Patterico's Pontifications

2/22/2026

George Washington, 250 Years Ago

Filed under: General — JVW @ 9:54 pm



[guest post by JVW]

On his forty-fourth birthday, some 250 years ago, George Washington sat at winter camp in Cambridge, Massachusetts, taking stock of the momentous events of the past year and invoking all of his abilities to ensure that he could place an army in the field come spring, thereby keeping the revolutionary hopes arrive. A Continental Congress was sitting in Philadelphia, with its delegates attempting to coordinate a multi-colony plan to do battle with the world’s greatest military power. King George III had formally declared the American colonies to be in rebellion, and various towns and boroughs from the northernmost part of Massachusetts (now Maine) to the southernmost part of Georgia were openly discussing the idea of independence from Great Britain.

The previous year had been quite the whirlwind for the Man from Mount Vernon. After the battles of Lexington and Concord in April, the Continental Congress had gathered in Philadelphia and two months later selected him to be Commander-in-Chief of all Continental forces, an appointment that the General humbly declared that “my abilities & Military experience may not be equal to the extensive & important Trust” and wrote home to Mrs. Washington that “far from seeking this appointment I have used every endeavor in my power to avoid it.” At this same time, British and Continental forces clashed at Breed’s Hill in Charlestown, Massachusetts, adjacent to Bunker Hill which would mistakenly carry the name of the battle for posterity. While the redcoats had technically won the field on Breed’s Hill, it had come at an enormous cost of 1,000 casualties (including 226 killed), roughly twice as many as suffered by the Colonials. The Siege of Boston was underway.

The General soon left Philadelphia for Cambridge, across the Charles River from Boston, where he assumed command of a rather rag-tag outfit assembled to implausibly withstand a British attempt to drive the New England army (also sometimes referred to as the Boston army) out of Essex, Middlesex, and Suffolk Counties. The British held the city of Boston, including the all-important port, as well as neighboring Charlestown. The Colonists, under the command of General Nathaniel Greene, held the outlying areas. When the new Commander-in-Chief arrived he immediately saw that his army, such that it was, lacked uniforms, gunpowder, cannon, and ammunition. He did have about 16,000 men of whom roughly 14,000 were available for duty. Another 1,500 were injured or sick (camp fever, epidemic typhus spread by lice, was a common presence and typhoid fever was a killer). The one supply Washington’s Army did have was food, as the surrounding New England farms were in the midst of a verdant growing year.

Fortunately for the slowly-developing Continental Army, British General William Howe was content to wait for the arrival of a full compliment of reinforcements promised to him by Parliament before launching an all-out attack, likely spooked by the carnage his troops had endured on Breed’s Hill. At the same time, his Continental counterpart had approved a rather audacious plan to invade Quebec, partly due to the success of Colonel Benedict Arnold of the Connecticut Militia and Major General Ethan Allen of the Vermont Militia, who together led the capture of Fort Ticonderoga in upstate New York earlier in May. General Richard Montgomery and Colonel Arnold (who now held a commission in the Continental Army) were given command of the Quebec offensive. Their aim was two-fold: prevent the British from controlling the Hudson River up to Lake George thereby cutting off New England from the mid-Atlantic, and perhaps enticing the French-Canadians into joining the Revolution on the side of the Colonists. Though the end result was a disastrous defeat in Quebec City at the end of the year, the campaign did end up forcing the British commanders in Canada to request relief from Boston, which further prevented General Howe from continuing with the siege.

A strong compliment of British troops at last sailed into Boston in early December 1775, but by then the weather had grown too fierce for the British to entertain any serious military offensive until spring. Both sides hunkered down for the New England winter: the British relatively snug in Boston and Charlestown while the Patriots were subjected to the cold of rural Cambridge and environs, though it would be nowhere as severe as the army would experience in Valley Forge two winters later.

