President Donald Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
Ok so hash tag six four four five ero.... ermm... makes me concerned about certain things in the world. Namely, why weren't all three posts posted at 3:22am?
Removing reporting and investigation on far-right terrorist groups and militias happened very early in the 2nd Trump presidency. I also seem to recall that this would also heavily affect screening processes for such affiliations in regards to military service and various law enforcement employment. Screening which had gaps as it was.It is a not a development that bodes well. At
Yes, I'm aware of that... but they did restore it again during Biden, and it was just taken back down again.
I'm at a loss on why more people can't see through what's going on here.
‘Incredible Corruption’: Blockbuster Report on Trump Crypto Grift Leaves Observers Stunned
“If this is true, this is the largest public corruption scandal in the history of the United States and it’s not even close,” said one critic.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/15/us/po...
Just another day in Trump's America... look at the brown people over there ----> no, over there ----> get all the lefties too!
--->>> Trump pockets billions <<<----
Lol they're keeping Trump away from London in case enraged Cockneys burn him at the stake. Keeping him locked away in castles and royal residences and entertaining the poor old cockwomble with military parades etc. At least this time he can see what proper marching is really like.
I'm going to guess 95%+ of Brits think Trump is a colossal twat.
@rococo and other legal experts
Is this a constitutional crisis (in the actual technical terms, not in the abused ones of "stuff i don't like is happening")?
IEEPA statute requires congressional oversight ever 6 months, the terms end on oct 2 for the april 2 tariffs
Speaker Johnson just had his rule approved to delay till march 2026.
Is it viable because it's congress overriding congress? or is the statute binding congress binding for the house unless the senate agrees as well?
I think we have been in constitutional crisis at least since Trump refused to try to get Garcia back from El Salvador after he was deported by mistake, even after the Supreme Court told him to do so.
He was later sent back here, but since there were then made up charges filed against him so he isn't back to his original status, I don't consider it to be over.
I think we have been in constitutional crisis at least since Trump refused to try to get Garcia back from El Salvador after he was deported by mistake, even after the Supreme Court told him to do so.
He was later sent back here, but since there were then made up charges filed against him so he isn't back to his original status, I don't consider it to be over.
no because he didn't refuse to "facilitate" the return as ordered.
and the doj can try to indict anyone and it takes a grand jury to do that and they had a grand jury vote on that.
moreover he is going to be deported anyway to a third country as the judge order preventing his deportation only applied to El Salvador for "risks for his life", and now that SCOTUS greenlighted deportation to third countries that doesn't work anymore to prevent deportations.
it's not a crisis if the actual powers interact as prescribed and find a solution even if you don't like the solution.
now instead with IEEPA, in my understanding the house is basically disregarding the Senate and taking powers from the Senate.
that's a crisis because when coequal powers abuse each other there is no prescribed way to solve that (and judges can't order congress to have hearings or hold votes)
Speaker Johnson just had his rule approved to delay till march 2026.
Is it viable because it's congress overriding congress? or is the statute binding congress binding for the house unless the senate agrees as well?
Congress can conduct its business as it sees fit.
no because he didn't refuse to "facilitate" the return as ordered.and the doj can try to indict anyone and it takes a grand jury to do that and they had a grand jury vote on that.moreover he is going to be deported anyway to a third country as the judge order preventing his deportation only applied to El Salvador for "risks for his life", and now that SCOTUS greenlighted deport
Of course he did. How do you think anyone tried to facilitate it (soon after being told to do so).
yes and if the house defies a law passed by the house+the senate, isn't that a constitutional crisis? it's not the house self-determining it's own rules.
The house accepted to bind itself to review emergencies under IEEPA every 6 months and the senate agreed as well and they bound each other by law to do that.
Now the leadership of house refuses to follow that agreement (because if the emergency had a review, the house would vote against it), and there is no recourse from the senate available.
The house, through its leadership, has reviewed it. Do you think the law requires a debate and vote?
The house, through its leadership, has reviewed it. Do you think the law requires a debate and vote?
I think the IEEPA paragraph i reported requires the full house (and senate) to meet and decide if they want to have a joint resolution.
The house didn't met and has no intention to do so (because if it did, the emergency would be voted as ended)
@rococo and other legal expertsIs this a constitutional crisis (in the actual technical terms, not in the abused ones of "stuff i don't like is happening")?IEEPA statute requires congressional oversight ever 6 months, the terms end on oct 2 for the april 2 tariffs Speaker Johnson just had his rule approved to delay till march 2026.Is it viable because it's congress overriding
I am not an expert in this area at all.
I don't read the NEA (incorporated by reference into IEEPA) as requiring an actual vote. Whether Congress has complied with the requirement to "meet to consider a vote" on a joint resolution is a fair question, but in practice, this provision has been mostly ignored by Congress for many decades. In other words, the practice predates Trump. And there isn't much of an enforcement mechanism.
let's the game begin
What exactly is Antifa, you ask? It’s as vague as “woke” and can be applied to anyone at any time. #Freedom
KKK is fine, though. Proud Boys are cool.
This nebulous “fascism is bad” group that has less organization than Anonymous? That ****’s gotta go.
9/16 - Roccoco questions the safety of continuing to post on 2+2 Politics.
Seriously though, it’s so frustrating as a “normie” to see all these big and powerful institutions just roll over one at a time like dominoes. 1%ers with less spine than the random minimum wage Joe who holds a sign up on the street for a day.
Random minimum wage guy feels he has less to lose than a luminary at one of those institutions who has large houses they have to buy.
9/16 - Roccoco questions the safety of continuing to post on 2+2 Politics.
Seriously though, it’s so frustrating as a “normie” to see all these big and powerful institutions just roll over one at a time like dominoes. 1%ers with less spine than the random minimum wage Joe who holds a sign up on the street for a day.
so when half or more of corporate american went with a full black screen on social media during actual riots in 30+ american cities, that wasn't scary or frustrating, but institutions doing 1/100th of that to align a bit with the right after decades of complete submission to leftist ideals is frustrating ok.
