Protests against President Trump's anti-immigration orders erupt at airports after our government detains legal U.S. residents holding green cards at several of these airports. NPR's report counts about a dozen protests nationwide, including eight at big-city airports, and counts protestor numbers in the "thousands," meaning, presumably, less than 20,000 (or they'd have said "tens of thousands"), but that's quite impressive for short notice, and the protests appear to have continued after the NPR report went up. And later, two federal judges struck down parts of the Trump orders, freeing some (but not all) of the detainees. Just remember that failure in this matter may be what Mr. Trump wants, so that if terrorists inflict a massive attack, he can institute far more draconian Orders later on. Still, speaking out is always the best course, so if you're looking for an airport protest near you, this page can help you find one.
Scott Shane at the New York Times finds no shortage of researchers who can tell you exactly why Mr. Trump's Executive Orders won't reduce terrorism. Key finding: very, very few folks who've perpetrated terrorist attacks against America came from the seven countries on Mr. Trump's little Enemies List -- but more have come from four countries that he left off. I'm not sure we should have had to wait until paragraph 6 to learn that Mr. Trump has business interests in all four of these countries. It wouldn't be too much to ask, would it, that the next four years make good Americans profoundly tired of the corruption that has enabled Donald Trump's ascension?
It gets better: American border agents are apparently trying to figure out folks' political views via their Facebook pages before allowing them into the country. This may not be the first time our border agents have done this, but how on Earth would that fact make what they're doing now right? I thought we Americans had faith in our form of government, and in our ability to assimilate anyone, from anywhere on Earth. From this we must conclude that the loudest opponents of immigration must also have the least faith in our country, though (like many truths) Our Glorious Elites tell us the opposite.
Ho hum, Factcheck analyzes Donald Trump's claim that we could have stopped ISIS if we'd just taken all of Iraq's oil, and finds it wanting. Of course we should point out that ISIS has been depending on Syria's oil far more than on Iraq's (less than 40% of its revenue came from Iraqi oil, for a period of perhaps six months in late 2008 and early 2009), and we should also point out that ISIS grew out of Tha Bush Mobb's little adventure in Iraq, but seriously, how is it just OK to take some other country's natural resource? How is it just another policy option? And how is it that so few members of our "liberal" media will even raise the quite reasonable objection that stealing another country's resources just sets you up for further trouble down the road?
Finally, Sheila Bapat at TruthOut sounds a hopeful note in the fight for better pay and working conditions for domestic workers. President Trump no doubt stands at the ready to smack down the Obama Administration's attempts to make life better for these folks -- which included getting overtime protections for domestic workers for the first time -- but Ms. Bapat reminds us that "(d)omestic worker activists have demonstrated their power in local and state-level coalition building," and "their core work lies in fostering values and building dialogue that often transcends party lines." Imagine that -- actual bipartisanship, organized around actual folks' needs, and not Our Glorious Elites' lies about both sides happening to want what Our Glorious Elites want.