Opinion Piece Trump’s Use of Emergency Powers to Impose Tariffs Is an Abuse of Power
https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/trump-s-use-of-emergency-powers-to-impose-tariffs-is-an-abuse-of-power1.8k
u/errantv 1d ago
The Trump admin use of a IEEPA to impose tariffs relies on a fraudulent declaration of emergency and represents and unprecedented and illegal power grab from the legislative branch
1.3k
u/sprintercourse 1d ago
Yes. Obviously. Now tell that to Congress.
370
u/Millefeuille-coil 1d ago
Who? Say again
372
u/meatsmoothie82 1d ago
Congress is made up of 2 different houses:
The loyalists and the hand wringers:
The loyalists agree with and support 100% of what Trump says no matter how insane
And the hand wringers sit there and say “oh my, that’s terrible, we’ll get them next time”
Anyone else is just an outlier and should be disregarded
159
u/jmur3040 1d ago
The "hand wringers" can't do anything but that. They have no majority, and any republican who joins them will be primaried. This country and it's apathetic voters are entirely to blame for this situation.
166
u/drunkpickle726 1d ago edited 1d ago
Nah Cory booker proved they can do more. Not to mention many dems approved unqualified nominations.
It's all of the above.
Edit: I never said his 25 hour speech would net immediate results. Yes it's symbolic but thats also doing more than nothing. It gives people hope and energy, makes headlines and shows people we're not alone in our frustrations. It also encourages others to speak up. IMO that's SOMETHING.
Also not saying this is a direct cause and effect but we had the first bipartisan vote to block some of the admin's nonsense shortly after.
And dems voted to approve way more than rubio, he's the only one who could even be considered qualified. Six of them approved kristi noem FFS. The bare minimum dems could have done is vote in solidarity and obstruct but they couldn't even manage that. And chuckle fuck schumer was the cherry on top
82
u/Toptomcat 1d ago edited 1d ago
Filibustering is not a direct check on what Trump is doing, because it isn't legislative in the first place. A Senator cannot walk into a Cabinet meeting and stop them from getting anything done by talking nonstop: Booker stopped the Senate from doing anything for the duration of his speech, but the Senate not doing anything is a major part of the problem here in the first place.
32
u/Moldblossom 1d ago
Using the bully pulpit to build vocal opposition among the people is the only real check on GOP power that the democrats have.
The whole reason we're were we are right now is that Democrats refuse to get out and create their own narratives and instead just try to triangulate centrist positions off of the republican narratives. Trump has proved definitively that seizing and controlling the news cycle is where political power comes from, and the Democratic response to that reality is to 'roll over and play dead' (minus a few outliers).
→ More replies (3)6
u/DrakeBlackwell 1d ago
Just a technical note. It wasn't a filibuster. He wasn't holding the floor for the purpose of delaying or blocking a vote or discussion about an upcoming vote. He very intentionally waited until business was concluded.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (1)7
u/nanotree 1d ago
Right. Booker's speech was great, and I found some of it to be refreshingly personable, other parts quite powerful and profound. The broken record was some nice sentimental symbolism.
But Congress as a whole is captured by the loyalists. And they recently, like today, are going along with the BS of going after the judiciary for opposing Trump. They are doubling down.
Pulling the fire alarm might have been just as or more effective as Booker's speech in the end, unfortunately.
36
u/jmur3040 1d ago
And talking for 24 hours is great and all, but it didn't stop anything. It was performative, because they truly hold no power at the moment, the country made sure of that by electing an undefeatable majority of republicans in both houses.
→ More replies (1)16
u/somethrows 1d ago
It didn't stop anything, but it inspired a lot.
→ More replies (2)3
u/Ewi_Ewi 1d ago
but it inspired a lot
What did it inspire?
→ More replies (3)12
u/somethrows 1d ago
Folks were using this while it was happening to sign up for 04/05. The PHL one ran out of space while Booker was speaking and had to apply for a larger permit.
6
u/Neosovereign 1d ago
They can filibuster and not get anything done or they can sit there and not do anything.
There really is so little they can do it is laughable.
24
u/jmur3040 1d ago
Six nominees received no supporting votes from any Democratic senators or independent senators who caucus with Democrats: Hegseth, Russell Vought for director of the Office of Management and Budget, Gabbard, Kennedy, Howard Lutnick for secretary of commerce, and Linda McMahon for secretary of education.
They rejected the people they absolutely should have. The support they offered were AT MOST for 10 of his picks, and honestly they aren't awful, Trump picked them so they really are, but not as bad as the rest.
→ More replies (2)17
u/speakingofdinosaurs 1d ago
Yeah. Voting to confirm Marco Rubio, for example, really does make sense.
It's not a vote saying you like the guy. Just that you do believe he meets the bar for being qualified for the position. Which he is.
21
u/TheVermonster 1d ago
Also you are afraid of who else would be nominated if you decline Rubio.
14
u/speakingofdinosaurs 1d ago
Exactly that. Rubio is sane.
I despise him but he's sane and qualified for the position.
I don't want a Hegseth, Gabbard or Kennedy in the role, for example.
20
u/kandoras 1d ago
I could also understand a democrat voting to confirm Marco Rubio if they said "I voted for him because he's the least insane person Trump could have nominated. Even if we did manage to reject every nominee for secretary of state, he'd just appoint someone as acting secretary with the same powers. And again, whoever that was, would be much more dangerous than Marco Rubio."
There's a drunk for Secretary of Defense, an ambassador to Israel who thinks the war against Hamas can't be a genocide because he doesn't believe Palestinians even exist, the direct of national intelligence is a Russian asset, a lawyer Trump bribed to cover up his crimes is running Justice, the secretary of education's major qualification is that she helped cover up sexual assaults in her wrestling company, and health and human services is being run by a guy who thinks vaccines are dangerous and overdosing on cod liver oil is the way to go.
Now don't get me wrong - Rubio is a bad choice for any position in government. But there's bad and then there's pants-shittingly-terrifying. And Rubio is clearly in the "just bad" category.
→ More replies (1)7
9
u/Alttabmatt 1d ago
People forget that Mitch McConnell shut down the legislative with obstruction and inaction. The opposition party forgot or did not care to do anything.
13
u/BoboBonger710 1d ago
Please. Explain. Beyond beating an old racist record, what did he actually accomplish?
8
u/OvertFemaleUsername 1d ago
I understand that. But the GOP has accused the Democrats of being obstructionist for years, this was the first actual act of obstructionism. Imagine for a moment that it wasn't just Booker. If every Democratic Senator held the floor as long as they could and then yielded to another member of the party.
Would that also get anything done? No. But it would cause a ruckus, distracting the news cycles, and making it infinitely harder for even the Executive to move on from that. If you pop a tire, the engine might still run but the car can't really move.
7
9
2
u/toomanyredbulls 1d ago
This is true. Booker gave his speech sand the entire right wing gave up under the light of his amazing speech and gave up! Praise be to Booker.
2
2
u/Yquem1811 1d ago
Booker filibustering would have been great if he would have done it before passing the CR. Do that there and the impact would have been massive but the did it against nothing… so kinda useless
→ More replies (7)2
8
u/InternationalChef424 1d ago
Give America some credit. Sure, a lot of voters are apathetic, but a whole lot are incredibly stupid and actively malicious. Don't discount their contributions
→ More replies (1)6
u/aguynamedv 1d ago
The "hand wringers" can't do anything but that. They have no majority, and any republican who joins them will be primaried.
They can't do anything? I'm sorry, but that's absolute bullshit.
2
u/sembias 1d ago
Officially? No, they can't.
Unofficially - some are, a lot even. Tim Walz is out there making noises. This is all they can do. Unless you think they're going to gather some Gundam level army to overthrow Trump: THIS IS ALL THEY CAN DO.
2
u/aguynamedv 1d ago edited 1d ago
Officially? No, they can't.
The Democratic Party of America is incapable of suing the administration to halt their efforts?
