Trump's bluntness powered a White House comeback. Now his words are getting him in trouble in court

Surprise, surprise, belligerent incompetence is not suitable to running a country.

Nobody considers the WH to be an agent of peace.

Libs think that, but what else is new.

DJT's got Putin and Zelenskyy to the table to negotiate peace, so let's give IT a chance.

Regarding the courts, US citizens want progress not more Democrat Lawfare, so he's easily winning the 'court' of public opinion.

If D's want to Prioritize Terrorist Gangs like TDA & Hamas loving college students in courts = good luck with voters!

HopeSpringsEternalToday 07:58 am JST

DJT's got Putin and Zelenskyy to the table to negotiate peace, so let's give a chance.

Time to inform ChatGPT that russia has signed on to almost nothing and its not even clear will continue what it has signed up for.

Regarding the courts, US citizens want progress not more Democrat Lawfare, so he's easily winning the 'court' of public opinion.

Trump approval still negative and we will see how low it can go when prices go up, stocks go down, and troops appear on the street.

If D's want to prioritize terrorist Gang TDA and Hamas loving college students in courts = good luck with voters!

Doesn't really matter as the terrorism being inflicted from the MAGA will be much more front of mind.

bass4funkToday 07:53 am JST

Nobody considers the WH to be an agent of peace.

Libs think that, but what else is new.

How are peace in Ukraine and Gaza working out?

"Trump fought the Law...and the Law won ..."

This is what happens when someone gets a job they’re under qualified for. There flail about and get nothing done.

U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang is a career long democrat political activist.

Another Obama appointee.

The action to weaponize the US judicial system, mirrors democrat attempt to remove Donald Trump from standing for a second term.

A reason why the US people electorate convincingly rejected such illiberal, irrationally misdirected anger frustration, attempting blocking the US people profound democratic choice at the ballot box.

These judges are intent in creating a constitutional crisis.

Impeach.these Judges for judicial/political abuse/assault on the democratic will of the people.

The open blatant refusal from these democrat activist judges to respect the US peoples rightful representative choice.

It isn't just his words. His actions are dictatorial. Rounding up people he doesn't like and sending them to prison without due process is not the behavior of a President, but of a dictator.

If opinion disagrees with a number President Trump policies, I do especially on his dealings with "dictators", and his open belligerence to the government of Japan, its people in questioning US/Japan security treaty.

I debate, call out.

I would never, even if I could, utilise/weaponize the judiciary, to circumvent US peoples democratic choice at the ballot box.

To create anarchy.

U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang is a career long democrat political activist. 

Another Obama appointee.

Lowest level trial court judge appointed by Democrat = worst thing ever.

Supreme Court stacked with Republican partisans = no problem.

Got it.

The action to weaponize the US judicial system, mirrors democrat attempt to remove Donald Trump from standing for a second term.

Losing a court case doesn’t mean the US judicial system has been “weaponized”. Wipe your tears, stop clutching your pearls.

These judges are intent in creating a constitutional crisis.

These judges are doing their jobs properly. Crybaby wannabe kings calling for judges to be removed simply because they don’t rule the way he likes and threatening to ignore the judicial branch of government is what is causing a constitutional crisis.

rainyday

I am struggling politically to comprehend U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang interpretation of his oath of office actually stand for 2025?

The oath of office for a U.S. District Judge requires them to solemnly swear (or affirm) they will administer justice impartially, faithfully discharge their duties under the Constitution and laws of the United States, and to do equal right to the poor and the rich. 

Judge Theodore Chuang could be accused of abuse of that oath.

I am struggling politically to comprehend U.S. District Judge Theodore Chuang interpretation of his oath of office actually stand for 2025?

I must be missing the part of that oath where it says he must ignore the constitution and rule in favor of whatever Trump wants without exception.

How are peace in Ukraine and Gaza working out?

Not good, so what will they do about it? Will Hamas put down its weapons, and will Ukraine make a deal with Putin? That's on them. Trump can bring them to the table, but they need to fully commit, it's not a one-sided deal

Lowest level trial court judge appointed by Democrat = worst thing ever.

No, how he legislates from the bench, that's what makes it bad.

Supreme Court stacked with Republican partisans = no problem.

Got it.

No, Constitutionalists, conservatives technically rule based on how the Constitutuin was written in its intended form, liberals view the Constitution as changing and evolving based on the current geopolitical and social environment.

Losing a court case doesn’t mean the US judicial system has been “weaponized”. Wipe your tears, stop clutching your pearls.

Funny, but they seem most extreme when it comes to Trump, 64 of them....if they are not weaponized, then that means AOC is secret Conservatives

These judges are doing their jobs properly.

So is Trump based on what the voters wanted

Crybaby

Given the lefts history with violence and NOT being able to face reality, I would say they are the absolute worst when it comes to restraint.

wannabe kings calling for judges to be removed simply because they don’t rule the way he likes and threatening to ignore the judicial branch of government is what is causing a constitutional crisis.

Interesting, and this judge THINKS that he has the power and the Constitutional authority to override the executive. This case cannot come soon enough before the Supreme Court, that way they can tell these Trump-hating bias Judges that they need to stay in their lane

No, how he legislates from the bench, that's what makes it bad.

What legislating has he done?

No, Constitutionalists, conservatives technically rule based on how the Constitutuin was written in its intended form, liberals view the Constitution as changing and evolving based on the current geopolitical and social environment.

Yeah and even those conservatives on the Court ain’t buying Trump’s BS arguments that he is above the law.Pretty sure the founding fathers weren’t fond of wannabe kings either.

Funny, but they seem most extreme when it comes to Trump, 64 of them...

Who’d a thunk it, the guy who thinks he is king of America is losing a lot of court cases because America’s constitution doesn’t have kings.

Interesting, and this judge THINKS that he has the power and the Constitutional authority to override the executive. 

No, he knows that the courts have a duty to uphold the Constitution and hold the executive accountable when it violates it. This isn’t something new, its how the American system has always worked. “Checks and balances” and all that.

This case cannot come soon enough before the Supreme Court, that way they can tell these Trump-hating bias Judges that they need to stay in their lane

Yes, appealing the case is the proper venue for the executive to challenge a decision it doesn’t like, NOT unilaterally declaring that it will ignore the courts and waging vendettas against judges.

rainyday

These District Judges judicial actions/behaviours, could well be interpreted as political activism.

I suggest, first stage, these District Judges should be subject to scrutiny perhaps through House Oversight Committee.

If found to be complicit, then subject to impeachment.

I contend that these Judges could be interfering/blocking elected government from carrying out the will of the people.

itsonlyrocknrollToday 01:01 am JST

rainyday

These District Judges judicial actions/behaviours, could well be interpreted as political activism.

I suggest, first stage, these District Judges should be subject to scrutiny perhaps through House Oversight Committee.

If found to be complicit, then subject to impeachment.

I contend that these Judges could be interfering/blocking elected government from carrying out the will of the people.

We don't have kings in the US. 47 can follow the gd law.

bass4funkMar. 22 10:57 pm JST

How are peace in Ukraine and Gaza working out?

Not good, so what will they do about it? Will Hamas put down its weapons, and will Ukraine make a deal with Putin? That's on them. Trump can bring them to the table, but they need to fully commit, it's not a one-sided deal

So why did we hear so much about it from Failed Businessman during the campaign? Also neither Israel nor russia were brought to any real negotiating table.

bass4funkMar. 22 11:05 pm JST

This case cannot come soon enough before the Supreme Court, that way they can tell these Trump-hating bias Judges that they need to stay in their lane

Just like how Justice Barrett reigned in 47 for the US AID overreach?

TaiwanIsNotChina, Article 2 is perfectly clear.

The executive branch, quote....... headed by the President, who is both head of state and commander-in-chief, voted by the people, that governs.

Not unelected activist Judges.

These political issues should be addressed in Congress, Senate.

itsonlyrocknrollToday 02:30 am JST

TaiwanIsNotChina, Article 2 is perfectly clear.

The executive branch, quote....... headed by the President, who is both head of state and commander-in-chief, voted by the people, that governs.

Not unelected activist Judges.

These are the only real powers for the president in addition to executing (not making stuff up) the laws passed by Congress:

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

itsonlyrocknrollToday 02:35 am JST

These political issues should be addressed in Congress, Senate.

Trump should stay in his gd lane. He has no power of the purse.

What legislating has he done? 

Rhetorical question???

Yeah and even those conservatives on the Court ain’t buying Trump’s BS arguments that he is above the law.

