Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Donald Trump the Megathread part II - Mod Warning updated in OP 12/2/26

18818828848868871862

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 12,561 ✭✭✭✭fullstop


    He doesn’t have the balls to say it to any of their faces. Went running home from G7 and started tweeting about Macron from the safety of his toilet. Laying into Canada again now but didn’t say boo to Carney last week. He’s an absolute coward



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 25,623 ✭✭✭✭My name is URL


    His followers truly believe that tariffs are sanctions on the other lot.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,310 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,791 ✭✭✭✭Frank Bullitt


    Tells you a lot about his followers. And not just in America, also here.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,628 ✭✭✭Dr Robert


    The dollar at the lowest level in four years against the euro.

    Winning 😂



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,576 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    Elect a clown... Expect a circus



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,988 ✭✭✭✭briany


    To be fair, it's difficult if not impossible to be cognizant of and angry about 30 different things at once. It's just further proof that the 'flood the zone' strategy is working as well now, if not better, than when it was implemented about a decade ago.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 42,784 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    It's not an important state but Martin Heinrich and Ben Ray Lujan are two great senators. I really like Heinrich, he's very progressive and a great speaker. He'd thump Trump or any Republican.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,105 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    There does seem to be a point of diminishing returns for scandals.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 895 ✭✭✭maik3n


    Scotus further encouraging Americas descent into a Christian Theocracy.

    One might argue that their cause has merit when it comes to sex ed classes but with this, it is definitely verging into ''Dont Say Gay'' Laws territory.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,712 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    The matter has been coming to a head for some time. The idea of "judge shopping" for federal injunctions has been gaining traction for some time. For example, if there is a firearms restriction passed, you know it'll end up in Federal district court in San Diego (or whichever district Judge Benitez presides over, but i think it's SD) because he's well known for pro-gun rulings. Which i think is precisely counter to the gun example that Sotomayor was trying to make.

    Any ruling on a federal law normally only has effect within the jurisdiction of that court. If the fifth circuit decides the sky is green and the ninth circuit decides it is red, then within those jurisdictions as far as the law is concerned, the skies are green and red and in the Sixth Circuit, the skies are whatever color the legislature or common law has decided. Yet somehow folks are fine with national injunctions. If four district courts decide not to issue an injunction in their cases and a fifth one decides to impose a national injunction, then that fifth court from outside the jurisdiction has just overridden the other four within their own jurisdictions.

    This seems unsustainable.

    The individuals in areas where courts have not ruled till have the same options and opportunities as this indivuals in areas where the courts have ruled before they made their rulings.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,310 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    The lunatic on the TV today, quite apt the man emphasises insanity in his diatribes



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,854 ✭✭✭Wolf359f


    But judge shopping was fine when it was a conservative judge in Texas in Biden's term though?

    It may be unsustainable due to the sheer numbers of XO's Trump is signing that potentially violate the constitution.
    Shouldn't the constitution be protected at all costs? If an XO potentially breaches the constitution, wouldn't the most rational option be, a federal judge issues an injunction until the supreme court rules on it? It's kinda like a presumption of innocence.

    Maybe, just maybe if he issued legal XO's there would be no reason for federal judges to take a case and issue an injunction. Ya know if you're all for law and order and checks and balance etc…



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,938 ✭✭✭Damien360


    As I see it, that's not unlike the EU. Irish court ruling may be overruled by EU for whatever reason but we tend to drag our feet before changing. Same with courts across the EU. God help anyone in EU court trying to impose a law on France after they ruled. I would look at countries in EU as local court and EU court as federal in the context of US system. To be honest, most Irish people take little heed of EU court ruling until we have to.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,988 ✭✭✭✭briany


    Nothing sticks to Trump. There's always a new outrage to eclipse the old one. When everything is an outrage, nothing is an outrage because nothing particularly stands out.

    That list of around 30 things that was posted - you'll have a group of people who have one issue on that list where that's there prime concern, but that has balkanised public backlash. Nothing big enough to reach critical mass. Hopefully I'm proven wrong on this.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,791 ✭✭✭✭Frank Bullitt


    Sorry, this is absolutely hilarious when she starts talking and he keeps going. This is gas.



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,712 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    That's kindof the point. The issue of judge shopping for national injunctions has been a point of discussion for some time and has been increasing in prevalence in recent years. To quote Justice Kagan three years ago, "It can't be right that one district judge can stop a nationwide policy in its tracks and leave it stopped for the years that it takes to go through the normal process." (Why she has apparently changed her opinion of late I have not yet determined, I’ve not yet read the dissent). It hasn't just come up in the last six months since Trump has been in charge. Your last paragraph should give additional emphasis to this, unless you feel that the laws or regulations passed under the Biden administration were equally wrong to warrant a Texas judge issuing national injunctions. If they were legal, the injunction wouldn't have been issued, right? At least, by your logic.

