Wednesday: Hili dialogue

January 22, 2025 • 6:45 am

Welcome to a Hump Day (“Аҳамп амш” in Abkhaz): Wednesday, January 22, 2025, and National Blonde Brownie Day, which aren’t worth considering since they lack chocolate. 

It’s also Answer Your Cat’s Questions Day (they have only one: “When’s dinnertime?”), National Southern Food Day,  Roe v. Wade Day (the case was “decided” on this day in 1973, but the decision is obsolete), National Hot Sauce Day, and Come in From the Cold Day (the temperature in Chicago right now is 7°F or -14°C).

‘Here’s a good place for southern food: Mrs. Wilkes’s Dining Room in Savannah, Georgia, a place I hope to visit before too long. It used to be a boarding house, but now what remains is a famous dining room, renowned for its soul food and copious all-you-can eat home cooking. Give me fried chicken!

Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this day by consulting the January 22 Wikipedia page.

Da Nooz:

*It took only a day for the legal battles over Trump’s executive orders to begin, but this is what people should be doing who are opposed to Trump’s policies. And here is one policy that is probably illegal. (Article archived here.)

Attorneys general from 18 states sued President Trump on Tuesday to block an executive order that refuses to recognize the U.S.-born children of unauthorized immigrants as citizens, the opening salvo in what promises to be a long legal battle over the Trump administration’s immigration policies.

The complaint, filed in Federal District Court in Massachusetts was joined by the cities of San Francisco and Washington, D.C.

The states view Mr. Trump’s attempt to limit birthright citizenship as “extraordinary and extreme,” said New Jersey Attorney General Matthew J. Platkin, who led the legal effort along with the attorneys general from California and Massachusetts. “Presidents are powerful, but he is not a king. He cannot rewrite the Constitution with a stroke of the pen.”

On Monday, in the opening hours of his second term as president, Mr. Trump signed an order declaring that future children born to undocumented immigrants would no longer be treated as citizens. The order would extend even to the children of some mothers in the country legally but temporarily, such as foreign students or tourists.

Mr. Trump’s executive order asserts that the children of such noncitizens are not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States, and thus aren’t covered by the 14th Amendment’s longstanding constitutional guarantee.

The order flew in the face of more than 100 years of legal precedent, when the courts and the executive branch interpreted the 14th Amendment as guaranteeing citizenship to every baby born in the United States, regardless of their parents’ legal status. The courts recognized only a narrow exception for the children of accredited diplomats.

But there are signs the judiciary could be divided on the issue. Judge James C. Ho, who Mr. Trump nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, has been more sympathetic to some of Mr. Trump’s arguments, likening unauthorized immigrants to an invading army. That comparison has also been made by lawyers for the state of Texas and another declaration by Mr. Trump that illegal crossings at the southern border amount to an “ongoing invasion.”

Here’s the relevant part of the Fourteenth Amendment, and I think it’s pretty clear:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now many people don’t like the idea of immigrants coming here illegally just to have kids who automatically become American citizens (and can later help their parents later gain citizenship), but the law is the law, like it or not. This should be adjudicated fairly quickly, I’d expect, but I’ve heard that resolving this should take years.  The Constitution is clear!

*Trump pardoned many of the January 6 insurrectionists, including some violent ones.

Rioters locked up for their roles in the Jan. 6 Capitol attack were released while judges began dismissing dozens of pending cases Tuesday after President Donald Trump’s sweeping grant of clemency to all 1,500-plus people charged in the insurrection that shook the foundation of American democracy.

With the stroke of a pen on his first day back in the White House, Trump’s order upended the largest prosecution in Justice Department history, freeing from prison people caught on camera viciously attacking police as well as leaders of far-right extremist groups convicted of orchestrating violent plots to stop the peaceful transfer of power after his 2020 election loss.

More than 200 people convicted of Jan. 6 crimes were released from federal Bureau of Prisons custody by Tuesday morning, officials told The Associated Press.

The pardons and commutations cement Trump’s efforts to downplay the violence that left more than 100 police officers injured as the mob fueled by his lies about the 2020 election stormed the Capitol and halted the certification of President Joe Biden’s victory.

On the NBC News last night, a reporter asked Trump how he could justify pardoning those who injured others, including police officers, and including some perps who got long sentences. Trump answered with something like, ”Well, some murderers go free.” A reprehensible (non)answer from a reprehensible man.

