Traditions are what binds us together. Merry Christmas to all.
The Tyranny Of Process
To the dismay of many, I’ve long been a fan of Chesterton’s Fence, the concept that one ought to know why a fence was put up before tearing it down. Among the reasons why others disagree is that it means things people want done now have to wait until the analysis is completed. Whether that thing is the deportation of all immigrants, legal or not, or the eradication of language that might offend, it’s a stumbling block for people on both ends of the political spectrum.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.
==H.L. Mencken
People know what they want and they want it now. Some would call this immediate gratification. Some would call this the death of deliberative thought. Some would even call this the tyranny of process. Continue reading
Tuesday Talk*: Is MAGA Really Dead?
In the New York Times, Ezra Klein writes that the Trump “vibe shift” is dead.
The Trump vibe shift was American culture and institutions moving toward President Trump and Trumpism with a force unexplained by his narrow electoral victory. It was Mark Zuckerberg donning a chain and saying that the corporate world was too hostile to “masculine energy.” It was corporate executives using Trump as an excuse to wrest control of their companies back from their workers. It was the belief that Trump’s 2024 coalition — which stretched from Stephen Miller and Laura Loomer to Elon Musk and Marc Andreessen to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Joe Rogan and Tulsi Gabbard — was the arrival of something new rather than, as many thought in 2016, the final heave of something old.
As 2025 closes, Trump’s polling sits in the low 40s, with some surveys showing him tumbling into the 30s. Democrats routed Republicans across the year’s elections, winning governorships in New Jersey and Virginia easily and overperforming in virtually every race they contested.
Less Than 60 Minutes
Connect the dots. David Ellison’s Skydance bought Paramount, which owned the Columbia Broadcasting System, which produced, inter alia, the news magazine “60 Minutes,”* and now wants to add Warner Bros. Discovery to his stable, which had agreed to be acquired by Netflix, in a hostile bid. To accomplish this, Ellison sought to use his relationship with Trump to box out Netflix and gain the inside track to approval of a takeover.
Not long ago, Trump touted his friendship with Ellison and his expectation that CBS, in general, and 60 Minutes, in particular, would treat him with greater acquiescence than it had in the past. All that changed, however, when 60 Minutes aired a segment on Marjorie Taylor (or Traitor, as Trump prefers) Greene, who did not have nice things to say about her former idol. Trump was not pleased. Continue reading
Van Wagner: Snow Removal, Sure, But Judge Removal In Wisconsin?
Ed. Note: This is a guest post by Madison, Wisconsin, criminal defense lawyer Christopher Van Wagner.
There’s blood in political and judicial waters in Wisconsin today. Some of the blood has been shed by a sitting elected judge, targeted by DOJ and yesterday found guilty by a federal jury of felony crime. But this is not a horror story. This is not about whether a certain judge is guilty or not. This is about whether she can be removed from the bench, now, later, ever.
The simple answer is she can be. But there is no simple way to remove her. The full answer requires discussion of the four separate ways to boot a sitting elected Wisconsin judge off the bench.
Here are the four ways to do so. Continue reading
Epstein Fades To Black
There is a law. It required full disclosure within 30 days. On the one hand, the Department of Justice announced on the morning of the 30th day that it would not comply with the law, as if the law gave them an option. On the other hand, most of what was disclosed was already disclosed, other than some pictures of a young Bill Clinton which, to no one’s surprise, were one of the few things unredacted.
On the third hand, without explanation or justification, this is much of what the DoJ produced:
So?
Seaton: Christmas 2025
Dear SJ:
What follows is my annual attempt at a Christmas letter. Normally this is set to Tom Lehrer’s “Christmas Carol.” With the passing of that beloved humorist last year, I thought long and hard about whether I’d use it again this season. I’ve decided to do just that as it’s my way of honoring him. So Mr. Lehrer: will you do the honors?
Christmastime is here by golly, disapproval would be folly
Deck the halls with hunks of holly, fill the cup and don’t say when! Continue reading
Buying A Soldier’s Loyalty
During his bellicose address to the nation, Trump announced that he is sending every member of the United States military a check in the amount of $1776 as a “warrior dividend.” While most of us don’t have any particular problem with giving our military a bonus payment, per se, this payment raises a host of issues, not the least of which is why is he doing this?
President Donald Trump’s promise Wednesday to pay troops a “warrior dividend” bonus is actually a military housing stipend already approved by Congress, and not a generous new White House program.
The rebrand, confirmed by a senior administration official and two congressional officials, follows a pattern for the president, who has previously claimed credit for routine military pay increases that weren’t his doing.
Former FBI Agents Get Pseudonymity
Ka$h Patel’s firing of “disloyal” FBI agents have given rise to a number of potential claims for wrongful discharge, but the former agents suing in Does v. Patel aren’t the one who were canned for doing their jobs in investigating Trump or the J6 insurrectionists, but the agents who took a knee after the killing of George Floyd.
The lawsuit says the agents were assigned to patrol the nation’s capital during a period of civil unrest prompted by Floyd’s death. Lacking protective gear or extensive training in crowd control, the agents became outnumbered by hostile crowds they encountered and decided to kneel to the ground in hopes of defusing the tension, the lawsuit said. The tactic worked, the lawsuit asserts — the crowds dispersed, no shots were fired and the agents “saved American lives” that day.
For Patel, however, this was deemed political expression, agents who chose sympathy with the protesters in conflict with Trump administration’s animosity toward the protests. For that, they were fired. Continue reading
You Gave It To Google, So No Warrant Needed
It’s not a ruling, as there is no majority of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in its Commonwealth v. Kurtz opinion saying so, but that’s only because the fourth vote held it unnecessary to reach the question. The point, nonetheless, is clear. While the Supreme Court’s decision in Carpenter v. United States may have carved out a narrow exception to the Third Party Doctrine for cellphones, as a theoretical body part to which people have no real option to possess at all times and thus compelled to provide information to third-party providers, Google search is a voluntary act for which no warrant is needed.
In the case, the police were trying to find out who committed a sexual assault of a person known in the opinion by her initials, “K.M.” Police figured that whoever committed this crime may have googled K.M.’s name or address before committing the crime. Investigators obtained what is known as a “reverse keyword search warrant,” asking for Google to hand over the I.P. address of whoever may have googled the name or address of the victim shortly before the crime. Google responded that someone at a particular I.P. address had conducted two searches for K.M.’s address a few hours before the attack. The I.P. address was in use at the home of the defendant, Kurtz. The police had not suspected Kurtz in the crime, but they started to watch Kurtz closely, obtained a DNA sample, and found a DNA match from the crime.
