Losing in Court Isn’t Enough: DOJ Must Be Sanctioned

In the run-up to the midterms, district and circuit federal court judges have done an admirable job in beating back absurd, abusive Trump regime legal maneuvers that are utterly lacking in merit. Moreover, they are apparently designed to either disrupt the midterms or assure the unraveling autocrat in the Oval Office that his dutiful lackeys at the Justice Department are doing everything possible to try to do just that. Alternatively, the flurry of vindictive actions against long-held presidential enemies — such as Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and former FBI director James Comey — is simply meant to distract the addled president; catnip for a demented feline, if you will.

The range of abusive, nonsensical actions is breathtaking:

-Sending an unverified list of semi-suspected noncitizen voters to have their ballots set aside;

-Rushing to the 9^th Circuit prematurely for relief;

-Challenging the results of a not-yet-transpired Alaska Senate race;

-Pounding on doors to interrogate suspected noncitizen voters;

-Defying a district court in racing to destroy hundreds of trees at the East Potomac Golf Course (and then coming up with a cock and bull story that contradicts Trump’s own social media post that this is not part of a “final plan”);

-Filing an “information” (not seeking or failing and not obtaining) indictment to try to fudge the statute of limitations in a third vindictive effort to prosecute James Comey;

-Rummaging through decades-old immigration paperwork to try to strip Rep. Omar of citizenship.

While it remains a mystery how any federal court official issued a search warrant for Omar’s home, overall the courts — to their credit — have rebuffed DOJ’s legal gamesmanship, often in exceptionally harsh language.

From the 9^th Circuit’s snub of the non-emergency, “emergency” appeal in California:

The United States’s claimed emergency, at least in part, is a self-constructed one. At least part of the delay here is attributable to the United States’s own delay in filing suit, in realizing that existing California state law governs the issuance and processing of ballots, in recognizing that California has millions of registered voters and processes ballots on a schedule aligned with that scale, and in communicating to the court its desired relief.

The concurrence from Trump-appointed Judge Bennett was even more dismissive (and on the merits, to boot):

Despite these various mechanisms to challenge the eligibility of a voter, Plaintiff prefers that this court require a different procedure to effectuate a challenge to over 20,000 voters solely because, in a different context, the California Legislature permits the segregation of ballots. See Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2, § 20363 (providing for the segregation of ballots in a recount). But Plaintiff’s preference does not carry with it the force of law. . . .

Beyond the infeasibility of and risks associated with segregating tens of thousands of ballots, Defendants also lack the ability to verify voters’ citizenship status before December 4, 2026—the deadline for counties to certify their election results to the Secretary of State. . . . Plaintiff seeks equitable relief, asking us to order Defendants to set aside vote-by-mail ballots from over 20,000 individuals whom Plaintiff believes are likely noncitizens. 

But Plaintiff offers no workable plan as to how this could be accomplished, let alone how it could be accomplished without burdening Defendants more than necessary. Instead, Plaintiff simply claims that California has an existing regulation, Cal. Code Regs. tit. 2, § 20363, which provides for ballot segregation. But as discussed, that regulation is inapplicable.

From the golf course case, Judge Ana Reyes all but called the government lawyers a pack of liars (multiple times):

The Government felled hundreds of trees from East Potomac Golf Course without real notice even though it knew of the scheduled removal at least a week prior. And even though the Court literally warned against bulldozers bulldozing on no real notice. … And even though the Court was equally clear that it did not want an act-first ask-forgiveness-later situation. … All this is concerning. 

The Government appears to have set the timing of the tree removal and late notice to impede Plaintiffs’ ability to seek Court intervention. And its recent actions call into question other representations it has made to the Court over these many months. …

Government counsel argues that President Trump, who discussed the Plan to redesign the Course no fewer than five times, has “at most . . . has given preliminary thought to” the Washington National Plan. That claim does not square with the record. The Court cannot disbelieve the President’s clear, repeated statements of fact when those statements find support in the record and the Government has presented no credible evidence to contradict him.

And yet, even defeats for the government’s patently frivolous actions and refreshing rebukes from courts leave us unmoved. The government, particularly Attorney General Todd Blanche and his flunkies, suffer no adverse consequences from trying every trick in the book — no matter how frivolous, no matter how legally unsound and constitutionally abusive. Indeed, they may well get ‘atta boys for having angered federal court judges.

Donald Trump gives US Attorney General Todd Blanche a pat on the back after a roundtable in the East Room of the White House on October 21, 2026. (Photo by SAUL LOEB / AFP via Getty Images)

Unless and until DOJ lawyers themselves face sanctions pursuant to Rule 11 and referral to state bar associations for misconduct, the incentive to keep abusing the federal court system will remain. Frankly, handing out more-than-justified sanctions would stiffen the spines of DOJ attorneys, encouraging them to push back against their political bosses. 

