Better in their words…

Trump sends troops into Portland to protect ICE; Democrats howl; homeless show more sense than officials; Rubio boots Colombian president; FBI kneelers fired; trio of Supreme Court wins boost TAW.

Source: FOOL AROUND ☙ Sunday, September 28, 2025 ☙ C&C NEWS

WORLD NEWS AND COMMENTARY

🔥🔥🔥

That escalated fast. Yesterday afternoon, the BBC ran a story headlined, “Trump orders deployment of troops to Portland and authorizes ‘full force.’” Portland! That figures.

The BBC reported that Antifa “protestors” have “targeted” Portland’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facility since early June, often “leading to violent clashes.” By early this month, the US Attorney had charged 28 people for crimes like arson, assaulting police officers, and resisting. Rose City Antifa, a designated terrorist organization, has been doxxing ICE agents by posting their home addresses online and on flyers.

Then on Friday, DHS reported that agitators had “repeatedly attacked and laid siege to an ICE processing centre” in Portland. Yesterday, President Trump essentially said “that’s enough,” and ordered War Secretary Pete Hegseth to take care of business, including “Full Force” (it was not clear whether that meant lethal force).

Democrats are as mad as transgender hornets. Oregon’s handsome Governor Tina Kotek said she couldn’t find any sign of Antifa in Portland, no matter where she looked, and so everything is fine: we don’t want federal troops. “There is no national security threat in Portland. Our communities are safe and calm,” she insisted.

Mixing his narrative metaphors, and trying to look scrappy, Democrat Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer exclaimed, “Trump is not a king! Democrats will fight in Congress to stop him.” Portland Mayor Keith Wilson, who took office in January, growled, “I urge Oregonians to reject Trump’s attempt to incite violence in what we know is a vibrant and peaceful city.”

These Democrat remarks seem unhinged and detached from reality. But actually, this time they aren’t crazier than sprayed roaches. This is a legal strategy. Democrats are planning several steps ahead. By denying there is any violence in Portland, Democrats are creating a record for later lawsuits against Trump if and when he declares a state of emergency. They’ll tell courts that all local officials agree everything is safe and peaceful.

🔥 Portland, Oregon, is Antifa’s unofficial world headquarters. The oft-mocked metropolis is the birthplace and headquarters of “Rose City Antifa,” the oldest known Antifa group in the United States (founded in 2007). Beyond Rose City, Portland has a long tradition of wacky left-wing activism and weirdly violent protest, making it a demonic hub of Antifa activity.

During the Summer of Protest’s mostly peaceful riots, videos from Portland resembled a war zone. Trump sent DHS to get the city under control, and the media used clips of violent clashes between cops and masked protestors to try to make Trump look like a deranged dictator. The Summer of Protest stretched into Portland’s winter of malcontent. In December ’20, Antifa (unsuccessfully) tried to capture a downtown Portland CHAZ/CHOP-style ‘occupied zone,’ but cops tore it down after a couple days.

During this period, so-called celebrities like obscene comedian Chelsea Handler raised bail money for Portland Antifa, and Democrats generally fell over themselves praising and supporting the ill-behaved anarchists.

🔥 It certainly feels like something is building toward a climax. Courageous independent journalist Andy Ngo, who has reported on Antifa for years, said Rose City is planning a major protest and confrontation at the ICE facility this afternoon, because of the Administration’s new reinforcements.

2020’s unresolved conflicts are crashing toward a noisy conclusion.

Some Democrats may hope a far-left protester will die in the protests, so that person can become the new poster child for Trump Administration overreach. But that could backfire. If the clashes become violent, it could also give Trump a reason to declare a state of emergency and invoke the Insurrection Act.

During 2020, President Trump’s responses were markedly measured, garnering criticism from conservatives for doing too little. He did not, for example, activate the National Guard without local consent (which Portland withheld). Federal officials from other agencies (like DHS) were required to travel in unmarked cars, and so forth.

But of course the media ran with a police brutality narrative anyway.

This time, by invoking War Secretary Hegseth, Trump has shot directly to an obvious military response— presumably National Guard, but it is not yet clear who’ll be deployed. You can bet the Democrats’ lawyers are on standby to file lawsuits as soon as they find out which agency will respond. From all appearances, President Trump is bringing the fight.

🔥 In related news, enjoy the perspective of this Portland homeless lady, who said she supports Trump’s plan to end Portland’s homeless support programs, since the programs only enable people (but don’t empower them):

CLIP: Even Portland’s homeless have more sense than Oregon’s elected officials (1:02).

This kind of thing is why I always pick on Portland. When homeless people are smarter than the city’s elected officials, well, Houston, we have a problem.

🔥🔥🔥

Yesterday, Politico ran a very encouraging story headlined, “State Department revokes Colombian president’s visa.”

At a recent immigration rally in New York City, Columbia’s hot-headed president Gustavo Petro pounded the podium and called for U.S. soldiers to disobey orders and incite violence in response to Israel’s violence in Gaza. “When diplomacy ends, we must pass to a different stage of struggle,” Petro shrieked.

The irony of calling for violence to stop violence was lost on the plantain-eating president.

So Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared him persona non grata and revoked his visa on account of his “reckless and incendiary actions.”

It is safe to say that Gustavo Petro is not a Trump fan. Trump has targeted Colombia for “enhanced” drug enforcement, and they are probably expecting the Marines any minute. The country is also subject to 10% Trump tariffs. In an earlier dustup, Colombia refused to accept its deported migrants back. Trump responded by hiking their tariff to 25% and Petro quickly backed down. I think his backside is feeling sorer than if he’d spent a weekend at a ghost-pepper-eating contest.

Earlier this week, in an address at the UN, Petro had harsh words for the United States. “Washington and NATO are killing democracy,” Petro fumed. “They are spreading totalitarianism at the global level,” he claimed, before forcefully insisting that the “United States no longer teaches Democracy but rather kill, kill democracy, especially among its immigrants, filled with greed.”

Petro, a far-left socialist who was once a member of the leftist M-19 guerrilla group, remains defiant. After hearing the news, he tweeted that he didn’t care, and has argued that anyway, he still has legal rights to attend United Nations events.

We’ll see. The State Department has not responded to his latest rhetorical attacks.

The fascinating takeaway is that it looks like the Trump Administration is warning foreign officials that, if they come here, they can’t swank around trashing our reputation and defaming the country without consequences. They aren’t citizens and have no constitutional right to free speech like Americans do. Rubio has often stressed that they are guests, and when guests overstay their welcome, they have to go home.

Buh bye.

🔥🔥🔥

Yesterday, the Hill ran a heartwarming story headlined, “FBI fires agents who knelt during 2020 racial justice protests.” It was perhaps the single most illustrative photo encapsulating the politicized lunacy of the Biden Administration: twenty-odd FBI agents wearing covid masks and kneeling to black protestors during the 2020 BLM riots.

Five years later, cue the theme song from Apprentice: you’re fired!

The problem with FBI agents taking a knee for lawbreaking rioters is that it doesn’t make law-abiding Americans feel very safe. Law enforcement doesn’t kneel to criminals and then stop them from looting the Quickie Mart. Plus, in America, we don’t kneel to anyone. Just saying.

The Hill disapprovingly noted that, in previous comments related to federal firings in general, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt explained, “President Trump is only interested in the best and most qualified people who are also willing to implement his America First Agenda on behalf of the American people. It’s not for everyone, and that’s okay.”

By framing Leavitt’s perfectly sensible and innocuous explanation with anonymous reports about “low morale” at the FBI because agents fear political purges, the Hill was inviting readers to intuit a sinister motive behind Leavitt’s actual words. But the paper was too chicken to actually make the accusation. Cowards. Rush Limbaugh would have shaken his head and said, “drive-by journalism.”

⚖️⚖️⚖️

President Trump is enjoying another run of major wins at the Supreme Court this week. The Democrats keep teeing up the shots and Trump’s lawyers keep taking them. The first story appeared in the New York Times under the headline, “Supreme Court Allows Trump to Slash $4 Billion in Foreign Aid Funding.”

After the Administration froze around $4 billion in questionable foreign aid grants, an “AIDs activist” NGO sued, arguing that since Congress had approved the funds, the Executive Branch had no right to interfere. The NGO’s lawyers argued it was an emergency— people intended to get our tax money could die.

But this week, five Justices agreed —for now— to let Trump’s funding freeze stand, since the Executive’s constitutional authority over foreign affairs outweighs any “potential harm” to aid recipients.

If, as now seems likely, the Supreme Court ultimately holds that President Trump has the final say in foreign aid, it will be a game-changer. Instead of just becoming a check issuer, President Trump will hold constitutionally founded control over whether foreign countries get Congressionally approved money or not— vastly increasing his leverage in negotiating with them over anything.

For example, forget about the AIDs vaccine grant. Imagine instead that Congress authorized another $60 billion for Ukraine. The Supreme Court just said Trump can say ‘no.’ And it gives the President vastly more negotiating power with Congress, who would need his approval to slosh money toward well-connected friend in other countries. Not to mention all the potential for helping get the budget under control.

The Democrats should have left it alone.

⚖️ In another win with potentially vast implications, on Monday CNN ran a story headlined, “Supreme Court agrees to reconsider precedent that limits who Trump can fire.” The high court is poised to reverse an ancient law that has empowered the deep state for 80 years.

The case was filed by spurned and furious former FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter. Trump fired her in March. An appeals court promptly reinstated Slaughter, who’d held the post since 2018, because federal law says that presidents may only remove FTC commissioners “for cause.” The appellate court can’t be criticized too much, since it was just upholding a dusty, Roosevelt-era Supreme Court decision called Humprey’s Executor.

Now get this— even though the statute clearly requires “cause,” Trump’s notice of Slaughter’s removal specifically did not provide any cause. They defied Humphrey’s Executor on purpose.

To Democrats, it was a gold-lined invitation. In other words, Trump’s team practically dared Slaughter to sue.

On Monday, SCOTUS reversed the appellate court and held that Trump could —for now— remove Slaughter. It was a short, temporary order, without much reasoning, but as the liberal Justices raged, the decision trampled the 1935 Humphrey’s precedent. Courtwatchers conclude, as do I, that the majority intends to overrule Humprey’s Executor.

Four years ago, the Supreme Court sliced off part of Humphrey’s and held that presidents could fire directors of single-member boards without cause. But at that time, Justices Thomas and Gorsuch said they would have reversed the 1935 case. They even called it a “direct threat to our constitutional structure and, as a result, the liberty of the American people.”

In other words, one of the oldest cases protecting the beating heart of the administrative state is poised to be overturned. Again, the Democrats could have left it alone, accepted Slaughter’s loss and taken the ‘L’ right now, but saved the rule.

They just couldn’t resist. FAFO.

⚖️ You might call this one the final boss. The New York Times ran the story yesterday headlined, “Trump Administration Asks Supreme Court to Allow End of Birthright Citizenship.” We are quickly approaching the endgame.

On January 20th, one of Trump’s first executive orders ended so-called “birthright citizenship,” which triggered a flurry of lawsuits and appellate stays.

“Birthright citizenship” is the long-held understanding that anyone born inside the US borders automatically becomes a citizen. This rule arose from a single sentence in the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, and has been in place and enforced for so long that nearly every adult assumed it was a bedrock Constitutional right.

But for years, some conservative think tanks have taken a different view. They note that the 14th Amendment was written only to allow freed slaves to become citizens, not free-range invaders. The sentence from which the rule was derived says “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

The pesky language “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” has become the linchpin of the argument. If a person only needs to be “born … in the United States,” then what does the rest of the sentence even mean? Why is it there? President Trump argues that the past-tense (“subject to”) participial phrase means the 14th Amendment’s naturalization provision only applied to freed American slaves and their children who were already born in the United States. In other words, they were already “under the jurisdiction” of the government because of laws related to slaves.

This week, President Trump’s lawyers asked SCOTUS to rule on the whole basket of lawsuits and injunctions that stopped his January 20th executive order from having effect. “If the justices accept the birthright citizenship cases,” the Times wrote, “they would offer a final verdict as to whether Mr. Trump’s order was constitutional, a case that could define what it means to be an American.”

If SCOTUS accepts the case (which seems likely), it will be briefed this fall and decided next summer. To be fair, from here, ending citizenship for children of illegal migrants seems like an uphill battle, since the 14th Amendment’s language has long been assumed to mean automaticcitizenship. An 1898 Supreme Court case ratified that view, and many provisions scattered throughout the Immigration and Naturalization Act further define and depend on it.

But … TAW. The Times noted that the Supreme Court “has repeatedly allowed central pieces of Mr. Trump’s agenda to proceed on a temporary emergency basis, even as their legality is tested by the courts.” What the Times didn’t say is that the justices cannot let the cases proceed on “a temporary basis” unless they believe Trump is “substantially likely to prevail.”

⚖️ Taken all together, and in light of previous Trump wins at SCOTUS, can you see what’s happening? I’m beginning to think that Trump’s team anticipated all this lawfare, so they carefully picked issues conservatives have longed to get before the court, framed them just right and made them urgent so the Court would have to address them, and baited progressives into suing.

Let me put it another way. Even if you can’t believe Trump’s team intentionally designed this string of key cases for the Supreme Court, counting on Democrat lawfare to help secure decades (or more) of long-wished-for conservative wins —if believing that is a bridge too far— then you must still admit they have been unbelievably fortunate.

Onwards!

Have a blessed Sunday! Circle back here tomorrow morning to kick off a fresh week of essential news and commentary. And, as always, THANK YOU for your continued loyal support of the C&C mission.

Share

Don’t race off! We cannot do it alone. Consider joining up with C&C to help move the nation’s needle and change minds. I could sure use your help getting the truth out and spreading optimism and hope, if you can:☕ Learn How to Get Involved 🦠