quote:

How does the Secret Service even think of letting someone in a mask near one of their protectees?

The stairs were steep!

quote:

he entered Capital Burger and headed up a few stairs

He sat at a table next to her and didn't order anything?

quote:

Originally posted by BigSwede:
He sat at a table next to her and didn't order anything?

He had to retrieve the money from the purse, first.

quote:

'm getting quite annoyed with her and her constant glamour photo ops.

..."the victim, who chose to remain glamorous"...

Wait. She has grandchildren?

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

quote:

Originally posted by BigSwede:
He sat at a table next to her and didn't order anything?

He had to retrieve the money from the purse, first.

I get it

She was on their detail and a lone guy sitting next to her, not ordering anything didn't get their attention?

Just a joke to lighten the mood, my friend.

Trump Derangement Syndrome afflicts more Universities than just Harvard:

https://www.detroitnews.com/st...-big-10/83193724007/

UM faculty urge Ono, regents to create mutual defense compact in Big Ten

The Detroit News

The University of Michigan's Faculty Senate has adopted four resolutions, including one that calls on the university's administration to enter into a mutual defense pact with other members of the Big Ten to fend off attacks on academic freedom and other moves by the Trump administration, according to results released Monday.

Nearly 93% of the UM Faculty Senate voters supported a motion to enter into a mutual defense pact with other Big Ten schools. Over 3,000 of the Senate's 7,600 members participated, according to a Faculty Senate release. The senate members include staff, graduate students, librarians, archivists and curators.

UM becomes the fifth of the Big Ten's 18 university faculties to approve a resolution calling for the mutual defense compact, which is envisioned as pooling resources and funneling money to a participant that is targeted by a government body. The others are Michigan State University, Rutgers, Indiana and Nebraska. No such compact exists yet and would need to be created by the presidents of Big Ten universities.


UM faculty mull idea
The non-binding resolutions also urged UM's administrators to continue or resume all legally compliant diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives as well as protect international faculty, students and staff from unwarranted detention by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.


UM is "actively partnering" with higher education organizations, including the Big Ten Academic Alliance, the Association of American Universities, the American Council on Education and the Association of Public Land Grant Universities, to advocate for individual institutions' interests and higher education, spokeswoman Kay Jarvis wrote in a Monday email.

"We value faculty engagement and recognize non-binding resolutions as an important way for the faculty senate to weigh in on issues impacting our community," Jarvis wrote.

The resolutions were passed in a four-day voting period that ended Sunday after UM in late March closed two offices and an initiative dedicated to DEI, shifting the money to other initiatives including scholarships. At least 22 UM international students and recent graduates have had their visas or their right to stay in the United States revoked by the Trump administration.

Derek Peterson, a professor of history and African studies, said he wrote the resolution to protect international faculty, students and staff.

"We've asked for legal support for international students ... whose visas are revoked or who are interned by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and we hope the university will act seriously on that score too," Peterson said. "Having legal advice close at hand, ready to be deployed for our students who are here, and our faculty and staff who are here on visas is essential to protect them."


The Faculty Senate release said the resolutions are meant to defend UM community members from interference by the Trump administration. Over 200 Faculty Senate members signed a petition calling for a special meeting last week in response to threats to the "foundational principles of American higher education," the news release said.

"I think all four are really important statements of the mood of the faculty and its relationship to the administration, and the silence from the administration right now on important issues," said Sandy Levitsky, an associate professor of sociology, in a statement.

"These were resounding votes," Levitsky said.

How Big Ten compact idea began

Rutgers University faculty were the first to back this kind of mutual defense concept, which is a non-binding resolution to "commit meaningful funding to a shared or distributed defense fund. This fund shall be used to provide immediate and strategic support to any member institution under direct political or legal infringement."

The UM's defense compact resolution was presented by UM law professor Sam Bagenstos, who was the general counsel for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services during the Biden administration. Bagenstos said Monday every individual institution right now is in a very difficult situation.

“The rational thing for any individual institution to do when faced with demands from the Trump administration to do things that are illegal or unnecessary/at risk of losing their federal funds is for each individual institution to do what the Trump administration wants and preferably to do it before they’re asked in the hopes that the administration will focus on someone else,” Bagenstos said.

“The problem is that what may be individually rational for any one institution or even for every institution taken individually is incredibly harmful to the academy as a whole, and so there needs to be some mechanism by which the various colleges and universities can commit that they are going to stand together,” he added. “And the idea of a mutual defense compact is to commit that the universities will stand together and get rid of the problem of collective action that they have when the administration goes after universities one at a time.”