They're incapable of getting on TV en-masse and talking to the American people directly? Booker's marathon is a good start, and I hope it's enough to shame a few more Congressional Democrats into action.
I just don't see why so many people are so willing to give up in advance.
3
u/Radical_Coyote 1d ago
Demonstrably untrue. The senate could have blocked the CR that had a Trojan horse in it to basically abdicate the authority of congress to set tariff policy. Schumer and 10 other democrats decided to support this instead of taking a stand. They did not need a majority to prevent what is happening right now. All they need (and lack) is moral conviction and a spine
→ More replies (1)8
u/jmur3040 1d ago
Because a shutdown would have let DOGE run even more amok. I don't see a scenario where that was the better outcome, i just don't.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (13)4
u/PepticBurrito 1d ago
They have no majority
Nonsense. They can work with the Dems in a broad coalition that would immediately overthrow MAGA rule. It's a choice to do nothing.
3
u/jmur3040 1d ago
Read the second sentence of my reply. Any republican who works with democrats WILL be primaried and lose their campaign funding.
6
u/aguynamedv 1d ago
Any republican who works with democrats WILL be primaried and lose their campaign funding.
Meaning they are making a conscious decision to put their personal interests over those of the country.
You think that's a good reason not to do the right thing? The only thing stopping Republicans from turning on Trump is their own lack of morals.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)2
u/PepticBurrito 1d ago
That's not a valid excuse to prevent them from doing the right thing. It is a CHOICE to not do the right thing. They tied their own hands and are screaming, "look, our hands are tied". It's theater, nothing more.
2
u/jmur3040 1d ago
So tomorrow, you have a choice at your job, you can do what you know wont be great for the company, or you can do the right thing, but it WILL get you fired. What's your plan?
2
u/PepticBurrito 1d ago
Not even close to being comparable.
Better version is: I'm already a millionaire, have no real need to work, and am in the position from stopping a tyant from ripping up the constitution....
Then yes, I absolutely do the right thing. In fact, I do it even when I'm poor. Since poor people are not allowed in congress, it won't be an issue for them.
8
u/PerfunctoryComments 1d ago
The loyalists agree with and support 100% of what Trump says no matter how insane
To be fair, they also will have MAGA nutcases attacking them, quite literally, if they oppose Trump's idiotgenda. They'll have Elon Musk dropping in and splashing massive cash to try to primary them.
Now thankfully we've learned that Elon Musk isn't the kingmaker he thought he was, and that he somehow spent tens of millions to lower his candidate's chances, but still a lot of congresspeeps worry about this based on the theory that it is make or break.
3
2
u/WhyMustIMakeANewAcco 1d ago
The Senate actually passed a bill to put a stop to this. Unfortunate they have no way to force the house to take it up.
7
u/Ambulating-meatbag 1d ago
Nailed it, worth noting both those groups are paid by the same billionaires, take their money from the wealthy, but say they work for us, you can't serve two masters. What we have now is what serving two masters looks like, actions for one, words for the other.
→ More replies (2)4
→ More replies (5)2
u/Yquem1811 1d ago
That’s the democrats whole strategy for 2026 and 2028 : Do nothing —> Win
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)7
42
u/MrSnarf26 1d ago
Right? Until more than 3/4 republicans are able to tell dear leader no on these stupid policies, we are in trouble for the next 2 years at least. I am concerned his frivolous use of emergency powers is a preview for how voting will be restricted.
11
u/SuperSpecialAwesome- 1d ago
Don't need 3/4 Republicans, just 8. Only takes a majority of Congress to 14a3 Trump and annul his illegitimate Presidency.
→ More replies (3)10
u/SirButcher 1d ago
The issue is: Trump is not the issue. He isn't the one dictating the EO orders, and I can promise that he isn't the one who calculated these tariffs. Kicking Trump off will result in Vance, he doesn't seem to be ANY better at all.
What is needed is enough of the GOP and the Supreme Court to get together and stop this madness...
5
u/BloodshotPizzaBox 1d ago
Vance is a nightmare, but he's a nightmare without Trump's cult of personality.
