TV News LIES

Scouting America, formerly known as the Boy Scouts of America, has said it is “surprised and disappointed” by a report that the US defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, could sever all military ties to the organization for being “genderless” and failing to “cultivate masculine values”.

In a draft memo to Congress obtained by NPR, Hegseth criticized Scouting America, which began admitting girls in 2018, for purportedly attempting to “attack boy-friendly spaces”.

“It is no longer a meritocracy which holds its members accountable to meet high standards,” Hegseth wrote.

The US military has provided support to the Scouts for more than a century. But in the memo, Hegseth said: “The organization once endorsed by President Theodore Roosevelt no longer supports the future of American boys.”

His proposal, which has not yet been sent to Congress, calls for the Pentagon to pull medical and logistical aid to the National Jamboree, a gathering of up to 20,000 Scouts at a remote site in West Virginia about every four years. It also looks to prohibit Scouting troops from meeting at military installations in the US and abroad.

More...

A federal appeals court over the weekend declined to lift a lower court order barring the Trump administration from using expedited removals to rapidly deport migrants without a court hearing.

The administration earlier this year looked to expand the use of such proceedings, which were previously only used for recent arrivals encountered close to the border. The White House aimed to broaden the use of expedited removals to those who crossed the border at any point in the last two years, anywhere in the country.

In a 2-1 decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, the panel declined to lift an August ruling that barred the administration from implementing the policy as the legal battle plays out.

More...

In October, President Trump proposed a compact for higher education, a federal takeover of state and private institutions thinly disguised as an offer of preferential funding consideration. Most of the initially targeted universities rightfully have rejected Trump’s unlawful and unconstitutional compact, but some schools, including the University of Virginia and Cornell, have since signed separate agreements with the federal government.

Initial media coverage largely portrayed the deals as compromises that allowed the universities to preserve institutional autonomy and resolve outstanding federal investigations. But subsequent revelations about the coercive ouster of UVA’s former president underscore how, in fact, “deals” like these represent a dangerous new front in the Trump administration’s war on higher education.

UVA’s settlement, announced on 22 October, appeared to focus narrowly on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs, to safeguard academic freedom, and to avoid external monitoring or monetary penalties. Cornell paid $60m and made various promises related to admissions, DEI, antisemitism and foreign financial ties in exchange for a restoration of federal funding. UVA’s leaders hailed “a constructive outcome” that “uphold[s] the university’s principles and independence”, while Cornell’s declared that federal funding would be restored without sacrificing academic freedom. But the reality is very different.

UVA’s deal is not a deal at all. It provides that if UVA makes unspecified changes on “DEI” to the federal government’s satisfaction and provides it with data through 2028, the administration will close currently open investigations into the university. The federal government can open new inquiries at any time.

What the agreement does do is contractually bind UVA to the Trump administration’s definition of discrimination. That definition outstrips anything the law requires and, in fact, may force UVA to violate statutory and constitutional law. Far from extricating the university from government oversight, the agreement subjects UVA to federal monitoring and the risk of draconian financial penalties if the federal government decides, at its sole discretion, that the university has not complied.

More...

Don’t give up the day job. On Tuesday, Donald Trump came to the annual Thanksgiving turkey pardoning ceremony at the White House ready to serve up some political satire. It went about as well as you would expect.

Like a startled turkey flapping in zigzags, the US president’s speech ricocheted bafflingly from topic to topic. He told jokes in the worst possible taste and watched them arc through the Rose Garden sky before landing with a thud. And on a day intended for charity and good cheer, he described a state governor as “a big, fat slob”.

Trump has never met a presidential tradition he did not want to trash. For nearly eight decades, the turkey presentation has been a silly but reassuring ritual in which presidents offer a few bad puns and uplifting words about the state of the nation. They are not meant to make news.

But this year, of course, things were different. Normally, two turkeys are in attendance following a public vote on which should be pardoned. On Tuesday, however, Gobble was present but Waddle was “missing in action”, as Trump put it – evidently a bird of the same feather as Marjorie Taylor Greene.

The Rose Garden was transformed, its grass paved over with Mar-a-Lago-style slabs, while nearby was the presidential walk of fame, featuring tacky gold and framed portraits of Trump’s predecessors save for Joe Biden, replaced by an autopen. Behind the president was a framed mirror in which a yellow crane could be seen at the site of the former East Wing.

More...

The Trump administration is framing its boat strikes against drug cartels in the Caribbean in part as a collective self-defense effort on behalf of US allies in the region, according to three people directly familiar with the administration’s internal legal argument.

The legal analysis rests on a premise – for which there is no immediate public evidence – that the cartels are waging armed violence against the security forces of allies like Mexico, and that the violence is financed by cocaine shipments.

As a result, according to the legal analysis, the strikes are targeting the cocaine, and the deaths of anyone on board should be treated as an enemy casualty or collateral damage if any civilians are killed, rather than murder.

That line of reasoning, which forms the backbone of a classified justice department office of legal counsel (OLC) opinion, provides the clearest explanation to date how the US satisfied the conditions to use lethal force.

But it marks a sharp departure from Donald Trump’s narrative to the public every time he has discussed the 21 strikes that have killed more than 80 people, which he has portrayed as an effort to stop overdose deaths.

A White House official responded that Trump has not been making a legal argument. Still, Trump’s remarks remain the only public reason for why the US is firing missiles – when the legal justification is in fact very different.

And it would also be the first time the US has claimed – dubiously, and contrary to the widely held understanding – that the cartels are using cocaine proceeds to wage wars, rather than to make money.

In a statement, a justice department spokesperson said: “These operations were ordered consistent with the law of armed conflict.” The Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment.

More...

An exodus of Justice Department employees has left behind a trail of emotional farewell notes warning that agency values are eroding.

The big picture: The writers, who are among the thousands who have departed the DOJ under Trump 2.0, did not mince words about "potentially irreversible damage," a retreat from ethics, a "toxic work environment" and potential harm to vulnerable groups.

Context: The Justice Connection, a network of DOJ and FBI alumni, has collected dozens of farewells, many overflowing with gratitude for the agency's mission while also warning about the consequences of damaging the institution.

Executive Director Stacey Young said in a recent statement that the department's workforce is "being asked to put loyalty to the President over the Constitution, the rule of law, and their professional ethical obligations."

What they're saying: The "current incarnation" of the DOJ "defines 'justice' in a way that I do not recognize," former trial attorney Carrie A. Syme wrote in a March farewell, adding, "please remember that the vast majority of DOJ attorneys are people of good will who are trying to maintain a true sense of justice."

Devon Flanagan, who served as a trial attorney in the Wildlife and Marine Resources Section, warned that damage will accelerate as more employees "find these stressful and demeaning conditions untenable."

Zoom in: Three assistant U.S. attorneys who resisted dismissing New York Mayor Eric Adams' case addressed their April resignation notice to Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, saying that the DOJ has "decided that obedience supersedes all else."

More...