Second ('Third') Trump Presidency Thread

For what it’s worth, I don’t give a **** if we pay back NYC for housing migrants. I’m just curious if this was a fun way to give 4 people a wrongful term lawsuit victory.
 
mqt said:
No, what I’m saying is cities were told by the government, “hey do this expensive thing and then we’ll pay you back” and now we’re firing someone for making the payment. If it’s ruled that this is part of the funding freeze that was put on hold, or the Courts eventually decide that this was a lawful use of funds allocated to FEMA for this purpose, the Trump Admin might have just fired four people for refusing to break the law.
Click to expand...

What did NYC do? Completely ignore federal immigration laws and create an emergency? Doesn't seem like that was originally FEMA's purpose and someone at FEMA determines how these funds are dispersed. It doesn't just happen automatically after Congress allocates funds. An administrative process with decision making trees is taking place.
 
thethe said:
What did NYC do? Completely ignore federal immigration laws and create an emergency? Doesn't seem like that was originally FEMA's purpose and someone at FEMA determines how these funds are dispersed. It doesn't just happen automatically after Congress allocates funds. An administrative process with decision making trees is taking place.
Click to expand...

I would assume there are processes in place for this sort of expense reimbursement just like any other program. The devil is surely in the details here, but if it was indeed found to be lawfully required spending as appropriated by Congress, I can’t imagine their case would be weak for claiming they were fired for refusing to violate the law.

As for what New York did, it doesn’t much matter if there was an agreement in place with Congress. This ain’t politics, it’s government contracts. That NYC has so many migrants is the reason they get the money from this specific program.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mqt said:
I would assume there are processes in place for this sort of expense reimbursement just like any other program. The devil is surely in the details here, but if it was indeed found to be lawfully required spending as appropriated by Congress, I can’t imagine their case would be weak for claiming they were fired for refusing to violate the law.

As for what New York did, it doesn’t much matter if there was an agreement in place with Congress. This ain’t politics, it’s government contracts. That NYC has so many migrants is the reason they get the money from this specific program.
Click to expand...

Who is engaging the state governments in contracts? Who is determining the details? Who ultimately determines the final end recipients.

I think a judge should intervene in the procurement of pens and pencils next. How dare the executive branch determine that allocation!
 
thethe said:
Who is engaging the state governments in contracts? Who is determining the details? Who ultimately determines the final end recipients.

I think a judge should intervene in the procurement of pens and pencils next. How dare the executive branch determine that allocation!
Click to expand...

Hi, you’re responding to a hypothetical question that asks what happens if this is found to be a case of the government freezing funding illegally. This isn’t a declaration that the courts need to be involved and I will not lose a wink of sleep if the largest municipal government in the country does not get its bills paid by the Feds. But I’m curious about the consequences if this is part of something that is ruled illegal because I’m a weird guy who’s intrigued by how labor laws are handled.
 
I really hope we avoid this obvious disaster.

n a statement after their meeting, Abdullah was more direct. “I reiterated Jordan’s steadfast position against the displacement of Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. This is the unified Arab position. Rebuilding Gaza without displacing the Palestinians and addressing the dire humanitarian situation should be the priority for all,” he wrote on X.

But Trump’s comments made obvious he’s serious about moving forward with the plan he revealed one week ago.

“We’re going to have it, we’re going to keep it, and we’re going to make sure that there’s going to be peace and there’s not going to be any problem, and nobody’s going to question it, and we’re going to run it very properly,” Trump said.

“We’re going to take it. We’re going to hold it. We’re going to cherish it,” Trump said of Gaza.
Click to expand...
 
[tw]1889504867686707356[/tw]

Nothing a reasonable person didn’t already know.

The elections are stolen too guys.
 
bafkreibo7ac7o5t7dfnrifbxfukt6w254iud7rk2bbepfvkxcjoudift4y@jpeg
 
Man - if these Epstein files are released we are going to see some wild stuff afterwards. Better be limited to zero redactions.
 
Tapate50 said:
Hard to believe she got over 40%, truly
Click to expand...

Can anyone explain how she was ever an attorney, much less a "successful one? I mean I'm sure she is fairly intelligent. You don't graduate law school at a pretty prestigious college if you are of average or below average intelligence. But her ability to explain things and portray a viewpoint is beyond terrible, which is like 90% of an attorney's job.

I recall when mqt tried to tell us that how somebody performs in an interview and their public speaking skills aren't an important aspect of being POTUS, lol.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mqt said:
Maybe? It’s not money being handed to migrants, it’s reimbursing cities for housing them.
Click to expand...

Eh, that's a bit of potato/potato. The cities would essentially just be a funnel for the same money. Whether FEMA directly paid them or just reimbursed the cities, it's the same money.

If we asked Mexico to pay the cartels a sum of money to stay out of the US and then reimbursed Mexico for that money, we would still be funding the cartels, even if we aren't the ones directly doing it. The intent is the same.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Carp said:
Can anyone explain how she was ever an attorney, much less a "successful one? I mean I'm sure she is fairly intelligent. You don't graduate law school at a pretty prestigious college if you are of average or below average intelligence. But her ability to explain things and portray a viewpoint is beyond terrible, which is like 90% of an attorney's job.

I recall when mqt tried to tell us that how somebody performs in an interview and their public speaking skills aren't an important aspect of being POTUS, lol.
Click to expand...

She got ahead because she isn’t white and not a man. She was also willing to do aggressive things to get ahead early in her career.

I believe I read it took her multiple attempts to pass the bar but that could be a lie.

Everyone know how she got to where she was - she is not intelligent…at all.
 
mqt said:
Maybe? It’s not money being handed to migrants, it’s reimbursing cities for housing them.
Click to expand...

Someone can reimburse my mortgage company for my mortgage is it to my benefit?

No one stuck a gun to my head to buy this house. Or live here
 
Last edited by a moderator:
thethe said:
There are people alive that actually voted for Biden in 20 and Kamala in 24. What type of idiot you have to be to do that is well special.
Click to expand...

My SIL is going full on bonkers democrat on IG.

Women liberals are a wild bunch. They really like to telegraph their mental issues
 
Tapate50 said:
My SIL is going full on bonkers democrat on IG.

Women liberals are a wild bunch. They really like to telegraph their mental issues
Click to expand...

Left is absolutely getting loonier. Moderates will continue to walk away.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top