Before going on to the outrages du jour, please take a look at This is why Kamala Harris really lost by Eric Levitz at Vox.
Executive Summary: A majority of the people who voted don’t know shit from Shinola.
The article is based on an analysis by Blue Rose Research. “Few pollsters boast a larger data set than Blue Rose — the company conducted 26 million voter interviews in 2024. And the firm’s leader, David Shor, might be the most influential data scientist in the Democratic Party.” It says that voters who were most closely engaged with news and politics swung toward Democrats. And voters who were least engaged swung overwhelmingly against Democrats. Unfortunately, there were more people in the second group.
David Shor said, “People have a lot of complaints about how the mainstream media covered things. But I think it’s important to note that the people who watch the news the most actually became more Democratic. And the problem was basically this large group of people who really don’t follow the news at all becoming more conservative.”
Up to that point, I was not at all surprised. I was also not surprised that the non-engaged voters are mostly being influenced by stuff they view on social media. What did surprise me is that the biggest swing to the right wasn’t from users of X but from users of TikTok. At Lawyers, Guns, and Money, Paul Campos points out a lot of other things in the data that point to a hugely ignorant electorate, IMO.
Now on to the Alien Enemies Act deportations. Malcolm Ferguson is reporting at The New Republic that the “criminals” Trump wants to warehouse in prisons in El Salvador are any migrant men with tattoos.
“These are criminals, many many criminals … murderers, drug dealers at the highest level, drug lords. People from mental institutions. That’s an invasion,” Trump said in reference to the deportees.
In reality, immigration officials appear to be simply detaining any Latino men with tattoos.
“The men sent to do hard labor in a Salvadoran prison with no due process include: A tattoo artist seeking asylum who entered legally, a teen who got a tattoo in Dallas because he thought it looked cool, a 26-year-old whose tattoos his wife says are unrelated to a gang,” the American Immigration Council’s Aaron Reichlin-Melnick wrote on X.
“Our [Immigrant Defenders Law Center] client fled Venezuela last year & came to US to seek asylum. He has a strong claim. He was detained upon entry because ICE alleged his tattoos are gang related. They are absolutely not,” immigration lawyer Lindsay Toczylowski wrote on Bluesky. “Our client worked in the arts in Venezuela. He is LGBTQ. His tattoos are benign. But ICE submitted photos of his tattoos as evidence he is Tren de Aragua. His @ImmDef attorney planned to present evidence he is not. But never got the chance because our client has been disappeared.”
Aguilera Agüero, one of the people detained and deported, has a tattoo that reads “Real until death” in Spanish, a line from Puerto Rican reggaeton star and Trump supporter Anuel AA. Agüero’s family denies all ties to Tren de Aragua.
“People have started identifying some of the 238 Venezuelan migrants deported to Bukele’s torture dungeons by the U.S. fascist regime. The brother of one of them posted that his relative is a barber with no criminal record and no links to any criminal organisations,” another account wrote on X.
“This Radical Left Lunatic of a Judge, a troublemaker and agitator who was sadly appointed by Barack Hussein Obama, was not elected President – He didn’t WIN the popular VOTE (by a lot!), he didn’t WIN ALL SEVEN SWING STATES, he didn’t WIN 2,750 to 525 Counties, HE DIDN’T WIN ANYTHING!” Trump wrote on Truth Social. …… “This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges’ I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!! WE DON’T WANT VICIOUS, VIOLENT, AND DEMENTED CRIMINALS, MANY OF THEM DERANGED MURDERERS, IN OUR COUNTRY. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!” the president wrote.
And just like that, members of the House GOP filed articles of impeachment against U.S. District Judge James Boasberg. Chief Justice John Roberts issued a gentle rebuke. “For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose,” Roberts said. Maybe Roberts is getting a little nervous about the Frankenstein monster he helped create.
Judge Boasberg asked for some answers from the DoJ by noon today. The DoJ refused to give all the requested answers. So now they’ve got until noon Wednesday. And there is a hearing scheduled for Friday.
Meanwhile, a judge has ruled that Musk’s deconstruction of USAID was unconstitutional, and it should all be put back.
Also meanwhile, Musk’s Lost Boys have a new tool to gain entry to agencies they want to destroy, and the tool involves guns. See Josh Marshall, here and here.
Yesterday I wrote that DoD web pages about the Navajo Code Talkers have been taken down. Today we learn that the Native American marine who was one of the Iwo Jima flag-raisers, Ira Hayes, also has also been deleted from the DoD site.
I am aware of a brokerage in lower Manhattan. In the nineties their most productive office was usually the headquarters office in Manhattan. When it wasn't it was the Caracas office. The amount of capital flight was staggering. These Venezuelan immigrants are simply following the money.
Thanks. I was blocked from that article. Your summary offers plenty. The invocation of that act is questionable as the feared gang members overthrew the prison staff in Venezuela and later escaped. There was no involvement by the Venezuelan govt so calling it a wartime invasion doesn't hold water.
There's less than 1,000 of that gang in the US before this deportation.
The lack of due process is a fundamental part of the Trump/Musk alliance. They've yet to provide proof of any waste and/or fraud in the federal govt, just as they refuse to provide proof about the people deported. And they lie about what they've cut and how much money's being saved.
And they're being forced to rehire thousands that were illegally fired or laid off, which hardly seems 'efficient' at all.
Nice touch that you called Roberts rebuke 'soft', unlike the mainstream media. When I read his words, it sounded like he was guiding Trump/Musk to use legal means, more than chiding them. It's like Roberts' soft ethics rules that lack all enforcement despite ample evidence that some billionaires are definitely gaining power to direct the federal courts due to their 'gifts' to two justices.
I was able to get to the Vox article [without subscribing] by clicking the (small) button to go their Homepage, then clicking through to the article there. Long article, well worth the reading time – partly for what they don't say!
When talking to a fringe MAGAt, the response to defend dismantling DEI is that it's a commitment to true equality with no favoritism based on gender, religion, national origin or complexion. But it's only minorities that are being purged. If all are treated equally, why are minorities the sole targets?
Robert's rebuke is a warning that the favoritism of the USSC has limits. Where those limits are, I'm not sure. But if Trump can harass and intimidate the judiciary into the level of cowardice we see in the GOP in Congress, democracy is toast. But Roberts and Barret have sided with the sane three on several occasions. My prediction is that they will not side with Trump if/when he declares martial law and calls out the military. My prediction is that the USSC won't allow Trump to cancel elections. And my prediction is that without the legitimacy of a favorable ruling, the military won't move to prevent elections. How many individuals in the FBI will risk prison by participating in illegal election interference … we may find out.
I think Roberts would prefer that Trump not put the USSC in the position of criticizing a coup attempt. I think Roberts would give Trump a lot of latitude in the use of force but putting the USSC stamp of approval on mass murder of non-violent liberal protesters might be a bridge too far. We may find out.
I think for Trump to lock up his high-profile critics may be a bridge too far. Roberts was way outa line with the highly delayed decision that prevented a trial of Trump for J6 in 2024. Somehow, I think Roberts thought that a criminal prosecution in an election year would give Democrats an unfair advantage. But Trump was being prosecuted for crimes he committed. Still, I think Roberts (and Barret) won't provide cover for the arrest and prosecution of Liz Cheney with no evidence of a crime. We may find out.
I think Musk wants to take down Social Security and the VA as much as he can get away with. I think this will turn a lot of Trump's base against him, vocally and emphatically. To the degree that Trump has to deliver someone's head to the mob (rhetorically speaking), it may be Musk if he's been ignoring Trump's direction. (And I expect Musk has frequently not told Trump specifics and will continue to reject attempts to put limits on him and the Muskrats.) Musk wants the power and not the politics but Trump won't accept being a figurehead for Musk's power grab when it threatens the legacy of Trump The Great. I'd like to find out. Seeing Trump and Musk at each other's throats would be Karma of the highest order.
To Magats, "all jobs were dumbed down for minorities and women, depriving we men of the good jobs and great status we would have had except for government forcing companies to give away great jobs to the undeserving!"
That's actually been Republican Party doctrine for years, now, but, it was only shouted out at CPAC. Now, it's all-but part of the discourse.
"John Roberts issued a gentle rebuke"
It was gentle but it was a bit of a shot across the bow and the fact that he did it the same day as Stump's temper tantrum says something. I wonder if Roberts lays awake at night and regrets, the vote on citizens united. No Citizens United no Stump!
You assume that zealots have human aspects like regret.
"They were careless people, Don and John – they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made."
Rewritten for the times.
I am working up a revision of the swearing in ceremony for our new age. The old one is seemingly obsolete.
I (insert name here) do swear/affirm (only heathens affirm) to tell you what the chief executive contends is his reality and only what the chief executive ascribes to as reality.
At this point I am not sure if a salute (Musk style) is required toward a picture or statue of the chief executive need be required. Please advise.
As to what is defined legally as perjury will need some work to accommodate the new ceremonial.
So much to update and the rush is on. Then off to redact all the nosegay definitions from the dictionary. So much to do so little time.
Gotta have something about owning the libs at all costs.
When are they going to learn that costs more than they could even dream of scamming up.
What a brouhaha on CNBC this morning with Rick Santelli playing defense for the Elon and his budget cutting. Neither Rick nor Joe Kernen would agree that the Congress was the branch of government assigned to spending or that budget cutting should be done according to the Constitution and in agreement with the courts. A lot of loudness, interruptions, and whataboutisms. Civility was hard to find. Steve Liesman tried his best to preserve sanity and decorum, while showing a spine against a lot of nonsense. Perhaps Rick and Joe need to work on the Faux business channel were telling lies and poor ethics if not illegalities seem to be expected of its audience regarding its broadcasters.