Whats going on in the World

Not Fox - talk to this person.

"It’s going to be the worst season ever," Louisiana State University AgCenter crawfish specialist Mark Shirley told Louisiana Radio Network. "The population is just not there. The buyers are offering $7 and $8 a pound to the fishermen just to try to get them to go out and bait traps and go find them. It could be whatever price, they’re just not there."

Crawfish, often referred to as mudbugs or crayfish, are tiny freshwater crustaceans that taste similar to lobster and shrimp. They are big business in Louisiana, where Shirley says 361,000 acres should be in production, but drought stopped farmers from flooding their fields.
I just get a big laugh about the "Buyers offering 7$ and 8$ a pound. Hell 2 and 3 years ago you couldn't get that much for Bluefin. It was 2$ and 3$. But the biggest difference is we had to go out in any weather, with an investment of many thousands just in safety gear. Not a Jon boat and 25 Hp. Johnson. That's the reason i'm out of business and my boat for sale. GRRRR..

Sorry for the rant.
 
Sad....


People asked for all of it. They made a wish and it was granted.
 
This should get a rise out of a few of you...

Supreme Court Backs Biden for Now in Dispute With Texas Over Border Barrier

A federal appeals court had ruled that Border Patrol agents may not remove concertina wire erected by the state except for medical emergencies.

The Supreme Court sided with the Biden administration on Monday in a dispute over a concertina-wire barrier erected by Texas along the Mexican border. The justices temporarily lifted an appeals court’s ruling that had generally prohibited federal officials from removing the wire.

The Supreme Court’s brief order gave no reasons, which is typical when the justices act on emergency applications. The vote was 5 to 4, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining the court’s three liberal members to form a majority.

The dispute is part of an escalating legal battle between Texas and the Biden administration over border security.

Since 2021, Gov. Greg Abbott, a third-term Republican, has mounted an aggressive multibillion-dollar campaign to impose more stringent measures at the southern border to deter migrants from entering the country. Those include erecting concertina wire along the banks of the Rio Grande as well as installing a barrier of buoys in the river.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit last month limited the ability of federal Border Patrol agents to cut the wire.

The panel prohibited agents “from damaging, destroying or otherwise interfering with Texas’ c-wire fence” while the appeal is pending, but made an exception for medical emergencies that are likely to result in “serious bodily injury or death.”

Ken Paxton, Texas’ attorney general, sued the administration in October, saying that Border Patrol agents had unlawfully destroyed state property and thwarted the state’s efforts to block migrants from crossing the border. According to the lawsuit, border agents cut the wire at least 20 times “to admit aliens illegally entering Texas.”

Migrants have been injured by the wire, and drownings in the Rio Grande’s swift currents have become more common. In court papers, Mr. Paxton argued that federal officials using bolt cutters and forklifts had destroyed parts of the barrier for no reason other than to allow migrants to enter.

In the Biden administration’s emergency application, Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar rejected the contention that federal officials had done anything improper. “Border Patrol agents’ exercise of discretion regarding the means of enabling the apprehension, inspection and processing of noncitizens in no way suggests that they cut wire for impermissible purposes,” she wrote.

Calling the appeals court’s injunction “manifestly wrong,” Ms. Prelogar said the barrier interfered with Border Patrol agents’ responsibilities.

“The injunction prohibits agents from passing through or moving physical obstacles erected by the state that prevent access to the very border they are charged with patrolling and the individuals they are charged with apprehending and inspecting,” she wrote. “And it removes a key form of officer discretion to prevent the development of deadly situations, including by mitigating the serious risks of drowning and death from hypothermia or heat exposure.”

The exception for medical emergencies was insufficient, Ms. Prelogar wrote. “It can take 10 to 30 minutes to cut through Texas’ dense layers of razor wire,” she wrote. “By the time a medical emergency is apparent, it may be too late to render lifesaving aid.”

The injunction was also unjustified, Ms. Prelogar wrote. “Balanced against the impairment of federal law enforcement and risk to human life,” she wrote, “the court of appeals cited as Texas’ harm only the price of wire and the cost of closing a gap created by Border Patrol agents.”

Mr. Paxton asked the justices to strike a different balance.

“It is in the public interest to deter unlawful agency action and to respect property rights,” he wrote. “It is also in the public interest to reduce the flow of deadly fentanyl; combat human trafficking; protect Texans from unlawful trespass and violent attacks by criminal cartels; and minimize the risks to people, both U.S. citizens and migrants, of drowning while making perilous journeys to and through illegal points of entry.”
 
1705958535381.png
 
This should get a rise out of a few of you...

Supreme Court Backs Biden for Now in Dispute With Texas Over Border Barrier

A federal appeals court had ruled that Border Patrol agents may not remove concertina wire erected by the state except for medical emergencies.

The Supreme Court sided with the Biden administration on Monday in a dispute over a concertina-wire barrier erected by Texas along the Mexican border. The justices temporarily lifted an appeals court’s ruling that had generally prohibited federal officials from removing the wire.

The Supreme Court’s brief order gave no reasons, which is typical when the justices act on emergency applications. The vote was 5 to 4, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining the court’s three liberal members to form a majority.

The dispute is part of an escalating legal battle between Texas and the Biden administration over border security.

