19 Comments
⭠ Return to thread

So this country is now being run by a bunch of damn nazis. Where are the Democrats? Why aren't they stepping up, speaking out, calling out these nazi scum, and taking action to resist/obstruct Trump in every way possible? We know the media is complicit in all of this because 90+% of the media is owned by conservatives. I want to know why our elected Democratic officials aren't fighting this stuff 24/7. Why should we vote for them if they aren't going to protect us from Trump's stormtroopers?

Expand full comment

There are multiple democrat-led lawsuits in the court system right now. Dem AGs, among others are suing. Many elected officials are speaking out and demonstrating - eg, Eliz Warren, Jaime Raskin, Ron Wyden, AOC, Deputy Mayors in NYC, and others. We Dems need to initiate and push for a general strike. In the meantime, please buy nothing on Feb 28, "economic blackout" day, except for necessary food and emergency items (https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?hsimp=yhs-076&hspart=infospace&type=ud-c-us--s-p-bkivufdg--exp-none--subid-fk6j226i&p=feb%2028+economic+blackout. )

Expand full comment

Yeh Judith in that regard the great black hope Tanya Chutkins crumbled. She is unwilling to bar Musk from meddling in Federal Agencies: https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/17/judge-chutkan-musk-lawsuit-hearing-00204590

Nows the time for a New book, Profiles in Cowardice.

Expand full comment

Just means she'll need a fact finding hearing. The standard for a TRO is a party must convince the judge that they will suffer immediate irreparable injury unless the order is issued. If the judge is convinced that a temporary restraining order is necessary, she may issue the order immediately, without informing the other parties and without holding a hearing. Requires "clear and convincing evidence" of harm.

To seek a permanent injunction, a plaintiff must pass the four-step test: (1) that the plaintiff has suffered an irreparable injury; (2) that remedies available at law, such as monetary damages, are inadequate to compensate for the injury; (3) that the remedy in equity is warranted upon consideration of the balance ...

Need to see what affidavits were attached.

Expand full comment

Daniel, you are a lawyer, a retired jurist in your own right, an institutionalist, and think in terms of he law and precedent.

But we are faced with an unprecedented scoff law and a supreme court that supports the scoff law..

All is temporary until decided by SCOTUS, and we have the history of this Supreme Court to forecast their decisions.

I doubt that there is a betting parlay in Vegas featuring SCOTUS, because only a fool would vote for the defendant. If SCOTUS agees with the lower court ruling ,which is conservative, they refuse to take the case, if it is a case that they wish to set as rock solid precedent like Presidental Immunity, they will take the case.

Expand full comment

Baloney. As usual the media dolesn't understand the procedure. Without evidence the judge lacked discretion.

Expand full comment

Are you saying that Tanya Chutkan lacked discretion. Here I thought that a judge was all about discretion. If they don't have discretion then we don't need judges just automatons, AI.

Expand full comment

It's not a done deal. The judge is open to the plaintiffs returning with facts that will lead to a ruling against Musk.

Expand full comment

I am only a layman, but so far she has ruled in favor of the plaintiff's, to me that is a tell. She didn't have to, and should not

Expand full comment

1. Discretion -- "clear and convincing" is not the same as "preponderence." Judges can't rule if the plaintiffs don't bring actual evidence. Can't grant a TRO on the pleadings. In antideluvian time, the lawyers had to verrify, under oath, the pleadings. Who are the actual witnesses?

2. In the actiual case on the merits she has to take testimopny and give both sides due process before she rules.

Expand full comment

Why do you think Trump and Musk want to kill MSNBC? Because it’s liberal, what doesn’t make sense is why its viewership has dropped off so precariously and why Trump and Musk want to 1. Shut it down or2. Buy it and turn it into Fox 2! I only get my political news from MSNBC and Trump hates it and wants it gone because it tells the truth about him. I don’t understand why its viewership has dropped off so much, it doesn’t make sense. I never watch Fox , I turned it on once and was so shocked by the lies I couldn’t believe they were allowed to air.

Expand full comment

Many of my liberal friends and family have tuned out. What’s discussed on MSNBC is too painful for them to watch. Unfortunately, that’s exactly what trump and his Nazis want, so they can do as they please. So tune in, get engaged, and fight back.

Expand full comment

I have the same reaction here. I could not believe how many well-educated people I know watched Fox News over the years, like my brother-in-law, who was a Professor of Chemistry but gradually slipped into the abyss of lies. Like Trump's wholesale lies that he is not embarrassed or ashamed as a leader, he keeps on spewing out lies. My husband claimed to be far left but only watched the TV news channels, and yes, he read but not widely enough to escape the embrace of the liberal media that has led us down the path of culture wars.

Expand full comment

A number of them are. AOC, Crockett, Murphy, Sanders, Stansberry, Gallego, Pritzker, Jaypal, and a number of others. I get at least one email a day from Jeffries, and I am an Independent. But why should you vote for them? Well, who else is there, duh? No political philosophy can EVER match, to a tee, every individual value of humans. I have mostly voted against politicos most of my life, but not always. I helped start a green party in my state. It essentially went nowhere, and it is a minority/majority state that votes D. 'murkans are fast becoming a zombie culture. Most young persons cannot name 20 percent of necessary facts on most any subject. Most older folks are cynical, uninformed, stressed out, dumbed down, drugged UP UP UP, Way malnourished, gaslighted, extorted and manipulated, and drowned in psychologically overwhelming propaganda. What have you done in the last 15 years to tamp this junk down?

Expand full comment

I am with you on all but Jeffries, His number one contributor is AIPAC, aside from that he is a coward. He stood in from of the mikes and complained that he could do nothing because he doesn't have leverage.

Yes he does it is called Nay and obstructionism, even if it means bringing the government to a halt.

Expand full comment

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. At AIPAC there's a Musk problem.

Expand full comment

Thanks for the update. Let us face embarrassing human facts - in the brain of humans, there is no perfect logic. Overarching power, such as Pelosi or rumpfk or Anyone with leverage, humans mostly fish or cut bait. I have seen this with Jeffries, but still not a bad man. I do not defend him. Now is not the time for half-efforts or calculations of risk vs. benefit. But we should comprehend what the House and Senate have morphed into - click bait and hustle. A massive issue with Constitution, which allows SC to make decisions about EVERYTHING. WHaTTT??????????????????????

The hugest, of many sins of said Constitution is the god-like attitude of SCOTUS. AT the time, divined wisdom from ON HIGH. Where is THAT?????

All of this is ill usion/delusion. We live in Kabuki theatre. The Cartesian mind must be destroyed, violently and completely, if possible. We have to stop thinking like we live inside some mind hive. WE ARE a hive, not inside or obedient to IT. There are 'things' greater than self, but it is NOT another MAGA self. Get it together. Grow up, get a life while there is one left to get. No insults or put downs intended.

Expand full comment

The god like attitude towards SCOTUS is manufactured by the controlling money powers.

He was a vile racist and murder but Andrew Jackson was right. The Supreme court can only rule, it has not the means to back up it's ruling and a law without enforcement is not a law, proof is the scofflaw whom sits in the Offal Office. Courts rule and he ignores the courts.

Maybe you are in a hive, you can only speak for yourself, and from what I have seen in 85 years, you have a lot of company. I know the hive mind, I know how to interact with it, how to pull out a screen of honey without being stung, but I am not of a hive.

Expand full comment

Useless Hakeem Jeffries whining that they can't do anyting because they have no leverage.

They certainly do, It is called Nay. And feckless Chuck Schumer crawls out of his shell, and bleats before a microphone, while for his whoe career he has enabled the fascists with his political cowardice.

Expand full comment