The Trump administration had a press gaggle Friday. A gaggle is a press pool that is a subset of the press who then participate in a press conference, and the members of the pool are responsible for getting the content of the conference to the rest of the press. The Friday gaggle was an expanded one in that, in addition to the pool itself, additional members of the press were explicitly invited to participate—which of course means yet other members, the vast majority of the press, were not explicitly invited to attend.
That’s the subtitle of a Wall Street Journal op-ed. The answer should be obvious, too: it would be the height of jingo-ism to assert US government jurisdiction over non-citizens outside our borders—outside, for instance, the 14th Amendment’s subject to the jurisdiction of the US.
Firing into another country at a foreign national, especially one that’s a citizen of the country being fired into, could well be a violation, but that potential would be a violation of a different set of circumstances than the question before the Supremes in the present case, Hernandez v Mesa. That other set of circumstance has to do with international relations, foreign policy, the nature of casus belli, and on and on—and all purely political matters, not legal ones, and so not only a different set of circumstances, but a matter that’s outside the reach of court jurisdiction.
There’s a new sheriff in Phoenix, the one replacing Sheriff Arpaio, who was defeated in the election last fall. The new cop has withdrawn Arpaio’s policy of holding prisoners for as long as “necessary” for Immigration and Customs Enforcement to come get those flagged for deportation.
I agree. Cooperation with the Feds is a two-way street; the Feds have to work with the locals, too.
[New Sheriff Paul Penzone] won’t hold immigrants flagged for deportation by federal authorities past their release date in a major policy change.
University of Chicago pupils (I can’t call them even students in the scale of pupil-student-scholar) are objecting to non-Left speakers being allowed on “their” campus.
The [pupils] objected to the school’s Institute of Politics’ invitation to former Donald Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski. They claim that allowing him to speak “normalizes bigotry” and provides a platform for fascism.
These precious ones are actively ducking away from a clear opportunity to “denormalize bigotry” by running away from him.
The coalition of students from U of C Resists, Graduate Students United, Students Working Against Prisons, and UChicago Socialists claim that the school’s “commitment to free expression doesn’t require the institution to host him….
“Aren’t you concerned, Sir, that you are undermining the people’s faith in the First Amendment freedom of the press and the press in this country when you call stories you don’t like fake news…?”
That’s what CNN’s White House Correspondent, Jim Acosta, asked President Donald Trump during last Thursday’s mid-day press conference.
No, the NLMSM is doing a fine job all by itself in undermining the people’s faith in the press—the shot about the First Amendment is disingenuously irrelevant and an illustration of the NLMSM’s performance—the undermining needs no help, and is getting none, from Trump.
That’s Howard Kurtz’ claim. In his piece about the NLMSM, Michael Flynn, and the “leak” that led to his resignation as President Donald Trump’s National Security Advisor, Kurtz said that The Washington Post story that began the thing was “good reporting.”
Then Kurtz said this:
[T]he Post story would not have been possible without the cooperation of nine unnamed senior officials who furnished the leaked information.
The Post story was built entirely on those unnamed persons. Unnamed. We don’t know there were nine. We don’t know they were senior or even officials. We don’t even know they exist. I have to ask: what part of “unnamed” is unclear to Kurtz?
This time, courtesy of the Progressive-Democrats in the House of Representatives. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Congressman Elijah Cummings (D, MD), as part of their whining about the Republican majority in the House
…cited a tweet purportedly from [ex-National Security Advisor Michael (Lt Gen, USA, Ret)] Flynn that said, “I feel it is unfair that I have been made the sole scapegoat for what happened.”
Which Cummings proceeded to emphasize, with Pelosi chiming in.
CUMMINGS: Madam Leader, just this morning, Flynn tweeted, and this is a quote, “scapegoat,” end of quote. Scapegoat. He basically described himself as a scapegoat.
Army Colonel Jeffery Nance, the presiding judge in the Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl desertion case has some concerns, officially because Bergdahl’s lawyers has them; unfortunately, Nance has his own, and they’re misplaced.
The judge…called video of [President Donald] Trump repeatedly calling Bergdahl a traitor during campaign speeches “disturbing” at a pre-trial hearing Monday.
He went further:
He also asked prosecutors pointed questions about whether Trump’s criticism has already created a public perception that Bergdahl won’t be treated fairly.
Mexico is upset with President Donald Trump’s efforts to tighten border security and especially with his efforts to deal more thoroughly with illegal aliens present in the US, many of whom are Mexican. A coalition has formed—a group of Mexican officials, legislators, governors and public figures planning to meet [in the US] with migrant groups—to plot ways in which to interfere with our enforcement of our immigration laws.
One of those ways was described by Mexican ex-Foreign Minister Jorge Castañeda:
The backlog in the immigration system is tremendous [the idea is to double or triple the backlog]….
A couple days ago, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D, MA) was disparaging a fellow Senator, Jeff Sessions (R, AL) who was being advised-and-consented regarding his nomination for Attorney General. Senators objected, and then the Senate voted to require her to be silent for the remainder of that debate when she persisted in the disparagement. Understand, too, that whatever we might think about the Senate’s rules against disparaging a colleague, the rules are quite clear and quite well known to all Senators and their staffs.