Thanks to my observant sister, who told me my head should be exploding due to the IRS settlement scandal when many sources, blogs and pundits hadn’t even covered it yet, I was able to get some commentary out even ahead of my legal ethicists listserv, which, predictably since they pounce on Trump whatever he does, REALLY pounced yesterday.
On the bad side, my head hasn’t stopped exploding yet, and the whole house is a mess. And I haven’t even been able to seriously consider the gravamen of the New York Times joining Margery Taylor Greene in condemning Trump’s helping to jettison a GOP Congressman who couldn’t bring himself to condemn anti-Semitism.
On my Facebook page, a smart, Trump Deranged Jewish lawyer friend who called for everyone to vote for the illegal and dishonest “restore fairness” Virginia gerrymandering referendum, bemoaned the end of CBS radio and called it smoking gun proof that CBS was now working for MAGA. Yes, CBS radio’s demise is Trump’s fault. He even included a weepy reference to Edward R. Murrow. News radio is, like the US Postal Service, bow ties, landlines and the Sears catalogue, outdated, anachronistic and disposable, having once served a great purpose. You know, like the Model T.
Yes, it’s crazy out there. Use the Open Forum to start fixing it,
Ethics Alarms 
Barney “I had been too sanguine about Fannie and Freddie” Frank is being eulogized by some as: “(A)rchitect Of Landmark Wall Street Reforms“
Let’s leave aside his claim that he knew nothing about a gay brothel hidden in plain sight; heck, that could happen to anyone, am I right?
Anywho, some people (myself included) will have a hard time glorifying someone for a solution to a problem they were instrumental in creating; the Sub Prime Mortgage Meltdown
To be sure, Frank had a plenty of help (the Community Reinvestment Act, Franklin Raines, Maxine Waters, Greg Meeks, Maurice Strong, Bill Clinton, Janet Reno, Barack Obama, etc.), but his filthy fingerprints are all over it.
THIS will put a finer point to it.
PWS
A great example of how the MSM covered up part of a disastrous scandal and botch the Democrats shared responsibility for so Republicans could be blamed, giving us Barack Obama…a prime example of how that party cheats. So now we have to put up with whitewashed tributes to Barney.
Can the laws be changed so that the MSM can be punished with violating campaign finance laws? We know statutes of limitations can be retroactively extended.
I strongly recommend watching the 08:36 video, which accurately depicts the Bizarro World scenario where EVIL Republican were clamoring for MORE regulation, while Lefty was in epic Circle_The_Wagons CYA mode.
Maxine Waters’ “Desktop Underwriting” comment would make any prudent actuary $#!t themselves sideways.
PWS
I won’t link a specific article, because the same taglines are being used in every one of them. They’re calling the US now announcing a 5,000 person troop deployment to Poland as a “U-turn by the Trump administration.”
I will say that Trump not making the announcement together with the withdrawal of 5,000 troops from Germany was a mistake on his part. Trump will Trump and all….
But this is NOT a “U-turn.” Germany is not a particular friend to the US now. Trump has right about Germany since 2016. At one time, Germany was the front line against Russia. It isn’t anymore. The US should be in the Baltic states and Poland. Places where they spend more than their minimums on defense. Places that embrace the US. Places that welcome our soldiers and train seriously, rather than make it a joke.
The mainstream press love Europe and hate America, so this isn’t a surprise they get it wrong. But they sorely misjudge the public opinion here. Most Americans feel like Europe are a bunch of freeloaders. Those that support NATO feel like we need to because the Europeans can’t be trusted to behave and we want to nip anything before it affects the whole world. We can simultaneously want NATO and resent the crap out of Europe. Trump’s treatment of Europe is popular amongst many Europeans. Our dishonest press makes the Europeans think that’s not the case.
NATO is a good thing – but as all alliances go they always have been and always will be formal arrangements of nations with shared security interests.
Security interests change and alliances are bad ONLY so much as they aren’t constantly reevaluated. NATO lasting exactly as NATO has lasted for 3/4s of a century is NOT a testament to lasting security interests of those nations but a testament to the ability of people not recognize change when they have to.
But, security interests have changed as the reality on the ground has changed.
“NATO” is a good thing, but NATO is fairly uninterested and unserious.
The shift east into Poland directly shows that the United States is aware of the change while western European countries, comfortable with free defense wants to maintain the illusion of seriousness and interest in NATO.
