Trump / Musk (other than DOGE) Omnibus Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 12K
  • Views: 324K
  • Politics 
Icky Mettle said:
It is ironic that Mitch— once the ringleader of Republican obstructionism— is now the only Pub voting along with Dems to prevent insanely unqualified cabinet nominees from landing the positions for which they are nominated. To whatever extent he’s grown a conscience, it’s too late now Mitch. You fucked us. Over and over.
Click to expand...
Wake me up when Mich casts an impactful vote that breaks with the Republicans.
 
nycfan said:

Senate votes to confirm Tulsi Gabbard as director of national intelligence​



“… The vote was 52-48 mostly along party lines, though Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky joined Democrats in opposing the confirmation….

… McConnell appeared to reference some of Gabbard’s positions in a statement he released after voting against her, saying she has “a history of alarming lapses in judgement.”

“The nation should not have to worry that the intelligence assessments the President receives are tainted by a Director of National Intelligence with a history of alarming lapses in judgment,” McConnell said. …”

——

Mitch is facing apparently significant health issues (he’s fallen twice recently and has to be moved around via wheelchair) so maybe in a rush to make his peace with some higher power ….
Click to expand...
He doesn't have that much time. He has a lot to atone for
 
www.nbcnews.com

This obscure law is one reason Trump's agenda keeps losing in court

Lawsuits challenging Trump policies raise big constitutional questions, but they also rely on a law that requires the government to follow the correct procedures when changing course.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com

This obscure law is one reason Trump's agenda keeps losing in court​

Lawsuits challenging Trump policies raise big constitutional questions, but they also rely on a law that requires the government to follow the correct procedures when changing course.

“Lawyers challenging President Donald Trump's aggressive use of executive power in the courts are turning to a familiar weapon in their armory: an obscure but routinely invoked federal law called the Administrative Procedure Act.

While lawsuits challenging such provocative plans as ending birthright citizenship and dismantling federal agencies raise weighty constitutional issues, they also claim Trump failed to follow the correct procedures as required under the wonky 1946 statute.

… Known in abbreviated form as the APA, the law allows judges to throw out federal agency actions that are "arbitrary and capricious" on various grounds, including failing to articulate why the agencies are changing policy.

… The APA haunted Trump during his first term.

…
In 2019, the Supreme Court found that the administration had not revealed its true reason for wanting to add a citizenship question to the census.

"Reasoned decision-making under the Administrative Procedure Act calls for an explanation for agency action. What was provided here was more of a distraction," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote then.


A year later, the court ruled that the administration had failed to consider various factors when it sought to unwind the Obama administration policy that protects "Dreamers" from deportation. Its actions were "arbitrary and capricious" under the APA, Roberts wrote.

On both issues, Trump administration officials "were sloppy, and the court did not like that," said Jonathan Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law.

… Trump is by no means the only president to have fallen afoul of the APA, which judges routinely cite in striking down federal agency actions on a wide variety of issues, including environmental and consumer regulations that agencies sometimes spend years reviewing. …”

——
The APA is not “obscure” at all inside the beltway or among government litigators — it is a frequently used tool that gives the judiciary a good bit of leeway to review rules changes, so seems a weird way to frame it.
 
nycfan said:
——
The APA is not “obscure” at all inside the beltway or among government litigators — it is a frequently used tool that gives the judiciary a good bit of leeway to review rules changes, so seems a weird way to frame it.
Click to expand...
I agree, but you're underselling the APA. It's not a "frequently used tool." It literally structures our executive agencies. Every time an agency does anything, the APA is implicated and until now, the agencies at least followed the procedures the APA lays out.

The Comstock Act is an obscure law. The APA is the backbone of our government. There's a reason why law schools have whole courses devoted to studying it, and those are lecture classes, often for 2Ls.
 
superrific said:
That kid's comment is one of the funniest things I've ever heard. Is that X alpha robot or whatever the fuck his name is?
Click to expand...
It is and clearly he is just echoing things he's heard his dad say.

Also, I checked the longer press conference video and believe the kid did say what it appears he said.
 
lawtig02 said:
He’s planning something with this Kennedy Center thing. I’m not sure what yet, but this has Stephen Miller written all over it.
Click to expand...
1739390456588.png



Message from Ben Folds earlier this afternoon.
 

Inspectors General Sue Trump Administration After Being Fired by President​

Lawsuit claims president failed to notify Congress or provide reasons for termination​



“
Eight inspectors general fired by President Trump in late January filed a lawsuit against the administration Wednesday alleging their termination violated the law, adding to dozens of other legal challenges facing the president at the start of his new term.

About 17 inspectors general were fired last month in a Friday night purge by the White House, which didn’t publicly announce the moves or provide an explanation as to why the officials lost their jobs. The firings led to concerns from both Democrats and some Republicans that the administration might have violated federal rules that require advance notice to Congress before such firings.

… IGs from the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Education, Labor and State as well as Veterans Affairs, Health and Human Services and the Small Business Administration are plaintiffs in the lawsuit. Defendants include Trump and the heads of agencies where the plaintiffs worked.

…
IGs are tasked with scrutinizing the actions of federal agencies to make sure they comply with laws and don’t misuse authority or taxpayer money. They have investigative powers and can respond to congressional requests for internal probes.

Trump has targeted other federal watchdogs and law-enforcement officials in recent weeks. On Monday, the Office of Government Ethics said Trump had removed its director, David Huitema, who had been confirmed by the Senate in November for a five-year term. Trump’s Justice Department has fired lawyers who worked on special counsel Jack Smith’s two prosecutions of the president.

Trump has accused IGs of being against his agenda and insufficient in their loyalties—even when he had appointed them. In April 2020, he fired intelligence community IG Michael Atkinson—his own appointee—after he had informed Congress about a whistleblower complaint concerning a phone call Trump had with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The call was the basis of Trump’s first impeachment. …”
 
Callatoroy said:
I will admit it takes some big balls and a "fuck any appearance of hypocrisy" to start this thread and post all the faux anger / indignation that is sure to come given how joe weaponized the justice dept and his pardon power. I thought you guys had accepted you lost the moral high ground here but hell no. You just ran up the back side of the hill and now pretend you never tumbled down the front Can't hide all the shit stains on your clothes though as they tell the truth.

At least I know my buddies lawtig and WM won't be offering much in this thread because I remember their previous condemnations of joe's use of pardons. My prediction is either this will be a really short thread as people care about not being hypocrites, or It will be a very large thread because the left doesn't give two shits about hypocrisy because its ingrained in their DNA.
Click to expand...
I also had a separate thread on Biden’s pardons at the end of his term if you want to bump it back to the top.

Trump has started his term with pardons in a very unusual way that seems to also bear discussion.
 
roostra said:
So, to be clear, your argument is Biden did it so it is perfectly fine that Trump is doing it?

Perhaps you could address the merits of these pardons.
Click to expand...
Actually its the opposite of my argument. Biden's use was terrible and enabled trump's abuse. So far, trump's use is as bad and likely to get worse. My comments, knowing the characters on this board, were to preemptively call out the hypocrisy that was sure to follow.
 
nycfan said:
I also had a separate thread on Biden’s pardons at the end of his term if you want to bump it back to the top.

Trump has started his term with pardons in a very unusual way that seems to also bear discussion.
Click to expand...
No need. I made my point (at least from my pov). Pardons are a dark stain on biden and trump comes along and says hold my beer. Just disgusting all the way around. I'm normally a traditionalist and not in favor of changing much in the way of our g'ment as in ending the filibuster, etc. But after joe and donald I would like to see pardon reform because neither could be entrusted with the privilege.
 
Up until the time that the FBI directorship was announced, I agreed. However, when a man with no scruples and an announced vendetta against Hunter Biden was put in charge, all political punctiliousness went out the window. As events have proven, that is more than justified by the arrogance and disregard to custom, decorum and rule of law shown by this administration.

Not exactly what I wanted from a president but with the current atmosphere, it's what I'd have done as a father.
 


But

Trump’s Resignation Program for Federal Workers Can Proceed, Judge Rules​

The decision was a win for the Trump administration, which has been stymied by a series of other court rulings in recent days. The judge said the plaintiffs lacked standing.

www.nytimes.com

Trump’s Resignation Program for Federal Workers Can Proceed, Judge Rules

The decision was a win for the Trump administration, which has been stymied by a series of other court rulings in recent days. The judge said the plaintiffs lacked standing.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

“
A federal judge said Wednesday that the Trump administration’s deferred resignation program for federal workers could proceed, allowing the White House to move forward with a key part of its plan to reduce the federal work force by encouraging mass buyouts.

Judge George A. O’Toole Jr., a U.S. District Court judge in the District of Massachusetts, did not weigh in on the program’s legality. He instead stated in his five-page ruling that the incentive plan, known as “Fork in the Road,” did not directly impact the plaintiffs of the lawsuit, which included a number of unions representing federal workers, and so the plaintiffs did not have standing to challenge it.

“The unions do not have the required direct stake in the Fork directive,” Judge O’Toole wrote, adding that they were “challenging a policy that affects others, specifically executive branch employees.”

“This is not sufficient” for standing, he wrote.

The unions challenging the plan had sought a temporary restraining order to block the plan from going forward. In his ruling, Judge O’Toole added that precedent from previous cases showed that the court did not have subject matter jurisdiction to consider the unions’ claims. …”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top