An Opening Salvo

 by John Hinderaker

On February 13, a left-wing judge in the District of Columbia entered a temporary restraining order barring the federal government from enforcing executive orders that paused the disbursement of certain foreign aid funds. On February 25, the same judge ordered the federal government to make some of the payments that had been “paused”–namely, those to federal contractors for work that had been completed.

The case wound up in the Supreme Court on an application by the federal government to vacate or stay the district court’s February 25 order. That application was denied earlier today, on a 5-4 vote, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Barrett joining the liberals–an alignment that we have seen in several high-profile cases. Today’s decision has generated a fair amount of comment, mostly by people who haven’t read it.

The case, in its present posture, raises technical issues relating to federal court procedure, as well as substantive issues relating to sovereign immunity, and whether it has been waived under the Administrative Procedure Act. The majority decision–there isn’t a full-fledged opinion–resolved nothing:

Given that the deadline in the challenged order has now passed, and in light of the ongoing preliminary injunction proceedings, the District Court should clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines. The order heretofore entered by THE CHIEF JUSTICE [an administrative stay] is vacated.

Justice Sam Alito wrote a dissenting opinion on behalf of the four conservative justices. Finding more significance in the current proceeding, it begins:

Does a single district-court judge who likely lacks jurisdiction have the unchecked power to compel the Government of the United States to pay out (and probably lose forever) 2 billion taxpayer dollars? The answer to that question should be an emphatic “No,” but a majority of this Court apparently thinks otherwise. I am stunned.

I’m not. There are major constitutional battles coming, over the separation of powers and the roles of Congress and the President in spending money. Major issues will be addressed: Does the President have the power to refuse to spend money that Congress has appropriated? Does the President have the power to re-allocate money appropriated by Congress among various uses or programs? If so, under what circumstances? What is the President supposed to do, for example, if he learns that a particular program is riddled with fraud?

The Democrats’ answer to that last question is, Nothing. This is what we have seen play out in Minnesota, in the Feeding Our Future scandal. State agencies knew that the program was close to 100% a criminal fraud, yet the Tim Walz administration did nothing until the FBI finally stepped in. That is the model the Democrats would follow at the national level.

Today’s brief encounter in the Supreme Court was the opening salvo in a long, and very important, war. I don’t think there are any tea leaves to be read from the 5-4 decision. What we hear in the background is the distant thunder of major constitutional issues that are about to be fought out.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2025/03/an-opening-salvo.php

Five Ukrainian Fables

by Victor Davis Hanson 

Fable One: Donald Trump Is Appeasing Russia?

Who wiped out the Wagner group in Syria? Who sold offensive weapons to Ukraine first? Who warned Germany not to become dependent on the Russian Nord Stream II deal?

Who withdrew from an unfair missile deal with the Russians? Who cajoled and berated NATO members to meet their military investment promises made following the 2014 invasion of Ukraine?

In contrast, who originally conceived a Russian “reset” in 2009? Who publicly virtue-signaled pushing the red “reset” button in Geneva with the current Russian Minister Sergey Lavrov?

Which ex-European leader got a million euros a year working for Russian energy companies?

Of the last four presidents, under whose watch did Putin not invade another country?

Which American president, in hot-mic style, offered to (and did) dismantle US-Eastern Europe missile defense plans in exchange for temporary Putin quietude (“space”) to aid his 2012 reelection?

Fable Two: A Trade War?

Donald Trump is not wildly slapping tariffs on Europeans.

He is simply saying that 1945 is now 80 years past and that the asymmetrical tariffs that Europe imposes on U.S. imports should be corrected. The massive trade surpluses Europe accumulates each year should give way to fairer, more balanced trade.

If Europe does not want tariffs, then simply calibrate its own tariffs on what America places on European imported goods, and work down jointly to zero tariffs on both sides.

Fable Three: America Is Bullying Europe?

The U.S. does not actively interfere in European elections and politics.

In 2024, Europeans, especially the British Laborites, bragged about sending over campaign “volunteers” to work against Trump and, earlier, his conservative predecessors.

British subject Christopher Steele sought to sabotage an entire American 2016 election with a falsified “dossier.”

The Ukrainian ambassador in 2016 wrote an op-ed all but endorsing Hillary Clinton and trashing her opponent.

In September 2024, Mr. Zelenskyy was flown in on a Biden-provided US military jet to Scranton, Pennsylvania—at a pivotal time in the most pivotal swing state—to surround himself with Democrat politicos.

His media-frenzied presence signaled a partisan campaign theme that a Harris win and the continuance of massive Democrat aid to Ukraine would ensure manufacturing jobs, such as the artillery shell factory he selected to visit.

As to NATO, Trump’s pressure from 2017 to 2021 finally pushed more NATO nations to rearm. But even eleven years after promising to invest a mere 2 percent of GDP in defense, nine of the 32 members still have not complied.

Fable Four: Negotiating With Putin Is Selling Out?

In the long history of Western diplomacy with mass-murdering tyrants, Putin doesn’t even rank among the worst. Just ask his former reset partners Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.

FDR fueled mass-murdering “Uncle Joe” Stalin’s Red Army as a way to defeat Nazi Germany.

Richard Nixon flattered and cajoled the greatest mass murderer in history, Mao Zedong, to triangulate China against the Soviet Union.

Ronald Reagan offered to share missile defense expertise with Soviet Russia.

Europeans have hosted almost every Palestinian murderous terrorist leader, as a way either of deflecting terrorism from their own shores or emphasizing their general loathing of Israel.

Fable Five: Europe Is Going To Save Ukraine?

Europe rushed to congratulate and celebrate with Zelensky after his preplanned White House blow-up. They are loudly announcing that a supposedly isolationist and appeasing U.S.—which has sent more aid to Ukraine than all nearby European nations combined—will now be supplanted by a “new” muscular and rearmed Europe.

We sincerely hope so.

But on every recent international moral question—ganging up on a lone Israel to appease terrorist forces in the Middle East, standing up to China’s mercantilism, neo-imperialism, and domestic oppression of minorities, or Russia’s prior 2008 and 2014 invasions—European outrage has been muted, real consequences nonexistent.

We are now witnessing European heads of state sending the same old, same old virtue signaling support for the brave Zelenskyy, who supposedly spoke truth to power to the mean U.S. Orange Man.

But where does such performance art lead after the cult hero Zelenskyy had gnawed the hand that gorged him?

To multitudes of European tanks, skies full of European jets, and division after division of crack European infantry now heading east to “back up” Ukraine—led on horseback by its new Joan of Arc, Ursula von der Leyen?

Aside from all the present posturing and mock-heroics, the only way to save Ukraine is for the U.S. president, Donald Trump, to reflect joint Ukrainian, American, and European interests in stopping the war, forcing Putin as far back eastward as possible where he started in 2022, and creating a credible deterrent along with a DMZ/industrial corridor tripwire to stop another 2008, 2014, and 2022 invasion.

Anything else is empty carnival barking.

https://amgreatness.com/2025/03/06/five-ukrainian-fables/

"Absolutely Factual": Stranded Astronauts Confirm Musk's Pre-Election Rescue Offer Was Snubbed

 Elon Musk revealed on a recent Joe Rogan podcast that SpaceX offered to rescue the stranded Boeing Starliner astronauts on the International Space Station last year, but the Biden administration rejected the offer "for political reasons." Musk claimed, "There is no way they're going to make anyone supporting Trump look good" ahead of the November presidential elections. 

Fast forward to Tuesday, a Washington Post journalist asked the stranded astronauts, Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams, if the Biden administration rejected Musk's space rescue offer ahead of the election.

Wilmore responded: "I can only say that Mr. Musk, what he says is absolutely factual…" He noted that the exact reasons behind the offer being rejected were unknown to him or Williams. 

... and the WaPo journalist was crushed by Wilmore's response, validating Musk's claims. 

The big revelation by Wilmore, plus Musk's comments, paints the Biden-Harris administration as reckless for jeopardizing the lives of two of America's top astronauts. 

Musk commented about this on X:

The astronauts were only supposed to be up there for 8 days and now have been there for 8 months. SpaceX could have sent up another Dragon and brought them home 6 months ago, but the Biden White House (not NASA) refused to allow it. President Trump asked to bring them back as soon as possible and we are doing so.

Bill Ackman chimed in on the conversation:

So not only did Biden not invite @elonmusk to the White House EV summit, Biden would not let Elon retrieve the astronauts from the Space Station. When a president puts our astronauts at risk for his own political benefit, we have reached a new low point in presidential history.

Once again, the Biden-Harris regime stands accused of prioritizing a corrupt political party first over national well-being, this time at the expense of two astronauts who have remained in space for 7.5 months longer than initially anticipated. 

We could see this playing out a mile away. We said last August:  "Additionally, it's an election year for the Biden administration, which has been on a crusade against Trump and his supporters, but also is very anti-Musk. Any rescue mission by SpaceX's Dragon spacecraft is undesirable news flow for Democrats." 

https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/absolutely-factual-stranded-boeing-starliner-astronauts-confirm-musks-2024-rescue-offer

Bessent Highlights Trump’s Fed Silence, Rejects Inflation Worry

 

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent rejected the idea that President Donald Trump’s tariff hikes will ignite a new wave of inflation, and suggested that the Federal Reserve ought to view them as having a one-time impact.