As 1776 broke, the sad news from Quebec City made its way to headquarters in Cambridge. The Patriots had not just suffered a complete defeat, but General Montgomery had been killed, Colonel Arnold was wounded, and Colonel Daniel Morgan of Virginia was captured (and would not be exchanged for an entire year). General Allen had been captured earlier in October, and would remain a British prisoner until May 1778. The only saving grace for the Continentals is that British General Guy Carleton decided to continue to defend Fort Saint-Jean rather than pursue and perhaps annihilate the retreating Continental forces.

With no battles to fight, General Washington undertook the tasks that tended to define much of his command: he wrote the Continental Congress imploring them to allocate more money for the arming, feeding, and pay for the troops; he tried to instill order and discipline in his men; he charmed and rebuked politicians as he saw necessary; he reviewed field reports and promoted or demoted officers as necessary; he mapped out strategies for spring campaigns; and he wrote and received dozens and dozens of letters both official and personal. On February 11, the General rode out to Dorchester Heights, south of Boston, to personally inspect fortifications for cannon captured at Fort Ticonderoga due to arrive in Cambridge soon. This would set the stage for a decisive development in the Siege of Boston.

Two-and-one-half centuries ago, on Thursday, February 22, 1776, George Washington was well immersed in what would be a six-year endurance test of his own resolve to see the war through. Though he continued to outwardly display all of the characteristics of bold and firm leadership, privately the daunting task in front of him was taking its toll. In a January 14 letter to his former secretary and confidant Colonel Joseph Reed, the General issues the usual complaints about lack of enlistments, a dearth of qualified officers, and the shortage of funds needed to outfit and pay an army. He then muses on how his life might be different had he turned down command:

I have often thought, how much happier I should have been, if, instead of accepting of a command under such Circumstances I had taken my Musket upon my Shoulder & enterd the Ranks, or, if I could have justified the Measure to Posterity, & my own Conscience, had retir’d to the back Country, & livd in a Wig-wam [. . . .]

He then snaps out of it and declares that if he can overcome the enlistment issue and have an army ready to fight in the spring, then “I shall most religiously believe that the finger of Providence is in it, to blind the Eyes of our Enemys; for surely if we get well throw this Month.” He ends with a solemn pledge to attack Boston the very first opportunity he gets, which will be the subject of our story next month.

– JVW

Planned Outage: 3 p.m. Pacific

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 8:22 am



Our hosting service informs me this morning that there will be a planned outage at 3 p.m. Pacific, 6 p.m. Eastern, today. It is expected to last 2-3 hours. The host will perform some “urgent database upgrades.”

Sorry for the short notice. Did not want you to be surprised.

2/20/2026

Weekend Open Thread

Filed under: General — Dana @ 9:53 am



[guest post by Dana]

Let’s go!

First news item

Good news from Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that President Donald Trump violated federal law when he unilaterally imposed sweeping tariffs across the globe, a striking loss for the White House on an issue that has been central to the president’s foreign policy and economic agenda.

Trump took the news well:

Note:

Irony: If Trump had embraced and demanded Congress pass the bipartisan Russia sanctions legislation, he’d already have a Congressionally-blessed way to impose massive tariffs against many of the same countries he targeted, including China and India.

Second news item

Inside the White House pardon “process”:

More than a year in, the White House’s pardon process remains a puzzle for those trying to navigate, and in some cases profit, from it. The nearly dozen people who NOTUS spoke with — including sources both outside the Trump administration, like lawyers and lobbyists, and inside the White House — described an ever-changing situation. Many said it is predicated on who has access and who can create the most appealing stories for their clients.

“There is no process, there is no right way to do this,” another source involved in the pardon process said. “It’s chaos.”

. . .

Multiple people NOTUS spoke with have tied the White House’s efforts to tighten control over pardons to [“pardon czar” Alice Marie] Johnson’s decreased access. There’ve been concerns internally over the outside reaction to some of the pardons. Senior aides, including Wiles, have been concerned with how people are profiting off the process, according to two sources familiar with discussions on pardons.

Read the whole story.

Third news item

Uh-oh:

The UK is blocking President Trump from using its military air bases for a possible attack on

Iran — because the lefty government believes such strikes could violate international law and doesn’t want Britain implicated, according to a new report.

Trump has already hit back by slamming the UK prime minister’s plan to resolve a long-running dispute over a strategically crucial chain of islands in the Indian Ocean.

Fourth news item

There has been no Congressional appropriation of funds:

President Trump on Thursday announced the United States will contribute $10 billion to the “Board of Peace” he established as part of his 20-point peace plan for Gaza, although the funding source isn’t yet clear.

“I want to let you know that the United States is going to make a contribution of $10 billion to the Board of Peace,” Mr. Trump told representatives from roughly 50 countries on Thursday. “The president called that a “very small number when you look at that compared to the cost of war.”

. . .

The White House did not immediately respond to a request to share the funding source.

Trump has also maintained that he will control the board after he is no longer in office. He has already said that he will control the funds donating by member nations.

Anyone else see a BIG problem here??

Have a great weekend.

—Dana

2/19/2026

Trump Adorns the DOJ With Image of Himself

Filed under: General — Dana @ 1:58 pm



[guest post by Dana]

No:

This is completely inappropriate, and it should be removed immediately.

Trump’s image and the MAGA slogan slapped on this particular building announces that the DOJ is essentially Trump’s personal law office. How else to look at it? Given that Trump has appointed an attorney general whose priority is to do the president’s bidding, protect him, and oust disloyal employees, we cannot be surprised by this latest antic. I will say, however, that it’s laughable that, out of all the presidents America has elected, it’s none other than the convicted felon promoting himself at the Justice Department.

This:

This is a stunning confirmation of the grim reality, which is that Donald Trump has seized control of the once independent Justice Department and is using it to pursue his political objectives—including trying to punish his perceived enemies. Exactly what his supporters baselessly accused the previous administration of doing.

Thoughts?

—Dana

About Iran: Will He Or Won’t He?

Filed under: General — Dana @ 10:33 am



[guest post by Dana]

This:

The U.S. Constitution (Article I, Section 8) vests the power to declare war solely in Congress, not the President. While presidents often initiate military actions, current debates in 2026 emphasize that Congress must assert its authority to authorize significant, sustained military engagements and prevent unconstitutional, unilateral war-making.

Efforts for Congress to authorize any action on Iran in the works:

Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) plan to move next week to force a vote on a resolution to require authorization from Congress before President Trump can use military force against Iran.

“Trump officials say there’s a 90% chance of strikes on Iran. He can’t without Congress,” Khanna said Wednesday in a post on the social platform X. “@RepThomasMassie & I have a War Powers Resolution to debate & vote on war before putting U.S. troops in harm’s way. I will make a motion to discharge to force a vote on it next week.”

Surely, none would have a problem with this.

Today Trump suggested a decision regarding Iran would be made within 10 days, while urging Iran to “make a deal”:

US President Donald Trump indicates he’ll be making a decision on a potential strike against Iran in the next 10 days.

Recalling the US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities in June during his remarks at the inaugural meeting of the Board of Peace, Trump says, “Now, we may have to take it a step further — or we may not. Maybe we’re going to make a deal.”

“You’re going to be finding out over the next, probably 10 days,” Trump says.

Trump reiterates that Iran “can’t have a nuclear weapon.”

“You can’t have peace in the Middle East if they have a nuclear weapon,” he says.

“Now is the time for Iran to join us on a path that will complete what we’re doing,” Trump says.

“If they join us, that’ll be great. If they don’t join us, that’ll be great too. But it’ll be a very different path,” Trump continues. “They cannot continue to threaten the stability of the entire region.”

“They must make a deal. If that doesn’t happen… bad things will happen,” he adds.

Oh:

—Dana

Former Prince Andrew Arrested

Filed under: General — Dana @ 9:22 am



[guest post by Dana]

Arrested:

The brother of King Charles III, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, has been arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office in connection with his close relationship with the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

His arrest Thursday follows years of allegations over his links with Epstein, who took his own life in a New York prison in 2019. The accusation at the heart of his arrest is that Mountbatten-Windsor, who was previously known as Prince Andrew until October when his brother stripped him of his titles and honors, shared confidential trade information with the disgraced financier.

King Charles released this statement after his brother’s arrest.

To the point and makes it clear that it is not his place to intervene in any way.

The AP defines “misconduct in public office”:

The Crown Prosecution Service, which decides on whether a charge has the potential to lead to a successful prosecution, defines misconduct in public office as the “serious willful abuse or neglect of the power or responsibilities of the public office held.”

Thames Valley Police said it was “assessing” reports that Mountbatten-Windsor sent confidential trade reports to Epstein in 2010, when the former prince was Britain’s special envoy for international trade.

Specifically, emails released as part of the Epstein files appeared to show Mountbatten-Windsor sharing reports of official visits to Hong Kong, Vietnam and Singapore.

—Dana

2/13/2026

Weekend Open Thread

Filed under: General — Dana @ 8:28 am



[guest post by Dana]

Let’s go!

First news item

Trump’s immigration policy drawing negative judgement :

For six months, dozens of judges appointed by Donald Trump have rebuffed — and sometimes pointedly rebuked — his administration’s effort to lock up thousands of immigrants under a novel reinterpretation of decades-old deportation laws.

This mass detention strategy, implemented by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, has met an overwhelming rejection by federal judges appointed by every president since Ronald Reagan.

. . . 373 have rejected the administration’s effort to require detention — without the possibility of bond — for anyone who crossed illegally into the United States, even if they’ve lived in the country for decades without incident. That contrasts with just 28 judges who have sided with the administration’s view.

Even judges Trump appointed are largely against him: 44 of them have ruled against the administration in mass-detention cases. Twenty Trump-appointed judges have signed off on the policy.

Related:

A federal judge appointed by President Donald Trump issued a sharply-worded opinion Thursday ruling that the administration had violated the constitutional rights of detainees at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility in Minnesota, and granted a temporary restraining order with strict new requirements for the ICE agents.

. . .

Thursday’s ruling. . . was written by Judge Nancy Brasel, who previously served as a federal prosecutor and Minnesota state judge. She has been on the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota since Trump appointed her in 2018.

In Brasel’s 41-page ruling, she blasts ICE for the “threadbare declarations…without examples or evidence” offered by the federal government’s attorneys claiming that noncitizens detained at the Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building were granted telephone access to their legal counsel.

Brasel noted that the plaintiffs had provided ample and detailed evidence that the thousands of detainees at Whipple were systematically being denied access to their attorneys but “little submitted by Defendants,” the Department of Homeland Security, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, ICE, Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons, and several other senior federal immigration officials.

Second news item

Unsurprising::

The Trump administration is dramatically expanding an effort to revoke U.S. citizenship for foreign-born Americans as it works to curb immigration, according to two people familiar with the plans.

Over the past several months, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the agency within the Department of Homeland Security that’s responsible for legal immigration, has been sending experts to its offices around the country or reassigning staff members to focus on whether some citizens processed through those offices could now be denaturalized, these people said.

. . .

The effort is part of the overall push by Homeland Security to drastically curtail immigration and deliver on Trump’s policy agenda. The push has included DHS’ sending scores of immigration enforcement officers into U.S. cities on deportation missions and purchasing mega warehouses to hold detainees.

DHS has also increasingly sought to remove legal immigrants from the U.S. by revoking thousands of visas, including for some people who participated in pro-Palestinian protests, and trying to deport green card holders.

Third news item

Ukraine really needs a break:

On Thursday morning in Milan, the IOC announced it had withdrawn the accreditation of Ukrainian skeleton pilot Vladyslav Heraskevych, in effect banning him from taking part in the Olympics due to his insistence of wearing a helmet depicting the images of Ukrainian athletes slain since Russia invaded his home country in 2022. According to an IOC statement, the organization’s president, Kirsty Coventry, met face-to-face with Heraskevych at the sliding center in Cortina on Thursday morning, in an attempt to convince him to leave his helmet behind. The IOC says it offered the athlete alternative ways to outwardly display his grief, such as by wearing a black armband or ribbon. When Heraskevych wouldn’t relent, the skeleton heats proceeded without him.

