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

You're just flat out lying now.

1. You've literally got Republican supreme court judges ruling on their religious or ideological beliefs. Aileen Cannon for example was repeatedly forced to walk back her decisions when they were found to be wrong.
2. Americans are struggling more than before, his tax cuts mostly benefit the wealthy. Inflation is accelerating and the country is heading to a likely recession.
3. Putin uses him like a little bitch. Trump does nothing but move his deadlines up another two weeks. Pretending he is interested in standing up to these countries isn't based on reality, in fact he has repeatedly praised their leaders (apart from Iran, who aren't actually a thread to the US at all).

Honestly, Trump has proven himself to be an attrocious president for the second time. But continue to fawn over the noted rapist. This nonsense of saying we should educate ourselves, you're promoting a criminal.

Countries don't pay tariffs, importers do. Have you any examples of countries paying the tariffs on behalf of the importer? Or lowering the price so the net effect is zero?

He threatens more but never does it. Just another two weeks. He recently fawned over Putin, giving him full state honours, and received nothing in return.

He is continuing to give billions to Israel, which you agree with, but you agree he shouldn't be giving weapons for free to Ukraine. Israel is defending itself against an attack and so is Ukraine but they are different because?

You don't seem to understand how tariffs work, which I guess explains a lot. Brazil doesn't pay those.

Brazil in the meantime has gotten China as a huge customer for their soy beans, previously China bought soy beans from US farmers but thanks to Trump's tariffs China has looked elsewhere. This means that a ton of farmers are now facing hardship, just like the last time he was in office and will likely need bailouts. Of course Project 2025 was extremely clear on that: No bailouts for farmers, instead they can go bankrupt so their farms can be bought on the cheap by Trump's pals.

As for his 'sanctions on Russia': They are relatively weak and he keeps putting off more severe sanctions time and time again. I mean, this is all widely available information. You can't expect us to keep feeding it to you.

Anyway, I think I will ignore you from now on because you seem like the usual 'Ukraine can't win, they have to give up territory, Trump is the best' MAGAt and it's gotten boring. It almost sounds like you're just reading from a template at times.

Shame tbf, I would have loved to see the discovery part of the lawsuit.

Speaking as an evangelical Christian, I believe that God exercises providential control over the history of nations. The Old Testament says, “The Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will and sets over it the lowliest of men” (Daniel 4:17). Similarly, the New Testament says, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God” (Romans 13:1). 

This is the most revealing bit of the whole piece for me and an insight into the thinking of his supporters.

Just to remind everyone, the 1st amendment of the United States reads,

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Congress shall make no law…

To read this literally, it would appear that freedom of speech can lawfully be supressed if it comes from somewhere else. This amendment appears not to say anything specifically about the US Federal government monkeying with what you can say or exercising its power in this realm.

Now, there is judicial precedent to pad this out, and that has up until now taken a wider interpretation that prohibits other branches of government from suppressing free speech. However, it wouldn't be the first time if the current SCOTUS were to roll back something that was considered a settled issue…

But it's worth reiterating that these first amendment protection do not extend to private companies rescinding any bullhorn they may possess.