State of the Discussion

" The number of examples of actual election fraud (voting dead peoples mail in ballots, etc.) is microscopic. BUT, the vast majority of those have been people on the right…."

Note the distinction between "voter fraud" (beloved of RWNJ screamers) is something that individual voters would do, while "election fraud" is something much more systematic, typically by election officials at some level.

But yes, I've noticed that "voter fraud" seems to be something done by people on the right, for which they typically get an extremely mild 'slap on the wrist'.

IMO, such election-related crimes are the ONE case where "loss of franchise" (temporary or permanent) is completely appropriate. It's not as harsh as jail time, nor even as fines.

If they repeat offend? Yeah, jail time. CLEARLY unteachable.

I guess I'd also like to comment on the whole accelerationist / looking for the revolution thing.

Here are my politics:

I affirm the commonwealth with a small-r republican form of government as my own idea of the best available form of government. In Lincoln's formulation, a government of, by, and for the people. And I think in general, at least for certain definitions of "the people", that's what the sainted founders tried to establish, and they did a pretty good job considering the conditions under which they were working. Which is to say, basically in a contentious social and political climate and while at war. And I think we've been trying to expand the definition of "the people" since then, with some success, and at some significant cost.

I also affirm the ideas presented by Locke in the 2nd Treatise on Government. We're born with certain inherent rights, but in the absence of society - which is to say government - we're on our own to defend those rights. And as a result, the strong take what they want and the less strong suffer what they must. So we have governments. And because there are lots of different kinds of people, almost anything a government does will piss off some of those people. So, assuming a government that is remotely representative of the people governed, we accept that there be some limitations on what we can and cannot do - some limitations on the exercise of our inherent rights - in the interest of not living in a world of warlords.

That's my political manifesto, FWIW.

You have to go back at least 50 years - Vietnam War days - to find people "on the left" who had any interest in anything resembling revolution.

Over the last 30 years at least, the people who have been unwilling to abide by the basic social contract I described above have all been on the right. The people who have consisted threated the lives of People Like Me if they don't get their way, all on the right. The people organizing themselves into unaccountable militias - private unaccountable armies - are all on the right. The people engaging in political violence and terror, not all on the right, but overwhelmingly on the right.

And most recently, the people who engaged in a deliberate scheme to overturn a lawful election, all on the right. And I am talking not just about the J6 rioters, although they most certainly are included. But also people in government, including people who are in Congress as I write this.

I won't even get into the current POTUS' fanciful understandings of, and disrespect for, the institutions that have allowed this country to persist as something resembling a republic for 250 years.

So I am not interested in, as Paul Simon had it, hints and allegations that people like me are trying to spur on some kind of revolution. We are holding on by our fingertips hoping this republic survives the next three years.

I hope I make myself clear.

I apologize for the belligerent tone of my last few comments. I wake up every day wondering what fresh hell awaits, and trying to get my head around the idea that somebody like our current POTUS not only holds that office, but does so with the support of a significant percent of the population. I have utterly lost respect for the Republican party and the soi-disant "conservative movement" as it currently exists, and also for a lot of people I know personally, because as far as I can tell they have no regard whatsoever for the institutions and traditions of this country. And saying that brings me no pleasure whatsoever. And all of that puts me in a truly foul mood, one which I do not enjoy and would be glad to be rid of.

But nonetheless, here we are.

What is going on now is utter bullshit. If you are offended by my referring to the likes of Miller, Noem, Patel, et al as "freaks", pick another word. Sociopaths. Corrupt lickspittles. Whores to power. Opportunistic sycophants to a sick, sad, increasingly demented old man.

They are deeply and profoundly corrupt, starting with Trump, and they are destroying this nation. We're rich and have a formidable military, so we'll survive in some form, but our standing in the world will be diminished for at least a generation, and our cohesion as a polity is in tatters.

So yes, I am pissed off. Thank you all for your patience.

ICE has set quotas, and it is easier to fulfill those with non-criminals who're naive enough to trust in the system (and e.g. show up when called upon for hearings etc.) Parents are also easier to get through their children (either the parents get arrested when they come to take home their kids from school or kindergarten or the kids get arrested and used has hostages to lure out the parents).

