Federal judge blocks Trump from using Defense funds for parts of border wall

[MTAtech]

That judge should be arrested and convicted for treason.

That's just psychobabble from you. Judges rule on cases. It's your unhinged opinion that judges that rule appropriately but against what your Führer leader wants should be persecuted and bullied -- just like they were in Nazi Germany.

Here in America, we specifically established that the Judicial branch should not be swayed by political influence and that's why they have lifetime appointments.

By the way, "treason' against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. There is nothing coherent in your post.

 

[Media_Truth]

Trump never said that Mexico would pay for the wall. Trump said so. Don't you remember?

 

[joko104]

Trump never said that Mexico would pay for the wall. Trump said so. Don't you remember?

Mexico is paying for the wall by tariffs. However, Democrats in Congress refuses to release the money because they are giving it to their relatives and spouses that they don't end up giving to themselves - with what is left to foreign criminals in our country under Democratic Party protection.

 

[Frigidweirdo]

yet another judge that doesn't know where his limited powers are.
i wish judges would actually follow the law instead of making **** up.
they do not have the power to create law only uphold existing law.

This judge is 100% wrong.

Trump can disperse the funds as congress has already approved them.
he doesn't need congressional approval in an emergency.

So all he needs to do is declare and emergency and he's the king of the USA.

 

[Frigidweirdo]

That judge should be arrested and convicted for treason.

Yes, when the definition of treason is "something somebody does that I don't like".

 

[upsideguy]

Mexico is paying for the wall by tariffs. However, Democrats in Congress refuses to release the money because they are giving it to their relatives and spouses that they don't end up giving to themselves - with what is left to foreign criminals in our country under Democratic Party protection.

A little lesson in economics for you my friend. Mexico is not paying the tariffs; US consumers and US companies are.

What Is A Tariff And Who Pays It? | Tax Policy Center
NY Fed: Trump tariffs costing US consumers $1.4 billion per month

Mexico gets hurt because the tariff makes consumers climb the demand curve (fewer buyers at higher prices), but they don't pay anything.

Tariffs are simply friction on the wheels of an economy..like running an engine with too little oil. You will find very, very few, if any, economists that will tell you tariffs are a good idea.

 

[JustHanging]

Sorry, not wasting my time on watching your bait.

Meh. Your loss. America is going to build a +$b wall which will be defeated by a $20 device. You just can't explain that kind of stupid. Except by saying: "You got Trumped."


Bolton 'Deep in His Heart' Believes Trump Is a 'Moron,' Former Aide Claims

'Idiot,' 'Dope,' 'Moron': How Trump's aides have insulted the boss

 

[JustHanging]

Mexico is paying for the wall by tariffs.

You pay the tariffs. Not Mexico.

Honestly, this is as bad as thinking spending billions on a wall makes sense, when Mexico has "Ladders".

lad·der
/ˈladər/
noun
noun: ladder; plural noun: ladders

a structure consisting of a series of bars or steps between two upright lengths of wood, metal, or rope, used for climbing up or down something.


Imagine that "something" is a wall. Now do you understand?

 

[apdst]

i know of no instance where the Congress is conducting illegal search and seizure. If your cryptic post is referring to Congress subpoenaing Trump's businesses and tax records, the law specifically says that they can and it's been upheld by two federal courts, which undercuts your assertion that it as illegal. it's also not search and seizure, as numerous cases in case law have affirmed that tax records aren't property of the taxpayer.

In other words, your view is contrary to historical precedent and law, which makes it without any merit at all.

Subpoenaing private documents is illegal search and seizure. The 4th Amendment applies to Congress, too.

 

[MTAtech]

Subpoenaing private documents is illegal search and seizure. The 4th Amendment applies to Congress, too.

Repeating a legally flawed argument doesn't suddenly make it more valid. As stated many times on the forum, the courts have dismissed that argument and now consider it frivolous. Tax documents and business records held by a third party aren't an individual's personal documents and they have no 4th Amendment protection.

Moreover, the notion that using the proper legal means to obtain documents, a subpoena, is illegal -- is flawed on its face. That argument is further undercut by the recent rulings by federal judges that Congress' actions were proper.

I do get it. You don't like when the Democratic controlled House uses subpoenas the way Republican controlled Houses used them, with your approval. You were all for Congress using subpoenas on President Obama but strongly object when they are used on President Trump. Yes, your defense of imagined constitutional rights fully depends upon which side they are being used against. If Congressional power is being used against a Democratic president, you are all for it; against a Republican president, it's unconstitutional. Fortunately, we have a impartial judiciary -- at least, for now.

 

[MTAtech]

Trump never said that Mexico would pay for the wall. Trump said so. Don't you remember?

Quite Orwellian. “‘Who controls the past,’ ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.’”

 

[Media_Truth]

A little lesson in economics for you my friend. Mexico is not paying the tariffs; US consumers and US companies are.

What Is A Tariff And Who Pays It? | Tax Policy Center
NY Fed: Trump tariffs costing US consumers $1.4 billion per month

Mexico gets hurt because the tariff makes consumers climb the demand curve (fewer buyers at higher prices), but they don't pay anything.

