B Happy...Go Surf!!!

2nd Light Forums
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Trump not a fan of the law.
Topic Summary: Which also makes him no fan judges too.
Created On: 03/18/2025 12:11 PM
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - johnnyboy - 03/18/2025 12:11 PM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - Cole - 03/18/2025 12:17 PM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - tpapablo - 03/18/2025 12:45 PM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - fishkller - 03/18/2025 12:55 PM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - crankit - 03/19/2025 06:41 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - tpapablo - 03/19/2025 08:12 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - johnnyboy - 03/20/2025 05:09 PM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - Cole - 03/21/2025 06:29 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - Cole - 03/19/2025 09:25 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - tpapablo - 03/19/2025 11:01 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - Cole - 03/20/2025 03:59 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - Pagerow - 03/20/2025 07:17 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - RustyTruck - 03/21/2025 07:32 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - tpapablo - 03/21/2025 07:55 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - Cole - 03/21/2025 07:58 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - tpapablo - 03/21/2025 08:29 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - Cole - 03/22/2025 05:34 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - RustyTruck - 03/21/2025 09:05 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - RustyTruck - 03/19/2025 09:02 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - fishkller - 03/19/2025 02:40 PM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - gdudewe - 03/19/2025 04:27 PM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - johnnyboy - 03/20/2025 05:12 PM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - fishkller - 03/20/2025 02:17 PM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - 3rdworldlover - 03/21/2025 06:53 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - tpapablo - 03/21/2025 07:04 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - Cole - 03/21/2025 07:17 AM  
 Trump not a fan of the law.   - johnnyboy - 03/24/2025 12:07 PM  
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 03/18/2025 12:11 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


johnnyboy

Posts: 28396
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Trump's call to remove judges from the bench came after his allies amplified attacks on U.S. District Judge James Boasberg, following an order the judge issued Saturday instructing the administration to turn around aircraft deporting alleged gang members to Venezuela. The planes continued to their destinations, but the administration has insisted it did not defy the judge's directive.

"This judge, like many of the Crooked Judges' I am forced to appear before, should be IMPEACHED!!!" Trump wrote in a Truth Social post Tuesday.

Now Chief Justice Roberts is starting to get the picture, albeit far too late to prevent Trump and Musk from stopping their all out assault on the rule of law, separation of powers, due process and impeachment process.

Trump and Musk have demanded that this "crooked Judge" be impeached. Musk's typical threat to primary a congress member is not going to work because federal judges are appointed for life. Roberts, who fed these dragons and gave Trump immunity, is now defending this Judge and all judges but its a bit late for this and it will have no effect.

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

 03/18/2025 12:17 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 74225
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

If the SCOTUS thinks they are safe, they are sadly mistaken. The only cure for this spreading disease is the impeachment of the Commander in Chief.

-------------------------
I was right.
 03/18/2025 12:45 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tpapablo

Posts: 46744
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

Sounds like they are exercising free speech to me. But, then, progs are against that, aren't they? Truth be known, I have had some harsh words about some judges in my time. In any case, this idiotic decision will be appealed and overturned. The judge will not be impeached and everyone knows it.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q
 03/18/2025 12:55 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


fishkller

Posts: 25892
Joined Forum: 11/13/2016


Tclown believe the same thing about

Project 2025

Grocery Prices

Ukraine War



...ssssssSteaks'd!




-------------------------


We have certain things in common Jeffrey..
 03/19/2025 06:41 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


crankit

Posts: 17964
Joined Forum: 07/30/2003

Sounds like the libtard "judges" are pro crime, illegal immigration, Hamas and other left causes, not pro-USA and the rule of law!

-------------------------
Romans 8;18-32 John 3;16-18; Ecl. 10-2 (Moderated)
 03/19/2025 08:12 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tpapablo

Posts: 46744
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

Originally posted by: crankit Sounds like the libtard "judges" are pro crime, illegal immigration, Hamas and other left causes, not pro-USA and the rule of law!
They are prog idiots, so yes they are pro-crime, pro-terrorist. and pro immigration. They are tough on crime only when it involves conservative Americans.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q
 03/20/2025 05:09 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


johnnyboy

Posts: 28396
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

This is the part where Tpap, a lawyer, explains how our constitutional framework dictates how an appellate process works to question judges legal mistakes. Impeachment for decisions someone doesnt like would mean literally half of all decisions would subject the judge to an impeachment process requiring 2/3 of the senate, who is occasionally busy with running the country, depending on which party is in the majority. An appeal is made citing the mistake, the issue is briefed by both sides and the appellate court decides and writes their legal opinion. Of thst doesn't work, the case can be appealed to the Supreme Court, who has to accept the case from the thousands out there. It's a process centuries old and replicated in each state with state law.

This democratic, constitutional process was fine for centuries until Trump's DOJ lawyers defied a federal judge and the Court's order? Why? Good luck having Tpap explain this. But let's be clear, federal judges are appointed, or as the joke goes, anointed for life. They can only be removed with a 2/3 vote of the senate. Very rare. And remember, once Trump and his fellow dipshits target this judge and make these insulting directives and corruption allegations, that same judge will remain on their case. That judge will remember that. So will the all the other judges in the courthouse that think this move a threat to the process and their very comfortable jobs.

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

 03/21/2025 06:29 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 74225
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Originally posted by: johnnyboy

This is the part where Tpap, a lawyer, explains how our constitutional framework dictates how an appellate process works to question judges legal mistakes. Impeachment for decisions someone doesnt like would mean literally half of all decisions would subject the judge to an impeachment process requiring 2/3 of the senate, who is occasionally busy with running the country, depending on which party is in the majority. An appeal is made citing the mistake, the issue is briefed by both sides and the appellate court decides and writes their legal opinion. Of thst doesn't work, the case can be appealed to the Supreme Court, who has to accept the case from the thousands out there. It's a process centuries old and replicated in each state with state law.



This democratic, constitutional process was fine for centuries until Trump's DOJ lawyers defied a federal judge and the Court's order? Why? Good luck having Tpap explain this. But let's be clear, federal judges are appointed, or as the joke goes, anointed for life. They can only be removed with a 2/3 vote of the senate. Very rare. And remember, once Trump and his fellow dipshits target this judge and make these insulting directives and corruption allegations, that same judge will remain on their case. That judge will remember that. So will the all the other judges in the courthouse that think this move a threat to the process and their very comfortable jobs.


Well said. The more enemies in high places Trump creates, the better, as far as I'm concerned.



-------------------------
I was right.
 03/19/2025 09:25 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 74225
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Originally posted by: crankit

Sounds like the libtard "judges" are pro crime, illegal immigration, Hamas and other left causes, not pro-USA and the rule of law!


How so? Can you give some examples?

You have no idea what you are talking about, now do you? lol


-------------------------
I was right.
 03/19/2025 11:01 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tpapablo

Posts: 46744
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

"For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose."
That changed when progs called for the impeachment of conservative justices. I've often said, if you idiots do something, then so shall we. Reap the whirlwind, progs. Where were you then, Rusty?

-------------------------
I :heart; Q
 03/20/2025 03:59 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 74225
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Originally posted by: tpapablo

"For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose."


That changed when progs called for the impeachment of conservative justices. I've often said, if you idiots do something, then so shall we. Reap the whirlwind, progs.

Where were you then, Rusty?


They are taking bribes. Their decisions are tainted. If the ones Trump wants to impeach are taking bribes, I agree with him.



-------------------------
I was right.
 03/20/2025 07:17 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Pagerow

Posts: 6510
Joined Forum: 12/22/2005

t-poop-for-brains doesn't understand the difference between

Taking bribes (i.e. conflicts of interest) and Judicial decisions

Wrongz again!

-------------------------
The GOP are now:

Guardians
Of
Pedophiles
 03/21/2025 07:32 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


RustyTruck

Posts: 35291
Joined Forum: 08/02/2004

Originally posted by: tpapablo

"For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose."


That changed when progs called for the impeachment of conservative justices. I've often said, if you idiots do something, then so shall we. Reap the whirlwind, progs.

Where were you then, Rusty?


I'm right there with AOC and most clear thinking people. Clarence Thomas is and has been accepting brides for his judicial opinions for quite some time and he should be removed from the bench for corruption.

That's a far different thing than a despot calling for the removal of a justice who delivers an unfavorable ruling.

Do you still have the receipts for your law school education? You might be able to get some money back.

-------------------------
"Are you a Communist?"
"No I am an anti-fascist."
"For a long time?"
"Since I have understood fascism."

-Protagonist Robert Jordan, "For Whom the Bell Tolls" (Hemmingway)
 03/21/2025 07:55 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tpapablo

Posts: 46744
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

You just made a bigger fool out of yourself than I already did. You think these progs aren't wanting to impeach the conservative justices because of their opinions? A dumber thing has never been spoken. You, sir, need to get back the money spent on your elementary school education.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q
 03/21/2025 07:58 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 74225
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Are they looking to Impeach all Conservative justices?

Can you link in the impeachments for Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett?

-------------------------
I was right.

Edited: 03/21/2025 at 08:02 AM by Cole
 03/21/2025 08:29 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tpapablo

Posts: 46744
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

Originally posted by: Cole Are they looking to Impeach all Conservative justices? Can you link in the impeachments for Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett?
Of course they are. They are progs. They have also voted to remove security protection for the Justices and have expressed their desire to pack the court. No on the links, Cole. I shan't do your bidding. I am quite content to let you remain ignorant.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q
 03/22/2025 05:34 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 74225
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Originally posted by: tpapablo

Originally posted by: Cole

Are they looking to Impeach all Conservative justices?



Can you link in the impeachments for Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett?


Of course they are. They are progs. They have also voted to remove security protection for the Justices and have expressed their desire to pack the court. No on the links, Cole. I shan't do your bidding. I am quite content to let you remain ignorant.


Expressed their desire. Give me a break. Just more meaninglessness drivel.

Once again you have been shown to be clueless. Lies are your only hope.





-------------------------
I was right.
 03/21/2025 09:05 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


RustyTruck

Posts: 35291
Joined Forum: 08/02/2004

Originally posted by: Cole

Are they looking to Impeach all Conservative justices?



Can you link in the impeachments for Roberts, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett?



He's projecting, as usual.

-------------------------
"Are you a Communist?"
"No I am an anti-fascist."
"For a long time?"
"Since I have understood fascism."

-Protagonist Robert Jordan, "For Whom the Bell Tolls" (Hemmingway)
 03/19/2025 09:02 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


RustyTruck

Posts: 35291
Joined Forum: 08/02/2004

"For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose."

Pugs keep wiping their dirty bums with the Constitution while they whine about "law and order".



-------------------------
"Are you a Communist?"
"No I am an anti-fascist."
"For a long time?"
"Since I have understood fascism."

-Protagonist Robert Jordan, "For Whom the Bell Tolls" (Hemmingway)
 03/19/2025 02:40 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


fishkller

Posts: 25892
Joined Forum: 11/13/2016


Nah Tdork

it changed when Thomas and Alito sold out America by accepting bribes.

next...



-------------------------


We have certain things in common Jeffrey..


Edited: 03/19/2025 at 06:10 PM by fishkller
 03/19/2025 04:27 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


gdudewe

Posts: 5397
Joined Forum: 11/09/2011

Trumpolov is a Felon, felons don't like laws.

-------------------------
It was fun while it lasted.
 03/20/2025 05:12 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


johnnyboy

Posts: 28396
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Double

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.



Edited: 03/20/2025 at 05:13 PM by johnnyboy
 03/20/2025 02:17 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


fishkller

Posts: 25892
Joined Forum: 11/13/2016


Sometines I think his "law degree" came out of a backcountry moonshine still

-------------------------


We have certain things in common Jeffrey..
 03/21/2025 06:53 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


3rdworldlover

Posts: 23639
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

"No collision"
"No Project 2025"
 03/21/2025 07:04 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tpapablo

Posts: 46744
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

This is the part where Tpap, a lawyer, explains how our constitutional framework dictates how an appellate process works to question judges legal mistakes. Impeachment for decisions someone doesnt like would mean literally half of all decisions would subject the judge to an impeachment process requiring 2/3 of the senate, who is occasionally busy with running the country, depending on which party is in the majority. An appeal is made citing the mistake, the issue is briefed by both sides and the appellate court decides and writes their legal opinion. Of thst doesn't work, the case can be appealed to the Supreme Court, who has to accept the case from the thousands out there. It's a process centuries old and replicated in each state with state law.
No, I am not a prog and feel no compulsion to lie. Instead, I would tell the truth, which is that the appellate process is not mentioned in the Constitution, but impeachment is.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q
 03/21/2025 07:17 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 74225
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Originally posted by: tpapablo

This is the part where Tpap, a lawyer, explains how our constitutional framework dictates how an appellate process works to question judges legal mistakes. Impeachment for decisions someone doesnt like would mean literally half of all decisions would subject the judge to an impeachment process requiring 2/3 of the senate, who is occasionally busy with running the country, depending on which party is in the majority. An appeal is made citing the mistake, the issue is briefed by both sides and the appellate court decides and writes their legal opinion. Of thst doesn't work, the case can be appealed to the Supreme Court, who has to accept the case from the thousands out there. It's a process centuries old and replicated in each state with state law.


No, I am not a prog and feel no compulsion to lie. Instead, I would tell the truth, which is that the appellate process is not mentioned in the Constitution, but impeachment is.


Are speed limit laws in the Constitution? How about bank robbery? Insider trading perhaps? Divorce law? No? So what's your point? Established law, is established law.



-------------------------
I was right.

Edited: 03/21/2025 at 07:18 AM by Cole
 03/24/2025 12:07 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


johnnyboy

Posts: 28396
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Is presidential immunity listed in the constitution? No? And yet you argued for it and defended it many times. It seems your originalist position is yet another double standard that's not really following a rule but a political determination aimed at self interest.

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

Statistics
146590 users are registered to the 2nd Light Forums forum.
There are currently 0 users logged in to the forum.

FuseTalk Basic Edition - © 1999-2025 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.

First there was Air Jordan .