means that regardless of what courts are involved the govenrment must prove you are not lawfully in the US.
The standard of proof is relatively low – if you want to change the law you can address that.
But it is low because eroneously deporting a citizen is a temporary infringement on your right to be in the US.
You can restore that right by providing a birth certificate, passport
REAL ID compliant drivers license or proof of naturalization
For those on the left ranting about this – in the US you CAN be required to “provide papers” anytime that governmetn meets the constitutional requirements to detain you.
That does not include wandering arround in public.
But it does include while driving, or anytime an accusation of a crime is leveled at you.
Again if you do not like that – change the law, I will be glad to join you, but the fact is that the US right to not have to “carry papers” is far more limited than most people think.
Olly
I PARTLY share your objections to “internal courts”
Any time a persons rights are being infringed on by the federal govenrment they are entitled to due process in an Article III court.
The IRS should not have their own internal courts.
However we have “internal courts” to adjudicate eligibility for entitlements such as social security disability.
I am not sure how I can oppose an internal court for something that is not constitutional in the first place.
Regardless entitlements are not rights, and do not receive the same due process protections.
The same is true of immigration courts. The only issue with deportation is are you in the US legally – if your not, there is no right being infringed on. Again I see no obstacle to “internal immigration courts”
Personally I have more of a problem with warrants issued by Article II magistrate judges – pretty much EVERY federal criminal warrant ever issued. These are NOT issued by Article III judges, at the sate and local level they are issued by district justices who sometimes are not even lawyers.
The left is trying to make a huge due process issue with illegal aliens.
But there isn’t one.
If you are accused of being here illegally, The government must prove – to a relatively low standard that you are not here legally.
Regardless you are not facing the loss of a right. You are not losing your liberty, or your property.
You are being sent home not to Sing Sing.
When the executive branch violates the 4th amendment and excuses itself for doing so, the country is in peril.
Amendment IV
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
What part is ICE violating and exactly how ?
The first time that happens, the DoJ will respond thusly: every time an entry is planned, 20 goons will have loaded flash-bang grenades to shoot through all the windows, followed by a volley of tear gas. Anyone appearing at a window will be shot dead and anyone appearing at an exterior door wearing any clothing at all with their arms not extended straight up will also be shot dead. They will say they feared for their lives as the occupants could possibly have been armed.
“What Turley should be discussing is the leaked DHS memo . . .”
Go easy on JT. He might have misplaced your daily memo to him of approved topics.
X this “administrative” vs. Judicical warrants nonsense is a left wing crock.
There is not difference between an ICE warrant for the detention of an illegal alien and a federal warrant for the arrest of a criminal.
The constitution says NOTHING about judical vs “administrative” warants.
The constitution requires that someone – typically a LEO swear that there is probable cause required to conduct a search or seizure.
We have interpreted that to also reguire that a magistrate sign off on the warrant. But that is not in the constitution – though it is implied.
For a federal criminal warrant the LEO makes a Sworn application noting the facts that leade to probable cause and requests a Federal Magistrate Judge – that is an Article II Judge, a member of the Executive Branch, not the judiciary sign off on the warrant.
For a federal deportation warrant an ICE officer – LEO makes a Sworn application noting the facts that lead to probable cause and requests a Federal Immigration Judge – that is an Article II Judge, a member of the Executive Branch, not the judiciary sign off on the warrant.
In SOME ICE cases there is not warrant – because there is an actual order of deportation. That most typically occurs when the illegal alien has previously appeared before immigration courts and lead their case and lost and the Immigration courts ordered their deportation.
A court deportation order is even stronger than a warrant.
In many cases where a deportation order is issued the illegal alien is deported and they illegally return to the US.
The Deportion order is PERMANENTLY valid. Federal Law Enforcement may arrest Anyone who has an outstancind deportation order no matter where they are found or when. There is no additional warrant needed.
