The offical Trump Tariff thread

The idea of saying you’re a Christian and a libertarian is so wild to me. You don’t have to agree with me about Jesus at all, and I know you don’t…but saying your King is Jesus and serving selfishness is just ****ing wild to me. Here come 30 responses about how I got it all wrong from jokers and bots.

 

Man Baby mad, mad, mad at the Supreme Court. To punish the Supreme Court, Man Baby wants a global 10% tariff. That will show them, I tell you.

Trump admitted that using tariffs as a social media-delivered political weapon against international trade partners will be "more complicated" because of the court’s 6-3 opinion. But he vowed to place a 10 percent global tariff on “all imports” indiscriminately under "Section 122" powers before marching back home.​

 

Just the worst ****ing people….we have to figure this out

 

a Christian libertarian is the equivalent of a faith based Han Solo

"hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good blaster at your side, kid, also Trust the Force"

...Just does not compute

I will tell you something, though, for real;

the 20-30 years ago version of me here on this BBS and in life would have (and, in fact did) treat any assertion of faith with sneering disdain as inferior to the gods of reason, or science or economic optimization or utility functions or whatever

The much older version of me realized that that is a tremendous mistake. In part because of maturity, in part because our whole societal undoing seems to show this.

In the word of the wire's Omar Little - A man or woman or anyone has to have a code, and that code just can't be an outcome or an output or "merit" - that way lies nihilism and degradation and bullshit


No - the code should be religious or moral or ethical or - in any event- something designed to make a REAL DIFFERENCE in your everyday life and the lives of those around you and not just some bullshit plot on a graph.

A society optimized for outputs on a plot is a society that lets a Jeffrey Epstein/Trump/Musk run rampant, a society that has values that transcend outcomes does not .

Give me a person or people with a set of decent values (make them biblical or Buddhist or whatever) and who practice them in every day life over every wall st prick or quant genius or whatever the hell our cluster f of a society has produced and we will all be the better for it and a lot happier as well

 

Easy now.

I may not love the "church", but that doesn't mean I don't keep Jesus and his teachings close to my heart. He makes me want to be a better person, everyday.

 

Coulda given me some mandolin chords...ukulele? gimme a break, it's got like 3 ****ing strings.



Love John Prine, that's a great song, he has a whole bunch of great songs.

His last favorite of mine:



[I have never seen sweet potato wine in my life]

 

I forgot that one! He's about as lovable a human as I could even imagine...

Edit: I'd be happy to chart it out for you on mando, but I hope you got the G, C, and D covered, right?

 

Man Baby likes to project. He has been 24/7 all in on foreign interests. He nows thinks that the SCOTUS is cutting into his action.


Crybaby Trump Now Accuses SCOTUS Of Being 'Swayed By Foreign Interests'

 

Does the Supreme Court ruling mean I'm gonna get that extra $0.50 back on that bag of USA lemons I bought at Costco? Sweet.

 

The Great Negotiator does not want to cut a deal with Congress.

Instead, Trumps wants to act by fiat. He wants to issue regal degrees executive orders.

This could be the summation of his second term. Trump wants to act like he is King.

 

Trump has very few hard opinions on policies. Two of these policy positions are tariffs and deporting immigrants. Both of which are deeply underwater with the American voters. Trump has also gone all-in for both, refusing to backtrack on either.

 

Trump used to be good at politics.

Every time that an American goes int a grocery store and thinks these prices keep going up, their next thought will be ... I bet Trump Tariffs are to blame.

 

Justice Gorsch's Concurrence went after the king.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-1287_4gcj.pdf


"On this reading, moreover, the President is unconstrained by the significant procedural limitations in other tariff statutes and free to issue a dizzying array of modifications at will. … All it takes to unlock that extraordinary power is a Presidential declaration of emergency, which the Government asserts is unreviewable. … And the only way of restraining the exercise of that power is a veto-proof majority in Congress."

"That view … would 'represent[] a "transformative expansion"' of the President's authority over tariff policy … and indeed—as demonstrated by the exercise of that authority in this case—over the broader economy as well. It would replace the longstanding executive-legislative collaboration over trade policy with unchecked Presidential policymaking."

"The President's assertion here of broad 'statutory power over the national economy' is 'extravagant' by any measure. … As in those cases, 'a reasonable interpreter would [not] expect' Congress to 'pawn[]' such a 'big-time policy call[] … off to another branch.'" (quoting Biden v. Nebraska, Barrett, J., concurring)

"The President asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope. In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it. … We claim only, as we must, the limited role assigned to us by Article III of the Constitution. Fulfilling that role, we hold that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs."

"Our founders understood that men are not angels, and we disregard that insight at our peril when we allow the few (or the one) to aggrandize their power based on loose or uncertain authority."

"Without doctrines like major questions, our system of separated powers and checks-and-balances threatens to give way to the continual and permanent accretion of power in the hands of one man. That is no recipe for a republic."

"Article I grants Congress, not the President, the power to impose tariffs. Still, the President claims, Congress passed that power on to him in IEEPA, permitting him to impose tariffs on nearly any goods he wishes, in any amount he wishes, based on emergencies he himself has declared. He insists, as well, that his emergency declarations are unreviewable. A ruling for him here, the President acknowledges, would afford future Presidents the same latitude he asserts for himself. … So another President might impose tariffs on gas-powered automobiles to respond to climate change … Or, really, on virtually any imports for any emergency any President might perceive. And all of these emergency declarations would be unreviewable. Just ask yourself: What President would willingly give up that kind of power?"

"Americans fought the Revolution in no small part because they believed that only their elected representatives (not the King, not even Parliament) possessed authority to tax them."

"Are we really to believe that the patriots that night in Boston Harbor considered the whole of the tariff power some kingly prerogative?"

 

You are thinking of a shadow docket ruling, where Kavanaugh's opinion (famously known as "Kavanaugh's stop," which he later backtracked on - no, you cannot stop solely based on skin color - in a completely unrelated ruling) was the only stated opinion, other than the dissent. The other justices didn't state anything, but just made a decision. Shadow docket sucks and should be done away with.

Judges, isolated and slow as they are, may be waking up a bit to not being so easily fooled. A federal judge recently was furious that he was misled by this administration into agreeing to a search warrant for a Washington Post reporter.

 

I don't think I have ever met a real Libertarian.

 

Following CA Gov Gavin Newsom's lead,

Illinois' JB Pritzker sends president $8.6BILLION 'invoice' over tariff ruling

​

Pritzker wrote a letter to Trump demanding he issue refunds to the people of Illinois now that the court has ruled the trade policies unconstitutional, attached with an invoice for $8.6 billion.

In the letter to Trump, Pritzker wrote: 'Your tariff taxes wreaked havoc on farmers, enraged our allies, and sent grocery prices through the roof. This morning, your hand-picked Supreme Court Justices notified you that they are also unconstitutional.'

He then demanded Trump refund the people of Illinois $1,700 per family, with more than five million households in the state, totaled out to $8,679,261,600.

'This letter and the attached invoice stand as an official notice that compensation is owed to the people of Illinois, and if you do not comply, we will pursue further action,' he added.

The invoice, captioned by Pritzker with the words 'cut the check,' was even marked: 'Past Due – Delinquent.'

​

 

Seriously? 15%?