16 Comments
User's avatar
al P's avatar

The left wants to guard their momentum that is now waning. For too long we have tolerated, on both sides, not making tough decisions and doing what keeps one’s party in office. We have moved away from the founding father’s constitutional principles. It’s painful, it will be painful. But doing the right thing is never easy. I’m not in agreement with all that Trump is doing but he has the right compass heading.

Expand full comment
Marshall Choka's avatar

.true..and yet there are people I know that want to call out Elon Musk and his money..How does one rationalize with this dark room, mushroom mindset?

Expand full comment
Don Wohlers's avatar

And Erick, you are SSSSSOOOOO right on.

Expand full comment
jabster's avatar

The "win" on deporting illegals came with the well-deserved asterisk of requiring due process.

This was decided correctly. Give them their day in court, and if they don't belong here they've got a one-way ticket out of here.

Expand full comment
RKelly's avatar

You do realize that for the broken Progressives Trump winning at the SCOTUS is just proof that Conservative Justices are totalitarian activist not principled jurists like the Democrat appointed justices.

Trump caused a Constitutional crisis with his appointments.Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and ACB should recuse themselves.

Expand full comment
jabster's avatar

A constitutional crisis can be invoked when everyone's playing by the rules and the progs don't get what they want.

Expand full comment
K Tucker Andersen's avatar

👏👏👏🙂🙂🙂Excellent logic - but you skipped who really started it . It was Mitch, who whatever his faults may be, decided that he single handedly would deny Merrick Garland his rightful seat on the Court. Can you believe how it would have changed things if Biden’s corrupt attack dog had been a Supreme.

Expand full comment
RKelly's avatar

"... with advice and consent of the Senate"

The Senate gave their advice, no, and no hearing required.

Expand full comment
Linda Gray's avatar

Just a question. I’m sure none of this, the judges stepping into the middle of what President is/was trying to and the subsequent retaliation against these judges is/was free. Is there money spent on both sides and if so, who’s paying? Is this above and beyond what these entities normally spend? I would really like to know.

Expand full comment
Rod Thomson's avatar

Right on the money — and off tariff rants.

Expand full comment
Pamela Brown's avatar

You are absolutely spot on !!

Expand full comment
Roger Beal's avatar

"WE" have not had this story backwards. Many of us have known this for several years, and have shouted the truth of it from the rooftops, defying claims of mis-mal-disinformation in the process.

Take the red pill, Erick. It'll do you good.

Expand full comment
Franklyn Murphy's avatar

"it becomes clear that we've had the story backwards."

Not we , but THEY have had the story backwards.

Expand full comment
Neil McKenna's avatar

I disagree with your take on what the SC is doing when you say "Trump keeps winning." Perhaps in an attempt to avoid an actual constitutional crisis (and again, I think you do a very important matter a disservice by attaching the term to that which it is not), the Court has reverted to what it was always supposed to be doing: namely, deciding cases on the narrowest possible grounds. In so doing whenever possible, they may never need to directly challenge presidential authority.

Expand full comment
Joe Guerriero's avatar

Bingo!

Expand full comment
Ted Chmura III's avatar

Once again Erick...you've managed to bring clarity to an mucked-up issue. Shining a bright spotlight is what you do so well !!

Expand full comment