There's a foreign country that has more than 28 firms registered to lobby on its behalf, spends billions of dollars buying influence in DC and academia, and gets more in-person lobbying meetings with US officials than any other foreign country.
Can you guess which it is?
I'm guessing that 80% would say Israel, and maybe 20% would say Ukraine.
It's not either one.
In fact, it's a country that sponsors Islamist, anti-American terrorism and shelters international Islamist terrorists.
The people on the left and MSNBC "Republicans" disingenuously screeching over idiot randos saying stupid crap, will next month elect as top law enforcement officer a man who fantasizes about the murder of children based on the politics of their parents.
The only people I want to hear from on this are people who were likewise outraged and wanted career consequences for Jay Jones.
If you were doing "we still need to elect Jay Jones" two days ago, you can have a seat about idiot groyper randos saying stupid shit in a group chat.
Relatedly, if you were excusing or defending people facing career or personal social consequences for cheering the literal murder of a man over his speech, you can have a seat.
Opposition to deportation on grounds of supporting continued cheap labor is either amoral or insincere.
The reason illegal aliens are such cheap labor is because they’re an exploitable underclass who can’t complain about abuse and illegality.
1/
The moment you legalize them, you remove the fear of them reporting their employers for illegal wages and exploitation. Our laws even financially incentivize such reporting.
So the moment they gain legal status, your slave-wage-cheap-labor argument goes up in smoke and they become about as costly as any other legal resident to employ.
2/
So this leaves us two options:
1) You do in fact want to keep them here to exploit and abuse them forever as artificially cheap labor caused by their fear of reporting abuse and illegality
or
2) You don’t want to keep them in that status, you want to grant them legal status, and your “but we need cheap labor!” argument was nonsense for what you wanted all along: amnesty for millions of illegal aliens.
3/
I missed the mass performative resignations when Joe Biden undid the years-long work of dedicated federal prosecutors by extending corrupt blank pardons to his own son, right?
Or when the White House attacked the special counsel for being honest about Biden forgetting things?
Seems to be a very selective sense of when the president's lawful but corrupt intervention in federal law enforcement work, benefiting allies at the expense of the rule of law, warrants outrage from the bureaucrats.
Or, for instance, when people working for Joe Biden decided not to prosecute Joe Biden for the same crime for which they were prosecuting Joe Biden's chief political opponent.
Or when the people working for Joe Biden tried to cut Joe Biden's son a sweetheart plea deal so corrupt it blew up in federal court under light questioning.
Surely that prompted loud resignations from outraged masses of bureaucrats upset about such unconscionable behavior perverting the rule of law.
Curiously, the media outlets which rush to label the political affiliations of any judges who rule in favor of conservatives, are uninterested in the specifics of the judges who heard this appeal.
They were two Obama appointees and a Biden appointee, the latter of which joined the bench in 2021 after having never been a judge before and her previous job experience having been as a left-wing activist openly attacking Republican politicians.
Judge Perez, who sits on the Second Circuit and heard this case, has zero previous judicial experience and spent her career at the left-wing Brennan Center for Justice, where she published conspiracy theory pieces about Republicans wanting to destroy freedom
Judge Chin, one of the Obama appointees, you may remember as the judge who authorized the anti-First Amendment opinion that the Supreme Court unanimously overturned in National Rifle Association of America v. Vullo.
Chin had held that it was fine for NY officials in their official capacities to demand that banks stop doing business with right-wing political groups like the NRA.
It was a decision so heinous that the ACLU represented the NRA, and the pro-NRA opinion at SCOTUS was authored by Sotomayor.
I must be one of the few people who believe that Carter’s post-presidency legacy was, despite some mitigating work like Habitat for Humanity, far worse morally than his presidency.
Here's Jimmy Carter issuing a statement of condolences for Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez.
"we have never doubted Hugo Chávez's commitment to improving the lives of millions of his fellow countrymen."
"Chávez will be remembered for his bold assertion of autonomy and independence for Latin American governments and for his formidable communication skills and personal connection with supporters in his country and abroad to whom he gave hope and empowerment."
In the midst of the Cold War, while Fidel Castro was terrorizing his people, Carter was dedicated to normalizing relations and helping Castro economically.
In 2002, Carter traveled to Cuba on the dictator's personal invitation and, in a propaganda coup for the dictatorship, demanded the US take the first steps towards normalization.
His apologists have tried to mitigate that by pointing to his simultaneous calls for political reform -- but of course that didn't amount to anything.
That didn't stop Carter from again going to Cuba at the new dictator Raul's invitation in 2011 while Cuba was holding an American aid worker hostage.
Carter responded by attacking the US justice system, attacking US lawmakers critical of Cuba, and called the Castros personal friends.
The US aid worker remained imprisoned in Cuba for several more years.