Second ('Third') Trump Presidency Thread

acesfull86 said:
Article I
Section 8

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

…

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

—————

^ There’s also this, in addition to what others have pointed out over the past couple of pages
Click to expand...
Congress gave this power to the president - tariffs.
 
sturg33 said:
then go use your massive mandate and huge congressional advantage and go re write the amendment
Click to expand...

We don’t have super majorities to do that. But then don’t use arguments for other things of “what would the founders” think.
 
mqt said:
Several courts have weighed in on this situation since 2019. This is akin to suggesting criminal appeals should be ignored because the person was convicted. Many have already said it’s not the deportation of an illegal immigrant at issue, it’s the shuffling to a foreign prison. In the case of this individual, that prison being in El Salvador presents its own specific legal issue.

It’s certifiably insane that the MAGA’s position is now that the Executive Branch can imprison someone extrajudicially.
Click to expand...

The SCOTUS had the chance to rule on that and didn't. I'll presume it's legal.
 
Last edited:
thethe said:
We don’t have super majorities to do that. But then don’t use arguments for other things of “what would the founders” think.
Click to expand...
The founders were brilliant but were not perfect. That's why they gave us an amendment system. They knew we would need to change

Also, the key founds supported limits. It wasn't until we elected the socialist wanna be kind FDR where we actually had to write the rule in our law


Key Founders’ Perspectives
George Washington:
Washington set a powerful precedent by voluntarily stepping down after two terms in 1796, citing exhaustion and a desire to avoid perpetuating power. His decision, often credited with establishing the two-term tradition, was less about endorsing formal limits and more about modeling republican virtue. In 1788, he wrote that the Constitution’s checks were sufficient to prevent corruption without term limits, suggesting he saw no need for a formal restriction.
In 1799, when urged to run again, Washington rejected the idea, criticizing the divisiveness of political parties and reinforcing his belief in rotation. His actions influenced later presidents but were not a call for constitutional limits.
Thomas Jefferson:
Jefferson was a strong advocate for the two-term tradition, viewing it as a safeguard against monarchical tendencies. He argued that a president serving beyond two terms risked becoming a "hereditary monarch" and that the people should reject candidates with such ambitions. In his 1821 autobiography, he wrote that a president consenting to a third term should be rejected for showing “ambitious views.”
He also expressed concern about presidents serving into old age, risking ineffective governance, stating that without limits, “the indulgence and attachments of the people will keep a man in the chair after he becomes a dotard.” Jefferson’s refusal to run in 1808, despite public support, reinforced his commitment to rotation.
James Madison:
Madison’s early support for lifetime tenure during the Convention reflected his focus on executive independence. However, as president (1809–1817), he adhered to the two-term tradition, suggesting he accepted the emerging norm of limited tenure. His silence on formal limits later in life indicates he saw the practice as sufficient without constitutional mandate.
John Adams:
Adams, who served one term (1797–1801), did not explicitly advocate for term limits but followed the precedent of not seeking prolonged power. His writings focus more on checks and balances than on specific term restrictions.
Anti-Federalists (e.g., Melancton Smith):
Anti-Federalists like Smith, in a 1788 essay, supported term limits for federal offices, arguing that long-serving officials could become “inattentive to the public good, callous, selfish, and the fountain of corruption.” While focused on legislators, this view extended to executives, reflecting a broader suspicion of entrenched power
 
In y
sturg33 said:
The founders were brilliant but were not perfect. That's why they gave us an amendment system. They knew we would need to change

Also, the key founds supported limits. It wasn't until we elected the socialist wanna be kind FDR where we actually had to write the rule in our law


Key Founders’ Perspectives
George Washington:
Washington set a powerful precedent by voluntarily stepping down after two terms in 1796, citing exhaustion and a desire to avoid perpetuating power. His decision, often credited with establishing the two-term tradition, was less about endorsing formal limits and more about modeling republican virtue. In 1788, he wrote that the Constitution’s checks were sufficient to prevent corruption without term limits, suggesting he saw no need for a formal restriction.
In 1799, when urged to run again, Washington rejected the idea, criticizing the divisiveness of political parties and reinforcing his belief in rotation. His actions influenced later presidents but were not a call for constitutional limits.
Thomas Jefferson:
Jefferson was a strong advocate for the two-term tradition, viewing it as a safeguard against monarchical tendencies. He argued that a president serving beyond two terms risked becoming a "hereditary monarch" and that the people should reject candidates with such ambitions. In his 1821 autobiography, he wrote that a president consenting to a third term should be rejected for showing “ambitious views.”
He also expressed concern about presidents serving into old age, risking ineffective governance, stating that without limits, “the indulgence and attachments of the people will keep a man in the chair after he becomes a dotard.” Jefferson’s refusal to run in 1808, despite public support, reinforced his commitment to rotation.
James Madison:
Madison’s early support for lifetime tenure during the Convention reflected his focus on executive independence. However, as president (1809–1817), he adhered to the two-term tradition, suggesting he accepted the emerging norm of limited tenure. His silence on formal limits later in life indicates he saw the practice as sufficient without constitutional mandate.
John Adams:
Adams, who served one term (1797–1801), did not explicitly advocate for term limits but followed the precedent of not seeking prolonged power. His writings focus more on checks and balances than on specific term restrictions.
Anti-Federalists (e.g., Melancton Smith):
Anti-Federalists like Smith, in a 1788 essay, supported term limits for federal offices, arguing that long-serving officials could become “inattentive to the public good, callous, selfish, and the fountain of corruption.” While focused on legislators, this view extended to executives, reflecting a broader suspicion of entrenched power
Click to expand...
in your post Washington literally says that the separation of powers is enough.
 
Im aware. He also set the precedent to step down. Everyone followed suit except the socialist wannabe king and now apparently the latest socialist wannabe king
 
sturg33 said:
Im aware. He also set the precedent to step down. Everyone followed suit except the socialist wannabe king and now apparently the latest socialist wannabe king
Click to expand...

Well Washington was basically the president of the country for 20+ years.

He probably just didn't have it in him any longer. He paid his dues to the country.
 
thethe said:
Should not be overlooked how nobody can tell Garmel how Trump is breaking the law here.....
Click to expand...

The only thing Trump did wrong was his people accidently sent Garcia to El Salvador.

The SCOTUS didn't say deporting him anywhere else was illegal.

The SCOTUS didn't accuse Trump of any other wrongdoing besides that simple mistake.

As I said it was up to Garcia's lawyers to file a Habeas Corpus which is his only venue under the Alien Sedition Act and they didn't.
 
thethe said:
And you’ll pretend the left will ever do this. So one side has to be principled. Loser mentality.
Click to expand...
Dude you realize this was one of the biggest gripes about Biden./Dems from independent voters right? The Tuition reimbursement crap, the border actions, the Biden election coupe. For a party that talked about protecting our democracy, they constantly took a big shit the constitution and our laws.

It turns out, voters don't like that from any party.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top