Talk about whatever you like in the comments.And please support the Althouse blog by doing your Amazon shopping going in through the Althouse Amazon link.
Agosto 6, 2025
Sunrise — 5:39.
Talk about whatever you like in the comments.And please support the Althouse blog by doing your Amazon shopping going in through the Althouse Amazon link.
Mga Post
50 komento:
…unfortunately doesn’t look like the smoke is clearing. It was a perfect day in Lake Tahoe today. Zephyr wind was down and the lake was quite calm. Hundreds of kayaks, paddle boards and foils out and about..
I just listened to RFK Jr's Public Service Announcement regarding mRNA vaccines.
Clear, concise, to the point, and providing a path for individuals to explore it further. I feel sure more will be coming out on this. What a good choice for Trump to have made, and he's doing constructive things, not taking a scorched earth approach. But I'm also hoping that the fish-in-a-barrel business environment enjoyed by the pharmaceutical companies won't be around too much longer..
The streets where I live.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ItoVAinNp0&t=309s
You can see our piso (flat) across the river on some shots.
Video was made on a nice sunny day, but that is not typical. The climate here is very like Seattle or Vancouver, but rainier.
This (Casco Viejo) is the core of the pintxo (Basque Tapas) zone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFMjAhKeHsI&t=517s
The rather excited narrator aside, Bilbao is not a tourist destination at all. The nightlife in the video is certainly mainly locals, or suburbanites in town Saturday night. Also a good reason not to live in the actual Casco Viejo, street noise.
Me, I'm no longer up to the wine and pintxos lifestyle.
This summer was blazing hot in June and early July with highs over 100, but cooled to lows around 65 degrees. In August!
Before global warming mania, no one pretended that they could predict the weather or predict a woman's emotions. Today, every month is the "hottest ever" even when it's not, and women's emotions are mostly predictable as rage or paranoia.
Adam Schiff is now under investigation for bank fraud, mortgage fraud and wire fraud.
He's due to not be arrested next week.
Because he's above the law.
Isn't Schiff the guy who publicly insisted many times that there was direct proof of Trump's Russian collusion (which nobody else has ever seen)? If anyone deserves to twist in the wind...
What's important for people to realize this week is that the FBI has something they call "burn bags."
They put evidence in there. To destroy the evidence. You see, they put the burn bags in a furnace and that way, they destroy the evidence.
Remember that the next time you're on a jury and some FBI guy is testilying.
The air was unhealthy for sensitive people when we went out this morning and sensitive is defined to include those over 65 so it was like smoking a couple cigarettes.
"... it was like smoking a couple cigarettes."
A pack of smokes is now $14 in Boston ($7 if you buy the 'imported' Marlboro cigarettes from the mob guy driving the food wagon down the construction site).
You're getting this for free and whining about it?
When I bought a 2006 Mustang GT, I could never imagine that she would be the most reliable and long-lived vehicle I’d ever own. I’ve lived 9 addresses since. 175k miles on the original spark plugs. No tune ups, nothing but fluids, tires, wiper blades, batteries, filters, belts, and bulbs. I honestly believe I could get another 100k out of her, these 4.6 3Vs are impossible to kill, but because of utility, I let her go.
Up until now, every car and truck I’ve ever owned has been blue. If I’ve learned anything recently, it’s to be like George, and do the opposite! So it’s a Hyundai Santa Cruz XRT in Canyon Red (Orange?) I hear bad things about Hyundai engines lately, although the older V6s are anecdotally very reliable. The XRT employs a 2.5 turbo with impressive HP and torque.
If not for the 10 year warranty, I might have gone in a different direction.
I also closed on a 2/2 condo this week, in the same neighborhood of the house I sold. The house sale was a nightmare. I moved out 18 months ago and had to file a forced partition lawsuit to get it done. Probably lost $300k on the distressed sale and more on legal expenses, but I had no choice. I was held hostage.
It’s all good now, and getting better. I met a lovely woman on the beach about a year ago while conducting my evening sunset photo ritual, and we’re getting along quite well.