The schools would likely agree to share resources of various kinds, Bagenstos said, which might be legal resources or strategic communications resources. Without some kind of mutual agreement across institutions, he said every person is on their own.

“And that puts our administration, our regents, in a terrible position and so knowing that the faculty has their back if they want to join a mutual agreement with the other universities in the Big Ten, I think is supportive of the administration and standing up for the values of the university,” Bagenstos said.

Faculty opponent speaks out

But Faculty Senate member Keith Riles, a H. Richard Crane Collegiate Professor of Physics, spoke in opposition to the mutual defense compact resolution and called the university's previous commitment to DEI illegal, according to the senate release.

"You brought this down on all of us, and now some of you have the nerve to cite academic freedom," Riles said in a statement. "Give me a break. You don't have a leg to stand on. Until you have the integrity to acknowledge past law-breaking and vow never to repeat it, you lack the credibility to invoke such high principles."

Others disagreed. The faculty expects more from the University of Michigan's executive leadership, said Kevin Cokley, professor and associate chair of the Psychology Department and professor of education, who co-sponsored the resolution related to DEI initiatives that requests the university reinstate the programs and rehire staff who lost their jobs.

"One of the ways that the University of Michigan has really sort of stood out in higher education is that we have been seen as an exemplar for DEI," said Cokley, whose resolution was approved with nearly 79% support. "I would really hope that the university would retain the Office of Diversity Equity and Inclusion, which they have currently dismantled."


Over 95% of senate voters also approved a "Statement in Support of the Core Missions and Values of Higher Education in the United States of America" that was drafted by governance leaders at universities in the Big Ten Academic Alliance.

Levitsky said she hopes UM President Santa Ono and the Board of Regents hear that faculty are looking for the administration to stand up for the research they conduct and the values they stand for.

The strategy of "preemptive capitulation is not working. It is demoralizing to faculty, staff, students and alumni to see our university lay low like this, instead of standing up for what we do and what we believe," she said.

UM Regent Sarah Hubbard, a Republican, has previously defended the Ono administration's actions including the closing of the DEI offices after the Trump administration threatened to cut federal funding.

"We are eliminating bureaucratic overspending and making Michigan more accessible," Hubbard said on X at the time. "I will continue to push for even greater financial support for talented students with financial need."


Peterson said there have been "heartening signs of resistance" to the Trump administration's agenda, mostly from private universities on the East Coast in the past week. Harvard University refused to comply with several federal demands, which the Cambridge, Massachusetts school said violate the First Amendment and civil rights laws. In response, the Trump administration froze over $2.2 billion in grant funding and $60 million in contracts with the university.

"It's time for us at Michigan, the United States' most prominent public institution, to play a leading role here," Peterson said. "To tell the Trump government that we're not going to roll over and acquiesce to rules emanating from Washington that are plainly in variance with what the federal government ought to be involved with."

hmackay@detroitnews.com

Jennifer Chambers and The Associated Press contributed.

Good, more useless spending saved!

I think more of these Universities should all get together and promote Hamas, Hezbollah and ignore antisemitic behavior. Do it as a group with a common purpose, where all schools can create a state of fear for students who don't subscribe to the mindset. Then Pam Bondi can indict all of them on RICO charges to violate title 9 and antisemitism laws. Please high and mighty Ivy Leaguers take the bait.

Advice for Ivy League Universities: Take the Trump Deal, Before It’s Too Late | Victor Davis Hanson

Trump Says It’s ‘Not Possible’ to Give Every Deportee a Trial
The president says he is being ’stymied at every turn' by the courts, including the Supreme Court, on his use of the Alien Enemies Act.

President Donald Trump on April 21 said that the U.S. government cannot provide a trial to every individual who is slated to be deported, responding to a recent Supreme Court ruling that temporarily barred the government from conducting removals of illegal immigrants under the Alien Enemies Act.

This was Trump’s first public comment on the issue since the Supreme Court on Saturday morning barred Trump from directing immigration officials to conduct more flights of illegal immigrants identified as gang members to a Salvadoran prison.

In a post on social media, Trump said that he was being “stymied at every turn” by the courts, including the Supreme Court, on his use of the Alien Enemies Act. A federal judge in Washington initially blocked his use of the 1798 law.
“I’m doing what I was elected to do, remove criminals from our Country, but the Courts don’t seem to want me to do that,” the president wrote in the post. “My team is fantastic, doing an incredible job, however, they are being stymied at every turn by even the U.S. Supreme Court, which I have such great respect for, but which seemingly doesn’t want me to send violent criminals and terrorists back to Venezuela, or any other Country, for that matter.”

