"California judge" blocks President Trump order withholding funding to sanctuary cities

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Trump = not winning

Appeal it, Trump and go to the Court. You will win there.

Jake Fakey= Stolen Valor Lying Cuck.

See!

Yeah, I see you are a cuck. And a fake soldier.

 

[Pogo]

I'm not going to comment on whether the judge/panel is right or wrong, should or shouldn't have ruled as s/he/it did, etc. because I haven't read the decision, nor do I know off the top of my head what precedents and so on pertain to the matter, and, frankly, I don't feel like making the effort to find out. I will say, however, that at this rate, we're going to end up with country being "run" by the judicial rather than by the executive branch.

The judicial branch is there as a check on that executive branch. That's kind of the whole point.

Do you think that was an abuse of power or something?
Because, otherwise, I don't even see the point in you saying that. The last travel ban was within his authority. Pretty sure holding municipalities and states accountable for doing illegal acts and helping criminals is within his administrations authority as well.

Oh I didn't even address the content. I addressed the use of the adjective "California" firstly, and the wish of the other poster to dispense with the intentionally-designed system of checks and balances secondly.


Any minute now we'll hear from AG Gump: "I really am amazed that a judge sitting on an estuary in the most populous state can issue an order that stops the President of the United States in what appears to be clearly his statutory constitutional duty". I wonder if Gump voted to put this judge in place too...

so, if you don't think that, then why say it? Seems redundant.

I didn't say it. YOU did.

 

[IsaacNewton]

So Drumpf has once again overstepped his authority and was slapped down by the courts. What's a small-hands Mussolini wannabe to do?

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Jake joined the Navy, and was promptly kicked out for offering blowjobs to fellow sailors.

 

[TNHarley]

I'm not going to comment on whether the judge/panel is right or wrong, should or shouldn't have ruled as s/he/it did, etc. because I haven't read the decision, nor do I know off the top of my head what precedents and so on pertain to the matter, and, frankly, I don't feel like making the effort to find out. I will say, however, that at this rate, we're going to end up with country being "run" by the judicial rather than by the executive branch.

The judicial branch is there as a check on that executive branch. That's kind of the whole point.

Do you think that was an abuse of power or something?
Because, otherwise, I don't even see the point in you saying that. The last travel ban was within his authority. Pretty sure holding municipalities and states accountable for doing illegal acts and helping criminals is within his administrations authority as well.

Oh I didn't even address the content. I addressed the use of the adjective "California" firstly, and the wish of the other poster to dispense with the intentionally-designed system of checks and balances secondly.


Any minute now we'll hear from AG Gump: "I really am amazed that a judge sitting on an estuary in the most populous state can issue an order that stops the President of the United States in what appears to be clearly his statutory constitutional duty". I wonder if Gump voted to put this judge in place too...

so, if you don't think that, then why say it? Seems redundant.

I didn't say it. YOU did.

omg nevermind lol

 

[Pogo]

Suppose we were under attack by North Korea and an ultra liberal judge blocked Trumps ability to wage war.

This is a MUCH more serious national problem than the just the irresponsible actions of a lone judge. They can and will put us ALL at risk over their agendas.

There needs to be some kind of judicial consensus requiring "X" number if judges from "X" number of various states to halt Executive orders that pose no threat to national security and are in fact necessary to ensure national security.

Allowing one idiot on the bench here and there to stop the President from protecting the nation is a serous risk to national security.

Imagine a federal judge issuing a stay on D-Day in 1944, lol.

These idiots need to be impeached as soon as they make these idiotic asinine rulings.

Once AGAIN Sparkles --- you said the same thing last week, you were asked on what basis, and you ran away.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The law does not state the local police have to do the federal government's job....and pay for it themselves??

If they are refusing to do that job, your point is immaterial, isnt it?

no, i don't think so??? there are 2 points in my statement....

Your first point, that the local cops dont have to do the Feds job, is true and the Feds should contribute to their efforts to do that job, which I believe also to be true.

But these are cases where local jurisdiction are refusing to cooperate with the Feds in this matter, so why should they get the funds for doing what they are refusing to do?

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

I say withhold the funds anyway, screw the psycho libtard judge.

I say go for it! It will add another charge onto the Articles of Impeachment of the Narcissist-in Chief.

And the Orange One just keeps 'WINNING' in his race to the bottom!

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Breaking News Update!

Kate Steinle was unavailable for comment!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Trump = not winning

Appeal it, Trump and go to the Court. You will win there.

