Recent Appearances...

Warning: Undefined array key "rbname" in /data/rantburg.com/www/pgrecentorg.php on line 14
Hello !
Recent Appearances...

-Land of the Free

When Presidents Are Right and Courts Are Wrong: Defying the Bench to Save the Nation

2025-05-31

[PJMedia] When a president defies a court, the media pulls the fire alarm. Legal experts fill TV panels with words like "unconstitutional" and "authoritarian." The phrase “constitutional crisis” gets tossed around like glitter at a political parade.

But what most people forget is that history doesn’t always side with the judiciary. Some of America’s greatest presidents defied court rulings, and history later confirmed that those examples of defiance were not only justified but necessary. They didn’t do it to seek power. They did it to protect the country when others froze.

That’s not a crisis. That’s leadership.

Now that two federal courts have blocked President Trump’s new economic tariffs, it’s worth revisiting the long American tradition of presidents ignoring the gavel when national security, survival, or sovereignty are on the line. In every example below, the court ruled against the president, but the president was right.

LINCOLN AND HABEAS CORPUS: BREAKING THE LAW TO SAVE THE UNION
In 1861, as the nation buckled under secession, President Abraham Lincoln suspended the writ of habeas corpus. That gave Union generals the authority to arrest Confederate sympathizers without a judge reviewing the case.

This was no hypothetical fear. Pro-Southern saboteurs in Maryland had torn up railroad tracks and destroyed bridges, threatening troop movements near Washington, D.C.

Chief Justice Roger Taney, still clinging to the robes of his infamous Dred Scott legacy, ruled that Lincoln had no such authority in Ex parte Merryman. Taney claimed only Congress could suspend habeas corpus.

Lincoln ignored him.

FDR AND THE GOLD CLAUSE CASES: LEGAL ORTHODOXY VS. ECONOMIC RECOVERY
When Franklin D. Roosevelt came into office, the country was sliding off a cliff. Unemployment had reached biblical proportions. Banks were failing. People hoarded gold. Deflation made debt impossible to repay.

FDR made a radical move: he took America off the gold standard. He voided “gold clauses” in contracts, which guaranteed payment in gold instead of paper dollars.

The move enraged investors and Wall Street lawyers, who saw it as a direct violation of property rights.

In Perry v. United States (1935), the Supreme Court acknowledged that Roosevelt's move was unconstitutional. He had broken binding contracts. However, the Court effectively shrugged and ruled that the plaintiff hadn’t suffered actual damages since he had been repaid the equivalent amount in currency.

Roosevelt stared down the Court and dared them to stop him.

The gamble worked. Inflation began to rise, banks stabilized, and Americans could breathe again. Critics accused him of shredding the Constitution.

TRUMAN AND THE STEEL SEIZURE: NO COURT CAN BUILD A TANK
Fast forward to 1952. The Korean War was raging. The United Steelworkers threatened a nationwide strike. Without steel, the U.S. military couldn't make tanks, artillery, or warships.

President Harry Truman, unwilling to let war production halt, ordered the federal seizure of America’s steel mills.

The case reached the Supreme Court quickly. In Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, the Court ruled that Truman had exceeded his constitutional authority. They said Congress had not authorized the seizure, and therefore it was unlawful.

Truman lost. Legally.

But he complied with the ruling and found other ways to keep steel flowing. The military stayed supplied, and the war effort never stalled.

JEFFERSON AND THE JUDICIARY: MIDNIGHT APPOINTMENTS AND MORNING RESOLVE
When Thomas Jefferson took office in 1801, he faced a judiciary packed with Federalist loyalists thanks to John Adams’ last-minute “Midnight Judges.” Jefferson refused to deliver some of their commissions. One of the snubbed appointees, William Marbury, sued.

That case became Marbury v. Madison.

Chief Justice John Marshall used it to establish judicial review, the principle that courts could declare laws unconstitutional.

But while flexing the Court’s power, Marshall also agreed that Jefferson didn’t have to deliver Marbury’s commission.

Link

Home Front: Politix

Trump looking to suspend key Constitutional right as judges hamper his mass deportations plans

2025-05-10

If he can move the Overton Window merely by saying a few words…

[Daily Mail, whee America gets its news] President Donald Trump is looking at suspending habeas corpus, the right of a person to challenge their detention in court, as part of his sweeping immigration crackdown.

'The Constitution is clear, and that, of course, is the supreme law of the land, that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus can be suspended in a time of invasion,' White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller told reporters.

'So it's an option we're actively looking at,' Miller said. 'A lot of it depends on whether the courts do the right thing or not.'

Trump campaigned for the White House on a pledge to deport millions of undocumented migrants and has repeatedly referred to their presence in the United States as an 'invasion.'

Since taking office in January, Trump has been seeking to step up deportations, but his efforts have met with pushback from multiple federal courts which have insisted that migrants targeted for removal receive due process.

Although Trump has not mentioned habeas corpus explicitly in public, last month he commented on steps he could take to combat nationwide injunctions against his actions on deportations.

