Because it's so funny, but in a stupid kind of way.
Elon Musk dismantles USAID
- Thread starter stinkynuts
- Start date
She sounds retarded. The MAGA brain rot is strong with this one.
If you believe that, then why did you post a clip where he supports their right to protest his own policy?
Some will.
I suspect they won't be as big as last year because of the different political environment.
He declared 'destroying property is not peaceful protest' as justification for crackdowns.
You really think that was a speech that said student protesters were protected while they protested?
You're smarter than that.
And you haven't seen the crackdown on free speech in faculty and students over Palestine as laying the ground towards stifling debate and protests?
Here more proof for you all leftie on this board who is in denial !!!
"Destroying property is not peaceful protest" is the basic view of the USA.
Please point to a single instance of a President saying otherwise.
Of course it is.
I've told you repeatedly that there is a vicious backlash against campus protest.
You're the one who seems to think it was ordered by Biden.
Totally agree.
Remember Twitter provides nothing but entertainment. USAid has tons of contracts, health campaigns, actual actions.
Musk has no constitutional authority. Only congress can shut down the program. The president does not have the statutory power to disobey congressional mandates. Congress has the power of the purse. BTW, if elon wanted waste fraud and abuse he'd hired accountants not computer hackers. Now he has stolen the most vital information from Americans.
If he wants to publicly name new CIA hires (enjoy that Vladimir! A gift to you and our Chinese friends) then these hackers need to be publicly accountable. After all, the US taxpayer ultimately funds this.
Last edited:
'Possibility of imprisoning someone': Judge outlines what could happen if Trump does not comply
There are possibilities for recourse if President Donald Trump refuses to comply with a court order, a retired federal judge told NPR on Tuesday. This analysis comes after a judge in Rhode Island found Monday that the Trump administration violated a court order demanding that the president restore federal grant funding.
Nancy Gertner, a retired federal judge who was appointed by President Bill Clinton, explained potential options to NPR’s Leila Fadel. Gertner has also consulted on several lawsuits filed against the Trump administration.
Gertner said it was not normal for someone to violate a judge’s order.
“It's unusual that someone will have violated the rule that he just — the order — that he just put in place almost the week before,” she said. “I mean, that's certainly unusual, unusual to call out a party that is not paying attention, that is not following the rules that he's laid out, that is unusual. Doesn’t happen all the time”
Fadel asked what could happen if a president ignores court rulings.
“Well, the court, a judge, has tools available to him or her,” Gertner said. “In the first instance, they can cite the parties in front of them for contempt. They can impose fines, of course. Since one of the parties arguably here is Elon Musk, it's not clear that fines are going to make a particle of difference. There's even the possibility of imprisoning someone until the order is followed.”
But these options aren’t necessarily viable.
“All of these are obviously empty threats with respect to the defendants," she said. "In this case, the marshals would have to enforce whatever orders the judge entered. The problem is that the Marshals Service is under the Department of Justice, and if Trump wanted to fully not comply, he could direct the Department of Justice not to comply.”
“At that point,” Gertner said, “you have a full on constitutional crisis. You have one branch of the government ignoring the legitimate comments, the legitimate orders, rather, of another branch.”
Gertner argued that Trump’s actions around this court case show he is in the midst of a power grab. “Let me also say the other thing available to Trump, because he doesn't agree with the judge, is to appeal, and so to some degree, hastening a constitutional crisis says something about what he's trying to do, which is more about showing his power than it is about following the law.”
“The question is whether or not Trump is exercising power in a legitimate way,” Gertner said of the number of lawsuits being brought against Trump.
“These cases are essentially saying there's nothing remotely legitimate about what the president is doing under these circumstances," she said. "I can't emphasize enough how difficult it is for a judge to enter a temporary restraining order, which is the case. In these cases, you have to find the likelihood of success on the merits, and you have to find irreparable harm, and the bar is high. It says something about how far Trump has gone from what the legitimate lawmaking function is in these cases that judges are doing this."
There are possibilities for recourse if President Donald Trump refuses to comply with a court order, a retired federal judge told NPR on Tuesday. This analysis comes after a judge in Rhode Island found Monday that the Trump administration violated a court order demanding that the president restore federal grant funding.
Nancy Gertner, a retired federal judge who was appointed by President Bill Clinton, explained potential options to NPR’s Leila Fadel. Gertner has also consulted on several lawsuits filed against the Trump administration.
Gertner said it was not normal for someone to violate a judge’s order.
“It's unusual that someone will have violated the rule that he just — the order — that he just put in place almost the week before,” she said. “I mean, that's certainly unusual, unusual to call out a party that is not paying attention, that is not following the rules that he's laid out, that is unusual. Doesn’t happen all the time”
Fadel asked what could happen if a president ignores court rulings.
“Well, the court, a judge, has tools available to him or her,” Gertner said. “In the first instance, they can cite the parties in front of them for contempt. They can impose fines, of course. Since one of the parties arguably here is Elon Musk, it's not clear that fines are going to make a particle of difference. There's even the possibility of imprisoning someone until the order is followed.”
But these options aren’t necessarily viable.
“All of these are obviously empty threats with respect to the defendants," she said. "In this case, the marshals would have to enforce whatever orders the judge entered. The problem is that the Marshals Service is under the Department of Justice, and if Trump wanted to fully not comply, he could direct the Department of Justice not to comply.”
“At that point,” Gertner said, “you have a full on constitutional crisis. You have one branch of the government ignoring the legitimate comments, the legitimate orders, rather, of another branch.”
Gertner argued that Trump’s actions around this court case show he is in the midst of a power grab. “Let me also say the other thing available to Trump, because he doesn't agree with the judge, is to appeal, and so to some degree, hastening a constitutional crisis says something about what he's trying to do, which is more about showing his power than it is about following the law.”
“The question is whether or not Trump is exercising power in a legitimate way,” Gertner said of the number of lawsuits being brought against Trump.
“These cases are essentially saying there's nothing remotely legitimate about what the president is doing under these circumstances," she said. "I can't emphasize enough how difficult it is for a judge to enter a temporary restraining order, which is the case. In these cases, you have to find the likelihood of success on the merits, and you have to find irreparable harm, and the bar is high. It says something about how far Trump has gone from what the legitimate lawmaking function is in these cases that judges are doing this."
Debating US policies is not nearly as protest worthy as protesting to demonize Israel/Jews is. No Jews=no news.
But what if the DoJ, headed by attorney general Bondi refuses to prosecute the case. If anything Judge Gertner may be the one going to jail.
You can't put a judge in jail for making a ruling.
There's a constitutional norm that the executive obeys a judicial ruling. That norm could have been broken any time in the last 250 years. It wasn't. US kids are raised on how brave Justice Marshall first slapped down an over-reaching president in 1788. To simply toss that means the US is no better than Peron's Argentina or Orban's Hungary. A lawless, stupid corrupt kleptocracy of dumb.
It will basically cause a constitutional crisis and destroy the USA. The Blue states will say "fuck it!" and refuse to cooperate any more. Some federal departments will cooperate, some won't.
And in 2 years time, Trump will either badly lose both Houses and be impeached, or refuse to hold mid term elections. And if he refuses to hold mid terms, then every Blue state and swing state is going to refuse to recognize the Federal government.
It's a weird result. One would have thought that the US would collapse and die over some great war of principle or ideology, rather than the inflated ego of a dementia-suffering senior with a bad hair weave.
Sure, but whether you use that as justification for police crackdowns is different.
There were no police crackdowns the same way on climate protests or BLM.
What BIden did was to articulate that if you declare there is property damage you can bring in the police.
Are you really going to argue that country's response to Palestine protests was the same as to climate protests?
Universities and students have seen a year and bit of heavy censorship and removing people who protest.
Do you really think they are energized to protest more or wary of how much it cost them during a 'moderate' government?
Of course not ordered, but encouraged is a fair comment.
The ground has been laid to quell student protest.
Just when the country needs it.
The courts won't stop trump, project 2025 or Musk at this point.
Now all science and health care will be filtered through the brain worm or Musk. Fire all scientists and Musk will be left using Tesla as the sanctioned source for science.
She funneled nothing. It was approved by congress. She did her job. She doesn't have the authority to stop payments except for cause.
Again, the whole discussion involves people talking about shit they don't understand. Actually, given the amount of bs doge is pushing into the blog o sphere, it's clearly deliberate to confuse as they in essence perform a coup.
Your elected representatives mean nothing. Only the president counts. Not the courts either. That, my friends, is dictatorship.
