41 thoughts on “News/Politics 5-31-25”

  8. On Vance and US constitutional government.

    Via Kimberley Strassel

    Vance Courts Trouble for Trump: He takes on Chief Justice John Roberts. — That’s unhelpful to the administration.

    ~ If the British coined the term “too clever by half,” Vice President JD Vance might own the political update of “too smart by 99%.” And Donald Trump might wonder at what point he asks his veep: Please stop helping—at least when it comes to Mr. Trump’s greatest legacy and biggest asset, the U.S. Supreme Court.

    Mr. Vance recently offered his own take on the “role” of that body, in particular Chief Justice John Roberts’s “profoundly wrong sentiment” that the judiciary exists to “check the excesses of the executive.” The vice president finger-wagged that this was “one-half” of the job; the “other half” was to stop a “small but substantial number” of courts from telling “the American people they’re not allowed to have what they voted for,” namely “immigration enforcement.” Also, to be “extremely deferential” to the “political judgment” made by “the people’s elected president of the United States.”

    Mr. Vance did at least preface his comments with a warning that they may prove “inflammatory”—before inflaming away.

    Students of law—or of, well, grade school—no doubt quickly picked up on the first problem. The foundation of the U.S. system is the constitutional separation of powers, checks and balances. Congress has the purse. The executive has the sword. The judiciary’s power is to settle “all Cases” and “Controversies” “arising” under the Constitution and other laws. Far from being “profoundly wrong,” Chief Justice Roberts’s sentiment was profoundly basic. To have a court that jumps to the will of a president or a changeable voting majority is to have . . . Venezuela. Mr. Vance, a Yale Law School graduate, surely would have disapproved of the court’s rubber-stamping Joe Biden’s student-loan forgiveness or vaccine mandates—even though Mr. Biden won an election. … ~

    https://www.wsj.com/opinion/vance-courts-trouble-for-trump-law-legal-system-policy-341d958b?st=WaCG7H&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

    • dj

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  9. Trying not to be overly political or argumentative here, but this is rather curious to me as this goes after the source who helped craft Trump’s picks on the Supreme Court, after all, taking on the Federalist Society … (From Politico):

    ~ Trump goes after Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society in fury over court ruling

    Trump’s attack came after the U.S. Court of International Trade struck down his tariffs, a blow to the primary pillar of his economic agenda.

    President Donald Trump leveled unusually pointed criticism of a prominent conservative legal activist and organization Thursday as he railed against a ruling that struck down his sweeping tariffs.

    The president, in a post on his social media platform, slammed Leonard Leo, the former chair of the Federalist Society, calling him a “sleazebag” who “probably hates America.”

    “He openly brags how he controls Judges, and even Justices of the United States Supreme Court — I hope that is not so, and don’t believe it is!,” Trump wrote.

    Trump’s attack came after the U.S. Court of International Trade on Wednesday struck down his tariffs, a massive blow to the primary pillar of the administration’s economic agenda. The ruling was temporarily stayed by an appellate court on Thursday. One of the judges on the three-person panel that blocked the tariffs is Timothy Reif, who was appointed by Trump in his first term.

    The blame, Trump said, lay with the Federalist Society.

    “I am so disappointed in The Federalist Society because of the bad advice they gave me on numerous Judicial Nominations,” he wrote. “This is something that cannot be forgotten!”

    Leo, in a brief statement in response, did not criticize the president. … ~

    https://www.politico.com/news/2025/05/29/trump-goes-after-leonard-leo-and-the-federalist-society-in-fury-over-court-ruling-00375813

    • dj

    Like

    Reply

  10. So no comment on the incoming price increases from the Trump tariffs you and the WSJ predicted that didnt materialize?

    Just ignoring that are we?

    Denial, it’s not just a river in Eygpt.

    Like

    Reply

  12. And Roberts has turned out to be a total fraud, not at all what the Federalist said he was. But when you’re pals with out of control judges like Boasberg, it’s not surprising at all.

    https://x.com/TonySeruga/status/1908561377683530019?t=tzCyg2sB3OQchEYUauy-sA&s=19

    “Chief Justice Roberts’ Secret Friendship with Trump Prosecutor Ally Norm Eisen Exposed 🚨

    Roberts didn’t just bump into Eisen at a D.C. cocktail party. No, these two are apparently such “good pals” that Roberts jetted off to the Czech Republic for a week-long sleepover at Eisen’s lavish 150-room palace.

    It’s straight from the mouth of Norm Eisen himself—the very same man who practically wrote the Deep State’s instruction manual on how to destabilize political opponents via color revolutions, lawfare, and weaponized legal warfare against President Trump.

    revolver.news/2025/04/resign…

    But wait, there’s more (no wonder the 2020 election fraud cases went nowhere):🚨 REVEALED: Chief Justice John Roberts Caught in Secretive, Invite-Only Club of Elite Judges and Lawyers That Includes James Boasberg, Beryl Howell, Amit Mehta and Ketanji Brown Jackson 🚨”

    See the problem? So much for “conservtive”….

    Like

    Reply

  13. “You still want to tell me this is not a coordinated operation to undermine a President that was duly elected by an overwhelming majority of the American people?

    Here’s @NormEisen bragging that he has 152 open legal matters against the administration. He filed the first one at 12:01 PM. He had someone listening on their iphone to the swearing in ceremony.

    Look at the perverse level of happiness and the evil gleam in his eyes as he says it.

    You couldn’t script a better villain if you created one yourself. This is deranged.”

    https://x.com/DefiyantlyFree/status/1928711889661604100?t=oKWEusqyRZDgv18TE93Wgg&s=19

    But… but Trump!

    Spare me.

    Like

    Reply

  16. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/2024presgeresults.pdf

    Like

    Reply

  18. And that small % accounts for about 3.5 million votes, so yeah overwhelming. Yuge even.

    And look at the electoral map. Way more red than blue. Cali and NY are the issue. Without them, it’d be far worse for dems

    https://www.google.com/search?client=ms-android-mpcs-us-revc&sca_esv=f30558a2e31c0092&sxsrf=AE3TifP40U8_tL53Ka3gI2gjFTopwERuUQ:1748727977726&udm=2&fbs=AIIjpHwdlVWI4oi2g38E8_BbusNmV4N_PDMDZa8kD6jzfAqHH_e2wpq3bNF0nim2pM6iwiIN7GBeniJcy6WEpbObsVxMJ2Hj3UF9IQKNmQWcRDzP422_qSjxEsKlQgjf1ftGnbRAMDsK-Y51siF4FbA6olixvaeXoOXH4dod3k7ZVCgrZmfYYHhS_Ksbeyu9Ha-8oygUbRAMOvSoXHn_5wFn1MiQHYDiRh5v2Q0IKODMrATM8mPyFeE&q=electoral+map+2024&sa=X&sqi=2&ved=2ahUKEwjy_66v186NAxWkLFkFHWoKG4kQtKgLegQIEhAB&biw=384&bih=721&dpr=1.88#sv=CAMS_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

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  21. And, always, so much more importantly ….

    *But God* …

    Whether judgement or deliverance for a nation, it is always in His hand; not ours or any one political candidate’s.

    And so we wait to see.

    • dj

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  22. Vance is not a puppet of Trump. And he is not wrong about Roberts…the judicial branch needs to stay in their lane and bug off the executive branch. The people voted for Trump to lead by an honest vote unlike what happened with the last administration. I don’t care what the polls say…people are ticked!

    “That’s one-half of his job,” the vice president added. “The other half of his job is to check the excesses of his own branch. You cannot have a country where the American people keep on electing immigration enforcement and the courts tell the American people they’re not allowed to have what they voted for. That’s where we are right now.”

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  23. Building to a constitutional battle down the line perhaps. But the founders have built that into our form of government and hopefully it holds strong. We are not a monarchy.

    • dj

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  24. President Trump Isn’t a Tariff King: A sweeping trade court ruling puts the executive in his proper constitutional place.

    ~ … America doesn’t have a king who can rule by decree. …

    … The Trump tariffs have created enormous costs and uncertainty, but now we know they’re illegal. As the three-judge panel explains in its detailed 52-page ruling, the President exceeded his emergency powers and bypassed discrete tariff authorities delegated to him by Congress. …

    … No other President has used IEEPA to impose tariffs. As the trade court explains, Richard Nixon used the law’s precursor, the Trading With the Enemy Act, in 1971 to impose 10% tariffs for a short period to address a balance of payments problem. The Justice Department said Mr. Trump’s tariffs are no different. 

    Not so. As the panel notes, Nixon tariffs were upheld by an appeals court because they were a “limited surcharge” and “temporary measure calculated to help meet a particular national emergency, which is quite different from imposing whatever tariff rates he deems desirable.” The latter is what Mr. Trump did, at one point jacking up rates to 145% on China. …

    Congress also limited the President’s emergency powers in IEEPA to prevent overreach. “The legislative history surrounding IEEPA confirms that the words ‘regulate . . . importation’ have a narrower meaning than the power to impose any tariffs whatsoever,” the panel notes. 

    Mr. Trump invoked IEEPA because he wanted to impose tariffs as he sees fit. But the Constitution doesn’t let the President ignore Congress and do whatever he wants. …

    https://www.wsj.com/opinion/donald-trump-tariffs-ieepa-court-of-international-trade-ruling-08e76022?st=UPYJow&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink

    • dj

    Like

    Reply

  25. Who joined the uproar here when Obama said,  “I’ve got a pen, and I’ve got a phone. And I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions and administrative actions” … ?

    Would a Democrat ‘king’ not be acceptable in your sight — but a Republican ‘king’ somehow be quite acceptable now?

    Just asking.

    • dj

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  26. Well we don’t have a “republican” king…only those who don’t like him believe it to be so..

    We have a President who is trying to set to right all the disastrous and criminal actions allowed to happen these past four years and beyond. We have a President who actually wants good for the legal citizens of this nation. He does not desire to profit financially on the backs of those he represents unlike past “kings”….

    Oh and Obama and his “pen and phone and using them”…he was just being an ass…..he didn’t and does not care about this nation…he cares about…himself…

    Nj

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  27. Dj,

    You’re just proving my point about an out of control judiciary.

    See, a “trade court” doesn’t have that kind of power. It’s not even a real court, it’s made up nonsense.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  32. She broke the law. She’s not exempt from prosecution just because she’s a judge. But here they are, circling the wagons. They fear accountability for their mistakes, and in this case, crimes.

    https://x.com/MAGAresponse/status/1928607622753611983?t=tg2dJAhPfXAkLAipXcPwQg&s=19

    “You can’t make this up! 🚨

    130 retired judges just filed a brief urging a federal court to drop charges against corrupt Wisconsin judge Hannah Dugan.

    They claim her arrest undermines “centuries of precedent on judicial immunity.”

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  33. “WOW: 130 *retired* judges file a brief demanding Judge Hannah Dugan’s charges be dropped—after she was caught aiding & abetting an illegal alien

    They say she has “absolute immunity for her official acts”

    Abusing your position to help commit crimes is an “official act”? 🤡”

    https://x.com/JohnStrandUSA/status/1928812999357128888?t=C0iZcIs-7f7yvWXd5T8Taw&s=19

    —–

    “These 130 retired judges sound an awful lot like the “51 former intel experts” who said Hunter Biden’s laptop was fake

    This bulldog broke the law and now she’s being held accountable

    Americans aren’t fooled by these deep state tactics anymore”

    https://x.com/DC_Draino/status/1928823273581683118?t=aZ1vSEd3WGF_1tqBfUinyQ&s=19

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  34. I don’t like some of the executive orders which seem to go beyond the scope of the presidency. And having ICE agents or ( worse) contractors covering their faces the way they did to detain a lone woman on the street a few weeks ago is disgraceful to me. It won’t and shouldn’t be forgotten.

    Not all of the President’s EOs go beyond his powers. Still he should be careful how he allows his administration to conduct itself. Or it will come back to bite us all.

    As for the tariffs, I think technically they’re at least partially Congress’ responsibility. However, a lot of things are Congress’ responsibility and they have apparently abdicated those responsibilities to the President.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  36. In my opinion the Judicial branch, which was supposed to be the weakest, has been wagging the dog for decades. I’m glad to see Judge Dugan held to account. She may have been wearing her official robes when she helped an illegal evade ICE, but she was not performing her official judicial job. At the least it should be adjusicated for everyone’s clarification.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  38. AJ – You wrote that Trump won an “overwhelming majority of the American people.” That is different from saying a majority of the electoral college votes.

    As for the vote difference, no, that is not an overwhelming difference when compared to the totals: 75,017,613 for Harris, and 77,302,580 for Trump. The percentages tell a more accurate comparison: 48.32% for Harris, and 49.8 for Trump. IOW, slightly less than half of voters voted for either one.

    Like

    Reply

  40. Then there is that pesky fact that fraud was uncovered with the voting process. And it wasn’t in favor of Trump. How much went undetected? All we know is we now have a President fighting for us…as in USA!😊

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment