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

​

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/

 

[HTTP Error 404]

He could have enforced existing laws and influenced Congress, which his party controls, to pass more stringent laws and immigration reform.

They were expecting him to try that. "Oh hey thinks he has the house and senate, we'll block and slow walk him there. Only have to do it 2 years and then we can fix this in the midterms."

Instead he did the thing that only Trump could do. He bypassed them all using powers he absolutely has at his disposal but it isn't "polite" to use. He's getting things done -- even if currently temporary -- and gutting the system's very important network of abused pipelines where American funds are turned into uniparty power.

He's got them openly screaming about the evils of (white) african migration, and churches choosing to shut down rather than have to give the same services to white people they give to saintly pet brown people.
He has them flying across the world to have romantic luncheons with literal human trafficking gang members.
He has them using the only weapon they have left -- weaponized judges, many of whom aren't even Americans -- which is working just as long as Trump LETS it work and is making EVERYONE aware that we have a problem.

Judicial overreach was supposed to be their "in case of actual American, break glass" thing. A one or two time a year thing meant to stop some action that accidentally damaged some Uniparty platform. It was never meant to be used literally once a week for an entire administration. But as we saw with the leftists on X calling everyone Nazis -- you're a nazi, I'm a nazi, they see nazis under their bed at night -- the left finds a tactic that works and just abuses it until it doesn't anymore. That judge that keeps putting herself in charge of Trump's cases ("randomly") and has ignored SCOTUS? She's the judicial equivalent of the pink haired retard on twitter explaining that yes, maybe it is Nazi talk to expect to be able to pick what religion your own child is taught.

Meanwhile, the polling still supports Trump. Americans are sick and tired of wetbacks being allowed in. They're sick and tired of trannies and niggers running around being trannies and niggers and demanding everyone thank them for it. They're sick, oh so sick, of the Denmothers of the Longhouse explaining to everyone how it's gonna be, because they know best how to live YOUR life in their 98% white gated Californian community. The only reason this all had support is the 8% of America that is part of the Marxist Death Cult called "Progressivism" had dared everyone to stop clapping. Well, that's over now. Someone should let the Alt-Left, the progressives, know that things are different -- because I don't think they've realized people have stopped flinching when the pink haired retards call them a ceremonial bad name and threaten to kill them and take their children away via societal pressure.

Trump should be pushing even harder. Make the "new left" that will be forming in the next 10-30 years be forced to take center-right positions because the center has moved so far to the right -- towards Nationalism, towards Populism, towards Isolationism, towards Meritocracy -- that they HAVE to reject the retarded excesses they've been addicted to since the late 80s. Trump is a 90s democrat who was left behind when the party ran off a cliff. I want the next Clinton to be a Ronald Reagan clone wearing a DNC badge.

 

[The Last Stand]

Ridiculous. They would have done all that anyway and the result would have been identical.

AFAIK, correct me if I'm wrong, any Supreme Court decision could be overturned but only by them or 2/3 of Congress and the states. It would be up to Congress to rewrite a law if it gets turned down. The President cannot overturn a Supreme Court decision, but they can appoint SC judges.

Assuming the birthright law is constitutionally protected, you'd need to make a new amendment and get that approved.

 

[X Prime]

You are wrong, because SCOTUS decisions are irrelevant. All Trump has to do is dare them to enforce.

 

[HTTP Error 404]

What is the due process for an illegal violating immigrant law? The court hasn't said so beyond "24 hours isn't enough." So 36 hours.

Remember, this is motte and baily bullshit. Due Process means the process to which they are due, unless you want it to mean "a fair trial", unless you want it to mean "NO ORANGE MAN BAD HE CAN'T JUST DO ANYTHING ORANGE MAN BAD THEY'RE DUE AN IMMGIRATION PROCESS THAT LETS THEM LIVE HERE FOR FREE FOREVER." And they pick whichever one they can get away with and will further their argument, which is, and always has been, "open borders 24x7 forever, no human is illegal, and only nazis deport anyone ever."

 

[Wherethereisawhip]

If the SC rules against him, the Executive branch has no power

No. The SC actually has no power outside what the other branches allow it outside of the courts. As seen with the student loan forgiveness mess the democrats just kept ignoring it along with everything that's happened with the Pennsylvania SC and election night shit. After all, they granted the whole power of Judicial Review to themselves instead of any amendment or act of law. The courts do not have any power over the purse which is the real mover of any sort of government or an defined power to remove the President. Their only capital is prestige itself and being the only court written to exist in the constitution.
They can't really do shit if Trump just says no, outside of have the media whine about it which its always going to do anyways.

 

[Exterminatus]

Why did the Dems never make it an actual law?

Because abortion was a convenient political tool both for the Dems and Reps, it allowed them to milk outrage and get donations. The Dems in their general arrogance believed that SCOTUS would never overturn Roe v Wade even in defiance of left-leaning justices like Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who felt that the ruling was made on very shaky legal ground.

Is there a chance the 14th will ever be legit overturned and discarded?

You need a two-thirds majority to repeal or add an amendment to the Constitution. One of the more famous examples is how we passed the 18th Amendment, bringing in Prohibition, then repealed it later on with the 21st Amendment.

