Mamdani makes big move to ruin NYC and create bigger, better homelessness

New York City is about to earn a shiny new nickname: Tent City, Filth City, or maybe Lepto City, courtesy of that charming bacterial souvenir from homeless encampments.

New York's socialistically new mayor, Zohran Mamdani, has decided the NYPD should keep its hands off closing down these charming outdoor living rooms.

Ever since Mamdani teased this genius plan back in December, fresh encampments have been sprouting like weeds across neighborhoods. The fallout is a disaster for the folks actually living rough and for anyone trying to keep the city functional.

From Friday through Sunday night during that lovely bone-chilling winter storm, eight people turned up dead outdoors, likely homeless. Mamdani even admitted several were already known to the shelter system. Compassionate, right?

As these setups multiply, locals dial 311 in desperation, but the NYPD is now handcuffed. Even New York's Strongest, the sanitation crew, get orders to scoop up the trash and human waste but leave the mattresses, clothes, cardboard shanties, and all the rest exactly where they are. 

In other words, full maid service, zero actual cleanup of the hazardous junk pile.

City Councilwoman Joann Ariola watched this farce unfold along Jamaica Avenue, in Queens, and quipped, "What next, a city-funded turndown service?"

We should all be furious. Mamdani's serving up a twisted version of "compassion" for the homeless while flipping the bird to every resident and business owner stuck dealing with the fallout. These encampments drag in crime, garbage, and a general collapse of basic street decency.

They also invite lovely blasts from the past like leptospirosis, currently making the rounds in a Berkeley, California encampment. The bug hides in rat urine but spreads through tainted surfaces or puddles. The cold keeps it somewhat in check now, but come spring thaw, parents near these setups will be yelling at kids not to splash in puddles or paw random street junk.

Even fellow Democrats are losing it over Comrade Mamdani's refusal to act. Upper West Side Council Member Gale Brewer fumed, "You cannot have defecating, you cannot have food on the street, you cannot have all these boxes." 

But Mamdani's answer is apparently yes, you can.

His predecessor Eric Adams went hard the other way, clearing encampments and declaring, "We cannot tolerate these makeshift, unsafe houses on the side of highways, in trees, in front of schools, in parks. This is just not acceptable."

Mamdani's responded: "We are going to take an approach that understands its mission is connecting those New Yorkers to housing."

Sure, that's one job, Comrade Mayor. But you're also supposed to keep the rest of the city safe, livable, and appealing to the tourists and businesses that keep the lights on. This policy basically tells them all to pound sand.

No city should have to put up with sprawling encampments. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2024 that towns can clear them. Justice Neil Gorsuch nailed it: otherwise, "with encampments dotting neighborhood sidewalks, adults and children in these communities are sometimes forced to navigate around used needles, human waste, and other hazards to make their way to school, the grocery store, or work."

Sound familiar, New York?

Since that ruling, even Democratic heavyweights like failed California Gov. Gavin Newsom and various mayors out west have cracked down hard.

Mamdani is sprinting in reverse, dooming Gotham to more crime and disease outbreaks. Los Angeles Police data from 2018-2022 showed the homeless were 1 percent of the population but 11 to 15 percent of violent crime suspects.

Nationwide, 13 percent of those in encampments are registered sex offenders. In states like Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island, it's a jaw-dropping 50 percent or higher, per the Cicero Institute. Yeah, that's exactly who you want your kids dodging on the walk to school or after dark.

Mamdani claims he's doing the right thing for the homeless, keeping their plight front and center to force housing solutions while they now freeze in their tents and cardboard boxes.

If you enjoy  Brain Flushings and would like to subscribe or Buy Me a Coffee, and check out the sponsors on this page, I would appreciate it, as it supports my work and my coffee drinking habit. No pressure and subscribing is free.

In reality, he's turning them into political props and making their situation worse. Street life slashes life expectancy by about 27 years on average. Crime, disease, overdoses under cardboard or on piss-soaked mattresses; that's the compassion we're witnessing.

Adams put it perfectly, calling out the nonsense: "there is nothing compassionate or 'progressive' about leaving people to freeze in makeshift encampments. It ... dehumanizes the very people who need help."

But hey, virtue signaling over results, the classic move.

Tweet

Florida Hits Execution Milestone: 16th This Year for a Monster Who Raped and Drowned a 6-Year-Old in '79

I believe that if there's one thing that separates a functioning justice system from a revolving door for the worst of the worst, it's the willingness to follow through on a death sentence. Florida just did that Thursday night, putting Bryan Frederick Jennings, 66, to death by lethal injection for the 1979 abduction, rape, and drowning of little Rebecca Kunash, a six-year-old girl snatched right from her bedroom while her parents were in the next room. 

It's the 16th execution in the Sunshine State this year, shattering any previous record and sending a message: Justice delayed might be inevitable, but justice denied ain't gonna happen on Ron DeSantis's watch.

Jennings was pronounced dead at 6:20 p.m. ET at Florida State Prison near Starke, after a three-drug cocktail did its work. When the warden asked if he had any last words, the guy who spent over four decades gaming the system bellowed a single, defiant "No." No remorse, no plea for mercy, just "No." 

The victim's family kept their distance from the media scrum afterward, which is their prerogative after all these years. Florida Department of Corrections spokesman Jordan Kirkland confirmed it all went textbook smooth: "The execution took place without incident," he said. "There were no complications." In a world where everything seems to go sideways, at least this worked as advertised.

This makes 42 executions nationwide so far in 2025, per the Death Penalty Information Center, a nonprofit that's not exactly cheering from the rooftops for these executions, but facts are facts. That's the most since 2012, a sharp rebound from the dismal 11 in 2021, when the death penalty was basically on life support after peaking at 98 back in 1999. All 42 have come from 11 states, mostly in the South and Midwest where folks still believe in accountability. 

Up in the leftist-run north? Zilch. And while President Trump has vowed to crank up federal executions, none have happened yet this year.

Jennings' saga is a masterclass in how the appeals racket turns "swift justice" into a bad joke. Convicted and sentenced to death in 1980, that got tossed on appeal. Same story with his second trial. It wasn't until the third go-round in 1986 that the third death sentence stuck, along with life terms for kidnapping, sexual battery, and burglary. 

This baby-killer outlasted two of the prosecutors who nailed him, Rebecca's own dad, and four Florida governors since his first conviction. He even dodged a date with the needle in October 1989 when the state Supreme Court hit pause on four inmates the night before. Talk about nine lives.

The Death Penalty Information Center pegs the average death row stint at 20-24 years these days. Jennings' execution too forty-five. That's not justice; that's cruelty to victims' families. 

Gov. DeSantis, who's been on a tear with this, nailed it at a news conference on August 12, in Tampa: "Some of these crimes were committed in the '80s. Justice delayed is justice denied. I felt I owed it to [victims' families] to make sure this ran very smoothly. If I honestly thought someone was innocent, I would not pull the trigger." DeSantis gets it: The endless legal limbo isn't mercy; it's a middle finger to the Rebeccas of the world.

Back on May 11, 1979, Jennings, a 20-year-old Marine on leave, yanked the screen off a little girl's window, snatched her, raped her, beat her, and dumped her body in a canal where it turned up hours later. I hate the fact they called his military service into play. I'm a former Marine and this guy was a total disgrace to the uniform and the nation. 

[He will rot in hell.]

 Cops nabbed him that same day on a traffic infraction, and the evidence was a prosecutor's dream: He matched the neighbor's description, his shoe prints were at the scene, his fingerprints on the sill, his clothes and hair were soaked. Case closed, except for the four-decade sequel of appeals, including a fresh one claiming a right-to-counsel violation after his lawyer croaked in 2022.

Florida's racked up 122 executions since the Supreme Court greenlit capital punishment again in 1976, with over 250 souls still cooling their heels on death row. Before this year, the state maxed out at eight per calendar. DeSantis flipped the script because, as he sees it, enough is enough.

Two more executions are queued up: Richard Barry Randolph on Nov. 20, and Mark Allen Geralds on Dec. 9. If they go off without a hitch, Florida hits 18 for 2025. A veterans' group piped up this week begging for clemency for ex-military types on the row, fair point actually, only 12% of Florida's death row wore the uniform. But seven of the 18 executed or slated this year did serve, including Jennings. Doesn't change the math on monstrous crimes.

In the end, this isn't about vengeance; it's about closure. For Rebecca Kunash's family, it's 46 years late, but better than never. DeSantis is delivering what too many blue-state DAs won't: The scales balanced, one horror story at a time. If that's "extreme," sign me up.

If you like Brain Flushings and want to Buy Me a Coffee, I would appreciate it, as it supports my work. Obviously, there is no pressure but I certainly wouldn't stop you. 

Tweet

SCOTUS grants Trump request to lift stay halting Venezuelan deportations

Well look who just notched a huge win in the Supreme Court sandbox. On Monday, the justices—by a razor-thin 5-4 margin—gave President Donald Trump the green light to dust off a 1798 wartime immigration law and start deporting Venezuelan nationals, including some alleged Tren de Aragua gangbangers, faster than you can say "muffins de escoria."

The high court granted President Trump’s request to vacate a lower court’s ruling that had tied the administration’s hands, handing a temporary victory to the MAGA faithful and their border-hawk agenda. 

Cue the liberal tears.

At the heart of this legal cage match? The Alien Enemies Act—yes, a law so old it predates indoor plumbing and Nancy Pelosi's parents. 

Passed by Congress in 1789, it’s been dusted off just three times before Trump decided it was his new favorite toy: the War of 1812, World War I, and World War II. Apparently, the fourth time’s the charm when you’re trying to remove certain migrants out of the country at warp speed.

Trump’s legal eagles swooped into the Supreme Court, arguing that the lower court’s meddling “rebuffed” their immigration playbook—specifically, their sacred duty “to protect the Nation against foreign terrorist organizations and risk debilitating effects for delicate foreign negotiations.” [Translation: “Let us do our job, you robe-wearing buzzkills.”] The justices, or at least five of them, nodded in agreement and lifted the stay. Score one for Team Trump.

This whole clusterfrack kicked off when U.S. District Judge James Boasberg—a guy who clearly didn’t get the memo about Trump’s second term—slapped a 14-day timeout on the administration’s use of the 1798 law last month. A federal appeals court backed him up in a 2-1 call, because of course they did. During that appellate circus, Obama appointee Judge Patricia Millett sniffed, “Nazis got better treatment” than some of these deportees. 

Oh, please, spare us the melodrama, Your Honor. 

Boasberg and the appeals crew grilled the administration over Trump’s proclamation invoking the Alien Enemies Act to ship out Venezuelans—and over the three planes that hauled hundreds of migrants to El Salvador the very next day like it was a FedEx overnight delivery. At least 261 people got the boot, including over 100 Venezuelans kicked out “solely on the basis” of this ancient statute. 

The flights touched down right around the time Boasberg dropped his temporary halt, which raises a fun little question: Did Team Trump just thumb their noses at the judge? Boasberg sure thinks so—he’d ordered any planes already in the air to turn around “immediately.” Spoiler: They didn’t.

Fast forward to April 3, and Boasberg’s still having a hissy-fit. He’s considering contempt charges against Trump officials for playing hide-the-ball with info about those flights, even after he asked nicely—multiple times. 

The government’s excuse? “National security concerns.” Yeah, right. 

But then Deputy Assistant AG Drew Ensign let slip in court that the flight details probably aren’t even classified. Boasberg’s response? “Pretty sketchy,” he mused, likely while side-eyeing the feds like a disappointed dad. He’s also demanding names, locations, and interoffice gossip about who was calling the shots—and whether they were watching his rulings go down while sipping coffee and ignoring him.

This Supreme Court smackdown might’ve cleared the runway for Trump’s deportation push, but don’t pop the champagne just yet. Boasberg’s still got contempt on the table, and as of today—April 7, 2025—a preliminary injunction hearing’s looming tomorrow. Buckle up, folks; this legal rollercoaster’s got more twists than a pretzel factory.

"I pour my heart into these posts, and if they’ve sparked something for you, I’d be thrilled if you’d treat me to a coffee over at Buy Me a Coffee – totally optional, of course!"

Tweet

Alexandria Obviously-Comatose wants Chuck Schumer to have Senate declare Gorsuch & Kavanaugh Liars

Got her nails done to save America

Congresscommie Alexandria Obviously-Comatose (Dumb-NY) and Rep. Ted Lieu (Dumber-CA) have joined forces to issue a letter calling on Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (Douche-NY) to say that SCOTUS Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh are liars and while doing so, he should wag his finger at them. 

Obviously-Comatose, you may recall, had barely escaped the insurrection on Capitol Hill on January 6th when a man in horns, and others went into the Capitol and walked around. AOC was merely four blocks away and felt her life was in danger for some reason, and she is not a liar when she said that she almost died on that hill.

Anyway, the letter which was addressed to Schumer claimed that Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, [both who were threatened with retaliation by Schumer] had lied to the Senate when they said during their respective confirmation hearings that Roe v. Wade was settled precedent.

“Our Constitutional Republic cannot tolerate Supreme Court Justices who lied in order to get confirmed. The legitimacy of the Court is at stake,” Lieu tweeted, sharing a screenshot of the letter. “Letter from @AOC and me requesting the Senate to make a finding on whether Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch lied to the American people.”

AOC shared Lieu’s lie and added her own, saying, “We cannot allow Supreme Court nominees lying and/or misleading the Senate under oath to go unanswered. Both GOP & Dem Senators stated SCOTUS justices misled them. This cannot be accepted as precedent. Doing so erodes rule of law, delegitimizes the court, and imperils democracy.”

“We request that the Senate make its position clear on whether Justices Kavanaugh and Gorsuch lied under oath during their confirmation hearings,” Obviously-Comatose and Lieu wrote in the letter, adding, “We must call out their actions for what they were before the moment passes so that we can prevent such a mendacious denigration of our fundamental rights and the rule of law from ever happening again.”

But neither Justice lied in their confirmation hearings. Here is Kavanaugh's response regarding the standing of both Roe and Casey. Nowhere did he mention of the decisions being irreversible:

Roe v. Wade “is important precedent of the Supreme Court that has been reaffirmed many times. But then Planned — and this is the point that I want to make that I think is important. Planned Parenthood v. Casey reaffirmed Roe and did so by considering the stare decisis factors,” he said in 2018. “So Casey now becomes a precedent on precedent. It is not as if it is just a run-of-the-mill case that was decided and never been reconsidered, but Casey specifically reconsidered it, applied the stare decisis factors, and decided to reaffirm it. That makes Casey a precedent on precedent.”

And here is what Gorsuch said when recognizing the precedent of Roe and the role Casey played in reaffirming the earlier opinion:

“Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, is a precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court. It has been reaffirmed. The reliance interest considerations are important there, and all of the other factors that go into analyzing precedent have to be considered,” he told senators in March 2017. “It is a precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court. It was reaffirmed in Casey in 1992 and in several other cases. So a good judge will consider it as precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court worthy as treatment of precedent like any other.”

Gorsuch added, “For a judge to start tipping his or her hand about whether they like or dislike this or that precedent would send the wrong signal. It would send the signal to the American people that the judge’s personal views have something to do with the judge’s job.”

* * *

 Consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and please check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, you help in the fight against Communism, ignorance, The New York Times, and the heebie-jeebies.