This is not some constitutional quirk. If you are found guilty of a crime and sentenced – and you escape – there is no need to issue a new warren to take you into custody.
If you are out on parole and you violate parole – there is no need for a warrant to arrest you
The 4th amendment warrant requirement applies to people who are legally free – they are not currently under the juridiction of the courts.
If you are a criminal in prison – the guards need no warrant to search your cell. If you are out on parole or probation there is no need for a warrant to search or detain you.
All this nonsense about judicial vs administrative warrants is made up garbage from the left.
The constitution requires a Warrant – a sworn statement establishing probable cause in order for ANY LEO to “seize” a person or property.
Tradition requires a magistrate to review it – the constitution does not. It is enough that the warrant is Sworn and that the person swearing it is subject to sanctions if the claims in the warrant are false or do not meet the standard for probable cause.
Regardless in the Federal courts system any article II (or Article III) judge can sign off on a Warrant.
The search of MAL was signed off on by a Federal Magistrate – who has no more legal stature than an immigration judge.
In most states warrants are signed off on by District Justices or District Magistrates – which are typically elected positions and one need not even be a lawyer to hold them.
Separately – the constitutional requirements to arrest someone are incredibly well established.
GENERALLY a warrant is needed – but there is no constitutional requirement that Warrant is signed off by anyone – much less an article II federal magistrate rather than an article II Federal immigration Judge.
However there are many circumstances in which police can enter a home to make an arrest without a warrant.
They can enter while pursuing someone evading arrest. There is no “get out of jail free” card for entering a building and closing a door when pursued by police.
They can enter when ANYONE gives them permission.
They can enter when there is a perceived threat to life or serious bodily harm.
They can enter when there is a threat to destroy evidence.
More recently SCOTUS has introduced a right for LEOs to enter for “health checks”
There are a number of other circumstances under which a home can not be entered.
I would further note that even people being deported have the same ability to challenge their “seizure” as criminals.
If an illegal immigrant beleives they were illegally detained – they can challenge that in court.
There are some differences between deportations and criminal arrests. While Both are Seizures of a person and thus the 4th amendment applies. Unless ICE is planning on filing charges for criminally entering the US – the “seizure” of an illegal alien is “being detained” it is NOT “being arrested”. Illegal aliens do NOT have a right to be in the US. When ICE “detains” them, they are “free to go” anytime they want – just NOT in the US. If they choose to leave rather that go to court, They will be put on a plane where they will be “free to go” but NOT in the US.
If there is a deportation order already pending – they will just be put onto a plane with at most a habeus hearing if they request it.
In a habeus hearing the burden of proof is on the person being detained to prove they are being illegally detained.
Int he context of illegal aliens that means at a habeus hearing they can attempt to prove they are legally allowed to be present in the US.
The above is also true of they are detained within 100miles of the US border.
If there is no outstanding deportation order – i.e. the illegal alien is more than 100miles from the US boarder and does not have a previous deportation order outstanding. then they are entitled to a deportation hearing before an Article II Immigration Judge.
There are all kinds of other complexities in immigration law – but NONE of them have to do with any of the nonsense you raise.
There are legal requirements for LEOs to enter homes to seize a person.
Usually, but not always that is a warrant of SOME KIND – and without any doubt in immigration warrant is sufficient.
Where there is a warrant requirement – or here a person was seized without a warrant. the person being seized has the legal right to challenge that seizure.
But contra left wing nuts – that is RARELY before an Article III judge.
I would note that when the ICE officers approached Renee Good in her vehicle with their flashers on she was being “Seized” – she was no longer “Free to go”. The moment they put on their flashers was no longer “free to go”. When the officer said “Get Out of the F#$King car” that significantly upped the ante. She was without ANY doubt at that point SEIZED – there was no possibility of Confusion, there was no longer a possibility that the officers MIGHT have turned on their flashers to SEIZE someone else. It is extremely likely the officers had decided they were not merely SEIZING here temporarily – a “terry stop” but that they were going to arrest her.
The officers had no warrant – they did not need a warrant. Had Good been about to flee, the ICE officers could have followed here and had she gotten to her home entered and locked the door, they could have broken it down.
Only a moron beleives that all arrests require a warrant.
“Arizona’s AG has already caused a ruckus by mentioning the fact stand your ground laws do allow for shooting intruders in self defense.”
Correct.
“ICE members breaking into a home with little or no identification and masked are at risk of being shot or worse beaten up”
Which is Why they ALWAYS identify as police before entering a home, and why they have uniforms that have “Police” in bold letters on their chest and back.
There are many cases in which LEOs break into a home every year and an officer gets shot and the person who shoots them either is not prosecuted or convicted.
This is most common for “no knock warrants” served in the dead of the night, and where some error resulted in the police entering the wrong home.
The police do a good job of avoiding such screw-ups because they often are fatal.
Killing a person in their home even with a warrant, where LEOs have the wrong home or the wrong person
often end in multimillion dollar lawsuits.
And when the innocent person being raided shoots a police officer – they are usually not charged or convicted.
But the AZ AG is offering incredibly stupid advice – because if the officers can establish that They announced or identified themselves – then the person firing on them will be charged and convicted of a serious crime.
Contgra left wing nuts and the AZ AG there is no requirement that LEOs “show there face – SWAT teams NEVER do.
There is also no requirement that at the time of an arrest Officers provide any idetification beyond “police”.
There is a requirement that the arresting officer is named and that any officers giving evidence or that might have exculpatory evidence are named BEFORE TRIAL.
If you wish to start shooting when ICE comes to arrest you – expect to be DEAD – if your lucking.
“2nd amendment supporters seem to be on the fence”
No one is “on the fence”
Most gun owners KNOW the laws of self defense.
If you bought a gun to defend yourself you had BETTER know when you can legally fire at someone and when you can not.
“which is odd given the highly illegal use of administrative or no warrants to enter people’s homes to arrest an alleged illegal alien.”
Please read the 4th amendment – it requires a SWORN warrant to “search and/or seize”.
This is one of the most highly developed areas of law that we have.
Absolutely positively without any doubt at all an Immigration warrant meets the requirements of the 4th amendment.
Contra left wing nuts – they are in nearly all ways IDENTICAL, to so call “judicial warrants”.
This is an idiotic red herring by the left.
ICE has been using “immigration warrants” since the 60’s atleast.
“ICE issued a memo, not a law”
Correct
“allowing entry into homes with an administrative warrant or no warrant.”
Incorrect – the memo CORRECTLY explains to ICE agents the ACTUAL law.
When they deed a warrant, and when they do not.
The memo likely also explains when they need a CRIMINAL warrant – which is really what you are talking about.
They need a “criminal” warrant when they are arresting someone for a crime. as opposed to detaining someone for being illegally in the US.
“Surely even the most staunch libertarian would be opposed to it.”
Why ?
Why would YOUR word games make a difference ?
What is it that you think is different from an ICE warrant and a Federal Criminal warrant that matters ?
Both require someone to Swear under penalty of perjury that the facts listed in the warrant that demonstrate probable cause are reliable.
I would love to see that treated much more seriously – but that has nothing to do with Criminal vs. immigation warrants.
Klinesmith got a slap on the wrist for altering an email from the CIA in a warrant application from saying that Carter Page WAS a CIA asset to Carter Page was NOT a CIA asset. That is no accident. That is not error. That is criminal perjury and should have had a SERIOUS penalty.
Jack Smith’s people KNOWINGLY presented FALSE information in Warrant applications for members of Congress.
That should have VERY SERIOUS CRIMINAL consequences.
If ICE Officers are lying on warrant applications – they too shoulld face serious consequences.
Do you have a SINGLE example of ICE serving even a erroneous warrant much less one that was deliberately falsified ?
