What The Liberal-Left Does Not Understand About Trump

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by impermanence, Aug 25, 2023.

  1. Sandy Shanks

    Sandy Shanks Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Messages:
    26,679
    Likes Received:
    6,471
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "US President Donald Trump, in a stunning rebuke of the US intelligence community, declined on Monday to endorse the US government’s assessment that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election, saying he doesn’t “see any reason why” Russia would be responsible.

    “I have great confidence in my intelligence people, but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today,” Trump said during a joint news conference after he spent about two hours in a room alone with Putin, save for a pair of interpreters," CNN, July 2018.

    Today, Trump supporters in the House, far right Republicans known as the Freedom Caucus, also agree to side with Russia.

    Politico reports, "Far-right Republicans are likely to weaponize the domestic-foreign imbalance in the White House’s spending request: $40 billion total, including $24 billion in Ukraine. There is long-running skepticism among these Republicans about continuing to fund the war in Ukraine, and it’s unclear if McCarthy wants to defy them to strike another spending deal with Biden. White House aides and Democratic congressional negotiators expect that the speaker, in order to appease the hard right, will push to make some cuts and could threaten at any point to blow up the package."

    In other words, the Freedom Caucus is threatening to shut down the government if they don't get what they want.

    Who in the hell voted for these guys? The Russian army is suffering severe casualties and enormous loss of equipment, and there is not one American casualty. Trump's people in the House want to give Russia some slack.

    Trump Republicans in this forum will be unable to respond to this issue. Evidently, they side with Russia, too. They also want to choose our next President.
     
  2. dairyair

    dairyair Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2010
    Messages:
    82,166
    Likes Received:
    21,226
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    MAGA are acting UnAmerican.
    Most are of European decent.

    But most are anti Europe and pro former communist and now fascist country Russia.

    How can they claim to be America 1st? When there's nothing about America they like. But prefer a dictorial fascist country like Russia.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2023
  3. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    37,205
    Likes Received:
    9,650
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You have stated your opinion on what you think the Deep State is. But the Deep State does not exist, period. It is a political buzzword mostly. This is about as bad as the Da Vinci Code, which was a popular conspiracy theory in the 80s and 90s with the illuminati.

    But whatever your "secret society" is, it is not government workers. That makes no sense because there are jobs in which a person does this. In my agency, they were known as Tax Law Specialists. They either wrote or revised current and past IRS regulations. So, why is that a secret?
     
  4. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    37,205
    Likes Received:
    9,650
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Mostly because "America First" is an isolationist policy from the world, immigration, both legal and illegal, and from people whom they don't like, which is 90% and rising.
     
  5. Gdawg007

    Gdawg007 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2010
    Messages:
    4,227
    Likes Received:
    1,693
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Bloated, corrupt, fascist. That literally is the embodiment of Trump. Literally, his body is two of those three things.

    I'm not sure what it is about those on the right who see themselves as hard working money generating people. Most of the states run by the right take more form the Feds than they give. In fact, most small businesses get a whole pile of benefits those who work for a living don't get. And those benefits come from the federal coffers.

    Also, there are plenty liberals who run businesses. Doing so isn't some holier than thou virtue. This us versus them mentality you are creating doesn't help anyone. Labor and capital are both roles necessary in an economy. One doesn't have supremacy over the other. One without the other is useless. Policies should enhance how they work together, and for the most part, the US does a decent job at that. Still room for improvement.
     
  6. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,835
    Likes Received:
    2,741
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Really? And you know that how?
     
  7. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,835
    Likes Received:
    2,741
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So who authorized your agency to write or rewrite IRS regulations?
     
    Lil Mike likes this.
  8. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Banned

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,531
    Likes Received:
    6,761
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  9. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    37,205
    Likes Received:
    9,650
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your own claim, and the conspiracy theory about "The Deep State" is that there is a "secret society" that runs or influences the government. this is not even close. Do we have influence on the government? Yes, it is called lobbying. And if you have enough money, per the Citizens United Supreme Court Ruling, lobbying is a form of political free speech. But in my agency, the IRS, we literally had people who job, in part, was to write regulations when required to. These are GS 13 to GS 15 level. Business groups, individuals, rich individuals, and so forth, lobby members of Congress directly and indirectly to vote in a particular way for legislation. If not, then they won't fund them in the next election. And politicians want to keep that seat no matter what. We see this with Speaker McCarthy and the Freedom Caucus with their demands. The GOP has a razor-thin majority and he desperately wants to keep his seat. It was part of the bargain to get that speakership in the first place where only one person, one person, can call for a vote to get him removed. That is all it will take. And the Freedom Caucus has threatened that if McCarthy compromises with Democrats again on the CR or any other issue, they will do exactly that. But none of this is the Deep State, is it.

    then you have the actual legislation itself where it will literally state that the President or the Agency or Department head can allow regulations to be written on the legislation passed.

    The US Constitution, the actual legislation, and the regulations each play a part. Regulation is based on the legislation that was passed. But the legislation does not predict anything or everything, or clearly define things. Legislation becomes statues under the code. And in that code, regulations. The code is like the fence surrounding the house. the regulations are what color, size, and other attributes of the fence. We have a very complex set of regulations with each title having numerous regulations based on the laws that were passed by congress. If there is any dispute, then it is the courts that decide. All of this is "public" on record regardless of the court's decision on the law or the regulation therein.

    this is law 101 and government 401.

    And people who have had professional jobs within the government and who are used to using laws and regulations have an understanding of this. That is why conspiracy theories are always 1% truth, and 99% fabrication.
     
  10. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    37,205
    Likes Received:
    9,650
    Trophy Points:
    113
    With the irs, we have three different types of regulations. We have the code of federal regulations, revenue procedures and revenue rulings. It is within the authority of the agency and subscribe by statue. In my agency specifically, it is 26 USC 7805. It states, and I quote, "Except where such authority is expressly given by this title to any person other than an officer or employee of the Treasury Department, the Secretary shall prescribe all needful rules and regulations for the enforcement of this title, including all rules and regulations as may be necessary by reason of any alteration of law in relation to internal revenue."

    Every department or agency has this in their statutes that create the agency or department, as amended, and the regulations. We have Codes 1 through 50, although not in sequential order on every number. Treasury or IRS is Title 26 generally.
     
  11. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    37,205
    Likes Received:
    9,650
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump did when he used the mugshot to get campaign cash.
     
  12. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Banned

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,531
    Likes Received:
    6,761
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    why should I give a damn what Trump thinks?
     
  13. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Banned

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,531
    Likes Received:
    6,761
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    why should I give a damn what Trump thinks
     
  14. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    37,205
    Likes Received:
    9,650
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, you did write, "who cares" which means everyone from what you wrote. So, I gave one exception.

    Now if you said, "I don't care" then that would be totally different.
     
  15. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,835
    Likes Received:
    2,741
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I don't recall ever saying anything about secret societies. I was very specific to point out that it's part of the Executive branch. Very specific.

    Also you noted that Congress actually authorizes changes the IRS makes. Also very good. Real Schoolhouse Rock stuff.

    Now perhaps you can tell me who in Congress authorized EPA to usurp NHTSA's Congressionally authorized ability to regulate CO2. No need for a full accounting of names, I can accept a couple.

    Go ahead, I've got time.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2023
  16. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    37,205
    Likes Received:
    9,650
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But you are using the Deep State Conspiracy theory. And in the urban dictionary, it is based on a secret society that runs the government. In the MEGA world, it is the rank and file who do their jobs in which the "deep state" exists.

    It is in the statute as was with mine. EPA is by definition, and created by Congress, a regulatory agency. So its mission is to write regulations on the laws that congress passes.
     
  17. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,835
    Likes Received:
    2,741
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Where in the statute?
     
  18. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    37,205
    Likes Received:
    9,650
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you want that, it was under reorganization plan #3 by Nixon, ratified by both the House and Senate committees for that reorganization. It combined several other agencies within three departments to create on agency. EPA is an independent agency I believe and the administrator is given a "cabinet level rank, which means he must be confirmed by the Senate for his appointment to become official. That senate vote was 66-34.

    But the specific statute regarding this is probably based on all the environmental laws that have been passed such as the Clean Water Act and others. So, you will need a good lawyer to perform a thorough search for that. The internet is not much help other than what the official government page says, and i don't think you will accept that as an adequate answer.
     
  19. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    84,461
    Likes Received:
    59,029
    Trophy Points:
    113
    HOW IT STARTED: Preliminary Philly Budget to Reduce Police Funding by $14M, Adds Reforms.

    —NBC Philadelphia, June 18th, 2020.

    How it’s going: Philadelphia Police Chief Resigns amid Homicide Wave.

    'Philadelphia police commissioner Danielle Outlaw will be resigning from her post later this month, leaving the City of Brotherly Love reeling from a crime spike after three tumultuous years in office.'

    'Over the course of her tenure, annual homicides in Philadelphia rose from 499 in 2020 to 516 in 2022. Before Outlaw’s arrival, between 2007 and 2019, murders in the city ranged between 246 and 391 per year.'

    https://instapundit.com/604059/

    Dani Outlaw is a terrible name for a Police Chief.
     
  20. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    37,205
    Likes Received:
    9,650
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The police budget was in excess of 4.9 billion when the 14 million dollar reduction was enacted due to budget shortfalls from the Pandemic from your own link. So, it was an economic issue, not a political issue. A $14 million decrease to a nearly $5 BILLION police budget is like you providing a nickel to a $1000 bar tab.
     
  21. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    84,461
    Likes Received:
    59,029
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fake news. It's 56 TIMES your comparison.

    And your claim is Fake News. The very first line of the link contemporaneous article.
    "The budget comes amid nationwide protests demanding police reform in the wake of George Floyd’s death."

    I'm still surprised at how some folks on the Left just make stuff up, things that can be double checked in seconds, for example by reading the FIRST line of the linked proof. They reversed the planned $19M increase with a $14M DECREASE a $33M swing. And they increased spending on the following virtue-signaling:
    • 'Implicit bias training for police
    • Equity Manager for the police force'
    Nearly 700 additional people were killed, and you are 'ho hum'. Small wonder folks don't think some on the Left don't care if felons kill them.
     
  22. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    37,205
    Likes Received:
    9,650
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The swing you are referring to is proposed, much like how auto insurance money "save you money" type of thing. But $14 million is not a large figure compared to the rest of the budget. It is like saying, "The Chinese own 800,000 acres in Texas and that is wrong." The Kings Ranch is 864000 acres alone. The XIT ranch in the panhandle is 640,000 acres alone. And percentage-wise, it is less than one percent, not even one tenth of one percent.

    You chose a poor example here to try to argue about "police defunding" and ignoring the economic realities, which your link described, in why they made those proposals.
     
  23. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    84,461
    Likes Received:
    59,029
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually you did. The cut is 56 times your claim and 700 additional are dead. You also claimed it had nothing to do with the Floyd protests and the Left's defund the police movement, when it most certainly did.

    My example is flawless.

    'The Reuters/Ipsos survey showed that 40% of voters think Republicans are best suited to solve illegal immigration, while just 32% of voters picked the Democrats.'

    That 32% represents some cult like devoted folks.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2023
  24. Pieces of Malarkey

    Pieces of Malarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2022
    Messages:
    3,835
    Likes Received:
    2,741
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Very good. And I will remind you, as I've stated ad nausea elsewhere on the forum, that I too have worked both with and for the Federal government and this is my wheelhouse.

    I will also say that I would never criticize the IRS, both because I have no idea how they work and, having gone bankrupt once in my life, they were eminently helpful. True, they wanted their money, but they were quite flexible on how they got it.

    So you were close. The authorizing legislation is the Clean Air Act. And I won't torture this question anymore.

    For the first 35 years of EPA's history CO2 was not considered a regulatable pollutant, simply because it isn't. Instead NHTSA's CAFE standards regulated CO2 (CO2 and fuel economy are exact mathematical inverses)inverse. In 2007 the state of Massachusetts sued EPA in the SC to force them to regulate CO2. In what can only be called an absurdity Massachusetts won. Well not really won but between the Bush administration's cowardice and the Obama administration's naked partisanship CO2 became effectively a pollutant in a total abortion of rationality and sanity without Congress ever having to touch the CAA. And now this country (and other western nations) are chomping at the bit to shoot the economy and the country in the head by preposterously eliminating possibly the greatest invention ever, the internal combustion engine. All because EPA apparently couldn't say "you'll need to amend the CAA".

    I was very specific when I spoke of the Deep State. And this is the best example I can offer. A regulatory agency operating completely outside the bounds of their Congressional mandate.

    And by the way, here's a good article on the origin of the term "Deep State".

    https://www.racket.news/p/tracking-...ID-8fExmVKkX6Q8ngT9pK-GKwkguGjT6JJDRGjkMqeSng

    And finally, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo this fall stands a very good chance of eliminating what's called the Chevron deference that allows agencies to wander so far astray from their Congressional mandates (of course this particular decision goes even further than Chevron. More like a Massachusetts deference).

    You should watch for it.
     
    Green Man likes this.
  25. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    84,461
    Likes Received:
    59,029
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Defer No Longer to Chevron

    'The statute implicated in the two cases to be argued tomorrow, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless v. Department of Commerce, is the Magnuson-Stevens Act. The law governs fishery management in federal waters and expressly authorizes the National Marine Fisheries Service under narrow circumstances to require fishing vessels to carry and pay federal observers who enforce agency regulations, subject to a salary cap at 2–3% of the value of the vessel’s haul. The agency claimed implicit power under the statute to compel a wide variety of domestic vessels to pay monitor salaries of up to 20% of their revenues.'

    Amazing.

    'These are cases that squarely call for the Court to confront Chevron deference—and indeed the question presented is whether the Court should overrule Chevron or at least clarify that statutory silence concerning controversial powers expressly but narrowly granted elsewhere in the relevant statute does not constitute an ambiguity requiring deference to the agency.'

    Does Statutory Silence Grant These Unelected Agencies Power is the question before the Court.

    'Chevron deference has been a juridical embarrassment, enabling a federal agency takeover of the courts’ Article III power to interpret the law and of Congress’ Article I power to legislate. Beyond that constitutional objection, Chevron deference defies the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946, which clearly assigns the duty to interpret statutes to courts rather than agencies.'

    Vast Power Grab By Unelected Administrative Staff Pukes Over A Free And Self-Ruled People.

    'Judicial deference under such circumstances is farcical. Agencies routinely get away with 180-degree reversals of their prior interpretations, typically after a change in presidential administration.'

    Ridiculous: that does not provide a Free People with proper notice of what is requird of them, so that those that wish to can order their lives in a lawful manner.

    'While serving on the D.C. Circuit, then-Judge Brett Kavanaugh charged in a 2016 law review article that “Chevron encourages the Executive Branch (whichever party controls it) to be extremely aggressive in seeking to squeeze its policy goals into ill-fitting statutory authorizations and restraints.” He observed, “In many ways, Chevron is nothing more than a judicially orchestrated shift of power from Congress to the Executive Branch.” As Justice Clarence Thomas noted in his 2015 concurrence in Michigan v. EPA, what is often misidentified as an agency’s “interpretation” of an ambiguous statute could typically be characterized as “formulation of policy,” but even if that “fact might allow us to escape the jaws of Article III’s Vesting Clause, it runs headlong into the teeth of Article I’s” conferral on Congress of “[a]ll legislative Powers herein granted.”'

    Kavanaugh, Thomas, Gorsuch, Roberts, Alito have all pointed out to the muddle of separation powers that is Chevron Deference (as did Kennedy shortly before retiring.)
     
    Pieces of Malarkey likes this.

Share This Page