Monday, April 21, 2025
GOP Congress Look To Stop ‘Judicial Coup D’Etat’
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Homan: How Many Angel Moms And Dads Has Sen. Van Hollen Met With In Maryland?
"Border czar" Tom Homan told ABC's "This Week" that what's really concerning to him about the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia is how Democratic Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen went to El Salvador to meet him while ignoring the chaos on the Southern border over the past four years and those murdered by illegal aliens in his own state.
"What bothers me more than that is a U.S. Senator traveled El Salvador on taxpayer dime to meet with a MS-13 gang member, public safety threat terrorist," he said. "And in the meantime, the day before he traveled, an illegal alien who was arrested for murder was released in the streets rather than honoring an ICE detainer in his very own state."
"What concerns me is Van Hollen never went to the border last four years under Joe Biden, when he had a 600 percent increase in sex trafficking women and children," Homan said.
"How many angel moms and dads has he met in the state of Maryland? That's what concerns me."
JON KARL, ABC: Senator Van Hollen has obviously got a chance to meet with him. But he had to travel to El Salvador to get any information. Is that a concern to you at all? I mean, these are people sent by the United, I mean, in his case, sent by the United States and not even a U.S. Senator could get any information about his whereabouts or the condition of his incarceration without actually going down and making the trip to El Salvador himself.
TOM HOMAN, TRUMP ADMINISTRATION BORDER CZAR: Well, he obviously knew his whereabouts because he went there to see him. But you know what's -- what bothers me more than that is a U.S. Senator traveled El Salvador on taxpayer dime to meet with a MS-13 gang member, public safety threat terrorist. I mean, in the meantime, the day before he traveled, an illegal alien was arrested for murder was released in the streets rather than honoring an ICE detainer in his very own state.
What concerns me is Van Hollen never went to the border last four years under Joe Biden, when he had a 600 percent increase in sex trafficking women and children. You have a record number of non-suspected terrorists cross that border. You had a quarter million Americans die from fentanyl overdose because of open border. You had over 4,000 illegal aliens died making that journey, which is an historic record.
What shocks me is he has remained silent on the travesty that happened in our southern border. Many people died, thousands of people died. I met with hundreds of angel moms and dads who buried their children that were murdered by illegal alien. How many angel moms and dads has he met in the state of Maryland? That's what concerns me.
'Weird Trick Let D.C. Judges Stage A Coup'
The Supreme Court’s ruling in J.G.G. v. Donald J. Trump was not an unqualified triumph for the Trump administration’s deportations of foreign gang members, but it was a definite rebuke not just to Judge Boasberg, but to the entire D.C. Circuit Court shadow government.
The ACLU filed J.G.G. v. Trump in defense of five Venezuelan inmates in New York and Texas. All of the men claimed that they were not gang members and there was no indication that any of them were being deported, denying them any actual standing for coming before the court.
Especially before Judge James Boasberg who is thousands of miles away in Washington D.C.
Despite the lack of standing and the case being filed in the wrong venue, Judge James Boasberg, the chief judge of the D.C. Circuit Court, not only blocked the deportation of all gang members back to Venezuela, but ordered that planes currently over international airspace that were carrying gang members turn around and bring them back to the United States.
Boasberg fumed that the planes were not turned around on his mere word and threatened the Justice Department with repercussions for not recognizing his power over not only the entire country, but also the entire planet.
But why was a judge from the D.C. Circuit Court on a case involving inmates in Texas?
The answer is that leftist organizations and the judges of the D.C. Circuit Court were using one weird trick to seize power over the entire country (if not always the planet) and transform themselves into a shadow government able to block any Trump administration move.
The Supreme Court’s ruling vacating Boasberg’s order stated that, “the detainees are confined in Texas, so venue is improper in the District of Columbia” and directed that the appropriate “venue lies in the district of confinement”. So how did a D.C. judge ever get involved at all?
In Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s concurrence he noted that the “only question is where that judicial review should occur. That venue question turns on whether these transfer claims belong in habeas corpus proceedings or instead may be brought under the Administrative Procedure Act.” The Supreme Court’s ruling even noted that “initially the detainees sought relief in habeas among other causes of action, but they dismissed their habeas claims” and stated that “their claims fall within the ‘core’ of the writ of habeas corpus and thus must be brought in habeas.”
Kavanaugh then laid out a brief history of detainees, including those terrorists at Gitmo, bringing claims under habeas corpus rather than, strangely, under the Administrative Procedure Act.
The Administrative Procedure Act had been created in response to the rise of a vast unaccountable government bureaucracy under FDR. The APA was supposed to stop the administrative state from turning into exactly the kind of self-governing machine it grew into which FDR had described as threatening to “develop a fourth branch of government for which there is no sanction in the Constitution.” It was not meant to block presidents from executing their policies or subject every one of those policies to the review of the D.C. Circuit Court.
The D.C. Circuit Court however has enabled every leftist ‘resistance’ group to go ‘judge shopping’ and file APA complaints to block anything and everything President Trump does.
And so the ACLU appealed to the D.C. Circuit Court, wielding the Administrative Procedure Act, to challenge the question of whether President Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act (which predated the APA by 148 years) applied and what could be defined as wartime. The ACLU was asking Boasberg to block President Trump’s use of presidential powers based on an act meant to check bureaucratic overreach. And Judge Boasberg went ahead and tried to seize control of U.S. forces abroad from President Trump in the name of an act meant to regulate agencies.
The Supreme Court’s response to this unconstitutional abomination was milder than it deserved.
What gave the ACLU and Boasberg the idea that they could get away with it? The ACLU had previously sued the Trump administration for removing materials falsely describing the existence of a ‘transgender’ society as a violation of the “Administrative Procedure Act” by “removing articles without a reasoned basis” as if that were a matter subject to the APA.
In another case, ‘Judge’ Ana Reyes, a Uruguayan activist lawyer appointed by Biden as the first gay ‘Latinx’ judge in the D.C. Circuit Court, blocked the removal of mentally ill individuals who hallucinate the idea that they are members of some other sex than their biological one, by claiming that it’ss “soaked in animus and dripping with pretext, Its language is unabashedly demeaning, its policy stigmatizes transgender persons as inherently unfit” and argued, despite the mountain of evidence, that the Department of Defense had “not provided a legitimate reason for banning all transgender troops” and therefore violated the Administrative Procedure Act.
Reyes had confused the Administrative Procedure Act with her own personal opinion and rather than ruling on the legality of a policy based on actual laws, abused the APA to seize power over the Pentagon to promote her own favored social and sexual worldviews in the APA’s name.
But the Supreme Court has begun shooting down some APA abuses.
In its response to a Biden judge in Massachusetts blocking the Trump administration from ending education grants that violate its ban on DEI, the court noted that Judge Myong Joun and the court “lacked jurisdiction to order the payment of money under the APA” and that monetary cases involving the government are supposed to go to the Court of Federal Claims.
The APA has become a favored weapon of choice whether the issue at hand is financial, foreign policy, deporting illegal aliens or even publishing materials about the existence of transgenderism on government websites. During the first term of the administration, leftist groups had taken to boasting of having entire “teams of APA litigators and experts”.
And with a 93% loss rate for the Trump administration in APA cases, the judicial coup was a sound strategy. All a leftist judge had to do was declare that the Trump administration’s actions were “poorly reasoned” or lacked “sufficient rationale” and would override the president’s orders.
The APA enabled a massive shift of power from the executive branch to district courts, and to the D.C. Circuit Court which had seized virtually unlimited power from both the president and local courts and judges in the process creating an unelected shadow government.
But the D.C. judicial shadow government overreached itself. And Boasberg’s attempt to seize presidential powers has created a constitutional moment of crisis that may unwind the coup.