    We can continue as we are, or we can finally put a stop to it. If they are not permitted, they cannot be abused.

    Post edited by Manic Moran on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,855 ✭✭✭✭Loafing Oaf


    especially when the subject is presumably never running for office again. Then it only really matters if it’s likely to trigger impeachment and given the currrnt state of play in congress, that would seem to be in the dead girl/live boy territory…



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators, Paid Member Posts: 33,133 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    Does the ruling not stop injunctions full stop though? Its one thing to say it only applies in the fifth district or whatever until it ultimately gets to the SC to decide if there are disagreements (and that seems relatively sensible to me). This ruling is saying they can only give relief to the explicit plaintiffs even if they believe the law itself is unconstitutional.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 14,421 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    All chess is 3d at a minimum. Even if you are on a flat computer screen (the game might be 2d if only on a top down view), the second you start playing, time comes into account making it 3d.

    Save boards.ie by subscribing: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,793 ✭✭✭✭Oscar_Madison
    #MEGA MAKE EUROPE GREAT AGAIN


    It’s a good reminder of just how much religion dominates US politics- a greater bunch of hypocrites you couldn’t get - thankfully in ireland we’ve cut the umbilical cord to the Catholic Church in the main- American churches are simply money generating machines servicing a need to maintain certain “values” as the citizens see fit, usually discriminating against ethnicities and the marginalised of society - people pay good sums of dollars weekly to be a part of their “church” - it’s no different to a political lobby group. It’s got nothing to do with “God” and everything to do with keeping certain parts of society at arms length



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 15,536 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    And lest we forget, the SCOTUS is majority RCC. 7-2



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 4,234 ✭✭✭Field east


    I cannot get my head around on what grounds three of the seven judges abstained. Was the decision to be made not clear . The three involved knew exactly of the outcome because the all knew who was going to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’. So all three effectively voted to support what Trump wanted.
    what had they to gain by abstaining



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,576 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    1000012181.jpg

    1) denial means it is absolutely true

    2) would you define "sleazebag" perhaps as someone who lurks around teen models as a grown ass man, or who says if he wasn't related to his daughter he would date her, or when asked what he has most in common with his daughter the answer was "sex", or someone who cheated on all of his wives, or someone who has sex with a pornstar while his 3rd wife was at home with his newborn?

    Or how about ALL of them?

    Elect a clown... Expect a circus



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,600 ✭✭✭Economics101


    Actually it's 6 out of 9.

    It would appear that US Catholics are pretty mainstream on social issues. The real hardcore and oppressive approach to issues like abortion and gay marriage comes more from (Protestant) Evangelicals. Sure there is a strong conservative Catholic wing (think of J D Vance), but there is a liberal mainstream in US Catholicism (think of Pope Leo XIV),which is very active on issues such as opposing the brutal activities of ICE, the gutting of Medicare and Medicais, stc



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 15,536 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    I strongly doubt Alito, Thomas, Roberts and Coney Barratt are mainstream in their views, and Kavanaugh's lurching to the right on a regular basis now. Gorsuch is a bit hard to read.

    Maybe Soto-Mayor is more mainstream. Most don't realize Thomas is a right-wing Catholic as it gets.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,673 ✭✭✭Patrick2010


    Pardon my ignorance but how do Supreme Court judges get appointed, if there’s a vacancy can the sitting president just appoint anyone he likes?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 37,426 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Sitting President nominates someone, then they go through Senate confirmation hearings and a vote. So the President selects, the Senate votes/approves. I assume they at least have to be a judge in an existing court, not just anyone at all.

    It's why Mitch McConnell was able to stop Obama in the last few months of his Presidency when a vacancy came up after the death of a SC judge (Scalia I think); Obama nominated a judge but McConnell as Leader of the Senate refused to hold confirmation hearings, saying it was too close to the end of Obama's presidency. But then in the last few months of Trump's first term and even closer to the election, McConnell helped ram through Trump's nominee.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,600 ✭✭✭Economics101


    What you are saying is that the Supreme Court Catholics are not representative of US Catholicism in general. Agreed.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,048 ✭✭✭RickBlaine


    I'm pretty sure the founding fathers would have been appalled if they knew of McConnell's antics around Obama's nomination. Utterly despicable and hypocritical.

    It was also one of the earliest signs that the GOP is willing to openly break all norms and conventions if it suits them politically. It was a shocking and controversial move back in 2016, but now 9 years later such norms are being broken on a weekly basis.



Advertisement
Advertisement