quote:

TheHill.com: DOJ cutting American Bar Association access to judicial nominees

by Rebecca Beitsch - 05/29/25 5:54 PM ET

Attorney General Pam Bondi told the American Bar Association (ABA) on Thursday that the Trump administration would no longer cooperate as the organization vets its judicial nominees.



In a letter, the Department of Justice (DOJ) accuses the bar association of failing to “fix the bias in its rating process,” a claim that follows the organization labeling some of President Trump’s nominees as unqualified for the bench.

“Unfortunately, the ABA no longer functions as a fair arbiter of nominees’ qualifications, and its ratings invariably and demonstrably favor nominees put forth by Democratic administrations,” Bondi wrote in the letter to ABA President William Bay.

“Accordingly, while the ABA is free to comment on judicial nominations along with other activist organizations, there is no justification for treating the ABA differently from such other activist organizations and the Department of Justice will not do so. Specifically, the Office of Legal Policy will no longer direct nominees to provide waivers allowing the ABA access to non-public information, including bar records. Nominees will also not respond to questionnaires prepared by the ABA and will not sit for interviews with the ABA,” she added.

ROSAL

About fucking time.

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:
https://x.com/EricLDaugh/status/1929921961922122179

[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe id="twitter-widget-1" scrolling="no" src="https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&lang=en&theme=&id=1929921961922122179" style="position: static; visibility: visible; width: 550px; height: 823px; display: block; border: none; background-repeat: no-repeat; background-image: url('https://codejanitor.net/embeds/images/bgmessage.png'); background-position: 50% 85px; background-size: 200px; overflow: hidden;" title="Twitter Tweet"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

[sarcasm] I wonder what the democratic leadership in those cities are suddenly doing to achieve these near miraculous numbers?[/sarcasm]

I’ll be honest, I’m not wild about all the pork in it, either. Raising the debt limit bothers me, and I’m hopeful that the other changes Trump is putting into effect make it irrelevant. I hate the omnibus system - I think it’s beyond lazy and it allows a lot of legislation to pass that otherwise wouldn’t, but those are seemingly the exact reasons congress loves doing it this way. How do you get a bunch of corrupt assholes to agree to give you what you want? I think unfortunately the way it works is that you give them something in return. I wish it didn’t work that way, but it seems to be so.

quote:

I hate the omnibus system - I think it’s beyond lazy and it allows a lot of legislation to pass that otherwise wouldn’t, but those are seemingly the exact reasons congress loves doing it this way. How do you get a bunch of corrupt assholes to agree to give you what you want? I think unfortunately the way it works is that you give them something in return. I wish it didn’t work that way, but it seems to be so.

But it doesn't have to work that way. It works that way because they are all greedy, and they can get away with it. You support my pork, and I'll support your pork. They benefit from it both with donors and with constituents who want some project or program. They all hope to get rich and retire before the shit hits the fan. But they know they are complicit, no matter what they say.

It's a problem that will eventually require solving. Term limits along with it. It's a problem I don't think the founding father anticipated, and I don't have the answer.

That said, for the good things in the bill, I hope it passes and President Trump signs it into law.

House Speaker Mike Johnson said Musk is "terribly wrong" about the bill...

https://x.com/Geiger_Capital/s...lled-bill-trump-goes



Trump vs. Rand

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump on Tuesday slammed Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) after Paul appeared on CNBC's "Squawk Box," saying he's "just not open to supporting $5 trillion ... in debt ceiling increase.

Trump hit back, writing on Truth Social: "He loves voting ‘NO’ on everything, he thinks it’s good politics, but it’s not."

In a subsequent post, Trump attacked Paul again, writing that he "never has any practical or constructive ideas," adding "His ideas are actually crazy (losers!). The people of Kentucky can’t stand him. This is a BIG GROWTH BILL!"

As author and commentator Tom Woods wrote of Trump's decision to attack Paul:

Rand Paul has defended Donald Trump at times when other Republicans ran and hid.

All through Russiagate, Rand insisted the whole thing was a witch hunt and that Trump was innocent.

During the first impeachment trial, Rand emerged as one of Trump's staunchest defenders in the Senate. Same for the second such trial, which Rand denounced as "absurd" and "political theater."

He defended Trump against campaign finance allegations in 2018.

Establishment left and right alike went after Trump in 2019 for his Syria withdrawal, and at that moment when the President needed allies, Rand supported him.

Likewise for Trump's 2018 summit with Vladimir Putin. Said Rand:

"Yes, the vast majority of the foreign policy community, the bipartisan consensus said you shouldn't meet with Putin. They also said he shouldn't meet with Kim and this is an extraordinary thing about President Trump that should be lauded and not belittled is that he is willing to meet with adversaries to try to prevent us from having World War III."

So you'd think the response to all that would be to say: thanks, Rand, for all the support, especially when it was most difficult to stand in my corner and other Republicans had abandoned me. Now let's see if we can address your concerns.

https://www.zerohedge.com/poli...lled-bill-trump-goes

Can someone explain this whoLe “TACO” thing to me?

My understanding is the dems are against Trumps use of tariffs claiming they are a “tax” on the US citizens.

