“Resistance may or may not be futile. Acquiescence definitely is.”
-Yvonne Abraham
 
			
			
									
			
			
	“Resistance may or may not be futile. Acquiescence definitely is.”
-Yvonne Abraham
Jonathan V. Last, The Assassination of Charlie Kirk:
Charlie Kirk’s murder was not just a murder. It was an assassination. That’s the crucial point.
We often forget the philosophical underpinnings of criminal law. Rightly understood, we view crimes as being committed not against individuals, but against society itself. Thus, when someone is murdered, the offense is not against the victim and his family, but against everyone. All of us. It is an offense against nature, heaven, and man.
Assassination goes a step further. In addition to all of the above, assassination is, like terrorism, an attack on our body politic. An attack on how we choose to live together. On our system of government. Which in America’s case, means an attack not just against all of us, but against liberal democracy itself…
Pray for Charlie Kirk. For his wife and his two young children. For his extended family and his friends, his colleagues and fellow parishioners, that they would all find comfort and peace. Pray for our leaders, that they would be wise, prudent, and charitable in the coming days. When you see people being neither wise, prudent, nor charitable—and you will—pray that they are given grace and offer them yours as a down payment. Pray equally for those you love most and for those you like least.
Cameron Cummins-Smith,Not All Victims Should Be Martyrs:
It is bad that Charlie Kirk was shot and killed. That does not make him a good man. You don’t have to make him into a martyr just because he was a victim. Painting Kirk as a role model for political discourse requires either a staggering ignorance or intentional neglect of what he actually stood for.
Elizabeth Spiers, Charlie Kirk’s Legacy Deserves No Mourning:
[Kirk] was an unrepentant racist, transphobe, homophobe, and misogynist who often wrapped his bigotry in Bible verses because there was no other way to pretend that it was morally correct…
Many of the facile defenses of Kirk and his legacy are predicated on the idea that it’s acceptable to spread hateful ideas advocating for the persecution of perceived enemies as long you dress them up in a posture of debate… The man who said, “Black women do not have brain processing power to be taken seriously. You have to go steal a white person’s slot” said it while wearing a nice shirt and a tie on a podcast instead of tattered overalls in the parking lot of a rural Walmart. That does not make it any less racist…
[It is] particularly galling to see him cast by some as a free-speech warrior. He created a professor watchlist explicitly designed to get academics fired who dared talk about the right’s usual assortment of verboten topics—anything to do with race or gender, in particular.
Unfortunately, while the Founding Fathers did foresee the possibility of personalistic rule, they did not expect Congress to betray the Constitution and become the willing toadies of the wannabe dictator.
– Steve Metz
Overheard: When you smear lamb’s blood above your door so J.D. Vance doesn’t visit… Assover.
Someone should ask Hegseth why F/A-18s have started identifying as submarines under his watch. Is that “warrior culture”?
Update: Third F/A-18 in the drink! “Super Hornet” to be renamed “Lemming.” More seriously, three?!? WTF?
The choice is not between order and liberty. It is between liberty with order and anarchy without either.
-Justice Robert Jackson
Due process is what distinguishes us as a people from the monsters who do commit heinous crimes. If there’s no due process, we’re a society that can just lynch people on an accusation, with no need to get it right.
-Aaron Reichlin-Melnick
“Whatever may have been my political opinions before, I have but one sentiment now: that is, we have a government, and laws, and a flag, and they must all be sustained. There are but two parties now: traitors and patriots. And I want hereafter to be ranked with the latter.”
– U.S. Grant (1861)
It is time for every American patriot to stand up, speak out, and defend our democratic processes because the moment we allow them to be eroded is the moment that we risk losing the freedoms and justice they were built to protect, and that countless Americans have fought and sacrificed to defend.
-AZ Attorney General Kris Mayes
Steve Vladeck has a summary of DOJ corruption under Trump:
There isn’t enough electronic ink to fully summarize the background of the Eric Adams saga. To make a very long story short, the 110th Mayor of the City of New York was indicted last year by federal prosecutors on one count of conspiracy to receive campaign contributions from foreign nationals and commit wire fraud and bribery; two counts of soliciting campaign contributions from foreign nationals; and one count of soliciting and accepting a bribe. In essence, the indictment claimed that Adams received more than $100,000 worth of free plane tickets and luxury hotel stays from wealthy Turkish nationals and at least one government official over the course of a decade.
Trump’s AG, Pam Bondi, and one of here deputies, Emil Bove, are attempting to stop the prosecution. It’s a straight up quid pro quo to enlist Adams’ assistance with deportations. Towards that end, they directed the lead prosecutors in the NY US Attorney’s office – Trump appointees themselves! – to drop it. Their direction was so egregiously unlawful that the prosecutors quit:
What’s striking about this is not just how transparent what’s actually happening is; it’s Bove’s candid admission, in today’s letter, that “the policies of a democratically elected President and a Senate-confirmed Attorney General” take precedence over a Justice Department lawyer’s oath … to the Constitution. It would be one thing if Bove argued that the President’s (or Attorney General’s) interpretation of the Constitution takes precedence over that of an Interim U.S. Attorney. But that’s not even his argument. Rather, it’s that Sassoon (who, although it shouldn’t matter, is a Republican who clerked for Justice Scalia) had no business raising to the Attorney General her view of what the law required in a case in which it conflicts with the political preferences of the President—indeed, that it was “insubordinate” for her to do so.
My original post follows below the break but Vladeck’s write-up is much better.