Mateo

I think I heard him say “God Bless América” and then “o sea Chile, etc.” In other words, he was quite explicit he meant all América.

Reminder: DHS legislation that funds ICE at current levels without policy restrictions is in the Senate and needs 60 votes to pass. Deadline is next Friday.

This sure seems more like the tyranny the Constitution is supposed to protect against than forgiving student loans.

This video shows Donald Trump’s lawless federal agents again out of control. The Senate cannot vote to keep funding this. Every single agent complicit in these horrors should be put on trial at the state level for real accountability.

the entire contradiction at the heart of the last 15 years of dem dysfunction has been simultaneously insisting the only mechanism for punishing republican malfeasance is the vote while also adopting a posture of bipartisan comity with those very politicians voters are supposed to be disciplining.

Plus it’s all about the particulars of each case, Dems can pick the most egregious case(s) to impeach making THAT the story

But then why not let it play out at the Supreme Court first? It makes it clear who is trying to starve families and gives them a clear moment to cave with better messaging.

This allows Trump (via DOJ) to use taxpayer money to bribe eight GOP Senators. It's that simple, there's no other way to describe it.

And where's the compensation for people injured by the Trump admin's unlawful conduct through DHS & DOGE?

Take a bow, @schumer.senate.gov, you did this.

Nothing makes sense anymore, but how is this not a poison pill?

Spending Bill Would Pave Way for Senators to Sue Over Phone Searches

Here is a good reason to deny UC, the bill allows for payments from Trump DOJ to eight GOP senators worth millions:

www.nytimes.com/2025/11/10/u...

That video along with the actual data would be a perfect ad. It could end with Trump saying again that he doesn’t want to hear about affordability.

Didn’t meant to give the wrong impression. I think this is the stuff authoritarian nightmares are made of and no one will be safe. I’m originally from Venezuela so I know.

Not how it’s supposed to work or worked for decades.

You still need reasonable suspicion for the stop, ie, some reason to believe the person in an undocumented immigrant.

The Supreme Court suggested that being Latino in LA is enough.

Sorry, one last thought, (I think we mostly agree this is all ridiculous), but many US citizens do not have Real ID because they do not drive or do air travel, particularly in big cities.

Needless to say but there are millions of Latino US citizens in LA.

Not sure it completely follows from logic. We can debate the merits of requiring immigrants to carry their immigration papers, typically a passport with a visa or green card. I’m sure the US is not alone on that.

The issue is probable cause for a Kavanaugh stop is mostly Latino-looking in LA.

I think many do, but they over-learned the “lessons of 2024” as people do not vote to save democracy. That is in my opinion the wrong lesson from 2024, but more importantly, the prospect of an authoritarian takeover is very different from an actual authoritarian regime.

Chris Murphy: "This is a country that's falling apart because Trump is in the middle of an authoritarian takeover. We're not on the verge of an authoritarian takeover. We're in the middle of it ... I have no moral obligation to vote for a budget that literally funds the destruction of our democracy"

Stress-Free Eric Adams Spends Day Bribing Pigeons In Central Park

Stress-Free Eric Adams Spends Day Bribing Pigeons In Central Park

Today's article is about a form of bad-faith speech somewhat akin to bullshit, which I'm calling (because why not) wank. I don't quite think I've focused the ideas down as much as I can, but I think it says some interesting things regardless:

Yup, it wouldn’t surprise me if this and the Federal Reserve are the two issues Trump loses at SCOTUS.

Primarily inflation. Also, and relatedly, a justified sense that what was delivered did not have sufficient or immediate impact on people’s everyday life, meaning runaway costs of healthcare, child care, elder care, education, and housing.

But did he do it “within the rules of the game” if he supported and organized towards authoritarianism, inequality, and transgressing basic democratic norms?

Passively supporting political violence and the destruction of democratic institutions is not quite playing within the rules.

Ideally, and poverty was reduced a great deal during that time, which is an undeniably good thing.

There was also a lot of corruption and crime though and very little investment in long term prosperity. Once oil prices fell, hunger, mass poverty, and mass exodus of Venezuelans took place.

The authoritarian aesthetic parallels between Trump and Chavez are many though.

Yeah, that’s why it is imperfect. He later lost the 2007 referendum and elections after that were not entirely free. No question that he was very popular when oil prices were high and the government spent a lot in social programs.

In my book, we already crossed that rubicon when congress, the courts, federal agencies, and the media failed to fight back against the power grabs. Elections under such conditions are rarely fair and free.

Imperfect analogy, but as a Venezuelan, Maduro and to a lesser extent Chavez come to mind.

I agree but it goes beyond his base. He has bent institutions and the media to his will as well.

I often go back to an article in 2016 that explained how Trump was wrestling while other politicians were boxing based on Barthes’ World of Wrestling essay: web.mit.edu/21l.432/www/...