*The WaPo describes other lawsuits (article archived here):

Some of Trump’s actions faced immediate legal challenge. Before he had left the U.S. Capitol where he was inaugurated, three lawsuits raised legal questions about his appointment of Tesla founder Elon Musk to run the nongovernmental “Department of Government Efficiency.” The public interest groups behind the lawsuits say the “DOGE” panel violates laws on transparency for government advisory groups.

. . . In a complaint obtained by The Washington Post ahead of its filing, the public interest law firm National Security Counselors says that the DOGE panel is breaking a 50-year-old law, the Federal Advisory Committee Act, that requires advisory committees to the executive branch to follow specific rules on disclosure, hiring and other practices.

Note that ACLU has joined the 18 states in challenging the birthright decision mentioned above. And the WaPo notes some executive decisions by previous presidents that didn’t stand.

In addition, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Lawyers for Civil Rights filed separate legal challenges in New Hampshire and Massachusetts on behalf of parents whose children would not be eligible for citizenship under Trump’s order.

“Denying citizenship to U.S.-born children is not only unconstitutional — it’s also a reckless and ruthless repudiation of American values,” Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

. . .All modern presidents have used a flurry of executive orders to show proof of forward progress in the earliest moments of their tenure — and those efforts have not always been met with unmitigated success.

In 2009, newly inaugurated President Barack Obama signed an executive order to close Guantánamo Bay, the U.S. base in Cuba that had become a symbol of the excesses and injustices of the war on terror. Sixteen years later, the base remains open, and 15 detainees are housed there. Obama’s administration had difficultly finding states willing to relocate terrorism suspects to prisons within their borders.

President Joe Biden ran on an unprecedented equity agenda and on his first day dictated an all-of-government effort to counter systemic racism. Now that he is a former president, some of his critics and allies say the enduring results of his Day 1 mandate are scant.

But Trump’s flurry of first-day activity threatens an expansion of executive power that critics have unsuccessfully sought to staunch since the tenure of Richard M. Nixon, observers say.

We will have to let the law work its power for many of these orders, but some (I don’t know which ones) will stand for at least as long as Trump is President.  And if the DEI dismantling stands, as I hope it will, it will be hard for future Presidents to resurrect it.  As for renaming the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America,” well, that’s pure idiocy. As is the threat to retake the Panama Canal.

*And of course despite Trump’s promises, the Ukraine war continues. As I said, we should not assume that Trump was actually going to do what he said he’d do on Day 1, though he’s done more than I thought. From CNN:

President Donald Trump has missed his deadline for ending the war in Ukraine.

Of course, no one truly believed Trump would be able end the grinding, three-year conflict in 24 hours, as he implausibly promised repeatedly as a candidate. Even his new special envoy to Ukraine has asked for 100 days to find a solution.

Yet the missed deadline — and the scant mention of the conflict during Monday’s inauguration celebrations — nonetheless underscore how difficult the challenge of ending the fighting in Ukraine will be for the new president, who so far has made no public attempts at brokering peace.

Amid the laundry list of priorities Trump recited during his inaugural address, Ukraine did not warrant a mention. While Trump declared himself a “peacemaker,” he offered no specific pledges of continued American assistance to Kyiv.

For now, it appears Trump’s first order of business will be a talk with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, who he accused of “destroying Russia” during remarks in the Oval Office on Monday.

“He can’t be thrilled, he’s not doing so well,” Trump told reporters amid a lengthy signing ceremony, a rare moment of criticism about the Russian president. “Russia is bigger, they have more soldiers to lose, but that’s no way to run a country.”

Asked how long the war would last, he said he couldn’t answer before speaking with the Russian leader.

Umm. . . doesn’t Zelensky get a say in this?  It sounds as if Trump is going to give away part of Ukraine to Russia, just to keep things calm. How can he do that? By threatening Ukraine with withholding weapons.  I don’t like that at all, since I don’t think Ukraine should lose a square millimeter of territory, and should get Crimea back. Pity that Trump controls so much power and resources that he can make credible threats.

*The Wall Street Journal reports that “Hamas is effectively back in control in Gaza.” (Article archived here.) Alas, ’tis true:

After Israeli troops stood down when a cease-fire came into effect in the Gaza Strip, Hamas began sending thousands of its forces onto the streets to establish control.

The deployment—envisioned by the agreement that pauses the fighting while the combatants exchange hostages for prisoners—highlights how the U.S.-designated terrorist group remains the dominant power in the territory. Israel hasn’t been able to destroy the group or empower an alternative.

Hamas punctuated its authority Sunday by parading armed and uniformed militants through the streets flashing V-signs to cheering crowds. When Hamas transferred the first Israeli hostages to the Red Cross, Arab mediators said they could see fighters from Hamas’s core Nukhba Force unit clad in full military gear and armed.

The open show of force after months of being pushed underground was a signal that aid groups and governments will need to cooperate with Hamas as reconstruction efforts get under way in the coming weeks—an outcome Israel has hoped to prevent.

“The Hamas presence on the ground armed is a slap in the face to the Israeli government and army,” said Gershon Baskin, a former Israeli hostage negotiator who is now Middle East director for the diplomacy advocacy group International Communities Organization. “It highlights that Israel’s goals for the war were never achievable.”

The fragile truce between Israel and Hamas pauses a war that is among the deadliest in modern Middle Eastern history. The conflict has reduced much of Gaza to rubble and killed around 47,000 people in the enclave following Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel, which killed about 1,200 people and left another 250 held hostage.

The WSJ says this “raises questions about how Gaza will be governed after the fighting?” Hamas has already answered that question, and it will never give way to the Palestinian Authority being in charge, much less a military presence of Israel. And since Hamas has said it will re-enact October 7 over and over and over again, and because there are going to be several thousand released terrorists, why does anybody with a brain think that this cease-fire will bring permanent peace to the region. Hamas, like Palestinian Islamic Jihad, is sworn to destroy Israel. Israel will have no peace until Hamas is gone.

*I was waiting for this, but it doesn’t make me happy. Garth Hudson, the last surviving member of The Band, has died at 87.  There are no more of them.

Garth Hudson, the Band’s virtuoso keyboardist and all-around musician who drew from a unique palette of sounds and styles to add a conversational touch to such rock standards as “Up on Cripple Creek,” “The Weight” and “Rag Mama Rag,” has died at age 87.

Hudson was the eldest and last surviving member of the influential group that once backed Bob Dylan. His death was confirmed Tuesday by The Canadian Press, which cited Hudson’s friend, Jan Haust. Additional details were not immediately available. Hudson had been living in a nursing home in upstate New York.

A rustic figure with an expansive forehead and sprawling beard, Hudson was a classically trained performer and self-educated Greek chorus who spoke through piano, synthesizers, horns and his favored Lowrey organ. No matter the song, Hudson summoned just the right feeling or shading, whether the tipsy clavinet and wah-wah pedal on “Up on Cripple Creek,” the galloping piano on “Rag Mama Rag” or the melancholy saxophone on “It Makes No Difference.”

The only non-singer among five musicians celebrated for their camaraderie, texture and versatility, Hudson mostly loomed in the background, but he did have one showcase: “Chest Fever,” a Robbie Robertson composition for which he devised an introductory organ solo (“The Genetic Method”), an eclectic sampling of moods and melodies that segued into the song’s hard rock riff.

I can still reel off their names

Robbie Robertson
Garth Hudson
Levon Helm
Rick Danko
Richard Manuel

I saw them live in a small venue at the University of Maryland, and they were fantastic.  Do the young folk listen to them any more?

Here’s an early video of the Band on the Ed Sullivan Show doing “Up On Cripple Creek,” and you can see the bearded Hudson on the clavinet and wah-wah pedal.  They’re all dead. . . .

Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili is fed up:

A: Are you asleep?
Hili: No, I’m waiting for better times.
Ja: Śpisz?
Hili: Nie, czekam na lepsze czasy.

And a lovely photo of the affectionate Szaron:

*******************

From Barry:

From Stacy:

and from Jesus of the Day:

From Masih, who is right:

Amnesty International is evil:

From Bryan. Brian Cox is always fun to listen to, and he’s always smiling when he discusses physics. This is cool!


Two more selections from Jez’s large thread of pets behaving in a funny way:

From Malcolm: Night cats!

From the Au7schwitz Memorial, one that I posted:

A Dutch girl was sent from Westerbork to Auschwitz, and did not survive. She was 17.

— Jerry Coyne (@evolutionistrue.bsky.social) 2025-01-22T11:59:08.012Z

Two posts from Doctor Cobb. The first, a Roman one:

ANCIENT ROMAN: *looking at shirts labeled M L and XL* excuse me these sizes are backwards

— Frovo (@frovo.bsky.social) 2025-01-18T19:24:55.403Z

Some nice camouflage. If you wait a tick you’ll see them.

