update - Tom Homan on tape taking $50k cash bribe form FBI undercovers

silentkisser

Master of Disaster
Jun 10, 2008
4,576
5,901
113
Like many things w Trump it's theatre. But give him credit - that same theatre worked with CBS and ABC Columbia and other places. They kowtowed and settled rather than going the distance.
I honestly cannot believe ABC suspended Kimmel. I'm sure there are tonnes of morons celebrating this and patting themselves on the back. And many of them are probably consider themselves free speech warriors (or something equal untrue). They don't see a Trump appointee heading the FCC threatening broadcasters as just the next step to authoritarianism. Bunch of morons. Could you imagine what they would do if Biden did an iota of this? Where are the free speech protests???

America is FUCKED. I know there are MAGAts on here that think this is great. But, the US is not going to recover from Trump. It has started down that slippery slope to oblivion, and most Americans are too stupid to see it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frankfooter

kherg007

Well-known member
May 3, 2014
10,176
9,362
113
I honestly cannot believe ABC suspended Kimmel. I'm sure there are tonnes of morons celebrating this and patting themselves on the back. And many of them are probably consider themselves free speech warriors (or something equal untrue). They don't see a Trump appointee heading the FCC threatening broadcasters as just the next step to authoritarianism. Bunch of morons. Could you imagine what they would do if Biden did an iota of this? Where are the free speech protests???

America is FUCKED. I know there are MAGAts on here that think this is great. But, the US is not going to recover from Trump. It has started down that slippery slope to oblivion, and most Americans are too stupid to see it.
Nobody who mocked Paul Pelosi's almost murder was banned or shut down.
It's horrible what happened to Charlie and he didn't deserve that fate. But if you believe Charlie was honest, then he believed in free speech, even ugly free speech (eg, he said black women don't have the brain power to occupy high government positions). I support his right to say it. And I support my right to criticize him for it.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
101,082
28,285
113
Nobody who mocked Paul Pelosi's almost murder was banned or shut down.
It's horrible what happened to Charlie and he didn't deserve that fate. But if you believe Charlie was honest, then he believed in free speech, even ugly free speech (eg, he said black women don't have the brain power to occupy high government positions). I support his right to say it. And I support my right to criticize him for it.
Well, at least we finally know who killed Kirk.
This is his 3rd or 4th video denying he killed after he refused to take $150 million.

 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
83,972
121,179
113
NEW YORK (AP) — More than a dozen elected officials were arrested Thursday while protesting conditions at a New York City immigration holding facility where a federal judge this week extended a court order requiring the government to shape up its treatment of detainees.

The officials — including the city’s fiscal watchdog and state lawmakers — were among 77 people detained during protests at 26 Federal Plaza in Manhattan. The government building, home to immigration court, the FBI‘s New York field office and other federal offices, has become a hotbed of arrests and detention amid President Donald Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration.


A federal agent detains New York City Comptroller Brad Lander and other elected officials after they demanded access to the inspect the detainment facility at immigration court at the Jacob K. Javits federal building, Thursday, Sept. 18, 2025, in New York. (AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura)

A federal agent detains New York City Comptroller Brad Lander and other elected officials after they demanded access to the inspect the detainment facility at immigration court at the Jacob K. Javits federal building, Thursday, Sept. 18, 2025, in New York. (AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura)© The Associated Press
Eleven officials were arrested inside the building while attempting to inspect holding rooms on the 10th floor that are the subject of ongoing litigation alleging squalid conditions and overcrowding, according to a coalition of politicians, advocates and faith leaders involved in the protest. They were given summonses and released. The building was later locked down because of a telephoned bomb threat, authorities said.




The officials had gone to the holding facility to see if U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement was complying with a preliminary injunction issued Wednesday that requires the agency to limit capacity, ensure cleanliness and provide sleeping mats, among other remedies, the coalition said.