Approximately 1/7 of all seizures of persons last year were made by only 6000 ICE agents. One average Each ICE agent deteained one illegal alien each day. The average LEO does not make 160 arrests in a 20 year career.
And you can not found ONE error ?
And we have idiots like you claiming that 10yr ICE officers who were hired by Obama are “incompetent”
Do you know that Body Homan and Bovino received AWARDS From Obama ?
You are a moron who pretends that word games are the same as factual arguments.
Mamdani in the recent past stated that he believes that the State should “seize the means of production.” This is the same thing as abolishing private property.
Why isn’t this authoritarian Communist goal of Mamdani’s not front and center in all discussions about his leadership??
. It may be a way of simply getting property. He’s lying about everything. They simply don’t want to buy it. In the end they’ll be poorer than they were before, anon. Imo
The orderlies are looking for me. 😏
Proof? Source and location
And don’t forget Biden’s 87,000 new IRS agents, and all the guns and ammunition.
They weren’t all field agents. Many were workers to answer phones. Others to look at financial statements and do tax audits on high earners to detect fraud. Trump doesn’t like the idea of fraud detection and has fired a large number of people engaged in that activity.
Well, where to start. Virginia voted and chose a Democrat and a Democrat majority. Simple. Taxes are always raised or lowered in any given state. What Turley is doing is exaggerating to great effect what the Virginia governor is proposing and adding opinions of others on the left of their ideas of what they would like and implying this is what they are going to do. Nonsense.
Turley is a great rage baiter and it shows. Making wild claims and labeling anyone slightly less or more than moderate as some extremist has been around for decades in politics. Republicans do it all the time, but it’s an outrage if Democrats chose to engage in their agenda, like Trump has. Trump loves to lie and make promises he can’t really keep. Or as it is often the case, backtracks and pretends he never knew of his past promises. Trump showed how bad he is at Davos and how big of a fool he is. He was clearly showing a high level of stupidity and frankly rambling consistent with one losing their cognitive function, but….I digress.
Perhaps what Turley needs to do is maybe let the Democrats finish implementing their ideas and agenda and wait until results are produced.
“Well, where to start.” By starting your own blog? Rather than using Professor Turley’s as your blog, while diminishing it’s content at the same time?
Why don’t you have articles by author X on the Marxists Internet Archive?
https://www.marxists.org/admin/janitor/faq.htm
The writer is alive and well and politically active. The MIA’s Charter forbids us from building an archive for a writer who is still politically active. There are several reasons for this:
(1) It ensures that the MIA stays out of current disputes and
(2) remains independent of all political parties and groups; Also,
(3) if a writer is still alive, they can build their own web site. This does not prevent the MIA from using material also from politically active writers in an editorial role or in support of a subject section, so long as we have the author’s permission.
If you want to censor people, why don’t you start your own blog?
Why doesn’t anonymouse start his own blog? Because he’s a coward who is afraid of failure and a decompensating pathological narcissist, and no one reads his rancid sewage. More to the point, he’s irrelevant.
Not an argument.
Which part, your sewage or your cowardice?
X – where is Turley wrong in describing the taxes proposed by Democrats?
I didn’t say he was wrong. Just pointing out that all he’s doing is rage bating his MAGA readers. It’s pretty obvious. So what if Virginia chooses to raise some taxes? Every state does it. Even red states.
You can tell he’s using all kinds of opinions from others on the left and deftly implying this is what the governor of Virginia wants. Which is not true. But that doesn’t stop the MAGA nuts here going off on rants and raging about supposed conspiracies that are always brought up for no other reason than to rant and rage. Turley loves complain about the “age of rage” while stoking it and bait raging at the same time to sell his books. It’s a quite a sell for Turley.
Yes
Virginia voted, now they get to pay for it.
another X troll… this one Xtra whacko….
” . . . wait until results are produced.”