'There are ways to mitigate it and there's some very strong ways,' Trump told reporters on April 30.

'There's one way that's been used by three very highly respected presidents, but we hope we don't have to go that route. But there is one way used successfully by three presidents – all highly respected – and hopefully we don't have to go that way but there are ways of mitigating it.'

One former federal prosecutor told CNN that Miller has the wrong idea about suspending habeas corpus.

'Essentially everything Miller says about suspending habeas corpus – which would eliminate the ability of the courts to rule on immigration matters – is wrong,' said Elie Honig, now a CNN senior legal analyst.

'The Constitution makes clear that suspension of habeas corpus is to be reserved for actual rebellion or invasion posing the most dire threats to public safety. And Congress has never passed a law authorizing deportations without any court involvement, as Miller suggests.'

Among other measures, Trump has invoked an obscure wartime law in March to summarily deport hundreds of alleged Venezuelan gang members to a prison in El Salvador.

Several federal courts have blocked further deportations using the 1798 Alien Enemies Act and the Supreme Court also weighed in, saying migrants subject to deportation under the AEA must be given an opportunity to legally challenge their removal in court.

The AEA was last used to round up Japanese-Americans during World War II and was previously invoked during the War of 1812 and World War I.

Many judges, including one appointed by Trump, have rejected the invocation of the AEA, stating in rulings how the administration had not shown the United States to be under invasion by a hostile foreign power, as laid out under the 18th century statute.

Suspending habeas corpus could potentially allow the administration to dispense with individual removal proceedings and speed up deportations, but the move would almost certainly be met with stiff legal challenges and end up in the Supreme Court.

It has been suspended only rarely in US history, most notably by president Abraham Lincoln during the 1861-1865 Civil War and in Hawaii after the December 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

In March, the US government deported more than 200 Venezuelan immigrants alleged to have ties to the Tren de Aragua gang to El Salvador, paying the Salvadoran government to imprison them.

Since then, they have had no access to lawyers or ability to communicate with their families. Neither the US nor Salvadoran governments have said how the men could eventually regain their freedom.

The Republican president has touted his immigration crackdown as he marked his 100th day in office last week.

Trump won the White House election last November in large part on promises to combat what he repeatedly claimed is an invasion of criminal migrants.

Trump has sent troops to the Mexican border, imposed tariffs on Mexico and Canada for allegedly not doing enough to stop illegal crossings, and designated gangs like TdA and MS-13 as terrorist groups.

In March Trump invoked the little-known Alien Enemies Act and flew two planeloads of alleged Tren de Aragua members to El Salvador's notorious maximum security CECOT prison.

In a proclamation, Trump said Tren de Aragua was engaged in 'hostile actions' and 'threatening an invasion or predatory incursion against the territory of the United States,' adding that Venezuela's Nicolas Maduro was pulling the strings.

Link

Home Front: Politix

The Civil War Ended 160 Years Ago Saturday ‐ Or Did It?

2025-04-28

[PJ] A hundred and sixty years ago today, the largest Confederate surrender ended the U.S. Civil War. Or did it?

On April 26, 1865, rebel Confederate Gen. Joseph E. Johnston surrendered at Bennett Place to Union Gen. William T. Sherman, effectively ending the Civil War, a war which Democrats had launched in fury over the election of an anti-slavery Republican president (Lincoln). In the 19th century, Democrats used war, domestic terrorism, election fraud, dishonest propaganda, and fear tactics to undermine American patriotism, peace, and equality. If that sounds very familiar to our own day, that is because the Democrats never really stopped fighting a civil war, despite the surrender. They simply changed the battlegrounds and weapons.

Bennett Place ended the military phase of the Civil War, and was certainly a historic victory. But mere days before, a Confederate empathizer who opposed civil rights had assassinated Abraham Lincoln, leaving racist, incompetent Vice President Andrew Johnson — a Democrat — to butcher Reconstruction. Victorious Union Gen. Ulysses S. Grant would go on to face and fight widespread Democrat domestic terrorism against Republicans (particularly black voters) when he was elected to the presidency. To this very day, Democrats are still encouraging domestic terrorism and protecting violent criminals in order to advance their chaotic ideology and undermine the current Republican administration.

Related: Lincoln’s Assassination and the Democrat War That Never Ended

Link

-Great Cultural Revolution

Fired Insubordinate Officers Reveal Massive U.S. Military Resentment Against Elected Civilian Command

2025-04-16

[Federalist] Politics is the domain of the president, not the oath-bearing members of the uniformed services.

There is a cancer in America’s military ranks, and it must be expunged before it’s too late. That cancer lies in uniformed service members’ widespread rejection of the uniquely American concept of civilian control of the military and disregard for the absolute necessity that America’s military officers remain apolitical in the face of the constitutional will of the electorate.

Recent events reveal this cancer, and they include the relief for cause of Navy Vice Adm. Shoshana Chatﬁeld after she reportedly refused to hang photos of President Donald Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth on her headquarters’ customary "Chain of Command" board and reportedly told her subordinates in a town hall that she would "wait [the Trump administration] out" the next four years. They also include the relief for cause of Col. Sussanah Meyers, commander of the U.S. Space Force’s base in Greenland, after she openly questioned (to all of her subordinates via email) Vice President J.D. Vance’s official pronouncements regarding the United States, Greenland, and Denmark.

Since Trump’s inauguration, numerous other senior generals and admirals have been relieved by President Trump for various publicly unspeciﬁed reasons, including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force Gen. Charles "CQ" Brown; Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti; Adm. Linda Lee Fagan, the commandant of the Coast Guard; and Air Force Gen. Timothy D. Haugh, director of the National Security Agency and commander of U.S. Cyber Command. Each of these four-star ﬁrings is publicly shrouded in a certain degree of mystery, but rumors abound that so-called diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) played a part in one way or another.

Admittedly, a president ﬁring his senior generals is not a new thing. Barack Obama ﬁred his senior general in Afghanistan, Army Gen. Stan McChrystal, after a Rolling Stone article revealed derisive comments by McChrystal and his staff regarding Obama’s leadership. Harry S. Truman ﬁred one of America’s most famous and revered military leaders, Army Gen. Douglas MacArthur, after MacArthur repeatedly disobeyed Truman’s orders regarding the Korean War. And Abraham Lincoln famously had no problem ﬁring his senior Army generals in the heat of the Civil War. What made these ﬁrings so noteworthy, however, is that they were rare exceptions that proved the rule of America’s senior generals and admirals wholly respecting civilian control of the military.

What we see now is not Obama and McChrystal, Truman and MacArthur, or Lincoln and his failed generals. The widespread nature of the current problem looks and feels like something completely new in the American experience and appears to be pervasive across the force.

I am a retired U.S. Army colonel. My service record runs a typical gamut for an old colonel, with tours in tactical units (including service in Afghanistan and Iraq) interspersed with service at high-level military headquarters in and around Washington, D.C. Nowadays, I run an account on X with a little more than 200,000 followers. I offer commentary on political and social issues, with a particular emphasis on the military. As a result, I have many military followers, including some still on active duty. I offer active-duty service members a conduit to anonymously share disturbing military trends.

Since Trump’s inauguration, I have been ﬂooded with reports of insubordination in the ranks toward Trump and Hegseth. Those reports range from fairly senior officers in the Pentagon showing open disrespect around the E-Ring coffee maker, all the way down to junior enlisted disrespecting their president and secretary of defense in the ship’s galley or the chow hall.

As one active-duty Army officer recently described to me regarding the experiences of a female Army officer colleague:

Women across the unit are coming to [her] asking about what happens to them. It’s in their minds that SECDEF is going to pull them from combat arms and reclass them. Zero evidence of that but doesn’t stop the rumor mill anyway. Those rumors are playing the telephone game across all soldiers, men and women alike. So they are all on this "f*** Trump f*** Hegseth" train.

For over 235 years, the idea of a civilian commander-in-chief has been a sacred premise guiding our military, enlisted and officer alike. I grew up around the Army, joined as a young man, served for 22 years, and have kept my ﬁnger on the pulse of the defense establishment since I retired from active duty. I can honestly say that never once in that time was I ever made aware of the political leanings of any officer superior to me.

Rarely would I even hear political thoughts from my peers or subordinates. In fact, I recall that early in my career, senior officers advised me not to vote in elections, as such an act might suggest I was a political partisan. The duty to remain apolitical was simply that important to officers of that bygone age. We saw ourselves as a sort of band of violent monks, bound by sacred oaths.

To me, that bygone commitment was never more evident than when Bill Clinton became president. During Clinton’s 1992 campaign, it came out that as a young man he had avoided the draft, in part because he "loath[ed]" the military. Vietnam was still a raw wound in the minds of many senior officers and senior enlisted, yet despite Clinton being arguably the most anti-military president in U.S. history, he was respected as the duly elected commander-in-chief, and signs of "resistance" in the uniformed ranks were impossible to detect. We honored our oaths.

Somewhere along the way, something changed. I believe that change has taken place within the senior ranks and, by way of example, has spread throughout the force. We must once again make senior officers loyal to their oath, and the rest of the force will follow.

I have heard from some anti-Trump officers that it is acceptable for them to challenge Trump and be "disloyal" to him on political matters because while the enlisted oath of office includes the phrase "that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States," no such words regarding the president appear in the officer oath of office. This idea is highly disturbing.

It suggests that officers are not bound to follow the lawful orders of the president if they disagree politically. Not only is this contrary to the sacred officer tradition of being apolitical, but it is also contrary to the part of the officers’ oath that requires officers to "support and defend the Constitution" (after all, the president’s military role arises in the Constitution). Finally, it is contrary to the actual commission of all U.S. military officers, which states in part: "And this officer is to observe and follow such orders and directions from time to time as may be given by the President of the United States of America."

