5 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

Once again, you are good with one branch acting lawless but expect another to just go along with it. Everything you just said shows you do not understand what is going on. There is lots of BS and fluff, but at the end of the day, you do not understand or, more likely, don't care because of TDS or a liberal agenda.

You are kidding, right?  Because I believe that the proper processes must be followed, that is believe in a limited Executive branch, and that the Judiciary branch is a coequal branch of the government makes me a liberal or have TDS?  Have you read any of my previous posts?  

The administration is wrong here.  All stop. The judiciary is actually correct on these rulings and not out of line.

17 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

Once again, you are good with one branch acting lawless but expect another to just go along with it. Everything you just said shows you do not understand what is going on. There is lots of BS and fluff, but at the end of the day, you do not understand or, more likely, don't care because of TDS or a liberal agenda. Cute words like "patently against the founders' ideas" and "guard rails" while ignoring the judge driving over Article II. 

Nice edit.  Would you care to share what part of Article II vests such broad authority.  The first sentence? Or section 3?

 

And that does not even include Article III powers of the courts.  In these cases, the judges are not inventing new law.  How are they unlawful? Because they contradict what Trump wanted?  The sad thing is you would be singing a different tune if it were a court overturning a Biden edict you didn't agree with.  By your argument any court that disagreed with the Executive is "unlawful".

this is usually where diehard starts moving the goalpost. 

1 hour ago, Diehardfan said:

No, I do, but you are ignoring the lawlessness of these judges.

You clearly have no clue about the role the three branches of government, and why their powers are separate but equal.
The judiciary includes all of the lower courts as well as the SCOTUS. 

You clearly believe that the POTUS is above the law if you don’t think they have to follow the courts.   

 

 

1 minute ago, Tnt4philly said:

You clearly have no clue about the role the three branches of government, and why their powers are separate but equal.
The judiciary includes all of the lower courts as well as the SCOTUS. 

You clearly believe that the POTUS is above the law if you don’t think they have to follow the courts.   

 

 

LOL in one instance in international waters I'm glad he didn't. Going past that is you all making it so to distract from the BS rulings of these judges who want to overturn the election.

5 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

this is usually where diehard starts moving the goalpost. 

 

5 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said:

this is usually where diehard starts moving the goalpost. 

Does posting it twice make it twice as good in your mind?

31 minutes ago, BBE said:

You are kidding, right?  Because I believe that the proper processes must be followed, that is believe in a limited Executive branch, and that the Judiciary branch is a coequal branch of the government makes me a liberal or have TDS?  Have you read any of my previous posts?  

The administration is wrong here.  All stop. The judiciary is actually correct on these rulings and not out of line.

hahahhaha like I said you don't understand or have an agenda. Good news is you all have means of checks and balances as mentioned. As for the flight and him ignoring it impeach him if you want or wait for SCOTUS to do something.

It's time for diehard to take his ball and go home for the day.   

16 minutes ago, BBE said:

Nice edit.  Would you care to share what part of Article II vests such broad authority.  The first sentence? Or section 3?

 

And that does not even include Article III powers of the courts.  In these cases, the judges are not inventing new law.  How are they unlawful? Because they contradict what Trump wanted?  The sad thing is you would be singing a different tune if it were a court overturning a Biden edict you didn't agree with.  By your argument any court that disagreed with the Executive is "unlawful".

My fault is coming into a room full of TDS or libtards and expecting something other than derangement.

4 minutes ago, DiPros said:

It's time for diehard to take his ball and go home for the day.   

Why? My side is in power and winning and it's only going to get worse for you all. I'm loving this. By the time you all get back in power things are going to look a lot different and there isn't crap your tears and BS can do to stop it. So why exactly do I need to take my ball and walk? Cause you all think you are right? Ok.

1 minute ago, Diehardfan said:

My fault is coming into a room full of TDS or libtards and expecting something other than derangement.

Again, A district judge is part of the judiciary and can make a ruling regarding the executive branch.  If you can't get that then who is the deranged?

