patrick.net

https://x.com/VigilantFox/status/1949609289951113683

“Thanks god we have free speech, if we would be in Moscow people would be arrested”
— Von Der Leyen to a guy who is being arrested for speaking up

Aussies put a land acknowledgement sign on their house, so a comedian brought natives to stay with them but the family wouldn't let them in

https://x.com/JasonJournoDC/status/1956886209898086544

Late last week, the Washington Post’s entire editorial board ran a handwringing editorial springing to Republican John Bolton’s defense, headlined, “FBI raid targeting Bolton crosses a line in the Trump revenge campaign.” ...

Hilariously, the Editorial Board bent over backwards to scold Trump for “revenge raids” and to sermonize about “forbearance,” but not once did they trot out their favorite mantra: “no one is above the law.” That line was practically a daily drumbeat during the Mar-a-Lago saga and every other Trump case. But now, when it’s Bolton’s boxes? Suddenly, the slogan vanishes, disappearing like the faint ghost of a distant echo.

The deepest irony is that they convinced themselves that Trump was a one-off, an aberration, a man so uniquely dangerous that feeding “norms and standards” into the shredder was justified by the exigencies of the moment. Every raid, every novel theory of prosecution, every “emergency” departure from precedent was platformed as democracy’s last stand.

The problem with governing by exception is that exceptions have a nasty habit of becoming precedents and biting you in the tender parts. Once you’ve broken the seal —politicized prosecutions, FBI raids on ex-presidents, hyper-creative readings of statutes— you shouldn’t be surprised when the same exacting playbook is used against your people. Yet somehow, the Post seems shocked that the tools sharpened for Trump are now cutting against Bolton.

It’s the oldest legal lesson of all: if you cheer when the state stretches the law to nail your enemy, you don’t get to complain when the same stretched law comes looking for you.