Our continued support of NATO only occurs because it’s the easiest way to enact the *real* alliance of interested parties which would be best defined as an “Eastern European Treaty Organization”.
On the bad side, my head hasn’t stopped exploding yet, and the whole house is a mess. And I haven’t even been able to seriously consider the gravamen of the New York Times joining Margery Taylor Greene in condemning Trump’s helping to jettison a GOP Congressman who couldn’t bring himself to condemn anti-Semitism.
It is strange to observe former opponents and enemies teaming up when their interests coincide. People that should not be talking, are talking.
Massie is not an antisemite and therefore to call him such when what he opposes is Israel’s policies and its meddling in US politics, is not ethical. I read that Massie is the only one who does not accept AIPAC corrupt bribery. Israel (and Mark Levine and now Jack Marshall) declare that this is antisemitism, but it is not. It is an upstanding and moral position.
Signature Significance. He refused to vote for a resolution that was very clear and necessary, based on the (intellectually dishonest quibble that one out of 5 resolutions didn’t jibe with his biases. Here’s the resolution that every other GOP Representative voted for:
H. Res. 894
In the House of Representatives, U. S.,
December 5, 2023.
Whereas acts of hate, intimidation, discrimination, and violence based on ethnicity or religion have no place in our country nor in the global community;
Whereas the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s working definition of antisemitism is widely accepted and serves as a critical tool to help individuals comprehend and identify the various manifestations of antisemitism;
Whereas, since the massacre of innocent Israelis by Hamas, an Iran-backed terrorist organization, on October 7, 2023, antisemitic incidents of harassment, vandalism, and assault in the United States have spiked 388 percent over the same period last year, according to reports from the Anti-Defamation League’s (ADL) Center on Extremism;
Whereas drastic increases in antisemitic activity has also been seen in Jewish communities around the world since the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks;
Whereas the slogan “From the River to the Sea”, which is a rallying cry for the eradication of the State of Israel and the Jewish people, has been used by anti-Israel protesters in the United States and globally;
Whereas, on October 8, 2023, a car with individuals holding Palestinian flags appeared to intentionally swerve out of its lane, nearly hitting a visibly Jewish family in Clifton, New Jersey;
Whereas, on October 15, 2023, an individual in New York, New York, punched a Jewish woman in the face at Grand Central Terminal solely because she was Jewish;
Whereas, on October 28, 2023, a Jewish man in Sydney, Australia, was severely injured by 3 anti-Israel rioters, in which he was punched in the head at least 12 times, suffered a concussion, 2 black eyes, and 4 spinal fractures;
Whereas, on November 3, 2023, a Jewish woman’s store in New York City was attacked by a mob of anti-Israel protesters all because she hung posters of Israeli hostages in the store window;
Whereas, on November 3, 2023, 4 masked men walked into a restaurant in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and proceeded to tear down an Israeli flag and yelled “Free Palestine”;
Whereas, on November 4, 2023, an Arizona man was arrested by Federal authorities for threatening to execute a local Rabbi and “every other JEW I can find tonight at midnight of your Sabbath”;
Whereas, on November 4, 2023, during an anti-Israel protest in Washington, DC, rioters shouted their support for Hamas massacre on October 7, 2023, and other acts of terror targeting Israel, called for the end of the State of Israel, and spewed hateful and vile language amplifying antisemitic themes;
Whereas, during that same protest in Washington, DC, rioters stormed and tried to scale the White House fence, vandalized property by staining blood-red handprints onto the side of the White House pillars, and spray painted “Death to Israel” and “Glory to our Martyrs” on buildings in DC;
Whereas, on November 6, 2023, Paul Kessler, a 69-year-old Jewish man, tragically died due to injuries sustained when an anti-Israel protester struck him in the head with a megaphone in Los Angeles, California;
Whereas, on November 11, 2023, as part of a massive anti-Israel protest, rioters set off smokebombs in front of a synagogue in London, England;
Whereas, on November 12, 2023, police found several headstones at the Chesed Shel Emeth Cemetery, a Jewish cemetery in Brooklyn, Ohio, were desecrated with swastikas;
Whereas, on November 13, 2023, a mezuzah was torn off the doorpost of a Jewish person’s apartment and a knife was stuck into the wood in its place in Milan, Italy;
Whereas, on November 13, 2023, the evening before the March for Israel in Washington, DC, anti-Israel rioters vandalized a Jewish medical tent by spray painting “Free Gaza”, “Palestine Will Be Free”, and “Gaza Will Win”; and
Whereas, on November 15, 2023, anti-Israel protesters illegally blocked and violently attacked the Democratic National Committee headquarters, endangering the lives of individuals inside, including Members of Congress, and injuring 6 Capitol Police Officers; Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives—
(1) strongly condemns and denounces all instances of antisemitism occurring in the United States and globally;
(2) reaffirms and reiterates its strong support for the Jewish community at home and abroad;
(3) calls on elected officials and world leaders to condemn and fight all forms of domestic and global antisemitism;
(4) clearly and firmly states that anti-Zionism is antisemitism; and
(5) rejects all forms of terror, hate, discrimination, and harassment of members of the Jewish community
I clearly see why he avoided “signing” that devious document. But I do clearly see why you believe it was written by way of some sense of “justice”. In my mind though, you suffer under an overt and direct indoctrination. I mean this literally.
The attack by Gazans, though horrible and cruel as an act, mirrors the abuse, torture and state-injustice of Israel since it sounding. War, oppression, injustice, these create psychotic, pathological reaction.
I recognize that you will not grant to Gazans any right to their anger, but that is because you take the side of those who commit the original violence. You do recognize that creating Israel created a mass, but you have this unrealistic notion that Gazans and Palestinians should just give up.
You are a classic Neocon in this sense. I respect that you have these views, but I do not share them.
I am not concerned with justifying the Gazan attack on the kids high on LSD and dancing in the night, I only try to explain the incident by way of a fuller picture. You do not know, and you do nit care, that some factions in Israel are planning the demolition of the Mosque. Therefore, Al Aqsa Flood was the name of their attack. You may feel Israel is justified in doing that, or completely possessing the West Bank, but the people there suffering the robbery don’t agree with you.
My views do not justify (or validate) any particular violence, all I seek to do is see the circumstances fairly and accurately.
That document, Jack, is corrupt. Simply because it associates an anti-Zionist posture with antisemitism. That narrative no longer works. For this reason I speak of dis-aggregation.
If you paid more attention to what is really going on you would be aware of how thoughtful people (and Jews and Israelis) are beginning to see the entire context of what has resulted in the mess that is Israel today (a nearly fascistic government and a nation caught in a trap of its own making).
It was right, moral and ethical that Massie did nit bend his knee to sign that ridiculous document. For that reason, naturally, they took him out by way of vast money spent. But people SEE what happened there. I do. Others too. It will not turn out well.
“The attack by Gazans, though horrible and cruel as an act, mirrors the abuse, torture and state-injustice of Israel since its founding.”
That’s the capper. I’m not going to waste time discussing this issue with you, Alizia. That statement is ethically absurd and counter-factual on its face. You are trying to justify a terrorist act inflicted on people who had no involvement in the previous acts that supposedly occurred over decades. You can’t, any more than American blacks could justify keeping a white family imprisoned in their basement in 2026 to do household chores. For you to even dare to write something like this on an ethics blog shows either a screw loose or an absence of basic ethics comprehension.
I’ll leave it to others here to knock down your delusions. Good luck.
You are trying to justify a terrorist act inflicted on people who had no involvement in the previous acts that supposedly occurred over centuries.
Founding: 1948! You misunderstood.
No I didn’t. I meant to write “decades” and just changed the reply accordingly. You seem to be under the mistaken impression that Israel attacked its Arab neighbors after it was established. It was the other way around.
I think I am under no mistaken notions and I honestly think my perspective on the entire issue is on a plane you do not have access to. Why that is, baffles and intrigue me, so I try to understand. Here is one element, an important one:
You are in essence an American patriot in the sense that your core values and identity extend from those of your father. He fought in the war that defined the entire age we are in. America, intelligently and shrewdly, conquered the world by defeating nearly every enemy, and took over the world-management system of its ally (England). This was portrayed as Righteousness Prevailing. And certainly in many ways it was indeed that. Yet it is the duality of America, America’s shadow, about which you seem ‘closed to understanding’.
Any American violence (killing, destruction, even the death of children) is, for the American patriot, excusable because, ultimately, necessary. It is the objective (Americanism) that justifies everything. This was made evident in Iraq. Astounding death and destruction of the social fabric was brought about, perhaps a half million death, but there is no one required to pay the price. It hangs on no one’s conscience. It is “memory holed” and though the debt of ‘karma’ (national karma) may be increasing like the national financial debt, it is no part of the American mind-set to be even concerned. The debts accumulate, America is oblivious. The damage committed is never recognized, though the damage done to the social body of America mounts up. But no causal connection is made.
The parallel to Israel is evident. Just as American’s are “God’s people’ and act for God in this world (Americanism is nearly a religious ideology, a conviction), that was exactly the mythology employed by the Jews returning to the Ancestral Lands. It was presented as a movement ordained by God (and Christian Zionists actually see it lije this). The Soul of America identifies as God’s political child in this world! And the contradictions to that ideological belief never are seen or realized: this is the duality I mention. So many good things, and down in the shadows every perversity imaginable.
The defense of Israel is a reflex of the Righteous Spirit. The actual facts, of course, contradict the Mythic Narrative (the Civil Religion of Israel’s founding and the previous history of Jews in the region). But this does not matter! The righteous story is the operative one. And just as it is noted that the contradictory story I tell (closer to genuine history) is perceived and labeled as unrighteousness heresy, and as ‘evil’, to the same degree thatvthe shadow is suppressed the narrative of Holy Israel is strengthened. No matter that it just wiped out 70-80% of Gazan infrastructure and, obviously, intends definitional genocide and displacement of that population, the bad done is shrouded over. It’s actually ‘good’.
Now you see these two powers, joined together, will likely carry on in similar directions, but here’s the magic key: they will not prosper. Because they originated in bad, destructive actions that ‘infect’ the operation. That is why there is always something festering there. A wound that never heals.
You have to understand that my views (if I can put it in this way) transcend the human story. We are always lying to ourselves! We always cover over our duality and our ‘shadow’. I am describing a very very human situation — man’s plague really. It is that issue of ‘complicity’ that is (in my view) the ultimate ethical problem.
It is also not necessarily an immoral position to accept AIPAC money. But we are in agreement that members of Congress should be prohibited from accepting financial gifts from ANY entity.
Well, I think we’re in agreement, unless your feelings are limited to only Israeli-based groups that seek influence in our government.
I have been thinking about the settlement and sort of wonder if the terms are not that much different from the logic regarding fruit of the poisonous tree in which if the government violates one’s rights in obtaining evidence, the evidence cannot be used to prosecute the person. In Trump’s case the government violated his privacy rights by leaking the returns to the media. As such, it can be inferred that the act tainted any potential evidence or effectively prevented him from having a fair trial if he might be charged. Unlike, excluding a magazine of ammo because the find was in a bag 9 feet away and out of reach of the suspect and the prosecution had legally found the actual weapon, sharing tax returns included any and all evidence of wrongdoing in any exists. Because we have no way of knowing what might be unlawful the potential juror could easily be convinced that many laws were broken and they develop preconceived notions of guilt.
As I understand the logic of the fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine the goal is not to reward an accused it is to prevent government abuses. For that reason I see a parallel of logic. Obviously, given that Trump has been victimized by a legislature that creates look back legislation for the sole purpose of prosecuting him it does seem that his legal team sought to prevent future abuses of power at the federal level. This settlement has no bearing on state prosecutions if any are warranted.
What do we think about Nancy Mace’s to bar foreign-born U.S. citizens from serving in Congress, the federal judiciary, and as Senate-confirmed political appointees?
My take is that this does not have a chance as this requires 2/3 of the votes in Congress, and ratification by 3/4 of the states. The target of her proposal are representatives like Ilhan Omar, Shri Thanedar, and Pramila Jayapal, all of whom have devided loyalties according to Mace. My note: Harmeet Dhillon would also not be able to serve in Donald Trump’s administration.
John Daniel Davidson from the Federalist is heavy in favor of her proposal. His views on citizenship are decidedly different from SCOTUS Justice Gorsuch’s creedal view on American citizenship.
https://thefederalist.com/2026/05/22/america-is-a-nation-of-settlers-not-immigrants/
Bring back disorderly conduct. I don’t even like going for walks anymore because I’m afraid of running into some crazy person.
The woman at Tim Horton’s with heart failure who tried to attack one of the employees and ending up dying when the employee fought back signals something really wrong with society.
The woman seemed to have a pretty instinctive reaction to becoming violent, which makes me think she’s gotten away with it many times throughout her life. I feel sad about what happened, but this whole scenario is such a deep absurdity that it makes me feel crazy.
This scenario also makes me think of your duty to confront. Maybe people in her life should’ve been more forceful with her to hopefully set her on a better path. It’s such a disgraceful way for someone to pass away.
Here is an interesting article.
https://reason.com/2026/05/22/a-swat-team-destroyed-an-innocent-womans-home-shes-been-waiting-6-years-for-justice/?comments=true#comment-11480160
Very quiet Friday at EA. What are the opinions on the following tweet by Adam Schiff?
My thoughts go out to Tulsi Gabbard and her family, as her husband battles this serious health problem. I hope and pray that he makes a speedy and full recovery.
While the circumstances around her departure are deserving of our sympathy, let’s be clear: Tulsi Gabbard’s only positive contribution to our nation’s national security is her resignation.
She politicized intelligence. She dismantled critical agencies keeping Americans safe. She weaponized the IC to pursue baseless election fraud claims. And more.
We must ensure that her tenure — marked by a devotion to the person of the president and not to the security of the country — represents a terrible exception at DNI and not the new normal.
Par for the course. Schiff has always been lower than whale shit. Yes, it’s appalling – but nothing that dude says or does surprises me any more; I just don’t think it’s possible for him to go any lower. The good news is that the reactions to the tweet are pretty much universal: disgust.
My wife and I have been debating the illegal immigration issue on and off for a while now, and part of the reason we keep returning to ethics of the illegal immigration issue is the fact that so many in leadership in the Catholic Church have been very critical of Trump’s deportation efforts. As faithful Catholics, we believe we need to listen when our bishops speak. It doesn’t mean we mindlessly agree, but in cases where the bishops take a position we initially oppose, it is incumbent upon us to study and ponder the issue as thoroughly as we can before making any objections.
To that end, my wife and I are trying to be as open as we possibly can regarding the issue of how to manage people who are in our country and in our local communities illegally. I have told her that I think the best way to understand a viewpoint with which we disagree is to argue from that viewpoint and to steelman its arguments as best we can. Interestingly enough, my wife and I do highlight differing aspects of why we have problems with illegal immigration. I focus very heavily on the human trafficking issue. She focuses very heavily on the financial injustices the illegal immigration causes.
From the trafficking standpoint, I think that is it clear that a lot of illegal immigrants end up practically as slave labor, which has largely been overlooked because it seems like it keeps prices down in the supermarket. But far more devastating is the sex trafficking which never seems to get the attention it deserves, especially when so many of these “lost and displaced children” end up serving the debauched desires of affluent Americans who believe they can continue their predations because “Who would dare contact the authorities?”.
However, for the sake of attempting to steelman the pro-illegal immigration position, my wife and I have considered the various aspect which are due any human person regardless of immigration status: the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. There is an aspect of which, regardless of immigration status, if people need food, water, clothing, shelter, it is ethical to exercise charity and provide those necessities. Granted, there are prudential limits on this (staples vs filet mignon, a small apartment vs a 4 bedroom, 3 bath house), but this seems straightforward enough.
As a next step, it would be preferable, and in line with the dignity of human beings, for illegals to be employed in some limited fashion so as to earn their keep until such a time as the legal processes dictating their deportation run their course. However, this employment itself has to be understood as a form of charity and should not be at the expense of needed employment by legal members of the community, nor undermine, without the express permission of legal members of the community, the economics of legal businesses.
So it seems important, with both Christian charity and the law of the land, to help out illegal immigrants who are in need, without impeding the due process resulting from their illegal status. This does not require believing that the illegal immigrants have the right to remain, but out of respect for their dignity as human beings, assisting them and perhaps even encouraging them towards legal status.
There are still other aspects my wife and I have not delved into, such as whether we could steel man any of the “good illegal immigrant” cases where some illegals have been working for years in a community, established deep ties around them, and seem – other than their immigration status – to be upright citizens. This one seems to run into the intractable problem of essentially continuing to perpetuate a crime every day these illegals remain in the country. Maybe some day we’ll have some great insight to share on that problem.
Where the conversation turned interesting was when my wife brought up the details of school financing, and how illegal immigration impacts that.
As I mentioned, my wife is concerned with the financial injustice illegal immigration causes, and schools have become a particular passion for her. This is not to gloss over identity theft, fraud, burdens on the medical systems, and numerous other financial concerns, but because she’s so in tune with how schools are funded (because we homeschool, and because funding keeps becoming an issue when anyone decides maybe some of that funding should help students to AVOID public schools, but that’s another discussion) she had a lot to say on the issue.