BREAKING: "No bag policy" has been implemented for tonight's WNBA game in an attempt to crack down on dildo throwers.
Dildo? - dang they caught me
I used to ride this path in the 1990- early 2000's.
It was mostly pristine.
Now that Democrats run the shit show - it looks like this.
More: When Democrats run the shit show.
(Colorado - In decline)
btw- I define fascism as the massive oppressive punitive democratic regulatory state.
I tried to read the Glamour piece about the dildo throwing ... it only took five 'graphs before the author started blaming Republican men.
Why do so many un-educated idiots like Mamdamni?
The BBC and CNN can suck it.
"BBC and CNN are in full panic mode—after one of their key Gaza sources, Islamic Jihad spokesperson Tariq Salami, was captured and interrogated by Israeli forces.
During the interrogation, Tariq openly confesses what the media won’t let the audience to know:
Western journalists agreed to Hamas’ propaganda terms for covering the war.
According to him, here’s how it works:
•When Hamas rockets hit Gaza hospitals or schools, blame Israel.
•When Hamas fires from hospitals or hides in schools, Israel isn’t allowed to strike—because “war crimes.”
•When Palestinians commit terror, it’s justified—because Israel exists.
Yes, you read that right:
They blame Israel not just for defending itself, but for simply existing.
Tariq also confirmed that the explosion at Al-Ma’madani Hospital was caused by an Islamic Jihad rocket that fell short—but Hamas and the media agreed in advance to blame Israel no matter what.
This isn’t journalism.
It’s a coordinated disinformation campaign—between Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Western media outlets.
And they’re STILL doing it."
@Peachy (10:29), check the definition of “free stuff.”
For the better part of 20 years, Senator John Cornyn has spent his time attacking Democrats and judges. At the behest of our revenge president, he has submitted legislation aimed specifically at NY AG Tish James who won case against Donald Trump for ripping off lenders. Trump has not paid the $500 million settlement.
So Cornyn is introducing the LETITIA Act to increase penalties for public officials who commit financial fraud because Trump's DOJ is investigating a charge of home mortgage fraud against James and Senator Adam Schiff.
I doubt that he considers that the law may affect Trump as well.
Remember that the next time you're on a jury and some FBI guy is testilying.
They want us to believe that their handwritten notes are always completely truthful, and therefore no audio or video recordings of their interrogations are necessary.
This is stupidity on stilts. We have known since the Clinesmith scandal that the FBI will falsify its reports to serve their political masters.
If an FBI agent told me the sky was blue, I'd look out the window. If an FBI agent testified at a trial where I was a juror, I would ignore any evidence that came only from his notes with no other corroboration. They are untrustworthy Stasi scum.
The FBI quit Burning Bags because Global Warming.
Three cheers for RFK, Jr., ending the use of mRNA vaccines. Microsoft was bad enough using its customers as beta testers. Tony Fauci, Rochelle Walensky, the FDA, and Big Pharma used us as alpha testers with mRNA.
Benjamin Wittes speculates on a weird announcement from General Bondi:
“Attorney General Pam Bondi directed her staff Monday to act on the criminal referral from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard related to the alleged conspiracy to tie President Donald Trump to Russia, and the Department of Justice is now opening a grand jury investigation into the matter.”
So now Bondi has taken the logical next step: The department has said that it is not presenting to a grand jury any information not already on hand.
Why am I so confident of this? Because there is nothing to investigate here.
As I have explained before, the statutes of limitations will have run on nearly all crimes one could allege, assuming that there were any crimes. To the extent a prosecutor tried to use a “conspiracy” charge to get around this problem, one still has to do more than allege a conspiracy to do something illegal.
Stupid Rachel Maddow thinks she’s living in a dictatorship. She hasn’t been arrested, she’s still on the air, but she thinks she’s in a dictatorship. It’s too ridiculous to be funny.
Now it’s the turn of the lefty extremists to stand athwart the tide of history yelling “Stop.”