But federal agents barred them from entering the holding rooms and arrested them as news reporters and photographers documented the scene. The arrests happened as the officials were conducting a sit-in in the hallway, encircled around a sign showing a slash through the word “ICE.” Agents bound their hands with plastic ties, lined them up against a wall and paraded them down a hall.


Federal agents detain the elected officials after they demand access to inspect the detainment facility at immigration court at the Jacob K. Javits federal building, Thursday, Sept. 18, 2025, in New York. (AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura)

Federal agents detain the elected officials after they demand access to inspect the detainment facility at immigration court at the Jacob K. Javits federal building, Thursday, Sept. 18, 2025, in New York. (AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura)© The Associated Press
In a statement, Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin singled out the city’s comptroller, Brad Lander. She accused the Democrat of showing up “unannounced with agitators and media” and yelling that he wouldn't leave until detainees were released. Lander was previously arrested at the building in June after he linked arms with a person authorities were attempting to detain outside immigration court.


Federal agents detain elected officials after they demanded access to the inspect the detainment facility at immigration court at the Jacob K. Javits federal building, Thursday, Sept. 18, 2025, in New York. (AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura)

Federal agents detain elected officials after they demanded access to the inspect the detainment facility at immigration court at the Jacob K. Javits federal building, Thursday, Sept. 18, 2025, in New York. (AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura)© The Associated Press
“Another day, another sanctuary politician pulling a stunt in attempt to get their 15 minutes of fame while endangering DHS personnel and detainees,” McLaughlin said, adding that “Lander’s obsession with attacking the brave men and women of law enforcement, physically and rhetorically, must stop NOW."





Another arrested politician, state Sen. Jabari Brisport, said immigration officials used zip ties to lock the doors to the holding areas and put duct tape over cracks to prevent them from seeing inside.

“What I saw on the 10th floor today was both disgusting and cowardly,” the Brooklyn Democrat said. After the immigration officials were finished, “they laughed, and I heard them laugh about what they were doing, and they should absolutely be ashamed of themselves.”

Outside, police arrested dozens of people, including politicians, advocates and religious leaders, who were protesting in front of a garage entrance used by vans transporting immigrants to and from the detention facility.

Other officials who were detained included the city’s public advocate, Jumaane Williams; Democratic state Sen. Julia Salazar; and City Council Member Tiffany Caban.




“A federal judge has indicated that the federal law is not being followed — the conditions are cruel and inhumane, that ICE is not respecting their rights,” Lander told reporters after his release. “And no elected official or other oversight agency has been allowed in to see it.”


Demonstrators chant during a protest against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) outside the Jacob K. Javits federal building, Thursday, Sept. 18, 2025, in New York. (AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura)

Demonstrators chant during a protest against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) outside the Jacob K. Javits federal building, Thursday, Sept. 18, 2025, in New York. (AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura)© The Associated Press
On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan issued a preliminary injunction keeping in place requirements that the agency give detainees adequate space; thoroughly clean the cells three times a day; provide soap, towels, toilet paper, toothbrushes, toothpaste and feminine products; and make accommodations for confidential, unmonitored and unrecorded legal telephone calls.

View on Watch
The injunction followed a temporary restraining order last month in the wake of a lawsuit that immigration and civil rights organizations filed on behalf of people held at the Manhattan facility. In court filings, detainees complained they were fed inedible “slop” and endured the “horrific stench” of sweat, urine and feces, in part because the rooms have open toilets.

Elected officials among dozens of protesters arrested at a Manhattan immigration holding facility
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
83,972
121,179
113
The Trump administration escalated its fight with Harvard University on Friday, placing the Ivy League school under extra financial oversight and threatening sanctions if it does not provide additional data on its admissions practices.

Education Secretary Linda McMahon said the department was placing Harvard under “heightened cash monitoring,” forcing the school to use its own money to pay out financial aid for students and then seek reimbursement from the government.


She also threatened “further enforcement action” if the school does not turn over records to prove it no longer is considering race in admissions.

Harvard did not respond to a request for comment.

