Shipwack
Shipwack's JournalWhat the Next Democratic President Must Do on Day 1
From an article on Slate:
How does that cash out? First, let’s remember that the Supreme Court has now effectively granted the president authority to impound federal funds duly appropriated by Congress and to abolish federal agencies established and funded by Congress. I think that is terrible and anti-constitutional. But thanks to the Supreme Court, that is now the law. So let’s talk about what President AOC can do with those powers in 2029. On Day 1, she needs to impound ICE’s budget. She needs to refuse to spend the billions of dollars that Congress has appropriated to the agency and fire tens of thousands of immigration agents immediately, starting with those who committed acts of violence and discrimination—which, by that point, may be almost all of them. Close as many immigrant detention facilities as possible and free the detainees.
Then turn to Customs and Border Protection. Fire CBP chief Greg Bovino. Fire every single agent who participated in the horrific operations in Chicago, D.C., and L.A. Refuse to pay out a penny in benefits to any agent who broke the law. Release all the information about ICE and CBP’s immigration sweeps, including the names of every agent who participated. Start investigations and prosecutions of any law-breaking agent whom Trump doesn’t pardon. Repurpose the billions of dollars in savings as a reparations fund for every victim. Run the reparations program through a new agency established by executive order. Pay to return noncitizens who were wrongly deported back to the country. Transform ICE and CBP’s headquarters into the nerve center of a new Truth and Reconciliation Agency, and use this extra money to pay out damages to the victims of the mass deportation campaign. This would be 100 percent legal under the precedent established by Trump and the Supreme Court.
Give them a taste of their own medicine… Full article at
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2025/12/trump-democracy-supreme-court-2028-democrats.html
Gov Newsome triangulating again.
“I think there’s a broader narrative that we ought to address,” Newsom said Wednesday at The New York Times’ DealBook Summit. “We have to be more culturally normal. We have to be a little less judgmental.”
The California governor didn’t spell out what he meant by “culturally normal,” but he has recently been a critic of what he calls “woke culture.”
I guess he feels the need to move toward the “center” again to stay relevant…
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/gavin-newsom-tells-democrats-culturally-normal_n_6931dfa1e4b0824b6df8a368
Yeah, yet another Chucky Kirk post...
I posted a quote on Facebook book about reading some obituaries with satisfaction, and got some pushback for talking “ill” of the recent dead. Here’s my reply:
Kirk demonized my friends and beliefs, was emphatically against “live and let live “, practiced stochastic terrorism, and pushed a history of America that erased people of color and women.
Despite all this, I didn’t wish him to be killed or die. On the contrary, I wanted him to live a long life so he could see the failure of his vile philosophy.
Now, I don’t particularly mourn his passing, but I do acknowledge that he was part of the human race.
“Any man’s death diminishes me,
Because I am involved in mankind,
And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee.” - John Donne
I also am exhibiting the exact amount of sympathy he had for the victims after various school shootings and gun rampages: none.
He literally said on April 5, 2023, "I think it's worth it. I think it's worth to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights."
Since he believed that, I have no problem with -his- death being part of the price… however, I will mourn the deaths of all the victims of gun violence who -didn’t- agree to be part of the cost.
Epilogue
My MAGA brother texted me that I needed to see the “whole” Kirk speech about gun violence, and not fall prey to liberal sound bites that twist things. He sent me a link, and… well… if anything, it puts Kirk in an even worse light… not going to waste bandwidth telling my brother that, though. Lol
Trump Deployed the National Guard. But What Does That Mean?
I found this post on SubStack interesting and informative... I am fairly certain it can be read by non-subscribers. Please let me know if I'm incorrect.
Title 10 federalization, the Insurrection Act and Posse Comitatus
by Jay Kuo
Yesterday, “Border Czar” Tom Homan went on Fox and announced that, in response to Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass’s criticisms, the White House was “already mobilizing” and was bringing in the National Guard that night.
...
A great deal of confusion quickly ensued across social media and among legal experts. Under what authority was Trump acting, if he didn’t have Gov. Newsom’s consent to deploy the guard? Was this under a Title 10 federalization, or was it an actual invocation of the Insurrection Act?
...