Ultimately, contempt citations (of the sort now the subject of heated litigation in the D.C. Circuit, concerning the Trump regime’s defiance of Judge James Boasberg’s directive to turn around planes filled with deportees headed to CECOT) may be required to halt this relentless assault on the rule of law.

Aside from a new president, the most effective and entirely justified remedy for such widespread, shameless abuse of the justice system is impeachment of Attorney General Todd Blanche. Even before the current spate of lawless, partisan actions, Blanche’s record (e.g., ongoing defiance of the Epstein Files Transparency Act, refusal to investigate publicly disclosed instances of graft involving the president’s inner circle) and his repeated appearances in partisan campaign settings violate his oath of office and make a mockery of his department’s title (“Justice” Department).

In sum, courts deserve kudos for holding the line against Trump autocratic abuses. But extraordinary times and unprecedented abuse require that they do more. Sanctions and contempt citations must be meted out when appropriate. The new Congress will have an obligation to act as well, starting with the impeachment of an unfit partisan hack occupying the august role of attorney general.

-Jennifer Rubin, The Contrarian is community-supported. Help fund bold journalism and critical lawsuits to stop Trump’s corruption by becoming a paid subscriber. Join the fight now.

 

Yes, we are insignificant!

 

-NASA

As for the Orange Monkey

 

As for the Orange Monkey (a slur on monkeys), we now know openly and easily de facto just what a Russian kompromat he was and has always been. Impeached but not found guilty by the weak and frightened Republicans, Schiff warned that without penalty he will stage a revolt again. 

He was right, just as they all were in the DOJ in finding him closely connected to Russian influence.  We are stuck with a traitor who gives aid and comfort to the enemy in front of us all. He is exactly what we all supposed and feared from the day they came down the escalator to announce his hatred for non-whites and desire to be the only one to make us great again. 

A suspected pedophile, hated by his mother, unable to manage an honest business, abhorred by real businessmen in New York, without any love or even consideration for people, teaching his twisted children to be disgusting grifters like himself, so stupidly tricked into a war that has undermined our current economy, and ruined the reputation of a country honored and valued for its rule of law and largesse. He’s truly a waste of flesh. 

-John Dillon

 

Why are we still trapping and killing wolves and coyotes during the sixth mass extinction crisis?

 

A wolf leaves Yellowstone National Park. It follows the scent of elk, crosses an invisible boundary and enters Montana. Nothing in the landscape tells it that the rules have changed. Yet an animal protected and studied inside the park can now legally be shot or trapped. We call Yellowstone’s wolf restoration a conservation triumph. Why, then, do we permit the killing of the very animals we worked so hard to bring back?

Murdering wolves is the antithesis to conservation.

In 1995, gray wolves returned to Yellowstone after decades of absence following their extermination from the region. Their restoration became one of America’s most celebrated conservation achievements. But the protections surrounding these animals remain fragmented. Yellowstone’s wolves regularly move beyond park boundaries, particularly when following migrating elk. They cannot distinguish a protected landscape from a hunting district. We have created an unfair playing field, and then we congratulate ourselves when the wolf loses.

In February 2021, Montana Governor Greg Gianforte trapped and shot a radio-collared wolf known as 1155M, approximately 10 miles north of Yellowstone. The wolf had been born inside the park and collared by wildlife biologists. Gianforte had a valid wolf license but had not completed the required wolf-trapping certification course. State wildlife officials issued him a written warning. The governor subsequently completed the course. His actions were widely reported, but the larger question extends beyond one public official: What does it say about our conservation priorities when animals tracked for scientific research can be legally killed just outside the landscapes established to protect them?

The consequences are measurable. According to Yellowstone’s 2022 Wolf Project report, approximately 19 percent of wolves primarily using the park were killed during the 2021–22 hunting season. Researchers also documented changes in pack structure, including the dissolution of two packs. Although Yellowstone’s year-end wolf population increased, a population count alone cannot capture the disruption of family groups, the loss of breeding animals or the consequences for long-term research.

Why are we still trapping and killing wolves and coyotes during the sixth mass extinction crisis? At a time when humanity should be repairing the ecosystems it has fragmented, we continue to target native predators for fulfilling their ecological roles. An international scientific assessment estimates that approximately one million animal and plant species face extinction threats. Habitat destruction, exploitation, climate change and pollution are unraveling ecological relationships around the world. Yet our approach to predators too often reflects an older belief that nature must be controlled rather than understood.

