Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Trump / Musk (other than DOGE)

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 12K
  • Views: 618K
  • Politics 
wmheel1287 said:
That context makes the statement worse, not better. It is precisely the role of the courts to determine the legitimate power of both Congress and the Executive. It is the role of the the Executive to appoint candidates for the judiciary. It is the role of Congress to approve of those candidates for the judiciary.
Click to expand...
Guess our board Trumpers snoozed through 10th grade Civics.
 
Bobfripp said:
This is you before the election ...
Hombre Masturbacion GIF by Hablemos de Sexo y Amor

This is you after the election ...
Hombre Masturbacion GIF by Hablemos de Sexo y Amor
Click to expand...
Come on dr bob, are you against a little me time? Sorry but just can't get all that excited pontificating all of the left's philosophical questions. I mean you just have to live life and say to yourself, what can be, unburdened by the what has been right?
 
Callatoroy said:
Come on dr bob, are you against a little me time? Sorry but just can't get all that excited pontificating all of the left's philosophical questions. I mean you just have to live life and say to yourself, what can be, unburdened by the what has been right?
Click to expand...
No offense Calla-man. Sometimes, we just need to unburden ourselves. ;)
 
wmheel1287 said:
That context makes the statement worse, not better. It is precisely the role of the courts to determine the legitimate power of both Congress and the Executive. It is the role of the the Executive to appoint candidates for the judiciary. It is the role of Congress to approve of those candidates for the judiciary.
Click to expand...
I know its precisely the role of the courts to determine the legitimate power of the president. A court ruling may or may not do that. He is talking about activist judges ruling just to impede his actions. He isn't talking about SCOTUS issuing a ruling and trump disregarding it. He isn't saying trump is above the law and shouldn't following court decisions.
 
Geisterfahrer said:
That it’s Congress’s power to legislate and spend. As far as I know, they’ve never ruled the President can destroy that power by fiat.
Click to expand...
And in the end it won't be destroyed. Money will go where it is by law supposed to go. And he will use the authority he has to reduce the size of the executive branch and the spending along with it.
 
CFordUNC said:
We’ve always had a “largely open border.” The border is the exact same as it has always been under every single presidential administration. There are patrolled ports of entry and there are thousands upon thousands of miles of unpatrolled land where people who are desperate enough to cross over rivers or other rough terrain often gain illegal entry in the United States. Short of literally building some sort of mythical impenetrable fortress wall along 100% of the border, we’re never going to be able to stop 100% of illegal immigration. What we *can* do, and what I support wholeheartedly, is robust reinforcement of our border security through beefed up border patrol personnel, beefed up technological infrastructure, strict policies on apprehension and expulsion- you know, exactly like the bipartisan border bill created by Republican Senator Jim Lankford. That bill was a fantastic start. I’m more than happy to spend whatever money we need, and allocate whatever resources and personnel we need, to secure the border as best we can. I’m happy to spend whatever money we need and allocate whatever resources and personnel we need, to detain and expel migrants who commit crimes here in the U.S. I think we should allocate whatever money and whatever resources we need to make our system of legal immigration more efficient. But we’ve always had a “largely open border” and we will always have a “largely open border” unless you think that spending tons of taxpayer money and tons of military manpower to literally secure thousands of miles of empty border land is a good use of resources.
Click to expand...
I'm not really taking a strong position on border wall versus other solutions, nor am I claiming to want a 100% secure border. I do wonder if the short-term cost of a border wall are less than the long-term cost of additional manpower, but that is a separate topic.

My issue has a lot more to do with the political side of the border and the fact that The Democratic Party seems to want to label as racist anyone who wants to have a more secure border while, again, sitting in there million dollar Manhattan townhome, far from the southern border.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top