Patterico's Pontifications

3/4/2025

Trump Addresses A Joint Session of Congress Open Thread

Filed under: General — Dana @ 4:15 pm



[guest post by Dana]

So, rather than fine-tuning their messaging in an effort to make constituents understand why the President’s cost-cutting decisions are beneficial to the nation at large, House Republicans are being told instead to not waste their time holding any more townhalls. Of course, that informs us of two things: It’s bad business for Republicans when videos of town halls showing angry constituents, who are less than pleased about ongoing cuts, go viral, and, there simply is no positive spin to put on these quickly made decisions that will hurt so many.

Congressional Republicans are again being advised against holding in-person town halls after several instances of lawmakers being berated by attendees went viral.

The chair of the National Republican Congressional Committee, which is the Hill committee that works to get Republicans elected to the House, told lawmakers in a closed-door meeting Tuesday morning that there were more efficient ways to reach constituents than in-person town halls, according to two sources in the room.

[Ed. – Pretty sure that “more efficient ways to reach constituents” is code for out of the public eye.]

Anyway, Trump is addressing a joint session of Congress tonight. Consider this an open thread.

—Dana

247 Responses to “Trump Addresses A Joint Session of Congress Open Thread”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (79eca2)

  2. The “more efficient ways to reach constituents” seems to be text spam.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  3. I really have no problem with an attempt to downsize the government. Needs to be done. It would be nice if it was done productively. For all I know it may be much better than reported, as the reporters are a collection of fools, innumerates and political operatives.

    It’s putting the pieces back together and having it work that worries me, as organization and judgement are not that much in evidence.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  4. I really don’t know anyone who doesn’t agree that our government needs to be trimmed down. The difficulty begins when you have someone like Elon and 20- somethings doing a slash and burn through lists. Something this huge requires a methodically careful dissection before making any decisions. I just don’t think that Elon and his little buddies have the patience, discipline and temperaments to approach it that way. So much is happening so quickly, I’m afraid that we are in the dark about much of it and it will come back to bite us big time.

    Dana (d72812)

  5. OTOH, these tariffs are beyond stupid (out that direction are moronic, cretinous and imbecilic, but you can’t say those things now).

    There is a point to tariffs, when used in a judicious manner. When used right (and infrequently) — to protect a national security interest, say — they are simply a sin tax.

    But most of the time free trade is the better deal. What Trump is doing is blowing up the entire world trade system, starting with our own, carefully built up, free trade zone. Forty plus years of GOP struggle against the forces of closed markets resulted in the most wealth creation in a century. Now he just tears it all down.

    But he says, look at TSMC building fabs here (things to ignore: the damage to Intel and the fact that TSMC is only building last-gen stuff here; the real fancy stuff will still be in Taiwan). Or Nippon Steel is investing in US Steel (net gain zero). Or for every job that is brought home another job at a US exporter is lost.

    Trumpian juche. It’s worked so well for his little Nork buddy.

    If a secret cabal intent on the destruction of America took charge in DC, it could do no worse.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  6. The difficulty begins when you have someone like Elon and 20- somethings doing a slash and burn through lists

    You could be right, but I’d be more concerned with the vast college of experts method. The kids have no conflicts of interest, no threatened benefits, no stocks in companies that have contracts (OK, other than Elon’s), etc. To the degree that part of the solution is to move to modern technology instead of COBOL and magtape, you really want those young turks.

    What I hope to see is a vast reduction in labor-intensive processes, replacing those with rule-based decision systems, modern database techniques and MUCH greater responsiveness. I mean, these people still have PBXes and paper filing. The FBI still takes notes on paper rather than recording interviews. And God help any air passenger who saw how air traffic control actually worked; sausage making would be less disturbing.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  7. I know that, in the past, I have defended the concept of tariffs. But I’ve never defended the idea of tariffs for the sake of tariffs, which is what Trump has wrought.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  8. Two words: Smoot-Hawley

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  9. My one comment:

    Remember when “You lie!” was such a terrible assault on decorum.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  10. RethugliKKKans were not kicked out when they heckled Biden and Obama.

    asset (d00634)

  11. RethugliKKKans were not kicked out when they heckled Biden and Obama.

    The guy today was given repeated warnings and heeded none of them.

    Joe Wilson said “You lie!” when Obama lied about Obamacare (you can keep your doctor!), then shut up. He apologized to Obama later.

    A man who heckled Biden over the Afghanistan withdrawal (his Marine son had been killed at “Abbey Gate”, and an other son had killed himself over the loss) was arrested and removed from the gallery.

    So, exactly the same.

    =======

    P.S. If this was my blog (and it certainly isn’t) I’d be warning you right now about your “RethugliKKKans” crap.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  12. RethugliKKKans were not kicked out when they heckled Biden and Obama.
    asset (d00634) — 3/4/2025 @ 7:53 pm

    Of course asset is 100% wrong. Not only thrown out, but arrested.

    lloyd (eddcb8)

  13. @Dana

    House Republicans are being told instead to not waste their time holding any more townhalls. Of course, that informs us of two things: It’s bad business for Republicans when videos of town halls showing angry constituents, who are less than pleased about ongoing cuts, go viral, and, there simply is no positive spin to put on these quickly made decisions that will hurt so many.

    No, it’s politically smart.

    Right now, the party out of power is motivated to make the ones in power “look bad”.

    So what do they do? Right from Obama’s astroturfing tactics… they bus in neighboring activist democrats from nearby counties to swamp that townhall and with complicit media, orchestrate a fake narrative that local republican voters are upset at current policies looking to take it out of that GOP politician.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  14. This time, it’s the Supreme Court that ruled 5-4 that Trump cannot violate the Impoundment Control Act by blocking the release of congressionally authorized USAID funds.
    It’s up Congress to do that, not the executive.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  15. Paul loves him some leftist judges voting as a block.

    NJRob (4f7935)

  16. Trump just keeps bullying the Ukrainian victim, thereby siding with the mass-murdering Putin terrorist regime, because Trump is with the terrorists when his CIA Director pauses sharing intelligence with Ukraine.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  17. Paul loves him some leftist judges voting as a block.

    Thanks for affirming you’re a sore loser, Rob, just like you’re a sore winner. The Impoundment Control Act was affirmed in the Nixon administration, as an appropriate check on the power of the executive and the balance of power among the three branches.

    BTW, since you took the effort to respond to me, why don’t you take the effort to back up your lie that I “pushed the 51 intelligence officials garbage hook, line and sinker”, and that I “took the bait because you wanted the lie to be true”.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  18. This time, it’s the Supreme Court that ruled 5-4 that Trump cannot violate the Impoundment Control Act by blocking the release of congressionally authorized USAID funds.

    As I read this (pdf), they simply remanded to the lower court the task of identifying those payments that the government must make.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  19. The issue is still live Paul. Yes, the 2.1 billion will be spent and lost by the time it goes back to the courts, but the underlining issue is still live.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  20. We can call this the Lindell Effect, which can be described as the plummet in sales after joining Cult Orange Jesus, thereby alienating half of your customer base.

    The China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) reported Tesla’s shipments from China fell to 30,688 in February, plunging 49% compared to a year ago, per Bloomberg News, and down more than half compared to January (63,238). Meanwhile, wholesale sales of new energy vehicles in China for the month hit 840,000 units, up 82% compared to last year.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  21. @16: The CIA Director said also that, given Zelensky’s letter to Trump, he expects that sharing will resume shortly. I would expect arms shipments to resume as well.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  22. @18

    This time, it’s the Supreme Court that ruled 5-4 that Trump cannot violate the Impoundment Control Act by blocking the release of congressionally authorized USAID funds.

    As I read this (pdf), they simply remanded to the lower court the task of identifying those payments that the government must make.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 7:55 am

    You’re right, the little I skimmed that document tracks.

    I think CJ Roberts is being a sneaky justice here…this would likely force the lower court to flesh out those payments in a way that if the DOJ object, may force the jurisdiction question (in that, this is a contract dispute and district court don’t have jurisdiction).

    whembly (b7cc46)

  23. What’s going to happen, Kevin and whembly, is that the courts will block Trump’s freezes until Congress changes the appropriations, which can happen as early as March 14th, the date of the next showing of governmental kabuki theater, i.e., when we’ve hit the limits of our funding the government.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  24. The Impoundment Control Act was affirmed in the Nixon administration

    At a time when Nixon had his back to the wall and the Court was FAR more statist than it is now. That, and other poor decisions (I may have mentioned Chadha in the past) need to be re-examined in the light of 50 years of the history of the Executive/Legislative balance.

    I believe that Congress’ ability to negate executive actions based on delegated legislative powers (“regulations”) needs to be restored in some way. I also believe that Executive judgement on the value and feasibility of discretionary spending needs to get deference (but be subject to a legislative negation).

    One of the problems I have (and apparently the Court has) is the lack of differentiation between commanded expenditures ($10m to build the Podunk Courthouse) and category expenditures ($10b to fund cancer research). In the latter case the executive ought to consider the research opportunities and their value in awarding contracts and might withhold some funds if no productive opportunity exists.

    There is also the attempt to renege on payment for delivered services on awarded contracts that is separately objectionable.

    It would also help to have more understanding of the scope of Executive Orders. Trump’s recent actions may have that result.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  25. Regarding Trump’s speech, that communist Glenn Kessler (who is still employed by Bezos) fact-checked his gish-galloping performance. Here’s one tidbit…

    “Europe has sadly spent more money buying Russian Oil and Gas than they have spent on defending Ukraine — by far!”

    This is false. Trump is referring to a study that found the European Union in 2024 spent more on Russian fossil fuels than financial aid for Ukraine — but that estimate did not include military or humanitarian contributions. Overall, European spending on Ukraine greatly exceeded spending on Russian gas and oil.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  26. This is the entire order:

    On February 13, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia entered a temporary restraining order enjoining the Government from enforcing directives pausing disbursements of foreign development assistance funds. The present application does not challenge the Government’s obligation to follow that order.

    On February 25, the District Court ordered the Government to issue payments for a portion of the paused disbursements—those owed for work already completed before the issuance of the District Court’s temporary restraining order—by 11:59 p.m. on February 26. Several hours before that deadline, the Government filed this application to vacate the District Court’s February 25 order and requested an immediate administrative stay.

    THE CHIEF JUSTICE entered an administrative stay shortly before the 11:59 p.m. deadline and subsequently referred the application to the Court. The application is denied.

    Given that the deadline in the challenged order has now passed, and in light of the ongoing preliminary injunction proceedings, the District Court should clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines. The order heretofore entered by THE CHIEF JUSTICE is vacated.

    Paragraph breaks and emphasis mine.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  27. @25: The weasel words “defending Ukraine” may make the statement true-but-misleading.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  28. Excellent fact check on Trump’s assertions of Social Security payments to 150yos.

    During his joint address to Congress, Trump claimed his administration is investigating widespread fraud in the Social Security program, stating that government databases list millions of beneficiaries at improbable ages, including individuals over 160 years old. …

    n a statement on February 19, Lee Dudek, the new acting Social Security Administration (SSA) commissioner, clarified that individuals listed as over 100 years old in the Social Security system are “not necessarily receiving benefits,” but are instead individuals without a recorded date of death.

    Meanwhile, a 2023 report from the inspector general revealed that 18.9 million people born in 1920 or earlier had no death information in SSA records, and 44,000 of them were still receiving payments. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, there were 80,139 people aged 100 or older in the United States in 2020. Since 2015, the SSA has used an automated process to stop benefits for individuals aged 115 or older.

    A 2024 audit from the Office of the Inspector General found that the agency had made $72 billion in improper payments between 2015 and 2022, accounting for just under 1% of the $8.6 trillion in total payments during that period.

    Nonetheless, Trump vowed to crack down on what he said was “hundreds of billions of dollars of fraud.”

    Most improper payments are to the accounts of recently deceased claimants where the reporting of their death has been delayed, sometimes through fraud, sometimes through bureaucratic incompetence. I know for a fact that SS may send an extra payment or two following a claimant’s death, but attempts to claw it back later.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  29. Paul Montagu (8f08d3) — 3/5/2025 @ 8:15 am

    How much financial support does the EU have to provide Putin for you to consider them to be in cahoots with the “greater evil?”