Which reminds me of Ephraim Kishon. He (being a Jew) was hiding in Budapest at the end of WW2. When the Red Army arrived, he like many others came out to greet them as liberators and found himself arrested and marched in the direction of Siberia. The Soviet general had a quota of prisoners to report to Stalin and took anyone he could get. All the Nazis had gone into hiding, so they were mostly safe. Kishon managed to escape during the march and later heard that in his place a farmer got taken right from his field to get the already reported numbers correct again.

Every word of what wj said 2 hours ago, and what nous says too. The extraordinary numbers of people showing valid US citizenship ID or proof that they're already legally in the system, which is completely ignored, makes a mockery of any suggestion that this is about criminal or illegal immigration. Not to mention the concentration on blue states. This is a vindictive campaign to retaliate against states who didn't go for Trump, and throw the red meat of "illegal" "criminal" "immigrants" to his bloodthirsty base, who are lapping it up. It's just a miracle that brave protesters with phones are providing evidence at the risk of their lives, and that Trump's people are so obviously incompetent and unfit (Noem, Bovino etc) that this is cutting through to the non-brainwashed and even the NRA, and that Renee Good and Pretti were "relatable" white people.

bc: Dehumanizing either side gets us nowhere.

When I hear you saying that to any of Noem, Homan, Bovino, Miller, Leavitt, or even some random MAGA congressman, I will accept that you're engaged in something other than Trumpologetics.

While we wait, I ask again: what do you think should be done about ICE? Or do you think nothing needs to be done?

--TP

Trump wants state and local cooperation in rounding up the illegal aliens, especially those convicted or charged with serious crimes. Sanctuary cities/counties/states are actively resisting the enforcement of federal law.

Seriously? I doubt you will find a single official, in any sanctuary city or county or state, who would have any problem at all at all with those convicted of serious crimes being picked up and deported. What they object to, and actively resist, are armed (and untrained) thugs rampaging around their population.

They might not be enthused about rounding up people who had committed no crime beyond coming here illegally. But that's not what's happening. People who are here legally, who have followed the law to the letter, are being grabbed, roughed up, and deported -- deported to, be it noted, countries other than the one they are from, even half way around the world.

For that matter US citizens are getting picked up, shackled,, and hauled across the country for interrogation (without any chance for the legal representation they are entitled to). And then left to get home at their own expense.**

In short, any claim that Trump (or Miller or Noem) has the least interest in legal status is simply not supported by the facts.

As for defunding ICE, at this point I'm not seeing anything less which will work. ICE is basically going to have to be cleared out completely and rebuilt from scratch. There are sure to be some few longstanding employees who should then be rehired. Some. But anyone hired in the last year should never work there again. (And, IMHO, never work in anything resembling law enforcement at any level ever again. All the way down to private security.)

** Far more than the number (citizens and non-citizens alike) who have simply been murdered.

"And this is where we part company on this issue."

I can live with that.

What I would submit for your consideration is that some people dehumanize themselves. I don't have to lift a finger.

Comport yourself like a sociopath and eventually people are gonna consider you to be a sociopath.

"My point is that by defunding ICE, you do give Trump what I think (I’m doing a bit of mind reading here) you fear"

The reality is that DHS has all the money they will ever realistically need, and more, in the bank already. The BBB gave them $178 billion, $30B for ops and $45B for detention. The DHS piece of the current package is $64 billion, with about $10 billion for ICE.

So they'll be okay unless they keep spending like a bunch of drunken sallors on shore leave. They just delivered a couple dozen brand spanking new SUVs to the ICE facility near me, so I think they're all set for a while.

None of which likely has any bearing on whether Trump sends the military into US cities. If he wants to and thinks he can get away with it, he'll find a reason. Or no reason.

The man does whatever the f*** pops into his head on any given day, unless and until somebody tells him no. So let's tell him no, whenever that opportunity presents itself.

wjca:

What do you see being accomplished by giving Trump what he asks for? 

My point is that by defunding ICE, you do give Trump what I think (I'm doing a bit of mind reading here) you fear: that he will militarize the response. Insurrection Act, Alien Enemies Act, etc. Without ICE, you'd have to take agents from the border and there is a limit to that. Defund DHS completely, you lose the Border Patrol (and TSA and the Secret Service too). Trump, OTOH, is still Commander in Chief. He can call up the guard or maybe even the Arctic Angels.

Trump wants state and local cooperation in rounding up the illegal aliens, especially those convicted or charged with serious crimes. Sanctuary cities/counties/states are actively resisting the enforcement of federal law. Those that think the obstruction isn't part of and the cause of much of the violence (and intentionally so) are naive IMO.

