It’s been less than a month and we have our first Trump Constitutional Crisis!

[Roundybout]

5 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said:

So glad I have that fool on ignore. 

Sounds like a declaration of defeat to me. 

[All_Pro_Bills]

23 minutes ago, Roundybout said:

There’s nothing to “investigate.” It’s an unconstitutional order. I work in public policy. The executive office does not have the power of the purse and cannot block congressional spending.

Sure Congress authorizes budgeting of funds but the Executive branch presides over the disbursement and procedures of spending. I expect these bills passed by the House and Senate do not mention each and every group and organization by name that should receive funding.

 

As for a crisis, that word wasn't used when Biden ignored the SCOTUS ruling that the President lacks the authority to forgive student loan debt. He did it anyway while pointing a big middle finger at the court. 

[Roundybout]

1 minute ago, LeviF said:

 

Freedom of speech, association, and assembly all wiped out. Followed immediately by the authorization of the importation of a new voting public, but now it's borderline illegal to complain about it.

I’m sorry you lost your right to discriminate against black people. Tissue?

[Roundybout]

1 minute ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Sure Congress authorizes budgeting of funds but the Executive branch presides over the disbursement and procedures of spending. I expect these bills passed by the House and Senate do not mention each and every group and organization by name that should receive funding.

 

As for a crisis, that word wasn't used when Biden ignored the SCOTUS ruling that the President lacks the authority to forgive student loan debt. He did it anyway while pointing a big middle finger at the court. 
 

 

 

No, the president approves budgets passed by Congress. He cannot step in and say “nuh uh” to a budget already passed and enacted, which is what he’s doing here. 
 

Biden attempted to exploit a loophole in the law that was shut down. It’s not the same thing. 

[LeviF]

Just now, Roundybout said:

I’m sorry you lost your right to discriminate against black people. Tissue?

 

You may sneer all you like, being a leftist you are 100% wrong all of the time. You've had your worldview propped up by fake laws, fake money, fake human nature, and of course the most important piece, fake "conservatives." These last two points are rather salient as I illustrated some time back:

 

On 11/30/2023 at 10:17 AM, LeviF said:

 

 

Modern conservatives have this erroneous notion that the general idea of liberty plus the Constitution can hold a nation together until the sun dies. The fact is that liberty can only exist in the context of shared vision of the common good. This concept was noted repeatedly by the founders. The less common the vision of "good" is, the less liberty your society (and therefore your government) may tolerate before it ceases to be functional.

 

In other words, you may pick two of the following: a free society, a functional society, a society in which two or more sizable factions have divergent and incompatible visions of "good."

 

The reality is that shared visions of the common good are often drawn along national (read: ethnic) lines. The laws passed in 1964 and 1965 attempted (and succeeded) in remaking America into something that historically cannot be called a "nation." It was the left's midgame (and the last point at which it could have been rebuffed by American politicians under ordinary processes) in the attempt to turn America from a free and functional society into something else.

[Trump_is_Mentally_fit]

9 minutes ago, LeviF said:

 

Freedom of speech, association, and assembly all wiped out. Followed immediately by the authorization of the importation of a new voting public, but now it's borderline illegal to complain about it.

You are saying that giving citizens rights destroys the constitution? 

 

I'd argue it strengthened the constitution because it brought millions of people under its blanket of protection against the racist tyranny of the state governmnents. I think the red states were probably happy the feds forced them to change. Enforcing discrimination is probably the ugliest task our sister states in the south had to do 

[LeviF]

2 minutes ago, Trump_is_Mentally_fit said:

You are saying that giving citizens rights destroys the constitution? 

 

I'd argue it strengthened the constitution because it brought millions of people under its blanket of protection against the racist tyranny of the state governmnents. I think the red states were probably happy the feds forced them to change. Enforcing discrimination is probably the ugliest task our sister states in the south had to do 

 

As usual, you have clear patterns of thought but oriented entirely in the wrong direction. People call you stupid on here but that's not strictly true. You're just all turned around.

[Roundybout]

4 minutes ago, LeviF said:

 

You may sneer all you like, being a leftist you are 100% wrong all of the time. You've had your worldview propped up by fake laws, fake money, fake human nature, and of course the most important piece, fake "conservatives." These last two points are rather salient as I illustrated some time back:

 

 

The reality is that shared visions of the common good are often drawn along national (read: ethnic) lines. The laws passed in 1964 and 1965 attempted (and succeeded) in remaking America into something that historically cannot be called a "nation." It was the left's midgame (and the last point at which it could have been rebuffed by American politicians under ordinary processes) in the attempt to turn America from a free and functional society into something else.

The notion that the modern nation-state is drawn along “ethnic” lines is foolish. Technology has given us a completely connected world, with the free movement and association of people enshrined as a human right. It’s not 1300 anymore. 
 

The common good that all human beings seek is the right to self-determination. The amendments you don’t like affirmed this right among ALL Americans no matter what background. The founding fathers of our country were enlightenment thinkers, influenced by Locke, Hobbes, and so forth. The Civil Rights Act was a natural extension of enlightenment thinking.

[T master]

1 hour ago, Roundybout said:

Did you miss the “unconstitutional” part or did that slide off your brain?

 

I'm not real sure about the constitutional part of this but i know back in the beginning the federal gov't was to over see actions of each state & to protect the states from foreign invasion and such . i

 

I never heard that the federal gov't was suppose to be the bank for each state, of course Roosevelt & Woodrow Wilson had different ideas about that and changed that completely .

 

But there is so much of the monies that are given out that needs to be looked at especially how they are used, i feel there is a ton of federal monies our taxes wasted on BS that is totally unneccessary ! 

[Trump_is_Mentally_fit]

Just now, LeviF said:

 

As usual, you have clear patterns of thought but oriented entirely in the wrong direction. People call you stupid on here but that's not strictly true. You're just all turned around.

One of is. Discrimination takes negative energy, energy that can be used positively. Ruining the potential future development of millions of citizens is just counter productive. Did you ever see the documentary "A Class Divided"? Check it out. Interesting message 

 

 

 

[Roundybout]

4 minutes ago, T master said:

 

I'm not real sure about the constitutional part of this but i know back in the beginning the federal gov't was to over see actions of each state & to protect the states from foreign invasion and such . i

 

I never heard that the federal gov't was suppose to be the bank for each state, of course Roosevelt & Woodrow Wilson had different ideas about that and changed that completely .

 

But there is so much of the monies that are given out that needs to be looked at especially how they are used, i feel there is a ton of federal monies our taxes wasted on BS that is totally unneccessary ! 

You are welcome to believe that. However, even in the beginning of the nation Congress was given the power to allocate funds and the President signed the budget. 
 

Trump CANNOT cancel funding already allocated by Congress. It’s illegal. 

[LeviF]

4 minutes ago, Roundybout said:

The notion that the modern nation-state is drawn along “ethnic” lines is foolish.

 

The notion that anything regarding building a nation needs to be "modern" or "enlightened" in the sense that you mean is a prior you haven't proven and has, in fact, been shot down by nature itself repeatedly.

 

And regarding "free movement" and "free association," what you really mean is the right of the third world to have access to what whites have built and maintained. Access to whites is not a right. Hope that helps.

[B-Man]

 

 

We already have a thread for this.

 

 

 

[All_Pro_Bills]

19 minutes ago, Roundybout said:

 

 

No, the president approves budgets passed by Congress. He cannot step in and say “nuh uh” to a budget already passed and enacted, which is what he’s doing here. 
 

Biden attempted to exploit a loophole in the law that was shut down. It’s not the same thing. 

You have a valid point but the premise behind the order is to dismantle the practice of providing these grants and awards which are part of a political patronage system that rewards political supporters of one party or both while providing little to nothing to the taxpayers. I'm not clear what products or services the government is procuring from these groups or what benefit there is from these programs to the taxpayers. For the most part this vast array of public-funded political patronage is outside the view of the voters and I suspect citizens of all political affiliations would be hard pressed to support such spending if they were aware of the amount of money that gets spent each year. I'll wager there's a lot of mid-6 figure salaries of people living off the work of the taxpayers while running these programs and basically doing nothing.

[Roundybout]

1 minute ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

You have a valid point but the premise behind the order is to dismantle the practice of providing these grants and awards which are part of a political patronage system that rewards political supporters of one party or both while providing little to nothing to the taxpayers. I'm not clear what products or services the government is procuring from these groups or what benefit there is from these programs to the taxpayers. For the most part this vast array of public-funded political patronage is outside the view of the voters and I suspect citizens of all political affiliations would be hard pressed to support such spending if they were aware of the amount of money that gets spent each year. I'll wager there's a lot of mid-6 figure salaries of people living off the work of the taxpayers while running these programs and basically doing nothing.

First of all, federal grants aren’t handed out like candy. There’s a rigorous application process that everyone who wants one has to meet. Many are “matching” grants, meaning the applicant has to provide at least a chunk of the money. 
 

Second of all, the grant funding does benefit all Americans. For example, federal historic preservation grants are extremely important in keeping parks kept up. Federal housing grants allow housing developers to provide more units at lower cost. 
 

Third of all, grant administration is one of my roles at work. It’s a tough job. You have to make sure every single dollar you have is accounted for, or else an audit comes knocking and you’re in trouble. I don’t know any grant administrator that sits around doing nothing.

[T master]

29 minutes ago, Roundybout said:

You are welcome to believe that. However, even in the beginning of the nation Congress was given the power to allocate funds and the President signed the budget. 
 

Trump CANNOT cancel funding already allocated by Congress. It’s illegal. 

 

Seeing as there is no such thing as a budget now i have heard stories of them and i have used them but our gov't not so much, but if funds are allocated to a state and they are being misused and not for what they were intended for why can't it be stopped .

 

Such as the monies that apparently congress okayed for the gain of function research and things of that nature . And stuff like the study of a guppies mating habits talk about a waste ...

 

Some one in our gov't needs to get a handle on all of this stuff . I can recall years back a uproar on why a hammer in Ace hardware costs (say for the sake of conversation) $25 but if it was a gov't contract the same exact hammer costs $150 that's wasteful spending !

 

And i know personally some of the gov't disaster spending is severely taken advantage of, so maybe it is wrong that he is just stopping it all together at 1 time but i'm all for them going through what monies are being handed out and finding out exactly what they are spending it on & who is receiving that cash and receipts should be produced to prove those funds are being spent where they say they are needed ...

Edited Tuesday at 03:31 PM by T master

[Roundybout]

7 minutes ago, T master said:

 

Seeing as there is no such thing as a budget now i have heard stories of them and i have used them but our gov't not so much, but if funds are allocated to a state and they are being misused and not for what they wee intended for why can't it be stopped .

 

Such as the monies that apparently congress okayed for the gain of function research and things of that nature . And stuff like the study of a guppies mating habits talk about a waste ...

 

Some one in our gov't needs to get a handle on all of this stuff . I can recall years back a uproar on why a hammer in Ace hardware costs (say for the sake of conversation) $25 but if it was a gov't contract the same exact hammer costs $150 that's wasteful spending !

 

And i know personally some of the gov't disaster spending is severely taken advantage of, so maybe it is wrong that he is just stopping it all together at 1 time but i'm all for them going through what monies are being handed out and finding out exactly what they are spending it on & who is receiving that cash and receipts should be produced to prove those funds are being spent where they say they are needed ...

That’s all well and good, but you’re missing the point of the thread - Trump cannot use this course of action to change government spending. It’s not constitutionally allowed.

[Roundybout]

42 minutes ago, LeviF said:

 

The notion that anything regarding building a nation needs to be "modern" or "enlightened" in the sense that you mean is a prior you haven't proven and has, in fact, been shot down by nature itself repeatedly.

 

And regarding "free movement" and "free association," what you really mean is the right of the third world to have access to what whites have built and maintained. Access to whites is not a right. Hope that helps.

We aren’t animals, we are human beings. No developed nation on this planet is an ethnostate. Even the empires of old, from Alexander to Mansa Musa, were multicultural. 
 

No, I mean the right of people to live where they please. What right do you have to prevent this?

[JFKjr]

1 hour ago, Roundybout said:

There’s nothing to “investigate.” It’s an unconstitutional order. I work in public policy. The executive office does not have the power of the purse and cannot block congressional spending.

 

Well you might want to start firing off those emails to the editor. Or the angry BlueSkys.

[BillsFanNC]

You mean unconstitutional like forgiving student loan debt?