On July 27, President Trump asked the U.S. Supreme Court to set aside the First Circuit’s ruling in the case involving the federal list of voters and its relationship to the U.S. Postal Service. Trump v State of California. Here is Trump’s filing, which argues that the lower court should not have acted because the Trump scheme is not yet ready for implementation anyway.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/26a124.html
docket 26A124
trump vs CA
https://www.scotusblog.com/2026/07/trump-administration-asks-supreme-court-to-clear-the-way-for-new-mail-in-voting-restrictions/
SB RE ABOVE
HOW MANY MORE EMERGENCY E LAW CASES RE TRUMP MACHINATIONS ???
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2026/07/26/100-days-midterms-polls-redistricting-democrats-republicans-senate-house/91037142007/
100 days until the midterms: Dems lead in polling, GOP in redistricting
Sunday marks 100 days until November’s midterms.
The Democrats, who are leading in the polls, still have an uphill battle against the Republicans’ redistricting wins and the rural bias in the Senate.
DEMS MORE VOTES – GOP MORE SEATS ??? >>> CIVIL WAR II ?????
—-
PR
APPV
TOTSOP
Please change me.
https://www.usatoday.com/videos/news/2026/07/27/trump-reveals-250-cadillac-escalades-ordered-for-motorcade/91070898007/
250 biiiiig $$$$ for TYRANT TRUMP convoys
GAS $$$ PER MILE ???
Mr. Lehman’s opinion is factually erroneous. There have always been pro-interventionism foreign/military policy individuals and groups prominent within the Libertarian Party since the time of its founding and outside of the party in the more broadly defined “libertarian movement.”
The LP at its founding included many followers of Ayn Rand, who held those views herself, although she didn’t approve of the LP and did not consider herself or her followers to be libertarians.
In the 1970s (iirc) and 1980s there was a prominent Adequate Defense Caucus in the LP. The 1980 l.p. Presidential ticket, the 1984 expected ticket which didn’t materialize, and the narrowly losing 1984 presidential nomination campaign (leading to a split where about half the delegates and many other party supporters left the convention and/or party) was in large part criticized / split over these issues.
A large subset of self declared libertarians and those frequently described as libertarians by others held hawkish views throughout the cold war and “war on (jihadist) terror”
Many LP candidates including, for example, Bob Barr, Wayne Root, Bill Weld, and many for all kinds of lower office have supported various US military operations / interventions at various times throughout the party’s 55 years. That also includes the 1972 presidential candidate , the party’s first.
Much of the Reform Caucus of the 2000s-2010s decade was characterized by it’s intra party opposition as interventionist.
If one defines US Government military aid to a foreign government that’s at war with another foreign government, and/or humanitarian aid to such a government which then allows it to concentrate more of its own available resources on military operations as a direct result, as interventionist, we could describe this blog’s owner and many of it’s frequent commenters as interventionist, for example via a vis Ukraine and Russia.
If you allow the foregoing to be published, one might expect responses along the lines of “people who disagree with me on (issue or issue set) x, y and or z are not real libertarians” and “some interventions are not like others because those are the good guys.”
Frequent long time LP candidate for (and holder of) internal and external offices, activist, donor, delegate, message forum debater etc Brian Holtz has said many times that abortion, immigration, military/foreign policy and maybe one other issue or issue category have been the most divisive within the Libertarian party and libertarian movement over the decades, and despite whatever disagreement I have with him I think that’s been historically correct as an objective fact.
You can define “real libertarian” how you wish. I’m not interested in that question. But the objective history of the party, movement, it’s candidates, caucuses, organizations and so on is factually on my side here. And I have always been very anti-interventionist myself, probably more so than many who may read this if it’s more than one person.
I likewise oppose conservative/libertarian fusionism and always have, and always opposed LP-GOP fusionism, cross endorsement, etc back when I supported the LP (I don’t support any party anymore). But to deny that those views, campaigns, strategies etc have played a huge role in the l.p. and movement all throughout their history is objectively inaccurate.
It might be dishonesty, myopia, wishful thinking, ignorance, etc, or some combination, on the part of various people. What it can never be is a knowledgeable and accurate assessment of historical reality.
R u rambling about?
Turd Potty Watch/Wash/Wish propaganda blog would be comment. Communist craphole censored by (George from) Philly = cccp = USSR
Knapp supports communists working with the LP apparently.
Stop attention whoring and smoking pcp and get back to therapy, Thomas.
Are you sure it isn’t Stock?
Occams razor says;
You are Stock. You are obsessed with getting attention for stock. Nobody else cares.
Knapp is obsessed with attention for himself. So, “Knapp’s diaper,” “Knapp is a loser,” etc are all Knapp.
You are attention whoring trolls.
Prove me wrong.