The moves are part of the administration's crackdown on Harvard as President Donald Trump seeks to eradicate what he describes as liberal bias at colleges around the country. Since taking office, Trump has used the Education Department in unprecedented ways, cutting federal research grants for schools that do not accede to his administration's demands and pressing colleges into paying large cash settlements to end federal investigations.

At Harvard, the Trump administration cut off $2.6 billion in federal research funding from the school after it spurned administration demands for sweeping changes to its governance and student disciplinary policy.




In a lawsuit filed by Harvard, a federal judge this month ordered the government to restore the funding, saying the administration had engaged in “a targeted, ideologically-motivated assault on this country’s premier universities.” On Friday, the Department of Health and Human Services unfroze $46 million in research funding for Harvard, the university said.

The Education Department is also investigating Harvard's admission practices as part of a wider effort to compel universities to prove that they are not using race to evaluate applicants. It says Harvard has not met all of its demands for information about its applicants and admitted students.

A group of students sued Harvard in 2014, alleging that its admissions policies unfairly disadvantaged white and Asian students. The case was resolved by the Supreme Court in 2023, which banned consideration of race in college admissions.



Harvard's finances are also facing new scrutiny. McMahon said she had concerns over the school's financial well-being because its federal funding is under threat. Harvard has a $53 billion endowment, the largest of any university.

___

The Associated Press’ education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

Moriah Balingit, The Associated Press

Trump administration threatens further sanctions in escalating fight with Harvard
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
83,972
121,179
113
The Trump administration has asked the Supreme Court to overturn an injunction blocking it from forcing transgender and non-binary people to be misgendered on their passports.

In April, a federal judge in Massachusetts ordered the administration to temporarily pause its new policy requiring that trans people's I.D. documents be marked only with their birth sex and denying the 'X' designation for non-binary people.





"[These policies] are part of a coordinated and rapid rollback of rights and protections previously afforded to transgender Americans, suggesting that these challenged actions are built on a foundation of irrational prejudice toward fellow citizens," wrote U.S. district judge Julia E. Kobick.

Her ruling was upheld on September 4 by an appeals court, which ruled that the government had not "demonstrated a strong likelihood of success".

Now the Justice Department is appealing to the highest court in the land, arguing that Kobick's injunction "has no basis in law or logic" and would force the government to issue "inaccurate" documents.



"The Constitution does not prohibit the government from defining sex in terms of an individual’s biological classification," wrote the Department's lawyers in a filing on Friday.

"The district court’s class-wide injunction irreparably harms the government and the public by blocking the President’s exercise of his constitutionally and statutorily conferred power to prescribe rules of the issuance of passports...

"Even worse, the injunction forces the government to misrepresent the sex of passport holders to foreign nations by using markers that reflect 'the false claim that males can identify as and thus become women and vice versa.'"

The administration further argued that the Supreme Court's decision in U.S. v Skrmetti — a case challenging Tennessee's ban on transition healthcare for trans under-18s — negated Kobick's ruling that the passport policy broke the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment by discriminating based on sex.


In Skrmetti, the court ultimately ruled that banning such treatments for trans children but not cisgender (or non-trans children) did not count as sex discrimination, or even as discrimination against trans people. Other courts have already begun to interpret that logic as applying to adult healthcare too.

"As this Court reaffirmed in United States v. Skrmetti, a policy does not discriminate based on sex if it applies equally to each sex without treating any member of one sex worse than a similarly situated member of the other," the Department wrote.

"And here, the challenged policy applies equally, regardless of sex — defining sex for everyone in terms of biology rather than self-identification."

While the passport police were active, some trans people — including Hollywood star Hunter Schafer — were issued passports that listed them as their birth sex, while others suffered delays in getting a passport at all.


The Trump administration has consistently described biological sex as "immutable", and it's true that the basic fact of whether someone's body produces sperm or eggs cannot be changed, nor can their chromosomes.

