Jump to content
squistion

L.A. & Nationwide ICE raids/protests - NYC Comptroller arrested visiting immigration court

Recommended Posts

Just now, Ron_Artest said:

BACKPEDAL

 

On 2/6/2025 at 12:50 PM, The Girlfriend said:

Under the United States Constitution and the principles of separation of powers, the President does not have unilateral authority to dismantle or cut funding to USAID (the U.S. Agency for International Development). Here are the key reasons:

1. Congressional Power of the Purse:

The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the exclusive authority to appropriate federal funds. This means that decisions about the budget and funding for federal agencies like USAID must be made by Congress through the appropriations process. The President can propose a budget or suggest changes, but only Congress can authorize and allocate the money.

2. Separation of Powers:

The U.S. government is divided into three branches: the legislative, the executive, and the judicial. This system is designed to prevent any one branch from accumulating too much power. While the President heads the executive branch and can influence policy and administration, he cannot unilaterally change the structure or funding of federal agencies because that power resides with the legislative branch (Congress).

3. Agency Independence and Statutory Authority:

USAID was established by law and its mission and structure are defined by statutes. Any significant changes to its mandate, organization, or funding levels would require legislative action to amend these laws. The President cannot unilaterally alter these statutory provisions.

4. Checks and Balances:

The system of checks and balances ensures that any attempt by the executive branch to make sweeping changes without congressional approval can be challenged in court. If the President were to try to dismantle or cut funding to USAID without going through the proper legislative channels, such actions would likely face legal challenges and could be reversed by the courts.

 

In summary, while the President can influence policy and suggest changes, the power to dismantle or defund a federal agency like USAID lies with Congress, as part of the constitutional checks and balances designed to prevent any branch of government from acting unilaterally on issues of national funding and organizational structure.

 

Here's one of gutterboy's 1000 aliases copying a complex legal opinion straight from chatgpt.  Happy now?

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, nobody said:

 

Here's one of gutterboy's 1000 aliases copying a complex legal opinion straight from chatgpt.  Happy now?

That's not me dummy.  Wrong again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Karen Bass lived in Cuba for a period and took numerous trips,  north of a dozen times, because she’s not a communist. She just likes old Chevys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, squistion said:

 

They should use horses and nets when chasing them down like that. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The President has the power to do what it takes to keep the country from going to Hell.”  

~President Harry Truman.

:doublethumbsup:

Thank goodness Donald J Trump was protected by the hand of God

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump: if I didn't send the guard and Marines the city would be burned to the ground.

LAPD chief: that's BS.

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Strike said:

He gets specifics wrong all the time, and not just about time.  And I'm not knocking him for it.  It is a fair criticism but at the end of the day I care about policy and not whether he called someone on Saturday or Monday.

When you have the big picture to worry about, you dont get bogged down in minutiae. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The national guard is not getting paid, doesn't have health insurance, because the WH is incompetent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ron_Artest said:

The national guard is not getting paid, doesn't have health insurance, because the WH is incompetent.

Not to mention sleeping on the ground since the state of California was given no advance notice of their activation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, squistion said:

Not to mention sleeping on the ground since the state of California was given no advance notice of their activation. 

Soldiers sleeping on the ground? Surely that has to be against the Geneva conventions? Or it must violate their contract? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ron_Artest said:

Don't be a nobody.  Educate yourself. Get the facts, multiple sources, make your own opinion.  Don't wallow in ignorance and stupidity.  Better yourself and others.

You’ve never had an opinion different from the msdnc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Soldiers sleeping on the ground? Surely that has to be against the Geneva conventions? Or it must violate their contract? 

FFS, sleeping on the ground is the first thing they teach you in boot camp.  It's always funny watch cowards who have never served opine on what a serviceman has to do.  :lol:

I'll take sleeping on the ground in sunny CA than Fort McCoy, WI in the middle of January.  Yeah, that happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

FFS, sleeping on the ground is the first thing they teach you in boot camp.  It's always funny watch cowards who have never served opine on what a serviceman has to do.  :lol:

I'll take sleeping on the ground in sunny CA than Fort McCoy, WI in the middle of January.  Yeah, that happened.

Ah Fort McCoy. The second leg of my cold weather training. And the coldest. Huge brawl at the E club.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ron_Artest said:

That's not me dummy.  Wrong again.

BS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, nobody said:

BS

Your lunatic conspiracy theories are out of control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I said I agree with it and stated why. You must really be confused that the Marines weren’t sent into Florida or else you would have said why not.  

I know damn well why the marines weren't sent to Florida, not that it matters. That you support it just reinforces that you're a partisan hack that is fully on board with Trump doing whatever he wants cuz "own the libs!" is the most important policy goal. He won't send Marines into a red state, period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 NYPD vehicles torched in Brooklyn. Must be maga again. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fnord said:

I know damn well why the marines weren't sent to Florida, not that it matters. That you support it just reinforces that you're a partisan hack that is fully on board with Trump doing whatever he wants cuz "own the libs!" is the most important policy goal. He won't send Marines into a red state, period.

Why not NY or Massachusetts? ICE has been doing enforcement there as well. They aren’t red states. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, squistion said:

 

 

I'm pretty sure people are allowed to dance, Kevin Bacon set us free. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

 

I'm pretty sure people are allowed to dance, Kevin Bacon set us free. 

Nobody puts Baby in the corner 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, squistion said:

 

Those people are great dancers. Where do they get it from? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

8 NYPD vehicles torched in Brooklyn. Must be maga again. 

Yeah, we have a far-right problem in the US.  Haven't you heard from the MSM and Democrats?  No lie.  They told us so it must be true.  Don't believe you're lying eyes.  :lol:  :doh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BarneyFife said:

The only good liberal is a dead liberal. 

Switch liberal for conservative and Libs of Tik Tok would be sending this post to the FBI

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

California national guards troops and marines deployed to Los Angeles to help restore order after days of protest against the Trump administration have told friends and family members they are deeply unhappy about the assignment and worry their only meaningful role will be as pawns in a political battle they do not want to join.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/12/los-angeles-national-guard-troops-marines-morale

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Why not NY or Massachusetts? ICE has been doing enforcement there as well. They aren’t red states. 

Trump does not have a personal beef with the governors of those states, yet. If Cuomo wins, that may change. If rioting breaks out in Minneapolis, he'll do it there, too.

Let's face it, marines patrolling in South Boston or Cedar-Riverside doesn't have nearly the same visual impact as it does in LA, the poster city for liberalism, the throne of the entertainment industry, surrounded by all those black and brown folks, taking on that socialist POS Newscum. He's going for bang for the buck (can't blame him) and attacking the largest, bluest bastion of Democratic rule in the country, in the city that he sees as defining the "liberal scourge." Of course, citizens there are helping him immensely by burning and looting and generally being morons, but LAPD had this thing under "control" in their own proud tradition.

I'll say this: the police forces in many of these liberal cities have piss-poor histories of being brutal, racist scumbags. What city were you a cop in?🤔

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Trump does not have a personal beef with the governors of those states, yet. If Cuomo wins, that may change. If rioting breaks out in Minneapolis, he'll do it there, too.

Let's face it, marines patrolling in South Boston or Cedar-Riverside doesn't have nearly the same visual impact as it does in LA, the poster city for liberalism, the throne of the entertainment industry, surrounded by all those black and brown folks, taking on that socialist POS Newscum. He's going for bang for the buck (can't blame him) and attacking the largest, bluest bastion of Democratic rule in the country, in the city that he sees as defining the "liberal scourge." Of course, citizens there are helping him immensely by burning and looting and generally being morons, but LAPD had this thing under "control" in their own proud tradition.

I'll say this: the police forces in many of these liberal cities have piss-poor histories of being brutal, racist scumbags. What city were you a cop in?🤔

 

Oh ok. It’s not about it being a blue state, it’s about a personal beef. And a possible future one. You make a lot of sense.  The rest of that post is some effeminate in whaling about the meanies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile in Florida: ☹️

DeSantis: Drivers Can Hit Protesters if Threatened
 
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has clarified that drivers in Florida are legally allowed to flee for their safety if they are surrounded by a mob while driving. This policy includes the right to drive off even if it means accidentally hitting someone blocking their path, emphasizing self-defense in situations where a driver feels threatened. This statement has sparked a debate on the balance between public safety and the right to protest.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, squistion said:

Meanwhile in Florida: ☹️

DeSantis: Drivers Can Hit Protesters if Threatened
 
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has clarified that drivers in Florida are legally allowed to flee for their safety if they are surrounded by a mob while driving. This policy includes the right to drive off even if it means accidentally hitting someone blocking their path, emphasizing self-defense in situations where a driver feels threatened. This statement has sparked a debate on the balance between public safety and the right to protest.

 

Excellent policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, squistion said:

Meanwhile in Florida: ☹️

DeSantis: Drivers Can Hit Protesters if Threatened
 
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has clarified that drivers in Florida are legally allowed to flee for their safety if they are surrounded by a mob while driving. This policy includes the right to drive off even if it means accidentally hitting someone blocking their path, emphasizing self-defense in situations where a driver feels threatened. This statement has sparked a debate on the balance between public safety and the right to protest.

 

👍 love my governor 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Conspiracy to Commit Civil Disorders? 🤔

Didn't know there was such a crime.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, listen2me 23 said:

Anyone see the woman(?) wearing goggles and a vest yelling that this land was mexicos?  Lol.  Classic.  

Looks like a Mexican It’s Pat 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My favorite videos are the ones where the peaceful protesters went after the law enforcement horses. 

That's sure to be good for the cause. Let's go after the animals. 

Also, the white couple that went off on an AA woman with a child in her car, asked the peaceful white people to move so she could go to work. That was another of my favorite videos. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, shadrap said:

Excellent policy.

Blocking off roads intentionally during protests should always result in some kind of charges. I think mowing people down with a vehicle may be a bit harsh, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Fnord said:

Blocking off roads intentionally during protests should always result in some kind of charges. I think mowing people down with a vehicle may be a bit harsh, though.

Well, that's the rub. If we as regular citizens can't do anything then, once again, we're at the mercy of the criminals doing this stuff. I would think that maybe if a few of those people get run over it might persuade them in the future to stay on the sidewalk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×