That's why we've only amended it 27 times in 248 years. The Founding Fathers did this by design, ideally to stop situations where the Constitution could be amended on a whim since it's the supreme law of the country. In short, the Republicans would need a supermajority, or we swap out the current Democrats with people who aren't crazy and evil.

 

[The Last Stand]

You are wrong, because SCOTUS decisions are irrelevant. All Trump has to do is dare them to enforce.

Stare decisis, meaning to "stand by things decided." If they "enforce," they'd have to be obligated to provide reasoning based on past rulings and the Constitution themselves. If anything, Article IV should Trump to enforce any immigration executive order he sees fits as it could be classified as an "invasion."

 

[X Prime]

Thank you for confirming that all SCOTUS decisions are irrelevant. It's no different from the emperor claiming he has clothes.

 

[The Last Stand]

Thank you for confirming that all SCOTUS decisions are irrelevant. It's no different from the emperor claiming he has clothes.

So, in other words, if the Supreme Court cannot prove that what Trump is doing is unconstitutional, then they cannot (should not) block it? I'm illiterate in this sort of thing.

What do you mean, "the emperor has clothes"?

 

[HTTP Error 404]

Thank you for confirming that all SCOTUS decisions are irrelevant. It's no different from the emperor claiming he has clothes.

The problem is, if he does do the Jackson maneuver, it lights the fuse on what amounts to a soft civil war. Has he purged enough of the Uniparty deep state swamp creatures from the government such that when he says "no, they're invaders, they are leaving, fuck Roberts and his country club with the child sex dungeon" you won't immediately see California and Arizona try to arrest (or kill) any ICE agents operating openly in their hellholes?

 

[X Prime]

The problem is, if he does do the Jackson maneuver, it lights the fuse on what amounts to a soft civil war. Has he purged enough of the Uniparty deep state swamp creatures from the government such that when he says "no, they're invaders, they are leaving, fuck Roberts and his country club with the child sex dungeon" you won't immediately see California and Arizona try to arrest (or kill) any ICE agents operating openly in their hellholes?

As if California and Arizona weren't heading that way eventually, let's be brutally honest here.

 

[The Last Stand]

The problem is, if he does do the Jackson maneuver, it lights the fuse on what amounts to a soft civil war. Has he purged enough of the Uniparty deep state swamp creatures from the government such that when he says "no, they're invaders, they are leaving, fuck Roberts and his country club with the child sex dungeon" you won't immediately see California and Arizona try to arrest (or kill) any ICE agents operating openly in their hellholes?

So, if the Supreme Court DOES enforce, they could manipulate what's written in the Constitution to back up their ruling? Then, it'd be up to the states to enforce how they'd see fit?

 

[JayseeDenton]

I don't know, guys... Democrats made globohomo their zeitgeist for the past 10 years and refuse to let it go.

Democrats are not a monolith. We're talking about a voter base of 70 million people across many different age ranges, demographics, and interest groups. The funding for it comes from an even wider pool of people across the world who have their own interests.

A lot of people wanted the "globo" but not necessarily the "homo" but were convinced it was both or neither. Corpos, business gurus, and eggheads really like the pragmatic economic benefits of globalism, and a lot of those people are 70 year old business minded people who didn't even know how to read culture when they were young.

It may seem absurd (and it is) but a screaming pink haired tranny talking to a number-brained billionare CEO is like unstoppable force meats easily moveable object. That guy has no fucking idea what the average person actually thinks or wants or what culture even is because his entire life has been spreadsheets and meetings with other massive players who think like he does. He has no idea the differences between the civil rights movement and marxism because he hasn't been on the internet or college campuses or spoken to a person under 40 since the 80s ended. (I keep saying it but I know these people, I was raised by these people, these people were my employers and high school teachers and friends),

That billionare CEO's (or old fashion democrat's) support for clown world went like this:
>Profits (or votes) are great, now's the time to think about future markets (or voters) and expand.
>Need the youth market and the foreigner market
>He wants to know what the kids are into these days
>What do you do when you want to know something? Hire an expert who studies it!
>Find people with "cultural studies" degrees from Harvard.
>Bring them in and get screamed at about clown world.
>"Huh.... this doesn't make sense to me but neither did the hippie movement and that was huge.... well they wouldn't have degrees from Harvard if they weren't thorough and unbiased in their research... i'm sure they're right"
>Invest in DEI and such
>Business goes Broke/Republicans sweep 2024
>Realize what millennials on 4chan figured out in 2014, these people are a tiny minority but are just loud and abuse online spaces and political correctness to make themselves immune to criticism but can't actually make people vote or open their wallets.
>To top it off you're getting calls from HR about people stealing breast milk from the fridge and progressives chanting "river to sea" outside your accountant's office.
Face when:

There are other dynamics going on here, some wanted open borders for cheap labor, some wanted it for Reconquista, some wanted it because they genuinely thought it was the right way to atone for colonialism, some wanted cheaper drugs, and some people wanted reparations but not trans shit, some wanted this but not that or that but not this and so on. The important thing is the lie that it was all one big happy family is done for and they're going to be cutting the fat. And more importantly, the people with actual power have realized such.

 

[HTTP Error 404]

So, in other words, if the Supreme Court cannot prove that what Trump is doing is unconstitutional, then they cannot (should not) block it? I'm illiterate in this sort of thing.

What do you mean, "the emperor has clothes"?

The Emperor has no Clothes is a reference to a fable. A con man tricks the Emperor into thinking he's buying magic clothing that can only be seen by the virtuous. He goes out on parade, showing off his new outfit -- which doesn't exist, he's either naked or in underclothes. Everyone cheers at what an amazingly great outfit it is, and how the Emperor is so finely dressed. However, a child, unbeholden to social pressures to pretend the Emperor isn't making a fool of himself, screams out that he has no clothes on. This shatters the illusion and makes it acceptable for everyone else to call the Emperor out on his foolish behavior.

But yes, SCOTUS is supposed to only do shit under the prevue of "is this legal under the constitution." But we have 3 Liberals, 1 liberal pretending to be conservative, and one chief justice that just wants to get back to fucking children at the country club, that all are entirely too willing to play politics. In a sane world, they'd be thrown off the bench, black bagged, or otherwise dealt with, but we're not in a sane world.

 

[The Last Stand]

The Emperor has no Clothes is a reference to a fable. A con man tricks the Emperor into thinking he's buying magic clothing that can only be seen by the virtuous. He goes out on parade, showing off his new outfit -- which doesn't exist, he's either naked or in underclothes. Everyone cheers at what an amazingly great outfit it is, and how the Emperor is so finely dressed.

So, if Hillary Clinton was President, and she didn't have clothes on... oh, my.

 

[HTTP Error 404]

As if California and Arizona weren't heading that way eventually, let's be brutally honest here.

We're about year 20 of a cold civil war that's only avoided going hot because the Marxists don't think they could kill enough White People to take full control yet. That's why everything, EVERYTHING, the left has been doing over the past 20+ years has been to flood the country with Non-Whites, sabotage everything they can (including getting as many White Americans hooked on Fentanyl as possible), tear down as many white institutions and instances of white culture as possible, et cetera.

If you want to see two countries that are further along -- the UK is currently undergoing the same process cause they "got it wrong" with Brexit and must be punished, and Canada is a few decades ahead of us and is often used to backdoor stupid leftist ideas into America under the guise of "it works for Canada we should do it too." Also, of course, South Africa. If you want to see the future of America, especially the big cities, look to those pictures of South African cities from 2005 to 2025.

It's all intentional, but even calling it out threatens to spark the mother of all chimpouts.

 

[X Prime]

The Emperor has no Clothes is a reference to a fable. A con man tricks the Emperor into thinking he's buying magic clothing that can only be seen by the virtuous. He goes out on parade, showing off his new outfit -- which doesn't exist, he's either naked or in underclothes. Everyone cheers at what an amazingly great outfit it is, and how the Emperor is so finely dressed. However, a child, unbeholden to social pressures to pretend the Emperor isn't making a fool of himself, screams out that he has no clothes on. This shatters the illusion and makes it acceptable for everyone else to call the Emperor out on his foolish behavior.

But yes, SCOTUS is supposed to only do shit under the prevue of "is this legal under the constitution." But we have 3 Liberals, 1 liberal pretending to be conservative, and one chief justice that just wants to get back to fucking children at the country club, that all are entirely too willing to play politics. In a sane world, they'd be thrown off the bench, black bagged, or otherwise dealt with, but we're not in a sane world.

Psst. I remind you of the last part of one of my posts on this topic.

Only a midwit or a low-IQ nigger thinks this has anything to do with "muh chex and balances."

 

[BallsMcLongDong]

So, if Hillary Clinton was President, and she didn't have clothes on... oh, my.

It's been nice seeing your growth into the racial noticer, based opinion having chud-lite. All without losing that thing that makes you special.
Your lust for old, sagging flesh. Sneed on, brother.

 

[The Last Stand]

Psst. I remind you of the last part of one of my posts on this topic.

If you want to protect the integrity of what the Constitution stands for, then those checks and balances have to be accounted for. Otherwise, what is the point?

 

[Hey Johnny Bravo]

Snip

Sorry, your post is too long for me to quote it fully.

I agree with you, but where I slightly disagree is the monolith aspect. The Obama era of the Democrat Party, for better and now worse, consolidated the party. Democrat whips are way better than GOP whips, hands fucking down. It's not even close. The problem, though, is that now the Democrats have tight vertical discipline that doesn't work anymore because it is too rigid. You have Democrats in the House who held safe seats for years telling party leadership they can't win on the tranny stuff, the leadership agreeing to a primary that replaces the old timer with a new person who is ideologically pure but otherwise feckless, and then that new idiot getting kicked out by a Republican. Or kicking themselves out when they get caught stealing public money.

That's my assessment, anyway. Democrat voters and donors see the writing on the wall, but the leadership does not; and, even if they do, they don't want to lose their position and go back to working a real job like the rest of us. I think Democrats screwed themselves by making the national party too rigid.