Posted on 03/15/2017 8:10:26 PM PDT by Signalman
He needs to get control of the DOJ and prosecute crooked politicians... McCain, Clinton, Obama, and many more in Congress and agencies. Put them in prison.
He needs to really drain the swamp, and put the fear of God into the whole corrupt government.
Anything short of that and we're all toast.
We need to have the (long notoriously bad) 9th circuit broken up into 2 or maybe 3 circuits.
and
yes, it is increasingly clear that the SorozNazi-DNC and their nefarious co-conspirators....whatever....are trying to cancel our elections retroactively and saboutage president Trump, dump Trump through constant disruption, street violence and intimidation, lies (mass media puppet shows called “news”) and by having illegal rulings spewed forth by political “judges”
the executive (presidency) is, however, a co-equal branch of government, the judiciary is not superior to it. And, the presidency is primarily entrusted by the constitution (and statutes directly on point) with not only the power but the duty to exclude any persons of any religions or nationalities that he believes represent a danger to USA. Period. In the area of national defense, the executive is primary. In the area of immigration law, congress is primary and congress has charged the president with the duty to exclude undesirable persons, as above. The courts are not primary in either national defense nor immigration.
Meaning, not only should DJT “defy” the illegal court rulings, but that he will find he HAS TO, either now or later in order to carry out his term of office. Remember that the clear intention, plan, plot, scheme of the communistic IslamoNazi leftists is mass-scale disruption of our elected government by illegal Judicial “orders” (and street thuggery, etc.). Given DJT will HAVE to “stand up to” (ignore) the illegal court orders eventually, THIS is a very excellent issue for him to do it with (national defense being a primarily-presidential responsibility PLUS immigration policy and duties having been clearly delegated, assigned by Congress to the President).
Taking a similar stand on some other illegal court rulings dealing with other subject matter could be criticized more substantially, but standing up or ignoring the courts when they so obviously seek to usurp proper presidential actions in areas of activity so clearly within presidential and not judicial primary functions ... well, it is a superior position for DJT to work from.
Go Trump! Drain the Swamp (including the judicial swamp).
I would like to see them hauled before Sessions and forced to explain themselves.
They are not the 3rd branch of the government, SCOTUS is. They are an inferior court. That’s how I understand it. Is that correct?
QUE the Drama ....
Trump should appear at the appeal hearing himself. Read the relevant laws and statutes and Constitutional enumerations.
Might as well deport the entire Obie admin while you’re at it. Works for me!
Why can’t Trump use a “Presidential Memorandum” instead of an EO?
That’s what Obama did...
there should be a way that the POTUS be able to circumvent the lower courts and go directly to the supremes in a matter such as this.
Why hasn’t that process begun yet?
Because, with all respect to the president, he is making serious tactical errors. He is allowing himself to fall into the trap of allowing the dems to “Shape the Battlefield.”
#1, STOP TWEETING!!!!! He looks foolish every time he does. Stop being (and needing to be) the headline every day.
#2, Follow the Schwarzkopf model. Spend your time quietly getting ready for the battle, rather than fighting little skirmishes way too early.
#3, Use the ground swell he had after the Mini-SOTU speech to get Gorsuch in. Stop everything else until Gorsuch is in, so what the little twerp Hawaii and 9th Circuit judges don’t matter!
#4, Get rid of the thin skin. Ignore the flea shoot. Show you are above it. When you stop responding to it, it stops.
#5, Stop screaming at the crowd at speeches. Let the PA do the work. Regardless of the words, the loud and brash screaming mood and tempo of the speeches makes him sound angry and out of control. That stopped being effective 3 months ago.
#6, Finally, sorry to say this, but stop talking about himself! Talk about how The Common Man will be helped, but stop leading with the bruised ego.
when Trump refused to strike down the judges ruling.
That's coming. Trump paid tribute to and laid a wreath at Andrew Jackson's grave this week for a reason.
President's do that sort of thing for a reason. It's symbolic.
“In those sections that make the Constitution the supreme law of the land, and the courts the judge of the law. The law includes the Constitution. Presidents are subject to the law too.”
Right. After nine years of a bloody war the Founders set up a system that allows unelected judges to be the final arbiter of what is or is not constitutional. The founders wanted to establish the same system of arbitrary tyranny they had just beat on the battlefield, right?
Go ahead and name and quote the Founders who argued for judicial supremacy over the legislative and executive branches.
Repeating myself a bit but...
Suddenly the leftist judges care about religious discrimination.
The same judges that would force Christians to give out abortatives against their religious convictions. The same judge who would probably force Christian doctors to perform infanticide?
At the very least you better bake a gay couple a cake, if you are a Christian, or be sued out of existence?
Obama ignored, and instructed others to ignore, many laws in his term, and Congress said and did nothing!
Your suggestions sound as if you want Trump to be more like G. W. Bush. The brashness/tweeting/comebacks had a lot to do with getting him elected. Are you really suggesting that judges are ruling against him because he is obnoxious, and that things would change if he'd "cool it"?
The scary thing to me about these recent rulings is that we have reached a point in which ANY judge can rule against ANYTHING he/she does not like while falsely claiming that the President is violating the constitution. NOTHING can/will be done about it unless we have a rock-solid majority on the Supreme Court. These judges are out of control and have usurped all Federal Government authority for themselves. The left won't need to win elections as long as they have the judges in their pockets.
No, I don’t want him to “be like” anyone. I want him to succeed.
Right now, his heart and mind are in the right place, but his tactics suck.
Winning starts with a dream, but once one is empowered to actualize the dream, it’s important to realize others will oppose you in the realization of that dream. Every team wants win, but every oppositional team wants them to lose.
It’s past time for the Game Plan and WAY PAST TIME FOR JUST revving up the fans. It’s time to execute. Just ask Brady and the Pats about what they did in the locker room this year.
It has already been reversed on appeal to the 9th Circuit Court.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Can you cite a reliable source for that? I seem to have missed that news.
No it turned out to be another judge on the 9th Circuit commenting on the first injunction.
The Constitution does make the Supreme Court the final arbiter of what the law means, and the Constitution is the law. Even though it might not spell that out, it doesn't really work any other way.
The other branches have their own power. If the court rules that a law means something that Congress doesn't like, Congress can pass a new law. Congress and the states can change the Constitution. The courts have no say in those processes.
But there is no room in our constitutional system for one of the branches to ignore the decisions of the others. Just as a court is not free to ignore a revised statute, the President is not free to ignore a court's ruling.
Yes, absolutely. They intentionally made them unelected and gave them lifetime appointments. They intentionally made the courts a seperate but equal branch of government. This is the American system. I'm sorry that you don't like it, but it's supposed to be rule of law and not of men.
"The founders wanted to establish the same system of arbitrary tyranny they had just beat on the battlefield, right?"
No, that is your own mistaken characterization. It is not arbitrary tyranny. Arbitrary tyranny would be an executive that is free to do as he wills, with no checks on his power. They system they established is one of distributed power.
That does not mean that every person always makes the right decision. But that's the point. They didn't want all the power held by one person.
Then you shouldn’t have any trouble citing the part of the US Constitution that gives judges plenary power to write and nullify laws and strike down congressional legislation. I’ll wait.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.