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:
The near-entirety of Trump’s speech consisted of elaborate (and not-so-elaborate) attempts to troll Democrats. How did “owning the libs” become a substitute for anything resembling a legislative agenda? Presumably, it will get old eventually. But it also speaks to a genuine anger and frustration many Americans felt during the Biden era on cultural flash points such as gender identity and so-called wokeness, themes that Trump homed in on with relish. He spoke at length about the need to ban transgender athletes from competing in women’s sports, for instance.

Some of the cultural shifts promoted by liberals during “the great awokening” did indeed go too far. It shouldn’t be too controversial to say that at this point. Minorities in America tend to be more socially conservative than White liberals, and left-wing cultural commitments — particularly on gender identity — did, in fact, alienate Hispanic, Black, Asian and Arab voters (and voters more generally).

On transgender issues, Trump is mostly aligned with public opinion. According to a New York Times-Ipsos poll, 71 percent of Americans oppose prescribing hormone therapy or puberty-blocking drugs to anyone younger than age 18. Meanwhile, only 18 percent — including just 31 percent of Democrats — believe transgender female athletes should be allowed to participate in women’s sports.

But the question remains: What exactly was the point of relitigating such grievances?
For fuck's sake, Hamid. How can it be just trolling democrats when AS YOU YOURSELF NOTE, even Democrats don't agree with the Democratic party on men in women's sports and how can it not be relevant WHEN JUST A DAY BEFORE EVERY SINGLE DEMOCRAT VOTED AGAINST THE MAJORITY OF THE COUNTRY!?

You aren't being trolled, you are being told, "FUCK YOU!"" and you deserve it you fucking cretins. The issue is still relevant because you are still obstructing the will of a supermajority of the country and your own party. Stop doing that and THEN it's no longer worth bringing up aside from reminding everyone what a collection of fucking useless and counterproductive retards you are.
 
Brother - both of his running mates have openly talked shit about him. This man has a stand that gives everybody around him dementia so that you magically forget all the stupid retarded shit. If nixon got impeached for watergate, and clinton for getting a BJ, jan 6 has to have some sort of consequences, or else the system is busted. Which it clearly is. I would be an NPC if I just sat around while everything gets worse and acted like it's fine. Being anti-troon does not mean I'm comfortable with our country becoming an isolationist wreck that cannot support basic standards of living.
You could just type "I'm gay and retarded." Brevity is the soul of wit.
 
This is the wrong court, and it lacks jurisdiction to handle this matter.
Federal Court of Claims is under 28 U.S.C. § 1346 and 28 U.S.C. § 1491. The plaintiffs demonstrate district court jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 1361 as stated in the complaint. How does the complaint not merit district court jurisdiction?
The legal instrument is mislabeled, as it compels as opposed to restrains. It is not facially a TRO, but a mislabeled preliminary injunction.
I will agree on the language, although the restrain in this case is to prevent the government from not following through with the executive order. The plaintiffs went with the TRO because their funding had been impacted and needed immediate relief.
The proposed remedy - which again, is not a TRO because it compels action - demands the government give an immediate universal remedy not limited to the actual parties in the suit.
This is one of the arguments that the government put forth which leans in their favor. I do think that all the organizations which have not been paid because of the freeze, but if they are not part of the lawsuit, then the shouldn't be party to the benefits of immediate relief.
 
This makes sense of why she showed up at the hearing carrying her newborn, when one would imagine such an individual would have nannies and other help perfectly capable of taking care of the child for the duration.

Elizabeth Holmes did the same thing and now she sees her kids once a week on visiting day.
She has three children, husband is a stay-at-home dad. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna told Wu today she was referring Wu, Johnston of Denver and Johnson of Chicago to Pam Bondi for crminal investigation.

 
I would say it's the other way around. Believe President Trump, with nothing to lose, would take the hits/fall, protecting Vice-President Vance as he learns the job and prepares for 28. Suggest Vice-President Vance knows this, which gives him room to learn and make his mistakes now instead of when he is the occupant of the Oval Office. Believe the two of them worked it out early on during the campaign.
Thats why its so funny when people act like Trump will want a 3rd term, he just spent the last 4 years watching Biden slowly rot away and then got shot. Every day he's president is another day he could be out golfing or doing a rally, the shit he enjoys. Trump is 100% going to take whatever falls he needs to to keep Vance pure.

Even the optics are going to make it seem like nothing really changed, Vance is already in the oval office and doing prayer breakfasts and other shit, why would anyone panic if Trump vanishes in 2 or 4 years?
 
Back