Trump's Second Term

Chris_Halkides said:
Common Dreams reported, "On Saturday, Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows wrote on Bluesky: "Can confirm 'state of Maine' hasn't apologized. (As the official keeper of all state records and guardian of the seal ;))." Jonathan Ladd, an associate professor at Georgetown University's public policy school, wrote that "Trump is constitutionally required to take care that U.S. laws be faithfully executed. On what legal basis can he treat the people of Maine differently depending on if their governor apologizes to him? None."" The legal points are above my pay grade, but from the cheap seats, it does seem like there is selectivity in who is getting hit with various sanctions.
Click to expand...


So Donald lied?

Why am I not surprised.
 
Villainous Judge.

Elon Musk
@elonmusk

He has a villainous look to him

Quote
Mario Nawfal
@MarioNawfal

🚨🇺🇸 ACTIVIST JUDGE BOASBERG CLAIMED J6 DEFENDANTS DESERVED HARSHER CHARGES — CALLED FOR "NEW LAWS" TO PUNISH THEM
Click to expand...
 
Lawfare against poor Dinesh

Elon Musk
@elonmusk
·
Skadden, this needs to stop now

Quote
Dinesh D'Souza
@DineshDSouza
Skadden Arps is the firm engaged in systematic lawfare against "2000 Mules."
They have a army of 17 attorneys working pro-bono against me.
I have 2 lawyers.
The Left's game is to ruin us through protracted, costly litigation.
@realDonaldTrump @PamBondi @Kash_Patel @dbongino

Quote
Insurrection Barbie
@DefiyantlyFree
Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom
Partisan Alignment: Corporate Dem establishment
Key Players: Greg Craig (former Obama WH Counsel, indicted)
Involved In:
•Ukraine Lobbying Scandal:
•Paid millions by pro-Russian Ukrainian interests via Paul Manafort.
•Fined for failing to register under FARA. No major prosecutions of Skadden lawyers, despite harsh treatment of Manafort.
•Avoided accountability while similar conduct was used to hammer Trump affiliates.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
A major law firm helps an innocent man sue for defamation after a film proven to be a lie falsely labels him a criminal. The film’s producers admit the error, issue a public apology, and the film is pulled from platforms.

Now suddenly, it’s “lawfare”?
 
Regarding the alleged Venezuelan gang members, The Economist wrote, "However, both the known details of the case and the context are alarming. The courts have a role because the powers Mr Trump is claiming are unusual and their justification is flimsy. America is not at war with Venezuela, to the dismay of many Trump-supporting Venezuelan émigrés. It is a huge stretch to argue that a gang is akin to an arm of the state, even if it bribes a lot of officials. This was not a national-security emergency: the deportees were already in custody. The government has broad powers to deport foreigners convicted of crimes. What Mr Trump appears to be claiming is the right to designate people as gang members—on what evidence is unclear—and send them to be locked up in a country where torture is common and gang suspects can be held indefinitely without trial. You don’t have to be a tattooed Venezuelan to be worried by the suspension of habeas corpus."

I wish that The Economist had been a bit more emphatic, but I don't disagree with their analysis. Defense attorney Scott Greenfield emphasized one of these points: "Contrary to the whims of the unduly passionate, the problem isn’t whether bad dudes can be deported, or whether this narco-gang are bad dudes. It’s not even whether the five Venezuelans on the plane were members of TdA and the very sort of really bad dudes who should be deported. Even if we assume all of the foregoing to be true and correct. it does not address the overarching question of whether the United States is at war with Venezuela or whether TdA, as a Venezuelan military force, has invaded the United States, If not, then the AEA does not come into play and the wartime authority granted the president is not available to Trump. In other words, deport them all you want, but only after utilizing the lawful process for deportation that would otherwise apply to anyone."

Greenfield also criticized Attorney General Pam Bondi: And what does our attorney general have to say about this?

“Our lawyers are working on this,” she said. “But what I will tell you is this judge has no right to ask those questions. You have one unelected federal judge trying to control foreign policies, trying to control the Alien Enemies Act, which they have no business presiding over… The judge had no business, no power to do what he did.”
Click to expand...
There is an expectation that the Attorney General of the United States demonstrate a passing familiarity with the law...This is the Attorney General of the United States misleading the public and attacking a judge for doing exactly what the law requires of him. And yet, she does it with gusto, to the disgrace of her office."
 
Last edited:
My blog from my signature is now hidden. Thanks dicatator Trump. I'll put it back in...August. I've taken out the link to it and all message boards and social media as well. There will be no politics on my phone most of the summer.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom