They were fools for thinking things would transpire any differently. The honeymoon is clearly over but F those other world leaders for being foolish enough to not see this coming. What did they think would happen? FN idiots.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/...-america-back-to.php


the Biden administration has told our allies that “America is back.”

Does this mean that it was some imposter nation that

- destroyed the ISIS caliphate,
- took out the Iranian terrorist Soleimani,
- helped broker peace deals between Israel and important Arab states,
- and supplied Ukraine lethal aid with which to defend itself against Russia?

So when a foreign country holds a U.S. president in contempt what exactly does it mean? Does it have any teeth behind it such as limiting his participation and input on future summits or is it the equivalent of a strongly worded letter?

'The president never shies away from taking questions': White House defends Biden not facing reporters for NINE DAYS during the Afghanistan fiasco and now insists he knew Kabul's rapid collapse was possible

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne...llapse-possible.html

The White House said Friday that President Joe Biden 'never shies' away from taking questions – after the president has been slammed for avoiding White House reporters' questions amid the chaos in Afghanistan.

The statement about Biden's willingness to face the press came as the White House communications team has kept Biden away from the reporters who follow him – and the president has avoided his typical proclivity to engage with them on issues of the day, even amid the unfolding international crisis.

Biden spoke from the White House on Wednesday about the coronavirus amid the evolving situation in Afghanistan, as his administration struggles to fire up a massive evacuation to get thousands of Americans, Afghans, and allied personnel out of the country after the fall of Kabul.

But he ignored a chorus of shouted questions about the situation there.

'The president never shies away from taking questions, White House Communications Director Kate Bedingfield told MSNBC in an interview Friday morning.

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:

'The president never shies away from taking questions, White House Communications Director Kate Bedingfield told MSNBC in an interview Friday morning.

No, he flees like Usain Bolt running the 100m.

What an incredibly absurd statement.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:

'The president never shies away from taking questions, White House Communications Director Kate Bedingfield told MSNBC in an interview Friday morning.

No, he flees like Usain Bolt running the 100m.

What an incredibly absurd statement.

Must be one of those "Trans" words for that, like Tanswomen means its a man

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
'The president never shies away from taking questions, White House Communications Director Kate Bedingfield told MSNBC in an interview Friday morning.

Down with the patriarchy - replace 'Baghdad Bob' with this 'Kabul Karen'.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
What an incredibly absurd statement.

This is just one more shining example of the utter incompetence of this entire administration. From top to bottom this is a cast of completely worthless clowns. In a mere 7 months they've done the impossible....they've failed more historically and spectacularly than anyone could have ever imagined.

quote:

Originally posted by lastmanstanding:
So when a foreign country holds a U.S. president in contempt what exactly does it mean? Does it have any teeth behind it such as limiting his participation and input on future summits or is it the equivalent of a strongly worded letter?

You might call it "limiting his participation" in that Biden will be pretty much ignored. Do the Russians want to play a bigger role in Syria? They will. Do the Red Chinese want to treat Vancouver like their own personal rest stop and public outhouse? They will.

The reason that should matter to Biden's puppeteers is that at his level, influence and intimidation are supposed to be power - they're much cheaper, much more effective and burn much less political capital than, say, sanctions or an invasion.

And now I will take questions.
Let me look at my list to see who we have prearranged questions with.
Now let me look at my predesignated answer to the question.

Is this really a press conference with questions, or just reporters participating in the press conference on behalf of the Biden administration.

Joe can’t answer questions without pre-planned questions and answers provided by those pulling his strings.


Joe just corrected the reporter.
“I thought the question was”… and then he said what the question was which was pre-planned.”

quote:

Originally posted by kimber1911:
And now I will take questions.
Let me look at my list to see who we have prearranged questions with.
Now let me look at my predesignated answer to the question.

Is this really a press conference with questions, or just reporters participating in the press conference on behalf of the Biden administration.

Joe can’t answer questions without pre-planned questions and answers provided by those pulling his strings.


Joe just corrected the reporter.
“I thought the question was”… and then he said what the question was which was pre-planned.”

Even with the rigged press conference he came across as feckless and weak.

This should generate news: Biden claimed that he told all of his European allies of his decision to withdraw (did he mention he would do it haphazardly and precipitously?) at the G7 meeting, and they all "agreed" with his decision.

Angela Merkel has already said she doesn't agree with the decision.

We'll see if what the European leaders say about this claim that they "agreed" with Biden's decision. He's now forced the media to ask them about this.

I want to know if this is a real thing that happened or another confabulation by a dementia-ridden brain.

He's getting actual questions. There is now an open conflict between Biden and the Deep State and the media is siding with the Deep State.

Yeah, I don't think that's going to work out for him


Germany Calls Biden’s Afghanistan Pull-Out the “Biggest Debacle” for NATO
U.S. allies “embittered,” as rogue states and terrorist groups cheer Taliban victory.


German Chancellor Angela Merkel and members of her government condemned the Biden administration’s catastrophic withdrawal from Afghanistan in harsh terms.

