***** Official Trump 47 Admin Court Battles *****

333,791 Views | 3150 Replies | Last: 14 sec ago by will25u
BusterAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:07p, 8/28/25
AG
It is a long row to hoe to argue that a board member of the Federal Reserve Bank who committed Bank Fraud, while in office, did not commit "Malfeasance in Office."
It takes a special kind of brainwashed useful idiot to politically defend government fraud, waste, and abuse.
Reply Quote
7
flown-the-coop
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BusterAg • 3:10p, 8/28/25
AG
I wasn't sure if it occurred during office or before. If during, then her position is even more laughable.

What an embarrassment.
Reply Quote
1
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 3:12p, 8/28/25
flown-the-coop said:
I wasn't sure if it occurred during office or before. If during, then her position is even more laughable.

What an embarrassment.

The houses were bought before she started working for the FED. But that doesn't make any difference in my view.

I committed fraud before I got hired for a company, but you can't fire me for cause because it has just come to light since I have been working for you. Nanny nanny boo boo, you can't get me.

Seems really silly to me.
Reply Quote
7
flown-the-coop
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 3:18p, 8/28/25
AG
Oh I agree. But that seems to be the case she is making.

Even the appearance of impropriety or honest mistake should be enough to"for cause" given the nature of the position she held.

The fact anyone defends her is insane to me.

Arrest her for trespassing tomorrow morning and end this.
Reply Quote
3
Mathguy64
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:29p, 8/28/25
AG
Yep. You should be allowed to make economic and financial policy for the country when you broke the law (allegedly, but those papers aren't forgeries) to benefit yourself financially on a loan.
Reply Quote
1
BusterAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 3:33p, 8/28/25
AG
will25u said:
flown-the-coop said:
I wasn't sure if it occurred during office or before. If during, then her position is even more laughable.

What an embarrassment.

The houses were bought before she started working for the FED. But that doesn't make any difference in my view.

I committed fraud before I got hired for a company, but you can't fire me for cause because it has just come to light since I have been working for you. Nanny nanny boo boo, you can't get me.

Seems really silly to me.

She had a duty to notify her lender that she was moving out of her primary residence. In fact, if she did prior to one year before closing, she had to notify the lender in writing what extenuating circumstance created the problem. She did not.

This is all so juicy because it has so much in common with NYC's stupid lawsuit against Trump. It is so hard to defend the Trump lawsuit and also attack Trump holding Fed board accountable for something so similar.

Cracks. me. up.
It takes a special kind of brainwashed useful idiot to politically defend government fraud, waste, and abuse.
Reply Quote
3
BusterAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Mathguy64 • 3:34p, 8/28/25
AG
Mathguy64 said:
Yep. You should be allowed to make economic and financial policy for the country when you broke the law (allegedly, but those papers aren't forgeries) to benefit yourself financially on a loan.

Unless you use too much fake tanning spray.

In that case, Orange Man Bad.
It takes a special kind of brainwashed useful idiot to politically defend government fraud, waste, and abuse.
Reply Quote
1
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:29a, 8/29/25

Reply Quote
2
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:31a, 8/29/25
Reply Quote
7
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:30p, 8/29/25
Reply Quote
4
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:37p, 8/29/25
Reply Quote
10
techno-ag
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 4:14p, 8/29/25
AG
will25u said:

Yeah that's pretty awesome. That's my president. I voted for this.
The left cannot kill the Spirit of Charlie Kirk.
Reply Quote
11
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:58p, 8/29/25
Reply Quote
4
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:04p, 8/29/25

Reply Quote
2
1 edit
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:30p, 8/29/25
Reply Quote
5
flown-the-coop
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 9:39p, 8/29/25
AG
SCOTUS now identifies as non-binary. Even if they had balls, they have no clue what to do with them other than ask the wise Latina.
Reply Quote
3
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:35p, 9/1/25
Reply Quote
2
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:46p, 9/1/25
Reply Quote
3
Ellis Wyatt
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:00p, 9/1/25
Biden appointee. They hate America.

Reply Quote
4
BMX Bandit
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:23p, 9/1/25
Quote:
after SCOTUS ruled explicitly that lower courts have no authority to do so.


For the 100th time, the Casa case on injunctions dues not apply to cases under the administrative procedures act.
Reply Quote
2
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:25p, 9/1/25


Reply Quote
5
1 edit
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:10p, 9/2/25
Is this how it is usually done? Withhold the order pending rehearing/en banc rehearing?

I know they will most of the time(less Trump) withhold injunctions pending appeal.


Reply Quote
4
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:14p, 9/2/25



ETA: Another

Reply Quote
5
1 edit
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:21p, 9/2/25


ETA: Thread...



ETA2:

Reply Quote
5
2 edits
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:30p, 9/2/25
Are DC juries/grand juries going to be a problem? My guess is, YES.

Reply Quote
5
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:31p, 9/2/25
Reply Quote
2
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 5:34p, 9/2/25
AG
Good. Humphrey's Executor has been grossly misstated in what it actually held versus what was said in dicta.

Dicta has no precedential binding.
Reply Quote
8
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:34p, 9/2/25
Reply Quote
4
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 5:43p, 9/2/25
aggiehawg said:
Good. Humphrey's Executor has been grossly misstated in what it actually held versus what was said in dicta.

Dicta has no precedential binding.


Reply Quote
4
aggiehawg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 5:45p, 9/2/25
AG
Gee, one might think I paid attention in law school, or something. Know how to read SCOTUS cases.
Reply Quote
4
Troy91
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:59p, 9/2/25
AG
That is the detail that most lay people miss when reading a single USSC case. They set up their plan years in advance in other opinions. They just wait until they have the correct fact pattern and the number of necessary votes before they finally issue the ruling that have been forecasting for years.
Reply Quote
2
flown-the-coop
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aggiehawg • 6:13p, 9/2/25
AG
You not only pay attention but study the detail and study many sources before you formulate an opinion.

Many other legal beagles simply cite a case or do, say its decided law, and anyone to the contrary is dumb and uneducated on the law.

These cases are hitting at the very foundation of our government and separation of powers. There will not be quick, easy answers people want.

Hopefully SCOTUS recognizes it needs to put itself in check and get back to being an officiator v player.

Always appreciate your take Ms Hawg.
Reply Quote
3
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:53p, 9/2/25
Reply Quote
3
will25u
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:54p, 9/2/25
Reply Quote
3
aezmvp
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to will25u • 10:10p, 9/2/25
will25u said:
Are DC juries/grand juries going to be a problem? My guess is, YES.


Solution:

Pass legislation eliminating the DC Circuit. Items located only in DC not pertaining to the federal government are handled by controlling Maryland district court. Items with the Federal government as either party are farmed out to the circuit courts. Judges are removed but any judge that is nominated in the 12 month period after to an open seat in another circuit court doesn't require reconfirmation and they retain tenure.

Pros: You eliminate a lot of high flyer sinecures, fill a bunch of judge seats without Senate battles. You make it harder to judge shop. And you eliminate a lot of lefty federal judges in one fell swoop.

Cons:... well you'd have to wait for a Senator to run out of steam and then vote it through. But other than that I'm not sure.
Reply Quote
4
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.