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/one-weird-trick-let-dc-judges-stage-coup
Saying ‘please’ and ‘thank you’ to ChatGPT costs tens of millions, OpenAI CEO admits
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman admitted that simple courtesies such as saying “please” and “thank you” to his company’s ChatGPT bot are surprisingly expensive — costing the firm substantial sums in electricity expenses.
Altman made the revelation when a user on the social media platform X asked about the financial impact politeness towards AI might have on OpenAI’s operating costs.
Altman responded by noting the loss was “tens of millions of dollars well spent,” adding cryptically: “You never know.”
Chatbots such as ChatGPT run on large language models (LLMs), which rely on extensive computational infrastructure hosted in data centers.
These models require thousands of high-performance GPUs (graphics processing units) to operate efficiently.
The GPUs perform vast amounts of parallel processing to interpret prompts and generate responses in real time.
Powering these data centers demands enormous amounts of electricity.
It’s estimated that generating a single AI-written response, such as a short email or paragraph, can consume as much as 0.14 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of energy — comparable to keeping 14 LED bulbs lit for one hour.
When scaled across billions of interactions daily, the cumulative energy usage becomes significant.
Globally, data centers already account for about 2% of total electricity consumption.
With the rapid expansion of AI applications and increasing demand for generative AI services like ChatGPT, experts warn that this figure could rise sharply in the coming years.
While some might view courteous interactions with chatbots as unnecessary, several AI experts argue that politeness significantly shapes AI interactions positively.
Kurtis Beavers, a director on the design team for Microsoft Copilot, has advocated for respectful prompts, stating they “help generate respectful, collaborative outputs.”
According to Beavers, polite phrasing doesn’t merely reflect good manners but actively influences how the AI replies, setting a more constructive and professional interaction tone.
“When it clocks politeness, it’s more likely to be polite back,” according to Microsoft WorkLab, a digital publication produced by the software giant that is specifically devoted to integration of AI in the workplace.
Politeness towards AI has become increasingly common.
A 2024 survey revealed that approximately 67% of American users regularly employ courteous language when interacting with chatbots.
Within that group, a majority (55%) believe politeness is ethically correct, while another 12% humorously indicated that their polite language serves as insurance against potential AI rebellion.
Raskin sinks to new low by vowing vengeance on foreign leaders who work with Team Trump
Putting partisan politics far above patriotism (if he has any), top Democrat Rep. Jamie Raskin is outright threatening vengeance on foreign leaders who work with the Trump administration.
Yes, he washes it through rhetoric about fighting “authoritarianism in our country,” but that’s simply cover for goonish threats.
Raskin (D-Md.) issued it on the “Pod Save America” podcast, after progressive host Tommy Vietor cited (surely left-wing) Latin America experts as urging Democrats to warn off “any foreign government that participates in the extraordinary rendition of American citizens.”
Reality check: No one is proposing any “extraordinary rendition of American citizens.”
Democrats keep trying to confuse people into thinking Team Trump is doing that, as cover for their efforts to fight the administration’s deportations of illegal migrants — which is not remotely authoritarian.
Naturally, Raskin ran with Vietor’s implied point, specifically pointing to El Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele as someone Dems “are not going to look kindly upon” “when we come back to power — and we will.”
His complaint is that Bukele refuses to send Kilmar Abrego Garcia (a Salvadoran citizen) back to the United States.
Abrego Garcia has never had any legal right to be here, though the Trumpies erred in sending him home without clearing an outdated 2019 order that said he could be deported, but not to El Salvador because he claimed a gang there was gunning for him.
(Bukele has eviscerated all the Salvadoran gangs, infuriating US “Latin America experts” of the kind Vietor surely relies on.)
Raskin’s also plainly peeved that Bukele is assisting the Trump “deport violent-criminal illegal migrants” efforts, but that’s still no reason to issue threats to a foreign prez.
Republicans have never punished foreign leaders who helped President Barack Obama in his initiatives; it’s insane to drag other countries into our domestic disputes.
Raskin dresses it up with his noise about “the descent into fascism in America,” but he’s the one destroying nonpartisan norms of our politics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)