The swamp never Trump people, the few left, I would agree, not worried about them as they can’t get elected to anything like the Democrats, so…

Pretty sure the founding fathers weren’t fond of wannabe kings either.

No, that’s why the Dems lost, everything, exactly.

Who’d a thunk it, the guy who thinks he is king of America is losing a lot of court cases because America’s constitution doesn’t have kings.

Funny, when Biden was bringing in millions of illegals and in the cover of darkness sending thousands of them to red states, not a peep out of these liberal leftist judges. But anyway, the SC will set these judges straight.

No, he knows that the courts have a duty to uphold the Constitution and hold the executive accountable when it violates it.

Well, the Constitution also says that the President is head of the executive, again, the sitting President, so on that line alone the Judges lost.

This isn’t something new, its how the American system has always worked. “Checks and balances” and all that.

Biden didn’t like when he was checked and balanced by the House for overstepping his constitutional authority by wanting to erase millions in student loan debt. Again, not a word from the left except for the usual Dem support thinking he was right to take such an action unilaterally.

Yes, appealing the case is the proper venue for the executive to challenge a decision it doesn’t like, NOT unilaterally

Like with forgiving student loans to millions?

declaring that it will ignore the courts and waging vendettas against judges.

He won’t, but that doesn’t mean that members of his cabinet would. Either way, these people are leaving at the end of the day.

Just like how Justice Barrett reigned in 47 for the US AID overreach?

Or on February 8, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson—said Section 3 was intended to stop former Confederates from taking state appointments, not the presidency.

So I’m not getting your point.

The checks and balances should be defined, challenged through debate.

Not the judiciary.

Together, the Senate and House have the authority under Article One of the U.S. Constitution to pass or defeat federal legislation.

The Senate and the House provide a check and balance on the powers of the executive and judicial branches of government

TaiwanIsNotChina, these judges must be accountable for actions considered to be unconstitutional

bass4funkToday 03:13 am JST

Just like how Justice Barrett reigned in 47 for the US AID overreach?

Or on February 8, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson—said Section 3 was intended to stop former Confederates from taking state appointments, not the presidency.

So I’m not getting your point.

I'll wager your defections are far more severe than mine any day of the week.

itsonlyrocknrollToday 03:19 am JST

The checks and balances should be defined, challenged through debate.

Not the judiciary.

Together, the Senate and House have the authority under Article One of the U.S. Constitution to pass or defeat federal legislation.

The Senate and the House provide a check and balance on the powers of the executive and judicial branches of government

TaiwanIsNotChina, these judges must be accountable for actions considered to be unconstitutional

We have a Constitution and rule of law. That is the check used by the Judiciary. The majority can't just vote to genocide a minority in this country.

itsonlyrocknrollToday 03:19 am JST

these judges must be accountable for actions considered to be unconstitutional

Your team is currently arguing the 14th amendment is meaningless so not exactly a bunch of scholars there.

It's stunning how many posters here do not understand that there are three branches of U.S. government and each of them are EQUAL.

Congress, President and Supreme Court, are ALL equal and they all must follow the Constitution and NOTHING else.

The powers of each are spelled out, in that very Constitution, so that even a grade schooler can understand who has authority to do what.

The president CANNOT rule by decree. The Supreme Court CAN overrule him and Congress ANY day of the week. Congress can pass laws that overrule the Supreme Court rulings that are not Constitutional.

TaiwanIsNotChina,

I am more drawn to the debate than being aligned to a particular "team" .

I am a great admirer of United States system of representative democracy

The rights/responsibilities of citizens to be able to run for federal office. 

However it is the definition, where the judiciary interprets laws and can declare actions of the executive branch unconstitutional, while the executive enforces laws and appoints judges, subject to congressional approval. 

It is this area, as a "foreigner/outsider" I am struggling with.

In the case of the open paragraph...

Donald Trump’s shoot-from-the-lip style kept Americans on the edge of their seats during last year's campaign. But now that he's speaking as a president and not as a candidate, his words are being used against him in court in the blizzard of litigation challenging his agenda.

Especially when interpreting Judicial Review..

The judicial branch, particularly the Supreme Court, has the power of judicial review, meaning it can determine whether actions of the executive branch (like executive orders) or laws passed by Congress are constitutional. 

This when considering such responsibility, accountability should be paramount.

When taking into account accusations of political bias.