<President Donald Trump announced that he will “get” the sovereign country of Greenland “one way or the other,” and is sending a U.S. delegation to the island including Vice President JD Vance‘s wife Usha Vance. The Prime Minister of Greenland, Múte B. Egede, called the Americans’ planned trip “very aggressive.”

On Fox Morning Futures on Sunday, Vice President Vance echoed the President’s aggressive stance on Greenland, and said: “Denmark, which controls Greenland, is not doing its job, and it’s not being a good ally. So you have to ask yourself, how are we going to solve that problem, solve our own national security.”

He added: “If that means we need to take more territorial interest in Greenland that is what President Trump is going to do because he doesn’t care what the Europeans scream at us, he cares about putting the interest of American citizens first.”

CNN legal analyst Sophia A. Nelson, who served as Republican counsel for the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee during the George W. Bush administration, responded to the interview by writing of Vance: “He's a quack. Threatening to take the territory of a sovereign nation, just because, is sick, demented and dangerous. Also illegal.”

Note: Nelson revealed that she left the Republican Party in 2020 “because of how the party treats women of color.”

Others on X are protesting Vance’s comments about Denmark and Europe. As one replied: “7,000 Danish soldiers fought in Afghanistan against the Taliban out of loyalty to the US. Of them, 43 were killed-per capita, more than the US. And Denmark spends 3% of its GDP on defense. And now to hear Vance squawk that Denmark is ‘not a good ally.’ Did he ever say thank you, even once?”

(The last part of that quote is a dig referencing the question Vance put to Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House during a recent meeting, when the VP combatively questioned the level of Zelensky’s gratitude for U.S. support.)

Note: As a NATO member, Denmark sent 9,500 personnel to Afghanistan between January 2002 and July 2013. 43 Danish soldiers were killed, “being the highest loss per capita within the coalition forces. In addition, 214 soldiers were wounded in action and injured.”

A self-described “sarcastic Democrat” replied to the Vance interview: “That's funny. Vance sounds like Putin here, talking about Ukraine, before he invaded.” Another added: “‘Territorial interest’ in another country, is a great way to lose all your allies. ‘Territorial interest’ is what Russia has in Ukraine.”>

<Donald Trump's administration has been in the news for its recent executive orders targeting law firms, including Perkins Coie LLP and Paul Weiss, that represented certain individuals and even groups who Trump sees as his political opponents, but now Elon Musk has added a new firm to the enemies list.

Over the weekend, Trump-pardoned conservative provocateur Dinesh D'Souza lobbed some accusations against Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP.

"Skadden Arps is the firm engaged in systematic lawfare against '2000 Mules' They have a army [sic] of 17 attorneys working pro-bono against me. I have 2 lawyers," according to D'Souza. "The Left's game is to ruin us through protracted, costly litigation."

D'Souza tagged Trump in the post, but it was Musk who weighed in.

"Skadden, this needs to stop now," Musk wrote. Some reports online suggest that Skadden has represented Musk in the past.

Popular MAGA influencer AwakenedOutlaw added, "It's probably time for an army of people online to dig into EVERYTHING and EVERYONE at Skadden, Arps."

"There are millions of us. Let's consider turning the tables on 'em," they added.>

Time for Dickwad D'Ouchebag to learn English.

<[Event "19th World Open"] [Site "Philadelphia PA"]
[Date "1991.07.??"]
[EventDate "1991"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Bukhman, Eduard"]
[Black "Mayer, Steven F"]
[ECO "E62"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]

<[Event "19th World Open"] [Site "Philadelphia PA"]
[Date "1991.07.??"]
[EventDate "1991"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Cooke, Eric N"]
[Black "DeFotis, Gregory"]
[ECO "B94"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.f4 e6 7.Be2 Qc7 8.O-O Be7 9.Kh1 O-O 10.Qe1 b5 11.Bf3 Bb7 12.e5 Ne8 13.Qg3 Nc6 14.Be3 Rd8 15.Rae1 dxe5 16.Nxc6 Bxc6 17.fxe5 Bxf3 18.Rxf3 b4 19.Ne4 Qxc2 20.Qf4 f5 21.exf6 Nxf6 22.Ng5 Rd1 23.Rg1 Bd6 24.Qh4 Re8 25.Qh3 e5 26.Rxf6 gxf6 27.Qd7 Re7 28.Qd8+ Kg7 29.Nh3 Rxg1+ 30.Nxg1 Qc7 0-1>