Jake Fakey= Stolen Valor Lying Cuck.

See!

Yeah, I see you are a cuck. And a fake soldier.

 

[mamooth]

Say it with me: SEE YOU IN COURT!

Being how Trump keeps getting humiliated in court, why are you asking for more humiliation?

It's not complicated. If Trump wants to stop losing in court, he should stop pissing on the Constitution. If you Trump-bedwetters want the country to stop laughing at you, you have to stop whining like little loser bitches.

 

[JakeStarkey]

He won't lose on the Sanctuary Cities issue in withholding money.

 

[Meathead]

Say it with me: SEE YOU IN COURT!

Being how Trump keeps getting humiliated in court, why are you asking for more humiliation?

It's not complicated. If Trump wants to stop losing in court, he should stop pissing on the Constitution. If you all of your Trump-bedwetters want the country to stop laughing at you, you have to stop whining like little loser bitches.

Whining?! Trump?

Only some beta male with tons of butt hurt would or could come up with that.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Say it with me: SEE YOU IN COURT!

Being how Trump keeps getting humiliated in court, why are you asking for more humiliation?

It's not complicated. If Trump wants to stop losing in court, he should stop pissing on the Constitution. If you all of your Trump-bedwetters want the country to stop laughing at you, you have to stop whining like little loser bitches.

Whining?! Trump?

Only some beta male with tons of butt hurt would or could come up with that.

See

 

[mamooth]

Only some beta male with tons of butt hurt would or could come up with that.

That would be why all the Trump-wimps are whining out their butthurt here in thread after thread.

It's strange. You'd think they'd be pleased about winning, but instead, the Trump-wimps constantly keep getting more whiny and butthurt. Every day they're here crying even harder about how the mean ol' liberals keep humiliating them and DearLeader.

You poor Trump-snowflakes. I suggest you all create a SafeSpace where you don't have to worry about those awful liberals laughing at you and triggering you with facts and evidence. Then you can retreat there, and do what conservative men always do when they're together out of the public eye.

 

[Pogo]

Judge Orrick blocked the Sanctuary City Order and Planned Parenthood videos - and donated $250,000 to Obama to get his job

Linkie?

Obama Appointee Blocks More Video Releases By Group Behind Planned Parenthood Sting

says a lot about you that you laugh while our great republic is being usurped.

Oh no Boilbutt, I'm laughing at you.
I want a link to this here "$250,000 donation".

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Breaking: Degeneracy In Action

The judge who issued the order is a homosexual.

 

[Pogo]

Just do it, Trump. These 'judges' have no say.

You have no say, obviously shoog, but whine on, by all means.

This faggot judge will be overruled. Like all 9th jerkit faggot rulings.

OH, the judge is gay? Why, I did not know that.

Yet another in the relentless litany of sound reasoning bases from the butthurt.

"faggot judge"....
"batshit crazy".....
"Impeach the fucker".....

Ah, I love the pungent smell of the Authoritarian dictator-worshipers in the evening.

You're a faggot too. Sorry for leaving your FAGGOT ass out.

Again --- linkie?

This thread is just a fallacy hunter's wet dream. Literally from the first word.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Only some beta male with tons of butt hurt would or could come up with that.

That would be why all the Trump-wimps are whining out their butthurt here in thread after thread.

It's strange. You'd think they'd be pleased about winning, but instead, the Trump-wimps constantly keep getting more whiny and butthurt. Every day they're here crying even harder about how the mean ol' liberals keep humiliating them and DearLeader.

You poor Trump-snowflakes. I suggest you all create a SafeSpace where you don't have to worry about those awful liberals laughing at you and triggering you with facts and evidence. Then you can retreat there, and do what conservative men always do when they're together out of the public eye.

Kate Steinle thought she was in a safe place!

 

[Marion Morrison]

Suppose we were under attack by North Korea and an ultra liberal judge blocked Trumps ability to wage war.

This is a MUCH more serious national problem than the just the irresponsible actions of a lone judge. They can and will put us ALL at risk over their agendas.

There needs to be some kind of judicial consensus requiring "X" number if judges from "X" number of various states to halt Executive orders that pose no threat to national security and are in fact necessary to ensure national security.

Allowing one idiot on the bench here and there to stop the President from protecting the nation is a serous risk to national security.

Imagine a federal judge issuing a stay on D-Day in 1944, lol.

These idiots need to be impeached as soon as they make these idiotic asinine rulings.

Would face military tribunal and be summarily executed by firing squad.