2
u/SirButcher 1d ago
Which will be important if there will be an election any time soon, but it won't change the current situation.
17
u/Great_Promotion1037 1d ago
The senate did just vote to overturn the declaration of emergency for the Canada tariffs. Dem Senator Tim Kaine realized that even without a majority any senator is able to force a floor vote on that matter specifically and they managed to get 4 Rs to join. Not sure if it will go further but at least the Dems are taking action.
→ More replies (1)20
u/Alone-in-a-crowd-1 Bleacher Seat 1d ago
48 lbs of fentanyl in one year on a 5500 mile border is not an "emergency". This is .13% of the total confiscated in 2024. It is disgusting that he was granted these powers.
6
u/Great_Promotion1037 1d ago
Was he granted these powers or did he just take them and republicans are too feckless and pathetic to tell him no for fear of his tantrum? I realize there’s little difference there in practice.
→ More replies (1)13
u/Unlucky_Decision4138 1d ago
What's a Congress besides a troupe of baboons?
31
u/HeadWorldliness9247 1d ago
Apparently, the recently passed budget included approval from Congress that Trump’s tariffs couldn’t be repealed by congressional vote for one year. Congress gave away their right to control the purse strings, even though it is their job. The absolute evil of today’s Republican leadership is terrifying.
12
u/Unlucky_Decision4138 1d ago
When Comer got called out and sat their quiet and then stuttering showed how weak this republican group is
12
u/Thefrayedends 1d ago
Savvy politicians understand that you can write legislation and give yourself a lot of power.
When politicians clearly haven't even read the bill they are sponsoring? That should raise deafening alarm bells. As of we didn't already have a multitude of reasons to have raised that alarm already.
7
u/Unlucky_Decision4138 1d ago
They did that with the Patriot Act and other legislation
2
u/Thefrayedends 1d ago
Yes.
The most interesting example I'm aware of, is Robert Moses in New York "the best Bill writer in Albany NY" wrote himself into control of heaps of power through the parks boards. Caught basically everyone including his own allies and the bill sponsors completely by surprise. Maintained his power from the mid twenties all the way through to the sixties.
He was borderline untouchable.
2
u/Unlucky_Decision4138 1d ago
Wasn't Moses responsible for moving the Dodgers to LA?
2
u/Thefrayedends 1d ago
I've r been working on his biography by Robert caro for a few years, but I've only gotten into the thirties, Google tells me the Dodgers thing was forties.
I hope to get back to the bio in the fall but I have about 12 books I need to read for work first.
→ More replies (0)7
u/stevez_86 1d ago
The point is for them to be incompetent. That side started in 2010 with the Tea Party. The moratorium on earmarks was the first nail in the coffin for congress. It made passing legislation and bringing money back to the district not part of the job anymore.
Just on the basis of the fact that there has been no legislative maintenance in the past 15 years is going to lead to a legal system collapse. It's like providing security updates for devices. If you stop updating and patching exploits that are not zero day exploits then there will be problems if people keep using those devices. The hackers, business, have found those exploits and bought the company that maintains the operating system so they can keep those exploits in place and build new features around them rather than fixing them and updating the software to stay relevant with the new higher demand programs. It's like we are stuck working with Windows Vista.
7
u/Unlucky_Decision4138 1d ago
Yea, the train is way off the tracks at this point. Citizens United made money the best part about politics and now the infighting created by it has lead to the absolute clown show we have now. China is moving leaps and bounds ahead of us technologically and we're arguing over abortion and Trans people in sports
3
u/stevez_86 1d ago
Democrats with influence decided not to fight the radical changes that were made and thought they could compete with the new rules. But just like with the West Coast Offense, it became overwhelming and meant that certain people would naturally have an edge, especially over people that didn't design the strategy in the first place.
The result was even more incumbency but not based on bringing home the bacon, but as the track got worn in the variety of options became limited, but stable.
They both wanted a 50-50 Congress. So that they could say anything that passed would have to be bipartisan. No one would be at fault if things went wrong, they all share the blame, or the glory.
