Jump to content

Trump gets lackey to file impeachment on judge, the Constitutional crisis is here

LGR4GM

By LGR4GM
in Topics

 Share

Recommended Posts

LGR4GM Hall of Famer

LGR4GM

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Not a matter of "if" anymore but "when" Trump seizes unlimited power. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/speaker-mike-johnson-floats-eliminating-federal-courts-rcna197986

Quote

“We do have the authority over the federal courts, as you know. We can eliminate an entire district court. We have power of funding over the courts and all these other things,” Johnson told reporters on Tuesday. “But desperate times call for desperate measures, and Congress is going to act.”

Johnson, a former constitutional attorney, later clarified that he was making a point about Congress’ “broad authority” over the “creation, maintenance and the governance” of the courts. Article III of the Constitution established the Supreme Court but gave Congress the power to “ordain and establish” lower federal courts.

Congress has eliminated courts in the past. In 1913, for example, Congress abolished the Commerce Court and its judges were redistributed to the federal appeals court, according to Congress.gov. And in 1982, Congress passed legislation abolishing the Article III Court of Claims and U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals, and established the Article I Court of Federal Claims and the Article III U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, who plans to hold a hearing focused on Boasberg and district judges next week, said he’s speaking with GOP appropriators about what he called “legislative remedies.”

“We got money, spending, the appropriations process to help try to address some of this,” Jordan said, without adding further details.

"Legislative remedies" is code for removing districts they disagree with and consolidating Trump's power. We're rapidly approaching the endgame now. 

LTS First Liner

LTS

Posted
Posted
On 3/21/2025 at 3:51 PM, K-9 said:

Yes, we have different ideas about what matters in America and have since our inception. But EVERYONE could agree that the Constitution and rule of law are paramount. Indeed, they have always been what makes our disagreements manageable. 

What’s changed is that a certain faction no longer believes that we shouldn’t have a convicted felon and sexual abuser hold the highest office in the land; a person who conspired to defraud the United States and disenfranchise 81 million voters. A person who fomented an insurrection. Integrity was the bare minimum requirement for the office, regardless of our differing opinions on what else matters, but no longer. 

On another note, a dictator is ALWAYS a bad thing in our representative republic democracy. Indeed, dictators are antithetical to that very idea of our Constitution.  

My commentary on dictators is not in relation to the United States Constitution but simply on the concept of dictators. 

No one agrees on the Constitution or the rule of law, that's why we have so many damn lawyers. The US is bloated with people challenging those concepts continually. Making a disagreement manageable is done by engaging in a debate with an open mind and not resorting to name calling, expletive, childish ranting.  it's something that our society is not very good at because it's continually encouraged to be that way.

At the end of the day, regardless of all your talking points, the truth is that Trump won the election. It says a lot about the state of this nation that so many people could find value in his statements. I have no words for those who still continue to support him. As for those who have regret, they are representative of where our society has been heading. Sheeple who never take a moment to think for themselves.

On 3/24/2025 at 5:29 PM, K-9 said:

Held for no other reason than spite by this phucking racist, fascist phuck who is mad at Canada. We are rapidly becoming the laughing stock of the free world because of this cheeto toddler in the oval office. 

Should we modify the swear filter?  Respect that its put in place by the mods please.

The US has been a laughing stock to many people outside of the US. I'm just glad that it's so obvious now that a caveman can see it. (not inferring you are a caveman, but rather the general population).

K-9 All Star

K-9

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, LTS said:

My commentary on dictators is not in relation to the United States Constitution but simply on the concept of dictators. 

No one agrees on the Constitution or the rule of law, that's why we have so many damn lawyers. The US is bloated with people challenging those concepts continually. Making a disagreement manageable is done by engaging in a debate with an open mind and not resorting to name calling, expletive, childish ranting.  it's something that our society is not very good at because it's continually encouraged to be that way.

At the end of the day, regardless of all your talking points, the truth is that Trump won the election. It says a lot about the state of this nation that so many people could find value in his statements. I have no words for those who still continue to support him. As for those who have regret, they are representative of where our society has been heading. Sheeple who never take a moment to think for themselves.

Should we modify the swear filter?  Respect that its put in place by the mods please.

The US has been a laughing stock to many people outside of the US. I'm just glad that it's so obvious now that a caveman can see it. (not inferring you are a caveman, but rather the general population).

Making disagreements manageable is dependent on the Constitution and the rule of law. The fact that there are perpetual challenges those constructs illustrates that. Disagreements should  be difficult, changes to it should  be a challenge. That idea was referenced by our founders, so it’s nothing new. It is folly to think that we all need to agree on these matters. That is unrealistic at best. But it’s essential to question our elected leaders and hold them to account. 

If I offended anyone by bypassing the language filter, I apologize. Sometimes my frustration with the bozo in charge gets to be a bit much. But the least he and his followers can do is remember that he represents not only the maga voters that elected him.

Anyone who gets less than 50% of a popular vote can’t claim a mandate and he should respect that. But he insists on running rough shod over the government anyway. 
 

Demoted Fourth Liner

Demoted

Posted
Posted
On 3/18/2025 at 7:54 PM, SABRES 0311 said:

So bring members of a gang designated as a terrorist organization back to the U.S.? Seems dumb but ok.

 

 

Look at all these "gang" members. Propaganda hits hard.

LTS First Liner

LTS

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, K-9 said:

Making disagreements manageable is dependent on the Constitution and the rule of law. The fact that there are perpetual challenges those constructs illustrates that. Disagreements should  be difficult, changes to it should  be a challenge. That idea was referenced by our founders, so it’s nothing new. It is folly to think that we all need to agree on these matters. That is unrealistic at best. But it’s essential to question our elected leaders and hold them to account. 

If I offended anyone by bypassing the language filter, I apologize. Sometimes my frustration with the bozo in charge gets to be a bit much. But the least he and his followers can do is remember that he represents not only the maga voters that elected him.

Anyone who gets less than 50% of a popular vote can’t claim a mandate and he should respect that. But he insists on running rough shod over the government anyway. 
 

Thank you for highlighting what I consider to be one of the biggest flaws with our system of government. The Electoral College is a concept that has far surpassed its purpose and needs to be eliminated.

As far as respect, there's nothing that man respects, perhaps not even himself.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Disagree 1
LGR4GM Hall of Famer

LGR4GM

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 hours ago, LTS said:

Thank you for highlighting what I consider to be one of the biggest flaws with our system of government. The Electoral College is a concept that has far surpassed its purpose and needs to be eliminated.

As far as respect, there's nothing that man respects, perhaps not even himself.

That electoral college at minimum should be proportional to the votes won. If you win 55% of a state, you get 55% of the electoral votes. Ties or partial vote goes to the person with more %. It's disenfranchisement for everyone in red or blue states who votes opposite their states majority. 

 

Demoted Fourth Liner

Demoted

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Donald Trump edges closer and closer to dictatorship. At this point it's a matter of when we cross the line, not if. 

 

We need him to cross the line, it's the only way to destroy him.

LGR4GM Hall of Famer

LGR4GM

Posted
  • Author
Posted
25 minutes ago, Demoted said:

We need him to cross the line, it's the only way to destroy him.

I was referring to "we" the US crossing the line to dictatorship. 

LTS First Liner

LTS

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

That electoral college at minimum should be proportional to the votes won. If you win 55% of a state, you get 55% of the electoral votes. Ties or partial vote goes to the person with more %. It's disenfranchisement for everyone in red or blue states who votes opposite their states majority. 

 

Better than nothing, but just abolishing it is the right move. 

All of that said.. popular vote would still have put Trump in office this election.  But, it would have had impacts on prior elections and it's still the right thing to do.

 

Demoted Fourth Liner

Demoted

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 3/19/2025 at 2:22 PM, SABRES 0311 said:

The judge offered no proof anyone on the plane was not a member of the terrorist organization. People are actually in favor of bringing terrorists back into the U.S. and you’re saying I’m the one who doesn’t care about the constitution?

😂

b/c not everyone is a terrorist, this is why you have due process so you can make sure these people being illegally sent to El Salvador are actually terrorist. Looks like the White House admitted they messed up and got rid of innocent people.
This is what you voted for, you want America to burn, Trump and Elon are doing a great job.


Guess it doesnt matter for MAGA as long as Twitter and Newsmax keeps pushing fake propaganda.

 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-administration-admits-error-deporting-092850908.html

El Salvador will not allow these people to ever get out of prison also, so this guy along with others have lost their lives just so you can pretend like good things are happening.

Edited by Demoted
  • Haha (+1) 1
LGR4GM Hall of Famer

LGR4GM

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 3/19/2025 at 2:22 PM, SABRES 0311 said:

The judge offered no proof anyone on the plane was not a member of the terrorist organization. People are actually in favor of bringing terrorists back into the U.S. and you’re saying I’m the one who doesn’t care about the constitution?

😂

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/man-was-sent-el-salvador-due-administrative-error-protected-legal-stat-rcna199010

Quote

The United States government accidentally deported a man to El Salvador due to an "administrative error," landing him in a notorious mega-jail and leaving him stuck there in legal limbo, according to legal papers filed on Monday.

Kilmar Arbrego Garcia came to the U.S. in 2011 from El Salvador and is a legal resident protected by a 2019 court order that prevented him from being sent back to his home country.

But, in court papers filed Monday, the government admitted that "on March 15, although ICE was aware of his protection from removal to El Salvador, Abrego Garcia was removed to El Salvador because of an administrative error."

Garcia lives in Maryland with his wife and 5-year-old child, who is autistic and intellectually disabled. The couple both work full-time, the filing says. This incident was first reported by The Atlantic. 

You care to comment on this or is it fine because "proof" wasn't offered by the Judge? Proof also wasn't offered by JD Vance or anyone in the administration other than a supposed "confidential informant". This is not freedom, this is tyranny. We have laws and once we decide that "feels" should replace laws, we are no longer a country but a dystopian hellscape run by Oligarchy fueled Dictators. 

SABRES 0311 First Liner

SABRES 0311

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/man-was-sent-el-salvador-due-administrative-error-protected-legal-stat-rcna199010

You care to comment on this or is it fine because "proof" wasn't offered by the Judge? Proof also wasn't offered by JD Vance or anyone in the administration other than a supposed "confidential informant". This is not freedom, this is tyranny. We have laws and once we decide that "feels" should replace laws, we are no longer a country but a dystopian hellscape run by Oligarchy fueled Dictators. 

Yep the administration screwed up. If they are going to enact the Alien Enemies Act they should have had concrete evidence/intelligence. Single reporting is not that.

The act also did not seem to pertain to the situation because the target country is not an adversary. I could be wrong on that though.

K-9 All Star

K-9

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, LGR4GM said:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/man-was-sent-el-salvador-due-administrative-error-protected-legal-stat-rcna199010

You care to comment on this or is it fine because "proof" wasn't offered by the Judge? Proof also wasn't offered by JD Vance or anyone in the administration other than a supposed "confidential informant". This is not freedom, this is tyranny. We have laws and once we decide that "feels" should replace laws, we are no longer a country but a dystopian hellscape run by Oligarchy fueled Dictators. 

What are the odds that the man they admit to making a mistake on is the only deportee they made a mistake on? 

An innocent man, husband to a natural born US citizen and father of a disabled child, deported to a foreign land with no chance to get out since US courts have no jurisdiction, because of tattoos. TATTOOS! And the El Salvador president can only offer a mocking “tsk-tsk” to the judge as he collects his $6m a year from this criminal administration to take deportees from the US. 

And I’d like to know in what court EVER, the onus was on the judge to offer proof of anything. That may be the most absurd notion I’ve heard in this or any other forum. 
 

Edited by K-9
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...