Or in the words of Ronaldus Maximus, "There you go again."

Taking up the mantle last week was Rep. Shri Thanedar (D-MI). Mr. Thanedar is outraged and he's had it, saying on X, “I’ve seen enough, Donald Trump is not abiding by a lawful Supreme Court ruling. As a member of Congress, I fully support impeaching him. NOW.” 

I've seen enough. Donald Trump is not abiding by a lawful Supreme Court ruling. As a member of Congress, I fully support impeaching him. NOW.

— Shri Thanedar (@ShriThanedar) April 16, 2025

You go, guy. Although Rep. Al Green (D-TX) and his cane spittled his way out of congressional chambers with the help of the Sergeant-at-Arms, he threatened to begin impeachment proceedings over the president's dastardly deeds (hat tips to Dr. Doom, The Green Goblin, and Lex Luthor). I don't think anybody ever bothered to take much note, as Al Green is not a serious representative. However, now that the progressives think they have a fishhook bigger than the other two they impeached Trump with, I bet they really get behind this one. And this one, of course, is the current immigration matter(s) that may keep CNN on the ventilator for a few more months. (Let's face it, the progressive media really, really needs Donald Trump. Their clapping seals must have daily doses of hand-tossed perch lest they starve.)

Anyway, it isn't vexing or inconsistent or disconnecting that prompts the disgust. It's the absurdity. These guys are too dumb to be anywhere near the levers of power. 

When you rest your argument on something that contradicts your argument in the first place, why do it at all? Why? I think the probable reason is for attention. Look at Jasmine Crockett (D-TX). Her antics are either a cry for help or she's just a robot. I haven't decided which yet, but either way, neither speaks well for her. Shri? He's brand new. Maybe he wants to make his bones, too. Or he could be just an absurd person who pops off saying absurd things. Don't know. But what I do know is that he's bucking to get control of a kamikaze destined to go down in flames like the other two before. And I think by now, even the normal Democratic voters (the ones who haven't ripened into full-blown progs yet) are probably thinking, "This is stupid. Move on." If they don't, they should. So here's my breakdown.

Joe Biden defied the US Supreme Court on the legality of student loan absolution. They gave him one big reason why he was not authorized to do that, and he turned around and defied SCOTUS forty-eight billion times. And nobody did one thing about it. The Fourth Estate didn't do anything, congressional Republicans didn't do anything, our "patriotic" bureaucrats who processed the paperwork didn't do anything, and neither did the DOJ nor the federal court system. Now I am not surprised at any of these do-nothings, but at least with the Republicans, I thought I had a reasonable expectation that they actually would. For this, shame on them all. Even Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA), whom I love dearly. Now this....this vexes me. He might have commented on it or not...and I'm not even going to bother looking that up because even if he did gripe, nothing changed because of it. Someone on the Hill should have — although at least some Republican state attorneys general returned to court to challenge it. 

Now Thanedar is saying that Trump needs to be impeached because he allegedly defied (I say this because things are still going through challenges, appeals, etc.) a ruling from SCOTUS. But he did not call for the impeachment of Biden, who actually did defy a ruling from SCOTUS. So unless the Democrats find some way of warping the standards and the intent of the law the way they did with Joe Biden's garage full of classified documents (and let's face it, they probably will because they already have) then they are stuck explaining to the American people how Biden got to skate and Trump does not. And I realize that the progs don't have any legal or ethical consistency, but a lot of voters still do. 

RELATED: Breaking: Supreme Court Issues Stay of District Court Order re: Return of Salvadoran National 

Watch: Censured Al Green Promises Anti-Trump Crowd He Will File Articles of Impeachment Against Trump

So I make the following argument: If impeachment proceedings begin, then in Trump's defense, he says he's just following precedent. Maybe not in the legal sense of the word, but at least following previous practices of a US chief executive. Biden defied SCOTUS, Congress didn't do anything, courts didn't do much of anything, DOJ didn't do anything.....therefore it was apparently an action de facto benign. Since that appears to be the case, the Trump defense ought to be that what he's doing in this immigration case is benign as well. He must tie his case to Biden's because whatever they decide to do to Trump for it, they must either retroactively indict (publicly denounce, blame, or call out) Biden for the same thing or let Trump off the hook as they let Biden off the hook. Average voters can see this. Anybody can see this. Progressives will try to nuance it with great difficulty, but I think it will carry with the base and especially the independents. 

And if the current DOJ is blamed for partisan politics when they don't pursue charges, then those same criticisms will be leveled against Merrick Garland and rightly so. Trump's defense, again, must be tied to Biden's to make the case front and center for the people that apparently some animals are more equal than others. And since the Democrats will never indict Biden, they won't be successful doing anything to Trump. If they do, it will be unquestioningly, incontrovertibly, and transparently clear that Democrats have one standard of the law for themselves and another for their political opponents. 

Now I see that Trump is adjudicating the matter through legal methods and will likely comply with whatever SCOTUS tells him he must do, which is that he must "facilitate" Abrego Garcia's release — not to be confused with his "return," which the left and some lower courts are contending, nor with the ongoing and conflicting messages over the separate Tren de Aragua deportations under the Alien Enemies Act. I don't know if this (Abrego Garcia's return) will happen. However, if they do bring him back, I hope they'll just put him on another flight out of here for immigrating illegally. As far as I know, you're still breaking the law when you do that. 

And perhaps Trump will learn something as well on efforts to use the Alien Enemies Act of 1789 to deport other TdA and/or MS-13 gang members — a clever idea, but employing it was over-engineering stuff as it opened such deportations up to a whole lot of challenges that eventually sunk the move. Maybe next time they will keep it simple. Did you come here legally? Do you have a visa? A green card? Do you have official documentation as a refugee? No? Bye. I don't think all illegal aliens should get due process in those cases. They should just get deported.

But the Abrego Garcia case opens up the bigger question to me. Why does Biden get to defy SCOTUS when Trump does not? Why is 46 permitted to ignore Supreme Court rulings and 47 must follow them? This is the constitutional crisis that is really occurring and not the nonsense the progs are screaming about. And it is this matter that I hope the administration will spotlight over and over and over again, because inquiring minds want to know. Voters want to know. The American public has a notoriously short memory, and unless the Trump White House resurrects this disconnect from recent collective memory and makes it a comparative issue, conservatives are probably going to get bit again in the future.