TUESDAY: Is Adam Smith allowed to say that?

TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 2026

What the congressman said: Adam Smith appeared as a guest on Fox News Sunday last weekend. 

We refer to Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), a Democrat from the state of Washington. In our view, he tends to be smart and sane. 

He serves as Ranking Member of (as top Democrat on) the House Armed Services Committee. It was in that capacity that he appeared on Fox News Sunday with its anchor, Shannon Bream, who has sometimes also been caught being both smart and sane. 

Bream isn't the standard Fox News Channel messenger person. On Sunday, she and Smith had a lengthy discussion about the current partial government shutdown.

In the main, we aren't concerned today with the shape of that longer discussion. Along the way, Smith surprised us with something he actually said. We join that discussion in progress:

BREAM (3/29/26): If you [Democrats] all want to change ICE policy, why not fund everyone as these bills were already agreed to? There was a bipartisan agreement on these bills. They hit this block in the Senate after they'd already been part of a bipartisan negotiation.

SMITH: Yes! They hit the block in the Senate after two American citizens were killed in Minneapolis, without any accountability!

BREAM: Which is a tragedy, but there are Americans tooRachel Morin, Jocelyn NungarayI mean, those are Americans who have been killed too.

SMITH: We have a legitimate debate to be had over how to do immigration enforcement. And by the way, I agree with Senator Cotton [an earlier guest]. The Biden administration did not do immigration enforcement the way it should have. We should have the border more secure than it was. But there's plenty of room between that policy, between the "radical left" policy you keep talking aboutyou know, open borders and all of thatand having masked, unidentifiable ICE agents show up, no probable cause, no due process, killing two people, warrantless searches of peoples' homes, detaining people without any due process. Can't we get somewhere in between in those two extremes? 

And so on from there. 

You're looking at part of a longer discussion. We're mainly concerned with these highlighted statements by Smith: 

The Biden administration did not do immigration enforcement the way it should have. We should have the border more secure than it was. 

We think we may have heard some major Democrat making some such statements before. But we're not totally sure that we have.

The handling of the southern border under President Biden remains the political gift which keeps on giving to purveyors of agitprop inside Silo Red. It's always there for Red American messengers to mention and fall back on. 

To the best of our knowledge, the handling of the southern border under President Biden remains unexplained to this day. Smith has at least acknowledged a fact what will seem to be obvious to tens of millions of voters: 

Absent some future explanation, the first three-plus years of border policy under President Biden are very hard to affirm. It seems to us that Smith had the right idea in admitting that this unexplained policy matter went wrong. 

A final point: 

Who were Rachel Morin and Jocelyn Nungaray?  Every Fox News Channel viewer will know. Some Blue Americans may not.

In our view, we Blues have promulgated some slippery evasions regarding the way they (and others) were sexually assaulted and murdered in recent years. Jocelyn Nungaray was only 12 years old at the time of her vicious killing by a pair of assailants. 

In our view, attention should have been paid by Blues as well as by Reds.

We Blues may be inclined to cling to our tribal dodges. It's a very human thing to do, but as we try to shape the future, we think it's a bad idea.


36 comments:

  1. Lots of people agree with Republicans that Biden was so focussed on keeping unemployment low and inflation in check, that he was a bit lax on immigration.
    On the other hand, he did have a plan to reduce illegal immigration, which was shot down by the Republican Congress.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Give Mitch McConnell credit. It would have been political suicide for Republicans, if they allowed Biden and the Democrats to reduce illegal immigration.

      Delete
  2. So much for that "Special Relationship with jaggoff thrump:

    Early Tuesday morning, Trump assailed the United Kingdom for declining to help him launch strikes on Iran, writing, “You’ll have to start learning how to fight for yourself, the U.S.A. won’t be there to help you anymore, just like you weren’t there for us.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He Seth doing damage control. "Hegseth: "As far as NATO, that's a decision that will be left to the president, but a lot has been laid bare ... you don't have much of an alliance if you have countries that are not willing to stand with you when you need them." NOT!

      Delete
    2. Take a huge public shit on our closest ally. That’s known as “the art of the deal”! lol 😂

      Delete
    3. But the folks Trump repeatedly took a giant shit on for his buddy Putin are still there for us:

      The 🇺🇸US has lifted sanctions on three 🇷🇺Russian vessels

      According to a notice on the website of the US Department of the Treasury, the vessels in question are the container ships Fesco Moneron, Fesco Magadan, and the cargo ship Sv. Nikolay

      Hey Dickhead, the POS Trump keeps rewarding Putin for helping Iran kill our soldiers. When is your wake-up call?

      Delete
  3. I am not the only one who noticed that Iran's control of the Strait of Hormuz was essentially their willingness to use their military. Any other country willing to use their military there could equally well claim to control the Strait. Someone commented:
    But the deeper move is priming the the public (and world) with a new mental frame: the Strait of Hormuz is not Iranian sovereign territory anymore.

    It's available real estate. It's takeable. Anyone with courage can have it.

    That's a massive Overton Window shift delivered, in a tweet, as an insult to the UK.

    A year ago "America controls the Strait of Hormuz" sounded like some twisted fantasy. Today Trump is telling Britain to go grab it themselves like it's a parking spot.

    In a few weeks, Trump has normalized the concept of Western control over the Strait so thoroughly that full US seizure now looks like the modest option compared to what he's suggesting allies do on their own.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I can't copy the full statement that this comment responded to. It told European countries who need the oil to build up their courage and just take the Strait.

      Delete
    2. They are not so stupid as to get into a war with a country that was not threatening them, at the behest of a country that did not consult them about their war plans. Europe will carve out what they need with Iran, without potentially escalating this war that has not even been joined in by the Saudis and others who have been targeted by Iran. A moron would do that, potentially disrupting the region in such a manner that more uprooting of Middle Eastern natives and migration into Europe might occur if the war expanded.

      Delete
    3. @5;18 See In private, Gulf leaders push for Iran escalation
      Gulf leaders may be sending confused messages too: calling for de-escalation in public while reportedly urging the White House in private to keep hammering Iran. Officials from Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE have told their US counterparts they want the conflict to continue until Tehran changes its behaviour

      Delete
    4. Ah yes, all the leading democracies of the Arab world

      Delete
    5. Gulf leaders, no less! The ones who goaded the fucking idiot Trump into the war.

      Delete
    6. Hopefully Jared was able to score a couple of billion $$$ from his Arab friends, praise Your Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ Almighty, as your secretary of War says, may we rain fire and hell on the Persian infidels.

      Delete
    7. Europe wants to test run taking Texas, before they take the strait.

      Delete
    8. America First!
      After Russia, Israel, Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE.

      Delete
    9. Praise be to Your Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, David the lifetime supporter of Israel

      Delete
    10. "the Strait of Hormuz is not Iranian sovereign territory anymore."

      Gee, that lasted less than a month. Because no one would have thought to say the Strait of Hormuz was Iranian sovereign territory before the genius US attack happened.

      "It's available real estate. It's takeable."

      This commenter doesn't get it.

      It isn't that anyone who wants to can control the Strait, it's that the combination of the US attack and the Iranian response have shown how easy it is to disrupt the Strait, and how difficult it is to stop the disruption.

      Trump has let the genie out of the bottle. The Dow went up 2.5% today based on...the idea that if the US withdraws, Iran will re-open the Strait? Me no think so. Iran is going to want some compensation for being bombed to smithereens in an unprovoked sneak attack.

      And as for Coporal Bone Spurs' comments about having the courage to take the Strait, the reason the US isn't doing it is because it's too hard, which is why he's now talking about walking away from the mess he created.

      Delete
    11. Actually, Hector, there is a long history of disputes over the Strait of Hormuz. Here's one example
      The 2011–12 Strait of Hormuz dispute was a dispute between a coalition of countries and Iran. The dispute arose on 27 December 2011, when Iranian Vice President Mohammad-Reza Rahimi threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz.[3] In late April 2019, Iran warned that it would block maritime traffic through the strategic waterway if it were barred from using it, amid escalating U.S. sanctions.[4]

      Delete
  4. The world wouldn't have had to deal with this disaster, if Ivanka had just let her old man fuck her when she was twelve years old.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. To be fair, she did give him a few lap dances.

      Delete
    2. If I may, I’d like to note my disapproval of these two comments.

      Delete
    3. One reason Democrats remain significantly less popular than Donald Trump may be their superciliousness.

      Delete
  5. A federal judge in Washington on Tuesday issued a preliminary injunction blocking further construction of the White House ballroom.
    Judge Richard Leon wrote that President Donald Trump can't build the ballroom without authorization from Congress, and that "no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have." More: https://abc7ny.com/post/federal-judge-orders-halt-white-house-ballroom-construction/18817126/

    Unfortunately King Orange Chickenshit already picked out the gold drapes and Corinthian columns, because, fuck you, what are you going to do about it

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't forget that the White House isn't Trump's house; it's the people's house. As the owner of a teeny, teeny percentage, I am grateful that my house is getting an improvement at no cost to me.

      Delete
    2. Did Trump ask the people?

      Delete
    3. Good. Give us your address and we will be happy to arrange some modifications that we think are improvements. You do not speak for the American people.

      Delete
  6. Trump signs EO to restrict mail-in voting. Because fuck you, what are you going to do about it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "Members of the mob that stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 are suing the federal government for tens of millions of dollars in damages, claiming the “indiscriminate” use of force by police officers repelling the attack caused them physical and emotional injuries."

    Was going to make a comment about MAGA snowflakes but really, these guys see all the looting going on and figure they want in on the action. The Trump DOJ will be more than happy to oblige.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because fuck us, what are we going to do about it

      Delete
    2. IIRC some left wing rioter have successfully used this tactic.

      Delete
  8. I had thought that Trump would surely lose on the matter of birthright citizenship. I just read a lengthy analysis by a top lawyer arguing the other way. Trump Is Right on Birthright Citizenship
    The 14th Amendment’s authors would exclude illegal and visiting aliens from U.S. ‘jurisdiction.’

    https://archive.is/JxPh9
    I am afraid this thoughtful article may be behind a paywall. Anyhow, I am now less certain how this case will be decided.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Marco Rubio was born in Miami in 1971. His parents became citizens in 1975. Rubio is a beneficiary of birthright citizenship.

      Delete
    2. The legal argument I linked to would give citizenship to children of any permanent residents, not just citizens.

      Delete
    3. You mean, visitors to the us can’t be arrested and tried by us authorities?

      Delete
    4. I agree with you, @11:07. I would think visitors are under US jurisdiction while they're here, except diplomats ofr foreign soldiers, or certain Native Americans. That's why I expected Trump to lose the case.

      The article I cited argues based on past judicial decisions.

      Delete