Trump / Musk (other than DOGE)

[ZenMode]

It's on a thread called explainer. Meanwhile, if you support busing the migrants to NYC, then how the hell can you complain about the cost. As you stated in a post immediately above this one, "why NY or any generally expensive city?"

Like I said, they didn't have to keep the migrants in NYC nor did they have to put them up in expensive NY hotels.

There are other options.

 

[BlueSmoke]

I can't help but think of the Time Magazine cover of Musk sitting at the Resolute Desk. Literally, he's almost in it...............and I suspect Trump knows it.

 

[ZenMode]

Or maybe he is complaining that a government checkbook office dose t duplicate the record-keeping actually being done by the feral agencies in charge of reviewing and confirming payment. He is co distantly playing a game of OMG no one is keeping track because the agency whose only job is to receive directions to make the actual payment is not also doing the job of the agency funded and and charged with contracting for and approving the payment.

It’s like blaming Bank of America if your check didn’t have enough detail in the check memo line for a random audit of Bank of America checks cashed to discern what the checks were for as part of your personal budget.

One would think, if that were the case, someone involved would have pointed that out to him at some point. If he's standing over the shoulder of the "check writer" and says (in shock) "Do you NOT put anything in the description????", that person would say "This is just the check writing stage. All of the details of how the money is spent is tracked by (insert department name)."

Still, I will be curious to see how much fraud is found and will wonder why, if a significant amount is uncovered, why it took this long to find.

 

[1moretimeagain]

Like I said, they didn't have to keep the migrants in NYC nor did they have to put them up in expensive NY hotels.

There are other options.

Make a big show of sending immigrants to NYC and then have a fit about immigrants being housed in NYC.

 

[CFordUNC]

I'll take a momentary break from shitposting to say that I think that the idea of reducing or eliminating wasteful government spending, or inefficient government spending, is good. I also respect the right of a new presidential administration to make appointments, remove appointments, create task forces, request more transparency, etc. I respect the right of the new presidential administration to make decisions on government spending and policy implementation and personnel with which I disagree.

Where I disagree with this administration is how they're doing it in ways that clearly defy the Constitutional order, clearly defy legal ruling, and clearly defy the legislative branch. That's not the right way to do it. I think that every presidential administration has the right to make their appointments and direct their appointees as they see fit, regardless of how much I agree or disagree with them, but I don't think that any presidential administration has the right to thumb its nose at the other two branches of government, nor do I think that it has the right to unilaterally cut entire swaths of the federal government sans Congressional approval or oversight.

As a conservative who believes strongly in the rule of law and order, in our system of checks and balances, and in the authority of the United States Constitution, it has been disheartening to see so many Republicans turn their backs on those very ideals on which they've always claimed their conservatism is founded. It may be fun to own the libs for now, but it's all fun and games until none of us- Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal- live under a rules-based society. All of us, regardless of ideology, will be negatively impacted, including- and perhaps especially- the ones who relish owning the libs the most.

It's fun to debate, discuss, and disagree about politics- and sometimes it's even more fun to talk trash with folks on an online message board about politics. But ultimately, I would imagine that every single one of us radical jihadists on this far left extremist echo chamber, would be more than happy to support a Trump administration that governs within the constraints of the rule of law and in a way that doesn't resemble slash-and-burn farming. I don't mean to speak for others here, but I certainly would love nothing more than to have these next four years under Trump go as smoothly and as economically prosperous as any presidential administration has been in my lifetime. I'd love to be the very first one on January 20, 2029 to say that Trump 2.0 was a job well done.

 

[superrific]

Like I said, they didn't have to keep the migrants in NYC nor did they have to put them up in expensive NY hotels.

There are other options.

1. They aren't putting them up in expensive hotels. What part of that do you not understand.
2. NY doesn't have the power to bus the migrants around. That Desantis and Abbott did so by having them sign phony waivers is not a model that should be emulated.
3. Why didn't the Pubs just pass the bipartisan immigration bill? That's so much easier than all this convoluted nonsense.

 

[MOUNTAINH33L]

Mighty nice of Elon for letting Trump sit in his seat.

 

[CFordUNC]

 

[UNCatTech]

you really aren't good at this.

This is me after the the election





This is you after the election



This is me 3 weeks after the election



This is you 3 weeks after the election

Yea, you know we have post where your alter ego comes out and admits you don't like things he's doing and how he only has one approach to everything.

 

[Shenanigans]

Just going to try to save you from wasting any more of your time.

1. They have zero interest in discussing anything in good faith. They clearly know what you mean, but try to find some minute detail to refute your point and then say you are dumb, yada, yada, yada. Any reasonable person knows that the dims royally fucked up the border with joe's policies and rhetoric, and kamala's incompetence. That is a fact as supported by the overwhelming negative polling on border security and election results. So, Ford saying no and super trying to employ some technicality is just them acting in bad faith. At that point, all further attempts are wasted time because they can't defend the border and they can't objectively own any team responsibility. Not rational to think they could on any other topic either. Cut and do something more useful like paint something and then watch the paint dry. You will get about as much meaningful insight.

2. There is zero desire to engage in objective political discussion. Not only is it in bad faith, but arrogance, wokeness, limited intellectual curiosity, and TDS precludes any possible worthwhile discussion. You are on a political board dominated by, not just dims, but waaaaay out there dims. How many of these critical thinkers do you think participate in boards where they are in the minority? They don't have any intellectual curiosity and would rather spend all their time in a safe space where their views are echoed back and forth. There is a severe lack of seriousness in what is actually being discussed. You can't actively and intelligently engage with people who are woke. Liberals yes, there is something to be gained and learned. But woke liberals, lol might as well be talking to radicalized jihadists. Not much different in their ability to think objectively. Brainwashed is brainwashed.

But, if you disagree, keep chopping wood.

The very kind people (not me) on this board and IC have spent 15+ years trying to have good faith discussions with you. They have shared 10's of thousands of reliable sources of information, yet here you are, dumb as ever. Trying to defend the indefensible.

I wouldn't describe myself as woke (calling people woke is like porn to you fake Christians). I would describe myself as hating you. Everything about you is repulsive.

I'm simply here to make fun of you, and god-willing, hopefully take a massive dump on your face while holding one of your guns.

And now you want to have a civil discussion, while Trump is destroying most decent things in this country.

In case I haven't said it before, fuck you, you stupid rube.

 

[Geisterfahrer]

Can we bring this one back to the rule of law please.

 

[Callatoroy]

Yea, you know we have post where your alter ego comes out and admits you don't like things he's doing and how he only has one approach to everything.

I have identified the things he is doing that I don't like. Those haven't changed. That's not the same as "I don't like the things he is doing"

 

[Shenanigans]

Can we bring this one back to the rule of law please.

If Trump doesn't have to, why do I, wwaaahhhh!!

I'll do my best, my best is mediocre, fair warning.

Down with the Palestinians! Get em trump army!

 

[ZenMode]

1. They aren't putting them up in expensive hotels. What part of that do you not understand.

The part where NYC has the third highest average hotel cost in the country. Surely you've been to NYC. There are no cheap hotels, restaurants, etc.

2. NY doesn't have the power to bus the migrants around. That Desantis and Abbott did so by having them sign phony waivers is not a model that should be emulated.

Ok. Get them to agree to go somewhere else OR find another way to house them.

3. Why didn't the Pubs just pass the bipartisan immigration bill? That's so much easier than all this convoluted nonsense.

Because it was politically beneficial to have an open issue. The same reason, for example, legislation is sometimes held up in Congress by one party or the other.

 

[superrific]

The part where NYC has the third highest average hotel cost in the country. Surely you've been to NYC. There are no cheap hotels, restaurants, etc.Ok. Get them to agree to go somewhere else OR find another way to house them. Because it was politically beneficial to have an open issue. The same reason, for example, bills are held up in Congress by one party or the other.

I lived in NYC for years. You're right -- the cost of living is high. Again, what are you complaining about? They maxed out all the other options. You know what NYC doesn't have a lot of? Empty buildings.

 

[UNCatTech]

I have identified the things he is doing that I don't like. Those haven't changed. That's not the same as "I don't like the things he is doing"

As someone that appears to understand the need for checks and balances, and accountability, you cant really be ok with him completely ignoring the guard rails in place to keep the US from becoming a dictatorship, correct?

Or are you ok with a dictatorship, as long as it's your dictator.

All his moves are that of a dictator, unless the legal system works and limits his power.

It would allowing me nice if Congress performed a they should, but we know they are scared of him.

 

[roostra]

Ok. Get them to agree to go somewhere else OR find another way to house them.

How, exactly, do you propose they should have done this?

 

[Callatoroy]

The very kind people (not me) on this board and IC have spent 15+ years trying to have good faith discussions with you. They have shared 10's of thousands of reliable sources of information, yet here you are, dumb as ever. Trying to defend the indefensible.

I wouldn't describe myself as woke (calling people woke is like porn to you fake Christians). I would describe myself as hating you. Everything about you is repulsive.

I'm simply here to make fun of you, and god-willing, hopefully take a massive dump on your face while holding one of your guns.

And now you want to have a civil discussion, while Trump is destroying most decent things in this country.

In case I haven't said it before, fuck you, you stupid rube.

You are the very definition of woke. You are also the definition of people who were repudiated in the election. So hate away. You are now an afterthought and hopefully will be further neutered over the next 4 years. If I had just been relegated to the trash heap and deemed useless by a majority of voters I'd be angry too. You would be lucky not to shit your pants while holding a gun barney

 

[ChapelHillSooner]

I know very little about the law, but is it the assumption moving forward that the Trump administration will appeal these rulings to SCOTUS, where we then face the following possibilities?

1) SCOTUS kneecaps the judiciary and Trump wins;

2) SCOTUS retains a shred of legitimacy; Trump backs down;

3) SCOTUS retains a shred of legitimacy; Trump still doesn't back down

I predict that SCOTUS will roll over to preserve the appearance that they still have some legitimacy. Trump and Musk can’t defy SCOTUS if SCOTUS just agrees to everything they want.

 

[TarSpiel]

You are the very definition of woke.

Just for clarification, this is incorrect, *I* am the very definition of woke.

If you want to ask me any questions about wokeness, fire away.