President Trump Press Briefing re: Supreme Court Decision

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

OhPleaseJustQuit just go away!

Stop trolling all of Dante's posts

.

Says she to me, in MY thread.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm.........





.

 

[Marener]

Democrats are children. Everybody knows that. It is exemplified on a daily basis with tantrums all across the country in the form of protests.Congressional Democrats and Supreme Court justices are no different.

So you have your panties in a wad about protests.

Meanwhile Trump slaps his name on the Kennedy Center.

You're letting your own personal bias cloud your perspective.

 

[drudge X]

What nonsense.

Bush, Clinton, Obama, Biden have done absolutely nothing to engage China but continue to allow the trade deficit to widen.

Would you like to know what the deficit with China was under Biden and Trump today?

 

[Dante]

It is the same on the Republican side. Most of the job of "governing" is learning to compromise. Trump and Republicans in Congress don't know how to do this.

They do, but they refuse until Trump says it's okay (the very few exceptions prove the rule)

 

[Marener]

3 Justices beg to differ.

It was a shot in the dark, but now the administration will just have to back-justify most of the tariffs at least partially based on other laws

Retroactive taxes are pretty fuckin nuts.

 

[drudge X]

It is the same on the Republican side. Most of the job of "governing" is learning to compromise. Trump and Republicans in Congress don't know how to do this.

Of course, Democrats learned the art of compromise so well that 15 million illegal aliens were allowed to invade and then providing them five star all inclusive hotel stay for months.

 

[martybegan]

Retroactive taxes are pretty fuckin nuts.

Not the tariffs, the justification for them. The laws are already on the books.

 

[MagicMike]

Of course, Democrats learned the art of compromise so well that 15 million illegal aliens were allowed to invade and then providing them five star all inclusive hotel stay for months.

Off topic

 

[Marener]

Not the tariffs, the justification for them. The laws are already on the books.

That's bullshit. If the original taxes are illegal, you can't make them legal by retroactively claiming a different justification.

 

[drudge X]

Off topic

Just giving you a lesson about compromise

 

[martybegan]

That's bullshit. If the original taxes are illegal, you can't make them legal by retroactively claiming a different justification.

Laws on the books. Ex post facto is about passing laws after the fact.

Using passed laws as another justification to replace the one overturned isn't ex post facto.

 

[task0778]

That’s what he just said in his speech, although I didn’t follow it entirely. (I’m multi-tasking.)

I stopped listening to political speeches about 15 years ago when Obama lied to us about his ACA Act. "One thin dime", remember that? It was a total lie then and pretty much every politician since has done the same thing.

In Trump's case, I see no way he can do his tariffs within our current laws. I'm sure he'll try another way and it'll still be unconstitutional cuz IMHO he's trying to usurp Congress' sole function to raise revenue. Not sure people realize it, but the path he's on leads to a dictatorship where too much power is in his hands. And the fact that Congress is dysfunctional is not a legit excuse for him to take their power and authority and do what he wants with it, even if it is in our best interests.

 

[theHawk]

Yes.

That is if Presidents agree to abide by SCOTUS rulings.

Why should they? Biden certainly didn’t.

 

[Dante]

Why should they? Biden certainly didn’t.

Oh yes he did. What world do you live in?

Even the AI Bot has you being the fool:

AI Overview:
President Biden has generally complied with Supreme Court rulings by halting policies deemed unlawful, such as the initial student loan forgiveness plan and eviction moratoriums.

While strongly criticizing decisions like the 2024 presidential immunity ruling, his administration has pivoted to alternative legal strategies rather than defying court orders.

 

[Dante]

Why should they? Biden certainly didn’t.

Stop trying to justify any Trump shit that ignores a SCOTUS ruling

 

[Marener]

Laws on the books. Ex post facto is about passing laws after the fact.

Using passed laws as another justification to replace the one overturned isn't ex post facto.

It is.

Imagine arresting someone, being told your rational for the arrest was illegal, and then just invent a new reason to explain why you arrested them. The arrest is still illegal.

You can't retroactively justify something.

 

[martybegan]

It is.

Imagine arresting someone, being told your rational for the arrest was illegal, and then just invent a new reason to explain why you arrested them. The arrest is still illegal.

You can't retroactively justify something.

Actually when it comes to evidence, it's called the concept of "inevitable discovery"

The court just said "this reason doesn't work". That means there could be other reasons that work.

Laws on the books, already in effect.

 

[Marener]

Actually when it comes to evidence, it's called the concept of "inevitable discovery"

The court just said "this reason doesn't work". That means there could be other reasons that work.

Laws on the books, already in effect.

Inevitable discovery has to do with admissibility of evidence from an illegal search. Not what I was talking about.

If he has other ways to make the tariffs work, he's welcome to try with new tariffs.

The old tariffs are illegal and must be refunded.

 

[martybegan]

Inevitable discovery has to do with admissibility of evidence from an illegal search. Not what I was talking about.

If he has other ways to make the tariffs work, he's welcome to try with new tariffs.

The old tariffs are illegal and must be refunded.

It has to do with a court ruling, and responding to that ruling.

Not illegal if they were legal under another law.

Trump just went for the easiest one first.

 

[Marener]

It has to do with a court ruling, and responding to that ruling.

Not illegal if they were legal under another law.

Trump just went for the easiest one first.

The law which has never been used to levy tariffs and doesn't even mention tariffs was the "easiest one first"?

You're delusional.