Tariffs are simply friction on the wheels of an economy..like running an engine with too little oil. You will find very, very few, if any, economists that will tell you tariffs are a good idea.

Absolutely. The lower and middle class of the US feels the pain of the tariffs. Certainly millionaires and billionaires aren't concerned about the everyday cost of goods. The lower and middle class also feel the pain of the Tax Cuts, which primarily benefit the wealthy. The lower and middle class stand to lose from health care changes. The Billionaires have taken control.

 

[ludin]

So all he needs to do is declare and emergency and he's the king of the USA.

nope because there are laws around declaring an emergency.
it would help if you people actually did some research around this stuff instead of just
throwing crap at a wall and posting nonsense.

 

[ludin]

That judge should be arrested and convicted for treason.

you don't know what treason is so stop throwing it around.

 

[Frigidweirdo]

nope because there are laws around declaring an emergency.
it would help if you people actually did some research around this stuff instead of just
throwing crap at a wall and posting nonsense.

Well you'd think there'd be laws about a president declaring an emergency two years into his presidency when NOTHING HAS CHANGED in those two years, wouldn't you?

Also you'd think there were laws about selling arms to the Saudis.

Apparently not.

 

[ludin]

Well you'd think there'd be laws about a president declaring an emergency two years into his presidency when NOTHING HAS CHANGED in those two years, wouldn't you?

Also you'd think there were laws about selling arms to the Saudis.

Apparently not.

again do your own research and educate yourself on the matter i know i have.

 

[Frigidweirdo]

again do your own research and educate yourself on the matter i know i have.

Yeah, imagine coming onto a political forum and expecting people to actually make their own arguments. Ridiculous right?

I think the Moon is made of cheese.

It's not.

Yes it is, go do your own research.

Look dude. Not interested.

 

[ludin]

Yeah, imagine coming onto a political forum and expecting people to actually make their own arguments. Ridiculous right?

I think the Moon is made of cheese.

It's not.

Yes it is, go do your own research.

Look dude. Not interested.

I have already supported my argument backed by laws.
so other than throwing crap at a wall what have you done?

 

[prometeus]

yet another judge that doesn't know where his limited powers are.
i wish judges would actually follow the law instead of making **** up.
they do not have the power to create law only uphold existing law.

This judge is 100% wrong.

Trump can disperse the funds as congress has already approved them.
he doesn't need congressional approval in an emergency.

Yet another ignorant post. Which law did the judge not follow and what did he make up?

 

[trouble13]

Trump hasn't been doing too well in the courts lately, though I expect his string of losses will eventually slow down as more of his own appointees are able to take on cases that concern him.

At the heart of the ruling is the argument that the President can't simply divert money from somewhere else just because Congress denied him funding for his preferred thing, because to go down that specific route rejects the concept of separation of powers.



Federal judge blocks Trump from using Defense funds for parts of border wall - CNNPolitics

I also feel compelled to repeat the obvious lest it goes down everybody's memory holes: Trump's 2016 platform was specifically that Mexico would pay for the wall. Since his revised platform is that Americans will pay for it, then he can campaign on that in 2020. If Americans agree then they can give him a second term and the Congress to sign onto it.

Unsutprisingly the article does not mention the judges political bias.

Federal judge who blocked Trump's border wall donated $20K to Obama

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

 

[Anagram]

Did anyone actually read the ruling or even a somewhat detailed summary of it, (something this CNN article does not qualify as)? Because I haven’t seen any posts from either side actually really touching on the grounds that the court ruled here.

 

[Atomic Kid]

nope i firmly still hold with reagan on issues.
know what you are talkking about before making inaccurate projects.

WTF is "inaccurate projects"?

 

[Atomic Kid]

Mexico is paying for the wall by tariffs. However, Democrats in Congress refuses to release the money because they are giving it to their relatives and spouses that they don't end up giving to themselves - with what is left to foreign criminals in our country under Democratic Party protection.

No they're not. 'We' the consumers pay for the tariffs.

 

[Media_Truth]

Here's a link to a parallel story. I find this statement especially interesting, considering the fact that Trump has been a 100% d***head. When his own Party controlled Congress, they would NOT approve it. The American people don't want it. And now his lawyers accuse the Democrats of NOT resolving the process through political means. Are Trump advocates just DENSE, are do they continue to buy this nonsense?

House lawsuit over Trump's national emergency declaration heads to court - CNNPolitics

Lawyers for the Trump administration warned of opening up the opportunity for branches to sue each other. "For over 200 years, Congress and the executive branch resolved political disputes through political means," said James Burnham, a government lawyer.

 

[washunut]

Here's a link to a parallel story. I find this statement especially interesting, considering the fact that Trump has been a 100% d***head. When his own Party controlled Congress, they would NOT approve it. The American people don't want it. And now his lawyers accuse the Democrats of NOT resolving the process through political means. Are Trump advocates just DENSE, are do they continue to buy this nonsense?

House lawsuit over Trump's national emergency declaration heads to court - CNNPolitics

Lawyers for the Trump administration warned of opening up the opportunity for branches to sue each other. "For over 200 years, Congress and the executive branch resolved political disputes through political means," said James Burnham, a government lawyer.

When during Trump's time in office have republicans held 60 seats in the senate?