    BuDuh (1f536d)

  30. I knew BuDuh would rear his ugly head.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  31. The CIA Director said also that, given Zelensky’s letter to Trump, he expects that sharing will resume shortly. I would expect arms shipments to resume as well.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 7:57 am

    That really assumes facts not in evidence. Resuming intelligence sharing and arms shipments depends how far Z will kowtow to Trump and how Trump feels about Ukraine at any given time. What actions has Putin taken to reciprocate?

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  32. To preserve my sanity, I no longer much care about numerical utterances from Donald Trump, so long as they are within an order of magnitude of actual fact. I accept that he speaks in hyperbole.

    What I *do* care about are matters of fundamental fact.

    Is there massive silly spending at Social Security? No, there is not despite what he said.

    Was USAID spending significant money for dubious, harmful or risible purposes? Yes, it seems they were. Was it a majority of their expenditures? Probably not, but they were enough of them to require reform.

    Is there a lot of fraud in Medicare and Medicaid payments? Perhaps. There are a lot of fraud prosecutions but I bet they miss most of it. As for waste, etc, I can see wasteful spending and possibly unwise spending in my own Medicare account. Not a lot of it, but it is there. It is not worth my time to help them find it, either.

    I think that Biden’s changes to Medicare Part D and Medicare Advantage may weaken the controls that existed before. There is, for example, MUCH less need for me to prefer generic drugs over brand drugs, given the much lower OOP caps in Medicare Part D. Similar things may apply in the Advantage world, but I have no personal experience there.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  33. Ratcliffe saying “he expects” means nothing.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  34. I knew BuDuh would rear his ugly head.

    Good argument.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  35. Ratcliffe saying “he expects” means nothing.

    It MAY mean nothing. It also may reflect internal thinking. The CIA Director is privy to national security issues.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  36. Paul Montagu (8f08d3) — 3/5/2025 @ 8:45 am

    Making the perfect the enemy of the good.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  37. Europe has spent 21.5B on Russian energy and 18.5B on lethal aid

    steveg (c55fba)

  38. Ratcliff may also be saying what he thinks ought to happen. It would be good to think he’s not a total YES-man.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  39. Europe has spent 21.5B on Russian energy and 18.5B on lethal aid

    But $130B on generalized aid. As I said, true-but-misleading.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  40. Ratcliff may also be saying what he thinks ought to happen. It would be good to think he’s not a total YES-man.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 8:53 am

    If he does that too much he may be out of a job.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  41. Kevin M (#26):

    Given that the deadline in the challenged order has now passed, and in light of the ongoing preliminary injunction proceedings, the District Court should clarify what obligations the Government must fulfill to ensure compliance with the temporary restraining order, with due regard for the feasibility of any compliance timelines.

    Good catch — I had been thinking the order is somewhat less than meets the eye. The 2 billion isn’t getting paid yet. The Supremes have given the district court some homework first, and more things for the Trump folks to appeal. Roberts really does not want the Executive to ignore the court, and also wants to be careful about setting precedents that forever weaken the court. So lower courts get stuck with endless homework assignments.

    Appalled (e9b231)

  42. Does Europe provide fuel to Ukraine?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  43. If he does that too much he may be out of a job.

    He’ll make more money elsewhere.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  44. Good argument.

    It’s just that original comment stands, despite BuDuh’s current jihad.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  45. The China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) reported Tesla’s shipments from China fell to 30,688 in February

    That word “from” causes me comprehension problems.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  46. It’s just that original comment stands, despite BuDuh’s current jihad.

    To me an ad hominum response just says “I don’t have an actual rebuttal.”

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  47. Europe has spent 21.5B on Russian energy and 18.5B on lethal aid

    Europe has spent €62 billion on military aid.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  48. “I don’t have an actual rebuttal.”

    There’s no reason to. BuDuh is trying to cram his words down my throat.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  49. Paul,

    Compare that to your much more tolerant response to #15, which *I* would have had problems with. How do you talk to someone who things Barrett and Roberts are leftists?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  50. Europe has spent €62 billion on military aid.

    Trucks and fuel are not lethal aid. Paying soldier’s wages are not lethal aid. You aren’t wrong, you’re just trying to unspin something rather than calling out the spin.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  51. Kevin, word of advice. Don’t jump into an argument that you know nothing about.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  52. Kevin,

    I didn’t say they were leftists. They joined the leftists in this case for foolish reasons. The 3 leftists vote in a way that can easily be predicted. They also cannot tell you what is a woman

    NJRob (4f7935)

  53. Trucks and fuel are not lethal aid.

    Good, then steve should back up his number. Maybe challenge him for once.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  54. The whole “how much have they spent” argument is really silly anyway. They bought fuel from Russia because the pipeline is there and fuel from America is blocked in several ways.

    I am reminded of this:

    Well, apart from medicine, irrigation, health, roads, cheese and education, baths and the Circus Maximus, what have the Romans ever done for us?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  55. Kevin, word of advice. Don’t jump into an argument that you know nothing about.

    Is that a new rule here?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  56. There IS a rule against ad hominum however.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  57. How does that lethal aid get transported in the battlefield without fuel?

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  58. Paul loves him some leftist judges voting as a block.

    later

    I didn’t say they were leftists. They joined the leftists in this case for foolish reasons.

    If it was those 3 judges alone, the decision would have been different so trying to walk that back is unconvincing.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  59. Is that a new rule here?

    That’s advice*, Kevin, not a rule, but you seem to be the guy who’s trying force your rules onto others, which I reject. No one appointed you the moderator or thread dictator here.

    * Because I literally used the word “advise”.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  60. How does that lethal aid get transported in the battlefield without fuel?

    I am attempting to ridicule the entire “who spent more on what?” discussion, since it is clearly based on what either side wants to include, and what estimates one accepts.

    The only thing that matters is overall spending, since a lot of it is fungible anyway. Which means that Paul is more likely to be right that Donald Trump (and why I have to say that is a mystery).

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  61. BTW, I thought that Slotkin’s response was excellent, not so much for content but for calm and forthright presentation and seeming reasonableness. The GOP responses in recent years have been poor by comparison. Her presentation should be a model for future responders.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  62. @30

    I knew BuDuh would rear his ugly head.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3) — 3/5/2025 @ 8:45 am

    So you don’t see the issue, whereby EU countries are sending $$$ to Russia, for their oil, which $$$ is being fungible is likely used to support their war efforts.

    None whatsoever?

    whembly (b7cc46)

  63. 3,4 and 6: In essence, this is the “Mom” argument: “Be nice.” “We agree with trimming down the government, but it should be done in an intelligent way, and not chaoticly.”

    Notably, no illustration is given of how that was ever done in the past. (and don’t even mention the feeble “sequester” from 2010-we’re at 36T in debt!)

    1. In the past 80 years, neither party trimmed the government at all. 80 years of growth, to the point where we are funding gay operas in Seria, while ignoring US voters in North Carolina; funding health clinics in Uganda, while giving Trump’s Secret Service detail man that needed to call tech support when his drone didn’t work. All while orrowing $2T a year.

    2. The GOP is not going to do it: the “intelligent” and “orderly” “Paul Ryan/John Boehner/Nikki Haley” wing of the GOP had a majority of the House and Senate in 2016-2018 – -and failed to do anything except a tax bill. They could have required US history to be taught in colleges receiving FISL, abolished USAID, trimmed our UN dues to $100 million, or even limited the “emotional support animal” scam. Nope. Nada. We just kept on borrowing and spending.

    3. The “orderly and intelligent cuts” wing of the US government does not exist. When the patient has ignored all dietary advice, clogged his arteries, and is on the verge of a cardiac incident, he needs to go cold turkey-off steak, onto vegan diet, toss the contents of his fridge, and ignore those who want it to be done in an “orderly” manner. When a lawyer has botched a case its time to an all hands revision of the work, not a 9-5 week writing memos. Its not going to get done otherwise.

    Harcourt Fenton Mudd (0c349e)

  64. None whatsoever?

    Asked and answered. I extend to you the same advice that I gave Kevin.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  65. Harcourt Fenton Mudd (0c349e) — 3/5/2025 @ 9:42 am

    It’s not that, Harc. The real issue is that DOGE is slashing personnel and programs en masse, without regard to the merits of said personnel and programs.

    I agree that what Musk is doing is “Governmental”, but has nothing to do with “Efficiency”. There’s nothing efficient about this. It’s slashing for slashing’s sake.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  66. If it was those 3 judges alone, the decision would have been different so trying to walk that back is unconvincing.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 9:17 am

    No reason to. You’ve noted Paul’s M.O. enough to know his game. I don’t need to pretend he’s a fair arbiter of anything.

    NJRob (4f7935)

  67. None whatsoever?

    None whatsoever. They need to keep the heat on in the winter and the lights on all year. If I have any issue it is with Germany closing their nuclear plants for stupid reasons, and an indication of Germany’s silliness as a nation.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  68. Rob, your MO is to lie about another commenter and run away every time you’re held to account for your lies. That’s your “game”, and it’s all hinges on whether people goosestep with Trump or not.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  69. 3,4 and 6: In essence, this is the “Mom” argument

    Well, only post #4 made that argument. What I said in 3 was:

    It would be nice if it was done productively. For all I know it may be much better than reported, as the reporters are a collection of fools, innumerates and political operatives.

    It’s putting the pieces back together and having it work that worries me, as organization and judgement are not that much in evidence.

    Which part of that do you disagree with, exactly?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  70. Paul is perfectly of with the EU financing Putin’s war and death machine.

    He chokes and insults anytime his hypocrisy is laid bare.

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  71. …perfectly ok…

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  72. And there it is again, BuDuh trying to cram his words down my throat. It’s a troll thing to do.
    My original words stand as originally written, especially now that his original claim has been fact-checked.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  73. @64

    Asked and answered. I extend to you the same advice that I gave Kevin.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3) — 3/5/2025 @ 9:44 am

    Noted for the unanswer.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  74. @67

    None whatsoever?

    None whatsoever. They need to keep the heat on in the winter and the lights on all year. If I have any issue it is with Germany closing their nuclear plants for stupid reasons, and an indication of Germany’s silliness as a nation.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 9:56 am

    I have sympathy for immediate needs so people don’t freeze to death.

    But, it’s been a decade of Russian aggression against Ukraine, that EU nations has rightly balked and back Ukraine’s defense. But, it’s really shallow that these same EU nations has done what appears to be ZERO to wean themselves off of that sweet Russian energy pipelines.

    My sympathy is waning…

    whembly (b7cc46)

  75. There’s nothing efficient about this. It’s slashing for slashing’s sake.

    I don’t see that. I see accusations of that, and nebulous reports that, if they show anything, show cherry-picked examples, most of which were promptly corrected.

    It is not possible to make meaningful cuts to Leviathan without making mistakes. There are lots of reports to the savaging of USAID as an agency, but damn few reports of the needful bits being relocated into the State Department.

    It’s almost as if reports of “why cutting the government is bad” are more likely to pass editorial discretion than stories about where programs ended up, or why USAID’s cultural imperialism (e.g. promoting transsexuals in Guatemala) was a problem.

    Right now, they are dealing with low-hanging fruit — there is a LOT of useless, risible and/or duplicative activity in the US government.

    Do we really need EIGHT major food assistance programs? We have a school lunch program and separate programs for school breakfast, childcare food and summer food services. All with their own administrative, purchasing and distribution groups. It would seem there is some room for consolidation.

    But what do we hear about? Once again it’s the national parks that are alleged to be in danger, a threat that recurs every time any budget conflict occurs. They always hold the little girl hostage to cuts to the gravy train for fat cats.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  76. It’s a troll thing to do

    It’s also ineffective as an argument.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  77. Except it was an answer, whembly, and I note that you didn’t take my friendly advice.

    This is getting tedious.
    • BuDuh made a comment or question in a thread.
    • I answered, which I thought was the end of the story.
    • In a different thread (and it was apparent that BuDuh ignored or didn’t see my answer), BuDuh asked why Chris and I why we didn’t answer his comment (in an obvious attempt to insinuate that I’m a hypocrite or to question my intellectual integrity), and I said “asked and answered”, because I had answered.
    • BuDuh apparently found my answer, then asked a ridiculous question that asserted the opposite of what I said, to which I answered with a question.
    • I posted a fact-check in this current thread, which triggered BuDuh to again try to cram his words down my throat.

