Trump Administration Predictions (2 Viewers)

[Isaac]

True. But Executive Orders can tell the employees of the Executive Branch how to respond to certain situations. He can order a department to reconsider a rule in many cases. The "deep state" was (and to some degree, still is) comprised of Executive Branch staffers exceeding their authority by writing rules when Congress should have stepped in - but didn't, the dirty boogers. The president can make the deep state bureaucrats stop enforcing rules that didn't originate from Congress. Take a look at his recent order to protect the 2nd amendment that is causing the DOJ to reconsider a lot of rules promulgated illegally by ATF.

Consider the Dept. of the Interior and their Wetlands rules, and the ATF and their firearms rules, which were DEEPLY derived from rules created by Executive-Branch fiat during the Obama and Biden administrations, and that Trump's first term was marred by insane levels of TDS, there are literally hundreds of Executive-branch rules out there that are being enforced as law - and in some cases result in criminal convictions - that shouldn't even be on the books. (See also the Chevron Deference Doctrine, now defunct thanks to the Roper-Bright case.)

Specific case in point: ATF's silencer and short-barreled rifle laws, the latter being applied to braced pistols. Specific case in point: Wetlands classification rules that have the result of an uncompensated taking of property by denying the owner certain uses over standing water that doesn't enter into a flowing waterway. Specific case in point: DWF requirement for fishing boats to have an inspector who will not help with the fishing enterprise and who must be paid by the boat's owner. Non-productive overhead.

That's three examples out of a much larger bunch illustrating Executive Branch rules created by fiat that were not acts of Congress but that resulted in fines and criminal charges. If they weren't laws, they had results that remarkably resembled laws. So when you make your claim that the president cannot rewrite a law, be sure to distinguish between an actual LAW passed by Congress vs. an Executive Branch rule that, through its consequences, has the EFFECT of law.

Well said doc, almost seems like you have just read Neil Gorsuch book Overruled,, which is all about that! He chronicles the growth of the administrative State over decades and decades and it's pretty fascinating and ugly how it all happened.

There are agencies that can create rules that are literally published nowhere except a memo in someone's drawer that even carry criminal sanctions.

 

[RogerCooper]

If trade barriers didn't work most countries wouldn't employ them.

They are used to benefit specific groups at the expense of the population overall. A good example was when Biden put a 100% tariff on Chinese EV's to benefit the UAW which was a big backer of Biden. While the American people were deprived a high quality, low cost EV's.

 

[RogerCooper]

True. But Executive Orders can tell the employees of the Executive Branch how to respond to certain situations. He can order a department to reconsider a rule in many cases. The "deep state" was (and to some degree, still is) comprised of Executive Branch staffers exceeding their authority by writing rules when Congress should have stepped in - but didn't, the dirty boogers. The president can make the deep state bureaucrats stop enforcing rules that didn't originate from Congress. Take a look at his recent order to protect the 2nd amendment that is causing the DOJ to reconsider a lot of rules promulgated illegally by ATF.

Consider the Dept. of the Interior and their Wetlands rules, and the ATF and their firearms rules, which were DEEPLY derived from rules created by Executive-Branch fiat during the Obama and Biden administrations, and that Trump's first term was marred by insane levels of TDS, there are literally hundreds of Executive-branch rules out there that are being enforced as law - and in some cases result in criminal convictions - that shouldn't even be on the books. (See also the Chevron Deference Doctrine, now defunct thanks to the Roper-Bright case.)

Specific case in point: ATF's silencer and short-barreled rifle laws, the latter being applied to braced pistols. Specific case in point: Wetlands classification rules that have the result of an uncompensated taking of property by denying the owner certain uses over standing water that doesn't enter into a flowing waterway. Specific case in point: DWF requirement for fishing boats to have an inspector who will not help with the fishing enterprise and who must be paid by the boat's owner. Non-productive overhead.