But many other features of sex, including genitals, body shape, and sexual function, can be altered via hormonal or surgical intervention — and generally play a bigger role in how someone is perceived and treated in daily life.

The Supreme Court, which has a conservative supermajority including three Trump-appointed judges, will now decide whether to take up the case. Over the past nine months, it has handed a series of victories to the Trump administration, often giving little or no explanation of its reasoning.

Earlier this month, a group of ten federal judges criticized the Court for its unsigned "shadow docket" opinions, saying it was "undermining" them and "throwing [them] under the bus".


Trump administration asks Supreme Court to let it limit sex designations on passports for transgender and nonbinary Americans
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
83,972
121,179
113
CAPE TOWN, South Africa (AP) — Five men deported by the United States to Eswatini in July have been held in a maximum-security prison in the African nation for seven weeks without charge or explanation and with no access to legal counsel, their lawyers said Tuesday.

They accused the Trump administration's third-country deportation program of denying their clients due process.





The New York-based Legal Aid Society said that it was representing one of the men, Jamaican national Orville Etoria, and that he had been “inexplicably and illegally” sent to Eswatini when his home country was willing to accept him back.

That contradicted the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, which said when it deported the five men with criminal records that they were being sent to Eswatini because their home countries refused to take them. Jamaica's foreign minister has also said that the Caribbean country didn't refuse to take back deportees.



Members of Eswatin Pro-democracy activists, hold placards during their protest outside the U.S. Embassy in Pretoria, South Africa, Friday, Sept. 19, 2025. (AP Photo/Themba Hadebe)© The Associated Press
Etoria was the first of at least 20 deportees sent by the U.S. to various African nations in the last two months to be identified publicly.

Expanding deportation program

The deportations are part of the Trump administration’s expanding third-country program to send migrants to countries in Africa that they have no ties with to get them off U.S. soil.




Since July, the U.S. has deported migrants to South Sudan, Eswatini and Rwanda, while a fourth African nation, Uganda, says it has agreed to a deal in principle with the U.S. to accept deportees.

Washington has said it wants to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose case has been a flashpoint over U.S. President Donald Trump's hard-line immigration policies, to Uganda after he was wrongly deported to his native El Salvador in March.



A leader of Eswatin Pro-democracy activists, speaks during their protest outside the U.S. Embassy in Pretoria, South Africa, Friday, Sept. 19, 2025. (AP Photo/Themba Hadebe)© The Associated Press
Etoria served a 25-year prison sentence and was granted parole in 2021, the Legal Aid Society said, but was now being held in Eswatini's main maximum-security prison for an undetermined period of time despite completing that sentence.

The U.S. Homeland Security Department said that he was convicted of murder. The agency posted on X in reference to a New York Times report on Estoria, saying that it “will continue enforcing the law at full speed — without apology.”




It didn't immediately respond to a request for comment from The Associated Press.

The Legal Aid Society said that an Eswatini lawyer acting on behalf of all five men being held in prison there has been repeatedly denied access to them by prison officials since they arrived in the tiny southern African nation bordering South Africa in mid-July.

The other four men are citizens of Cuba, Laos, Vietnam and Yemen.

‘Indefinite detention’

A separate lawyer representing the two men from Laos and Vietnam said that his clients also served their criminal sentences in the U.S. and had “been released into the community.”

"Then, without warning and explanation from either the U.S. or Eswatini governments, they were arbitrarily arrested and sent to a country to which they have never ever been," the lawyer, Tin Thanh Nguyen, said in a statement. “They are now being punished indefinitely for a sentence they already served.”



A member of Eswatin Pro-democracy activists, holds a placard at they protest outside the U.S. Embassy in Pretoria, South Africa, Friday, Sept. 19, 2025. (AP Photo/Themba Hadebe)© The Associated Press
He said that the U.S. government was “orchestrating secretive third-country transfers with no meaningful legal process, resulting in indefinite detention.”

U.S. Homeland Security said those two men had been convicted of charges including child rape and second-degree murder.

