Make a Contribution to Remove NSFW Ads

UPDATE: Donald Trump Takes Office as the 47th US President

Baby Boomers Clinton, Bush, Obama and Biden refused to reschedule Marijuana.

Clinton, Bush and Obama are confirmed weed smokers when they were younger.

If Trump reschedules it, it definitely will make the other former POTUS look like idiots.

Trump says he'll make a decision on reclassifying marijuana in the coming weeks

By NICOLE MARKUS
08/11/2025


President Donald Trump said Monday his administration was “looking at reclassification” of marijuana and intends to make a decision in the upcoming weeks.
“It’s a very complicated subject base,” he said during a press briefing. “I’ve heard great things having to do with medical and bad things having to do with just about everything else.”

His comments come after a Friday Wall Street Journal report indicated Trump was considering reclassifying the drug as less dangerous.
The move, which the Biden administration considered but did not ultimately enact, is controversial among some in Trump’s base. Charlie Kirk, an ally of the president, conservative activist and founder of Turning Point USA, said he hopes “this doesn’t happen.”….

Donald-Trump-Marijuana-ANIMATE.gif
 
Dems don't need to respond to Trump's DC takeover with statistics and and Jan 6 talk.

He just said HE took control of crime in DC, so let him own it. Start posting every single crime that happens in DCD from here on out and declare Trump a failure.

Let HIM start trying to respond with statistics which we know people don't care about.

Also keep talking about Epstein.
 
Big Tex said:
Dems don't need to respond to Trump's DC takeover with statistics and and Jan 6 talk.

He just said HE took control of crime in DC, so let him own it. Start posting every single crime that happens in DCD from here on out and declare Trump a failure.

Let HIM start trying to respond with statistics which we know people don't care about.

Also keep talking about Epstein.
Click to expand...
I put part of your post on her official bluesky post. Since there aren't a lot of replies, it might get to her. If they do anything from it idk but I'll know someone from her team saw it. Anyway good post.
 


Courage versus Complicity
How to identify a complicit settlement over the confession of error
Lawrence Lessig
Aug 12, 2025

As retired Admiral Mark Montgomery recently put it, the strategy of Donald Trump is not unusual “if you’re watching the Sopranos.” It is unprecedented for a president. In a single word, our commander in chief is an extortionist. He makes threats that exceed his authority, and he counts on his targets recognizing that it is cheaper to give in to those threats than it is to fight them. Seven months into the extortionist’s reign, almost every target has caved.

“Extortion” is a bold word. Let’s be precise about its meaning. Extortion involves the attempt to get something of benefit from another person through the wrongful use of force, threats, or coercion. The critical word in that sentence is “wrongful”: If the Department of Justice believes in good faith that a target has committed a criminal or civil wrong, and threatens prosecution unless that target settles, that is not extortion. But if a government official threatens prosecution or the withholding of a contracted benefit when the target has done no wrong, then that act is extortion. And conceivably, the target’s giving in could even be viewed as the payment of a bribe.


The clearest examples of this pattern so far have been Trump’s extortion of law firms. Almost immediately after coming to office, Trump issued a series of illegal executive orders targeting law firms that had represented clients adverse to Trump. Nine firms eventually agreed to give Trump $1B in free legal services in exchange for him dropping the threats against them. Four firms fought back. All four won their cases in the district court. Trump has not appealed.

The unanimous conclusion of the district courts affirms that the threats were illegal. That suggests the President’s actions were extortion. By settling with the President, the 9 firms were giving in to that extortion, giving the President “something of value” in exchange for his official act. As John Kecker told 60 Minutes, that act by those firms could well constitute bribery. (Keker and others penned an extraordinary oped in the New York Times at the start of this fight which ended with an extraordinary (for the Times) plea: “For God’s sake, stand up for the legal profession, and for the Constitution.”)

Trump’s extortion, of course, reaches far beyond the law firms. He has threatened news organizations (CBS, ABC, WSJ) and news-ish organizations (Meta, X). And he has threatened universities (Columbia University, Cornell University, Northwestern University, University of Pennsylvania, Brown University, Princeton University, UCLA, and my own university, Harvard).

The cowardice of the media organizations is unspeakable, though differently unspeakable depending on the organization. Meta and X are not serious news organizations. Their caving to extortion is just the cost of doing business. ABC apparently caved because of embarrassing discovery. But CBS’s cowardice was completely inexcusable for a news organization. The cause of action against 60 Minutes would have earned any normal lawyer legal sanction. The idea that it justified a $16 million settlement is absurd — as is agreeing to a “bias monitor” in exchange for a merger approval. Only the WSJ has stood firm against the President’s baseless threats, making them the first conservative opponent of the President with the power to prevail against him.

The claims against the universities are more complicated. The foundation for the President’s actions has been Title VI, which bans
discrimination in federally funded programs, and charges of antisemitism at these universities. But as Ben Eidelson and Deborah Hellman explain, Congress limited Title VI claims of discrimination to “race, color, [and] national origin.” Unlike Title VII, it does not protect against discrimination on the basis of religion. That weakens substantially the administration’s claims against the universities. And independently of those weak claims, the administration has no basis for threatening unrelated funding as a remedy for any alleged discrimination. The President certainly has no basis for insisting on monitors to ensure the content of academic work fits his conception of right and good.

