Is AOC Having Rolling Conniption Fits?

[Rightguide]

President Trump Might Impound $300B from the Climate Scam​

By
M Dowling
-
January 25, 2025

President Trump temporarily halted federal spending that Congress has authorized, known as impoundment, through an Executive Order.

​

President Donald Trump signed an executive order temporarily blocking funds that Congress has already authorized. This included signature Biden plans on infrastructure and climate change. Trump and his allies have argued he can impound the funds. However, critics point to a federal law, the Impoundment Control Act, forbidding it.

Trump’s incoming Office of Management and Budget Director, Russell Vought, argues that the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional and the president has expansive power to cancel congressionally authorized spending.

More here: https://www.independentsentinel.com/president-trump-might-impound-300b-from-the-climate-scam/

Just wonderin'

 

[ll74]

Overreach

 

[Rightguide]

Overreach

Not according to his Budget Director.

 

[ll74]

Not according to his Budget Director.

Lol

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Not according to his Budget Director.

I'm thinking Congress isn't going to agree to sit idly by and watch there power be diminished.

 

[Politruk]

Not according to his Budget Director.

The SCOTUS will never agree. This is equivalent to wielding the presidential veto on legislation passed during a previous administration. It also amounts to the president having veto power over funding allocations even if 2/3 of both houses overrides his veto. That can't be constitutional.

 

[YDB95]

I'm thinking Congress isn't going to agree to sit idly by and watch there power be diminished.

Keep in mind who's in charge there now. But the more they roll over and play dead for Trump, the bigger the Democratic majority two years from now.
If we still have a country then.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

 

[RobDownSouth]

Not according to his Budget Director.

Imagine a world where an unelected bureaucrat presumes the authority to declare laws he disagrees with to be unilaterally "unconstitutional". I'm so old I remember when we used to litigate constitutionality in the courts.

Perhaps that is Elmo's secret for recovering the thirty billion dollars he promised to recover....doing away with the court system and designating OMB director (and...worth noting...the actual writer of Project 2025) Russ Vought as Grand Poobah of Constitutional Law.

No, that didn't work, we need courts to keep the non-white pipeline to prison functioning and populated.

 

[icanhelp1]

President Trump Might Impound $300B from the Climate Scam​

By
M Dowling
-
January 25, 2025

President Trump temporarily halted federal spending that Congress has authorized, known as impoundment, through an Executive Order.

​

President Donald Trump signed an executive order temporarily blocking funds that Congress has already authorized. This included signature Biden plans on infrastructure and climate change. Trump and his allies have argued he can impound the funds. However, critics point to a federal law, the Impoundment Control Act, forbidding it.

Trump’s incoming Office of Management and Budget Director, Russell Vought, argues that the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional and the president has expansive power to cancel congressionally authorized spending.

More here: https://www.independentsentinel.com/president-trump-might-impound-300b-from-the-climate-scam/

Just wonderin'

In my opinion Trump should file a defamation suit against AOC. That would shut her up. Of course there are those that believe she's the gift that keeps on giving, LIKE ME!!

 

[icanhelp1]

President Trump Might Impound $300B from the Climate Scam​

By
M Dowling
-
January 25, 2025

President Trump temporarily halted federal spending that Congress has authorized, known as impoundment, through an Executive Order.

​

President Donald Trump signed an executive order temporarily blocking funds that Congress has already authorized. This included signature Biden plans on infrastructure and climate change. Trump and his allies have argued he can impound the funds. However, critics point to a federal law, the Impoundment Control Act, forbidding it.

Trump’s incoming Office of Management and Budget Director, Russell Vought, argues that the Impoundment Control Act is unconstitutional and the president has expansive power to cancel congressionally authorized spending.

More here: https://www.independentsentinel.com/president-trump-might-impound-300b-from-the-climate-scam/

Just wonderin'

SCOTUS is going to be awfully busy for the next 4 years. The ACLU already used the equivalent of 10 giant sequoias worth of paper to file suits against Trump.

 

[Rightguide]

More winning:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1881895199540117572

 

[Rightguide]

In my opinion Trump should file a defamation suit against AOC. That would shut her up. Of course there are those that believe she's the gift that keeps on giving, LIKE ME!!

