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:
Ideally the universities should be defunded on universal grounds rather than Israel First.

And a lot of them or all of them as well.

View attachment 7114753

I'm usually able to invoke theory of mind and logic to follow the thread and reason why people hold dumb opinions, even when they're emotionally based. I do not get this extreme zelensky worship. I mean look at this, he blows these blue college women's favorability of their own political party out of the water, it's not even close. I kind of get how the simping for ukraine came to be; biden and other democrats had illicit business there, the democrats and even many republicans plus the entire legacy media were tripping over themselves to conceal the corruption and depict ukraine as a paragon of modern liberal democracy when it's basically mini russia but a little more gay, it tracks that a lot of people are all in on ukraine, but being so obsessed with zelensky doesn't track. The guy is clearly putting on an act and it's a dumb obviously fake tough guy act, he isn't particularly good looking, he doesn't come across as intelligent, he's a nobody if not for the russian invasion. Why are people fawning over him? Just because ukraine = good and he = ukraine? I don't get it.
 
i can't believe trump would get rid of the department of education, imagine what this is going to lead to! schools are gonna start dumbing down their curriculum, kids are gonna start graduating without even knowing how to read or write, public schools are basically going to become daycare for violent niggers until they do something to get thrown in prison! I can't even imagine it!

wait a second...
 
Ok I'm not a American nor a law type person so I have a question for some of our Law Kiwi's

How do these Democrat lawfare cases always and I mean always end up in front of a Democrat Judge?

Really isn't it supposed to be random which case a judge gets? So how is it every damn time these lawfare suits end up on the desk of some activist judge who will rule in their favor? I know you can kinda of judge shop by choosing which district you file in but this shit in DC is crazy

Chutkin has had 6 anti-Trump cases assigned to her in the last month alone, that's hella not random at all. So is there some clerk somewhere in the DC circuit whose fucking around in the system to ensure these anti-Trump and DODGE cases all end up before sympatheic judges?
 
Citi's insane if they pay this out, but at the same time, Citi doesn't have the same inherent protections that Trump and the Trump admin has. The Judge actually could, perhaps, go after Citi for refusing.

If Citi pays this out, Orange Man is going to come down hard on them and use them as an example. Trump could argue that Citi is stealing money from the American people if they pay out and then the bank gets accused of treason.

Their executives don't need another Luigi situation as it stands already, so stepping in the political fight with Trump is just asking your employees to get confronted about it, likely in a negative way and puts targets on all your employees. I would be more concerned about the consequences of defying the president, especially this one, then I would a judge telling me to pay out to foreign NGOs. Its the same situation as the judge who ordered the shitskin criminals back on American soil.
 
Ok I'm not a American nor a law type person so I have a question for some of our Law Kiwi's

How do these Democrat lawfare cases always and I mean always end up in front of a Democrat Judge?

Really isn't it supposed to be random which case a judge gets? So how is it every damn time these lawfare suits end up on the desk of some activist judge who will rule in their favor? I know you can kinda of judge shop by choosing which district you file in but this shit in DC is crazy

Chutkin has had 6 anti-Trump cases assigned to her in the last month alone, that's hella not random at all. So is there some clerk somewhere in the DC circuit whose fucking around in the system to ensure these anti-Trump and DODGE cases all end up before sympatheic judges?
They do something called forum shopping. They pick a specific district to file these things in, which Chutkin is the only judge in, or one of like 2-3. So she gets them. Since she's very obviously on the Democrat's side -- the unfortunate reality of the situation is she's likely indoctrinated, and not actually being paid off -- they know to go to her and she'll try and fuck over Trump.
 
Ok I'm not a American nor a law type person so I have a question for some of our Law Kiwi's

How do these Democrat lawfare cases always and I mean always end up in front of a Democrat Judge?

Really isn't it supposed to be random which case a judge gets? So how is it every damn time these lawfare suits end up on the desk of some activist judge who will rule in their favor? I know you can kinda of judge shop by choosing which district you file in but this shit in DC is crazy

Chutkin has had 6 anti-Trump cases assigned to her in the last month alone, that's hella not random at all. So is there some clerk somewhere in the DC circuit whose fucking around in the system to ensure these anti-Trump and DODGE cases all end up before sympatheic judges?
They don't. It depends heavily on the district. The DC district is made up of judges from the DC metro area which is Democratic. You can find plenty of court cases in other districts that go the other way. The only districts that are particularly problematic are the 9th district and the DC district, along with the circuit courts in certain states. The 9th is overly large and many people have been calling for it to be broken up for years now. Even when it goes up to a Dem appointed judge, it isn't always ruled favorably for Democrats. You literally just posted a court case where the Dem appointed judge didn't rule favorably for Democrats, so I'm not even sure what you're bitching about.

What your saying is an example of confirmation bias where you only notice the cases that go against Trump and not the cases that don't, and this is partially supported by the fact that cases that go for Trump usually don't make headlines and quietly go away.
 
If Citi pays this out, Orange Man is going to come down hard on them and use them as an example. Trump could argue that Citi is stealing money from the American people if they pay out and then the bank gets accused of treason.

Their executives don't need another Luigi situation as it stands already, so stepping in the political fight with Trump is just asking your employees to get confronted about it, likely in a negative way and puts targets on all your employees. I would be more concerned about the consequences of defying the president, especially this one, then I would a judge telling me to pay out to foreign NGOs. Its the same situation as the judge who ordered the shitskin criminals back on American soil.
The right doesn't do that. (They should.) It would be more likely that the Citi execs would be confronted by ty-d-bowl hairdye troons screaming about them working with a "literal nazi fascist capitalist" than some MAGA people confronting them as they enter/leave their building.
 
Last edited:
Why are they trying to advertise for Maga Voters on Bluesky? That's like trying to advertise a pork BBQ restaurant in Tel Aviv.

Trump retracted one of the executive orders stripping clearances and contracts from a Democrat law firm:
View attachment 7116335
Source (Archive)

Tweet about the injunctions:
View attachment 7116340
Source (Archive)

Tweet about a corrupt judge:
View attachment 7116345
Source (Archive)
They will kneel before the Emperor, or be broken before him.
 
Back