Good Thursday morning.
Here is what’s on President Trump’s agenda today:
- President Trump’s schedule is not available.
News roundup:
Trump says Canada has not taken steps necessary to end tariffs
Mayors from ‘sanctuary cities’ grilled during House hearing
Supreme Court rules Trump administration must unfreeze foreign aid payments
Europe’s far-right split on Trump’s Ukraine squeeze
Allergy season is getting longer. Blame climate change
White House says Ukraine weapons and intel pause will lift when Russia talks set
President Trump appoints boy battling cancer as honorary Secret Service agent: ‘Biggest honor of them all’
Conservative justices ‘stunned’ by Supreme Court’s USAID decision, lambaste majority in scathing dissent
Fired NLRB commissioner asks federal judge for reinstatement
Musk’s DOGE terminates lease at Obama Presidential Library site
Internal State Dept memo reveals top brass question if feds should be ‘in the business of philanthropy’
Trump Admin Reportedly Cutting 80,000 Jobs From Veterans Affairs
Lawyers Already Trying To Use Trump’s Address To Congress As ‘New Evidence’ Against DOGE
Trump Admin To Collect Immigrants’ Social Media Handles
Biden Awarded $28 Million to Mysterious ‘Vaccine Company’ Run by His COVID Adviser and Based out of a Maryland PO Box
Chicago Mayor: Sanctuary Policies Make Cities Safer Because ‘Undocumented Immigrants Come Forward To Report Crimes’
And that’s all I’ve got, now go beat back the angry mob!
And he should do something about an over reaching SCOTUS as well.
As previously mentioned it must be understood that the Founders never created three branches of government that gave supremacy for one of the branches over the others. In fact the Court was considered the weakest because it has no power other than advisory.
To be clear it was the Marbury v. Madison Decision that the Court (itself), not the Founders who ratified the Constitution, gave themselves power only intended for a king or a despot. What if the Court, occupied by progressive non constitutional justices, appointed by compromised Presidents, demanded that a President honor a treaty to commit troops in what might be considered just a police action that will ultimately result in the expense of American treasure and blood?
Based upon the folly of ACB and Justice Roberts the Court has no limitations. Does the Court have the power to force the Executive to do what the Executive determines to have been mistakingly authorized by a legislature that was conned into giving weapons to enemy combatants? I see the Court was never used to force the Biden Administration to give Israel the weapons they purchased. The Executive has veto power so that a rouge legislature cannot bankrupt the country. Likewise the President has powers which no legislature can supersede and that goes for the Court as well.
President Jackson once made it clear that the Court has no power to enforce. President Trump can certainly create an Executive order to deal with emergency measures and that includes the robbery of taxpayer money which is exactly the type of situation that requires rapid Executive action. And that action should also include the prevention of an over reaching Court from obstructing what is none of the Court’s business based on the Sepeartion of Powers Doctrine and Original Intent.
Here’s why I was not disturbed by Roberts and ACB siding with the liberals-----it did not really undermine Presidential authority and it still left Trump fully open to do the work he set out for DOGE. The SCOTUS decision only affected releasing fund for work already done. It is merely a decision based on contract law. Any money set aside for unfinished or even unstarted projects are still subject to claw-backs.
I’m pretty sure you heard of the admission by the Administration that little of what DOGE has uncovered as waste and fraud will be corrected (and clawed back) this fiscal year. What it is intended to do is be reflected in next year’s budget. DOGE is revealing the grift and graft, Trump expects Congress to fix it for the future.
I suppose Trump can defy SCOTUS and refuse to pay, but to do so would totally undermine the support of a Supreme Court that is ready and willing to give him back his Article II authority in spades.
I understand Alito’s and Thomas’s anger, but momentary anger should not impede the end game.
Edited: I was sitting here giving thought to the current situation and this popped into my mind----
A young bull and an old bull were standing on a hilltop watching a herd of heifers. The young bull remarks, “Hey, let’s run down there and grab us a couple of heifers”. The old bull looks at him and says, “No son. Let’s walk down there and grab them all.”
I saw the contract aspect of it right off. I have been dealing with the philosophical and original intent aspects for a long time. My point is that Judges can uphold a contract or determine the validity but that power does not sway into the Executive Branch anymore than the belief (concept) that we are all treated equally under the same American law and includes the President. The President is exempt from much of the law that affects the rest of us just as a foreign ambassador is. He is subject only to Impeachment and Removal based on the Constitution that created the very Executive Branch which he occupies which requires but one individual to function.
The SCOTUS was created to deal with contracts and the lesser courts were created by the legislature to pick up the bulk of the work becuse one court cannot deal with millions of cases. But the SCOTUS has only an advisory role when dealing with the Legislature and Executive. Now people are free to disagree but my opinion was once universal and shared by the very people who created the document whose firewalls are breached every day.
You brought me a smile. Thanks.
I have faith Task. I’ll lend you a bit to tide you over.