<[Event "66th Greater Boston Open"] [Site "Watertown Mass"]
[Date "1999.10.09"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Paschall, William"]
[Black "Ivanov, Alexander"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B86"]
[WhiteElo "2421"]
[BlackElo "2587"]

<Entering the U.S. as a traveler feels riskier than ever.

Following Donald Trump’s executive order for “enhanced vetting” in security screenings, U.S. border officials are empowered to use aggressive tactics at ports of entry like airports. In recent days, there have been alarming cases of legal immigrants and tourists who are being denied entry and detained in custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

In one recent high-profile case, a French scientist who was traveling to Houston on his way to a conference was allegedly denied entry by Customs and Border Patrol over phone messages that criticized Trump’s science policies, according to France’s minister for higher education.

The Department of Homeland Security has denied that the scientist’s removal was based on his political beliefs. Tricia McLaughlin, a spokeswoman for Homeland Security, said the unnamed French scientist got denied entry because his device had “confidential information” from Los Alamos National Laboratory.

Nevertheless, it seems that these days securing your electronics before a trip should be as important as deciding which clothes to pack on vacation ― especially if you are traveling to the U.S. right now.

This month, Germany and the U.K. have even updated their travel advisories, warning their citizens that they could be liable to arrest or detention for breaking U.S. rules, and that legal permits do not guarantee entry into the United States.

“Have a plan before you travel, because you don’t want to be in the situation where you’re running late for a flight, you find yourself in secondary [screening], and you’re just like, ‘Oh, my God, I have to make this next flight, and I don’t know what to do besides comply,’” explained Saira Hussain, a senior staff attorney at Electronic Frontier Foundation who has represented travelers whose electronic devices were searched without warrants at a U.S. border.

No matter if you are a U.S. citizen, a visa holder or a foreign visitor traveling to Las Vegas on spring break, know what your rights are if a border agent asks to see your phone.

The U.S. government asserts that it has the ability to lawfully inspect phones, laptops and other types of electronic devices that cross U.S. borders.

“Any electronic device you own, including phones, laptops and tablets, can be checked at the border. Sometimes this means that customs officers will look at your device as is, but it can also involve trying to download its data,” said Petra Molnar, lawyer and author of “The Walls Have Eyes: Surviving Migration in the Age of Artificial Intelligence.”

Customs and Border Protection says searches of electronic devices are rare. In 2024, the federal agency reported 42,725 basic searches and 4,322 advanced searches on predominantly people who were not U.S. citizens. Under a basic search, a border agent physically inspects your phone and reviews what they can, while an advanced search means the agent can potentially download all of your files using an external device.

Who is deemed suspicious enough to necessitate an electronics search can vary. The American Civil Liberties Union has represented a military veteran, an artist, a NASA engineer, journalists, Muslims and people of color who had their devices searched at a border. A 2017 NBC News investigation found 25 cases where border agents directed U.S. citizens, nearly all Muslim, to hand over their phones at border crossings.

What generally happens in these searches is that a person is pulled into secondary screening and a border official may ask to search your phone, Hussain explained.

“They are supposed to put the phone into airplane mode before they start to search it,” Hussain said. “They’re not supposed to be looking at cloud-based applications, like they’re not supposed to be looking at your Facebook account.” But she noted that there have been reports of travelers having their social media profiles searched.

And if this search happens once, it might be more likely to happen again. In a case she petitioned to the Supreme Court, Hussain found that “if you have been pulled into secondary [screening] once, that it’s flagged in their databases, and it makes it more likely that you’re going to be pulled into secondary another time when you re-enter the country.”....>

<....You do not have to share your phone’s password, but there are risks and consequences if you refuse.

You are not required to share your password to unlock your phone, but refusing could affect your travel plans or your access to your technology.

The consequences for refusing to comply can be more severe, depending on your immigration status.

If you’re a U.S. citizen, a customs officer cannot bar you from entering the country, even if you refuse to provide access to your electronic device. You can state, “I do not give you permission to search my device,” and you should still be able to enter the U.S., but your phone might get taken. “What they can do is potentially seize your device, and that can last anywhere from weeks to months,” Hussain said.

If you are a green card holder, you generally have the same rights as a U.S. citizen upon entry to the U.S., with some exceptions. Hussain said green card holders that have been outside of the U.S. for more than six months may be seen as applying for readmission rather than traveling on the green card, which might jeopardize their ability to reenter the country. Green cards in general cannot be revoked without a hearing before an immigration judge.

Visa holders face more legal risks. Molnar calls these electronics searches “an invasion of privacy” but notes that “if you are a visa holder and you refuse, you may be denied entry into the United States.”

Hussain said people who are traveling on a tourist visa are “in the least protected category,” and their visa can be revoked if they refuse a search of their device.

“Some people will say, ‘What’s the problem, I have nothing to hide.’ But the right to privacy is not just about avoiding scrutiny of wrongdoing,” Molnar said. “Widespread surveillance leads to abuses of power, discrimination, and the stifling of the freedom of expression.”

Here’s how to prepare your tech devices to be possibly searched and to protect your privacy:

If possible, travel with a dedicated device that does not have your most sensitive information, like medical records or confidential conversations on it.

If you cannot switch phones, “backup important files and take them off your phone. Make a secure password and use two-factor authentication,” Molnar said.

Before you travel, review what you keep on your devices to help decide which files, photos or conversations you want to wipe or backup to a secure cloud-based storage service like iCloud.

Consider making it harder to access your phone without your explicit consent. With facial recognition software enabled on your device, a border agent could theoretically just point your phone at your face to unlock it.

If people want to assert their rights to the fullest extent, then they should add a strong, unique passcode so that their device “is not just something that the officer can take from you and then start looking through” without your consent, Hussain said.

If possible, type in the passcode yourself over sharing it verbally to an officer, which can help limit how long a border official has access to your device.

“If they have the passcode already, then they’re going to be able to search it further, potentially copy the contents of your phone without having to speak with you again,” Hussain said. “At some point the phone’s going to shut off, and when the phone shuts off, they’re not going to be able to reenter that phone without you providing that passcode.”

Customs and Border Protection has stated that its officers do not do searches while network connections are enabled. But in its digital privacy guide, the American Civil Liberties Union advises keeping your phone on airplane mode while crossing a border to make sure CBP is compliant to this policy.

In general, ask yourself: “Is there anything that you wouldn’t want [a customs official] to find or have access to?” Hussain said. This can help you decide which sensitive files you need to move to storage or to another device.

“When you think about a phone, you’re not just carrying with you the things that relate directly to your trip. You’re talking about a decade’s worth of photos and video and medical information and banking info and your emails,” Hussain said.>

<Dictators fear freedom of speech more than any other right because it is the beating heart of a free, democratic society. People who are free to speak are free to challenge authority, share ideas and organize, all of which undermine tyranny. This is why a true measure of a nation’s freedom can be seen in how much dissent it is willing to tolerate — and in a vibrant democracy, dissent is valued, not simply tolerated.

In the 1700s, the American framers, having recently freed themselves from British rule that suppressed free speech and persecuted dissent, understood the crucial role the First Amendment would play in protecting citizens from government overreach. Benjamin Franklin observed: “Whoever would overthrow the liberty of the nation, must begin by subduing the freedom of speech; a thing terrible to publick traitors.”

A true measure of a nation’s freedom can be seen in how much dissent it is willing to tolerate, and in a vibrant democracy, dissent is valued, not simply tolerated.

It’s no wonder, then, that Donald Trump’s administration has set its sights on America’s universities, institutions that serve as major centers of deliberation and free inquiry, institutions that have historically been principal sites and incubators of dissent and protest. If speech can be effectively chilled in these critical intellectual spaces, it makes it much easier to silence the broader public.

In recent weeks, the Trump administration has threatened universities with massive cuts to federal funding if they don’t submit to his agenda, which includes dismantling diversity, equity and inclusion programs and banning what Trump is calling “illegal protests.”

On March 10, the administration notified 60 universities that they are under investigation for what it alleges is a failure to protect students from antisemitism on campus and warned the schools they could face “potential enforcement actions” as a result. It comes at a time when there is an active debate on college campuses about what constitutes antisemitism and whether protests against Israel’s actions in Gaza would be included in that definition.

The Trump administration also announced that it was investigating 52 schools for using what it calls “racial preferences and stereotypes” in their educational programs and activities, essentially a continuation of its attack on DEI initiatives. Last week, the White House announced that it was pausing $175 million in federal funding to the University of Pennsylvania over its transgender athlete policies. And in a move that stunned the academic community nationwide, the Trump administration attempted to exert unprecedented control over Columbia University by threatening to cut $400 million in federal funding unless the school met a long list of demands — among them, placing its Department of Middle Eastern, South Asian and African Studies under academic receivership for at least five years.

Despite widespread calls from across the academic world urging Columbia to defend its independence, it appears that the university’s interim president, Katrina Armstrong, has conceded to Trump’s demands. Armstrong announced several new measures, including a ban on masks to conceal identities, the hiring of 36 campus officers with the authority to arrest students and the appointment of a new senior vice provost to review “programs in regional areas across the University, starting immediately with the Middle East.”

Meanwhile, running parallel to these investigations and threats, the Trump administration has been deploying Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to campuses to seize international students who have no criminal records and are accused of no crimes but who have participated in protests or online criticism of Israel’s conduct in Gaza, their school’s investments in Israel, America’s military support of Israel or the continuing war itself....>

<....Trump’s assault on academia has prompted massive opposition, with growing calls for administrators to resist this assault on academic independence. J Street, a Jewish lobbyist group, issued a statement blasting the administration’s actions: “While Trump will stop at nothing to attack higher education, we remain firm in our belief that universities are a tool for empathy, understanding and academic freedom.

“If the administration was serious about fighting antisemitism,” the statement continues, “it would listen to Jewish students; it would seek to calm campus tensions rather than escalate them; and it might start by throwing out the slew of bigots and conspiracy theorists it has promoted to top positions in its own ranks.”

University presidents, from Wesleyan’s Michael Roth to Princeton’s Christopher Eisgruber, have joined in condemning the administration’s assault on higher education. In The Atlantic, Eisgruber wrote: “The attack on Columbia is a radical threat to scholarly excellence and to America’s leadership in research. Universities and their leaders should speak up and litigate forcefully to protect their rights.”

Trump’s efforts to seize control of academia are part of a broader campaign to neutralize institutions that could potentially threaten his power. From law firms and media outlets to government inspectors general and federal judges, the administration is targeting every major institution that could challenge its agenda.

But Trump’s threats to cut off funding to some of the world’s premier research universities and deport students are especially alarming because the consequences of this intellectual retreat are not theoretical.

During the Red Scare of the early 1950s, the U.S. government expelled hundreds of immigrants, including Chinese students, effectively gifting the Chinese government with trained U.S. scientists and engineers. One of those scientists was Qian Xuesen; today he’s known as the father of China’s ballistic missile program. The odd twist of fate was summed up by Nicholas Sung in Just Security this way: “The very Chinese missiles that threaten Taiwanese and American security are the legacy of the U.S. government’s profiling and deportation of a Chinese scientist.”

Trump’s efforts to seize control of academia are part of a broader campaign to neutralize institutions that could potentially threaten his power.

Former U.S. Navy Secretary Dan Kimball, who fought to keep Qian in this country, was less polite in his criticism of the calls for the Chinese scientist’s deportation, saying at the time that it was “the stupidest thing this country ever did. He was no more a communist than I was, and we forced him to go.”

Qian wasn’t the only victim of the Red Scare. Among its earliest victims was, in fact, the federal workforce. It would eventually sweep up thousands of innocent Americans, destroying careers and reputations. According to historian Beverly Gage: “The anti-Communist surge reshaped every institution in American life: Hollywood, labor unions, churches, universities, elementary schools — and, above all, the national-security state. ... From on high, they told ordinary Americans how to live, whom to love, and what to say.”

Today, a similar pattern is emerging — and make no mistake, MAGA hysteria won’t be confined to America’s campuses. Karen Attiah, a columnist for The Washington Post, warns: “For now, the threat is directed at ‘others’: Palestinians, undocumented immigrants, trans people. ... For this kind of strategy to work, there must be an intentional creation of distance between human beings, the illusion that they are different from us, and that the weapons we throw at them are from a comfortable distance.”

Attiah added: “This distance is and has always been a delusion — a profoundly dangerous weakness that America touts as strength. ... Unless a groundswell of popular resistance moves to meaningfully stop the Trump administration’s targeting of Columbia and students, the rest of America will be considered prey. It is a matter of when, not if.”>

<President Donald Trump has said multiple times that he has no plans to cut Social Security. That suggests he understands the old political axiom that Social Security is the third rail in American politics. Touch it and get torched.

But we see something different in his administration’s actions. The marauding DOGE brigade has taken an ax to the bedrock program with staff cuts, leadership changes and office closures, and it has recently announced a new policy that would reduce the opportunities for people to conduct Social Security business over the phone. Even Republicans who have supported Trump have expressed concern about the downsizing efforts and the caustic rhetoric that could undermine public trust in the nation’s largest federal program and hurt their senior and disabled constituents who rely on Social Security.

Social Security is the third rail in American politics. Touch it and get torched.

There’s a long list of reasons we can’t fully trust this administration’s stewardship over the Social Security Administration, but let’s start with the following six signs.

The top reason is obvious. The administration needs to make big cuts to fulfill Elon Musk’s promise to trim 20% from the federal budget of $6.8 trillion and extend tax cuts for wealthy people. It’s impossible to make good on that promise without raiding programs that have heretofore been politically untouchable. Musk’s chainsaw approach — including shuttering offices and slashing federal staffing — is not gonna get to that 20% mark. The Social Security Administration paid $120 billion in benefits to more than 67 million people in 2024, providing benefits to elderly people, disabled people and dependents.

Reason No. 2: Musk and other DOGE leaders don’t understand how Social Security works. SSA employees have reported that the new DOGE-approved leadership team has shown little interest in learning about the inner workings of the massive and massively complicated agency, and Musk has wrongly disparaged it as a “Ponzi scheme.”

That rhetoric leads to the third reason on this list. This administration seems to care little about the American public or the government’s public servants. You see that in the way it has gutted federal departments and fired hundreds of people with little empathy for their plight. You see that in the closure of field offices and the scaling back of help lines with seemingly no regard for how elderly or disabled recipients or beneficiaries will get help. And you certainly saw it in the cavalier comments from billionaire Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who said his mother-in-law wouldn’t complain if the Social Security Administration failed to send her check.

“She’d think something got messed up, and she’ll get it next month,” Lutnick said on the “All-In Podcast.” Pushing the false narrative that fraud is rampant among those receiving Social Security payments, Lutnick went on to say that “the easiest way to find the fraudster is to stop payments and listen.”

Whoever screams, he said, are the people who’re stealing. I think it’s safe to say that very few people, regardless of their political affiliations, would be quiet if their Social Security payments didn’t arrive.

Clocking in at No. 4: Its laser focus on eradicating DEI notwithstanding, the Trump administration either doesn’t understand or doesn’t care about our country’s changing demographics. While Trump has appointed more women to his Cabinet than any other Republican president, his Cabinet doesn’t mirror the demographics of the country in terms of race, veteran’s status or ethnicity — but especially not in terms of income and wealth.

Public Citizen reports that President Joe Biden’s Cabinet was collectively worth $118 million; in January, the members of Trump’s Cabinet were collectively worth more than $460 billion. The average salary in the U.S. is $66,621 according to the SSA’s national wage index....>