Wolves are keystone predators. They are the gatekeepers of biodiversity, helping maintain the intricate relationships among wildlife species, ecosystems and habitats. Their presence influences prey populations, supports scavengers and can contribute to vegetation recovery and the restoration of wildlife habitats. Coyotes also perform important ecological functions, including regulating smaller mammals and sustaining food webs. These native predators are not obstacles to conservation. They are integral to the ecological systems we claim to protect.

The documentary How Wolves Change Rivers brought the concept of trophic cascades to a broad audience, showing how predators can influence entire ecological communities. Some of its claims, particularly those involving river channels, remain scientifically debated. Yellowstone’s recovery is shaped by many factors, including climate, vegetation, water and other wildlife. But that complexity strengthens the case for humility. We still have much to learn about the consequences of removing predators from functioning ecosystems.

Ranchers can suffer real financial losses when wolves or coyotes kill livestock. Wildlife managers must also consider public safety and local ecological conditions. But acknowledging these concerns does not require accepting recreational predator killing as a conservation necessity. Nonlethal approaches, including range riders, livestock guardian animals and improved fencing, can reduce some conflicts. Their effectiveness varies, and they require sustained investment. That is a challenge worth meeting.

We should also distinguish the temporary capture of wildlife for scientific monitoring from lethal trapping. Research collars help scientists understand migration, survival and family structure. Killing an animal for recreation serves a fundamentally different purpose.

We have converted vast landscapes into agricultural operations, highways and housing developments, then blamed wildlife for attempting to survive in the remaining fragments of its ancestral habitat. Rather than continually demanding that predators surrender their lives to accommodate human expansion, shouldn’t we be asking how human activities can change to accommodate the natural world?

The issue is not whether every wolf or coyote population is endangered. Coyotes remain widespread, and wolf populations differ substantially across regions. The question is whether wildlife policy adequately values predators’ ecological functions, social relationships and contributions to healthy habitats. Abundance alone does not make an animal disposable.

State wildlife agencies should strengthen protections for wolves that routinely cross Yellowstone’s boundaries, evaluate the ecological effects of lethal trapping and expand funding for coexistence programs. They should also make the scientific basis for predator-killing policies transparent to the public. Conservation should be judged not merely by how many animals remain alive, but by whether their populations can fulfill their ecological roles.

What are we teaching younger generations when killing a wolf becomes an occasion for applause? A rifle does not make a human ecologically superior to a predator. Neither does a photograph of its lifeless body. Wolves hunt to survive and feed their young. They communicate, cooperate and maintain intricate family relationships. Their value exists independently of our approval.

We cannot proclaim our love for wilderness while treating its inhabitants as disposable trophies. We cannot claim to be guardians of biodiversity while dismantling the relationships that sustain it. We have made the rules, drawn the boundaries and equipped ourselves with the weapons. The wolf has only its instincts, its family and its will to live.

If we are responsible for creating the conditions that endanger wolves, shouldn’t we also be responsible for protecting their right to exist?

Sources and References

1. National Park Service: Yellowstone Wolf Management

https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/management/wolf.htm

2. National Park Service: 2022 Yellowstone Wolf Project Annual Report

https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/upload/2022-Web-Wolf-Report.pdf

3. Mountain West News Bureau, March 23, 2021: Montana Governor Given Written Warning After Trapping, Killing of Yellowstone Wolf

https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/natural-resources-energy/2021-03-23/montana-governor-given-written-warning-after-trapping-killing-of-yellowstone-wolf

4. Montana Public Radio, March 24, 2021: Gianforte Takes Wolf Trapping Course Following Warning

https://www.mtpr.org/montana-news/2021-03-24/gianforte-takes-wolf-trapping-course-following-warning

5. IPBES: 2019 Global Biodiversity Assessment

https://www.ipbes.net/global-assessment

6. National Park Service: Yellowstone Wolf Ecology

https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/wolf.htm

7. USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service: Wildlife Services

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife-services

Christine Villabona-Kuntz is the founder of Pure Trixie Productions, an independent conservation media initiative focused on biodiversity, wildlife protection and ecological restoration.

 

“I felt love, concern and care from the whale”

 

Eight years into studying whales, Nan Hauser believed she understood their size and strength. Then one afternoon off Rarotonga she felt a pressure she had never felt before — a 40‑ton humpback whale pressing its head against her body and lifting her toward the surface.

At first, she thought the animal was playing too roughly. She tried to push away, but the whale kept tucking her under its pectoral fin. For seven and a half minutes the great creature nudged and nudged, even raising her clear of the water on its flipper.

Only when she glimpsed a second silhouette did she understand. The “whale” moving side to side was actually an 18‑foot tiger shark, arched in attack posture. In that instant the humpback positioned her on its head and raced toward her boat, shielding her with its massive body. Within ten minutes she was safely back on deck, shaking with shock and gratitude.

Hauser, a lifelong marine biologist, had never experienced anything like it. “I felt love, concern and care from the whale,” she told The Guardian. She had spent her career filming these animals quietly, believing the best way to understand them was to let them be. Now one seemed to understand her vulnerability and acted.

Scientists note that humpbacks have been documented interfering when predators attack other species, behaviour some call “mobbing”. Whether the whale’s act was true altruism or an instinct honed by eons of kin‑selected behaviour, Hauser felt the encounter as a deliberate choice.

The story didn’t end there. A year later Hauser was back in the Cook Islands when a familiar tail surfaced. She recognised the whale by the notches on its fluke and the scar on its head. As she slid into the water the whale approached, looked her in the eye and extended its giant fin. She rubbed its face and began to cry. The whale lingered near her boat for twenty minutes before swimming away.

There is no moral to pin on a whale’s fin, no proof that a giant mammal meant to save a human. There is only a moment when a life hung between a predator and a protector and something ancient stirred.

Perhaps this is what happens when we spend enough time listening rather than dominating: another being may recognise us as kin. In a world where we often assume only humans are capable of compassion, a humpback whale carrying a scientist to safety suggests the ocean itself may be watching over us.

#WhaleGuardian #HumpbackRescue #MarineLife #InterspeciesAltruism #OceanConnection #WildCompassion #ProtectiveWhale #NatureStories #HumanAnimalBond #LoveAndRespect

 

A Tiger with Empathy

 

The incident occurred during an early morning routine. Julian, a veteran caretaker at the animal refuge, was patrolling the perimeter track next to the tiger habitat when he abruptly lost consciousness and collapsed close to the perimeter wire.

He remained motionless on the ground. Khan, a tiger Julian had raised by hand since early cubhood, was lounging nearby when Julian collapsed. Within moments, the big cat hurried to the steel mesh, pressing his heavy frame against the enclosure structure. Then the animal displayed behavior staff had never witnessed previously. He extended one enormous paw through an opening in the bars toward Julian, softly brushing his shoulder and arm repeatedly, unwilling to pull it back.

A coworker noticed the commotion from a distance and rushed over, fearing an attack. However, Khan showed no signs of aggression. Instead, the tiger fixed his gaze on the security camera above the enclosure, emitting deep, urgent chuffing noises, the same vocalizations tigers rely on to communicate with one another.

Colleagues noted the animal was actively sounding an alarm for assistance. When medical responders reached the scene moments later, Khan remained stationed at the barrier. He observed silently as they treated Julian, finally stepping away only after the caretaker was placed onto a stretcher.

Physicians later verified that Julian experienced a sudden blood pressure drop brought on by dehydration, a medical event that might have gone undetected much longer without someone close by.
Julian returned to work two weeks afterward. His first stop wasn't his office. He wanted to thank Khan.

-FB

Coach Ben Johnson asked Cairo Santos If He Wanted the Opportunity: "Think about how powerful that is."

With about eight minutes left, Cairo Santos lined up for a 53-yard field goal that would have given the Bears a two-score lead. He missed. The ball hit the upright, announcers couldn’t stop saying “doink” and the Patriots had life.

Fast forward a few minutes. The Bears have another chance to put the game away, but now the kick would be from 58 yards. Five yards farther than the one Santos had just missed. Longer than any field goal he’d made in his 13-year NFL career.

Coach Ben Johnson initially called for a punt. Then he asked if Santos wanted the opportunity. Santos didn’t hesitate. “I want it.” Johnson trusted him. His teammates trusted him. And more importantly, Santos trusted himself. He stepped up and drilled a 58-yard field goal right down the middle. Career long. I woke up thinking how awesome that moment really was. Some pretty powerful lessons in those few minutes. First, confidence isn’t believing you’ll never fail. It’s believing in your ability to respond when you do.

Second, one mistake doesn’t erase years of preparation. Santos didn’t suddenly become a better kicker in those few minutes. He was the same guy who had just missed. The difference was that he refused to let his last attempt define his next one.

And finally, there’s a leadership lesson here that I love. Johnson could have played it safe. He could have let the previous miss influence his decision. Instead, he listened to his player and trusted him with an even bigger opportunity.

Think about how powerful that is. Having someone believe in you at a moment when it would be easy to question yourself. Whether you’re coaching athletes, leading employees, raising kids, or just trying to navigate life, people are going to miss sometimes. So are you.

The question is whether we create environments where mistakes become something to learn from or something to fear. And when your next opportunity comes, will you be willing to take it? Don’t let your last miss convince you that you’re incapable of making the next one. Sometimes the biggest moment of your career comes just minutes after one you’d rather forget.

Bear Down.

Justin M Boyd