For the Record: Happy Anniversary Bonus March! (With DACA Bonus)

Bonus Marchers and police, 1932. Photo by an unnamed Signal Corps photographer from the National Archives, via Wikipedia.

Just 88 years ago yesterday, in the midst of the worst economic calamity and one of the most consequential presidential elections in US history, the Bonus Expeditionary Force of 17,000 Great War veterans with their families and social justice warrior comrades were attacked with live ammunition at their Washington, DC campsite by local police, on orders from President Hoover's attorney general William Mitchell, two of them dying, and then driven out by an Army contingent under the command of General Douglas MacArthur.

Our friend Henry noted how much less respectful The New York Times was at the time toward President Hoover than they are toward President Trump today (one of the first papers to adopt a nonpartisan stance, as early as 1884, it had nevertheless endorsed every Democratic presidential candidate since 1912):

A fascinating thread about the Bonus Army yesterday highlighted similarities with protests today. But I was struck by how much *less* credulous the 1932 version of the New York Times was of Hoover compared to 2020 and Trump. “Blaming” and “Asserting”:https://t.co/BgZewqZIEb https://t.co/EdLEky5RoX

— Henry Porter (@HenryPorters) July 29, 2020

Also noteworthy was this:

"Candidate Roosevelt has fallen under the control of the violent radical left wing of his party," they didn't say. It's fun to remember Democrats won that year's election pretty handily, holding House and taking over Senate with a 12-seat gain, in spite of the demonstrations. https://t.co/Kl6dFTer8L

— 🔻Cookin With Yas🔻 (@Yastreblyansky) July 29, 2020

Here's hoping that's a sign.

Also, while I'm up:

SOPDDSHS Cuccinelli repeatedly told interviewer that Chief Justice decision found in Trump's favor in DHS v. University of California Regents, that he is allowed to end DACA but also has to complete some administrative "process", where in fact Roberts found Trump violated law. pic.twitter.com/ywz6jlsQBq

— 🔻Cookin With Yas🔻 (@Yastreblyansky) July 29, 2020

DHS action is "arbitrary and capricious" UNLESS it can say what it's going to do about the victims of its actions (which is not answered by saying oh it's congress's fault) pic.twitter.com/8fr3ZeHMuM

— 🔻Cookin With Yas🔻 (@Yastreblyansky) July 29, 2020

It's not just some silly office detail like making sure their initials are on every page. DHS has not shown it has any reason for the harm it wants to inflict on hundreds of thousands of entirely innocent people and it is NOT LAWFUL for them to proceed before they do so.

— 🔻Cookin With Yas🔻 (@Yastreblyansky) July 29, 2020

Nothing in the Roberts opinion overrides anything three federal judges have said in issuing injunctions against DHS proceeding. It directs DHS to go back and try again. They must obey the injunctions until they have complied.

— 🔻Cookin With Yas🔻 (@Yastreblyansky) July 29, 2020

Also in calling Cuccinelli the "acting deputy secretary" of DHS, the network misstated the SOPDDSHS's only legal title since judge threw him out of position as USCIS director https://t.co/33DkDKbs9U.

/fin

— 🔻Cookin With Yas🔻 (@Yastreblyansky) July 29, 2020