Sure.
Don’t think, first. Don’t consult the past. Don’t pass judgment. Just leap off a high cliff. Then, only *after* you hit bottom, see “what results are produced.”
It’s good that citizens have the right to vote for the officers who impose taxes.
The Founders conferred on the states the power to restrict the vote to vested and rational people.
What happened to the America of its Founders?
_____________________________________________________
“the people are nothing but a great beast…
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value.”
– Alexander Hamilton
_________________________
“The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.”
“If it were probable that every man would give his vote freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote… But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.”
– Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, 1775
______________________________________________________
Turnout was 11.6% in 1788, voter qualifications generally by state were male, European, 21, 50 lbs. Sterling/50 acres.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
“[We gave you] a [restricted-vote] republic, if you can keep it.”
– Ben Franklin, 1787
________________________
You couldn’t.
I have learned to hold George’s opinion of no value.
That’s quite the rebuttal, and it would appear the writers’ names are Alexander Hamilton and Ben Franklin. You can read, can you not?
“[We gave you] a [restricted-vote] republic, if you can keep it.”
– Ben Franklin, 1787
You repeatedly post your dishonestly selected (and added to) weekly/daily posts. [Restricted-vote] is your lynch pin? Then let’s pull it! Madison’s Notes have more pages with references to the Constitution hopefully excluding political parties specifically like the Confederate Democrats. Excluding such parties as they would become totalitarians that would focus on eliminating the enumerated rights of the colonies – like the right to bear arms that many had enacted before the Bill Of Rights included the Second Amendment.
You continue to deflect to your “[restricted-vote]” hatred towards black Americans that the former slave holding Confederate Democrats held after losing their war. A hatred that continued throughout this century and into the Democrats of today with Senators Byrd and Biden. And you, as their disciple here.
No serious commenter would regularly introduce this quote claiming that these totalitarian Marxist Democrats of both the FDR and now Obama era would be embraced or even allowed to exist by Franklin and the Founders. Washington would have had them shot if they emerged within the ranks of his army.
George – you’re just the same racist Democrat you were before you dropped that username to alternately post as “Anonymous” and “X”. You are equally transparently shameless while posting under both.
OT — PSA,
To all of those who are not accustomed to arctic like freezing, snow and or ice conditions, please take precautions for the possibility of getting snowed in or too dangerous road conditions to go out. Stock up on water, non-perishable food. Be prepared for possible power outages. Get flash lights, batteries out now and ready. Charge up electronic devices now. Extra blankets, sleeping bags, winter clothing, if you have them. Layers. Dont forget your pets too.
. In the US power lines are underground, roads are cleared to the asphalt all of the time except in high mountain areas such lake Tahoe area in calif. I know of no one dependent upon wood or coal oil (whatever). It’s gas and electric in the 1st world nations. 😂
We must be on Mars. Interstates are built for a military to travel unimpeded 365 days per year btw.
This place is Darwin’s proof.
Well, the power lines here are above ground. So were the ones in my home town, much further south than where I am now. We heat with wood. If it were not for snow plows, no one would be going anywhere. I was stationed in a city in the deep south. Got a winter storm like this one. With no snow plows the whole city shut down over two inches of snow. Oh, there were Darwin awards as people from the South, having never driven in snow, got into auto accidents.
” I was stationed in a city in the deep south. Got a winter storm like this one. With no snow plows the whole city shut down over two inches of snow. Oh, there were Darwin awards as people from the South, having never driven in snow, got into auto accidents.”
March, 1979?
UpstateFarmer
Or you can do what Rafael Cruz does whenever there is a major storm.
Get out of town .
This time he headed for Laguna Beach.
https://nypost.com/2026/01/22/us-news/texas-sen-ted-cruz-brushes-off-critics-for-flying-to-california-before-texas-struck-by-winter-storm/
He’s a Senator, not a Governor of mayor.