In many of the states that we know about, schools receive a great deal of funding based upon student headcount. In Wyoming, schools receive funding from local property tax to support the fixed costs of a school, but then receive money from the state for each student signed up for the school to the tune of (with a bit of simplification) $14,000-17,000 a head.
In examining the expenses of a school, the facility largely is a fixed cost. The cost of hiring a teacher is more or less a fixed cost, but that’s where there’s some of the “play” involved. If you have to have a first-grade teacher, the cost of that teacher is going to be roughly the same whether she’s teaching one student or thirty students. So to a certain extent, a school is incentivized to keep increasing the student head count up to the limits of what a teacher can handle, because once the facilities are established and the teacher is hired, each additional student is just net money. Of course, there are saturation points. Once you’ve added so many students, you might not have room in classrooms or have to hire teacher aides or additional teachers. If the students you bring in have special needs, you have to hire special educators, but it seems that there is clear incentive for schools to want the children of illegal immigrants.
As a note, there are national laws requiring schools to take children regardless of immigration status, so schools have their hands tied in this regard. What we determined was that this financial incentive to keep the schools pack naturally leads schools and teachers unions to oppose any effort to staunch the flow of illegal immigrants. Moreover, schools and teachers unions can hide behind the national law to keep these incentives out of public discourse.
Accepting illegal immigrants also allows the schools to continue to demand more money from the state. When students don’t speak English at home, translators and ESL teachers are required by law because not speaking English is considered a special need. This increases reading intervention as well. Also, free and reduced lunch programs as well as other special needs programs have more students who need more help, which has the schools clamoring for more money. Even assuming that illegal immigrants’ kids have no higher rate of needing this help than the norm, there are more kids, which increases the number of children who need the aid. So it would seem that teachers’ unions would be incentivized to support illegal immigration because it increases the demand for special education teachers, which in turn increases the demand for teachers overall.
So the general conclusion is that just regarding schools, illegal immigrants incur a lot of taxpayer costs, and the schools and teachers unions have incentive to support illegal immigration because it supplements their finances, which otherwise would be greatly flagging.
An objection at this point would note that the same costs would incur were all these children of legal status, but every other condition remained the same. More legal students at a school will require more teachers, more teacher aides, more classrooms, more special-needs instructors, and so on. That is all true. Our point mainly focuses on the incentive for schools and teachers to support increased illegal immigration. We don’t make any case that schools and teachers actively support increased illegal immigration, though there is plenty of evidence that teachers unions do. This was, to us at least, an interesting observation that adds to our understanding of how complex the issue of illegal immigration really is.
Fascinating comment, Ryan and obviously a comment of the day. Thank-you.
However, while devising a practical, fair, affordable, beneficial-to-the-nation-itself immigration policy is complex, the issue of illegal immigration is quite simple. It’s against the law. It’s against the law because open borders to a country like the US is literally national suicide. It’s against the law because a nation that does not take responsible steps to protect its culture is doomed. (See: Europe and Great Britain.) A law that isn’t enforced isn’t a law. A law that one can break and not suffer punishment isn’t a law. These are important laws. Important laws that enforcement officials will ignore if the law breaker gets away with it long enough isn’t a meaningful law—which is why there are no statutes of limitation on murder. If someone can benefit from breaking a law, then a society that doesn’t enforce such laws has announced an incentive to break that law. These are all basic principles of the law.
It’s simple. The immigration laws we have, flawed or not, have to be enforced uniformly and strictly. The critiques from anyone who does not have a stake in the welfare of the US are a distraction and unethical. That includes the Pope.
Jack,
To all your points outlined above: I agree! That is what makes steel-manning these arguments so difficult.
What is so frustrating about some Papal and USCCB statements is that the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) spells out a reasonable immigration stance, to whit, that people have a right to immigrate and that nations have a right to restrict immigration based on their needs and abilities of accommodate immigrants.
Kind of bizarre, but interesting, that Candace Owens interviewed Hunter Biden. I watched some and it was interesting at the least.
There is a very interesting channel (“Soft White Underbelly”) and he interviews every sort of person you can imagine. Drug addicts, Mafia bosses, people with problems, but also cultural and intellectual figures. He also interviews Hunter Biden.
It is curiously revealing to see how f***ed up people actually are. And how their ‘sickness’ manifests in antisocial behaviors.