vlafs.bsky.social
doctoral student, policy nerd, constitutionalist, veteran, mom, wife, and future world traveler
100 posts
234 followers
441 following
Discussion Master
comment in response to
post
Guess he can be right once in a while.
comment in response to
post
Another reason to leave IN. Indoctrination here we come.
comment in response to
post
But he is going to roll over anyone who gets in his way? An ignorant bully.Guess he is in the (-,-) quadrant. For those who need a translation, it is the worst.
comment in response to
post
Surely he used Grok.
comment in response to
post
Yes, death and destruction.
comment in response to
post
Ask her if she is willing to give up her healthcare and donate the proceeds to charity? If not, perhaps she is not a public servant, more like a taker. The again it is no surprise. All for me, none for thee.
comment in response to
post
No vets should vote for her. What a pariah!!!
comment in response to
post
Just what the wealthy private school supporters need. <snark> just in case anyone thinks I am a proponent.
comment in response to
post
Is this bigger than Watergate? Ummmm...could be...
comment in response to
post
Start calling your Senators, Tell them to advise against it. If he nominates, do not consent (confirm). Get ahead of the narrative. This is likely a trial balloon.
comment in response to
post
What cost cutting efforts? The admin fees for the courts, rehiring, and loss of productivity (health, science, etc.) basically wipe away the "savings".
He is pushing for an even bigger tax cut or subsidies.
comment in response to
post
Some might call it affordances and effectivities. The SAT would say the analogy is: Brides and pardons.
comment in response to
post
Professor Wolfers, that is how to pack a punch. Now we need to find methods and others to break it down this simply to resonate with the public. Perhaps Trae Crowder, Pete Buttiggieg, and AOC can do versions of this explanation. Humor and knowledge help frame the narrative.
comment in response to
post
Can it be used in a lesson on irony and disinformation in politics?
comment in response to
post
When Apple sues, I hope the judge requests a $1 bond. Those in the know will understand.
comment in response to
post
How long before he sicks the DoJ on them?
comment in response to
post
That is a sign for the ages and the aged.
comment in response to
post
I commented on this back door "pardon" for current civil suits. Get some Senators (Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Booker, Mr. Warner) to submit amendments and hold the floor. Get Pete B. on every news show. Stop this "seemingly benign item" from passing. Do not rely on the Senate Parliamentarian.
comment in response to
post
Unfortunately, many of these wins will be for naught, if the line in the budget reconciliation bill is passed by the Senate. Refer to the article by Erwin Chemerinsky. It requires the posting of bonds in all cases (including previous ones). Another form of immunity? One would have to ask a lawyer.
comment in response to
post
Perhaps because they are getting kickbacks in the form of jobs in the administration? Over 20 former Fox employees are in this administration. Does anyone really think they are doing it to be a public servant? While some have religious nationalist goals, others are in it for data and access.
comment in response to
post
Let me correct you slightly. It should be "most", not "one". The recently confirmed SSA Administrator had to Google the job. It is a flood the zone strategy - have the press focus on the mistakes of one "leader", while the rest perpetrate vile and potentially unlawful acts on the citizenry.
comment in response to
post
Yes, Mr. Steele it is. Do you even recognize the party you once led?
comment in response to
post
Unfortunately, it will be blamed on the previous administration, and these "folks" will buy that BS.
comment in response to
post
I have and continue to do so everyday, Congressman Lieu. Please get your "friends" across the aisle to do so. That might save our democracy. At least they could do would be to give a thumbs down to the "flying palace". How hard is it to enforce a constitutional provision. Heck, Senator Paul agrees.
comment in response to
post
Yes, and one which is a national security threat. Where are the anti-corruption republican congressmen, congresswomen, and Senators? Nowhere to be found.
comment in response to
post
It is an emolument. Are we really going to let our Congressional Reps and Senators approve of this "gift". I would hope not, but then why should any of us believe they will stop it?
comment in response to
post
Perhaps because she will lose big time.
comment in response to
post
Well he did take out the MAGA attorney nominee. He has to get back in the club.
comment in response to
post
Who knew christian values like feeding the hungry, caring for the sick, and welcoming others would be balked at by the MAGA faithful? Everyone knew. They want the Ten Commandments prominently displayed in schools, but not lived.
comment in response to
post
Like he cares what she spews.
comment in response to
post
Does she still have a law license?
comment in response to
post
Could this be a reason that the Lieutenant Governor of Indiana is pushing the 3/5 compromise?
Disgusting, but in keeping with the white nationalist agenda.
comment in response to
post
Big assumption regarding confirmation. This normalization of ridiculous behavior (appointments of the ill-qualified) is why the country is reeling. Do you want someone who shares secrets on a phone to be Ambassador to the United Nations? He screws up and moves up. Call senators, say "Vote no".
comment in response to
post
Concur. It also is a major break of faith. Perhaps some folks should reread and understand the first two commandments.
1. Thou shalt not have any other gods before God.
2. Thou shalt not make yourself an idol.
comment in response to
post
Perhaps this is not within his constitutional power? Congress took action to enact a law, making the action a crime. He may be immune while President, he becomes vulnerable to criminal indictment at 12:01 on January 20, 2029.
comment in response to
post
Spend over $200B more in the first quarter compared to 2024. Hmmm... makes me think that efficiency is not the goal.
comment in response to
post
Congratulations!!!!
comment in response to
post
Sounds a bit "Will no one rid me of this troublesome (in some descriptions "turbulent" or "meddlesome") priest?” Henry II.
comment in response to
post
Mr. Rubio, citizens are not to be "deported". Look it up.
comment in response to
post
Yes, the image is really forgiving. The judge is 65.
comment in response to
post
Yes, they do. Every instance of purposeful framing needs to be called out. this is how the opposition controls the narrative and normalizes illicit/illegal/unconstitutional behavior and moves all of us down a slippery slope.
comment in response to
post
Michelle is running?
comment in response to
post
Perhaps she should be concerned.
comment in response to
post
Please forward this to the White House Counsel, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary Chair, the House Judiciary Committee Chair, dissenting members of the Supreme Court, and the major media outlets. They need a reminder. Perhaps append the Schoolhouse Rock, I am just a bill video as a tutorial.
comment in response to
post
He knows. He does not seem to care, so long as he is part of the "elite".
comment in response to
post
A few already went down to scope out the prison. Look for future stock purchases from those that have not advertised their trip. For the one "gentleman" who gave a thumbs up, he should be receiving an ambassador nomination, if he is beaten in the midterm election.
comment in response to
post
Typing to fast "do" not "due".
comment in response to
post
Thank you Professor. This is both brilliant and timely!!!! May every university due the same, and may local and national news stations publish the information as public service announcement. Flood the zone with good news. We need to show why education and public service are crucial to the citizenry.
comment in response to
post
I find it hard to believe this doesn't tell us something. Has the major issue not be adjudicated before [United States v. Wong Kim Ark]? If the current justices were not contemplating shifting positions (stare decisis anyone), why take up the case at all? I am not a lawyer, but this seems simple.
comment in response to
post
Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee Ranking Member Peters and House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Member Gerry Connelly, perhaps you and your staff might want to do something about this? We know that the current AG won't.