Elizabeth Warren gets asked by a liberal reporter why she didn't see Joe Biden's decline.
It's awesome.
"You think he was as sharp as you?"
It's like a deer caught in the headlights.
"He was on his feet."
Dude.
It was reported the DC city council has voted unanimously to issue a resolution that Edward “Big Balls” Coristine was asking for the beatdown when he attempted to stop thugs from carjacking his girlfriend’s car.
"...who won case against Donald Trump for ripping off lenders. Trump has not paid the $500 million settlement."
A stunningly ignorant statement, even for you.
There is now a prediction market for whether or not a dildo will be thrown onto the court during specific WNBA games, so expect there to be many more. A person could make big money by placing a "prediction" and then tossing a dildo (sounds like a euphemism...).
What boatbuilder said. Claiming Lettia James won a case accusing Trump of "ripping off lenders" is as much slander as ABC claiming Trump was convicted of rape. The lenders themselves said that Trump completely paid them off, and that wasn't the crime. The crime was supposedly that since Trump inflated the value of his property, he got preferred rates that then prevented those lenders from offering such rates to others and thus hurting others that were not the lenders. It is such an absurd criminal statute that no one else ever was prosecuted for it. It was also so absurd that the first appeal review chastised the actual prosecutors (James actually did not prosecute it herself) were humiliated and begged the Appeals court not to sanction them. What is sad is the same Appeals court heard the case in October of last year and still hasn't rendered its verdict. At this point, it is hard to believe NY is even interested in the law.
In Schiff's case, he is alleged to have lied on tax documents in an apparent fraud to lower his tax liability. Tax fraud is prosecuted all the time.
Big Mike says: “Stupid Rachel Maddow thinks she’s living in a dictatorship. She hasn’t been arrested, she’s still on the air, but she thinks she’s in a dictatorship. It’s too ridiculous to be funny.”
Well Mike, not being arrested isn’t the sole benchmark for whether authoritarian tactics are in play. Independent journalism can still exist in a system that’s sliding toward authoritarianism—it’s just increasingly marginalized, vilified, or ignored.
If Maddow is sounding alarms about authoritarianism, maybe the focus shouldn’t be on whether she’s in handcuffs, but on whether the institutions that are supposed to constrain power are being openly defied, like what happened in LA yesterday.
A federal judge and the 9th Circuit issued clear orders limiting racial profiling and roving immigration raids. The Border Patrol then rolled up in a Penske truck, posed as employers, and arrested people based on location, language, and race—in the same spots previously flagged. That's not business as usual—that’s a federal agency thumbing its nose at judicial oversight.
If we care about checks and balances, that’s a five-alarm fire, not a partisan gripe.
Nova Scotia travel restrictions
From Viva Frei:
"Nova Scotia has formally prohibited hiking, camping, fishing, and the use of the trail system through the woods.
To prevent wildfires.
Under penalty of fines up to $25,000.
Canada has turned into a hellhole."
Rachel Maddow is an over-paid over-wrought joke.
'My corrupt team lost so now we live in a dictatorship!'
Oh do f-off Rachel.
7:44 - ---> Leland said.
Ron Ward: if the left can do childish backseat “I’m not touching you!” tactics, so can the right. Finding the loophole in what the judge said isn’t illegal - it’s good lawyering.
RR
JSM
Peachy, whether one likes Maddow or not is beside the point. The concern she raised—about growing authoritarian behavior—doesn’t rest on her personality or paycheck.
What matters is this: a federal agency appears to have defied a court order meant to stop racial profiling and roving immigration raids. That’s a threat to the rule of law, not just a partisan talking point.
If you're confident the government's behavior is above board, why not engage on the facts of the raid?
John, “finding the loophole” in a judge’s restraining order isn’t clever lawyering when the underlying issue is a federal agency continuing behavior the court explicitly ruled unconstitutional.
If the judge said you can’t profile based on race, language, job, or location, and the agency responds by dressing up like day laborers in a Penske truck to keep doing exactly that—that’s contempt of court, not legal ingenuity.
If the left pulled this stunt after a conservative judge’s ruling, you’d be the first to say it’s lawless, and I would agree with you.
Ward - ICE didn't profile, they did a sting. They posed as people hiring laborers, then checked the immigration status of the guys who showed interest. That's very different from profiling, which would be a coercive stop-and-verify.
Lefties have been pulling stunts like this, for the last 65 years. For instance, all their manufactured process crimes. It's not lawless when either side does it - it's quite lawful. Scrupulously lawful. Like staying on my side of the back seat but still reaching right to the dividing line lawful.
If the judge wants to find ICE in contempt, he will have to say exactly what part of his order they violated. He won't be able to, so he'll just harrumph.
RR
JSM
John, your response is a defensive pivot from “good lawyering” to semantic hair-splitting—recasting deception and entrapment as somehow unrelated to the profiling the court order addressed. It’s a clever dodge, but it collapses under scrutiny, especially when applied to the facts.
The judge’s order didn’t leave much wiggle room:
“Using a person’s race, language, job or location as probable cause to detain them violates the 4th Amendment.”
In this case, agents:
Returned to the same locations already flagged in the court case
Spoke Spanish to lure people seeking day labor
Arrested day laborers and street vendors—not gang members
You can call that a “sting,” but when the targeting criteria are location, language, and job, you’re squarely within the scope of the TRO. Whether they show up in SUVs or Penske trucks doesn’t change the constitutional issue.
And let’s be honest—if a Democratic administration pulled a stunt like this after a conservative judge blocked it, there’d be no talk of “scrupulous lawyering.”
You’d be yelling contempt of court—and you’d be right.
"A federal judge and the 9th Circuit issued clear orders limiting racial profiling and roving immigration raids. The Border Patrol then rolled up in a Penske truck, posed as employers, and arrested people based on location, language, and race—in the same spots previously flagged. That's not business as usual—that’s a federal agency thumbing its nose at judicial oversight.
If we care about checks and balances, that’s a five-alarm fire, not a partisan gripe."
Who does ICE answer to? The judiciary or the executive?
It is not "authoritarian" to protect your boarders from invaders and thus protect the rights of legal citizens.
Rusty, you’re asking the wrong question. ICE answers to the executive branch—but that doesn’t give it the right to ignore federal court rulings.
That’s what checks and balances are for: the judiciary reviews executive actions and blocks them when they violate constitutional rights—as the court ruled in this case.
The judge’s order didn’t block border enforcement—it blocked racial profiling and illegal detentions.
And let’s not lose the facts here:
Many of those swept up were legal immigrants or citizens.
Most had no criminal history.
These sweeps were not targeting “invaders”—they were targeting people looking for day work at Home Depot.
One more time now, if the rule of law only applies when it’s convenient, that’s not patriotism—it’s authoritarianism in slow motion.
Many of those swept up were legal immigrants or citizens.
And immediately let go, unless they were housing or trafficking those that were illegal (in other words committing other crimes, sort of likes those caught in a misdemeanor trespassing got felony convictions by charging another crime occurred).
Most had no criminal history.
And some had a history of gang banging, human trafficking and rape.
These sweeps were not targeting “invaders”
They in fact actually were by intent and by action.
It is authoritarian only as much as it is implementation of long-established law and they have the authority to do it. Along those lines, any enforcement of law becomes authoritarian. Your argument is silly, because your attempt to define the word in such a broad way works against you.
No Leland, don’t think so. A few things to clarify here—because several claims you made don’t hold up under closer scrutiny:
“Immediately let go” — Many legal immigrants and even U.S. citizens were detained for hours or days, even months, missing work or being subjected to unnecessary trauma. Some, as we now know, were even deported. Several credible reports document this, and in some cases, people were detained despite showing proof of legal status.
“Most had no criminal history” / “Some were gang bangers, traffickers, rapists” — That’s contradictory framing. You’re admitting most were law-abiding, then invoking a scary subset to justify the sweep. This is exactly the tactic courts have warned against: casting wide nets under the guise of targeting criminals.
