• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Trump's Second Term

Some background on the "Mad Dakota Dog-Killer's" "Suck it" post.

First, the post:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1925698710295466453
Click to expand...

Then the story.

'Evil and depraved': Kristi Noem buried over 'embarrassing' social media post

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem shared a notice of the voluntary dismissal of a lawsuit against DHS on the social platform X on Thursday, captioning the post, "Suck it."

The lawsuit Espinoza Escalona v. Noem was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, where a number of immigrants alleged wrongful deportation by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) under Noem’s leadership, claiming violations of due process.

Supported by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and other human rights groups, the lawsuit was voluntarily dismissed in March after defendants removed the plaintiffs from deportation proceedings.
Click to expand...

So, DHS launched a wrongful deportation of immigrants, they sued claiming violations of due process, DHS backed down and removed them from deportation proceedings, so the plaintiffs, no longer needing to sue, voluntarily dropped the suit.

How the ◊◊◊◊ does the Dog-Killer see this as a victory over the libs? She backed down! That's a defeat, not a victory! But of course, it's all just performative, and the MAGA morons will of course think she won and ha ha ha suck it libs!

Pathetic.
 
Last edited:
Probably won't happen, but I'd love to see it.

'An offense in Canada': Trump may be legally barred from traveling to the G7
Click to expand...

The 2025 G7 Summit is scheduled for June 15-17 in Kananaskis, Alberta in Canada. And despite tensions between him and Canada because of his trade war, Assistant White House Press Secretary Jennifer Jacobs says he will be there.

In a May 22 post on X, formerly Twitter, Jacobs wrote, "Trump plans to go to the G7 in Canada next month, @PressSec says."

But according to The Conversation, Trump may not be able to enter Canada legally because of his criminal record.
Click to expand...
 
Hakeem Jeffries smacks hillbilly upside the head.

Acyn (@acyn.bsky.social)

Speaker Pro Tempore: You are to direct your comments to the chair. Jeffries: You know what's interesting? Every time I come on this floor, I can use sharp language, he can use sharp language, you choose to admonish me. I don't work for you sir. I work for the American people.
bsky.app bsky.app
 
Andy_Ross said:
Trump says he's going to tariff all smartphones: "It would be also Samsung and anybody that makes that product, otherwise it wouldn't be fair. So anybody that makes that product. And that'll start on I guess the end of June ... when they build the plant here there's no tariff."

https://twitter.com/x/status/1925990567000862990
Click to expand...
Trump clearly doesn't believe in free markets.
 
Everyone is invited to his parade.

Donald J. Trump
@realDonald Trump
I am proud to announce that we will be hosting a magnificent Parade to honor the United States Army's 250th Birthday, on Saturday, June 14th, in Washington, D.C. For two and a half centuries, our brave soldiers have fought, bled, and died to keep us FREE, and now we will honor them with a wonderful Parade, one that is worthy of their service and sacrifice. Americans across the Nation are invited to attend. RSVP at america250.org/.
Click to expand...
 
Isn't this all just distraction from the bit in that bill that renders courts unable to hold anyone in contempt for violating court orders if a bond wasn't posted (which apparently isn't even a thing)? Newsweek reported on it yesterday. It's buried in the 1000 page bill. It will make the courts powerless against the executive that chooses to ignore it.

https://www.newsweek.com/hidden-provision-trump-bill-court-2075769

A provision "hidden" in the sweeping budget bill that passed the U.S. House on Thursday seeks to limit the ability of courts—including the U.S. Supreme Court—from enforcing their orders.

"No court of the United States may use appropriated funds to enforce a contempt citation for failure to comply with an injunction or temporary restraining order if no security was given when the injunction or order was issued," the provision in the bill, which is more than 1,000 pages long, says.

The provision "would make most existing injunctions—in antitrust cases, police reform cases, school desegregation cases, and others—unenforceable," Erwin Chemerinsky, the dean of the University of California Berkeley School of Law, told Newsweek. "It serves no purpose but to weaken the power of the federal courts."
Click to expand...
 
shemp said:
How the ◊◊◊◊ does the Dog-Killer see this as a victory over the libs? She backed down! That's a defeat, not a victory!
Click to expand...
In terms of actual lawyering, the best outcome is to have a judge rule in your favor on your case. The next best outcome is to have a case against you dismissed because it means no adverse judgement or opinion ensued. This means you can't be enjoined in the future from doing the thing you were sued for doing. Even if you capitulated on that one case and mooted it, you don't endanger any future case on the same fact pattern.

shemp said:
But of course, it's all just performative, and the MAGA morons will of course think she won and ha ha ha suck it libs!
Click to expand...
That's probably more likely, since I wouldn't accuse Sec. Noem of being a brilliant legal strategist. I'm sure she wants it known that she's just so fierce that the cowardly libs had to back down.
 
Stephen Miller
@StephenM
The justice system moves slowly for Americans, at light speed for aliens. Here a communist judge has created a constitutional right for foreign nationals, living in foreign countries, to be admitted to American universities funded by American tax dollars.

Quote
Eric Daugherty
@EricLDaugh
JUST IN: In a VERY short amount of time, activist Judge Allison Burroughs in Massachusetts blocks the Trump administration from banning Harvard from enrolling international students.
She is an Obama appointee...
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
TragicMonkey said:
Isn't this all just distraction from the bit in that bill that renders courts unable to hold anyone in contempt for violating court orders if a bond wasn't posted (which apparently isn't even a thing)? Newsweek reported on it yesterday. It's buried in the 1000 page bill. It will make the courts powerless against the executive that chooses to ignore it.

https://www.newsweek.com/hidden-provision-trump-bill-court-2075769
Click to expand...
This sounds totally ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ scary. Won't be long until our courts are like the Nazi People's Court.

en.wikipedia.org

People's Court (Germany) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

The People's Court (German: Volksgerichtshof pronounced [ˈfɔlksɡəˌʁɪçt͡shoːf] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:De-Volksgerichtshof.ogg" title="File:De-Volksgerichtshof.ogg">ⓘ</a>, acronymed to VGH) was a Sondergericht ("special court") of Nazi Germany, set up outside the operations of the constitutional frame of law. Its headquarters were originally located in the former Prussian House of Lords in Berlin, later moved to the former Königliches Wilhelms-Gymnasium at Bellevuestrasse 15 in Potsdamer Platz (the location now occupied by The Center Potsdamer Platz; a marker is located on the sidewalk nearby).1

The court was established in 1934 by order of Reich Chancellor Adolf Hitler, in response to his dissatisfaction at the outcome of the Reichstag fire trial in front of the Reich Court of Justice (Reichsgericht) in which all but one of the defendants were acquitted. The court had jurisdiction over a rather broad array of "political offenses", which included crimes like black marketeering, work slowdowns, defeatism, and treason against Nazi Germany. These crimes were viewed by the court as Wehrkraftzersetzung ("the disintegration of defensive capability") and were accordingly punished severely; the death penalty was meted out in numerous cases.

The court handed down an enormous number of death sentences under Judge-President Roland Freisler, including those that followed the plot to kill Hitler on 20 July 1944. Many of those found guilty by the court were executed in Plötzensee Prison in Berlin. The proceedings of the court were often even less than show trials in that some cases, such as that of Sophie Scholl and her brother Hans Scholl and fellow White Rose activists, trials were concluded in less than an hour without evidence being presented or arguments made by either side. The president of the court often acted as prosecutor, denouncing defendants, then pronouncing his verdict and sentence without objection from defense counsel, who usually remained silent throughout. The court almost always sided with the prosecution, to the point that, from 1943 on, being brought before it was tantamount to a death sentence. While Nazi Germany was not a rule of law state, the People's Court frequently dispensed with even the nominal laws and procedures of regular German trials and is therefore characterized as a kangaroo court.2 In 1985, the West German Bundestag declared the People's Court to be an instrument of judicial murder.3
Click to expand...
This has got to be unconstitutional, right? Paging JayUtah, JayUtah please pick up the courtesy white phone.
 
Last edited:
Andy_Ross said:
Everyone is invited to his parade.
Click to expand...
Only Americans. Chinese or brown people, communists, asylum seekers, people from Mexican countries, foreign Harvard students, liberals, trans kids and other groomers, disobedient jurdges, and fake news employees need not RSVP.
 
Now we know. Trump had trouble with math.
www.threads.com

FactPost (@factpostnews) on Threads

Q: Why do you not want the best and brightest from around the world to come here? Trump: I do, but many of them need remedial math. The students can't add 2 and 2, and they go to Harvard. Why would someone who can't do math get in?
www.threads.com www.threads.com
below:
The reality is, Trump is a dumb goon who needs remedial math. Remember that ridiculous chart of countries and percentages he waved around on liberation day?His ridiculous tariffs are proof that he can’t do math.
 
shemp said:
This has got to be unconstitutional, right? Paging JayUtah, JayUtah please pick up the courtesy white phone.
Click to expand...
Congress controls the purse and gets to make laws. If it says you can't use money to enforce a court order unless a surety was provided at the outset, then that's the law. The operative rule is Fed. R. Civ. P. § 65(c) :—
The court may issue a preliminary injunction or a temporary restraining order only if the movant gives security in an amount that the court considers proper to pay the costs and damages sustained by any party found to have been wrongfully enjoined or restrained. The United States, its officers, and its agencies are not required to give security.
Click to expand...
However, it has been up to the individual judge in each case to decide the amount of bond, and in many cases that amount is $0. It's mostly meant for suits between private parties under federal law. The government, as defendant in civil suits in federal court, is generally not considered to have a financial interest in the ultimate outcome of an injunction.

As the article notes, a court's power to enforce its authority by means of contempt findings is central to the co-equality of the judiciary. Buried somewhere in Ex Parte Grossman (IIRC) is the finding that if a court is unable to enforce civil contempt findings on its own terms, the judiciary would be reduced to a mere mockery.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom