Ryan

Maritime Administrator Stephen Carmel of @DOTMARAD was asked about the Jones Act waiver initiated by the @POTUS administration before the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee hearing today. A few key points. 1️⃣The waiver was approved by the @DeptofWar and @DHSgov. Neither the Maritime Administration or @USDOT were consulted. 2️⃣I COMPLETELY DISAGREE with Administrator Carmel comment that "I support it." He should not support it and should voice his opposition to the actions by Stephen Miller and Kevin Hassett in the White House. 3️⃣The mission of MARAD is to foster, promote and develop the maritime industry of the US. Carmel should have taken that question to emphasize the need to build more US domestic tankers and disagree with the current abuses of the waiver, i.e. the use of a Chinese ship to carry asphalt which @RepGaramendi noted later. 4️⃣The Jones Act waiver report posted by MARAD, after the completion of the waiver should contain an analysis on the justification and need for the waiver by MARAD. 5️⃣Administrator Carmel notes that under 501(a) that MARAD is not involved in the waiver process. Perhaps, this would have been a good time to ask Congress to CHANGE THAT LAW! MARAD Jones Act Waiver reports: maritime.dot.gov/ports/domestic…

RUSSIA—GATE! The timeline is not complicated and I am done pretending it requires any further investigation to understand what happened. On January 10, 2017, according to a court filing by my attorney @SidneyPowell1 , James Clapper made a phone call to Washington Post columnist David Ignatius directing him, in words to the effect of, "take the kill shot on Flynn." Two days later, Ignatius published a column disclosing the contents of my legally intercepted phone calls with Ambassador Kislyak and the machine that had been built to destroy me and my family lurched into motion. Leaking those transcripts was a serious felony. An egregious federal crime, committed by people with security clearances, committed against an incoming National Security Advisor, committed for the explicit purpose of kneecapping a president before he ever set foot in the Oval Office. Here is the question that has never been asked loudly enough and I am asking it now. David Ignatius did not operate in a vacuum. He was not some lone columnist who stumbled onto a classified intercept by accident. He had cultivated sources across official Washington for decades and some of those sources were not in the outgoing Obama administration. Some were sitting inside the incoming Trump transition. I am not naming names in this post. But I am stating plainly and for the record that there are individuals who held positions inside that transition, who maintained regular contact with Ignatius, and who have never once been placed under oath and asked what they knew, what they communicated, and when they communicated it. The kill shot did not fire itself. Someone inside what was supposed to be our own team made sure that Ignatius had what he needed, when he needed it, to pull the trigger. Someone made certain that the investigation that followed went absolutely nowhere. Every one of them has a name, a phone record, and a paper trail. Accountability doesn’t expire. Trust that there is a Grand Jury coming for you.

@BeyondTParties @DefiyantlyFree @grok Only for IEEPA. And they declared an emergency and went with it. Disagree if you wish but it was not unconstitutional.

@rhazel64 @DefiyantlyFree @grok No, my point was that even by the administration’s own interpretation there had to be some sort of national emergency for them to impact the tariff. Again, nothing stating the president just has sweeping authority to make whatever tariffs he wants.

You can disagree with Trump without calling him a pedophile and the anti-Christ and lying through your teeth. That’s the difference between those of us who are normal and the woke right. I can disagree with his position and still know he’s the only thing stopping full blown Marxism in the United States.

The Department of War is aware of the lawsuit filed today by two civilian members of the Stars and Stripes publisher’s advisory board challenging the Department’s modernization of Stars and Stripes. The lawsuit is without merit, and the Department expects to prevail. The Department remains committed to a Stars and Stripes that is modern, mission-focused, and worthy of the servicemembers it serves.

Thanks to President Trump’s LNG export approvals in his second term, U.S. exports will grow 100%. America has never been so energy dominant. 💪

@BeyondTParties @DefiyantlyFree @grok IEEPA is. And they didn't declare the emergency invalid. They declared via a contrived opinion that importation doesn't include tariffs. That doesn't affect the other authorities that still make what Trump did perfectly legal.

@rhazel64 @DefiyantlyFree @grok So again, it’s sweeping authority to just enact whatever tariffs he wants. It’s for national emergencies. At least that’s how they interpreted it and the SC concluded there is no way it says that.

@BeyondTParties @DefiyantlyFree You keep fixating on a subjective term. They say what they say. I forget if it was the main opinion or the dissent but they literally stated that there would not be harm done by blocking IEEPA because the admin could just use other authorities.

@rhazel64 @DefiyantlyFree I have. I can’t find anywhere in it where they say that the President still has this sweeping authority from other laws and so the tariffs can stand as they are. You’re saying it says that which means you’ve read it, which is why I’m asking you to show me since I’m missing it.

@BeyondTParties @DefiyantlyFree @grok No. It doesn't. @grok explain the trump administration logic for using IEEPA in the first place.

@rhazel64 @DefiyantlyFree @grok This answer makes it look like Trump and his team don’t really know the law or what it says.

@BeyondTParties @DefiyantlyFree Read it.

@rhazel64 @DefiyantlyFree Where in the ruling does the SC say that he has this sweeping authority from other laws so it changed nothing?

RT @DOGE: 1. Lame joke, Commdani. 2. Stay far away from the Garden for the next few weeks; we’ll buy you all the Citi Field tickets your co…

The Great Awokening did not merely give America's ruling class a way to justify their position in society. It gave these people a way to present Middle America, who were being economically gutted and culturally erased, who were being politically ignored and told that their suffering was a cause for celebration because they deserved it, as the villains. Endless accusations of racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, Islamophobia, and, if none of that worked, their whiteness and unconscious bias, served not only to protect our parasitic ruling class from any sort of accountability, but it turned the very people who had the most legitimate grievances against America's elites for their betrayal of this country into a morally acceptable punching bag.

Did you know that federal employees can add anyone to their health insurance plan with NO accountability?   I requested a report on this and found out around ONE BILLION DOLLARS per YEAR went towards fraudulent coverage. Government employees NEVER had to verify if the person they were adding was family. I introduced the FEHB Protection Act, which became law, to fix this problem and stop the fraud.   Americans deserve a system with accountability, not a free-for-all funded by federal tax dollars.

After I questioned Secretary Rubio on Code Pink and their ties to the CCP, their organization followed me out, berated me, and then their head person here in DC smacked me. I will be filing charges.

I will die on this hill. @SeanParnellASW cleaned up Stars and Stripes to where it now creates NORMAL content for warriors again. Without the ideological twist. Sane journalism that informs us. INEVITABLY an ideologue will always resort to lawfare to get their way in our society. To make everything woke, divisive, and lame again. That’s what they do. It’s like they want earth itself to burn so they can gleefully rule over the ashes. It may sound like I’m jumping to conclusions. I’m not. Any attempt to go back to making that paper a wretched hive of Marxist filth would be a colossal step in the wrong direction.

@BeyondTParties @DefiyantlyFree @grok which of the tariff authorities was struck down by SCOTUS? And what authorities are still viable?

@rhazel64 @DefiyantlyFree What you did was show the laws Trump said he got his authority from. Laws which the Supreme Court ruled didn’t give him that absolute authority.

@BeyondTParties @DefiyantlyFree No. They blocked 1 of many authorities. It was a bad decision, and quite literally said in the ruling that they only did it because he has other authorities so it doesn't matter. It was quite literally Roberts fence sitting because of his concerns over politicizing the court.

@rhazel64 @DefiyantlyFree Not to mention the Supreme Court has already found that a good chunk of Trump’s tarried were illegal. Which is why they were stopped.

Make claims, you mean like "trump's tariffs are unconstitutional"? I literally provided you with the laws that grant the President broad discretion over tariffs and trade. I'm not going to read them for you, nor am I going to engage under your straw man premise that Trump is issuing these tariffs without following any process because that's simply not true and acting like it is is willful ignorance.

@rhazel64 @DefiyantlyFree @grok I didn’t think you would. That would always amazes me the people who make claims, won’t back them up, but still act like everybody should just agree with the claims. I care more about the facts.

@BeyondTParties @DefiyantlyFree I just showed you five. You're creating a straw man to say essentially that because you haven't been shown the processes Trump followed to enact tariffs that he's therefore doing it indiscriminately and outside of the established laws.

@rhazel64 @DefiyantlyFree Exactly. And you seem to have no idea what law gives the president is authority. Otherwise it would be that easy to just provide the text that says “the president has the authority to enact tariffs at his own discretion”.

@BeyondTParties @DefiyantlyFree I just showed you the laws. I'm not going to read them to you.

@rhazel64 @DefiyantlyFree Yeah, repeating something over and over without showing the law doesn’t mean it is the law. I am asking for the specific law that says the president has the authority to just decide when and how he wants to make whatever tariff he wants.

@BeyondTParties @DefiyantlyFree Because you're ignoring the point. Those people were a small subset, and whatever they did, they still had their rights violated.

@rhazel64 @DefiyantlyFree And you still haven’t explained how the people who were convicted of assaulting officers really didn’t do that.