Trump Administration Predictions (3 Viewers)

[Thales750]

What planet are you living on? He was complaining about the rampant cheating in the counting rooms and with the non verification of signatures, and the finding boxes of new ballots to count until your guy actually won. And accepting ballots WEEKS after election day. This is de regur in Bridgeport elections. They're usually found stashed in bathrooms or under beds where apparently they were placed for safety. What were people trying to hide from observers by covering up the windows as another simply silly example?

He was lying.

 

[AccessBlaster]

The money saved by importing from China was available for other stuff, creating jobs.

Read the text yourself at https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1702. There is no mention of tariffs, so it is illegal. You don't need to be a judge to read a law. Trump is stealing money from Americans. Why aren't you angry?

50 U.S. Code § 1702 does not explicitly exclude tariffs but it also doesn’t mention or authorize them directly.

So: Tariffs are not listed among the powers granted under IEEPA.
They are not explicitly forbidden either.

It's a gray area at best.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

I am still trying to figure out how selling us cheap stuff is walking over us. Remember, the law he used, the IEEPA, makes no mention of tariffs. So "something" he did is illegal.

Manipulating your currency exchange rates is the "walking over us part." China diddles with exchange rates so that we cannot avoid deficits.

 

[Thales750]

Manipulating your currency exchange rates is the "walking over us part." China diddles with exchange rates so that we cannot avoid deficits.

Twenty something years ago I used to try to engage my conservative cigar buddies on this very topic, they were reluctant to even see China as a threat, i got that one right as well. You're one of a handful of people who have ever even been aware of this, mush less understood it's implications.

Which, by the way, are more than keeping them competitive on the world market. it ensures that that their low wages (compared to the first world) provided a living wage domestically, in effect, they had two completely independent currencies. They played the same game on taxes. Exporters were exempt from taxes. This made the goods they made too expensive for the their domestic market, but it kept food and shelter affordable.
They did a lot of stuff, and here is where we diverge. They had a lot of American help in making that happen, It wasn't the evilDems that did it, it wasn't the Rupubs either. It was the the ultra rich American Capitalist that pulled all the strings to get us to where we are.
Two things created this environment.

 

[RogerCooper]

50 U.S. Code § 1702 does not explicitly exclude tariffs but it also doesn’t mention or authorize them directly.

So: Tariffs are not listed among the powers granted under IEEPA.
They are not explicitly forbidden either.

It's a gray area at best.

When a law doesn't authorize something, then it can't be done. That is not a gray area. Are you saying that a President can do anything they want as long as it not specifically prohibited? Do Democratic Presidents have that authority as well?

 

[RogerCooper]

Manipulating your currency exchange rates is the "walking over us part." China diddles with exchange rates so that we cannot avoid deficits.

The Chinese government invests in US government securities. How are we the victims?

 

[Thales750]

The Chinese government invests in US government securities. How are we the victims?

Doc will go out of his way not to acknowledge the root causes for these problems.

 

[Steve R.]

Do Democratic Presidents have that authority as well?

Democratic Presidents endlessly abuse their authority. Obama infamously stated (paraphrased): "If Congress fails to act, I have a pen and phone." Biden refused to enforce immigration laws. Biden used the Justice Department as the enforcement arm of the Democratic party. Biden made racism, in violation of Civil Rights mandates, official US government policy.

 

[RogerCooper]

Democratic Presidents endlessly abuse their authority. Obama infamously stated (paraphrased): "If Congress fails to act, I have a pen and phone." Biden refused to enforce immigration laws. Biden used the Justice Department as the enforcement arm of the Democratic party. Biden made racism, in violation of Civil Rights mandates, official US government policy.

Steve, are you rejecting AccessBlaster's view that the President can do anything not specifically prohibited?

 

[Steve R.]

trying to control the content of 60 Minutes.

60 Minutes lied as an attempt to damage Trump. When a person/company defames you, you have a right to take it to court. That is not attempting "to control the content of 60 Minutes".

Cutting off Science funding ...

A broad statement that fails to distinguish between legitimate science versus fake science. Democrats have been funding fake science that supports their political agenda.

Then there is that well known adage that science follows the money. So naturally, when Democrats fund "science", it amazingly supports what the Democrats want politically.

The Republicans are defunding that illegitimate "research".

 

[AccessBlaster]

When a law doesn't authorize something, then it can't be done. That is not a gray area. Are you saying that a President can do anything they want as long as it not specifically prohibited? Do Democratic Presidents have that authority as well?

Every administration will test the legal boundaries, that's why we have judicial review.

 

[RogerCooper]

Every administration will test the legal boundaries, that's why we have judicial review.

My company has already had to pay money to the government, pending judicial review. The President took an oath to execute the laws faithfully, not to see what he can get away with.

Creating a tax without congressional authorization was already struck down in Loper Bright.

The IEEPA tariffs are theft. I want money to be returned out of Trump's accounts, not from the taxpayers.

 

[AccessBlaster]

When a law doesn't authorize something, then it can't be done.

On June 30, 2023, in the case of Biden v. Nebraska, the Court ruled 6–3 that the administration lacked the authority under the HEROES Act to cancel up to $430 billion in federal student loan debt without explicit congressional approval.

Immediately announced a “Plan B” to pursue debt relief under a different law the Higher Education Act of 1965 which explicitly grants the Education Secretary some authority to "compromise, waive, or release" student loan debt.

 

[RogerCooper]

On June 30, 2023, in the case of Biden v. Nebraska, the Court ruled 6–3 that the administration lacked the authority under the HEROES Act to cancel up to $430 billion in federal student loan debt without explicit congressional approval.

Immediately announced a “Plan B” to pursue debt relief under a different law the Higher Education Act of 1965 which explicitly grants the Education Secretary some authority to "compromise, waive, or release" student loan debt.

Do you think Biden's actions were proper?

 

[Steve R.]

The President took an oath to execute the laws faithfully, not to see what he can get away with.

Did you have a post condemning Biden for failing "to execute the laws faithfully"?

Creating a tax without congressional authorization was already struck down in Loper Bright.

Democrats did that with Affordable Care Act through misrepresentation and legislative finagling. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court, in a bad decision, upheld the Affordable Care Act.

What is also troubling about this, Congress was supposed to be covered by Affordable Care Act as a "pay for" so that it would not increase deficit spending. Of course, after a suitable period, Congress disingenuously withdrew itself from the program. So once again, Congress with much sanctimony and fanfare passes legislation for the public optics of it, but then quietly in the dark of night exempts itself from the negative consequences.

 

[Steve R.]

Do you think Biden's actions were proper?

NO!

 

[RogerCooper]

NO!

Good. Do you condemn Trump's unconstitutional actions?

 

[Steve R.]

Good. Do you condemn Trump's unconstitutional actions?

What unconstitutional actions?

 

[AccessBlaster]

Do you think Biden's actions were proper?

He was exhausting legal channels. I may not agree with it, but it falls within the realm of the ongoing tug-of-war between the executive and judicial branches it's how our system works.

 

[RogerCooper]

What unconstitutional actions?

His IEEPA tariffs for starters.

Biden's actions with regard to student debt were beyond what the law allowed, but the law did give the President some authority to cancel student debt. The IEEPA gives no tariff authority to Trump.