Since 2021, Gov. Greg Abbott, a third-term Republican, has mounted an aggressive multibillion-dollar campaign to impose more stringent measures at the southern border to deter migrants from entering the country. Those include erecting concertina wire along the banks of the Rio Grande as well as installing a barrier of buoys in the river.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit last month limited the ability of federal Border Patrol agents to cut the wire.

The panel prohibited agents “from damaging, destroying or otherwise interfering with Texas’ c-wire fence” while the appeal is pending, but made an exception for medical emergencies that are likely to result in “serious bodily injury or death.”

Ken Paxton, Texas’ attorney general, sued the administration in October, saying that Border Patrol agents had unlawfully destroyed state property and thwarted the state’s efforts to block migrants from crossing the border. According to the lawsuit, border agents cut the wire at least 20 times “to admit aliens illegally entering Texas.”

Migrants have been injured by the wire, and drownings in the Rio Grande’s swift currents have become more common. In court papers, Mr. Paxton argued that federal officials using bolt cutters and forklifts had destroyed parts of the barrier for no reason other than to allow migrants to enter.

In the Biden administration’s emergency application, Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar rejected the contention that federal officials had done anything improper. “Border Patrol agents’ exercise of discretion regarding the means of enabling the apprehension, inspection and processing of noncitizens in no way suggests that they cut wire for impermissible purposes,” she wrote.

Calling the appeals court’s injunction “manifestly wrong,” Ms. Prelogar said the barrier interfered with Border Patrol agents’ responsibilities.

“The injunction prohibits agents from passing through or moving physical obstacles erected by the state that prevent access to the very border they are charged with patrolling and the individuals they are charged with apprehending and inspecting,” she wrote. “And it removes a key form of officer discretion to prevent the development of deadly situations, including by mitigating the serious risks of drowning and death from hypothermia or heat exposure.”

The exception for medical emergencies was insufficient, Ms. Prelogar wrote. “It can take 10 to 30 minutes to cut through Texas’ dense layers of razor wire,” she wrote. “By the time a medical emergency is apparent, it may be too late to render lifesaving aid.”

The injunction was also unjustified, Ms. Prelogar wrote. “Balanced against the impairment of federal law enforcement and risk to human life,” she wrote, “the court of appeals cited as Texas’ harm only the price of wire and the cost of closing a gap created by Border Patrol agents.”

Mr. Paxton asked the justices to strike a different balance.

“It is in the public interest to deter unlawful agency action and to respect property rights,” he wrote. “It is also in the public interest to reduce the flow of deadly fentanyl; combat human trafficking; protect Texans from unlawful trespass and violent attacks by criminal cartels; and minimize the risks to people, both U.S. citizens and migrants, of drowning while making perilous journeys to and through illegal points of entry.”
Not really. Would really like to read and understand the rationale behind the decision. Texas is pretty smart, they will figure out a workaround.

For the Biden administration to bring this case, at least we have it on record that border security IS NOT a concern for the party.
 

Jamie Dimon scandalized Davos attendees last week: he said something nice about Donald Trump. All it took was two wars, sky-high inflation, millions of people entering our country illegally, out-of-control government spending and rampant crime in our big cities to make people realize how peaceful and prosperous our country was under the former president.

JPMorgan’s CEO told CNBC in an interview: "Take a step back, be honest. He was kind of right about NATO, kind of right on immigration. He grew the economy quite well. Trade tax reform worked. He was right about some of China."

Yes, Trump was right on all those issues, and Biden has been dead wrong. Wrong on Iran, wrong on energy, wrong on the border, wrong on crime and wrong on the economy. You don’t earn the worst-ever approval ratings of a modern-day president by getting things right.
 
:ROFLMAO:


Los Angeles Times’ letters editor Paul Thornton implored Californians leaving the state to stop criticizing it on the way out.

"To the people leaving California: May the road rise to meet you as you seek better lives in new places. Now, can you please extend some goodwill to those of us who remain?" Thornton asked in a Saturday piece headlined, "Commentary: If you want to leave, fine. But don’t insult California on the way out."

He went on to describe how staggering numbers of Californians are fleeing to other states.

"More than 800,000 Californians moved away in 2022, and many thousands more left last year. Often, the departees, cash in hand from the sale of their $1-million bungalows, feel the need to express disdain for their home state, and even some anger too," he wrote.

Thornton went on to describe a relative of his who told him about having relocated to a small town in another state far away, but being warned against bringing "those weird California ways" to his new neighborhood.

"And which ways would those be?" Thornton asked rhetorically. "Perhaps it’s our embrace of LGBTQ+ Californians. Or it’s our liberal politics, with the state Republican Party shrunk to irrelevance after its vicious attempt in 1994 to marginalize immigrants with Proposition 187."

Proposition 187, which passed by almost 60% but blocked by the courts from ever going into effect, proposed denying state social services to illegal immigrants. Since then, California has expanded access to government benefits and services to illegal immigrants.

The Golden State started the new year by granting illegal immigrants free healthcare, despite the state's looming $68 billion deficit. This new healthcare policy will cover sex change surgeries for California residents without regard for their citizenship status.
 
📱 Fish Smarter with the NYAngler App!
Launch Now

Members online

Fishing Reports

Latest articles

Back
Top