“I’ve agreed not to talk about prospective Fed policy going forward, “ Bessent said while answering questions after a speech at the Economic Club of New York. Still, “I would hope that the failed ‘Team Transitory’ could get back together and think that nothing is more transitory than tariffs if it’s a one-time price adjustment.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-03-06/bessent-highlights-trump-s-fed-silence-rejects-inflation-worry

Be Careful What You Read About DOGE & Non-Farm Payrolls In February

 Via SouthBayResearch.com,

The following is making the rounds, and it is technically true but factually false.

"In a typical February, state and local government hiring tends to drive national job growth, but we think we could see a sharp pull back in state and local government hiring this February due to uncertainty over federal funding following Trump’s guidance, Bloomberg notes."

Start with this 1st part: 

"government hiring tends to drive national job growth"

Government hiring does NOT drive February hiring

School 'hiring' drives February hiring.  

And since most schools are public, it shows up in Gov't payrolls. 

But even calling it 'hiring' is a misnomer.  

This is back-to-school restoration of temporarily released school staff.  

These are the folks who drive buses, work in the cafeterias, maintain the grounds, provide after-school activities, etc etc.

Otherwise Gov't hiring is actually almost non-existent in February, except for Post Office hiring.

So technically it is true - Gov'ts drive February hiring because they include education payrolls - but linking them to DOGE misrepresents the situation. 

(Note: cuts to Dept of Education will have an impact, but they haven't really started yet.)

Now for the 2nd part: 

"we think we could see a sharp pull back in state and local government hiring this February due to uncertainty over federal funding following Trump’s guidance"

So...you are guessing?

DOGE has zero impact on the back-to-school hiring.  

Nada.

DOGE does have a near-term impact on Private Sector hiring.  

For example, eliminating $1B in contracts to vendors for the purpose of promoting DEI in classrooms: that's a job killer.  But these began AFTER the NFP survey kicked in.

And that timing factor comes into play with all of the cost-cutting by Trump.

"Uncertainty over federal funding" was non-existent on January 20th when Trump was inaugurated.  Nobody took his bluster seriously.  It became a reality as February progressed, but that also means the impact would fall outside of the February payroll survey period.

I don't disagree with the assessment that a big wave is coming.

I do disagree that it starts in February.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/be-careful-what-you-read-about-doge-non-farm-payrolls-february

Movement to ban Chinese farmland purchases near military bases gains steam in the Senate

 The movement to ban China from scooping up U.S. farmland conveniently located near military bases is gaining steam in the Senate. 

The PASS Act, led by Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., has the backing of Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and would prevent any entity from a "covered country," which includes China, North Korea, Russia and Iran, from purchasing agricultural land near military bases or sensitive sites. 

It would also give the Department of Agriculture the ability to submit cases to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S. for review if it believes there is a national security concern and make the Agriculture secretary a voting member of the committee for purchases of agricultural land, biotechnology and any other transaction related to the agriculture industry.

The legislation has Democratic support from Nevada’s Catherine Cortez-Masto, whose state is home to sensitive research and testing sites like Area 51. It also has the backing of GOP Sens. John Hoeven, of North Dakota, and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming. 

The land purchased by Fufeng Group in Grand Forks, North Dakota, in 2021, which it planned to use to build a corn mill. (Fox News / Fox News)

China owned around 350,000 acres of farmland across 27 states as of last year, according to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. 

As of 2022, foreign entities and individuals held 43.4 million acres of U.S. agricultural land, which is nearly 2% of all land in the U.S.

"Our near-peer adversaries such as China are looking for any possible opportunity to surveil our nation’s capabilities and resources," Rounds said in a statement.

President Donald Trump's national security memorandum said Chinese farmland purchases "must be countered." 

"The United States will protect our farmland and real estate near sensitive facilities, strengthen CFIUS authority over ‘greenfield’ investments."

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said putting a stop to Chinese farmland purchases near military bases was at the "very, very top" of her list upon taking the new job. 

For years, Chinese nationals have been caught attempting to breach U.S. military facilities, sometimes with drones or by posing as tourists. 

Smithfield Foods, which has a Chinese parent company, owns the largest share of U.S. land of any foreign entity at 110,000 acres. 

Chinese companies own nearly 10,000 acres of farmland in Polk, Florida, near MacDill Air Force Base and 277 acres in San Diego County near Camp Pendleton. 

The PASS Act, led by Sen. Mike Rounds, would prevent countries such as China, North Korea, Russia and Iran, from purchasing agricultural land near military bases. (Andrew Harnik/Pool via)

A 2022 Chinese land purchase set off alarm bells when food producer Fufeng Group bought 370 acres for corn milling near a North Dakota Air Force base.

That prompted the Biden administration to propose a rule requiring any foreign company or individual looking to buy land within 100 miles of certain U.S. military bases to get government approval.

"This legislation would help safeguard our national defense, food supply, and rural economies and ensure farmland across South Dakota and our nation is protected from our foreign adversaries," Thune said in a statement. 

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/movement-ban-chinese-farmland-purchases-near-military-bases-gains-steam-senate