“Not targeting invaders” — But they clearly used language, job, and location to determine who to stop. That fits the legal definition of racial profiling, which the judge specifically prohibited. Using Spanish to lure people into an arrest is not neutral enforcement—it’s targeted deception.
“Authoritarian = enforcing laws” — No. Authoritarianism isn’t defined by enforcement—it’s defined by disregard for oversight, especially judicial oversight. When a federal agency operates in ways the courts have just ruled unconstitutional, that’s not just “law enforcement.” That’s a power grab.
Also, as we now know, many have been here legally for decades, only to have Trump void their legal status, making a life long preacher here illegally in mid-sermon. We now know Trump isn’t targeting the criminals he campaigned on. Just like lowering prices on day one, he lied to us.
If we can’t recognize the danger of that, regardless of the party in charge, then we’ve already started moving the goalposts on rule of law.
You make a bunch of claims, without evidence of any sort. None at all.
even months
Do you have any evidence of this? Does that evidence show that detainment was illegal?
That’s contradictory framing. You’re admitting most were law-abiding,
It is contradictory exactly to your framing. It is another instance of you wanting to use your definition of things to the exclusion of others. It's a debate tactic, but it is silly when that's all you got, and it is all you got. I'm not admitting most are law-abiding, because if they were assisting those in the country illegally, they may have broken several laws.
“Not targeting invaders” — But they clearly used language, job, and location to determine who to stop.
This is a meaningless statement. Language is not racial, because any race can speak any language. Your own arguments is that lawful people of all types want jobs. Of course they picked a location where known crimes are occurring.
That fits the legal definition of racial profiling, which the judge specifically prohibited.
I just explained how it doesn't, and you haven't explained how it does.
Using Spanish to lure people into an arrest is not neutral enforcement—it’s targeted deception.
Law enforcement is not allowed to speak Spanish, who is being racial here? You or law enforcement? Si hablo Espanol?
You really aren't a serious person.
No. Authoritarianism isn’t defined by enforcement
Indeed, but that's how you are using it when you say Trump's enforcement of law is him acting Authoritarian. Otherwise, you want to claim Trump saying things is authoritarian, when it is not. Trump saying he will use EOs and acknowledging that is authoritarian is a statement. Once Trump issued the EOs, the courts intervened. In every instance, he allowed the court order to stand until the SCOTUS threw out those orders, because the judges themselves were being authoritarian in denying a democratically elected official to enact lawful orders. Trump is no more authoritarian than every other President that issued EOs.
Leland, let’s not confuse volume with validity.
You’re demanding evidence, but much of it is readily available from court records and investigative journalism. For example:
The ACLU and multiple news outlets (including ProPublica, The Guardian, and LA Times) have documented legal immigrants and U.S. citizens detained for days or longer. In some cases, wrongful deportations occurred. [See Ortiz v. Jennings or Machic-Xiap v. Garland for examples.]
The courts have ruled repeatedly that language and jobsite location cannot be used as stand-ins for probable cause, especially when targeting day laborers. That’s exactly the profiling the judge’s TRO addressed.
Using Spanish as bait in areas already flagged by the court isn’t normal enforcement—it’s circumventing a judicial order.
As for the claim that assisting undocumented people is automatically illegal: merely offering a ride or renting housing doesn’t constitute criminal conspiracy—that’s been well-established in immigration law.
And no, speaking Spanish isn’t racial—but using it selectively to detain people based on assumptions about their immigration status absolutely is. That’s why the courts didn’t just block these tactics—they rebuked them.
You can call that “lawful enforcement,” but the courts called it unconstitutional. That’s not me redefining words. That’s how the checks and balances system works.
We may disagree politically, but we shouldn’t disagree on whether law enforcement must follow the law.
Explaining issues to MAGAS is a losing battle,,they cant hear....refuse any other allegiance alternative facts rule their day..Talking to the wall is the analogy!
Mag-post ng isang Komento
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.