In today’s extra Sunday edition, I want to address what has and importantly has not happened with respect to this deployment. As we look ahead, we need to keep straight what powers and authority Trump has invoked and which he is holding in his pocket. This will help us be clear-eyed about the most probable risks, and it will better inform what our next steps in response should be.
...
In today’s extra Sunday edition, I want to address what has and importantly has not happened with respect to this deployment. As we look ahead, we need to keep straight what powers and authority Trump has invoked and which he is holding in his pocket. This will help us be clear-eyed about the most probable risks, and it will better inform what our next steps in response should be.
https://open.substack.com/pub/statuskuo/p/trump-deployed-the-national-guard?r=1enjyx&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
Trump Deployed the National Guard. But What Does That Mean?
I found this post on SubStack interesting and informative... I am fairly certain it can be read by non-subscribers. Please let me know if I'm incorrect.
Title 10 federalization, the Insurrection Act and Posse Comitatus
by Jay Kuo
Yesterday, “Border Czar” Tom Homan went on Fox and announced that, in response to Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass’s criticisms, the White House was “already mobilizing” and was bringing in the National Guard that night.
...
A great deal of confusion quickly ensued across social media and among legal experts. Under what authority was Trump acting, if he didn’t have Gov. Newsom’s consent to deploy the guard? Was this under a Title 10 federalization, or was it an actual invocation of the Insurrection Act?
...
In today’s extra Sunday edition, I want to address what has and importantly has not happened with respect to this deployment. As we look ahead, we need to keep straight what powers and authority Trump has invoked and which he is holding in his pocket. This will help us be clear-eyed about the most probable risks, and it will better inform what our next steps in response should be.
...
In today’s extra Sunday edition, I want to address what has and importantly has not happened with respect to this deployment. As we look ahead, we need to keep straight what powers and authority Trump has invoked and which he is holding in his pocket. This will help us be clear-eyed about the most probable risks, and it will better inform what our next steps in response should be.
https://open.substack.com/pub/statuskuo/p/trump-deployed-the-national-guard?r=1enjyx&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
There are 7 documents we'll never see.
1) Epstein’s files
2) Mayflower Madam’s client list
3) Unredacted Kennedy assassination files
4) Trump’s tax returns
5) Trump’s school records
6) Trump’s “real” medical records
7) Transcript of the Trump - Putin Helsinki meeting.
A serious question about Marco Rubio...
In addition to being SecState, he’s now also the interim head of two agencies…
Is he now drawing 3 paychecks?
I'm losing track. Is this the 3rd or 4th time...
… that the Secret Service has dropped the ball?
The assassination attempt
The “attempted assassination” at the golf course
Noem’s stolen(?) purse
????
Is this another case of “whatever Trump touches dies”? He shuffled people around, got rid of some agents, appointed incompetent people to run it, etc.
Have all the competent people left, are they overworked, or just don’t give a damn anymore? Or, of course, all the above… 
Zionism has many definitions.
TL;DR anti-Zionism is against a political philosophy; anti-Semitism is bigotry.
The definition of Zionism depends on who you talk to. However, there is general agreement that Zionism is a philosophy that says that Jewish people need their own country, and that country has a right to defend itself. Zionism is a political philosophy. The devil is in the details (where is this country, what are its borders, what is self-defense, etc). The problem for me (and others) is how the government of Israel implements those goals. For example, purposely killing 15 people in an aid convoy (that had been properly identified) merely because there was a suspicion that a Hamas sympathizer was with them was wrong, and a warcrime.
Antisemitism is a prejudice against people who are of the Jewish faith, and/or those of Jewish ancestry. It doesn't care where they live in the world. It doesn't care if a person practices conservative Judaism, reform Judaism, or is a non-practicing person with Jewish ancestry.
What bothers me is when I criticize the actions taken by the Israrali government, or it's policies, and being told I'm anti-Semitic. There are people of Jewish faith that are against the actions of the people currently in power, or are even explicitly Anti-Zionist. Does that mean they are anti-Semitic?
I know nothing about this rabbi, and don't have time to research his beliefs. If he merely advocated that Israeli has a right to exist, then excluding him was wrong. If he advocates that the safety of Israel requires the death of every Palestinian man, woman, and child, I can understand why people might not want him associating with their cause.
Profile Information
Name: David LangdonGender: Male
Hometown: Texas
Home country: United States
Current location: Elgin, TX
Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 3,033