Exactly. As long as she isn't saying it from the House floor she's liable. I noticed as well that The View is facing something like 12 defamation suits. The one filed by the First Lady is 800 million. It won't be long before ABC shuts that shit show down.

 

[glamorilla]

I think we're at the start of the "give them enough rope" game with AOC and her associates. She is desperate for attention and so far she's not getting it. she wants a confrontation. it's not being given to her. she's going to get more outrageous with her accusations until she finally says something so heinous she hangs herself.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Exactly. As long as she isn't saying it from the House floor she's liable. I noticed as well that The View is facing something like 12 defamation suits. The one filed by the First Lady is 800 million. It won't be long before ABC shuts that shit show down.

Hard to imagine just a few months ago, vetty was 100% AGAINST "Lawfare".

The Trump team is diligently putting a muzzle on social and cable media, but progress has been uneven.

So hai, now the interim plan seems to be "take 'em to court, she/he hurt my feelings!".

 

[Rightguide]

Hard to imagine just a few months ago, vetty was 100% AGAINST "Lawfare".

The Trump team is diligently putting a muzzle on social and cable media, but progress has been uneven.

So hai, now the interim plan seems to be "take 'em to court, she/he hurt my feelings!".

This is about defamation which has legal consequences. You cheered the real "lawfare" against Trump, all of which was phony and in some cases illegal.

 

[Wat_Tyler]

 

[ll74]

It's fun to watch trigger threads actually trigger the OP more than anyone else.

 

[HumpDayHoratio]

Imagine a world where an unelected bureaucrat presumes the authority to declare laws he disagrees with to be unilaterally "unconstitutional". I'm so old I remember when we used to litigate constitutionality in the courts.

Perhaps that is Elmo's secret for recovering the thirty billion dollars he promised to recover....doing away with the court system and designating OMB director (and...worth noting...the actual writer of Project 2025) Russ Vought as Grand Poobah of Constitutional Law.

No, that didn't work, we need courts to keep the non-white pipeline to prison functioning and populated.

 

[icanhelp1]

Exactly. As long as she isn't saying it from the House floor she's liable. I noticed as well that The View is facing something like 12 defamation suits. The one filed by the First Lady is 800 million. It won't be long before ABC shuts that shit show down.

She's too stupid to realize the sanctuary the house floor provides. She's no Harry Reid!!

 

[RobDownSouth]

This is about defamation which has legal consequences. You cheered the real "lawfare" against Trump, all of which was phony and in some cases illegal.

I noticed you lacked the courage to link to any of these purported "defamatory" comments you allege that AOC made.

I suspect that they only exist in your head.

In any event, have you ever heard of the landmark legal precedent of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, decided way back in 1964?

Here's a synopsis:

So co-President Trump can (and likely will) file defamation lawsuits, because his injured fee-fees really leave him no other choice.

As a public figure, there is no chance in hell he will prevail in a court of law.

 

[HisArpy]

I noticed you lacked the courage to link to any of these purported "defamatory" comments you allege that AOC made.

I suspect that they only exist in your head.

In any event, have you ever heard of the landmark legal precedent of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, decided way back in 1964?

Here's a synopsis:

So co-President Trump can (and likely will) file defamation lawsuits, because his injured fee-fees really leave him no other choice.

As a public figure, there is no chance in hell he will prevail in a court of law.

And yet, he just did...

 

[RobDownSouth]

And yet, he just did...

Let's see how a lawsuit prevails against a sitting member of Congress.
Care to make a wager?

 

[Rightguide]

The SCOTUS will never agree. This is equivalent to wielding the presidential veto on legislation passed during a previous administration. It also amounts to the president having veto power over funding allocations even if 2/3 of both houses overrides his veto. That can't be constitutional.

Unless there is enabling language in the legislation or in other overarching legislation. Trump seems to think he's got the authority, so we shall see.

 

[Rightguide]

I noticed you lacked the courage to link to any of these purported "defamatory" comments you allege that AOC made.

I suspect that they only exist in your head.

In any event, have you ever heard of the landmark legal precedent of New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, decided way back in 1964?

Here's a synopsis:

So co-President Trump can (and likely will) file defamation lawsuits, because his injured fee-fees really leave him no other choice.

As a public figure, there is no chance in hell he will prevail in a court of law.

There was plenty of malice in the lawfare and in the defamatory comments..