    I advise moving on this tedium. It’s really good advice.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  78. …moving on from this tedium.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  79. I don’t see that. I see accusations of that, and nebulous reports that, if they show anything, show cherry-picked examples, most of which were promptly corrected.

    Kevin, did Musk & Co. actually examine personnel and programs in order to evaluate their relevance and to make them more efficient? Not that I could see.

    It’s more probable that his team of college students and recent grads did a mass crtl-f on words like “probationary” and “diversity” and slashed accordingly, without actually seeing the context of said words.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  80. What actually happened:

    Is it possible to justify them buying a single drop of oil from that maniac? My guess is that we are about to see..

    BuDuh (1f536d) — 3/3/2025 @ 6:58 pm
    ****
    Yep, it sucks that any European country is enriching Russia. It sucks even worse to align with the Russian terrorists.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3) — 3/4/2025 @ 6:21 am

    *******

    Paul, Chris, anyone????

    https://patterico.com/2025/02/28/weekend-open-thread-265/#comment-2850346

    BuDuh (1f536d) — 3/4/2025 @ 10:37 am

    *********
    Asked and answered.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3) — 3/4/2025 @ 10:45 am

    So the EU is aligned with the greater evil? I am not so sure you specifically said that, so I don’t want to put words in your mouth. That is my question.

    BuDuh (1f536d) — 3/4/2025 @ 10:50 am
    ************
    So the EU is aligned with the greater evil?

    Did I say that?

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3) — 3/4/2025 @ 12:06 pm

    I actually said that I specifically did not want to put words is Paul’s mouth. I clarified my question and Paul’s nuts receded further into his abdomen.

    Paul’s own rules mandate that the EU is in bed with the greater evil. It is no wonder he wants to move on.

    #MeToo.

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  81. Kevin, did Musk & Co. actually examine personnel and programs in order to evaluate their relevance and to make them more efficient? Not that I could see.

    Based on what? Do you get a behind-the-scenes newsletter or something? What I read in the MSM is about what I’d expect to read in the MSM no matter how well it was going. Leviathan protects its own. I don’t think the courts should attempt to micromanage this.

    It’s more probable that his team of college students and recent grads did a mass crtl-f on words like “probationary” and “diversity” and slashed accordingly, without actually seeing the context of said words.

    As I said, they are going after low-hanging fruit (and also those things that they are directed to go after, like DEI). It does not surprise me that diversity officers are having a bad time of it. Also, “probationary” seems to be used in the government in an odd way, including far more than just “new hires.” You may be right they made a mistake there.

    But if you think you know how to deal with databases and searches better than Musk’s 20-somethings, well, that strikes me as hubris. Musk may be poor at dealing with normal humans, but he knows how to judge the quality of tech geeks.

    Are their criteria the same as I would use? Not entirely. Are they just looking for twigs to trim, as these reports imply, or are the looking for branches and even roots to cut? The latter would result in more meaningful cuts, even if Trump would be satisfied with the anti-woke trimming.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  82. Notice that I have moved on.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  83. Ratcliff may also be saying what he thinks ought to happen. It would be good to think he’s not a total YES-man.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 8:53 am

    What Ratcliffe thinks “ought to happen” is irrelevant-which is why his tenure will be limited to (my prediction) no more than a couple of years. Wandering too far off the Trump policy reservation will get you fired.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  84. The real problem is not the cutting. There is so much redundancy that most cuts will be covered over by some other part of the blob. It’s the recombining. You may see massive duplication and the impulse is to hack the jungle with a machete, but what is really needed is identifying the core functions and the needs served, and challenging the duplicated parts to suggest a combination.

    This may or may not work, depending on how the groups view things: is the needed task what is important, or is the local empire what needs saving? Pournelle’s Iron Law may frustrate you.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  85. Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/5/2025 @ 11:06 am

    This is about the third time you have said that.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  86. Paul’s own rules mandate that the EU is in bed with the greater evil. It is no wonder he wants to move on.

    One, I don’t establish rules. That’s yours and Kevin’s thing.

    Two, and there it is, BuDuh, still furious and still furiously trying to cram his words down my throat.
    My initial comment, that “it sucks even worse to align with the Russian terrorists” still stands. Oh, and your initial link was fact-checked.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  87. North American tariffs: After decades of close economic co-operation, synergy and consolidation Trump’s tariffs are utterly upending American manufacturing. Even if unwinding these arrangements was beneficial, it will take years to undo and costs will be enormous.

    I expect major US companies to go to court, calling this arbitrary and capricious government and possible even a “taking” in the way that Trump is unilaterally destroying entire business plans by proclamation. His power over foreign affairs does not extend to what are mostly domestic concerns.

    This is a major unforced error, and he is too obstinate (a polite word for stupid) to walk it back. I said that Ukraine was burning political capital, but this will turn that furnace up to 17. When you piss off Fortune 500, you are not long for the world. The irony is that it allows foreign companies to come into our market while domestic companies are in disarray.

    I’m unsure whether Trump will lose in the courts or just at the ballot box, but he WILL lose, badly, if he persists in this utter destruction.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  88. I understand it was fact checked. And you understand that the fact check has nothing to with the question. But you parade it around as if it changes anything. It doesn’t.

    I find it completely unacceptable that the EU purchases anything from a mass murderer. You don’t.

    Tough on you and your pedestal.

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  89. That’s yours and Kevin’s thing

    The rule against ad hominum is not mine, it’s our host’s.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  90. This may or may not work, depending on how the groups view things: is the needed task what is important, or is the local empire what needs saving? Pournelle’s Iron Law may frustrate you.

    It’s not even about that, Kevin. It’s about Trump trying to illegally jump his agenda before his Congress has even gotten into it. Call me an institutionalist, but the legislative institution needs to be a part of it. I’m agreeable to some facets of the Unitary Executive idea, but not this.

    Also, you may say this is not illegal, but your opinion is irrelevant because the courts have consistently ruled otherwise.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  91. I find it completely unacceptable that the EU purchases anything from a mass murderer. You don’t.

    And there you go again, with this word cramming, like a little troll puke.
    I said “it sucks” for a reason.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  92. The point is that it sucks more that Trump is choosing the greater, aligning the mass-murdering Russan terrorist.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  93. …the greater evil

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  94. @92

    The point is that it sucks more that Trump is choosing the greater, aligning the mass-murdering Russan terrorist.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3) — 3/5/2025 @ 11:27 am

    Objection…assumes evidence not in facts.

    whembly (b7cc46)

  95. whembly, it’s called an opinion, an opinion based on observable facts, even made a comment with 21 factual statements to arrive at said opinion. You can agree with my opinion or not, that’s your business.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  96. 65 for sure: because it will not be done any other way. Don’t want to raise taxes as the Ryan/Boehner group (“tax collectors for the welfare state”) would do. Or scare everyone by adopting Haley’s clueless “let’s just make a change to Social Security.” He’s slashing right and left. If a congress that outlawed impoundment and funded USAID wants to do a better job, they should. But they won’t.

    Harcourt Fenton Mudd (0c349e)

  97. Also, you may say this is not illegal, but your opinion is irrelevant because the courts have consistently ruled otherwise.

    Indeed they have. I don’t dispute that. What I argue is that in the 50 years since the Berger Court drew the lines between Congress and the Executive, the administrative state has (as was predicted) metastasized and grown to rule America in the absence of meaningful Congressional control.

    We don’t have budgets or appropriations bills, we have continuing resolutions, zombie programs, and bureaucrats and agencies determining how we live. The utter irony in your argument is that you say that all of this is controlled by Congress, when damn little of it is. It should be, of course, but I’ll bet money on another continuing resolution funding the (I’m making this up) National Kumquat Board for another 2 years.

    The administrative state is now so powerful and immune to reform by a defanged Congress (again, Chadha and general faction) that ONLY the Executive has the ability to reform it, and it is at lest arguable that the Executive has control of his branch of government.

    So, the Court will have to revisit this if Congress cannot, and decide whether those Berger Court rulings should be upheld or overturned in light of the growing distrust of administrative government.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  98. * Burger Court. I didn’t realize is was spelled the same as Hamilton.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  99. North American tariffs: After decades of close economic co-operation, synergy and consolidation Trump’s tariffs are utterly upending American manufacturing. Even if unwinding these arrangements was beneficial, it will take years to undo and costs will be enormous.

    I expect major US companies to go to court, calling this arbitrary and capricious government and possible even a “taking” in the way that Trump is unilaterally destroying entire business plans by proclamation. His power over foreign affairs does not extend to what are mostly domestic concerns.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 11:22 am

    Presidents have wide ranging authority to impose tariffs under various authorities granted to him by Congress. Trump has invoked International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose his 25% tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China. And the courts generally don’t want interfere with a President’s foreign affairs and tariff powers, which is outside of their expertise to evaluate.

    The use of any of these authorities to impose tariffs would likely be challenged by importers or other stakeholders. However, despite the Supreme Court’s recent decision in the June 2024 case Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (which overruled the Chevron doctrine), any legal challenges to future Trump tariffs likely would face a steep uphill climb. The courts, including the Supreme Court, traditionally have been reluctant to interfere with the president’s exercise of foreign affairs and tariff powers.

    For instance, in United States v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corp., the Supreme Court found that the president has certain inherent powers in foreign affairs that do not require an affirmative grant of statutory authority from Congress.

    In J. W. Hampton, Jr. & Co. v. United States, it found that presidential authority under Section 315 of the Tariff Act was a valid constitutional delegation of authority as long as it sets out “intelligible principle.”

    Federal Energy Administration v. Algonquin SNG, Inc. upheld Section 232(b) tariffs on imported oil, after finding that Section 232 sets out an “intelligible principle” to guide presidential decisionmaking.

    Lastly, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided in Maple Leaf Fish Co. v. United States (1984) that courts have “a very limited role” in reviewing presidential trade actions “of a highly discretionary kind,” such as Section 201, and such actions can only be set aside if they involve “a clear misconstruction of the governing statute, a significant procedural violation, or action outside delegated authority.”

    The Maple Leaf Fish Co. case is particularly important since the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has jurisdiction over most trade law appeals. While precedent plays less of a role under the current Supreme Court, these past cases suggest that the courts are likely to take an especially deferential approach to executive branch decisions involving foreign policy, national security, and international economic policymaking, recognizing that it falls outside their normal purview and expertise.

    While Congress always has the option of passing legislation to amend or revoke some of the president’s delegated tariff-setting authority, it’s difficult to see that happening with a veto-proof majority in the current political climate.

    Paragraph breaks added. The Takings Clause wouldn’t apply to tariffs, the cost of which can be recovered by the businesses. It applies when a government takes something of value for any reason other than public use, including contract and patent rights, as well as trade secrets. How would someone calculate the cost of a destroyed business plan?

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  100. the greater evil…

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3) — 3/5/2025 @ 11:27 am

    You must believe in partial pregnancy as well.

    Derp.

    Reward Putin in any way, small or large, is evil. Period. Your multi year pronouncements have lost consistency in one fell swoop.

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  101. It’s not even about that, Kevin. It’s about Trump trying to illegally jump his agenda before his Congress has even gotten into it. Call me an institutionalist, but the legislative institution needs to be a part of it. I’m agreeable to some facets of the Unitary Executive idea, but not this.

    I understand that completely. I too believe in institutions and abhor ukase-based government. See what I said about the North American tariffs.

    The problem though is that we do not currently have an effective legislature, but we DO have a very powerful administrative state that seems to be independent of the Office that the Constitution says ALL Executive power resides in.

    Worse, the Courts are persisting in imposing 50yo decisions that exacerbate Congress’ weaknesses, either by removing a power that Congress used effectively to limit administrative government, or by treating a long series of continuing resolutions as legislative control and direction.

    We are at a stage where the brown stuff is all over the fan. Someone has to act. Congress is categorically unable to make any structural changes in the mess it has made, they are unable (indeed uninterested) in cutting any program or service or balancing any budget.

    Yet it must be done. Insanity would be to wait for Congress to get its act in order. It might also be insane to let Trump and Musk do it, but they are the first folks who’ve tried this century. I for one would like to see how they do without the “can’t do” chorus taking control.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  102. You must believe in partial pregnancy as well.

    Nice dishonest analogy.
    There really is no point to your stupid vendetta, BuDuh. I advise you do something else.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  103. Paragraph breaks added. The Takings Clause wouldn’t apply to tariffs, the cost of which can be recovered by the businesses. It applies when a government takes something of value for any reason other than public use, including contract and patent rights, as well as trade secrets. How would someone calculate the cost of a destroyed business plan?

    The takings clause is already getting a relook. Kelo was the last in a long series of expansions of governmental control of private property and commerce, going back to the New Deal surrender at the Court. Kelo will be overturned this year and other regulatory seizures of ownership control of property will follow in coming years.

    But regardless, it is more of a distortion of the Constitution to say that the President can undo, by the stroke of a pen, 20-30 years of progressively unfettered trade with our neighbors. There are long-held expectations that have not only happened in the absence of controls, they have been actively encouraged by administrations of both parties for decades.

    Is revoking long-settled DOMESTIC practices and expectations within the President’s unitary powers over foreign affairs? I think a takings argument stretches things less.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  104. Thanks for the thought, Paul. But I am perfectly fine doing what I am doing.

    No vendetta to be found here; it is far more simple. Just holding your words to account.

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  105. Paul, do you have a problem with how the nevertrumps treated the child that survived brain cancer?

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  106. Transcript of President Trump’s speech to Congress Tuesday March 4, 2025.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/04/us/politics/transcript-trump-speech-congress.html?unlocked_article_code=1.1k4.t6W0.QXxFNCgpnb16&smid=url-share

    Incidentally, through March 4, 1933, March 4 used to be presidential inauguration day

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  107. Paul, do you have a problem with how the nevertrumps treated the child that survived brain cancer?

    Democrats are not #NeverTrump. They are #NeverRepublican.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  108. Sure…

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  109. It’s funny that Trump thinks 30 days is long enough for the car companies to move all their parts suppliers to the USA. I doubt there is a car made that doesn’t have 50% or more foreign content. It would be easier to redesign all the cars than to move all the supply chains. Needless to say, either will take years.

    And why? It won’t do ANYTHING but disrupt. If he pushes this he’ll be out on his ass sooner than I thought.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  110. MAGAspeak needs to conflate #NeverTrump with Democrats because it makes them easier to demonize. That does not make it true, it only reinforces #NeverTrump’s belief that every word out of MAGA is a lie.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  111. Kevin, you’re assuming that his primary focus is in factories actually opening up. I think his first term made it pretty clear that his primary focus is headlines. I don’t think he sees any difference to himself between an announcement to open a factory or announcement to consider opening a factory or something along those lines and a factory actually opening up.

    The Fox con deal never materialized in Wisconsin
    The stuff he did to keep carrier for moving from Indiana to Mexico, resulted in carrier, moving a different pile of work to Mexico and then later on moving the pile of work that Trump objected to New Mexico

    But all that stuff is only known by nerds who hate Trump, etc., etc.

    Time123 (9c791d)

  112. Does your version of nevertrump fully support the congressional Republicans that fully support Trump?

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  113. Of course, that informs us of two things: It’s bad business for Republicans when videos of town halls showing angry constituents

    It should be obvious this was not natural or organic, but organized by part of the political opposition. (of course the townhalls are really campaign events themselves.)

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  114. Trump could scale back Canada, Mexico tariffs Wednesday, Lutnick says

    President Donald Trump will “probably” announce tariff compromise deals with Canada and Mexico soon, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Tuesday.

    The potential agreements would likely involve scaling back at least part of Trump’s brand new 25% tariffs on imports from Mexico and Canada, he added.

    Lutnick’s comments came minutes after the U.S. stock market limped to a close for a second day of sharp declines, spurred at least in part by investors’ fears that Trump’s aggressive policies will ignite a crippling trade war.

    After his remarks, U.S. stock futures tied to all three major averages rose.

    “Mr President: The Fortune 500 is on line 3. They sound unhappy.”

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  115. Does your version of nevertrump fully support the congressional Republicans that fully support Trump?

    #NeverTrump are, historically, those Republicans who never supported Trump. There are some who now support Trump out of resignation, just like AOC supported Biden. But their hearts are still with Romney.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  116. Dana (d72812) — 3/4/2025 @ 4:35 pm

    I just don’t think that Elon and his little buddies have the patience, discipline and temperaments to approach it that way. So much is happening so quickly, I’m afraid that we are in the dark about much of it and it will come back to bite us big time.

    He’s doing, or attempting to do, what he did with Twitter: Cut the workforce very quickly drastically, and reverse some decisions when the outcry is to loud.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  117. But what is the answer to my question?

    Does your version of nevertrump fully support the congressional Republicans that fully support Trump?

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  118. It should be obvious this was not natural or organic, but organized by part of the political opposition.

    “Outside agitators” is the traditional refrain. But it is probably not the case — many of Trump’s policies make traditional Republicans angry. Maybe the new thing is to call all non-MAGA “Democrats” but it does not make it true.

    I expect a lot of MAGA vs non-MAGA GOP primaries in 2026, with incumbents of both stripes getting opposition.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  119. Does your version of nevertrump fully support the congressional Republicans that fully support Trump?

    Asked and answered. Don’t like my answer, well so sorry.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  120. If it makes it any easier for you, #NeverTrump does not include, and never included the House Freedom Caucus or other posers of the same ilk.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  121. Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 12:53 pm “Mr President: The Fortune 500 is on line 3. They sound unhappy.”

    https://www.newser.com/story/365265/trump-delays-canada-mexico-car-tariffs-for-a-month.html

    Trump Delays Canada, Mexico Car Tariffs for a Month

    But he’s told automakers to start shifting production to the US, White House says

    …President Trump has delayed tariffs on cars from Canada and Mexico for a month after speaking to auto industry execs. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Wednesday that Trump has granted a temporary exemption to cars covered by the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement negotiated during Trump’s first term, CNN reports. Leavitt said Trump spoke to the “Big Three auto dealers”—Stellantis, Ford, and General Motors. “He told them they should get on it, start investing, start moving, shift production here to the United States of America, where they will pay no tariff,” she said. “That’s the ultimate goal.” Stocks rose after the announcement, with the Dow up 500 points, reports the Wall Street Journal.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  122. He’s doing, or attempting to do, what he did with Twitter: Cut the workforce very quickly drastically, and reverse some decisions when the outcry is too loud.

    Or when the mistake is obvious.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  123. BUt, Samy, you are mistaken that the point of DOGE is to cut the workforce. That may be a result, but the point is to rationalize the administration and agencies into something makes sense, rather than the disorganized sprawl that has resulted from so many independent empire-builders.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  124. It wasn’t answered. You skipped a step. Not “does your version of nevertrump support Trump?” That is clearly not my question.

    I’ll break it down to show you. Hopefully you try again.

    Does your version of nevertrump fully support the congressional Republicans that fully support Trump?

    This is where you can show me distinction between Democrats who are never-republican and nevertrump who appear to be never-congressional-Republican.

    Should be easy.

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  125. Most improper payments are to the accounts of recently deceased claimants where the reporting of their death has been delayed, sometimes through fraud, sometimes through bureaucratic incompetence.

    Now the thing is, there’s no way that Trump doesn’t know 9and would hear this explanation very soon if he didn’t) that millions of payments to long deceased individuals are not going out. It’s just that Social Security does not have a recorded date of death but presumes these people dead.

    But Trump said:

    Believe it or not, government databases list 4.7 million Social Security members from
    people aged 100 to 109 years old. It lists 3.6 million people from ages 110 to 119. I
    don’t know any of them. I know some people who are rather elderly but not quite that
    elderly. 3.47 million people from ages 120 to 129. 3.9 million people from ages 130 to
    139. 3.5 million people from ages 140 to 149. And money is being paid to many of them,
    and we are searching right now.

    In fact, Pam, good luck. Good luck. You’re going to find it. But a lot of money is paid
    out to people, because it just keeps getting paid and paid and nobody does — and it
    really hurts Social Security, it hurts our country. 1.3 million people from ages 150 to
    159, and over 130,000 people, according to the Social Security databases, are age over
    160 years old. We have a healthier country than I thought, Bobby

    The Democratic “response” never deals with things like that. And when the Republicans had a response, they didn’t either.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  126. One member of Congress died after listening to Trump’s speech, he was Texas Democratic Rep. Sylvester Turner who was two months into his first term serving Texas’ 18th District. The seat was previously held by Sheila Jackson-Lee, who died in July.

    https://www.newser.com/story/365253/rep-sylvester-turner-dies-2-months-into-his-term.html

    Turner was spotted having a medical episode in the Capitol Tuesday afternoon, was assisted by Capitol Police, and recovered sufficiently to attend the speech. Hours later, he suffered what’s being termed a medical emergency and died later in the hospital, reports KHOU. House Minority Whip Katherine Clark announced his death to the caucus Wednesday morning. Turner had previously fought bone cancer in 2022.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  127. There is no way that US manufacturers can change their supply lines in 30 days. Especially since Trump will flip on this issue before summer.

    If Congress passed a law that required this next week, it would be challenged as “arbitrary and capricious.” If the department of commerce issued these rules, they would be in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act.

    Either would also be in violation of the existing treaty.

    Trump is attempting to use his plenary power over foreign affairs to restructure American manufacturing, in the guise of fighting the fentanyl trade. But he fact that he has not exited the United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (nor does there seem to be a way he can before 2036) makes the claim of plenary power weak in the face of a ratified and binding treaty.

    That many US companies relied on that ratified treaty in making production decisions would seem to make the legality of these tariffs ripe for litigation.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  128. BuDuh (418d3b) — 3/5/2025 @ 1:08 pm

    Try it again in English. Obviously logic design is not a field you should enter.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  129. I realize I said “lethal aid” not “heavy weapons”

    The bulk of lethal aid being bullets and artillery shells.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  130. Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 8:47 am

    Is there a lot of fraud in Medicare and Medicaid payments? Perhaps.

    There’s probably so much that the whole medical economy depends on significant waste fraud and abuse, especially abuse.

    This is what allows for hospitals and doctors to lose money on some medical services.

    Pricing is so irrational we get opposition to taking drugs off the shortage list (being on the shortage list allows for legal sale by compounding (custom made) pharmacies)

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  131. BuDuh (418d3b) — 3/5/2025 @ 12:24 pm

    Hence vendetta, since you’re not trolling anyone else here, but I can tell that my saying that Trump is aligning with the greater evil triggered you.
    Anyways, I answered your question, more than once, defending my position quite well, and now you’re boring me.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  132. But you keep coming back, Paul.

    😃

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  133. But regardless, it is more of a distortion of the Constitution to say that the President can undo, by the stroke of a pen, 20-30 years of progressively unfettered trade with our neighbors. There are long-held expectations that have not only happened in the absence of controls, they have been actively encouraged by administrations of both parties for decades.

    Is revoking long-settled DOMESTIC practices and expectations within the President’s unitary powers over foreign affairs? I think a takings argument stretches things less.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 12:16 pm

    Why should any President be beholden to the status quo, either in domestic or foreign affairs? Congress created the tariff authorities, and they can repeal them at any time. There’s nothing in the Constitution that requires “progressively unfettered trade with our neighbors” or any other long term policy choice; nor is there a bar to stupid policies that will harm America.

    Businesses can adapt or die.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  134. Trump blamed Putin for starting the war:

    Tonight, I am pleased to announce that we have just apprehended the top terrorist
    responsible for that atrocity, and he is right now on his way here to face the swift
    sword of American justice. And I want to thank especially the government of Pakistan for
    helping arrest this monster. This was a very momentous day for those 13 families, who I
    actually got to know very well, most of them, whose children were murdered and the many
    people that were so badly — over 42 people — so badly injured on that fateful day in
    Afghanistan. What a horrible day. Such incompetence was shown — that when Putin saw what
    happened, I guess he said, “Wow, maybe this is my chance.” That’s how bad it was. Should
    have never happened. Grossly incompetent people.

    Actually, it’s more that the United States wanted to withdraw from a war that was costing it no or few casualties. (he didn’t factor in the possible importance to the USA)

    I heard someone say on the radio today the Russian buildup began in January (2021) but I don’t know. This person had not heard that it began around August but that was my impression.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  135. Is revoking long-settled DOMESTIC practices and expectations within the President’s unitary powers over foreign affairs? I think a takings argument stretches things less.

    Then impeach him.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  136. Trump blamed Putin for starting the war:

    Depending what day it is.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  137. KevinM
    Agreed

    Its hard to get a breakdown on “lethal aid” ( its being estimated as 20-25% of “military aid” in this conflict-plus its technically a secret) and I’ve noticed some people seem to include artillery shells and all missiles as part of heavy weapons even though technically, those are munitions that are connected to the weapon system. Small arms and small arms ammunition are excluded from “heavy weapons”, but no one seems to have a number

    steveg (c55fba)

  138. Nice set of insults Kevin. But the question is clear.

    I did not ask for your version of nevertrump’s opinion of Trump.

    I asked about your version of nevertrump’s opinion of Congressional Republicans that fully support Trump.

    Why this is intimidating to you is beyond me.

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  139. There was very little said in the speech about Israel or the Gaza war but much of what Trump said was nonsense (not hostile in any way, just nonsense)

    As commander in chief, my focus is on building the most powerful military of the future.

    As a first step, I am asking Congress to fund a state-of-the-art golden dome missile
    defense shield to protect our homeland — all made in the U.S.A.

    Ronald Reagan wanted to do it long ago, but the technology just wasn’t there, not even
    close. But now we have the technology. It’s incredible, actually. And other places — they
    have it, Israel has it.
    Other places have it. And the United States should have it too,
    right, Tim, right? They should have it too. So I want to thank you. But it’s a very, very
    important — this is a very dangerous world — we should have it.

    It’s not the same thing. Israel has a defense shield against shorter range missiles. Trump is talking about “Star Wars”

    He surely does not mean protection against missiles coming from Mexico, where he said a province (or even the entire country, but he forgot this point elsewhere in his speech) had been taken over by the cartels:

    The territory to the immediate south of our border is now dominated entirely by criminal cartels that murder, rape, torture and exercise total control. They have total control over a whole nation, posing a grave threat to our
    national security.

    The cartels are waging war in America, and it’s time for America to wage war on the
    cartels, which we are doing.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  140. In case you are going to fake confusion again Kevin, by “version of nevertrump’s opinion” I am not asking about your version of their opinion. “Version of nevertrump” is specific to what you believe is “nevertrump.”

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  141. Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/5/2025 @ 1:37 p

    Try again with the USMCA still in effect. The president cannot quit a treaty outside its terms for quitting. And, in fact, he has not attempted to do so.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  142. I asked about your version of nevertrump’s opinion of Congressional Republicans that fully support Trump.

    Congressional Republicans who fully support Trump are no longer #NeverTrump, if they ever were.

    I assume you will go on to assert they all fully support Trump, which is patent nonsense.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  143. Trump also said that he’d “received signals” that Russia wanted to end the war:

    Simultaneously we’ve had serious discussions with Russia. Then I’ve received strong signals that they are ready for peace. Wouldn’t that be beautiful? Wouldn’t that be beautiful?

    Wouldn’t that be beautiful?

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  144. Then impeach him.

    How about just letting the courts emasculate him?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  145. Buddha, stop being a troll. We all know that never Trump means a sweet sparkly white, whose grapes came from the never Trump region of southern France.

    Time123 (5b563c)

  146. Congressional Republicans who fully support Trump are no longer #NeverTrump, if they ever were.

    Who asked that question?

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  147. Examples are Himars ATACMS, Air defense systems and their missiles, M777 and shells, Tanks and ammunition, Bradleys TOW’s and 25mm, Strykers and 30mm. Probably because the ammunition is attached to the system

    steveg (c55fba)

  148. Time drops by to throw out an insult.

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  149. I’ll try to roll with the progress so far:

    Congressional Republicans who fully support Trump are no longer #NeverTrump, if they ever were.

    I will stipulate that and I will assign the group in your quote as Group A.

    Does #Nevertrump fully support Group A?

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  150. About the Gaza war he indicated he couldn’t say anything, because things were in flux:

    In the Middle East, we’re bringing back our hostages from Gaza.

    Translation: The United States is holding direct talks with Hamas. Israel considers the US attitude toward the continuance of Hamas rule to be reason not to worry about this

    In my first term, we achieved one of the most groundbreaking peace agreements in generations: the Abraham Accords.

    And now we’re going to build on that foundation to create a more peaceful and prosperous future for the entire region. A lot of things are happening in the Middle East. People have been talking about that so much lately with everything going on, with Ukraine and Russia. A lot of things are happening in the Middle East. It’s a rough neighborhood, actually.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  151. Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 1:48 pm

    The president cannot quit a treaty outside its terms for quitting.

    I think he can. Carter tore up the defense treaty with Taiwan.

    And, in fact, he has not attempted to do so.

    So it is still in effect.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  152. Russia is “they” according to Trump. That’s not true.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  153. Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 1:07 pm

    rather than the disorganized sprawl that has resulted from so many independent empire-builders.

    The empire builders are in Congress.

    Apparently even though Congress now rarely follows regular order.

    Musk believes that anything that’s gone on for a long time has a bloated payroll, and I think that’s why he wants to change things. Eliminating sprawl may be just means to an end.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  154. Who asked that question?

    Your question was so wound up in your required answer that nobody could be expected to parse it.

    But you are trying to walk this to show that all Republicans support Trump. That is not so. Not even all Congressional Republicans. Some members of Congress were and still are #NeverTrump.

    Democrats are not against Trump because they don’t like Trump. They are against Trump because they are Democrats and he is not. They would be against Romney too. Ask that clown who heckled Trump what he thought of Reagan. I bet I know.

    The entire set of #NeverTrump is this: persons who are registered Republicans, or lean Republican, who would never consider voting for Trump. Even if they pretend otherwise. Mitch McConnell is #NeverTrump. At one point JD Vance was #NeverTrump. Several sitting GOP Senators voted to convict Trump.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  155. But you are trying to walk this to show that all Republicans support Trump

    No.

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  156. Democrats are not against Trump because they don’t like Trump.

    I see the problem with engaging you on this.

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  157. Trump started out his speech by claiming that winning seven swing states amounted to a mandate like has not been seen in many decades: The American dream is unstoppable, and our country is
    on the verge of a comeback the likes of which the world has never witnessed, and perhaps
    will never witness again. Never been anything like it.

    The presidential election of Nov. 5 was a mandate like has not been seen in many decades.
    We won all seven swing states, giving us an Electoral College victory of 312 votes.

    We won the popular vote by big numbers and won counties in our country —

    Al Green interrupted him but I wonder if it was on this point, or just some preplanned nonsense.

    Trump went on to say that he won many more counties than (Kamala Harris)

    2,700 to 525 on a map that reads almost completely red for Republican. Now, for the first time in modern history, more Americans believe that our country is headed in the right direction than the wrong direction. In fact, it’s an astonishing record: 27-point swing, the most ever.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  158. BuDuh,

    they don’t want to answer for the same reason that they supported Democrats to beat Republicans like Cruz. It’s not Trump that they hate, but the pro-American policies instead.

    NJRob (4f7935)

  159. The empire builders are in Congress.

    How so. Not one of them gains a whit by the expansion of, say, the EPA or FBI. Sometime in the misty past those agencies were created and Congress has had very little to do with their growth since.

    It’s the Deputy Assistant Secretaries for Whathaveyou that are building the empires. They create a budget, send it up the ladder and fight for every last position. Their agency accumulates these group budgets, massages them and sends a final budget up to Congress.

    Congress ignores all this and passes a continuing resolution with a multiple of some 8 year-old baseline, and the agency gets the allocated amounts, mostly unrelated to current tasks, and parses out the dollars to all the little empire builders.

    But Congress does not actually know or care much about those little empires.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  160. I contend that #Nevertrump hates republicans that support Trump.
    I contend that Congressional Republicans are overwhelmingly supporting Trump

    I do not see any real distinction between them and the congressional Democrats who hated congressional Republicans last night.

    You see the distinction.

    We disagree to agree. Only difference is that I didn’t have to be so nasty about it, like you were. You got so worked up fearing that you would stomp on bear traps, like Paul does when he is asked a simple question, that you stumbled. Next time read the question, and hit it head on.

    Good luck, Kevin.

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  161. I see the problem with engaging you on this.

    If you do not know my position by now, I will never ever be able to explain it to you. But I am beginning to understand that this is not your objective.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  162. They keep on saying that the 13 year old boy getting into the Secret Service was a place that the Democrats could have or should applauded.

    But wasn’t that a farce, and if serious, a violation of the child labor laws, and, in any case, an unspoken indication that they expected him to die? How is that good news to be celebrated?

    One place I heard only one person say was a place that the Democrats could have or should applauded was the arrest and extradition to the United States off a man whom Trump said was the planner of the Abbeygate bombing in Kabul in August 2021

    Tonight, I am pleased to announce that we have just apprehended the top terrorist
    responsible for that atrocity, and he is right now on his way here to face the swift
    sword of American justice. And I want to thank especially the government of Pakistan for
    helping arrest this monster. This was a very momentous day for those 13 families, who I
    actually got to know very well, most of them, whose children were murdered and the many
    people that were so badly — over 42 people — so badly injured on that fateful day in
    Afghanistan. What a horrible day.

    News reports say that U.S. intelligence told Pakistan that he was the planner (his superior is till at large) and the United States sent FBI agents to interrogate him and he confirmed that he was responsible and for others as well.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  163. I contend that #Nevertrump hates republicans that support Trump.

    I agree with this.

    I contend that Congressional Republicans are overwhelmingly supporting Trump

    I disagree with this. Or at least I disagree with your meaning of the word “support.”

    There are those that wake up every morning thanking God for sending them Trump. I have no doubt.

    There are those that accept that Trump is the leader of their party and are willing to go along most of the time. After all, “party” has to mean something.

    There are those that acquiesce to the direction the party has taken and love their jobs more than they love their principles.

    There are those who are just telling themselves that if they quit a real MAGA will take their place. They spend a lot of time as “Devil’s Advocates.”

    And there are some who are just not accepting of this at all. Some HAVE quit. Some have self-destructed over it. And some just quietly oppose the worst of it. It’s easier to do in the Senate.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  164. . Not one of them gains a whit by the expansion of, say, the EPA or FBI.

    They get to question them and pressure them in committee.

    Many many members of Congress, for instance have some say on food aid or health matters.

    If bureaucracies were consolidated, many ewer members of Congress would be involved.

    That was said to be the reason the 1946 consolidation was so hard to get enacted.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  165. So, no I do not believe that #NeverTrump and Democrat are in any way interchangeable and are almost entirely separate groups. Calling all Democrats #NeverTrump is an exercise in redundancy whose only point is to pretend that no “real” Republicans oppose Trump.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  166. Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/5/2025 @ 1:37 p

    Try again with the USMCA still in effect. The president cannot quit a treaty outside its terms for quitting. And, in fact, he has not attempted to do so.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 1:48 pm

    Under USMCA Article 32.2 (Essential Security):

    Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to: ……..preclude a Party from applying measures that it considers necessary for the fulfilment of its obligations with respect to the maintenance or restoration of international peace or security, or the protection of its own essential security interests.

    I’m sure this is where the Administration will hang its hat.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  167. Many many members of Congress, for instance have some say on food aid or health matters.

    They only have input when it comes to creating a new program, like the 4 separate school food programs we have now. Most of the time it all falls into the black hole called “The continuing resolution.”

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  168. I’m sure this is where the Administration will hang its hat.

    The thing it chooses to do has 99% of its effect on non-security matters. It’s merely a transparent pretext and the court will not be fooled.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  169. BTW, from what I saw, Trump’s performance last night was expected, which is why I nodded off 10-15 minutes in, out of boredom because I’ve heard this same bullsh-t too many times before. I figured if there was anything new, then I’d see it in the news recaps.

    I didn’t catch Rep. Green’s performance, but read about it, and it was disgraceful. It put the Dems on lower ground than Trump, who’s already on low ground. His act was even more obnoxious than when Boebert-Marge were co-screeching at Biden while he was talking.

    I also saw something about Democrats using auction or bingo paddles or something to express their displeasure, which was classless, sophomoric and stupid.

    Not clapping for citizens who’ve endured hardships is also classless. It can still be done, while knowing that these guests were being used as political props, a longstanding tradition in SOTU speeches. They should’ve just assumed the traditional rituals and clapped.

    It’s clear to me that the Dems don’t know WTF to do or how to respond. Like a client of mine once said, they don’t know whether to sh-t or go blind. There’s no leadership because most of it is gutted and aging out, and there’s no concensus on the new leaders of the next generation. Only Hakeem Jeffries is in a serious leadership position, and he’s been pedestrian.

    They don’t know what issues to focus on. They have no say on tariffs because Biden continued most of them when he was prez. They have no say on immigration or the southern border for obvious reasons. They have no say on the Israel-Hamas war because Biden has been too much of a pizda on Hamas, similar to his being a pizda on helping Ukraine. They can have sort of a say on the economy, but inflation and interest rates are too high. Anyways, it’s not my job fix ’em, but if it were, traditional conservatism is the sweet spot, which they’ll never do because there’re too many hardline left-wing progressives still stuck on their hardline left-wing progressive issues.

    It’s the Dem Party’s fault for where it is, and mostly because it’s Biden’s fault for making the 2nd worst presidential decision of this century, to run for reelection.

    Seemingly, the one Democrat who gets all this is Fetterman.

    A sad cavalcade of self owns and unhinged petulance.

    It only makes Trump look more presidential and restrained.

    We’re becoming the metaphorical car alarms that nobody pays attention to—and it may not be the winning message.

    For me personally, events like the SOTU are a place of tradition and decorum, and participants should be grown-ups and act appropriately, and I think Fetterman agrees with that, too.

    IMO, he’s the one Democrat who’s been making the most sense, which may wrongly put him in the Remnant of his party, kinda like where I am with my party, but he’s right. And to his credit, he also has the same attire as me, but I rock those hoodies and shorts way better. I make it look good.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  170. In the “Afterword” (paperback edition) of Rick Reilly’s Commander in Cheat, there is this admission:

    Three times I heard the exact same answer: Trump would turn in mock anger and declare: “I cheat on my wives, I cheat on my taxes. You don’t think I’m going to cheat at golf? On my own course?”

    p. 246

    Is it possible that there could be a connection between that admission and his desire to sharply cut the budget of the IRS?

    (After the hardback came out, Reilly was swamped with further examples of the Loser cheating, a few from some who had earlier claimed the Loser didn’t cheat.)

    Jim Miller (a71d4c)

  171. Then impeach him.

    How about just letting the courts emasculate him?

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 1:51 pm

    Because based on this analysis, the courts will be reluctant to second-guess (or will defer) to the determinations by the Administration.

    ……..(I)n Maple Leaf Fish Co. v. United States (1984) (the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said) courts have “a very limited role” in reviewing presidential trade actions “of a highly discretionary kind,” such as Section 201, and such actions can only be set aside if they involve “a clear misconstruction of the governing statute, a significant procedural violation, or action outside delegated authority.”

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  172. President Trump is taking action, or threatening action, against colleges but he said nothing about that yesterday in his speech. Afraid of MAGA “America-Firsters if it became better known>

    https://thehill.com/homenews/education/5174865-trump-college-university-funding-student-protests

    Trump threatens to stop funding for any colleges allowing ‘illegal protests’

    ….“All Federal Funding will STOP for any College, School, or University that allows illegal protests. Agitators will be imprisoned/or permanently sent back to the country from which they came,” the president wrote in a Truth Social post, though he did not specify an enforcement mechanism.

    “American students will be permanently expelled or, depending on on the crime, arrested. NO MASKS! Thank you for your attention to this matter,” Trump added.

    The president’s post comes a day after multiple federal agencies announced they will be reviewing contracts and grants with Columbia University and deciding whether to continue them due to allegations of antisemitism on its campus.

    Trump has previously made similar statements about deporting foreign students who engage in protests.

    “One thing I do is, any student that protests, I throw them out of the country. You know, there are a lot of foreign students. As soon as they hear that, they’re going to behave,” Trump said at an event to donors, sources told The Washington Post.

    His latest post came days after Barnard College, an affiliate of Columbia University, saw pro-Palestinian protesters injure an employee, who later went to the hospital, as they tried to get into a building.

    That protest was to demand that 2 Barnard college seniors who has been expelled be reinstated. They had disrupted a class on the history of modern Israel and brought flyers with them that called for and predicted Israel’s destruction – one showing a boot stomping on a Star of David.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  173. The thing it chooses to do has 99% of its effect on non-security matters. It’s merely a transparent pretext and the court will not be fooled.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 2:35 pm

    Assuming it gets that far.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  174. I didn’t catch Rep. Green’s performance, but read about it, and it was disgraceful.

    That was right at the start, which was at about 9:16 to 9:20

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  175. Trump made several asides.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  176. Kevin, I take it that now you understand what I’ve been dealing with, regarding this troll.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  177. Party on!

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  178. Kevin is different. He may toss out an insult or two, but he can genuinely engage when he wants to.

    I appreciate your answer Kevin and we just happen to disagree.

    Paul never unwinds enough to attempt conversation.

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  179. @150 did applying the definition of champagne to never Trump not make it clear I was making a joke? I honestly haven’t been following this specific conversation very closely.

    Time123 (5b563c)

  180. I also saw something about Democrats using auction or bingo paddles or something to express their displeasure, which was classless, sophomoric and stupid.

    Well, stupid, and not helpful. They should have all sat on their hands, blank faced; not showed up at all, and if they wanted to push it, all just stand up and leave 7 minutes in, I don’t know if you do it 6 weeks in, vs next year, but if we are witnessing the end of America as it’s been known for the last 100 year.

    The combination of America’s soft and hard power created the economic and political stability of the post WW2 world. So, stupid Hitler is keen on dumping that leadership. MAGA just assumes that the first A just is stupid Hitler, not the country.

    Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a)

  181. The “troll” snapping washed away any attempt at humor, Time.

    It was needless for anything other than scoring points for poor Paul, IMO.

    I could be wrong.

    BuDuh (418d3b)

  182. How about just letting the courts emasculate him?

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 1:51 pm

    What’s the evidence that the courts have done so up to now? All that has happened are temporary restraining orders. I doubt after all the appeals, Trump will be “emasculated.”

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  183. That was right at the start, which was at about 9:16 to 9:20

    What can I say, Sammy, I didn’t see it.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  184. @11 Why do you want a fellow poster censored? I would not want you censored or anyone here even robb or lloyd and would protest if they were. Why democrats didn’t walk out their donor class would have been upset.

    asset (3fe2ba)

  185. Paul never unwinds enough to attempt conversation.

    No, that’s on you, my friend. You’ve already got your predetermined answers, and you spend the rest of the time trying a cram a MAGA square peg into a NeverTrump round hole. Anyone can see that.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  186. More carnage after speech. Dem. congressman drops dead after speech! (chance for left to replace him.) Speaker johnson’s chief of staff arrested for DWI.

    asset (3fe2ba)

  187. Here is a Trump “truth” that I don’t disagree with. Butchers like Hamas terrorists understand strong messages like this. We’ll see how they respond.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  188. Here’s a good description of the practical result of Trump “pausing” the sharing of military intelligence.

    What this means is American satellites will see Russian bombers carrying missiles taking off, bound for Ukrainian hospitals, power and transport infrastructure, and they will intentionally choose to sit on their hands rather than warn them it’s coming.

    Advantage to the Greater Evil.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  189. U.S. holding secret talks with Hamas

    The first problem is that there is someone to negotiate with, which shows Hamas hasn’t been destroyed.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  190. Trump could scale back Canada, Mexico tariffs Wednesday, Lutnick says

    President Donald Trump will “probably” announce tariff compromise deals with Canada and Mexico soon, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Tuesday.

    The potential agreements would likely involve scaling back at least part of Trump’s brand new 25% tariffs on imports from Mexico and Canada, he added.

    Lutnick’s comments came minutes after the U.S. stock market limped to a close for a second day of sharp declines, spurred at least in part by investors’ fears that Trump’s aggressive policies will ignite a crippling trade war.

    After his remarks, U.S. stock futures tied to all three major averages rose.

    “Mr President: The Fortune 500 is on line 3. They sound unhappy.”

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 12:53 pm

    Trump raising the white flag after a couple of bad stock market days. Makes him look pretty weak.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  191. “Mr President: The Fortune 500 is on line 3. They sound unhappy.”

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 12:53 pm

    No reprieves for other sectors, like building products, food, anything made in China (it’s gonna be an expensive Christmas). electronics, or steel.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  192. Paul Montagu (8f08d3) — 3/5/2025 @ 2:37 pm

    I managed to stay awake, although the games on my second screen helped a lot. I would have quite but I was hoping to hear something about Ukraine. Eventually he said some self-aggrandizing thing that mentioned Zelensky but really said nothing.

    Trump is an amazingly tiresome speaker, although I was waiting for his posse to say it was the best SOTU ever. By Far!

    As I said upthread, I have no expectations that any number he quotes is within a power of 10 of truth, and it may be wrong in direction, too. When he gets into that, I just hear “Blah blah blah Ginger.” Low expectations.

    I am glad he did not find some new horror to spring on us like American forces were invading Greenland/Alberta/Cuba or announce he was appointing Barron as ambassador to France or MTG as ambassador to Ukraine.

    I do regret not going with plan B (3 or 4 episodes of Gilligan’s Island).

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  193. courts have “a very limited role” in reviewing presidential trade actions “of a highly discretionary kind,” such as Section 201, and such actions can only be set aside if they involve “a clear misconstruction of the governing statute, a significant procedural violation, or action outside delegated authority.”

    A trifecta. And there is nothing discretionary about it.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  194. A trifecta. And there is nothing discretionary about it.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 4:53 pm

    Imposing tariffs is a discretionary action by a president.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  195. courts have “a very limited role” in reviewing presidential trade actions “of a highly discretionary kind,” such as Section 201, and such actions can only be set aside if they involve “a clear misconstruction of the governing statute, a significant procedural violation, or action outside delegated authority.”

    A trifecta. And there is nothing discretionary about it.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 4:53 pm

    Section 201 refers to Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974:

    Under section 201, domestic industries seriously injured or threatened with serious injury by increased imports may petition the [United States International Trade Commission] USITC for import relief. The USITC determines whether an article is being imported in such increased quantities that it is a substantial cause of serious injury, or threat thereof, to the U.S. industry producing an article like or directly competitive with the imported article. If the Commission makes an affirmative determination, it recommends to the President relief that would prevent or remedy the injury and facilitate industry adjustment to import competition. The President makes the final decision whether to provide relief and the amount of relief.

    Section 201 does not require a finding of an unfair trade practice, as do the antidumping and countervailing duty laws and section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. However, the injury requirement under section 201 is considered to be more difficult than those of the unfair trade statutes. Section 201 requires that the injury or threatened injury be “serious” and that the increased imports must be a “substantial cause” (important and not less than any other cause) of the serious injury or threat of serious injury.
    …………
    If the USITC finding is affirmative, it must recommend a remedy to the President, who determines what relief, if any, will be imposed. Such relief may be in the form of a tariff increase, quantitative restrictions, or orderly marketing agreements.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  196. The tariffs on China and elsewhere are different as they have minimal effect (other than as price bumps) domestically. The “national security exception” that Trump is using to upend the USMCA — a pact that he himself negotiated — causes a major disruption almost every manufacturer or retail chain in the United States, not only in price but in every aspect of their business.

    Grocers need to change all their produce buying (especially in the Southwest). Manufacturers need to uproot their entire supply chains and avoid all cross-border transactions. That sled that is made from Canadian wood and US steel that is assembled in Mexico and painted in the US is going to triple in price.

    And for what? What on earth does the US gain by disrupting a continent wide free market that the government spent 20 years putting together. The USMCA is structured so that disruptions of this sort are impossible.

    But I guess nothing is actually fool-proof if you have a big enough fool.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  197. Is there anyone who wants to defend tearing up the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement?

    Step right up.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  198. @197:

    Now is this relevant to the USMCA trade zone, which has its own, separate, dispute agreement?

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  199. *HOW is this relevant…

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  200. Apparently, Trump has unilaterally also scrapped the de minimus rules, which means the chotchke you bought on eBay from Mexico will have duty and taxes added and require the seller to complete a bunch of forms.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  201. The USMCA is not considered a treaty, but a trade agreement under Section 151 of the Trade Act of 1974. It was approved by the US House of Representatives (385-41) and the US Senate (89-10) and signed into law (Public Law No: 116–113) by President Trump.

    Again, if President Trump has violated the USMCA, the only remedy would be impeachment. No one would have standing to challenge Trump’s action in court.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  202. Apparently, Trump has unilaterally also scrapped the de minimus rules, which means the chotchke you bought on eBay from Mexico will have duty and taxes added and require the seller to complete a bunch of forms.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 5:16 pm

    As long as the buyer doesn’t have to.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  203. The “national security exception” that Trump is using to upend the USMCA — a pact that he himself negotiated — causes a major disruption almost every manufacturer or retail chain in the United States, not only in price but in every aspect of their business.

    Grocers need to change all their produce buying (especially in the Southwest). Manufacturers need to uproot their entire supply chains and avoid all cross-border transactions. That sled that is made from Canadian wood and US steel that is assembled in Mexico and painted in the US is going to triple in price.

    And for what? What on earth does the US gain by disrupting a continent wide free market that the government spent 20 years putting together. The USMCA is structured so that disruptions of this sort are impossible.

    If that is what will happen, then the voters will have a chance to express their opinion in 2026.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  204. The “troll” snapping washed away any attempt at humor, Time.

    It was needless for anything other than scoring points for poor Paul, IMO.

    I could be wrong.

    BuDuh (418d3b) — 3/5/2025 @ 2:55 pm

    I apologize for insulting you. The intent was to make a funny comment about what appeared on a cursory read to be a silly line of conversation.

    Time123 (2e928f)

  205. @205, At this point I don’t take Trump seriously when he threatens Tariffs. Seems like he wants the attention and noise but isn’t serious.

    I’m glad he’s not serious, it’s a stupid idea. I’d much rather he use to fabricate ‘wins’ in the media that will make his base think he’s doing something then actually damage the economy.

    Time123 (9c409f)

  206. Again, if President Trump has violated the USMCA, the only remedy would be impeachment. No one would have standing to challenge Trump’s action in court.

    Really? Lots and lots of companies are directly harmed. The section you assert he is using, based on the fentanyl problem just won’t work. Especially as Trump has abandoned that figleaf.

    The president initially threatened in November to impose the tariffs, saying that the three countries were not doing enough to halt the flow of drugs and migrants into the United States.

    On Monday, however, Mr. Trump appeared to change his terms, saying that Canada and Mexico needed to relocate auto factories and other manufacturing to the United States.

    “What they have to do is build their car plants, frankly, and other things in the United States, in which case they have no tariffs,” he said.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  207. But wait, Rip. You assert the USMCA is a public law. If so, it is binding on the President and anyone harmed by his reckless disregard for the law has standing.

    Please tell me why they would not.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  208. As long as the buyer doesn’t have to.

    Well, they have to PAY for the process. Assuming that the sellers don’t just decide to sell domestically. Of course they wouldn’t need as many workers if their sales volume decreases.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  209. Really? Lots and lots of companies are directly harmed. The section you assert he is using, based on the fentanyl problem just won’t work. Especially as Trump has abandoned that figleaf.
    ………
    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 5:40 pm

    Having to charge more for products is a questionable harm to a company; it harms customers more (and they definitely wouldn’t have standing to sue). Under I don’t think any court will investigate the motivations behind Trump tariffs; as long as there is an “intelligible principle” behind the decision. Unless they suddenly switch gears and stop being deferential to the executive; but given the composition of the current Supreme Court, I wouldn’t pin any hopes on that. As noted above, Congress has passed laws (delegating their specific Constitutional authority to the President) that give the President broad authority to impose tariffs and sanctions basically for any reason. That’s a problem Congress can resolve.

    The fentanyl problem is just one of Trump’s motivations for tariffs (and it certainly applies to Mexico and China). He wants to drive more manufacturing back to the US; protect the domestic steel and aluminum industries; and to raise revenue.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  210. Re-editing for clarity of post 211:

    Really? Lots and lots of companies are directly harmed. The section you assert he is using, based on the fentanyl problem just won’t work. Especially as Trump has abandoned that figleaf.
    ………
    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/5/2025 @ 5:40 pm

    Having to charge more for products is a questionable harm to a company; it harms customers more (and they definitely wouldn’t have standing to sue). <strikeUnder I don’t think any court will investigate the motivations behind Trump tariffs; as long as there is an “intelligible principle” behind the decision. Unless [the courts] they suddenly switch gears and stop being deferential to the executive; but given the composition of the current Supreme Court, I wouldn’t pin any hopes on that. As noted above, Congress has passed laws (delegating their specific Constitutional authority) that give the President broad authority to impose tariffs and sanctions basically for any reason. That’s a problem Congress can resolve.

    The fentanyl problem is just one of Trump’s motivations for tariffs (and it certainly applies to Mexico and China). He wants to drive more manufacturing back to the US; protect the domestic steel and aluminum industries; and to raise revenue.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 3/5/2025 @ 6:06 pm

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  211. Under I don’t think any court will investigate the motivations behind Trump tariffs; as long as there is an “intelligible principle” behind the decision.

    He is now on record saying it is intended to force companies to leave Canada and Mexico. There is no provision in the agreement that allows that. They don’t have to investigate a thing.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  212. “Move fast and break things” may work for smart capable people who use it to get results, but not for idiots who end up with a lot of broken things.

    The real crazy thing about this is that the USMCA created wealth and jobs in all 3 countries. Impoverishing Mexico is not a great plan.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  213. Some polling data from Tom Church, Hoover Institute…

    34% of Americans support tariffs.

    If they believe foreigners are responsible for paying them, support increases to 51%.

    If they think domestic sources pay, support drops to 22%.

    “Domestic sources” means that Americans are paying the price for tariffs.
    The weird part is even when Republicans were informed that Americans are paying for tariffs, 53% still support them, which means they put Trump over reason.
    Overall, the results are not favorable for tariffs. It’s a loser issue.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  214. As noted above, Congress has passed laws (delegating their specific Constitutional authority to the President) that give the President broad authority to impose tariffs and sanctions basically for any reason. That’s a problem Congress can resolve.

    But those laws do not apply to this agreement that was passed later and have no such provision. In fact, the USMCA specifically replaces all national trade dispute methods with 3 of its own. The normal methods are not applicable, by law.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  215. Just hours after US President Donald Trump imposed a 25% tariff on goods from Canada and Mexico, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick announced that he may change course based on the 2020 free trade deal called the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. “If USMCA rules followed, Trump is considering relief. We will see tariff changes on April 2nd with Canada and Mexico. The administration will balance the US budget. Trump is to move with Canada and Mexico, but not all the way,” Lutnick said on Fox News.

    The trade war in North America intensified after Trump’s decision as Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum announced retaliatory tariffs on goods from the US. This breakdown in trade relations comes just five years after the three nations signed the USMCA.

    The agreement, established during President Trump’s first term, facilitated the seamless movement of goods between the three North American countries without tariffs. It closely mirrored the trade provisions under the previous North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which had been in place since 1994. However, the tit-for-tat trade war between neighbors and allies has upended USMCA, which Trump once touted as the “best agreement we’ve ever made.”

    Do Trump Tariffs Violate USMCA?

    As aforementioned, the USMCA sets terms for goods to move between the three nations tariff-free. The terms of the deal were not up for negotiations until July 2026. So, Trump’s tariffs do violate the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement and put the entire deal in peril.

    https://www.timesnownews.com/world/us/us-news/trump-tariffs-do-25-tariffs-on-canada-mexico-violate-usmcaexplained-article-118719123

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  216. Trump officials eye tariff relief for USMCA-compliant products, Lutnick says

    WASHINGTON, March 4 (Reuters) – President Donald Trump’s administration is considering granting relief from his 25% tariffs on Canadian and Mexican imports to products that comply with the trade pact he negotiated with the two U.S. neighbors during his first term, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said on Tuesday.

    Two sources familiar with discussions between the Trump administration and Canadian and Mexican officials said the talks are aimed at exemptions for companies that comply with the 2020 U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement’s rules of origin, largely – but not exclusively – aimed at automakers.

    Two automaker sources said one scenario would call for a 30-day exemption from the tariffs, but automakers would have to demonstrate plans to invest more in U.S. auto production to remain exempt.

    Details of potential changes to the tariffs that took effect on Tuesday are far from agreed, the sources said. Trump will decide on any final deal, and since taking office, he has chosen to impose tariffs when given the option to back off.
    The 25% levies on Mexican and Canadian goods create particular problems for automakers, who face massive cost increases for parts and vehicles produced in Mexico and Canada bound for the U.S. market.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  217. Regarding those silly paddles…

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  218. As Tariffs Concerns Grow, Where Is the USMCA?

    With dizzying speed, the Trump administration earlier this month announced and then paused broad-based 25% tariffs on top U.S. trading partners Canada and Mexico, leaving both manufacturers and cross-border supply chains in a state of high anxiety. How the world will look at the end of the 30-day reprieve is anyone’s guess.

    Seemingly lost in the furor of activity is the USMCA, or U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement. The USMCA updated NAFTA, the long-standing North America Free Trade Agreement, and took effect in 2020 during President Trump’ first time in office. Trump had been highly critical of NAFTA and made renegotiating the North America trade pact a priority in his first presidency.

    Given the existence of the USMCA, shouldn’t it play a role in preventing a unilateral trade action by a partner to the pact? Is it a meaningless treaty in the face of these types of actions? Or is its role somewhere in between?

    The short answers:

    Trump is sidestepping the deal on “security” grounds.
    Canada and Mexico can challenge Trump in court, but that could take years.
    The deal is up for review next year anyway, so this could be a preview of things to come.

    The security claim is meaningless blather.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  219. As for the consequences:

    Mexico warns US it is ready to seek other trade partners

    Mexico will look for other trading partners if needed in the face of US President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariffs, his Mexican counterpart Claudia Sheinbaum warned Wednesday.

    Mexico has to take “important decisions for the future of the country” and “if necessary, other trading partners will be sought,” she said at her morning news conference.

    The USMCA trade pact blocked Mexico from seeking trade pacts with “non-market economies” (meaning China). The US abrogation of the agreement will end that prohibition.

    How many bad things can Trump do at once? It’s like students into a VW van.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  220. @219 Democratic donor class and DNC approved its safe and doesn’t cost the donor class any money.

    asset (f924ef)

  221. @221 Mexico leases a military base to china in Tijuana?

    asset (f924ef)

  222. Mexico opens 50 Chinese electric vehicle factories, pays the duty and floods the US market.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  223. DNC we want donor class stooge like slotkin to give response. Our consultants say that will please donor class and get us paid. Bernie Sanders won’t praise reagan and bush like slotkin. Both our and your enemy DNC is Sanders. We both only hate trump ;but he doesn’t cost us money. WE fear Sanders and AOC who will cost our donors money! DEI doesn’t cost donors money raising taxes on rich will! Transgenders OK Raising minimum wage not OK!

    asset (f924ef)

  224. @224 Americans are not buying electric cars now. They are sitting on dealers lot unsold.

    asset (f924ef)

  225. In yet another move designed to hurt Ukrainians…

    Donald Trump’s administration is reportedly planning to revoke temporary legal status for around 240,000 Ukrainians.

    According to the Reuters news agency, a senior Trump official and three sources familiar with the matter said the move is expected as soon as April – potentially putting almost a quarter of a million Ukrainians in the US on a fast-track to deportation.

    The planned rollback of protections for Ukrainians was under way before Trump publicly feuded with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky last week.

    You pull sh-t like that when you’ve aligned with the greater evil, the Putin terrorist regime.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  226. I don’t know if Putin has any close friends that he can just kick back, drink vodka, and shoot the breeze with, but if he does, I can just see him getting more than a little ribbing for his orange, turkey-necked and bald-headed, 78-year old “girlfriend”.

    “I’ll tell you, Vova, your grandfather faced down the Czar’s Cossacks with Lenin, your father charged through German minefields for Stalin, but the sacrifice you are making for Mother Russia is far above and beyond the call of duty.”

    nk (eaa51b)

  227. This is Trumponomics…indiscriminately slashing jobs, implementing stupid tariffs, and creating economic uncertainty. Trump’s chickens are coming home to roost with the latest report on February 2025 job growth.

    US-based employers last month announced plans to slash 172,017 jobs, a 103% increase from a year ago and the highest February total since 2009, according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas’s latest monthly job cuts report released Thursday.

    It’s the 12th highest monthly total in the 32 years Challenger has been tracking job cuts. The 11 others (four came during the Covid-19 pandemic) all occurred when the US was in a recession, Challenger data shows.

    The largest share of job cut announcements came in the government sector, where the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency has axed jobs, slashed federal spending and scrapped contracts.

    By Challenger’s count, there were 62,242 announced cuts across 17 federal agencies.

    This means 110,000± of those job cuts are predominantly private sector. The latest inflation rate was 3.0% last January and the New York Fed does not forecast a reduction, so interest rates are unlikely to go down.

    Paul Montagu (8f08d3)

  228. This is Bidenonomics:

    Solar Company That Received $3 Billion Biden Loan Warns It Might Go Bankrupt
    Sunnova Energy received the largest federal loan to a solar company in history

    A politically connected solar company says it has “substantial doubt” it can stay in business, a little over a year after obtaining a $3 billion loan from the Biden administration.
    Sunnova Energy said on Monday that its current finances are “not sufficient to meet obligations and fund operations for a period of at least one year from the date we issue our consolidated financial statements without implementing additional measures.”
    “Therefore, substantial doubt exists regarding our ability to continue as a going concern for a period of at least one year from the date we issue our consolidated financial statements,” the company said in a statement on Monday.
    Sunnova’s stock plunged over 70 percent following its announcement, according to Bloomberg.
    The news comes a year and a half after the Biden administration’s Department of Energy Loan Programs Office closed on a $3 billion loan with the solar company—the largest federal loan to a solar company in history.
    Sunnova’s ties to Biden administration officials and the history of consumer complaints against the company drew scrutiny and led to investigations by Republican lawmakers.
    Biden’s head of the DOE loan office, Jigar Shah, had close ties with Sunnova board director Anne Slaughter Andrew, who also sat on the board of a nonprofit trade group that was founded by Shah, the Washington Free Beacon reported in October 2023.
    Sunnova’s business practices have come under scrutiny as well. The company has been accused of scamming dementia patients on their deathbeds into signing five-figure, multi-decade solar panel leases, according to interviews and state consumer complaint records obtained by the Free Beacon in November 2023.
    The Free Beacon reviewed at least 50 consumer complaints filed against Sunnova in Texas since 2022. Multiple complaints alleged that Sunnova sales representatives persuaded elderly dementia patients, some on their deathbeds, to enter lengthy solar panel leases.
    Two Texas residents told the Free Beacon that their fathers were persuaded to sign such leases while senile and on hospice.

    “It was truly ripping off old people,” said one resident. “It was the biggest ripoff I’ve ever seen.”
    Republicans on the Senate and House energy committees launched investigations into Sunnova in late 2023.
    “We are alarmed about recent, credible reports that Sunnova has racked up numerous consumer complaints, including those alleging troubling sales practices, such as Sunnova pressing elderly homeowners in poor health to sign long-term contracts costing tens of thousands of dollars,” the lawmakers wrote in a letter to Shah.
    The DOE loan program has long been a subject of controversy. During the Obama administration, the office came under fire after issuing a $535 million loan to Solyndra, a politically connected solar company that ended up going bankrupt.

    Greater evil…

    BuDuh (4214e4)

  229. If Trump is failing to enforce the USMCA (Public Law No. 116–113), he is violating his oath (and the Constitution) to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed” and should be impeached. Of course, he did that on day one of his administration with his suspension of the TikTok ban, but nobody cared.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  230. 10 democrats join republicans (to please kevin m) in censor of Al Green. They will be primaried. Gerry connolly is acting like a squad member he is so afraid of being primaried!

    asset (282412)

  231. 230. This was not uncovered by Elon Musk or Donald Trump, although Trump calls the “green new deal” the “green new scam” – but that’s as much detail that he gets into.

    He’s actually talking about the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 which incorporated many of the idea in the Green New Deal resolution of 2019)

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/remarks/2025/01/remarks-by-president-trump-at-the-world-economic-forum/

    I terminated the ridiculous and incredibly wasteful Green New Deal — I call it the “Green New Scam”; withdrew from the one-sided Paris Climate Accord; and ended the insane and costly electric vehicle mandate.

    Trump actually did not terminate anything except the general idea.and things motivated by this philosophy here and there.

    Sammy FInkelman (e4ef09)

  232. WSJ: Trump’s Tariffs Are No ‘Emergency’

    The President invokes a law that doesn’t give him power to impose sweeping tariffs. Someone should sue.

    President Trump delayed his Mexico-Canada tariffs again on Thursday—this time for another month. He’s treating the North American economy as a personal plaything, as markets gyrate with each presidential whim. It’s doubtful Mr. Trump even has the power to impose these tariffs, and we hope his afflatus gets a legal challenge.

    The Constitution gives power over trade to Congress, which for most of U.S. history wrote tariff law. That changed after the catastrophe of the 1930 Smoot-Hawley tariff, as Congress said stop us before we kill the economy again and ceded authority to the President to negotiate bilateral trade deals. It ceded more power after World War II.

    The President now has the explicit power to restrict imports, but only for specific reasons. The President may impose tariffs on imports that threaten national security (Section 232) or in response to “large and serious” balance-of-payments deficits (Sec. 122), a surge of imports that harms U.S. industry (Sec. 201), and discriminatory trade practices (Sec. 301).

    During his first term, Mr. Trump used Section 232 to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum and 301 on goods from China. Mr. Trump’s executive orders imposing 25% across-the-board tariffs on Canada and Mexico and 10% (now 20%) on China instead invoke the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which gives the President authority to address an “unusual and extraordinary threat” if he declares a national emergency. Mr. Trump deems fentanyl and other drugs such an emergency.

    IEEPA’s language is intentionally broad to give the President latitude to address wide-ranging threats. But Mr. Trump’s tariffs arguably constitute a “‘fundamental revision of the statute, changing it from [one sort of] scheme of . . . regulation’ into an entirely different kind,” to quote the Supreme Court’s West Virginia v. EPA precedent distilling its major questions doctrine.

    Under that ruling, Congress must expressly authorize economically and politically significant executive actions, which Mr. Trump’s tariffs undeniably are. Whether fentanyl is an unusual and extraordinary threat is debatable, however, since drugs have been pouring across the borders for decades.

    So, it’s BS from other directions, too.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  233. (Trying again)

    WSJ: Trump’s Tariffs Are No ‘Emergency’

    The President invokes a law that doesn’t give him power to impose sweeping tariffs. Someone should sue.

    President Trump delayed his Mexico-Canada tariffs again on Thursday—this time for another month. He’s treating the North American economy as a personal plaything, as markets gyrate with each presidential whim. It’s doubtful Mr. Trump even has the power to impose these tariffs, and we hope his afflatus gets a legal challenge.

    The Constitution gives power over trade to Congress, which for most of U.S. history wrote tariff law. That changed after the catastrophe of the 1930 Smoot-Hawley tariff, as Congress said stop us before we kill the economy again and ceded authority to the President to negotiate bilateral trade deals. It ceded more power after World War II.

    The President now has the explicit power to restrict imports, but only for specific reasons. The President may impose tariffs on imports that threaten national security (Section 232) or in response to “large and serious” balance-of-payments deficits (Sec. 122), a surge of imports that harms U.S. industry (Sec. 201), and discriminatory trade practices (Sec. 301).

    During his first term, Mr. Trump used Section 232 to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum and 301 on goods from China. Mr. Trump’s executive orders imposing 25% across-the-board tariffs on Canada and Mexico and 10% (now 20%) on China instead invoke the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which gives the President authority to address an “unusual and extraordinary threat” if he declares a national emergency. Mr. Trump deems fentanyl and other drugs such an emergency.

    IEEPA’s language is intentionally broad to give the President latitude to address wide-ranging threats. But Mr. Trump’s tariffs arguably constitute a “‘fundamental revision of the statute, changing it from [one sort of] scheme of . . . regulation’ into an entirely different kind,” to quote the Supreme Court’s West Virginia v. EPA precedent distilling its major questions doctrine.

    Under that ruling, Congress must expressly authorize economically and politically significant executive actions, which Mr. Trump’s tariffs undeniably are. Whether fentanyl is an unusual and extraordinary threat is debatable, however, since drugs have been pouring across the borders for decades.

    So, it’s BS from other directions, too.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  234. If Trump is failing to enforce the USMCA

    He’s not “failing to enforce” it, he is fining people for observing it.

    Just like a bank robber is not “failing to enforce” laws against bank robbery.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  235. Peggy Noonan reviews the Democrats on display Tuesday

    Democrats looked like fools Tuesday night. We don’t need to dwell on how they sat grim-faced, seething, or walked out while the president spoke. One stood, yelled, brandished his cane and was removed by the sergeant at arms. Others held up little paddles bearing little insults. Some wore special color-coded outfits. Almost all refused to show normal warmth or engagement. From my notes, as the camera turned and dwelled on the furious faces: “They look like the green room in hell.”

    All while Donald Trump romped.

    Three thoughts. One, these aren’t serious people. Two, their job was to show they are an alternative to Mr. Trump, and instead they showed why he won. Third and most important, they will continue to lose for a long time. I hadn’t known that until Tuesday.

    Sometimes a party takes a concussive blow, such as the 2024 presidential loss, and you can see: They’ll shape up and come back, they’re pros, they lost an election but not their dignity. But now and then you see: No, these guys don’t know what happened, they are going to lose over and over before they get the message.

    Then she gives them advice they are going to largely ignore.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  236. If Trump is failing to enforce the USMCA

    He’s not “failing to enforce” it, he is fining people for observing it.

    Just like a bank robber is not “failing to enforce” laws against bank robbery.

    Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/6/2025 @ 5:05 pm

    Bank robbers don’t take an oath to defend the Constitution. Trump has an obligation to follow the law, and as the USMCA is a a public law, he’s obliged to obey it.

    Rip Murdock (271b5f)

  237. Kevin M (a9545f) — 3/6/2025 @ 4:57 pm

    It’s really up to Republicans in Congress to take action; whether it’s to claw back their authority from the President or impeach him. So far they’re just standing on the sidelines. Neither is likely to happen, though.

    Waiting for “someone” to sue will be like waiting for Godot

    Rip Murdock (271b5f)

  238. It’s really up to Republicans in Congress to take action

    Rip Murdock (271b5f) — 3/6/2025 @ 7:47 pm

    Unfortunately, they are missing the bone structure that extends from the skull to the tailbone.

    norcal (a72384)

  239. I’m pretty sure Kevin has read the novella Who Goes There? by John W. Campbell. Youse other guys have likely seen the movie version titled The Thing by John Carpenter.

    All those people, Republican and Democrat, are there because they got themselves (re)elected. The survival of the body of which they are a part is of no importance next to their own personal survival.

    nk (6d82f0)

  240. Politico reports in new poll 40% of voters say democrats have no plan to combat trump. 24% say the have a plan ;but its a bad joke! 10% say democrats are doing something anything Bueller? DNC responds our plan to stop Bernie and the left is barely working we don’t have time to stop trump.

    asset (ff7e3e)

  241. @237 Democrat donor class drones are not allowed to do anything that might prevent donor class tax cut. Noonan like the rest say become republican light. Gavin newsom is trying that now. Donors say appeal to moderate republicans not the 7 million voters who voted in 2020 ;but not in 2024. Consultants agree keep the donor cash flowing. Third way clinton democrats are worried that young democrats running for office are funding their campaigns with small donations from voters not large donations from corporate pacs. Consultants are worried how they will grift on these small donation campaigns and donors worry how they will control party.

    asset (ff7e3e)

  242. The survival of the body of which they are a part is of no importance next to their own personal survival.

    Indeed. Nice connection. I say we try hot pokers to see which ones are monsters.

    Kevin M (a9545f)

  243. Trump yesterday cancelled all new tariffs that are in violation of the USMCA. Meanwhile he wants to retaliate against Canada for dairy and lumber tariffs.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  244. Jimmy Kimmel on the March 5, 2025 not exactly State of the Union message by President Trump
    Wednesday, March 5, 2025

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMRGD6OwrDA

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

  245. Tariffs wee cancelled only till April 2. He cancelled tariffs he says were levied because of fentanyl but he still plans to impose them for economic reasons.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09)

Leave a Reply


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1525 secs.