US US Politics General 2 - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

General Trump Banner.png

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Also Star wars nerds: OMG ahsoka is bad ass! Best character ever! She is good at everything so I love her!
Okay, I'll take the bait. The real ones who watched the clone wars animated series as kids got to watch her grow up from an annoying sidekick to who she is now. Ahsoka was also trained by Anakin, one of the most skilled and experienced Jedi in the clone wars, so her power level makes sense.
 
I saw this in a lefty group. I figured you guys would get a kick out of it. View attachment 7028541
I cannot believe I just had to explain to someone how having your ear clipped is not a seemingly fatal wound.
Every single president I've lived through has been called the antichrist. It's always stupid because everyone forgets that the antichrist rises to power because he's a universally loved figure not someone whose politics you disagree with.
 
this is just more bullshit. if you go to a bunch of different leftie subreddits, judges and redditors alike (what's the difference these days?) are seething that trump and his admin are just ignoring their judicial orders.
View attachment 7028521
article | archive
View attachment 7028522View attachment 7028526

they also don't understand how law enforcement tiers work, and YET AGAIN they continue to spew this bullshit about congressionally ALLOCATED funds. if congress wants to mandate that those allocated funds are spent, they are more than welcome to pass legislation that demands that spending. that is actually how those things are supposed to work. as has been pointed out in the thread though, congress long ago abdicated a ton of its duties over to the executive branch simply to have a better chance of re-election.

View attachment 7028530

remember. andrew jackson ignoring the courts cost the lives of 4,000 people. ignore the millions of americans who struggled under biden as he sucked off illegals, that's totally fine, who cares about white people? redditors may actually have the mental capability to recognize that if trump just ignores this shit, there's nothing they can do at all.
View attachment 7028540
Stop quoting laws to men with swords.
 
this is just more bullshit. if you go to a bunch of different leftie subreddits, judges and redditors alike (what's the difference these days?) are seething that trump and his admin are just ignoring their judicial orders.
View attachment 7028521
article | archive
View attachment 7028522View attachment 7028526

they also don't understand how law enforcement tiers work, and YET AGAIN they continue to spew this bullshit about congressionally ALLOCATED funds. if congress wants to mandate that those allocated funds are spent, they are more than welcome to pass legislation that demands that spending. that is actually how those things are supposed to work. as has been pointed out in the thread though, congress long ago abdicated a ton of its duties over to the executive branch simply to have a better chance of re-election.

View attachment 7028530

remember. andrew jackson ignoring the courts cost the lives of 4,000 people. ignore the millions of americans who struggled under biden as he sucked off illegals, that's totally fine, who cares about white people? redditors may actually have the mental capability to recognize that if trump just ignores this shit, there's nothing they can do at all.
View attachment 7028540
1740586274315.png
Andrew Jackson would be proud.
trump better rember you got 4 years .
going to make 2028 & 2029 more toxic,
 
if i allocate you 6,000 cigarettes a day, you're not going to be able to smoke all 6,000. you'll have a surplus, which you can then save for later. i made this point earlier, but nobody who argues that all allocated funds should be spent down to the last dime will ever argue against it so i'm hoping you will.
This is why I specifically mentioned line items Congress wants money spent on. If we're going to get into semantics I will be exceedingly clear what I mean. If in USAID's budget Congress uses "will" or "shall" in regards to money being spent on initiatives, that spending needs to be conducted, because it is a command from Congress. Any items that say "may" are discretionary and should be left up to the executive for spending/freezing.

I think this interpretation should be rather uncontroversial.
 
This is why I specifically mentioned line items Congress wants money spent on. If we're going to get into semantics I will be exceedingly clear what I mean. If in USAID's budget Congress uses "will" or "shall" in regards to money being spent on initiatives, that spending needs to be conducted, because it is a command from Congress. Any items that say "may" are discretionary and should be left up to the executive for spending/freezing.

I think this interpretation should be rather uncontroversial.
I mean I can see where you might be able to assume you OUGHT to be able to boil it down to “will” or “shall,” but then the 2nd amendment says I can have a 155mm artillery piece if I want cause you SHALL not infringe. And that’s a really short sentence with two clauses separated by a comma that has had people at eachother’s throats for a lot longer than I’ve been alive.

It could say “this two billion dollars SHALL be used to cure AIDS in Somalia” and that contains zero instruction regarding how two billion dollars is supposed to cure AIDS in Somalia.

Or it could say “the government WILL use this two billion dollars to try to make the world really super betterer” and that’s wide fucking open to interpretation
 
That would be an argument for the courts to handle, because there are compelling arguments for both sides.

buddy. please. i'm trying to help you stop making these arguments.

The Secretary of State established USAID as directed by Executive Order 10973, signed on November 3,
1961. The agency was meant to implement components of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA; P.L.
87-195), enacted on September 4, 1961.

Section 1413 of the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998, Division G of P.L. 105-277,
established USAID as an “independent establishment” outside of the State Department (22 U.S.C.
§6563). In that act, Congress provided the President with temporary authority to reorganize the agency
(22 U.S.C. §6601). President Clinton retained the status of USAID as an independent entity, and the
authority to reorganize expired in 1999. Congress has not granted the President further authority to
abolish, move, or consolidate USAID since.

Section 1522 of that law stated that “the Administrator of the Agency for International Development,
appointed pursuant to section 624(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. §2384(a)), shall
report to and be under the direct authority and foreign policy guidance of the Secretary of State.”

there is no question. congress provided the president with authority, it was never actually given any new direction, and so it remained 'an independent agency' that reports to and is under the direct authority and foreign policy guidance of marco rubio, secretary of state. this isn't even in doubt. the very wording of it.

1740586749130.png
1740587044572.png
1740587075544.png
SEC. 412. TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS AND AUTHORITIES.

(a) Allocation of Funds.--
(1) Allocation to the secretary of state.--Funds made available
under the categories of assistance deemed allocated to the Director
of the International Development Cooperation Agency under section
1-801 of Executive Order No. 12163 (22 U.S.C. 2381 note) as of
October 1, 1997, shall be allocated to the Secretary of State on
and after the effective date of this title without further action
by the President.
(2) Procedures for reallocations or transfers.--The Secretary
of State may allocate or transfer as appropriate any funds received
under paragraph (1) in the same manner as previously provided for
the Director of the International Development Cooperation Agency
under section 1-802 of that Executive order, as in effect on
October 1, 1997.
(b) With Respect to the Overseas Private Investment Corporation.--
There are transferred to the Administrator of the Agency for
International Development all functions of the Director of the United
States International Development Cooperation Agency as of the day
before the effective date of this title with respect to the Overseas
Private Investment Corporation.
(c) Other Activities.--The authorities and functions transferred to
the United States International Development Cooperation Agency or the
Director of that Agency by section 6 of Reorganization Plan Numbered 2
of 1979 shall, to the extent such authorities and functions have not
been repealed, be transferred to those agencies or heads of agencies,
as the case may be, in which those authorities and functions were
vested by statute as of the day before the effective date of such
reorganization plan.

SEC. 522. ADMINISTRATOR OF AID REPORTING TO THE SECRETARY OF STATE.

The Administrator of the Agency for International Development,
appointed pursuant to section 624(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of
1961 (22 U.S.C. 2384(a)), shall report to and be under the direct
authority and foreign policy guidance of the Secretary of State.

SEC. 523. ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS COORDINATION AND OVERSIGHT.

(a) Authority of the Secretary of State.--
(1) In general.--Under the direction of the President, the
Secretary of State shall coordinate all United States assistance in
accordance with this section, except as provided in paragraphs (2)
and (3).
(2) Export promotion activities.--Coordination of activities
relating to promotion of exports of United States goods and
services shall continue to be primarily the responsibility of the
Secretary of Commerce.
(3) International economic activities.--Coordination of
activities relating to United States participation in international
financial institutions and relating to organization of multilateral
efforts aimed at currency stabilization, currency convertibility,
debt reduction, and comprehensive economic reform programs shall
continue to be primarily the responsibility of the Secretary of the
Treasury.
(4) Authorities and powers of the secretary of state.--The
powers and authorities of the Secretary provided in this chapter
are in addition to the powers and authorities provided to the
Secretary under any other Act, including section 101(b) and section
622(c) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151(b),
2382(c)).
(b) Coordination Activities.--Coordination activities of the
Secretary of State under subsection (a) shall include--
(1) approving an overall assistance and economic cooperation
strategy;
(2) ensuring program and policy coordination among agencies of
the United States Government in carrying out the policies set forth
in the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, the Arms Export Control Act,
and other relevant assistance Acts;
(3) pursuing coordination with other countries and
international organizations; and
(4) resolving policy, program, and funding disputes among
United States Government agencies.
(c) Statutory Construction.--Nothing in this section may be
construed to lessen the accountability of any Federal agency
administering any program, project, or activity of United States
assistance for any funds made available to the Federal agency for that
purpose.
(d) Authority To Provide Personnel of the Agency for International
Development.--The Administrator of the Agency for International
Development is authorized to detail to the Department of State on a
nonreimbursable basis such personnel employed by the Agency as the
Secretary of State may require to carry out this section.
the bill itself.

the agency is, as written, entirely subservient to the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio. i am a retarded layman, there is zero excuse for any judge not to understand this bill. it's written clearly.

I think this interpretation should be rather uncontroversial.
it's controversial because the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1997-98 is extremely clear about what powers the secretary of state has, and it's ALL of them. the organization directly reports to, and is under the authority of, the secretary of state.
 
I mean I can see where you might be able to assume you OUGHT to be able to boil it down to “will” or “shall,” but then the 2nd amendment says I can have a 155mm artillery piece if I want cause you SHALL not infringe. And that’s a really short sentence with two clauses separated by a comma that has had people at eachother’s throats for a lot longer than I’ve been alive.

It could say “this two billion dollars SHALL be used to cure AIDS in Somalia” and that contains zero instruction regarding how two billion dollars is supposed to cure AIDS in Somalia.

Or it could say “the government WILL use this two billion dollars to try to make the world really super betterer” and that’s wide fucking open to interpretation
Sure, and at that point I would say that, since Congress says the money SHALL be spent, it has to be spent on something, but the broad language means the execution of the spending should be left to the executive. Executive discretion mixed with some reasonable person doctrine should be enough for the courts, imo.
 
YOU KIWI PEOPLE NEED TO BE REEDUCATED.

I have had enough with the games, lies, gaslighting. The long nights, the cold sweats. WALKING ON EGGSHELLS with you 'people'.

YOU ARE ALL Lizards.

1. Republicans have very little actual power in government. WHY IS NO ONE TALKING ABOUT THIS? The House is getting by on a thread. What do you think is going to happen in the midterms?

2. Trump has ZERO POWER over state government. The blue states have formed a secret pact to counter not only Trump’s orders but also to counter tax reform. This is how it works: states generally conform their tax laws to Federal laws, but blue state have increasingly been choosing not to do that with zero repercussions: e.g. in California, HSAs do not exist for state tax purposes. And don’t think you’re safe because you live in a red state. Blue states will use market based sourcing laws to tax you even if you never set foot in the state. THE SUPREME COURT HAS ALREADY UPHELD THIS. THEY ARE NOT ON OUR SIDE.

3. Blue states are working with the Dems to create a Federally mandated database about our finances. Think FBAR but domestic and actually competent. They will use a FedCoin that we will have to pay our taxes with to maintain compliance. The next time a Democrat obtains power, it’s over.

THIS IS YOUR FINAL WARNING. THIS IS OUR LAST CHANCE TO EVACUATE PLANET EARTH.

And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
 
there is no question. congress provided the president with authority, it was never actually given any new direction, and so it remained 'an independent agency' that reports to and is under the direct authority and foreign policy guidance of marco rubio, secretary of state. this isn't even in doubt. the very wording of it.
My brother in Christ, in your post it clearly says

"President Clinton retained the status of USAID as an independent entity, and the
authority to reorganize expired in 1999. Congress has not granted the President further authority to
abolish, move, or consolidate USAID since."

Again, we're just not going to agree, and that's okay. If the Supreme Court determines that the President has the authority to unilaterally abolish USAID I am happy to eat crow when that happens, but as it stands right now, I believe there are compelling arguments for both cases.
 
Sure, and at that point I would say that, since Congress says the money SHALL be spent, it has to be spent on something, but the broad language means the execution of the spending should be left to the executive. Executive discretion mixed with some reasonable person doctrine should be enough for the courts, imo.
Ok. Then Trump should say “we will keep the money, so that by being less indebted we will spend less in tax dollars on interest payments, so our society and the businesses within can have an easier time investing in research and development”
 
If by 'formalized' you mean placed under the control and supervision of the State Department, then yes it was.
It still doesn't require Trump or Rubio get a permission slip from Congress to shutter USAID
Which is why the court case trying to stop Trump from returning overseas USAID staff was ruled in favor of Trump. He would have the power to recall staff.

What this issue is about is the DoS and USAID cancelling ongoing contracts and not paying for work done before Trump took office.

While the government can cancel contracts, they’ve targeted the USAID contracts in a very blanket manner, by basically saying that we don’t want to pay them anymore.

The not paying for prior work is the more egregious issue, because of the shockwaves it would send to the entire concept of government contracting. If the government can just not pay you for your work, why would anyone contract with the government? Would you contract with an entity known for not paying for work done?
 
Walking on eggshells? Clearly you don't understand how we do things around here.

Everyone goes full bore, full tard, full sperg, the whole time. That's the A&N way.
Nah, only on Reddit did I really rip into people. It would’ve been suicidal to bottle up that much raw contempt
The not paying for prior work is the more egregious issue, because of the shockwaves it would send to the entire concept of government contracting. If the government can just not pay you for your work, why would anyone contract with the government? Would you contract with an entity known for not paying for work done?
Man you have no idea how much I would love it if rent-a-mob globohomoists were uncertain of receiving payment for subverting everything normal
 
Back