1 minute ago, Diehardfan said:

My fault is coming into a room full of TDS or libtards and expecting something other than derangement.

i see you are up to your typical sidestepping when cornered with logic, today. 

also, calling someone a libtard because they don't agree with your opinion, even when the poster isn't a liberal. is a clear cut case of derangement. so, i guess, good use of irony by you in this post? 

Just now, Diehardfan said:

hahahhaha like I said you don't understand or have an agenda. Good news is you all have means of checks and balances as mentioned. As for the flight and him ignoring it impeach him if you want or wait for SCOTUS to do something.

Until SCOTUS rules, Trump is bound by the ruling.  You obviously did not read Article III.  I do understand and I do have an agenda.  My agenda is following the Constitution and doing things the right way by following the set rules.

If he continues on this path, he will earn an impeachment this time.

This nigh unlimited power of the Executive branch is ok because is ok because my party has control is at best hypocritical. 

 

I also noticed you never addressed my comment toward you regarding conservative lower court judges blocking Biden's Executive actions.

Just now, DiPros said:

Again, A district judge is part of the judiciary and can make a ruling regarding the executive branch.  If you can't get that then who is the deranged?

They can try to do whatever they want. Most of these are going to SCOTUS but that one was ignored and I'm glad. They were expecting it based on how quickly they got that response out and probably can't wait for it to go to SCOTUS

 

2 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

Why? My side is in power and winning and it's only going to get worse for you all. I'm loving this. By the time you all get back in power things are going to look a lot different and there isn't crap your tears and BS can do to stop it. So why exactly do I need to take my ball and walk? Cause you all think you are right? Ok.

someone needing to get satisfaction in life by how strangers on the internet feel, is neato. 

Just now, Alpha_TATEr said:

i see you are up to your typical sidestepping when cornered with logic, today. 

also, calling someone a libtard because they don't agree with your opinion, even when the poster isn't a liberal. is a clear cut case of derangement. so, i guess, good use of irony by you in this post? 

Nope, just hitting my BS limit early today because the same types are more off base today than usual.

8 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

LOL in one instance in international waters I'm glad he didn't. Going past that is you all making it so to distract from the BS rulings of these judges who want to overturn the election.

Bull sheet.  You've been going on for weeks now saying that Trump/WH did not need to abide by the rulings of the federal courts.  There are probably in excess of 25 posts in here where you've said that.

Just now, Alpha_TATEr said:

someone needing to get satisfaction in life by how strangers on the internet feel, is neato. 

Wow, there is some projection at it's best

Just now, Alpha_TATEr said:

i see you are up to your typical sidestepping when cornered with logic, today. 

also, calling someone a libtard because they don't agree with your opinion, even when the poster isn't a liberal. is a clear cut case of derangement. so, i guess, good use of irony by you in this post? 

I'm still wondering how I am no longer a Trumpbot/MAGAT and now a libtard/TDSer when I have been nothing but consistent in my view that Congress has ceded far too much authority to the Executive branch.

4 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Bull sheet.  You've been going on for weeks now saying that Trump/WH did not need to abide by the rulings of the federal courts.  There are probably in excess of 25 posts in here where you've said that.

Quote the ones back a few weeks. Now, I've been saying they are lawless.

Now do I care if he ignores them? Not a damn bit. You all can have your checks and balances and SCOTUS can sort it out. It's time for this crap to come to a head.

 

2 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

They can try to do whatever they want. Most of these are going to SCOTUS but that one was ignored and I'm glad. They were expecting it based on how quickly they got that response out and probably can't wait for it to go to SCOTUS

 

Actually, SCOTUS may not take the cases.  What then?  Are you going to ignore that SCOTUS found no error or did not find the case meets the necessary requirements for hearing?  

Just now, BBE said:

Actually, SCOTUS may not take the cases.  What then?  Are you going to ignore that SCOTUS found no error or did not find the case meets the necessary requirements for hearing?  

Then tough crap for your side. Tough crap for your side either way though cause they are in another country and aren't coming back. More please.

2 minutes ago, BBE said:

I'm still wondering how I am no longer a Trumpbot/MAGAT and now a libtard/TDSer when I have been nothing but consistent in my view that Congress has ceded far too much authority to the Executive branch.

common sense seems to ruffle the feathers of the fringes.