x.com/ukraine_world/status/2012120483324686696
VOTES IN FAVOR OF TRUMP
Trump appointees
-
A Senate war powers resolution aimed at limiting President Trump’s authority to take further military action in Venezuela failed Wednesday, after two Republican senators — Senators Josh Hawley and Todd Young — withdrew their support. Vice President JD Vance cast the tie-breaking vote to dismiss the measure. Meanwhile, the U.S. completed its first sale of Venezuelan oil, valued at about $500 million. Semafor reports that the revenue from the oil sales is currently being held in bank accounts
— Read on www.democracynow.org/2026/1/15/headlines/senate_republicans_kill_war_powers_resolution_to_limit_trump_on_venezuela -
Tragedy was the predictable outcome of a system built to prioritize intimidation over judgment, speed over restraint, and obedience over accountability
— Read on blogs.timesofisrael.com/a-neighbor-on-the-ground-renee-goods-death-by-design/And this is the part we have to say plainly, even if it makes people uncomfortable. What happened in Minneapolis was not a tragic anomaly. It was the predictable outcome of a system built to prioritize intimidation over judgment, speed over restraint, and obedience over accountability. When an organization adopts Gestapo-like tactics, operates with insufficient training, deploys agents into civilian spaces as shock troops rather than peacekeepers, and cultivates a culture that treats communities as hostile territory, tragedy stops being accidental. It becomes inevitable. Not because any individual woke up intending to kill a neighbor, but because the system rewards speed, force, and compliance, and punishes hesitation, judgment, and restraint.
The subtext is unmistakable. Some deaths count less. Some lives are provisional. Some victims deserve suspicion more than sympathy. That is not moral clarity. It is moral rot. And when institutions rot this way, excuses start to align. Justifications repeat. Force finds its rhythm.
-
www.nytimes.com/2026/01/14/world/middleeast/iran-protests-soltani-execution-trump.html
Iran was expected to execute a protester on Wednesday for the first time during the current wave of antigovernment unrest, according to human rights groups and family members of the protester. President Trump has threatened “strong action” if Iran carries out any such death sentences.
Rights groups and relatives identified the protester as Erfan Soltani, 26, from an area west of the capital, Tehran. He was arrested on Jan. 8 and has been denied access to a lawyer or other means to mount a defense, according to the Norway-based Hengaw Organization for Human Rights.
A statement by the rights group said his family was also kept unaware of the judicial proceedings and was allowed only a brief, final visit before the scheduled execution, on Wednesday. On Tuesday, his family said he had never used violence and only sought basic freedoms for Iranians.
Since Dec. 28, Iran has been rocked by the largest protests in years against its authoritarian rulers, prompting Mr. Trump to say he would respond strongly.
-
www.nytimes.com/2026/01/11/us/politics/trumps-appeals-court-judges.html
Trump’s ‘Superstar’ Appellate Judges Have Voted 133 to 12 in His Favor – The New York TimesPresident Trump has found a powerful but obscure bulwark in the appeals court judges he appointed during his first term. They have voted overwhelmingly in his favor when his administration’s actions have been challenged in court in his current term, a New York Times analysis of their 2025 records shows.
Time and again, appellate judges chosen by Mr. Trump in his first term reversed rulings made by district court judges in his second, clearing the way for his policies and gradually eroding a perception early last year that the legal system was thwarting his efforts to amass presidential power.
When Mr. Trump criticized a ruling from a so-called “Obama judge” in 2018, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. responded that “we do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges.”
But the data suggests that in the 13 appellate courts, there is increasingly such a thing as a Trump judge. The president’s appointees voted to allow his policies to take effect 133 times and voted against them only 12 times. Ninety-two percent of their total votes were in favor of the administration. That figure far outstrips support for Mr. Trump’s agenda from appeals court judges appointed by other Republican presidents, and from Mr. Trump’s appointees to the district courts.
Trump’s ‘Superstar’ Appellate Judges Have Voted 133 to 12 in His Favor – The New York TimesPresident Trump has found a powerful but obscure bulwark in the appeals court judges he appointed during his first term. They have voted overwhelmingly in his favor when his administration’s actions have been challenged in court in his current term, a New York Times analysis of their 2025 records shows.
Time and again, appellate judges chosen by Mr. Trump in his first term reversed rulings made by district court judges in his second, clearing the way for his policies and gradually eroding a perception early last year that the legal system was thwarting his efforts to amass presidential power.
When Mr. Trump criticized a ruling from a so-called “Obama judge” in 2018, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. responded that “we do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges.”
But the data suggests that in the 13 appellate courts, there is increasingly such a thing as a Trump judge. The president’s appointees voted to allow his policies to take effect 133 times and voted against them only 12 times. Ninety-two percent of their total votes were in favor of the administration. That figure far outstrips support for Mr. Trump’s agenda from appeals court judges appointed by other Republican presidents, and from Mr. Trump’s appointees to the district courts.
President Trump has found a powerful but obscure bulwark in the appeals court judges he appointed during his first term. They have voted overwhelmingly in his favor when his administration’s actions have been challenged in court in his current term, a New York Times analysis of their 2025 records shows.
Time and again, appellate judges chosen by Mr. Trump in his first term reversed rulings made by district court judges in his second, clearing the way for his policies and gradually eroding a perception early last year that the legal system was thwarting his efforts to amass presidential power.
When Mr. Trump criticized a ruling from a so-called “Obama judge” in 2018, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. responded that “we do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges.”
But the data suggests that in the 13 appellate courts, there is increasingly such a thing as a Trump judge. The president’s appointees voted to allow his policies to take effect 133 times and voted against them only 12 times. Ninety-two percent of their total votes were in favor of the administration. That figure far outstrips support for Mr. Trump’s agenda from appeals court judges appointed by other Republican presidents, and from Mr. Trump’s appointees to the district courts.
President Trump has found a powerful but obscure bulwark in the appeals court judges he appointed during his first term. They have voted overwhelmingly in his favor when his administration’s actions have been challenged in court in his current term, a New York Times analysis of their 2025 records shows.
Time and again, appellate judges chosen by Mr. Trump in his first term reversed rulings made by district court judges in his second, clearing the way for his policies and gradually eroding a perception early last year that the legal system was thwarting his efforts to amass presidential power.
When Mr. Trump criticized a ruling from a so-called “Obama judge” in 2018, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. responded that “we do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges.”
But the data suggests that in the 13 appellate courts, there is increasingly such a thing as a Trump judge. The president’s appointees voted to allow his policies to take effect 133 times and voted against them only 12 times. Ninety-two percent of their total votes were in favor of the administration. That figure far outstrips support for Mr. Trump’s agenda from appeals court judges appointed by other Republican presidents, and from Mr. Trump’s appointees to the district courts
-
The book cover. Princeton University Press -
Far-right activist Nick Fuentes leading a rally in Michigan in 2020. Nicole Hester/AP -
The New Right’s four camps according to Field -
The “Claremont-ers”:Intellectuals affiliated with the synonymous conservative think tank founded by the followers of Jewish-German philosopher Leo Strauss who advocate a radical recovery of American’s founding principles.
-
The Postliberals: Many of whom are Catholics seeking to demote democratic ideas in favor of the “common good,” and its smaller integralist wing that calls to end separation between church and state.
-
The National Conservatives: A big-tent movement promoting nationalism and a homogenous nation-state.
-
The hard right: A loose constellation of online agitators with PhDs who promote misogyny, race theory and aestheticized hyper-masculinity.
-
-
www.nytimes.com/2026/01/06/world/americas/cuba-economy-venezuela-oil.html
By all accounts, Cuba is enduring the worst economic moment in the 67-year history of its communist revolution.
While the island nation has endured periodic episodes of mass migration, food shortages and social unrest in decades past, never before have Cubans experienced such a wholesale collapse of the social safety net that the country’s leaders — starting with Fidel Castro — once prided themselves on.
“I, who was born there, I, who lives there, and I’ll tell you: It’s never been as bad as it is now, because many factors have come together,” said Omar Everleny Pérez, 64, an economist in Havana.
As Trump administration officials congratulate themselves on a triumphant military victory in Venezuela, in which President Nicolás Maduro was seized and the United States claimed control over the South American country, eyes have now turned to Cuba, which enjoyed a warm relationship with the jailed president and which depended on the oil he sent.
To buy gasoline, people have to use an app to sign up for an appointment — at least three weeks in advance. One resident of Havana, the capital, said he joined the queue three months ago, and is now No. 5,052 in line.
The lack of gasoline has led to sporadic trash pickup, which has led to outbreaks of mosquito-borne illnesses like dengue and chikungunya. Medicines are nearly impossible to find without relatives abroad to send them.
The Cuban government has consistently blamed its economic travails on a decades-long U.S. trade embargo that it claims puts a chokehold on its ability to do business in the world market and earn much-needed cash. Economic sanctions by Republican administrations, which have excluded food and medicine, have made it even harder, government officials say.
“Correcting distortions and reviving the economy is not a slogan,” President Miguel Diaz-Canel said in a speech last month. “It is a concrete battle for stability in everyday life, so that wages are sufficient, so that there is food on the table, so that blackouts end, so that transportation is revived, so that schools, hospitals and basic services function with the quality we deserve.”
The resulting power outages have hurt industries like nickel production, because the factories are off when there’s no power.
Another crucial industry, tourism, has also suffered in recent years. Before the Covid pandemic, four million people a year used to visit Cuba; that number has struggled to get back to two million, economists said.
Experts agree that while U.S. policies have hurt Cuba, poor planning and mismanagement are also to blame for the country’s economic troubles. Efforts to allow private businesses to operate have faltered because of onerous regulations.
The private enterprises, known as MiPyMEs, were legalized in 2021 and have been a lifeline in Cuba, Mr. Pérez and other residents said.
Some private stores resemble supermarket chains in the United States, with everything from Goya brands to Philadelphia cream cheese.
But prices at the private stores are exorbitant, particularly for people who earn salaries in the local currency. A typical monthly pension is 3,000 pesos, less than $7, while a carton of 30 eggs costs 3,600 pesos — $8.
Difficult living conditions helped spur spontaneous mass protests in 2021, but a harsh government crackdown quashed the demonstrations.
Cuba’s financial collapse has fueled an extraordinary exodus — about 2.75 million Cubans have left the country since 2020, according to Juan Carlos Albizu-Campos, a Cuban demographer. While the official population is about 9.7 million people, Mr. Albizu-Campos said 8.25 million would be more accurate.
-
Morning
Morning to everyone except Republicans or Republican enablers. 
Law, Power, and Justice 