If the government provided all illegal immigrants with a trial, Trump wrote, it would mean that there would need to be “hundreds of thousands of trials for the hundreds of thousands of Illegals we are sending out of the Country,” which is “not possible to do.”

Trump said the courts are being influenced and “intimidated by the Radical Left” and that “if we don’t get these criminals out of our Country, we are not going to have a Country any longer,” referring to criminal illegal immigrants.


Trump’s social media comment appeared to contain a response to critics who said his administration did not follow due process when deporting certain individuals. In one case that has drawn media attention, multiple Democratic lawmakers have traveled to El Salvador to seek the return of deported Salvadoran national Kilmar Abrego Garcia.

Federal officials and an immigration judge have said that Abrego Garcia is an illegal immigrant and likely a member of the MS-13 gang, which was designated as a terrorist group by the Trump administration earlier this year.

Abrego Garcia was also suspected to have been involved in human trafficking in 2022, Homeland Security said in a report this past week. He was deported to El Salvador in March, despite a court order barring his deportation.
In the Supreme Court order, the justices other than Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas wrote that the “government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class of detainees from the United States until further order of this court.” Alito wrote a dissent criticizing the way the court issued the order, calling it ”unprecedented“ and ”legally questionable.”
The high court acted in an emergency appeal from the American Civil Liberties Union, which argued that immigration authorities appeared to be restarting removals under the Alien Enemies Act.

Earlier in April, the high court ruled that deportations could proceed only if those about to be removed had a chance to argue their case in court and were given “a reasonable time” to contest their pending removals.

On April 19, lawyers for the Trump administration filed court papers opposing the high court’s ruling, saying, in part, that the government did provide advance notice to detainees before the removals.
“Detainees receiving such notices have had adequate time to file habeas claims—indeed, the putative class representatives and others have filed such claims,” Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...&ea_med=desktop_news

This message has been edited. Last edited by: parabellum, April 23, 2025 08:58 AM

El Salvador President Nayib Bukele met with Trump and supports his stance on illegals and specifically MS13 terrorists. This guy knows MS13 all too well.

https://x.com/GlockfordFiles/s...nistration-day-94%2F

I don't understand why any of the illegals deserve due process prior to being removed from the country.

Let's say any one of us is trespassing. The police either show up and tell us to leave or arrest us and remove us from the premises. We then either leave, get a ticket which we can pay, or end up in jail with an eventual court date. In none of these scenarios do we get "due process" prior to being removed. Only after.

I'd propose that we remove as many aliens as possible back to their country of origin. Then, if they believe they were improperly removed they can have their day in court. Just like any one of us.

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:
I don't understand why any of the illegals deserve due process prior to being removed from the country.

Let's say any one of us is trespassing. The police either show up and tell us to leave or arrest us and remove us from the premises. We then either leave, get a ticket which we can pay, or end up in jail with an eventual court date. In none of these scenarios do we get "due process" prior to being removed. Only after.

I'd propose that we remove as many aliens as possible back to their country of origin. Then, if they believe they were improperly removed they can have their day in court. Just like any one of us.

Totally agree. How is being sent back home a sentence that needs to be applied by a judge?

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:
I don't understand why any of the illegals deserve due process prior to being removed from the country...

I may not have all the facts, but my understanding is that he snuck into the US illegally in 2012. At some point he was found out and then applied for asylum, but I believe that his plea for asylum was denied by a judge in 2019, or later. So I believe he has had due process here, beyond what he deserved in my opinion.


.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

quote:

Originally posted by BigSwede:
He sat at a table next to her and didn't order anything?

He had to retrieve the money from the purse, first.

What bothers me the most about this, along with the Butler, PA fiasco, is that the mystique of the Secret Service may have evaporated. I believe part of the deterrent against attempts on the lives of the President and other high-ranking officials was the perception that the Service was almost ninja-like: the guys you saw around the protectee were not necessarily all the guys; they could close on the bad guys and neutralize them in a split second.

Realizing the Service isn't "all that", and actually worse than a couple of mall cops in the case of Noem's protection, just leaves the President, his family and other officials very vulnerable in my opinion.


.

More and more it's become apparent that Rubio was an excellent selection for Sec of State. This 34 minute interview was worth my time as it touched on multiple geopolitical issues.
https://x.com/TheFP/status/1915046718044807300