President Donald Trump: The Thread

[RockRaines]

Draining the swamp!

His lies (like today's about taxes) and hashtags are meant to appease and mislead his fanatical base. And it works.

[Dick Allen]

His lies (like today's about taxes) and hashtags are meant to appease and mislead his fanatical base. And it works.

His lies have almost his entire life. His entire existence is built off lying. In a way, you have to give him credit, he has gotten farther by lying than probably anyone. It's one thing he could brag about and actually be honest.

Edited September 6, 2017 by Dick Allen

[BigSqwert]

@realDonaldTrump

Will be going to North Dakota today to discuss tax reform and tax cuts. We are the highest taxed nation in the world - that will change.

link

 

He doesn't even care how obvious his lies are. This can easily be discredited but his followers do not care.

[Soxbadger]

http://www.siliconbeat.com/2017/09/05/micr...ers/?yptr=yahoo

 

Microsoft allegedly will pay for the defense of Dreamer employees and may file a motion to intervene on their behalf.

 

If they actually end DACA it is going to be a huge legal battle. If Trump thought the immigrant ban was tough, this could be far more difficult.

[bmags]

I don't see what their case would be, and if it would be strong enough to even get a stay on the program.

[Jenksismyhero]

I don't see what their case would be, and if it would be strong enough to even get a stay on the program.

 

Agreed. DACA's an executive order, not law. And isn't DACA basically an order saying that the executive won't enforce immigration law in certain circumstances? So what's the argument? That not enforcing the law is unconstitutional?

[Soxbadger]

Agreed. DACA's an executive order, not law. And isn't DACA basically an order saying that the executive won't enforce immigration law in certain circumstances? So what's the argument? That not enforcing the law is unconstitutional?

 

Its going to be a 1) improperly followed administrative procedure act, 2) due process and 3) equal protection argument.

 

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-...0905-story.html

 

California Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra promised legal action to challenge the Trump administration’s decision, arguing Tuesday that it was unconstitutional in light of the fact that the young immigrants followed the rules as instructed and, as such, may be denied their due process rights.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-otc-daca...n-idUSKCN1BG32Y

 

The group argues that the new Trump policy violates the Constitution’s Equal Protection and Due Process clauses, pulling protection out from under U.S. residents who relied on the government’s assurances. According to the letter NILC and its co-counsel sent to U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis, the group intends to assert the argument that the rescission of DACA “is unconstitutionally motivated by anti-Mexican and anti-Latino animus.”

 

But the strongest immediate legal case to block the new Trump policy, according to two legal experts, is probably going to be the same wonky argument that led to a nationwide injunction against Obama’s DAPA program: The Trump administration, according to this argument, violated the Administrative Procedure Act by rescinding the Obama policy without engaging in a formal notice-and-comment process.

 

I think you will see judge's reach conclusions that arent necessarily the best "legally" so that they can make sure innocent people arent harmed. Bad facts make for bad case law.

 

(Edit)

 

And Id bet that it gets stayed by at least 1 court, because if it ultimately was found unconstitutional it would be almost impossible to "right the wrong."

Edited September 6, 2017 by Soxbadger

[Jenksismyhero]

Its going to be a 1) improperly followed administrative procedure act, 2) due process and 3) equal protection argument.

 

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-...0905-story.html

 

 

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-otc-daca...n-idUSKCN1BG32Y

 

 

 

 

 

I think you will see judge's reach conclusions that arent necessarily the best "legally" so that they can make sure innocent people arent harmed. Bad facts make for bad case law.

 

(Edit)

 

And Id bet that it gets stayed by at least 1 court, because if it ultimately was found unconstitutional it would be almost impossible to "right the wrong."

 

I suppose I buy the Administrative Procedures Act argument, if that's really a thing. The constitutional arguments are bogus IMO. I think it would be pretty dangerous precedent to allow lawsuits against the government brought by citizens relying on promises that go unfulfilled.

[Soxbadger]

I suppose I buy the Administrative Procedures Act argument, if that's really a thing. The constitutional arguments are bogus IMO. I think it would be pretty dangerous precedent to allow lawsuits against the government brought by citizens relying on promises that go unfulfilled.

 

Sounds like 15 states have already joined in the federal lawsuit in NY, and California is planning their own.

 

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-dreamer...-htmlstory.html

 

Looks like they are going to be using the case Texas brought against Obama Administration as the basis.

[StrangeSox]

Trump calling up pelosi and Schumer to say he'd sign DACA, will work with Schumer to permanently eliminate debt ceiling

 

What a world

[Dick Allen]

Trump calling up pelosi and Schumer to say he'd sign DACA, will work with Schumer to permanently eliminate debt ceiling

 

What a world

Seems he is getting desperate looking for a friend. I wonder which mess has him most worried.

Edited September 7, 2017 by Dick Allen

[Soxbadger]

Seems he is getting desperate looking for a friend. I wonder which mess has him most worried.

 

I really dont think its that.

 

I actually think that seeing Harvey's devastation and now with the potential hurricane's in Florida, Trump may have realized that being President isnt the same as being the main character on a reality tv show.

 

Or cynically he realizes that he has a lot at stake financially in Florida and he doesnt want all the money to have gone to Texas.

[StrangeSox]

Or he's angry at McConnell and Ryan and has been publicly and privately feuding with them for weeks/months, and this was a way to screw them over. He seems to be motivated by media attention and spite, which in this case he gets both.

 

Seriously, if Trump gets the DREAM Act signed and permanently removes the debt ceiling brinksmanship, he'll get heaps of praise for it. One of the things he talked about with Schumer adn Pelosi this morning was about how good the media coverage of their meeting yesterday has been.

[Dick Allen]

Grabbing them by the p****.... just words. Calling Teump a white supremacist...fireable offense.

Edited September 13, 2017 by Dick Allen

[BigSqwert]

Grabbing them by the p****.... just words. Calling Teump a white supremacist...fireable offense.

 

I thought only dictatorships demand people get fired for criticism.

[Dick Allen]

I thought only dictatorships demand people get fired for criticism.

He is a wannabe.

[southsider2k5]

I thought only dictatorships demand people get fired for criticism.

 

Only the left has the right.

[BigSqwert]

Imagine if a television personality called the President a racist.

 

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account

@realDonaldTrump

 

Obama's '07 speech which @DailyCaller just released not only shows that Obama is a racist but also how the press always covers for him.

 

There literally is one of these for every situation. LOL

[RockRaines]

Only the left has the right.

Huh

[BigSqwert]

Like when a reality TV star publicly called President Obama a racist and the White House did not state that the comment is a fireable offense.

[Quin]

Only the left has the right.

 

And only the right has the left to go down the middle and up the sides!

 

Please read in Bilbo Baggins' voice

[Quin]

Imagine if a television personality called the President a racist.

 

 

 

There literally is one of these for every situation. LOL

 

There was one for Justin Verlander.

 

[pettie4sox]

Trump has been called a lot worst than a white supremacist. If ESPN wants to can her, that's their right, but Trump should keep his nose out of it.

[RockRaines]

He's talking about how people on the left can espouse their political views (regardless of how informed or uniformed they are) with no recourse and people on the right or those with non-SJW views are held to a different standard.

Still doesn't make sense. But ok.

[Reddy]

He's talking about how people on the left can espouse their political views (regardless of how informed or uniformed they are) with no recourse and people on the right or those with non-SJW views are held to a different standard.

This is so completely inaccurate.

 

Also, when we're talking about media personalities and backlash, those on the left tend to be attacking things like bigotry, racism, etc, even if they do so in tactless ways, while those on the right are actually perpetrating those things. There's a difference.