Reacting to his disqualification, Heraskevych, a medal contender, told reporters at the track: “It’s hard to say or put into words. It’s emptiness … In Ukraine now, we also have a lot of tears.” The athlete added that he didn’t want to downplay Coventry’s feelings, but doesn’t believe he violated any rules.

“This is the price of our dignity,” Heraskevych said via social media, alongside an image of himself wearing the much-discussed helmet.

President Zelensky weighed in on behalf of Heraskevych:

Fourth news item

They must be returned:

A federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to facilitate the return to the U.S. of a group of Venezuelan migrants who were sent to a maximum security prison in El Salvador last year under the Alien Enemies Act and accused of being members of the Venezuelan criminal gang Tren de Aragua.

The 137 Venezuelans the ruling applies to were deported to the notorious Center for Terrorism Confinement, or CECOT, in the Central American country, under the rarely-used Alien Enemies Act, despite an emergency ruling ordering the flight to be returned to the U.S.

Fifth news item

Well, that’s a whole lot of money:

The White House budget office is using millions of dollars from the former U.S. foreign aid agency to pay for the security detail of Russell Vought, President Donald Trump’s budget chief and an architect of the government overhaul that has cut thousands of federal jobs, according to three documents seen by Reuters.

The White House Office of Management and Budget, which Vought leads, is allocating $15 million of what remains of USAID operating expenses to cover the costs of his protection by the U.S. Marshals Service through the end of 2026, the documents showed. . .

A person familiar with the matter said that Vought’s security detail comprises more than one dozen U.S. Marshals, which Reuters could not independently confirm. OMB did not make Vought available for interview.

Sixth news item

We are definitely not in the best of hands:

God help us.

Have a great weekend anyway!

—Dana

2/12/2026

Sen. Mark Kelly 1st Amendment Rights Upheld, Secty. Hegseth Hit Hardest

Filed under: General — Dana @ 10:13 am



[guest post by Dana]

Sen. Mark Kelly’s preliminary injunction granted by GOP-appointed judge:

In a landmark decision for military retirees and elected officials alike, Senior U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled on February 12, 2026, that the Department of Defense may not move forward with disciplinary actions against Senator Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.). The case, which centered on a video in which Kelly and other veteran lawmakers advised active-duty troops to refuse “illegal orders,” has become a flashpoint for the intersection of military discipline, free speech, and the separation of powers.

From Judge Leon’s ruling:

United States Senator Mark Kelly, a retired naval officer, has been censured by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth for voicing certain opinions on military actions and policy. In addition, he has been subjected to proceedings to possibly reduce his retirement rank and pay and threatened with criminal prosecution if he continues to speak out on these issues. Secretary Hegseth relies on the well-established doctrine that military service members enjoy less vigorous First Amendment protections given the fundamental obligation for obedience and discipline in the armed forces. Unfortunately for Secretary Hegseth, no court has ever extended those principles to retired service members, much less a retired servicemember serving in Congress and exercising oversight responsibility over the military. This Court will not be the first to do so!

Worse still, Secretary Hegseth contends that this Court is not yet competent to decide the issues in this case. He and his fellow Defendants argue that military personnel 1 decisions are exempt from judicial review and, in any event, that Senator Kelly should first be required to go through the military appeals process so the military can have the first crack at adjudicating his First Amendment rights. I disagree. This Court has all it needs to conclude that Defendants have trampled on Senator Kelly’s First Amendment freedoms
and threatened the constitutional liberties of millions of military retirees. After all, as Bob Dylan famously said, “You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.”1

To say the least, our retired veterans deserve more respect from their Government, and our Constitution demands they receive it!

Senator Kelly’s First Amendment claim is not only justiciable; he is likely to succeed on the merits. He has also shown irreparable harm, and the balance of the equities fall decidedly in his favor. As such, his motion for a preliminary injunction on his First Amendment claim is hereby GRANTED.

Hegseth was right: FAFO. Indeed.

Score points for respecting the Constitution and protecting an American’s First Amendment rights.

Bonus point for quoting Dylan.