* * *

So it's clear that the liars are AOC and Lieu because neither Kavanaugh or Gorsuch lied and didn't even mislead. They simply followed the precedent set by Ruth Bader Ginsburg and then followed the law and the SCOTUS's larger precedent for righting wrongly-decided cases once they were confirmed.

Thank you, President Trump.

Tweet

We're going to go nuclear this week: thanks Harry

President Trump will be making the announcement Tuesday as to who he will nominate for the vacant seat on the US Supreme Court. 

There will be a battle and Chuck Schumer's nostrils will flare, pulling out all of the oxygen in the room, even though the Senate Minority Leader from New York  says it's just business, nothing personal, and certainly not revenge. But you know he will be fighting the appointment every step of the way as Republicans move to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

But thanks to Hairy Weed Harry Reid, there is the nuclear option whereby the nuclear option is now available to the Republicans as it was to the Democrats.

The nuclear option will happen if the GOP quashes the filibuster, a process the Democrats kept scratching at in 2013 when they nuked the filibuster for most judicial and executive-branch nominees.

The party of the KKK had the majority back then and never thought they would lose it, as former Senate leader Reid decided to keep the minority Republicans from keeping the country from bowing to the will of Obama. Instead of the 60 votes normally needed to nominate appointees, all the Democrats needed was 51 votes. 

This is how the party of Bull Connor and Robert Byrd was able to pack the lower courts with Obama liberals.

Even Schumer admits that Republicans have an edge since they control the Congress and the White House. He knows that no matter how many tears he sheds, all of Trump's cabinet choices are likely to be confirmed--and his choices appear to be even more conservative than were Ronald Reagan's.

The only exception Reid left when he changed the rules, was with the Supreme Court. So to get things done, Mitch McConnell might have no alternative but to use his power as House Majority Leader, to squash the filibuster altogether.

If McConnell cannot persuade eight Democrats to go along with Trump's SCOTUS nominee while ensuring all 52 Republicans vote for Trump's pick, then he will have to go nuclear.

McConnell's decision to hold off Obama's choice of Judge Merrick Garland after Justice Scalia died last February was a gamble that paid off, big league.

Thank you Harry.


Tweet

Bill de Blasio: fascist, socialist, man about town

You may not like Donald Trump, perhaps you do, but in any case, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio is using his power as mayor to go after him by "reviewing" his city contracts in light of what he said about Mexican immigrants. 

This is what fascists do when they don't like what you say.

De Blasio, a socialist and an Al Sharpton fan club president, doesn't care if what he is doing goes against the First Amendment--it's just a piece of paper, as far as he's concerned and in spite of Trump's inarticulate words, he has every right to say what he did, and the mayor has no right to abuse his office by going after his businesses.

Even Alan Dershowitz, a liberal attorney and Harvard's most distinguished civil liberties law professor, is against de Blasio on this and said, "This is not the American Way. De Blasio seems to put himself directly, squarely in conflict with the First Amendment," he told the Daily Caller, in an interview. He called de Blasio's actions "plainly unconstitutional," and said that "He would have a fairly open and shut case if they deprived him of any contract."

Trump said of Mexican immigrants that they are "bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists, and some, I assume, are good people."

De Blasio fired back: "Donald Trump's remarks were disgusting and offensive, and this hateful language has no place in our city." His press secretary then said that the city was reviewing all of Trump's contracts.

De Blasio's words almost echo Obama's statement that "The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam."

In a 1996 Supreme Court ruling, they ruled overwhelmingly that it was unconstitutional to tie government contracts to a person's beliefs. This is exactly what de Blasio is doing, and not that different from what the IRS has done with conservatives.

UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh also told DCNF that "The statement by the Mayor is a real danger to public debate," saying that it would set dubious precedent for all future city contracts.

I hope Trump sees fit to fight de Blasio and go after him personally. Besides the fact that he is in violation of Trump's civil rights, the Mayor is the embodiment of all that is wrong with the left.

In fact, de Blasio is handling the City of New York in much the same way that Obama is handling ISIS: with great bluster and total impotence.




Tweet