DJT says “F.U.” And threatens them anyway. Other countries with higher tariffs come hat in hand and reach deals to either invest in US, companies pledge to move production to US, reduce the tariffs they charge on US products, or some other agreement is put in place.


Trump threatened, they blinked, we end up with a better trade arrangement than before the tariff was threatened. Stock market goes back up, people are happy, it’s all good.

You’d think the dems would be happy, as the evil country-destroying tariffs were avoided and the existential threat to democracy has been avoided even if just temporarily. Now, I certainly would never expect them to go so far as to credit Trump for yet another “Art of the Deal”, but you’d at least think they could grudgingly acknowledge satisfaction that tariffs weren’t going into effect.


What do they do instead? Try some lame “TACO” acronym to suggest Trump backs down instead of going through with the tariffs. So, now are we to understand dems are FOR tariffs? Is there any explanation other than full blown TDS? Is just “Oppositional Defiance Disorder” on a grand scale and they have to pathologically push for whatever is opposite of his move?



And another thing, this illegal alien/terrorist who just torched the Jewish group in CO. I am seeing folks on the left blaming Trump in social media saying it is DJT’s fault that he was in the country.

Sure, he entered on Biden’s watch with a tourist VISA, made an asylum claim, and after that expired, was given a work permit, all under Biden. The work permit expired in March 2025, after Trump returned to office. Ergo, it’s Trump’s fault because he didn’t move fast enough to get him out of the country.

This from the same folks screaming that ICE is kicking people out too fast, they need more Due Process, and those that have been deported already need to be brought back???


This dipshits really need to make up their mind.

quote:

Originally posted by 911Boss:
Can someone explain this whoLe “TACO” thing to me?

The media are learning they can get Trump's back up with questions like this, hoping to get him off topic, they're trolling. The substance of their issue is immaterial, get him mad.

911Boss I’ll keep this short: They’re Leftists.
Irrational and annoying.

I’m sure we could come up with hundreds of adjectives but there’s no need really.

^^^^ Thank you. Was about to write this same thing. But yeah, the only “explanation” needed is that none is needed.

It is 2 things. TDS on the part of some who say it, but mostly I think it is part of the leftist strategy of demonizing everything Trump says or does. It is political propaganda to keep Dem voters convinced Trump is stupid/weak/demented.

Rush was right about low information voters and that leftism is a mental illness.

Pete Hegseth orders Harvey Milk's name be removed from the oiler USNS Harvey Milk During Pride Month .

And of course I have always thought naming a Navy vessel after the San Francisco gay rights activist/Supervisor was ludicrous. He was never an exemplary member of the Navy, in fact he did not receive an Honorable Discharge, but an "Under Other" discharge, which he distorted into a dishonorable one for political purposes in SF politics. And of course this has brought out long forgotten dirty laundry, which was well known in gay circles, and documented in SF Chronicle gay reporter Randy Shilts biography of Milk




And who knows, info about his ties to Jim Jones and Jonestown may resurface.

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...-from-u-s-navy-ship/

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
Pete Hegseth orders Harvey Milk's name be removed from the oiler USNS Harvey Milk During Pride Month .

Awesome

That was always meant as a big "fuck you" and finger right in the eye from the Left.

quote:

Originally posted by 911Boss:
Can someone explain this whoLe “TACO” thing to me?

It is to signify President Trump "folded" on the tariffs.

Goes to show what dipshits people are... the tariffs were to get the trade partners to the table, and holy shit, did they run there.

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
Pete Hegseth orders Harvey Milk's name be removed from the oiler USNS Harvey Milk During Pride Month .

And of course I have always thought naming a Navy vessel after the San Francisco gay rights activist/Supervisor was ludicrous. He was never an exemplary member of the Navy, in fact he did not receive an Honorable Discharge, but an "Under Other" discharge, which he distorted into a dishonorable one for political purposes in SF politics. And of course this has brought out long forgotten dirty laundry, which was well known in gay circles, and documented in SF Chronicle gay reporter Randy Shilts biography of Milk




And who knows, info about his ties to Jim Jones and Jonestown may resurface.

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...-from-u-s-navy-ship/

Well, it put a damper on gay pride month. Another reson for a good butt hurt.

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
Pete Hegseth orders Harvey Milk's name be removed from the oiler USNS Harvey Milk During Pride Month....

https://www.breitbart.com/poli...-from-u-s-navy-ship/

Numerous articles, including the above link from Breitbart, failed to mention that the woke Biden administration changed the names of two ships:

"While the renaming is rare, the Biden administration also changed the names of two Navy ships in 2023 as part of the effort to remove Confederate names from U.S. military installations.

The Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser Chancellorsville — named for the Civil War battle — was renamed the Robert Smalls after a sailor and former enslaved person. And the Maury, an oceanographic survey ship originally named after a Confederate sailor, was renamed the Marie Tharp after a geologist and oceanographic cartographer who created the first scientific maps of the Atlantic Ocean floor..."

Complete article:

https://www.militarytimes.com/...ts-icon-harvey-milk/

quote:

Originally posted by downtownv:
Well, it put a damper on gay pride month. Another reason for a good butt hurt.

I see what you did there.