—Dana

2/11/2026

The Pam Bondi Show: Mother Of All Trainwrecks

Filed under: General — Dana @ 2:09 pm



[guest post by Dana]

Attorney General Pam Bondi’s testimony before the House Judiciary Committee today was nothing less than a shit show. She lied, denied, sighed, and actually cried “Trump Derangement Syndrome” when left with nothing else to defend herself. Thus it is difficult to choose a video to post. But because I find her stunning disregard for the victims unforgivable and enraging, (at one point today, she refused to turn around and acknowledge their presence), I’m going to post Rep. Thomas Massie (R) and Rep. Dan Goldman (D) questioning Bondi about having neglected to redact information identifying the victims, yet having carefully redacted the co-conspirators names. If you believe, as I do, that the victims’ identifying information was intentionally not redacted to serve as a warning to other victims who may want to testify, then this is for you. With that, when Bondi was pressed about other victims wanting to come forward, she said all they had to do was call 1-800-CALL-FBI. This, despite the fact that the victims in attendance today denied having ever been contacted by the FBI:

Bondi sold her soul to Trump, thus and she will defend him to the death:

This is how much Bondi cares about the victims: rather than going after pedophiles and co-conspirators and defending victims, she said that they should be talking about the markets:

This:

AG Bondi needs to be fired. Immediately.

And when the Democrats do have that good upcoming election year, and Republicans can’t understand how it happened, they can refer back to AG Bondi’s testimony regarding the Epstein Files on Feb. 11, 2026, and they’ll have a big part of their answer.

P.S. when “Trump Derangement Syndrome” made its appearance today:

—Dana

score one for the Constitution, freedom of speech, and rule of law, Indeed

Filed under: General — Dana @ 6:26 am



[guest post by Dana]

President Trump hit hardest:

The U.S. attorney’s office in Washington, DC failed to secure an indictment against six Democratic members of Congress who made a video last fall telling service members they could refuse illegal orders, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter.

The members, Sen. Elissa Slotkin, Sen. Mark Kelly, Rep. Maggie Goodlander, Rep. Jason Crow, Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, and Rep. Chris DeLuzio posted a video to social media saying that as former members of the military and intelligence community, current members should refuse illegal orders, if they are given.

Note:

The indictment pursued by the office of U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro is the latest example of the Justice Department targeting the president’s perceived political opponents. The government attorneys assigned to the case are political appointees, not career Justice Department prosecutors, according to a source familiar with the investigation.

Below are the reactions by several of the six Democrats:

Sen. Mark Kelly:

This is an outrageous abuse of power by Donald Trump and his lackies. It wasn’t enough for Pete Hegseth to censure me and threaten to demote me, now it appears they tried to have me charged with a crime — all because of something I said that they didn’t like. That’s not the way things work in America.

Donald Trump wants every American to be too scared to speak out against him. The most patriotic thing any of us can do is not back down.

Rep. Jason Crow:

“Donald Trump’s DOJ just tried—and failed—to indict me in front of a grand jury.

“Americans should be furious that Trump and his goons tried to weaponize our justice system again against his political opponents. His attempts to intimidate and silence us will always fail.

“We will continue to fight back against their rising tyranny, along with all Americans of good conscience. Courage is contagious.

“Don’t Give Up the Ship.”

Sen. Elissa Slotkin:

Today, U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro attempted to persuade a Grand Jury to indict me. This was in response to me organizing a 90-second video that simply quoted the law. Pirro did this at the direction of President Trump, who said repeatedly that I should be investigated, arrested, and hanged for sedition.

Today, it was a grand jury of anonymous American citizens who upheld the rule of law and determined this case should not proceed. Hopefully, this ends this politicized investigation for good.

But today wasn’t just an embarrassing day for the Administration. It was another sad day for our country.

Because whether or not Pirro succeeded is not the point. It’s that President Trump continues to weaponize our justice system against his perceived enemies. It’s the kind of thing you see in a foreign country, not in the United States we know and love.

No matter what President Trump and Pirro continue to do with this case, tonight we can score one for the Constitution, our freedom of speech, and the rule of law.

—Dana

Next Page »

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0630 secs.