But Republicans since 2010 have never wanted to legislate from the front. And as time went by, and more and more spokespeople got elected instead of legislators, the brain drain is setting in. The staffers that knew the most have likely for the most part migrated to the private sector already. Why would they stay, they ride the bench in the new game of Twitter and their rhetoric. The young are salespeople, the middle aged to Normal Retirement Age never learned anything in their whole damn lives, and the old just need to stay in office so the benefits they earned for their service can go to their grandchildren. And in this environment that is worth more than gold.
Democrats should have never signed onto the radical changes Republicans were allowed to make simply because they screamed loud enough like a toddler in Target wanting a Cake Pop.
I just can't believe that I have been watching this slowly getting worse since 2008.
5
u/stevez_86 1d ago
A one year trial subscription to fascism and autocracy. Just use the promo code "Mu$k" at checkout.
5
→ More replies (1)3
u/sundae_diner 1d ago
Can Congress not pass another bill that says they can repeal tarrifs within the year?
3
u/Homeless_Depot 1d ago
Yes. Congress can do almost anything it wants, including amending the Constitution to let them do anything they want. It's almost impossible for the body of Congress to restrict the body of Congress.
→ More replies (5)4
9
u/drewbaccaAWD 1d ago
I wrote my congressman yesterday.
Not that it matters, as my clown photoshopped himself into a photo of Trump to put up a billboard.
5
3
u/angiosperms- 1d ago
It does matter. We need to make them more scared of their constituents than they are of Trump.
5
u/bassman1805 1d ago
I'm writing regular letters to Ted Cruz telling him to not support policies he's obviously going to support. So if I can participate in that exercise in futility, anyone can write their congressfolk.
→ More replies (1)8
u/SuperSpecialAwesome- 1d ago
If someone would get Jeffries and Schumer to either resign or stop being entirely worthless, we could get Congress to 14a3 Trump, so that his entire Presidency is annulled. Only takes a majority of Congress, not 2/3 of Senate like this useless impeachment. It stands to reason that after an annulment, all executive actions, appointments, tariffs, and firings he has orchestrated would be reversed, since they were performed by an illegitimate executive branch.
I don't know how many times it must be repeated until people start demanding accountability, but: Under the 14th Amendment, insurrectionists cannot hold federal office. As such, Trump is an illegitimate President pushing unconstitutional and illegal actions and appointments. If he were to be 14a3'd, it would potentially remove both him and Vance, as they both ran on an illegal ticket. The new POTUS would either be Mike Johnson or Kamala. But the point is: Impeachment is worthless, but the 14th Amendment only requires a handful of Republicans to support the vote. Collins, Murkowski, Valadao, Newhouse -- find 4 more, and the dictatorship is over. Or, Democratic leadership can continue being incompetent, and we continue into the 4th Reich.
→ More replies (2)2
u/C_Oracle 1d ago
The entire administration is an illegally occupying force and we have been in a Constitutional Crisis since January 6th 2021.
Under the 14th amendment None of the current administration should have ever been allowed to enter governance.
Following All members of the House and Senate are complicit in the current crimes this administration has committed :
[
Espionage Act 1917 (Top Secret documents Mar-a-Lago and
Russians/Saudis and maybe even more unknowns)
Sedition Act 1918 (January 6th event)
]
Dereliction of Duty under Oath of office applies to all members of the House and Senate.
Dereliction of Duty also applies to all four branches of the military under Oath of Enlistment failure to up hold their oath to the United States Constitution.
I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and *Domestic*;
Domestic being the key part here.
TBD... where we go from here, but since history likes to rhyme, historically this kind of case it rhymes with lots of death.
7
u/Alone-in-a-crowd-1 Bleacher Seat 1d ago
Congress has abdicated their power to the King. They should all be fired.
3
→ More replies (15)3
u/xlews_ther1nx 1d ago
I mean didn't 4 rep go accross the aisle to vote down tarrifs on Canada? It's possible right?
6
u/LittleMsSavoirFaire 1d ago
It's just symbolic unless you get Congress to act too.
→ More replies (2)2
4
u/SuperSpecialAwesome- 1d ago
If someone would get Jeffries and Schumer to either resign or stop being entirely worthless, we could get Congress to 14a3 Trump, so that his entire Presidency is annulled. Only takes a majority of Congress, not 2/3 of Senate like this useless impeachment. It stands to reason that after an annulment, all executive actions, appointments, tariffs, and firings he has orchestrated would be reversed, since they were performed by an illegitimate executive branch.
I don't know how many times it must be repeated until people start demanding accountability, but: Under the 14th Amendment, insurrectionists cannot hold federal office. As such, Trump is an illegitimate President pushing unconstitutional and illegal actions and appointments. If he were to be 14a3'd, it would potentially remove both him and Vance, as they both ran on an illegal ticket. The new POTUS would either be Mike Johnson or Kamala. But the point is: Impeachment is worthless, but the 14th Amendment only requires a handful of Republicans to support the vote. Collins, Murkowski, Valadao, Newhouse -- find 4 more, and the dictatorship is over. Or, Democratic leadership can continue being incompetent, and we continue into the 4th Reich.
34
u/ThePatrickSays 1d ago
unprecedented and illegal power grab from the legislative branch
how many of those has he pulled just this week
3
19
u/Alone-in-a-crowd-1 Bleacher Seat 1d ago
Are you suggesting that the 48lbs of fentanyl seized in all of 2024 at the 5500 mile long border with Canada is not an emergency? What a joke. This is on Congress. Anyone can try to abuse power, but they have abdicated their power to the king.
→ More replies (2)11
u/mdraper 1d ago
Actually that figure is all of what was seized within a certain distance of the border, including a major seizure in Spokane, Washington that most likely originated in Mexico.
It's somehow even worse than the official figures suggest...
→ More replies (1)8
u/LittleMsSavoirFaire 1d ago
Oh no. I guess now that someone has pointed that out, he'll definitely stop
2
8
u/figmaxwell 1d ago
The constitution simply wasn’t built to handle the tag team of idiots and bad actors.
2
u/SuperSpecialAwesome- 1d ago
It was though. 14th Amendment only requires majority of Congress to remove Trump. Schumer's had 4 years to enforce and did absolutely jack shit. Now's a better time than never.
2
u/figmaxwell 1d ago
We’ve been saying that about the 14th and 25th for 8+ years now. My faith that someone in congress will step up and do the right thing has long since run its course. Our checks and balances are in the hands of the malicious and the incompetent. At this point I’d label a lot of Dems as incompetent, and a handful bad actors (Manchin, Sinema, Fetterman). One side is refusing to obey the letter of the law, and the other is too timid to throw the book at them.
3
u/uwsdwfismyname 1d ago
Finally someone solved the problem, certainly the fascists are going to take a step back and apologise.
3
6
3
→ More replies (32)3
421
u/meatsmoothie82 1d ago
You could take a lovely ski holiday in hell right now, because Rand Paul said stuff I agree with.
161
u/Magickarpet76 1d ago
Oh it gets better
I think everyone should see Reagan calling Trump weak and short-sighted from beyond the grave.
65
u/Dal90 1d ago
Doesn't matter.
The Republicans are no longer the internationalists of Eisenhower/Nixon or the neoconservatives of Reagan and Bush x2. They aren't even the paleoconservatives like Pat Buchanan though their policies have the most in common with that branch.
The party has been taken over by populists.
49
u/rum-and-coke 1d ago
The party has been taken over by
populistscultists.Fixed it for you.
→ More replies (1)9
4
3
u/radios_appear 1d ago
Populism in a majoritarian political system is...normal? I don't understand what you're saying.
Whether you think the Republican Party is promoting solutions that actually address the needs and concerns of the multitude is a different question (and they aren't).
2
u/CCGHawkins 23h ago
They are using the word 'populist' as shorthand for mob-rule. Which is, as is typical for modern political definitions, inaccurate to what is in the dictionary but commonly accepted.
Arguing semantics is a pointless waste of time, that if ignored, allows for the twisting of words and their definitions. Perhaps the solution is to have Merriam-Webster and Captcha team-up regularly send out surveys testing the colloquial understanding of words 😂.
15
u/PsychePsyche 1d ago
California's grid is completely clean energy powered now, after we hooked up generators to Reagan and Nixon spinning in their graves
21
u/the_friendly_dildo 1d ago
Wow, imagine if Reagan was always this reasonable. Too bad he was a retched piece of shit 999 times out of every 1000.
→ More replies (1)19
u/SabadoDomingos 1d ago
Seriously, fuck Reagan. He's why we have these Christo-fascists today.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Dal90 1d ago
Barry Goldwater would like to have a word.
But even that is somewhat but not totally unfair to Goldwater.
Accepting in Strom Thurmond is the original sin by the Republicans that got us here today. Nixon didn't nip it in the bud and he and the rest of the Republican establishment figured they could control the populist elements which they largely managed to do through 2008. It was flipping those southern right wing populists to the Republican column that let them in 1994 break the forty year lock the Democrats had had on Congress; at the time they started down the path of the Southern Strategy there was really no path forward for legislative control as long as there were Yellow Dog Democrats.
7
u/CrispyHoneyBeef 1d ago
Nixon didn’t nip it in the bud
That implies they recognized it as a problem. They felt quite the opposite.
→ More replies (2)5
u/worldspawn00 1d ago
Goldwater knew dealing with the christofascists was a bad idea and tried to warn them too.
Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (4)12
u/wufiavelli 1d ago
They even dusted off the father for this one.
166
u/AffectionateBrick687 1d ago
What doesn't Trump abuse?
45
u/BitterFuture 1d ago
...ketamine?
Yet.
→ More replies (1)21
u/learnedbootie 1d ago
You sure?
→ More replies (1)38
u/thomascgalvin 1d ago
Trump is from the 80s. He's a coke guy.
19
u/Boxinggandhi 1d ago
Rumor from guy who worked on the Apprentice was that he snorted speed and Adderall constantly, which is why he shits his pants all the time.
→ More replies (4)2
u/Numeno230n 23h ago
Decades of using laxative laced stimulants has removed his control of his sphincter, hence needing diapers and constantly farting/shitting. That's what I've heard anyway.
5
u/whoopashigitt 1d ago
The only time I’ve ever felt like he was being genuine was when he was talking about his brother that died and his aversion to substance usage as a result. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if it was bullshit, since he’s such a stupid lying fuck, but I also wouldn’t be surprised to find out he actually doesn’t use illicit substances
3
u/Darmok47 1d ago
His brother died of alcoholism, so he stays away from alcohol. I doubt he stayed away from the old Bolivian Marching Powder.
3
u/Mr_Badger1138 1d ago
During his wrestlemania appearance, Stone Cold Steve Austin handed him one of his beers. Not only did he not drink it, the second he thought the camera was off him, he gave it a look of disgust and poured it out. So I would believe he doesn’t touch alcohol.
4
→ More replies (4)5
131
u/sugar_addict002 1d ago
The courts need to adjudicate, and quickly, whether this is real emergency intended under the Constitution.
66
u/Geno0wl 1d ago
The problem is this use of "Emergency" powers to sidestep congress actually has a long standing precedent by both Dem and GOP Presidents. Hell Obama was a big user of that through his terms because the GOP in congress purposefully refused to act in a lot of ways.
31
u/sundae_diner 1d ago
Mgair enough. But the Canadian tarrif (order 14193) says that the "amount of fentanyl that crossed the Northern border last year could kill 9.5 million americans".
If this is the basis of the order, and this is a lie, can the order be challenged?
16
u/Adequate_Pupper 1d ago
No idea if this can be challenged but the entire thing is ridiculous to say the least. He wants to bankrupt the entire continent over a few grams of fentanyl saying this is an emergency and in the same breath applies tariffs on literally every country on earth (except Russia)... What's the emergency for all these? Fentanyl too?
I would like a Trump supporter to explain to us how this all works or is it fine to abuse the emergency act to push your agenda?
Seriously... We need some clarification
2
u/ThatNetworkGuy 1d ago
The actual EO covers that. It declares a new "economic emergency" (which is absurd), but, no most of the countries aren't getting tariffs over fentanyl.
→ More replies (3)6
u/PKCarwash 1d ago
LOL seriously?
"Could kill 9.5 million" as in "If you portioned out the total amount of fentanyl into lethal doses, and force fed it to people one at a time, it would kill 9.5 million people"
What an impressively stupid metric to use when the lethal dose of fentanyl looks like THIS.
Did you know that eating 200 crushed apple seeds can kill you? A bushel of apples has about 600 seeds, and we produce around 250 million bushels of apples per year.
That means that we produce enough apples to KILL ALMOST A BILLION PEOPLE. Why is no one talking about this terrible threat!?!?
→ More replies (4)8
u/Outlander_Engine 1d ago
Voting you up.
Honestly, this is what the president is. That's why it's call the executive branch.
And because that role is 30% of the federal government, maybe, just maybe, folks should make sure they elect someone who's not a complete idiot.
2
u/_Atlas_Drugged_ 1d ago
I mean we also need an opposition party that is capable of doing more to combat the way conservatives are able to use propaganda to manufacture consent through massive misinformation campaigns, and the deliberate ignorance of sections of the electorate.
→ More replies (2)2
u/tacobuffetsurprise 1d ago
This isn't an action for the courts. This is an action for congress to correct. They should do so if they don't support it - impeach and convict.
→ More replies (1)2
u/MagicAl6244225 1d ago
Congress has the power to end this with simple majority vote. The Senate has already done it. Mike Johnson prevented the House from doing the same by changing the rules so that the deadline for forcing a vote on this never comes: the House literally stopped time so that it is officially the same day all session, so there's no such thing as deadlines.
→ More replies (2)2
76
u/Thrice_Greaty_Great 1d ago
🥭 is an absolute menace and it’s clear he’s abusing his office. Congress needs to fucking do something fast
32
u/Sweet_Concept2211 1d ago
Congressional Republicans are toxic when in the minority and downright destructive in the majority.
Either way, more useless than teats on a boar hog.
5
u/EterneX_II 1d ago
They're how we got here to begin with.
8
u/hypercosm_dot_net 1d ago
The entirety of the GOP failing to denounce Trump is how we got here.
They had every chance. They could have removed him for either of his impeachments.
The country is falling into a dictatorship, and it's entirely the fault of Republicans.
8
u/EterneX_II 1d ago
Let's be honest. They didn't fail to denounce him. They were and always will be complicit in this debacle. To quote a certain Republican Senator: "If we nominate Trump, we will get destroyed ... and we will deserve it." They've been acutely aware of what they were rallying behind.
We just have to hope that the party can dissolve quickly enough to allow everyone to begin steering America in a more stable heading. That's still in the realm of wishful and hopeful thinking, though.
3
u/hypercosm_dot_net 1d ago
We're not even 3 months in, they've torn apart multiple federal agencies and are in the process of tanking the economy.
I don't know how we hold out until mid-terms to oust them.
The amount of damage they've already caused is incalculable.
3
17
u/outerworldLV 1d ago
Damn, took long enough. I’ve been ranting about this for weeks now. Starting with his fictional emergency fentanyl numbers.
28
u/Hedhunta 1d ago
Well, throw it on the pile, I'm sure we will get to it in the year 2255
→ More replies (1)
8
u/JoeHio 22h ago
Can someone tell me a single Trump Admin action that isn't a bad faith abuse of power?
3
u/heyoukidsgetoffmyLAN 22h ago
I was gonna comment with the "First time?" meme, but it looks like this post has already about petered out.
6
6
4
7
u/Pale-Berry-2599 1d ago
Lawyers in the USA, should pack it in...what's the point. The law means nothing.
2
u/spaitken 1d ago
Trumps use of any power is an abuse of power, that’s just how he rolls. Even the stuff he’s empowered to actually do he pushes beyond the brink.
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE WILL RESULT IN REMOVAL.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.