I would think the justice department should also be advocating for United States Citizens or people wronged by the King.
Reuveni is the attorney Bondi suspended. She also appears to be telling lawyers to defend trump’s nonsense even if it’s not legal.
Reuveni said in court of the government’s position: “Our only arguments are jurisdictional. … He should not have been sent to El Salvador.”
Asked why the US couldn’t simply ask for his return, Reuveni said, “The first thing I did when I got this case on my desk is ask my clients the same question,” adding that he did not get a direct answer.
Attorney General Pam Bondi took issue with how Reuveni handled the case in court.
Bondi had this to say…
“At my direction, every Department of Justice attorney is required to zealously advocate on behalf of the United States. Any attorney who fails to abide by this direction will face consequences,” she said in a statement to CNN.
Bondi issued a memo on her first day as attorney general requiring lawyers to “zealously” advocate for administration positions or face disciplinary action and potential firing.
I guess good news now is that disasters proceed in an orderly fashion. The Democrats could pride themselves on a smooth transition of power to the fascists. The market computers had no problems processing the crash. When the next pandemic hits, let’s see if the morgues can’t handle all the bodies!
That is the classic kind of answer he gives when he has no idea what the interviewer is asking him about. I would bet a million dollars that, until that moment, he had not heard that there were protests over the weekend.
Oh I’m sure all his yes men that make up his administration probably work to shield him from any criticism. He likely believes that everyone really is happy with him and what he’s doing, in part because of that.
If I was someone from the administration, out in public defending this shit, I’d be pissed, no matter how devoted to Trump I was. It’s obvious that no human thought was involved in the tariff plan (entirely generated by LLM and no one looked over it afterwards), even though it had massive global implications, which means every person out there defending the plan on tv news is personally expending more effort than the entire administration did to come up with the plan in the first place. And they have to know that they’re defending the indefensible, too.
It is, although it seems to be so much worse than his usual - more incoherent, more nonsensical, and the part where he’s semi-coherent is seemingly referencing something in his head that only makes sense in his own head. (What’s this “terrible thing” that was witnessed that caused people to be at the protests? Or is that even what he means?)
I think that’s because he wanted to say something that could be applicable if the protesters were against him or for him. Or if they were in response to some event that happened that he was unaware of. Trump is incapable of admitting he doesn’t know something so he always just bullshits his way through an answer, but he’s learned to do it in a way that his people can later spin as needed. And they will. So in this case, the terrible thing is the protests themselves, which I’m sure they will claim were violent. But, if it had turned out the protesters were MAGA, then the terrible thing would be whatever they were protesting. It sounds, in the moment, completely nonsensical to normal people, but it’s spinnable to mean whatever his people need it to mean.
I don’t think it’s even some deliberate strategy, or something he plans at all.
I think it’s confabulation. It’s not that he doesn’t know about this particular thing, it’s that his memory is so thoroughly fucked up, he can’t rely on any memories about anything, and just like a migraine aura where you’re blind on the left side but your brain just fills in what it thinks should be there (trust me, it’s trippy noticing that all the licence plates on the road have three digits and are blank on the left side), he doesn’t actually remember much at all, and he doesn’t remember that he doesn’t remember, so his brain makes up any old plausible shit, pipes it out through his mouth, and then he believes whatever it is, no matter how little sense it makes.
It’s not strategy, it’s progressive brain damage.
(Note extremely well: this explanation excuses nothing. This sort of progressive dementia doesn’t change his personality, it reveals it.)
Here’s when investors pivot to defense companies and weapons manufacturers. Because it doesn’t matter if it works, works well, doesn’t work at all. It’s end stage capitalism theater, and oh man that train is never late.
…
The pillars of Reagan’s economic policy included increasing defense spending, balancing the federal budget and slowing the growth of government spending, reducing the federal income tax and capital gains tax, reducing government regulation, and tightening the money supply in order to reduce inflation.[7]
The results of Reaganomics are still debated. Supporters point to the end of stagflation, stronger GDP growth, and an entrepreneurial revolution in the decades that followed.[8][9] Critics point to the widening income gap, what they described as an atmosphere of greed, reduced economic mobility, declining real median wages, and the national debt tripling in eight years which ultimately reversed the post-World War II trend of a shrinking national debt as percentage of GDP.[10][11] …