A couple of ghost pipefish, pretending to be branches

— Keishu Asada (@cephwarden.bsky.social) 2025-01-07T10:40:10.598Z

38 thoughts on “Wednesday: Hili dialogue”

  1. Definitely go to Mrs. Wilkes–it’s not just the food, but the experience! Definitely the highlight of our trip to Savannah.

    1. Yep, if I’m ever in Savannah. I guess comparing it to Mary Mac’s Tea House in Atlanta wouldn’t be a good comparison since MM’s is a BBQ place, but the collards there!

      Also noted @ Wilkes – mashed rutabaga! I had never heard of them as a component of southern fare or urban cuisine. Rhubarb and rutabagas are the two things I most studiously avoid. I’ve only ever had something made of rutabagas once that I liked – rutabagas, carrots and cheese shredded onto something like a pita bread and baked. So if you have a favorite rutabaga recipe, pls post it.

      And factoid just learned last wk: rutabaga and canola are the same species – Brassica napus. Also, some say that rutabaga greens are as good or better than collards (Brassica oleracae, along with cabbage, broccoli, cauliflower, kale, Brussels sprouts and kohlrabi).

      1. Rutabaga: peel and slice about eighth-inch thick. Coat with mix of 1 tbsp olive oil and 1 tsp sherry vinegar, place in single layer on sheet pan, salt and pepper, and roast at 450F for 7-9 min. Cool. Serve with salad greens, crushed roast pistachios, and a vinaigrette. See Landau & Jacoby, “Vedge”, pages 42-43 – theirs is a bit more elaborate (has dark fried onion pieces in the vinaigrette).

        1. Thx, maybe the vinegar is the key. A lot of people put vinegar on their collards and such. It must temper the glucosinolates.

  2. I’m kind of hoping that Israel keeps track of who the remaining Hamas fighters are and where they are operating from, and uses the next chance to finish the job once the hostages are free. Otherwise the whole campaign would have been kind of pointless.

  3. I still listen to The Band, but I’m 61. I gave copies of the Last Waltz to my daughter and my nephews, and they have passed it on to friends. I tell them that the tickets were something like $25 and included a Thanksgiving meal. I tell them the musicians who are there to play with the group.

    PS I’m also bummed that Jules Feiffer passed away, and just a few days short of his 96th birthday.

  4. I chuckled at the Roman size joke. My god-daughter and I have a running joke about Roman numerals. For instance, if she asks me how long until something happens, I will hold up two fingers in a V and say, Five minutes. God dad jokes.

    1. I have one, but it’s R-rated.

      Roman Soldier: “You won’t believe how many women I’ve slept with”.
      Other Roman Soldier: “MMM…”
      Roman Soldier: “Don’t be ridiculous, not that many!”

  5. RIP Garth Hudson-this video (and his subtle smile in it) make me happy every time I watch:

  6. Yes, I wish that Trump had been a little more discriminating in his pardons of the J6 defendants. I have no issue with blanket pardons for any person not convicted of violence. Or for Jake Long, who has been in jail for four years awaiting trial. But anyone convicted of violence should have had their case individually reviewed. Some of them have been in prison for years, and Trump is not wrong that there is a disproportionality in many of the sentences, compared to some current criminal sentencing practices. It’s possible that that did happen, because some only had their sentences commuted. It could have been handled more tactfully, though, and he should have made a case for the pardons as he made them.

    1. What’s your take on the pardon of Ross Ulbricht? Seems to me that there’s money involved here somehow–I smell corruption.

      2. I think it’s a couple of things in play.
        1. Trump spoke at the Libertarian national convention and I think Angela McArdle was able to convince him that he could get some of the Mises Caucus side of the party to support him if he would publicly say he’d free Ross, as there are a lot of independents out there who saw Ulbricht as a symbol of state overreach who Trump could woo by promising to free him. The L party was pretty divided at the convention and I believe she threw her support behind Trump rather than Chase Oliver, who was the official L candidate.
        2. Musk is one of those who favored releasing Ulbricht and he has Trump’s ear. Others on the right also favor this.
        3. Knowing that Ulbicht is a symbol of deep state overreach, and given the way that Trump has a good innate knowledge of marketing and symbolism, it’s a way for Trump to give a good FU to the state, at least for those who have the eyes to see.

        I view some of the supporters of the release as hypocrites who want to kill cartel members because they facilitate people obtaining drugs, while at the same time favoring freedom for Ulbricht when his platform resulted in the anonymous distribution of drugs and other bad stuff.
        OTOH, he personally was not responsible for any movement of any illegal goods (whereas the cartels are), only for creating and running the very private web-based system, so without direct responsibility I can’t see how he is culpable for distribution of narcotics; obviously I’m wrong in terms of the legality, as proven in the court system.

        I don’t see this as a money grab as I don’t think he personally has much in the way of money these days after having a tremendous amount of bitcoin stolen from him a few years ago.

        Finally: I know he said he’d free Ulbricht on Day 1, but I thought maybe he was just blowing smoke. Regardless of whether I agree or not, it’s good to see he backed up his words with action.

    2. “Or for Jake Long, who has been in jail for four years awaiting trial.”

      The delays in Jake Long’s case were due to his requests. He was originally scheduled to go to trial in January 2023 but he asked for a postponement, the first of several.

  7. Inspirational musicians. The Band’s farewell concert is recorded forever in Martin Scorsese’s movie, The Last Waltz. Brilliant footage.

  8. Sad about the Band. And who is going to re-record Cripple Creek, since the first line has them going to the no-longer existing Gulf of Mexico. Not sure if Gulf of America rhymes well.

    2. According my gazetteer there are only two places in all of the USA called “America”, not counting the name of the country itself. There is Americus, Ga., and American Rivers, Falls, Peaks etc. but only those two little towns in Illinois and Oklahoma that are way off the beaten track, one a ghost town. So now when Simon and Garfunkel sing that they’ve all come to look for America, they can just board that Greyhound in Pittsburgh, head down the Ohio River, hang a left at the Mississippi, keep going and you can’t miss it.

  9. As a follow on to the announcement of the posting of the full day one usc conference video, please note that a one-hour video of jonathan rauch’s talk (32 minute talk plus 25 minute q&a) is up at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7K8ULGvz_n4
    His answer to the second question in the q&a is of particular importance I believe in positively opposing both the illiberal right AND left. Hopefully the url works.

  10. Love the night cats. What a cool video!

    Which reminds me…
    My paternal grandfather came to the U.S. at less than one year old. He was born in England when my pregnant great-grandmother gave birth while on her way to the U.S. from Poland to join her husband, who had already emigrated. So, my grandfather—a tiny baby—was not a U.S. citizen when he arrived. His parents (my great-grandparents) became naturalized U.S. citizens at a later date. Did my grandfather, who came to the U.S. as an infant with his Polish mother, become a citizen when his parents were naturalized? Or did he never actually become a U.S. citizen? Or was he actually a citizen of Great Britain, as he was born there? It’s all water under the bridge, but this is the kind of thing that the birthright citizenship debate will have to deal with.

    And yes, regarding all of the executive orders, I do hope that these are adjudicated in the courts, rather than in disruptive and potentially violent protests. We shall see.

    1. Often it depends on the registration of the vehicle of birth. Like.. the airline company or if on a boat… maybe Liberia or Panama! (Unlike ships, planes are generally registered in the same country as the airline company). That said, the airline company’s country must have birthright citizenship: a birth on a JAL plane won’t confer Japanese nationality as it wouldn’t in Japan proper.

      For this reasons many airlines are unhappy taking very pregnant women: the legal hassle. Not to mention a jet in flight isn’t the ideal maternity room.

      D.A.
      NYC

      1. Interesting! I dug a bit more into this and I learned that my grandfather (almost certainly) became a U.S. citizen when his parents completed their naturalization process—assuming that they did so before my grandfather turned 18. At least that’s how I read the rules today. I don’t know what the state of affairs was 1920’s, when my grandfather arrived as a babe in arms by boat—although my great-grandmother left the boat to give birth. A very small matter, obviously, but multiply it by millions and it could bankrupt the legal system! (Just kidding.)

  11. Birthright citizenship strikes me as something hastily stuck into the Constitution (the Fourteenth Amendment) along with a package of other measures to prevent the defeated and forcibly returned Confederate states from declaring former slaves as non-citizens despite their having been born on American soil. So now you are stuck with it. If only you had had the foresight to have repealed that provision immediately after the last slave-born U.S. citizen had died, it having accomplished its noble but specific and time-limited purpose. I suppose it had value when you were trying to fill the country up with legal immigrants. Knowing their children would be born citizens (and not citizens of the Old Country) was likely a big draw in assimilating their parents. But it would have been better to have been cast as a simple law, able to be repealed or amended as necessary to fit circumstances.

    But pray, if diplomats are not under the jurisdiction of the United States, could people in the U.S. illegally also not be under that jurisdiction? I fully get the argument and precedent that they are different, but maybe there is a good argument that they aren’t. Let’s see what your courts say. I’m sure the President knew it would be challenged. It seems perverse that a country can’t decide efficiently who is a citizen when immigration is such a contentious issue and there is evidence that unscrupulous actors are gaming the rules.

    1. Diplomats and those under some “Status of Forces” agreements – which are a sort of diplomat legally – never can get birthright citizenship anywhere except their home countries that sent them. It is a universal I think.

      The idea is that theoretically diplomats are not subject to local laws, don’t pay taxes and so shouldn’t benefit from birthright citizenship.

      D.A.
      NYC

  12. Let me try this again, since nobody has commented on Ukraine yet, and WordPress seems not to like the link I embedded with this when I tried it a couple times earlier.

    Russia’s resort to N Koreans to fight in Ukraine has gotten fairly wide coverage, I think, but I’m not sure that the destruction / depletion of their tanks and armored vehicles is so widely-known. From the coverage that I follow (Reporting from Ukraine), Ukraine is hammering Russia at command centers, logistical hubs and fuel depots with rocket attacks, too, to the point that their air power is crippled beyond just those planes that have been destroyed. Most recently, in the Pokrovsk area, Russian soldiers on crutches were sent back into battle.

    How long before Putin goes the way of Rasputin?

      1. Yes I have seen that footage. The mindset of the Russian military is archaic.
        They’ve also been seen executing surendering Ukrainians in situ, all seen with drones. Although from what I’ve r3ad from that site the Ukrainians go after them big time with drones.
        An interesting point but that is all it is at the moment, the Chinese will be squinting at their maps at territory they lost to the Kremlin in east Russia, Taiwan might be a distraction. A weakened Russia is vulnerable.
        Mark Galiotti’s podcast “In Moscows Shadows” is as he says, a good sourse of all things Russian. Military and political.

        1. I’ve been thinking that Russia is now vulnerable to attack by others. Today’s news via RfU only makes that more likely.

          As someone said at the end of this one, time for Putin to go the way of Rasputin.

        2. Russia is much stronger than it was 3 years ago. It has already killed five- or six-digit number of Ukrainians – the people whom the USA disarmed with the Budapest Memorandum of 1994, falsely promising to defend their country in return. Ukraine is exhausted, and European countries are unprepared for a major war. Unless the USA wakes up, Europe is toast.

    2. Unfortunately, the Russians are advancing. After 3 years of the West helping so inadequately that it looked like cruel imitation of aid instead of real aid, Ukraine is running out of soldiers willing to fight. In the US budget for 2025, not a single dollar is earmarked for military aid to Ukraine. By contrast, Russia has tons of manpower, and its allies give it plenty of ammo and even soldiers.
      Mere days ago, Ukrainians had to explode their only mine for metallurgy-suitable coal near the city of Pokrovsk to prevent the Russians from getting into it.
      And Russia has taken the lithium ore site that alone will pay off the current invasion of Ukraine (so far, Putin’s invasions have paid off every single time). In vain did Zelensky ask the false Western allies of Ukraine to help keep this site, promising them any profits from the lithium.
      The situation is bleak. Putin is winning.

  13. On Garth Hudson. I read an interview IIRC, possibly in Rolling Stone many years ago he was a bit reticent in telling his parents he was joining a country rock band after all that training. The band members told him if he joined he would get “all the pussy he could ever want” eh, sorry BUT it was a rocknroll mag.

  14. I’m not so sure you can safely say that “the Constitution is clear” regarding birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants. This piece found on the Heritage Foundation website raises some interesting legal questions, especially focusing on the legislative history of the 14th Amendment and what its authors intended by the qualifying words, “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” This SCOTUS is very keen on original interpretations, so I would not be surprised to find them rule in favor of Trump.

    https://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/birthright-citizenship-fundamental-misunderstanding-the-14th-amendment

Comments are closed.