Tariffs Catch-All

  • Thread starter Thread starter BubbaOtis
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 4K
  • Views: 136K
  • Politics 
Calheel said:
At least some of the law firms had backbone. I hope the law firms that gave into Trump lose a bunch of clients over it.
Click to expand...
The law firms that gave in can just refuse to comply with what Trump is demanding and I very much doubt that the required provision of pro bono work would be constitutional. The executive cannot create an army of private lawyers through extortion.

I mean, who knows. The Supreme Court has made a complete mess of everything. Imagine how much simpler everything would be, and how much better it would work, if not for this stupid unitary executive shit that has crawled into the law like a shit-covered skunk. We wouldn't even have to ask these questions -- it would be obvious that the executive does not have this sort of power. And if it did, it couldn't wield it however it chooses.

The fucking morons who focus on the first few words of Article II, while ignoring the works "take care that the laws are faithfully executed", have created such a crisis. If "faithfully executed" were enforced (which surely it can be, if the unitary executive can be), we wouldn't have any of these Trump problems. Or a lot fewer, I should say.
 
wmheel1287 said:
I've seen no evidence that any significant number of Republicans currently in office at the federal level are actually concerned AT ALL with the deficit.
Click to expand...
They've road that horse since Reagan first talked about it, but no republican president has decreased the deficit 50 years. It's just a talking point.

If they wanted to decrease the deficit and debt, they wouldn't start every campaign with "tax cuts".
 
Huh? said:
Based on this morning's vote, your "plenty of people on the Republican side that are also concerned with the deficit" numbers two. Once again, your statement is wrong - what's unique is that it was objectively disproven in a matter of hours.

Your side doesn't care one whit about the deficit. If you have any sense of shame, you will not bring up this canard of a both-sides argument again.
Click to expand...
Not my side. I'm a registered Democrat.
 
Huh? said:
Your side is to not take a side. That doesn't do anything to reduce the deficit, either.
Click to expand...
My side is to not reflexively agree with everything a Democrat says or disagree with everything a Republican says. I like to think about a position and decide for myself but I know other people like to just let their party's leadership decide for them.
 
nycfan said:

Trump Team Races to Cut Piecemeal Tariff Deals With More Than 70 Countries​

Administration might settle for written commitments from foreign governments to make certain economic reforms​


GIFT 🎁 🔗—> https://www.wsj.com/politics/policy...f6?st=moon2k&reflink=mobilewebshare_permalink
Click to expand...
“… People with knowledge of the discussions say that many of the offers President Trump is touting are preliminary calls or offers from other nations to negotiate, not fleshed-out economic proposals. While the administration has issued broad requirements for the countries coming to the table—such as reducing their tariffs and buying more American goods—the White House was still devising its negotiation strategy Thursday, as the countdown to the July 8 deadline began.

Traditional free-trade agreements typically take several years to negotiate. Narrower deals covering specific industries that Trump reached with nations such as China, Japan and Korea in his first term took several months. The White House now needs to speed-run negotiations much faster and with dozens of nations at the same time—something that is worrying lawmakers on Capitol Hill who are eager to see deals reached that can avoid the tariff-induced stock selloff of the past week.

The deals aren’t likely to be fully developed free-trade agreements, which typically need to be passed by Congress. Instead, Sen. Bill Hagerty (R., Tenn.), Trump’s first-term ambassador to Japan, said the administration might settle for written commitments from foreign governments to make certain economic reforms, akin to a term sheet that precedes an investment or business deal.

That perspective was backed up by a foreign-government official in contact with the U.S. …”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top