A third lawyer, Alma David, said that she represented the two men from Yemen and Cuba who are also being held in the same prison and denied access to lawyers. She said she had been told by the head of the Eswatini prison that only the U.S. Embassy could grant access to the men.


“Since when does the U.S. Embassy have jurisdiction over Eswatini’s national prisons?” she said in a statement, adding the men weren't told a reason for their detention, and "no lawyer has been permitted to visit them.” David said all five were being held at U.S. taxpayers' expense.

Secretive deals

The deportation deals the U.S. has struck in Africa have been largely secretive, and with countries with questionable rights records.

Authorities in South Sudan have given little information on where eight men sent there in early July are being held or what their fate might be. They were also described by U.S. authorities as dangerous criminals from South Sudan, Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar and Vietnam.

The five men in Eswatini are being held at the Matsapha Correctional Complex. It's the same prison where Eswatini, which is ruled by a king as Africa's last absolute monarchy, has imprisoned pro-democracy campaigners amid reports of abuse that includes beatings and the denial of food to inmates.


Eswatini authorities said when the five men arrived that they were being held in solitary confinement.

Another seven migrants were deported by the U.S. to Rwanda in mid-August, Rwandan authorities said. They didn't say where they are being held or give any information on their identities.

The deportations to Rwanda were kept secret at the time and only announced last week.

Lawyers for 5 men deported to an African prison accuse Trump's program of denying them due process
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
83,972
121,179
113
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration on Friday asked the Supreme Court for an emergency order allowing it to strip legal protections from more than 300,000 Venezuelan migrants.

The Justice Department asked the high court to put on hold a ruling from a federal judge in San Francisco that the administration wrongly ended Temporary Protected Status for the Venezuelans.




The federal appeals court in San Francisco refused to put on hold the ruling by U.S. District Judge Edward Chen while the case continues.

In May, the Supreme Court reversed a preliminary order from Chen that affected another 350,000 Venezuelans whose protections expired in April. The high court provided no explanation at the time, which is common in emergency appeals.

Solicitor General D. John Sauer argued in the new court filing that the justices’ May order should also apply to the current case.

“This case is familiar to the court and involves the increasingly familiar and untenable phenomenon of lower courts disregarding this Court’s orders on the emergency docket,” Sauer wrote.

The result, he said, is that the “new order, just like the old one, halted the vacatur and termination of TPS affecting over 300,000 aliens based on meritless legal theories.”




President Donald Trump’s administration has moved aggressively to withdraw various protections that have allowed immigrants to remain in the country, including ending TPS for a total of 600,000 Venezuelans and 500,000 Haitians who were granted protection during Joe Biden's presidency. TPS is granted in 18-month increments.

Congress created TPS in 1990 to prevent deportations to countries suffering from natural disasters, civil strife or other dangerous conditions. The designation can be granted by the Homeland Security secretary.

Chen found that the Department of Homeland Security acted "with unprecedented haste and in an unprecedented manner … for the preordained purpose of expediting termination of Venezuela’s TPS” status.

In denying the administration's emergency appeal, Judge Kim Wardlaw wrote for a unanimous three-judge appellate panel that Chen determined that DHS made its “decisions first and searched for a valid basis for those decisions second.”

Mark Sherman, The Associated Press

Trump administration asks Supreme Court to strip legal protections from Venezuelan migrants
 

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
83,972
121,179
113
Lawyers for an Oregon firefighter who was taken into custody by U.S. Border Patrol agents while fighting a Washington state wildfire filed a petition in federal court Friday asking a judge to order his release from an immigration detention facility.

The Oregon man, Rigoberto Hernandez Hernandez, and one other firefighter were part of a 44-person crew fighting a blaze in the Olympic National Forest on Aug. 27 when the agents took them into custody during a multiagency criminal investigation into the two contractors for whom the men were employed.