The trends we are seeing feel dangerously close to an embrace of 1970s South American-style military juntas. Think about Gen. Mark Milley telling China he would warn them about U.S. military activity. Think about Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman using his position on the National Security Council as a springboard for impeaching a president because he did not like the way that president was lawfully discharging his duties. These are not the marks of healthy civilian control of the military. They are instead marks of a military approaching the rationalization of a coup.

I have heard numerous theories as to how we got here, ranging from "Obama purged all the good generals" to "Gen Z are too narcissistic for selﬂess sacriﬁce," but I attribute the breakdown quite directly to DEI policies and practices. I do not mean that the advancement of officers for DEI reasons is the cause. Rather, the inculcation of DEI policies as a core ethos of military service has been monstrously destructive. Our military has always been driven by core values, such as, "Don’t give up the ship," "Duty, Honor, Country," and "Always Faithful." Traditionally, those values have been apolitical and solely revolved around the military’s fundamental mission of defeating America’s battleﬁeld enemies.

Somewhere in these early years of the 21st century, however, DEI also became a central ethos. One need only read the policy pronouncements of the likes of C.Q. Brown and Lisa Franchetti to see that they embraced so-called diversity for diversity’s sake and that DEI policies became a core ethos of America’s military — a new "warrior ethos" grounded not in warﬁghting but in a purely political and public policy doctrine.

So on the one hand you have a president elected to purge the political doctrine of DEI from America’s government, and on the other hand you have a generation of senior generals and admirals who mistakenly view DEI as an apolitical military ethos, every bit as essential to the military’s lineage and traditions as Audie Murphy, the Medal of Honor, and the USS Constitution. Thus, when Donald Trump seeks to exercise his constitutional powers to purge a purely political doctrine, the generals and admirals mistakenly see this as an effort to purge a fundamental, essential, and apolitical military ethos. This gives them license to feel justiﬁed in "resisting" the lawful orders of their commander-in-chief and engaging in insubordination as they falsely imagine they are protecting a core competency of our nation’s defense.

Fortunately, ﬁxing this problem is not that hard. It merely requires some extreme intestinal fortitude by Trump, Hegseth, and the military department secretaries in the face of a media determined to discredit their every move. The solution lies in two parts: education and example-setting.

Education will involve reinvigorated training, in every service and at every level, regarding the military’s duty of loyalty to elected civilian leaders and their lawful orders. A standard curriculum must be developed in the Department of Defense regarding those constitutional duties, and that curriculum must be taught in great detail at every level and in every professional development course, from basic training for every recruit up to the "charm school" for new generals and admirals.

Example-setting will mean more of what we have already seen: the relief for cause of senior officers for insubordinate behavior. But that’s not enough. Vice Adm. Chatﬁeld and Col. Meyers will no doubt soon be on MSNBC regaling us all with tales of the illegality of the Trump administration. Trump and Hegseth must take a more drastic approach, and the answer to that approach lies in Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which reads as follows:

Contempt toward officials: Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

This is the tool by which senior insubordinate officers must be made an example. While I doubt any generals or admirals will soon be breaking rocks at Leavenworth, the mere act of initiating a few well-publicized courts martial will drive home the message: Politics is the domain of the president, not the oath-bearing members of the uniformed services.

Good order and discipline must be restored. There is a cancer in the ranks of America’s military, and it must be expunged before it’s too late.

Link

-Land of the Free

Navy deploys another Houthi-fighting warship to new US southern border mission

2025-04-13

[FoxNews] USS Stockdale to join at least 2 other Navy warships deployed to border in March

The Navy recently deployed another warship, which successfully repelled multiple Iranian-backed Houthi attacks, to secure the southern border.

USS Stockdale, an Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer, left Naval Base San Diego on Friday to support U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) southern border operations, in accordance with President Donald Trump's recent executive orders.

The executive orders included a national emergency declaration and clarification of the military’s role in protecting the territorial integrity of the U.S.

"Stockdale’s departure reinforces the Navy’s role in the Department of Defense’s coordinated efforts to comply with the order," according to a statement from the Navy.

The ship will continue operations with an embarked U.S. Coast Guard Law Enforcement Detachment.

In February, Stockdale returned to San Diego after a seven-month independent deployment to the U.S. 3rd, 5th and 7th Fleet areas of operation.

It joined the Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group and remained in 5th Fleet following the departure of the ABECSG.

While in the 5th Fleet, Stockdale "successfully repelled multiple Iranian-backed Houthi attacks" during transits of the Bab el-Mandeb strait and escorted operations of U.S.-flagged vessels in the Gulf of Aden, according to the Navy.

It also engaged and defeated one-way attack uncrewed aerial-ship cruise missiles, according to officials.

Stockdale will join the USS Spruance and USS Gravely, two other Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers, which were sent to the border in March, Fox News Digital previously reported.

"As the DoD’s lead for implementing border-related executive orders, USNORTHCOM continues to support critical Department of Homeland Security capabilities gaps, with Stockdale making a vital contribution to these efforts," the Navy said.

Link

Arabia

US beefs up warship presence in Mideast, will have 2 aircraft carriers in region

2025-03-23

[IsraelTimes] Amid operations against Houthis and in apparent message of deterrence to Iran, USS Harry S. Truman will remain in Red Sea and USS Carl Vinson will head to region

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, in a rare move, is beefing up the Navy warship presence in the Middle East, ordering two aircraft carriers to be there next month as the US increases strikes on the Yemen
...an area of the Arabian Peninsula sometimes mistaken for a country. It is populated by more antagonistic tribes and factions than you can keep track of...
-based Iran's Houthi sock puppets
...a Zaidi Shia insurgent group operating in Yemen. They have also been referred to as the Believing Youth. Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi is said to be the spiritual leader of the group and most of the military leaders are his relatives. The legitimate Yemeni government has accused the them of having ties to the Iranian government. Honest they did. The group has managed to gain control over all of Saada Governorate and parts of Amran, Al Jawf and Hajjah Governorates. Its slogan is God is Great, Death to America™, Death to Israel, a curse on the Jews They like shooting off... ummm... missiles that they would have us believe they make at home in their basements. On the plus side, they did murder Ali Abdullah Saleh, which was the only way the country was ever going to be rid of him...
s, according to a US official.

It will be the second time in six months that the US has kept two carrier strike groups in that region, with generally only one there. Prior to that it had been years since the US had committed that much warship power to the Middle East.

According to the official, Hegseth signed orders on Thursday to keep the USS Harry S. Truman in the Middle East for at least an additional month. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss ongoing military operations.

The ship has been conducting operations in the Red Sea against the Houthis and was scheduled to begin heading home to Norfolk, Virginia, at the end of March.

And Hegseth has ordered the USS Carl Vinson, which has been operating in the Pacific, to begin steaming toward the Middle East, which will extend its scheduled deployment by three months.

The Vinson is expected to arrive in the region early next month. It had been conducting exercises with Japanese and South Korean forces near the Yellow Sea and the Sea of Japan and was slated to head home to port in San Diego in three weeks.

The presence of so much US naval power in the region not only gives commanders additional ships to patrol and launch strikes, but it also serves as a clear message of deterrence to Iran, the Houthis’ main benefactor.

Hegseth’s move shifts the Vinson and its warships away from the Indo-Pacific region, which the Trump administration has touted as its main focus.

Instead, this bolsters the latest US campaign against the Iran-backed Houthis. US ships and aircraft launched a new intensive assault against the group, including a barrage of attacks over the weekend that continued into this week.

US President Donald Trump
...Perhaps no man has ever had as much fun being president of the US...
, in a marked departure from the previous administration, lowered the authorities needed for launching offensive strikes against the Yemen-based Houthis.

He recently gave US Central Command the ability to take action when it deems appropriate.

US President Joe The Big Guy Biden
Joe <q>The Big Guy</q> Biden

...46th president of the U.S. Too old and senile to be prosecuted, not too old and senile to set national policy...
’s administration had required White House approval to conduct offensive strikes such as the ones over the weekend. It did allow US forces to launch defensive attacks whenever necessary, including the authority to take out weapons that appeared to be ready to fire.

Biden went to two carriers in the region for several weeks last fall. Then-Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin had ordered the Roosevelt to extend its deployment for a short time and remain in the region as the USS Abraham Lincoln was pushed to get to the area more quickly.

The Biden administration beefed up the US military presence there to help defend Israel from attacks by Iran
...a theocratic Shiite state divided among the Medes, the Persians, and the (Arab) Elamites. Formerly a fairly civilized nation ruled by a Shah, it became a victim of Islamic revolution in 1979. The nation is today noted for spontaneously taking over other countries' embassies, maintaining whorehouses run by clergymen, involvement in international drug trafficking, and financing sock puppet militias to extend the regime's influence. The word Iran is a cognate form of Aryan. The abbreviation IRGC is the same idea as Stürmabteilung (or SA). The term Supreme Guide is a the modern version form of either Duce or Führer or maybe both. They hate ~~Jews~~ ~~Zionists~~ Jews. Their economy is based on the production of oil and vitriol...
and its proxies and to safeguard US troops.

Link

-Great Cultural Revolution

What Dems Have Done to Deerfield girl‐and the rest of Illinois‐is Just Plain AWFL

2025-03-19

[JOHNKASSNEWS] By John Kass - March 19, 2025

You hear that gruesome story of the 13-year-old middle-school girl from Deerfield confronted by school officials and ordered to disrobe in front of a male classmate?

It sounds too AWFL to be true.

But it happened, according to her mother Nicole Georgas who said Tuesday she was filing a police complaint with the police in Deerfield on top of a complaint she filed with the U.S. Department of Justice.

The mom alone standing up for her daughter's privacy was repeatedly mocked and insulted by hostile trans activists as she addressed a crowded District 109 School Board meeting.

The story has gone viral world-wide and was broken by the Lake County Gazette and Dan Proft's radio show "The Morning Answer."

To understand this bizzarro world, please understand this:

Even though President Donald Trump has signed an executive order protecting girls' privacy, and has vowed to cut federal education funding to rogue states, the Illinois Democrats are funded by billionaire Gov. JB Pritzker, who is the bankrupt state's leading activist for transexuals.

And he's running for president.

"The male student was present in the girls' locker room," Georges said at the school board meeting. "Feeling violated, the girls made the choice not change into their PE (physical education) clothes with a biological male present."

The next day Georgas said, the officials at Alan B. Shepherd Middle School tried to bully a girls' PE class into changing in front of the boy.

"(The administrators) all came into the girls locker room, making them change into uniform. This went on all week," Georgas said. "My daughter refused to take part in her privacy being violated. How dare they!"

She said Shepard School Principal Rob Wegley told her daughter that any male student can use any girls' bathroom or locker room at his school so long as they say claim to "identify as female."

Georgas said Wegley told her this was the school policy as dictated by Ford and "legal counsel." She said she has filed a civil rights complaint on behalf of her daughter with the U.S. Department of Justice.

Know too that even though Nicole Georgas' story has gone viral world-wide, with world-famous women's rights activist author J.K. Rowling and champion swimmer Riley Gaines championing the girls cause, it hasn't gone viral in Chicago media. "I'd remove my daughter instantly from that school, then go full Nemesis," Rowling posted on X.

Is that puzzling that the Chicago media would ignore such a story?

Then you don't know politics.

I heard about this first by listening to Proft's show.

My friend, conservative Dan Proft of Chicago's Morning Answer has covered the story, and covered it well. He's interviewed Nicole Georgas about her daughter and I link to that interview and his podcast here.

But crickets from other Chicago media. Why?

Are they afraid of Pritzker and his horde of trans activists?

The Chicago Tribune‐where I worked for 40 years and was lead columnist and member of the editorial board‐has ignored it. The newspaper's political writer goes out of his way to bash Proft and curry favor with the establishment corporate left whenever they can‐because that is the Combine's paper–but is it wise for the Tribune to cede the issue and write off so many parents?

Apparently so.

Also, the Sun Times has ignored it.

Both newspapers capitulated to neo-Marxist George Soros long ago. So we've already established that they have bendable knees.

What has happened to Illinois where Gov. Pritzker can operate this way, even as he campaigns for president?

It was once a state of common sense, and the politics were all about common sense whether the Republicans of Abraham Lincoln or the Democrats under the Daleys.

Old man Daley wouldn't go broke promoting common sense. And Abe Lincoln was all about common sense.

But now?

The state is bankrupt, the public schools are atrocious, taxpayers are fleeing to seek opportunity. And in many areas, particularly wealthy suburbs like Deerfield, Downers Grove, Hinsdale, Western Springs and other such towns they are governed by AWFLs (Angry White Female Leftists).

And there is nothing more awful than the AWFLs.

You may have heard their sisters screaming in self-righteous rage at Jewish students during pro-Hamas protests at American universities.

From the river to the sea…

What happened to the men in those suburbs, the fathers?

They're afraid. Afraid of the AWFLs. Afraid of saying one thing that would anger them, and cost them social status in their leafy suburbs that once sported those Hate Has No Home Here signs on the front lawn.

Or they're in hiding.

In the wealthy suburbs the men (or the male impersonators who married those women) say little, lest they incur the wrath of the AWFLs.

These are corporate towns, and men in such towns are corporate types.

And in corporate suburban towns, whether in Loudon County, Virginia or Beverly Hills, California, or Martha's Vineyard there is but one religion:

Social status.

And they would sacrifice anything to protect their social status.

Anything.

They would have their own sons castrated to protect their status. Perhaps they wonder why religious fundamentalists hate them so. Does it matter?

It was the Christian moralist C.S. Lewis, in "The Abolition of Man" who years ago mentioned something we should all consider today when wrestling with the idea of this silencing of parents and the castration or sterilization of little children.

The ones afraid to risk their social status by protecting their children from the ghouls of government schools who would castrate or sterilize young children.

They are the Men Without Chests.

"We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst," wrote Lewis.

Some time ago after listening to Proft and while editing another column on this state of Illinois sanctioned child abuse, I quoted Helen Joyce, the journalist who was speaking about why it is so difficult for parents to move on after they've done what they've done.

Once they've done what they've done to their own minor children, there is no going back for them.

And I think her words are particularly apt today.

JOYCE: "Something you may not have thought of is that there are a lot of people who can't move on from this. And that's the people who have transitioned their own children.

So those people are going to be like the Japanese soldiers who were on Pacific islands and didn't know the war was over. They've got to fight forever. This is another reason why this is the worst, worst, worst social contagion that we'll ever have experienced.

"A lot of people have done what is the worst thing you could do, which is to harm their children irrevocably, because of it. Those people will have to believe that they did the right thing for the rest of their lives, for their own sanity, and for their own self-respect. So, they'll still be fighting, and each one of those people destroys entire organizations and entire friendship groups.

"Like, I've lost count of the number of times that somebody has said to me of a specific organization that has been turned upside down on this, "Oh, the deputy director has a trans child." Or, oh, the journalist on that paper who does special investigations has a trans child. Or whatever."

"So those people are going to be the people who will keep this bloody movement going, I'm sorry to say, because they've everything to lose, and it is a fight to the death as far as they are concerned."

What is required is for the activists to stop screaming and bullying that child, and all children and put their psycho-sexual politics aside. They might do us all a favor and eat their guilt and shame.

Just look at Pritzker. Politicians who promote the castration of children–and experiments I thought was once left to the demon once called Josef Mengele–are creatures I really don't want to think about now. This is Lent. And they will have an eternity to contemplate their sins. And their cruelty to little children who are just too young to understand what adults–including their parents and teachers–are doing to them.

There are many long days of Lent, which are best spent praying and fasting, and avoiding blood curdling anger. As a Greek Orthodox Christian I think of our Jesus prayer at times like this to protect my soul from anger:

"Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner"

And I think of our Lord who loved all the children. And those who didn't love them were warned of their fate in the Bible:

"It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones."

Protect them oh Lord.

Please protect the little ones.

Κύριε ἐλέησον

Kyrie Elaison. Lord have mercy.

Link

Home Front: Politix

President Trump has just issued an enormously consequential executive order revoking LBJ’s EO on ‘counting by race’

2025-01-23

[FoxNews] On Tuesday, President Donald Trump issued an executive order revoking President Lyndon Baines Johnson’s Executive Order 11246 from September of 1965 (and many other similar orders and memoranda from over the decades since). Trump’s new order is true to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the 14th Amendment. Trump’s order can be read here.

The horrible turn taken by Johnson towards "counting by race," was a deep one, a turn extended by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) in the 1978 Bakke decision and only finally and fully repudiated by SCOTUS in recent years is now federal policy that can be enforced by the Civil Rights Division at DOJ and the Office of Civil Rights at Department of Education.

This is neither a "liberal" nor a "conservative" action. It is the Constitution speaking, as the Constitution was amended to eradicate the great stain of slavery after the long and bloody Civil War.

The path to the original public meaning of the 14th Amendment has taken from 1868, when the 14th Amendment was ratified, until Tuesday to complete: Citizens of the United States may not have penalties inflicted upon them or awards given them based on any immutable characteristic or religious belief. No institution, from Harvard College, founded long before the Constitution was ratified, or the local convenience store, may lawfully violate this first principle of the 14th Amendment.

Do not discriminate on the basis of race, gender, ethnicity or religious belief. Period.

The 19th century SCOTUS took a horrible turn in the Slaughterhouse Cases which mangled the interpretation of the 14th Amendment and then the Plessy decision and the Supreme Court righted itself in Brown v. Board of Education in 1954. The Congress enshrined the core principle above in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Johnson did not understand what he launched, but in the past 20 years, "counting by race, gender, sexual orientation," along with hardships and discrimination against people of faith have taken deep root in government and elite institutions.

The Supreme Court has flailed for almost 50 years to finally, and I hope irreversibly, settle on what Abraham Lincoln, Dr. Martin Luther King and most recently Chief Justice John Roberts has concisely and eloquently stated in the 2007 case Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1 when he wrote, "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."

The chief justice lacked sufficient originalist allies on the highest court to infuse this bedrock principal of sound constitutional law into every fiber of government at every level of government until President Trump nominated and the United States Senate confirmed three new justices during Trump’s first term. Now the originalist majority is a solid six votes.

Trump’s executive order may be challenged. I hope it is.

The Supreme Court, built in part by President Trump, has already affirmed the original meaning of the 14th Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in recent years. Let any institution challenge this new EO and they will discover it is on the firmest of constitutional grounds.

Bravo to the many hands that crafted it and especially to President Trump who signed it.

Link

Arabia

Houthis Use Missiles, Drones to Attack US Ships in Arabian Sea…US Navy shoots ‘em all down

2024-12-02

Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.
[Regnum] Rebels from the Yemeni Ansar Allah (Houthi) movement said they attacked a US military vessel and three supply ships in the Arabian Sea using several missiles and UAVs, rebel spokesman Yahya Saria said.

"They struck an American destroyer and three supply ships of the American army. The operation was carried out using 16 ballistic and cruise missiles and a drone in the Arabian Sea and the Gulf of Aden," he said on the Al Masirah TV channel.

Did they strike or did they merely launch and let Allah see to the intersection of missile and target? The latter is their usual approach — though Allah almost always chooses to prevent the intersection, one way or another…

According to him, the US military supply ships Stena Impeccable, Maersk Saratoga and Liberty Grace were attacked. The Houthis intend to continue attacking US and Israeli-linked ships until the operations against the Gaza Strip cease.

As reported by Regnum, on November 22, the Houthis announced the launch of a hypersonic missile at the Nevatim airbase in Israel. It was claimed that such operations would not be stopped until the end of "Israeli aggression in Gaza and Lebanon."

On November 17, the Ansar Allah movement attacked a target in the southern Israeli city of Eilat, a Houthi spokesman claimed.

On November 12, Yahya Saria announced a successful attack on the US aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln in the Arabian Sea. The operation lasted eight hours. In addition to the aircraft carrier, the Houthis attacked two US destroyers in the Red Sea.

Following the escalation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Yemen's Houthis have warned that they will shell Israeli territory and prevent ships linked to the Jewish state from passing through the Red Sea and the Bab al-Mandeb Strait. Since October 7, 2023, they have attacked dozens of ships linked to Israel, the US and the UK.

Or not:

US Navy destroys Houthi missiles and drones targeting American ships in Gulf of Aden

[IsraelTimes] US Navy destroyers shot down seven missiles and drones fired by Yemen’s Houthi rebels at the warships and three American merchant vessels they were escorting through the Gulf of Aden. No damage or injuries are reported.

US Central Command says that the destroyers USS Stockdale and USS O’Kane shot down and destroyed three anti-ship ballistic missiles, three drones and one anti-ship cruise missile. The merchant ships were not identified.

The USS Stockdale was involved in a similar attack on Nov. 12.

Link

Arabia

Houthis claim to have launched a hypersonic missile at Nevatim airbase in Israel

2024-11-23

Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.

[Regnum] The Shiite military-political movement Ansar Allah (Houthis), which rules northern Yemen, announced on November 22 that it had launched a hypersonic missile at the Nevatim airbase in Israel.

"The Yemeni Air Force launched a strike using a Palestine-2 hypersonic ballistic missile at the Israeli enemy's Nevatim airbase in the Negev region in the south of the occupied territories," Houthi military spokesman Yahya Saria said on the AI Masihar television channel.

The military spokesman added that such operations would not stop until "Israeli aggression in Gaza and Lebanon" ended.

Earlier, on November 17, the Ansar Allah movement struck a target in the southern Israeli city of Eilat, a Houthi spokesman said.

On November 12, Saria announced a successful attack on the US aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln in the Arabian Sea. According to Yemeni media, the operation lasted eight hours. In addition to the aircraft carrier, the Houthis attacked two US destroyers in the Red Sea.

As reported by the Regnum news agency, on October 22, the Houthis announced their first strike using a hypersonic missile on an Israeli military base in Tel Aviv. The launched missile "successfully reached its targets, bypassing American and Israeli interception systems," Saria noted.

Link

-Land of the Free

Lest We Forget....

2024-11-19

[AbrahamLincolnOnline] "Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

Abraham Lincoln - November 19, 1863
From the 'Bliss Copy'

Link

Arabia

Houthis claim strikes on Israeli Eilat

2024-11-18

Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited.
[Regnum] The Ansar Allah (Houthis) movement struck a target in the city of Eilat in southern Israel. This was reported on his page on the X social network (formerly Twitter) by the movement's military spokesman Yahya Saria.

“The Air Force <…> carried out a military operation against a key Israeli enemy target in the Umm al-Rashrash area (the Arabic name for Eilat. – Ed.) in the south of occupied Palestine using drones,” he wrote on November 16.

Once again confusing wish and fulfillment. Inshallah.

Saria stressed that such strikes will continue until Israel abandons its aggressive policies in Gaza and Lebanon.

On November 12, Saria announced a successful attack on the US aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln in the Arabian Sea. According to Yemeni media, the operation lasted eight hours. In addition to the aircraft carrier, the Houthis attacked two US destroyers in the Red Sea.

Attacked, yes. Beyond that, nothing.

On October 28, Ansar Allah reported attacks on three commercial vessels using missiles and drones. It was noted that in the southern Arabian Sea, the SC Montreal was attacked by two drones, the bulk carrier Motaro was attacked with ballistic missiles in the Red Sea, and a cruise missile was fired at the Maersk Kowloon in the Arabian Sea.

On October 22, the Houthis announced their first strike using a hypersonic missile against an Israeli military base in Tel Aviv.

Following the escalation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Yemen's Houthis have warned that they will shell Israeli territory and prevent ships linked to the Jewish state from passing through the Red Sea and the Bab al-Mandeb Strait. Since October 7, 2023, they have attacked more than 190 ships linked to Israel, the United States and the United Kingdom.

Houthis claim to launch several drones at Israel, IDF unaware

[IsraelTimes] The Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen claimed to have launched several drones at Israel today.

In a statement, the terror group says it targeted “military and vital targets” in the Tel Aviv and Ashkelon area with several drones.

This morning, the IDF said it downed a drone launched at Israel “from the east” — thought to be from Iraq — near Rehovot, south of Tel Aviv.

The military is unaware of any drones launched from Yemen that reached Israel today.

Link

Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$T in /data/rantburg.com/www/pgrecentorg.php on line 132
-12 More