That's three examples out of a much larger bunch illustrating Executive Branch rules created by fiat that were not acts of Congress but that resulted in fines and criminal charges. If they weren't laws, they had results that remarkably resembled laws. So when you make your claim that the president cannot rewrite a law, be sure to distinguish between an actual LAW passed by Congress vs. an Executive Branch rule that, through its consequences, has the EFFECT of law.

All true, except that the case was Loper Bright. But these same arguments apply even more so to Trump's actions. The very same law firm that won Loper Bright is leading the case against Trump's tariffs.

The case involving the fishing boat inspector is effectively the same, only Congress can levy a tax. So, Doc_Man are you willing to be explicit that same acts illegal if done by a Republican.

 

[AccessBlaster]

They are used to benefit specific groups at the expense of the population overall. A good example was when Biden put a 100% tariff on Chinese EV's to benefit the UAW which was a big backer of Biden. While the American people were deprived a high quality, low cost EV's.

China, Europe, and Japan are all largely closed to American autos, yet they seem to be doing just fine. They're thriving because they protect their own markets while taking advantage of everyone else's. Trump has been talking about this since the 1980s

 

[The_Doc_Man]

All true, except that the case was Loper Bright. But these same arguments apply even more so to Trump's actions. The very same law firm that won Loper Bright is leading the case against Trump's tariffs.

The case involving the fishing boat inspector is effectively the same, only Congress can levy a tax. So, Doc_Man are you willing to be explicit that same acts illegal if done by a Republican.

First I have to be convinced that it is an apples-to-apples comparison. Yep, total brain-cramp on the Loper-Bright case name. No excuses, just the observation that it DOES happen for us ... more senior citizens.

Are you considering that a pathway exists for his tariffs under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. § 1862). Admittedly, some activist judges will probably try to get involved to stop him, but the question remains: What LEVEL of judges SHOULD have the authority to stop a national-level action?

 

[Thales750]

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/china-orders-halts-boeing-jet-deliveries-bloomberg-news-reports-2025-04-15/

 

[Thales750]

I get that you want to focus on the cheap stuff, but that doesn't do anything for the American exporter. Whose clobbered with trade barriers.

That's funny, because petrochemicals make up about 28% of our exports. It's one of our highest regulated industries, you people are always saying how much regulation hurts American competitiveness. Do you see a pattern here?

 

[Thales750]

Consider the source. Biased "news" kind of defeats the purpose of the "freedom of the press." The original idea was that the people could be truly informed about a political subject. When you have an opinionated and biased reporting source, the "truly informed" concept goes out the window.

Maybe from your vantage point from as far right as possible. To you, all sane news reporting looks biased. CNBC is a financial reporting service. I get it that as a believer in trickle-down, winner-take-all mantra, you have to believe that only Trickle Down Economist have credibility.

You and other here have said I have no credibility, and yet, my predictions don't seem to be even strong enough as to the destruction headed our way.

 

[RogerCooper]

First I have to be convinced that it is an apples-to-apples comparison. Yep, total brain-cramp on the Loper-Bright case name. No excuses, just the observation that it DOES happen for us ... more senior citizens.

Are you considering that a pathway exists for his tariffs under section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19 U.S.C. § 1862). Admittedly, some activist judges will probably try to get involved to stop him, but the question remains: What LEVEL of judges SHOULD have the authority to stop a national-level action?

Trump invoked IEEPA rather than section 232 probably due to the procedural requirements of section 232, which would have delayed things. Section 232 is unconstitutionally vague and broad and lacks a "discernible principle" as required under previous decisions.

As a tax case, there would probably not be a preliminary injunction, as the taxes can be refunded.

It would not unreasonable to require at least district court holding for a nationwide injunction. This may not be make much difference in practice. In the Abrego Garcia case, the Supreme Court, unanimously upheld the injunction (with some modification).

Do you consider a judge that enforces the law or the Constitution to be an "activist judge"? What about an "activist President" who writes his own laws? If the President wants tariffs, he can go to Congress to enact them.

Doc Man, let's apply the same standards that you apply correctly for Democrats to Trump.

 

[AccessBlaster]

That's funny, because petrochemicals make up about 28% of our exports. It's one of our highest regulated industries, you people are always saying how much regulation hurts American competitiveness. Do you see a pattern here?

Petrochemicals are a big export, but they’re not 28% of our exports it’s more like 13%. Still important, no doubt.

 

[RogerCooper]

China, Europe, and Japan are all largely closed to American autos, yet they seem to be doing just fine. They're thriving because they protect their own markets while taking advantage of everyone else's. Trump has been talking about this since the 1980s

Autos are heavy and expensive to transport. That is why the Japanese (and Volkswagen) assemble cars in the US? The countries listed are not closed to American autos, US cars generally too expensive or too big for them. Note that until recently they bought lots of American planes.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Autos are heavy and expensive to transport. That is why the Japanese (and Volkswagen) assemble cars in the US?

So are there any US cars being manufactured in Europe, Japan etc ?

 

[Pat Hartman]

You think I like being right?

I think you need to give Trump more than 5 minutes to correct many years of embedded corruption and mismanagement. He was thwarted at every turn during is first term. It is actually a blessing that the Dems stole the 2020 election. They gave Trump four years to hammer out a plan and he did it with a vengeance. Trump better understands the deep state now and has people who are willing to implement his plans. He actually hit the ground running Jan 20th and took everyone by surprise at how prepared his team turned out to be. Give him a chance to bring it home and stop second guessing every decision he makes. And especially, stop gloating when you think he has failed and in doing so, proved yourself right. You should want him to prove you wrong in your assessment of his ability. Saying that you have been proven right doesn't make you smart as you seem to think it does. You come across as very happy when you think Trump didn't immediately succeed. That is as anti-American as it comes if you believe Trump has identified some of the problems he needs to solve. Cheering when you think he failed is not a good look. The rest of us are willing to be a little more patient.

Trump is not a traditional politician or even a traditional businessman. He says too much too soon and so looks to the naysayers as though he is changing his mind when in fact, he is allowing public opinion to shape the details. I would prefer a more traditional method but compare it to the the old style waterfall method of software development with the newer more interactive methods for context. Just because you are not comfortable with Trump's methods doesn't mean they can't work. All we know for sure is that the existing methods do not work so let's just give the man some space.

Being cheated by our trading partners? American billionaires designed the system, and you cheer it on, thinking you have the only truth.

I explained when this happened and why. This is a history lesson. It does not serve billionaires to have China undercut their companies and put them out of business so I'm not sure where you're going with that one.

As usual, you throw in things that have no real value. Keeping the world economy from starving the middle class to death should be the real goal here.

Both the upper and lower classes would disagree with that statement

All I did was list a couple of the primary campaign issues. Not sure why you feel the need to denigrate them. Enough people thought them sufficiently important that they voted for Trump. But, it is what we have all come to expect from you. Trump makes Republicans and Democrats alike crazy because he makes all politicians look like the lying scum they are. They promise whatever they think will get them elected and deliver what their donors want. Trump actually works very hard at trying to deliver what he promises and that is what I like most about him. He has too many things that need fixing to get them all done but he has sure made a huge dent in a couple of them.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Do you see a pattern here?

Yes, I do see a pattern... your continued inability to see the damage done by excessive regulation adding barrier after barrier after barrier to a person's profitability in business.

You talk about Trump's tax cuts channeling money to the wealthy. But don't you see the regulations as channeling failure to small businesses that can't afford to follow insane regulations? That is (was) the deep state's attempt to compromise and destroy individual entrepreneurship so that people couldn't begin to accumulate wealth on their own. Can't you SEE that side of it? It is the Liberal method of assuring dependence on government because those piled-higher-and-deeper regulations block success.

 

[Thales750]

Petrochemicals are a big export, but they’re not 28% of our exports it’s more like 13%. Still important, no doubt.

When I was in the chemical business in 2015 that was the consensus. Oops. I may have remembered it incorrectly. It may that 28% of our production was 28% sent globally.
Our two biggest customers are Mexico and Canada. I wonder wht that will look like at the endo of this year.

 

[AccessBlaster]

This may not be make much difference in practice. In the Abrego Garcia case, the Supreme Court, unanimously upheld the injunction (with some modification).

His case has already been adjudicated in 2019. He was deemed to be here illegally 6 years ago by two judges.

 

[Thales750]

Yes, I do see a pattern... your continued inability to see the damage done by excessive regulation adding barrier after barrier after barrier to a person's profitability in business.

You talk about Trump's tax cuts channeling money to the wealthy. But don't you see the regulations as channeling failure to small businesses that can't afford to follow insane regulations? That is (was) the deep state's attempt to compromise and destroy individual entrepreneurship so that people couldn't begin to accumulate wealth on their own. Can't you SEE that side of it? It is the Liberal method of assuring dependence on government because those piled-higher-and-deeper regulations block success.

Flase narrative. At the chemical plant where I built their ERP system, which integrated with every aspect of the plant operation I had access to all that data. So you can accuse me of listing to Liberal media. But I had the actual information. I know how much the spent on it, and how many people they dedicated to it, and what the procedures were to deal with it.
So blah blah on your accusations.
I also spent decades into the building business where building regulations a tually help homeowner to not get conned out of their money by unscrupulous developers like Trump, but it protects legitimate builders from those same con men. No wonder Trump Co is so attached to deregulation.

Typed this on my stupid touch screen.

 

[Thales750]

I think you need to give Trump more than 5 minutes to correct many years of embedded corruption and mismanagement. He was thwarted at every turn during is first term. It is actually a blessing that the Dems stole the 2020 election. They gave Trump four years to hammer out a plan and he did it with a vengeance. Trump better understands the deep state now and has people who are willing to implement his plans. He actually hit the ground running Jan 20th and took everyone by surprise at how prepared his team turned out to be. Give him a chance to bring it home and stop second guessing every decision he makes. And especially, stop gloating when you think he has failed and in doing so, proved yourself right. You should want him to prove you wrong in your assessment of his ability. Saying that you have been proven right doesn't make you smart as you seem to think it does. You come across as very happy when you think Trump didn't immediately succeed. That is as anti-American as it comes if you believe Trump has identified some of the problems he needs to solve. Cheering when you think he failed is not a good look. The rest of us are willing to be a little more patient.

Trump is not a traditional politician or even a traditional businessman. He says too much too soon and so looks to the naysayers as though he is changing his mind when in fact, he is allowing public opinion to shape the details. I would prefer a more traditional method but compare it to the the old style waterfall method of software development with the newer more interactive methods for context. Just because you are not comfortable with Trump's methods doesn't mean they can't work. All we know for sure is that the existing methods do not work so let's just give the man some space.


I explained when this happened and why. This is a history lesson. It does not serve billionaires to have China undercut their companies and put them out of business so I'm not sure where you're going with that one.

Both the upper and lower classes would disagree with that statement

All I did was list a couple of the primary campaign issues. Not sure why you feel the need to denigrate them. Enough people thought them sufficiently important that they voted for Trump. But, it is what we have all come to expect from you. Trump makes Republicans and Democrats alike crazy because he makes all politicians look like the lying scum they are. They promise whatever they think will get them elected and deliver what their donors want. Trump actually works very hard at trying to deliver what he promises and that is what I like most about him. He has too many things that need fixing to get them all done but he has sure made a huge dent in a couple of them.

What are you going to say when the coming great depression wipes out your life's savings and Trump Co kills the entire global economies?
Is there a threshold for your support?

 

[The_Doc_Man]

So blah blah on your accusations.

May I respectfully return the sentiment?

 

[Thales750]

May I respectfully return the sentiment?

You'll come around, and paraphrasing to make a point is something I have come to expect from Pat, please don't descend to her level. One of her is enough for any 20 conversations.