Take the resistance far enough and what you end up with may not what you bargained for.  Or maybe some are bargaining for that response in search of the revolution. 

bc,

Let's hear your own suggestions. What do you think should be done about ICE, CBP, and the rest of those federal "agents"? And by who?

Or do you think nothing needs to be done?

--TP

Looked it up again. The Orestes-Neoptolemos affair is ambiguous in the sources. Either Hermione was the (unwilling) bride of Neoptolemos and Orestes tried to get her for himself (and slew Neoptolemos) or she was Orestes' fiancee, Neoptolemos tried to rape her and Orestes slew him for that. Again, no one asked the girl about her opinion.
Btw, here's the vase painting of Neoptolemos beating Priamos to death with the body of Priamos' grandson Astyanax: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Amphora_death_Priam_Louvre_F222.jpg
There are other stories with Odysseus either killing Astyanax or agitating for it in order to prevent him from growing up and taking revenge (Neoptolemos often involved though).

Actually reading both epics does not leave much sympathy for any of the male 'heroes'*. I wonder in what way Odysseus would explain his 1 year with Kirke and 7 years with Kalypso to his wife (Homer being very explicit about those relationships being sexual and the latter ending with the 7-years-itch). And other sources have Odysseus killed by his son with Kirke who then marries Penelope while his legitimate son Telemachos marries Kirke in turn.
In the Iliad Odysseus is the most active in suppressing protests from the common soldiers. Interestingly, in non-Platonic sources about the trial of Socrates, the philosopher is accused of citing these verses in his agitation against Athenian democracy.
He is, in some sources, also the main culprit in maltreating the women of Troy (and together with Neoptolemos organizes the sacrifice of Polyxena to the spirit of Achilles).
Orestes tries to justify the murder of his mother with the theory that sons are not blood related to their mothers (them being only seed vessels) and later murders Neoptolemos to steal his wife. Neoptolemos beats Priamos to death at the sanctuary altar with the body of Astyanax, his grandchild and son of Hektor (there are vase paintings of the scene).
Authors of post-antiquity had their work cut out to sanitize all of that.
What I find telling is that the Romans (with very few exceptions**) vilify Odysseus. Not for the deeds we find objectionable to-day but for using his brains instead of raw violence as a proper hero would do.

*Medea (for the female side) being an interesting case of developing from a Greek victim in the oldest to a foreign villain in the younger sources. Jason is an a-hole in all ancient sources I know.
**Apuleius being one in his 'the god of Socrates'

lj: my bad. I meant to put a divider there. Still, I thought (and think) the context is obvious and I wasn't being disrespectful. I will use my best MLA/Bluebook from here on out.

That is asking Trump to deploy the military for immigration enforcement without actually asking him, IMO.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. And we can't all spend our lives trying to figure out WTF Trump is going to do on a given day.

Or is that the point?

The point is to get DHS to stop beating the shit out of people, breaking into their homes, and shooting them.

Clear?

Push escalation until the revolution?

First, I'm not sure holding funding for DHS until they stop acting like the Gestapo counts as "escalation".

"Escalation" is when People Like Me start shooting back. Which is not on the calendar.

And I'm really not interested in hearing anything about "escalation" from any conservative voice, at all, right now and probably for the forseeable future.

You're a conservative, get your freaking Congress people to stop giving these freaks the space to destroy this country.

Thank you.

So it’s a chance (whether large or tiny) of accomplishing something vs no chance at all. Easy choice.

But do it anyway. Do whatever is available.

That is asking Trump to deploy the military for immigration enforcement without actually asking him, IMO. Or is that the point? Push escalation until the revolution?

This (the reaction of the Minneapolis public) is rather inspiring. You could say it's an example of Moral Sanity:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/2026/01/minneapolis-uprising/685755/?gift=cx0iluuWx4Cg7JjlT8ugCZ3XpunvY7eUEOPAgaybJ3M&utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

From where I stood, a few yards back from the scrum last Wednesday afternoon, it looked, at best, to be a savage caricature of our national divide: On one side, militarized men demanded respect at the butt of a gun; on the other, angry protesters screamed for justice.

But behind the violence in Minneapolis—captured in so many chilling photographs in recent weeks—is a different reality: a meticulous urban choreography of civic protest. You could see traces of it in the identical whistles the protesters used, in their chants, in their tactics, in the way they followed ICE agents but never actually blocked them from detaining people. Thousands of Minnesotans have been trained over the past year as legal observers and have taken part in lengthy role-playing exercises where they rehearse scenes exactly like the one I witnessed. They patrol neighborhoods day and night on foot and stay connected on encrypted apps such as Signal, in networks that were first formed after the 2020 killing of George Floyd.

***
Avalos told me that 65,000 people have received the training, most of them since December. “We started in a very different tone; it was preventive,” she said. Now, after Good’s death, “people are understanding the stakes in a different way.”

My copy of The Cure at Troy has just arrived. I'm looking forward. But it's weird how the story of Troy seems to be following me around at the moment; I just read Pat Barker's The Silence of the Girls, and will soon be starting the second and third volumes in her trilogy, The Women of Troy and The Voyage Home. It was fascinating to read the first, it is a story most of us know incredibly well, one of the cornerstone myths of Western culture. Yet reading it for the first time from the point of view of the women involved is a revelation.

do. whatever. is. available.

the (D)'s are minority but they are not utterly without any power. use what you have.

the sternly worded letters are not working.

To expand on what russell said: absolutely slash DHS (or, at minimum, ICE) funding. The administration may invent some way around that, and spend the money anyway. But if the funding isn't cut, they will definitely spend it.

So it's a chance (whether large or tiny) of accomplishing something vs no chance at all. Easy choice.

Perhaps the Federalist Society's vetting is less robust that they thought....

Also the Sinister Six's use of the shadow docket instead of actual cases. Those aren't precedent under any theory. I seem to recall reading that one of the Justices -- Alito? Thomas? -- was complaining about the lower courts not using the shadow docket rulings and said something like, "How many hints do you need about how we will eventually rule?"

I can't see anyone in this administration as Philoctetes, Hercules, or Odysseus. All of whom had, besides their tragic flaws, great and noble characteristics. That's what makes them "tragic heroes".

i certainly see the self-pity, and the enthusiasm to "repeat their every last mistake." But anything at all that would qualify as admirable? If someone like that snuck into this administration, she's keeping an incredibly low profile. (Probably, admittedly, as a matter of self preservation.) But it seems far more likely that anyone like that has walked away long since.

Actually it's a wonder that so many Trump-appointed judges keep stepping up and ruling against him. Perhaps the Federalist Society's vetting is less robust that they thought....

Even if the DHS budget gets slashed, what would stop His Orangeness to just transfer funds from elsewhere*? Iirc he already does so in other places** and SCOTUS has essentially said that nothing can be done about it

“Defense” will get its usual boost, so it’s not as if there is no money available.

and refuses to spend funds Congress has specified for use.

Historically the President can't repurpose funds except under very specific conditions that Congress has put into statute. So far, Trump's minions have been careful to at least make a case that such repurposings meet one of Congress' conditions. Depressing thought -- if the Dems retake Congress this year, it seems possible that sometime in the next two years the SCOTUS will actually say that Congress can't specify purposes for their appropriations.

Trump's proposed budget gives Defense a 50% boost, from a bit under a trillion dollars to a trillion-and-a-half. Battleships ain't cheap, you know. In point of fact, the Pentagon has no idea how to spend a trillion-and-a-half dollars per year; it will take them at least a few years to ramp up to that.

Impoundment was settled in the 1970s while Nixon was in office. The SCOTUS will probably revisit the subject. I expect them to rule that it's a political matter and deny that anyone has standing to bring the case.

Even if the DHS budget gets slashed, what would stop His Orangeness to just transfer funds from elsewhere*? Iirc he already does so in other places** and SCOTUS has essentially said that nothing can be done about it.

* "Defense" will get its usual boost, so it's not as if there is no money available.
** and refuses to spend funds Congress has specified for use.

Well, you certainly get no argument from me on the role played by the Heritage Foundation, the Federalist Society or the SCOTUS. And the roots of this have certainly been long in the growing, long before any dream of a Trump presidency. It just seems impossible to me to contemplate the particularly poisonous confluence of current circumstances without the craven behaviour of the GOP.

...so I guess this adds a second formula to the one that Snarki outlines. Sometimes it is the "zoom out until the particulars blur" tactic. This time it's the "tight focus to leave others off camera" tactic.

Either way, it saves face for the people who continue to facilitate this push to authoritarian illiberalism.