FILE - After lighting a fire line to burn up fuel for the Lick Creek Fire, a crew of firefighters begin to put out the flames, July 12, 2021, south of Asotin, Wash. (Pete Caster/Lewiston Tribune via AP, file)

FILE - After lighting a fire line to burn up fuel for the Lick Creek Fire, a crew of firefighters begin to put out the flames, July 12, 2021, south of Asotin, Wash. (Pete Caster/Lewiston Tribune via AP, file)© The Associated Press
Lawyers with the Innovation Law Lab said during a press conference that his arrest was illegal and violated U.S. Department of Homeland Security polices that say immigration enforcement must not be conducted at locations where emergency responses are happening.

The Bear Gulch Fire, one of the largest in the state, had burned 29 square miles (75 square kilometers) by Friday and was 9% contained.




The Border Patrol said at the time that the two workers were in the U.S. illegally so they were detained. Federal authorities did not provide information about the investigation into the contractors.

Lawyer Rodrigo Fernandez-Ortega said they filed a petition for habeas corpus and a motion for a temporary restraining order that seeks the man's release from the Northwest ICE detention center in Tacoma, Washington.

Homeland Security Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin said in an email to The Associated Press that the two men were not firefighters — they were working in a support role cutting logs into firewood.

“The firefighting response remained uninterrupted the entire time," she said. "U.S. Border Patrol’s actions did not prevent or interfere with any personnel actively engaged in firefighting efforts.” A spokesperson for the Border Patrol declined to comment, saying they don't comment on active or pending litigation.




Six Democratic Oregon Congressional leaders sent a press release late Friday calling on the release of the firefighter. “It’s outrageous for the Trump Administration to trample on the due process rights of emergency responders who put their lives on the line to protect Oregonians’ safety," said Sen. Ron Wyden. Sen. Jeff Merkley and four representatives said the arrests put communities in danger and stoke fear.

After Hernandez was taken into custody in August, his lawyers were unable to locate him for 48 hours, which caused distress for his family, Fernandez-Ortega said. He has been in the Tacoma facility ever since, they said.

Hernandez, 23, was the son of migrant farmworkers, his lawyer said. He was raised in Oregon, Washington and California as they traveled for work. He moved to Oregon three years ago and began working as a wildland firefighter.


This was his third season working as a wildland firefighter, “doing the grueling and dangerous job of cutting down trees and clearing vegetation to manage the spread of wildfires and to protect homes, communities, and resources,” his lawyer said.

Hernandez had received a U-Visa certification from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Oregon in 2017 and submitted his U-Visa application with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services the following year. The U-Visa program was established by Congress to protect victims of serious crimes who assist federal investigators.

He has been waiting since 2018 for the immigration agency to decide on his application and should be free during the process, his lawyers said.

Martha Bellisle, The Associated Press

Lawyers for firefighter ask judge to order his release from ICE facility
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shaquille Oatmeal

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
83,972
121,179
113
Florida federal judge tosses Trump's $15B defamation lawsuit against The New York Times


ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. (AP) — A Florida federal judge on Friday tossed out a $15 billion defamation lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump against The New York Times.

U.S. District Judge Steven Merryday ruled that Trump’s 85-page lawsuit was overly long and full of “tedious and burdensome” language that had no bearing on the legal case. The judge gave Trump 28 days to file an amended complaint that should not exceed 40 pages.




“A complaint is not a megaphone for public relations or a podium for a passionate oration at a political rally,” Merryday wrote in a four-page order. “This action will begin, will continue, and will end in accord with the rules of procedure and in a professional and dignified manner.”

Trump's legal team plans to continue the lawsuit “in accordance with the judge’s direction on logistics,” spokesman Aaron Harison said.

The lawsuit named four Times journalists and cited a book and three articles published within a two-month period before the last election.

The Times had said it was meritless and an attempt to discourage independent reporting. “We welcome the judge’s quick ruling, which recognized that the complaint was a political document rather than a serious legal filing,” spokesman Charlie Stadtlander said Friday.

Merryday noted that the lawsuit did not get to the first defamation count until page 80. The lawsuit delves into Trump’s work on “The Apprentice” TV show and an “extensive list” of Trump’s other media appearances.




“As every lawyer knows (or is presumed to know), a complaint is not a public forum for vituperation and invective — not a protected platform to rage against an adversary,” wrote Merryday, an appointment of former President George H.W. Bush. “Although lawyers receive a modicum of expressive latitude in pleading the claim of a client, the complaint in this action extends far beyond the outer bound of that latitude.”

The lawsuit named a book and an article written by Times reporters Russ Buettner and Susanne Craig that focuses on Trump’s finances and his pre-presidency role in “The Apprentice.” Trump said in the lawsuit that they “maliciously peddled the fact-free narrative” that television producer Mark Burnett turned Trump into a celebrity — “even though at and prior to the time of publications defendants knew that President Trump was already a mega-celebrity and an enormous success in business.”




The lawsuit also attacked claims the reporters made about Trump’s early business dealings and his father, Fred.

Trump also cited an article by Peter Baker last Oct. 20 headlined “For Trump, a Lifetime of Scandals Heads Toward a Moment of Judgment.” He also sued Michael S. Schmidt for a piece two days later featuring an interview with Trump’s first-term chief of staff, John Kelly, headlined “As Election Nears, Kelly Warns Trump Would Rule Like a Dictator.”

Trump has also sued ABC News and CBS News’ “60 Minutes,” both of which were settled out of court by the news organizations’ parent companies. Trump also sued The Wall Street Journal and media mogul Rupert Murdoch in July after the newspaper published a story reporting on his ties to wealthy financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Curt Anderson, The Associated Press
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shaquille Oatmeal

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
83,972
121,179
113
A federal appeals court stopped President Donald Trump from using the 18th-century Alien Enemies Act. Trump has sought to use it to deport Venezuelan migrants allegedly linked to the criminal gang Tren de Aragua.

What is the Alien Enemies Act?


The act lets the president detain foreign nationals from countries at war with the U.S. (Ye Jinghan/Unsplash)© Knewz (CA)
Passed in 1798 under President John Adams, the Alien Enemies Act lets the U.S. president detain or deport foreign nationals from countries at war with the U.S. Unlike other parts of the Alien and Sedition Acts, this law is still active today but has been used only three times — during the War of 1812 and the two World Wars.

Court stops deportations


The high court told the Trump administration to pause deporting several Venezuelan men. (MEGA)© Knewz (CA)
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court ordered the Trump administration to pause the deportations. Authorities held several Venezuelan men under the 1798 law. The administration argued the gang’s ties to Venezuela’s government justified the law’s use, but the courts disagreed.

Appeals court decision


The Fifth Circuit ruled 2-1 the 1798 law didn’t apply. (Wesley Tingey/Unsplash)© Knewz (CA)
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled 2-1 that the law didn’t apply, stating there was no “invasion or predatory incursion” by a foreign power. Judges Leslie Southwick and Irma Carrillo Ramirez made up the majority, with Judge Andrew Oldham dissenting. “A country encouraging its residents and citizens to enter this country illegally is not the modern-day equivalent of sending an armed, organized force to occupy, to disrupt, or to otherwise harm the United States,” the judges wrote.

The response


Others have supported the ruling. (MEGA)© Knewz (CA)
Lee Gelernt from the American Civil Liberties Union praised the ruling, telling the Associated Press, “The Trump administration’s use of a wartime statute during peacetime to regulate immigration was rightly shut down by the court. This is a critically important decision reining in the administration’s view that it can simply declare an emergency without any oversight by the courts.”

Trump suffers setback over migrant deportations
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shaquille Oatmeal

mandrill

monkey
Aug 23, 2001
83,972
121,179
113


The Trump administration is systematically locking up immigrants while they contest the government’s attempts to deport them, even if they’ve lived in the United States for decades and have no criminal record.

This indiscriminate mass detention — a dramatic shift in immigration enforcement policy that began on July 8 — has been declared illegal by dozens of federal judges, who have described it as a flagrant perversion of long-standing law, policy and common sense.


But the administration says its reinterpretation of the law is both legal and a key prong of President Donald Trump’s mass deportation strategy. They say no matter how long someone has resided illegally in the country — “for 25 minutes or 25 years” — the law doesn’t just allow, it requires, their detention while awaiting deportation. And they hope this interpretation encourages many to depart the country voluntarily.

The result has been hundreds of frantic lawsuits by immigrants who have been arrested without warning at work, at routine check-ins with immigration authorities or after immigration court proceedings. Immigration lawyers and advocates contend they’re being sent to overcrowded and unsanitary detention facilities.
This mass detention led to the Baltimore-area arrest of a Mexican man, in the United States for 30 years with no criminal record, who has a son on active duty in the Air Force; the arrest of a Brazilian man residing near Burlington, Massachusetts, who had a 1-week old baby at the time he was detained; and a Salvadoran woman, residing in Lake Elmo, Minnesota, who arrived in the United States as a minor in 2016 and has two U.S. citizen children, including one who was nursing at the time of her arrest.


Immigrant advocates say the goal is clear: make the process so excruciating that people give up and accept deportation — even if they have meritorious asylum claims or pathways to legal status.

“They’re making a legal argument that judges are consistently rejecting on the substance, but they’re also using the procedure to get what they want,” said Michael Kagan, director of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas’ Immigration Clinic.

Immigrants are increasingly turning to federal district courts — which historically have not handled immigration matters — as a last resort, citing violations of their legal and constitutional rights. Their lawsuits have led to dozens of recent rulings from gobsmacked judges who say the administration has violated the law and due process rights and is threatening to do so for millions more. The pileup of decisions is growing daily.

One judge called the administration’s reinterpretation of the law to prioritize detention “radical.” Another said it had resulted in “arbitrary” arrests and turned routine immigration proceedings into an unsustainable “game of detention roulette” in service of Trump’s mass deportation agenda. Another called the administration “willfully blind” to the plain meaning of long-standing immigration laws. Another said the administration’s position “defies logic.


“The Government’s discretion in matters of immigration is deep and wide, but surely its chop does not overcome the banks of due process enshrined in the Constitution,” said U.S. District Judge Julie Rubin, a Maryland-based appointee of Joe Biden.

In many cases, judges are ordering detainees immediately released from custody, so long as they vow to continue attending immigration court proceedings and remain in contact with immigration officials. They are still likely to be deported, but the judges say they may not be held indefinitely in detention facilities while they await the outcome of their proceedings.

In other cases, judges are requiring the administration to at least give immigrants a chance to seek bond from immigration judges — a fighting chance to win release from ICE custody that the administration has tried to deny.

Department of Homeland Security officials say they are confident the rulings from district courts will eventually be overturned by the Supreme Court and validate their strategy.


Judicial activists … have been repeatedly overruled by the Supreme Court on these questions,” said DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin. “ICE has the law and the facts on its side, and it adheres to all court decisions until it ultimately gets them shot down by the highest court in the land.”
Trump’s new view of the law
At the heart of the recent conflict are two related provisions of immigration law that have vexed courts for decades.
One pertains to “arriving” immigrants who are “applicants for admission” and are also “seeking admission” to the United States. This has long been interpreted by immigration officials and courts to apply to people apprehended near the border right after they entered. Under this provision of law, detention is mandatory, with few exceptions, and those detained have virtually no ability to challenge their confinement while deportation proceedings are underway.
The second provision permits — but does not require — immigration authorities to detain deportable immigrants who are already residing in the United States. It has long been applied to the millions of undocumented immigrants who have lived in the nation’s interior for years, often paroled into the country after encountering immigration officials at the border. Many have established deep roots, with U.S. citizen spouses, children and family members, as well as employment authorization and pending efforts to seek asylum or other pathways to remain in the country legally.

Article continues at link.....
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts