Researcher in the U.S. trying to stay informed and help others stay informed. I write a blog that focuses on public information, public health, and policy: https://pimento-mori.ghost.io/

I only recently began using ghost, and am slowly figuring things out. Apologies for any formatting issues.

  • 114 Posts
  • 251 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 13th, 2025

help-circle


  • Definitely, don’t get me wrong. Musk was not innocent in any of that. Theil is a Nazi too he just didn’t get on stage in front of the whole world and do a fucking salute (twice). They are both pieces of shit, but like yin and Yang pieces of shit. I think Theil knew he would be able to use Musk’s inability to keep anything to himself to his advantage.

    Just kind of funny/bizarre to think about the possibility that one evil villain piece of shit essentially mean girlsed another evil villain piece of shit, in what seems to be an ongoing feud that has lasted for several decades, but somehow keeps escalating.
















  • https://archive.is/zGrab

    The impression of a constitutional crisis is misleading. That impression was initially created by overreaching district judges selected by plaintiffs, who obtained temporary victories and leveraged those victories in the media. If there is a crisis, it does not arise from the actions of the administration but instead from a slew of highly aggressive judicial decisions that have transgressed traditional legal limits on the relationship between the judiciary and the executive branch — limits the courts respected during the Biden administration. — Adrian Vermeule, professor, Harvard Law School

    The administration always talks about ivy league elitists that hate America, but they never mention this guy for some reason.



  • Legal scholars are usually very knowledgeable about the law, but not always great lawyers in the courtroom (hence the judge basically rolling her eyes at the argument).

    Adrian Vermeule is a right wing constitutional law professor/legal scholar. He will never show up in court, but he is definitely influencing their legal argument.

    NYT actually just released an article today asking legal experts their opinion on what’s happening now. Of course Vermeule somehow managed to put the blame on the courts and not the administration.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/28/opinion/trump-constitution-rule-of-law.html

    https://archive.is/zGrab

    The impression of a constitutional crisis is misleading. That impression was initially created by overreaching district judges selected by plaintiffs, who obtained temporary victories and leveraged those victories in the media. If there is a crisis, it does not arise from the actions of the administration but instead from a slew of highly aggressive judicial decisions that have transgressed traditional legal limits on the relationship between the judiciary and the executive branch — limits the courts respected during the Biden administration. — Adrian Vermeule, professor, Harvard Law School




  • ??? That seems like kind of a bizarre takeaway, but just to be clear, this is far from over. We are in no way in the safe zone. Not even a little bit, DO NOT get complacent.

    Adrian Vermeule, the Harvard Law professor, who is behind their legal argument has been writing about executive authority and Carl Schmitt (the legal architect of the Nazi agenda) for several years.

    Unchecked executive authority is what allowed Hitler to legally carry out genocide. This is a very dangerous group of people.

    It’s just very funny that a group of ivy league and silicon valley billionaires have been spending the last few months trying to rally the public and get them on their side by somehow claiming that anyone opposed to their actions is an out of touch elitist.

    Meanwhile, the legal theory for the constitutional interpretation that is the basis of their entire power grab (judges can’t overrule a president’s order, we don’t have to have a warrant if we break down your door claiming we’re looking for gang members bc executive authority overrules individual liberty) is so highly technical and obscure, that it is actually a pretty flimsy argument and definitely out of touch with most American’s interpretation of the constitution (we the people did not want to be ruled by a king, so you can pry our liberty from our cold dead hands).

    Someone like justice Alito (who also coincidentally happens to be an ivy league graduate) would probably still support Vermeule’s interpretation, so a weak argument is no guarantee of protection. What often seems to make or break the argument, is public knowledge and opinion, which can then lead to public pressure due to justices hoping to preserve their legacy in history.

    You already have to do a lot of mental gymnastics to make the argument in the first place, but it would be next to impossible to make the public aware of this interpretation, and view it as anything other than an attempt to create a loophole allowing for the King to invade your home and seize your property, while taking away your right to defend yourself.



  • This is very funny to me:

    In a hearing on April 23, US District Judge Beryl Howell, who is overseeing Perkins Coie’s case, appeared incredulous at the government’s arguments. She subjected Richard Lawson, a Justice Department lawyer, to a barrage of often sarcastic questions about the scope of the executive order, brushing aside some of his positions as “hyper-technical legal arguments that may have no merit.”

    On the docket, meanwhile, the administration is outgunned.

    The two lawyers representing the government are Chad Mizelle, US Attorney General Pam Bondi’s chief of staff, who worked in the first Trump administration and at a pair of elite law firms, and Lawson, who joined the Justice Department after a stint at a conservative nonprofit founded by Trump aide Stephen Miller.

    Most of their legal arguments rely on constitutional interpretation of unchecked executive authority. This is actually the argument of a very prominent legal scholar and professor of constitutional law at Harvard.

    While they’ve been calling everyone around them bureaucratic elitists, they’ve now jumped into the game very confidently but totally dependent on this argument only to have a judge essentially say, this may make for a good publication on legal theory but essentially has no basis in reality 🤣



  • I mean they already are. They’ve been doing this since March.

    The only reason we know is because one of the many employees within ICE who have been leaking information to the press in the hopes we would pressure congress to do their jobs, also leaked this.

    If you know anyone in the conservative camp that’s still blissfully unaware/not pissed yet, loop them in. Their voices are the most important when it comes to giving Congress one last try while they’re still collecting paychecks paid for by our tax dollars.

    If it comes down to us fighting we will have to join together anyway if we stand any chance. The next civil war will not be left vs right, it will be Americans refusing to follow orders vs. corporate billionaires controlling both public and private military (Blackwater, Palantir, etc.).