So far, only Harvard has responded to the President’s threats through litigation. That resistance triggered an extraordinary response across the world, as the “veritas” school essayed to speak truth to power. But as the Times reports today, even Harvard is considering settling with the President as a way to make the fight go away.

We should be clear about principles in advance of any agreement.

  • Giving in to extortion is complicity with extortion. No doubt, that is understandable for some. If a thug threatens “your money or your life,” give him the money. But yielding doesn’t change the character of the act. It just makes it understandable.
  • For any ordinary business, giving in makes perfect sense individually. Apple is just a business. Its purpose is to maximize shareholder value. If it settles a baseless claim, plausibly, the only question that should be asked is whether it gave more than was necessary, and possibly whether that something more would constitute a bribe.
  • But for an organization that is more than a mere profit maximizer, giving in is a betrayal — if indeed, the organization is innocent of the claims made against it. CBS caving was a betrayal of its obligations as a news organization—given the charges against it were baseless. And likewise, Harvard giving in would be a betrayal, if indeed it is innocent of the charges made against it.
  • This is why it would be a mistake for Harvard to settle while admitting no wrong. I don’t know the facts. I do know the Harvard President’s task force found significant examples of antisemitism on Harvard’s campus. Of course, independent of Title VI, that finding demands a response by Harvard to fight that antisemitism and any hatred against any religious or ethnic group, including Muslims and Palestinians. But the precise question Harvard needs to answer is whether it believes its acts could provide a good faith basis for legal action by the Administration against it. If it does, then any settlement should admit as much, for admitting the wrong would transform complicity with extortion into a confession of error. And if there is legal error, let us confess it and correct it as quickly as possible.
  • Yet even that confession could only reach so far. The Obama Administration, for example, pursued Title IX and Title VI actions against universities aggressively. (Here’s ChatGPT’s summary of those actions.) But any threat under those Titles was proportionate to the wrong. The Obama Administration, for example, did not threaten to cut off research funding at university hospitals because of allegations of sex discrimination at undergraduate colleges. So while confessing error justifies some remedial response, it cannot justify paying damages far exceeding any plausible claim that the government could make against the university. Compare: If I hit your car and dented your bumper, but you in return pulled a gun and demanded $1M in damages, my paying even $100k is not my confessing error and settling a claim. My paying $100k is my complicity in your extortion.
  • I get the exhaustion of any institution like Harvard with this President, though I think it is naive to believe any settlement is a settlement. A settlement with this President is a reprieve, until a news cycle demands a new distraction. The reality is that in the Bannon-esque world we live in, Harvard is a perpetual distraction, settlement notwithstanding. But exhaustion makes an act understandable, just as the threat of extinction makes an act understandable. It doesn’t change the character of the act.
Thus, tl;dr: If my university agrees to settle without a statement of the form “we acknowledge our liability and are agreeing to a payment proportional to that liability,” my university will have joined the long list of institutions that populate our Sopranos-like universe. And it will have only strengthened the power of this most dangerous executive in his quest to destroy the independence free society requires.

Long live right, not a king. Long live truth, not complicity.
Click to expand...
 
blackbull1970 said:
Baby Boomers Clinton, Bush, Obama and Biden refused to reschedule Marijuana.

Clinton, Bush and Obama are confirmed weed smokers when they were younger.

If Trump reschedules it, it definitely will make the other former POTUS look like idiots.

Trump says he'll make a decision on reclassifying marijuana in the coming weeks

By NICOLE MARKUS
08/11/2025


President Donald Trump said Monday his administration was “looking at reclassification” of marijuana and intends to make a decision in the upcoming weeks.
“It’s a very complicated subject base,” he said during a press briefing. “I’ve heard great things having to do with medical and bad things having to do with just about everything else.”

His comments come after a Friday Wall Street Journal report indicated Trump was considering reclassifying the drug as less dangerous.
The move, which the Biden administration considered but did not ultimately enact, is controversial among some in Trump’s base. Charlie Kirk, an ally of the president, conservative activist and founder of Turning Point USA, said he hopes “this doesn’t happen.”….

Donald-Trump-Marijuana-ANIMATE.gif
Click to expand...
You gonna vote for Trump
 
Politic Negro said:
I put part of your post on her official bluesky post. Since there aren't a lot of replies, it might get to her. If they do anything from it idk but I'll know someone from her team saw it. Anyway good post.
Click to expand...
White people don't care about owning rhetoric. White folks are only interested in owning people.
 

Make a Contribution to Remove NSFW Ads
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MASTERBAKER
Trump Booed at US Open, Match Delayed by Security Measures
Replies
2
Views
178
lightbright
lightbright
MASTERBAKER
Trump did not place hand on Bible for oath of office during his inauguration
Replies
18
Views
648
mangobob79
mangobob79
lightbright
The ‘Arc de Trump’: President Shows Off Plans For His Latest Grandiose D.C. Construction project... what a fucking monuMENTAL clown
Replies
5
Views
135
geechiedan
geechiedan
P
Michigan judge tosses case against 15 accused fake electors for President Donald Trump in 2020
Replies
17
Views
511
Politic Negro
Politic Negro
MASTERBAKER
Donald Trump’s air-kiss to Melania at inauguration goes viral — thanks to her hat
Replies
5
Views
268
MASTERBAKER
MASTERBAKER
Back
Top