The debacle in Afghanistan was “an extremely bitter development. Bitter, dramatic and terrifying,” Chancellor Merkel said while speaking to reporters on Tuesday.

In her sharpest attack on Biden’s decision yet, the German chancellor suggested that the Biden administration’s hasty and messy withdrawal was motivated by “domestic political reasons” rather than geostrategic necessities.

https://legalinsurrection.com/...st-debacle-for-nato/

So; Will Biden defy a Federal court order?


Appeals Court Denies Biden Plea to Block Trump’s ‘Remain in Mexico’ Policy

https://www.breitbart.com/immi...court-remain-mexico/

A federal appeals court denied President Joe Biden’s plea to block the reinstatement of former President Donald Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy that kept migrants in Mexico while awaiting their asylum hearings rather than releasing them into the interior of the United States.

Last week, Trump-appointed Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk ordered the Biden administration to reinstate the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), commonly known as Remain in Mexico, after it ended the program in June and started releasing thousands of MPP migrants into the U.S.

Biden’s DHS appealed the permanent injunction by Kacsmaryk, asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to issue a stay blocking the injunction. On Thursday, Judge Jennifer Elrod, appointed by former President George W. Bush, along with Judges Andy Oldham and Cory Wilson, both appointed by Trump, denied Biden’s request.

Elrod, Oldham, and Wilson write that DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas failed to weigh the impact on border states that ending Remain in Mexico would have. Likewise, the court asserts that Texas, in particular, is harmed by the elimination of Remain in Mexico.

The three-judge panel writes:

DHS “failed to address whether there was ‘legitimate reliance’ on” MPP. In its seven-page June 1 Memorandum, DHS does not directly mention any reliance interests, especially those of the States. The closest the June 1 Memorandum gets is a reference to “the impact [terminating MPP] could have on border management and border communities.” But the Memorandum makes clear that “border communities” do not include border states. And the vague reference to “border management” is insufficient to show specific, meaningful consideration of the States’ reliance interests. [Emphasis added]

In response, the Government concedes that it failed to consider the States’ reliance interests. But it argues that is irrelevant because “the States have no cognizable reliance interest in a discretionary program.” We reject that argument for several reasons. [Emphasis added]

…

As the Supreme Court explained, “[w]hen an agency changes course, … it must be cognizant that longstanding policies may have engendered serious reliance interests that must be taken into account.” Those reliance interests included states’ interests. So if the termination of DACA — a discretionary, immigration program — must consider states’ “potential reliance interests,” then so does termination of MPP. That is particularly true here because the district court found as a matter of fact — and the Government does not contest — that states like Texas face fiscal harm from the termination of MPP. [Emphasis added]

The court also found that Mayorkas’ ending of Remain in Mexico “failed to consider DHS’s prior factual findings on MPP’s benefits.”

“In its October 2019 Assessment of MPP, DHS found that ‘aliens without meritorious claims—which no longer constitute[d] a free ticket into the United States—[were] beginning to voluntarily return home,'” the New Orleans-based court writes:

DHS also found that MPP addressed the “perverse incentives” created by allowing “those with nonmeritorious claims … [to] remain in the country for lengthy periods of time.” These benefits, DHS emphasized, were a “core component” or “cornerstone” of the agency’s prior immigration policy.
[Emphasis added]

Nonetheless, the June 1 Memorandum did not expressly mention, let alone meaningfully discuss, DHS’s prior factual findings. Instead, the Secretary changed policies based on his own findings that contradict DHS’s October 2019 findings. But an agency must provide “a more detailed justification” when a “new policy rests upon factual findings that contradict those which underlay its prior policy.” The Secretary did not provide the required “more detailed justification.” This further indicates that the termination of MPP was arbitrary and capricious. [Emphasis added]

The court states that DHS, in following federal statute, “can parole an alien” into the U.S. on a case-by-case basis, can release an alien on bail or conditional parole while they await deportation proceedings, or hold them in federal custody.

“What the Government cannot do, the district court held, is simply release every alien described in § 1225 en masse into the United States,” the appellate court writes:

The Government has not pointed to a single word anywhere in the [Immigration and Nationality Act] that suggests it can do that. And the Government cannot claim an irreparable injury from being enjoined against an action that it has no statutory authorization to take. [Emphasis added]

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt first filed their lawsuit challenging Biden’s end to Remain in Mexico in April, arguing that the move spurred “a huge surge of Central American migrants, including thousands of unaccompanied minors, passing through Mexico in order to advance meritless asylum claims at the U.S. border.”

The case is Texas v. Biden, No. 21-10806 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Burn baby, burn!

It's all crashing down around them and it's been just over a half a year.

Yeah, it would be great, except we have Americans abandoned to the biggest psychopaths on the planet, we gave them billions in equipment, and the US looks like a complete fool and unworthy of trust.

I hate to even think how much ole Joe is going to screw up in his remaining time left if he's managed as much as he has in only six months in office...

Heard a great description of Biden today.

They said listening to him is like listening to a kid in school give a book report on a book they haven't read.