3 minutes ago, Presnock said:

Believe the tariffs by Trump (blatantly illegal as that is assigned to the Congress) is to break the US away from all except the bad guys IMHO and he fell right into the BRICS program. I am unsure how many years it will take for anyone to trust the US again. IMHO he is a traitor to the US Constitution and the citizens (except the ultra rich) of the US. I am sure those that still support him will slam my comments but the facts speak for themselves again, IMHO based on a fairly educated English American person.

While the Court may ultimately determine that presidents applying tariffs is unconstitutional, to say it is "blatantly illegal" is just to lie. Trump is not the first president to apply tariffs, and over the years, long before Trump, Congress has been handing over their powers to the Executive Branch.

All of the sudden with Trump, the left wants to claw that power back. That's fine with me, I think the President has more power than the Constitution intended, but that did not start with Trump and again, to say as much is to lie.

27 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I think the President has more power than the Constitution intended, but that did not start with Trump and again, to say as much is to lie.

Pushing the legal boundaries of what one person can do without Congress during peacetime, many historians will rank Trump as the most extreme in U.S. history.

His supporters argue he isn't being "extreme," but is simply being "effective" by using powers that Congress lazily gave away to the White House over the last 100 years.

1 minute ago, Hamus Yaigh said:

Pushing the legal boundaries of what one person can do without Congress during peacetime, many historians will rank Trump as the most extreme in U.S. history.

All the leftist historians anyway, which is most of them.

1 minute ago, Hamus Yaigh said:

His supporters argue he isn't being "extreme," but is simply being "effective" by using powers that Congress lazily gave away to the White House over the last 100 years.

What supporters said he wasn't being extreme? Not me.

Are you saying it's okay for one president to apply a 10% tariff, but not okay for another to apply a 50% tariff?

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

While the Court may ultimately determine that presidents applying tariffs is unconstitutional, to say it is "blatantly illegal" is just to lie. Trump is not the first president to apply tariffs, and over the years, long before Trump, Congress has been handing over their powers to the Executive Branch.

All of the sudden with Trump, the left wants to claw that power back. That's fine with me, I think the President has more power than the Constitution intended, but that did not start with Trump and again, to say as much is to lie.

NO lie was there, I stated facts only but then again with you and your attitude I ignore anyway. have a good day!

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

All the leftist historians anyway, which is most of them.

What supporters said he wasn't being extreme? Not me.

Are you saying it's okay for one president to apply a 10% tariff, but not okay for another to apply a 50% tariff?

He originally went way beyond 10% so that it truly penalized those nations. I am not saying tariffs per say are ridiculous, only that trade imbalances need to be ironed out diplomatically iMHO anyway. If a country has a serious trade imbalance favoring their country then the US should work out a better balance using whatever plan is available again, IMHO.

13 minutes ago, Presnock said:

NO lie was there, I stated facts only but then again with you and your attitude I ignore anyway. have a good day!

You claimed the president applying tariffs was "blatantly illegal". Clearly this is not true, because other presidents have applied tariffs. So it's not at lie, it's an untruth? Or you misspoke?

You have an incredibly wonderful day!

12 minutes ago, Presnock said:

He originally went way beyond 10% so that it truly penalized those nations. I am not saying tariffs per say are ridiculous, only that trade imbalances need to be ironed out diplomatically iMHO anyway. If a country has a serious trade imbalance favoring their country then the US should work out a better balance using whatever plan is available again, IMHO.

I was and continue to be generally against tariffs. But again, to say they are "blatantly" illegal is a lie. Th court may or may not determine they are illegal.

The amount has nothing to do with whether or not the application is legal.

There are arguments for and against tariffs.

21 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I was and continue to be generally against tariffs. But again, to say they are "blatantly" illegal is a lie. Th court may or may not determine they are illegal.

The amount has nothing to do with whether or not the application is legal.

There are arguments for and against tariffs.

when I said blatantly, I having done so several times in my life, taken that same oath he has taken twice now to the support and maintain the laws within that Constitution and Congress has not delegated that authority to put tariffs on other countries, especially our closest neighbors and allies. He is weaponizing tariffs against most of the world and IMHO is doing so in violation of the constitution, which I can read too and it won't make any difference in my opinion of his actions even if HIS SCOTUS determines he did so "legally". Just because other presidents may have used tariffs like this doesn't in my opinion make his doing so any more legit. In any case, I was just explaining my opinion, not trying to convince you or anyone else to change your opinion.

10 minutes ago, Presnock said:

when I said blatantly, I having done so several times in my life, taken that same oath he has taken twice now to the support and maintain the laws within that Constitution and Congress has not delegated that authority to put tariffs on other countries, especially our closest neighbors and allies. He is weaponizing tariffs against most of the world and IMHO is doing so in violation of the constitution, which I can read too and it won't make any difference in my opinion of his actions even if HIS SCOTUS determines he did so "legally". Just because other presidents may have used tariffs like this doesn't in my opinion make his doing so any more legit. In any case, I was just explaining my opinion, not trying to convince you or anyone else to change your opinion.

HIS Supreme Court? It's always the same with leftists. They love the court when it goes there way, but it's the end of democracy when it doesn't. They love Executive power when it's in the hands of leftists, but it's the end of democracy when it is not.

And no, you were not stating an opinion, you were stating as fact, that the president applying tariffs is "blatantly illegal". If it were, and if you really cared about the Constitution, you would have railed against Biden and Obama when they applied tariffs.

Biden forgiving student loans was judged unconstitutional, but he did it anyway. Where were you for the Constitution then?

All you care about is getting Trump, and you';; say anything to do it.

NB This great Say What? moment by Solicitor General Sauer at 05 NOV 2025 Supreme Court oral tariff arguments:

The most ludicrous aspect of Sauer’s Supreme Court argument was his claim that federal revenue from Trump’s tariffs was “incidental.” Sauer claimed Trump was just exercising his constitutional power to manage foreign policy, not raising federal revenue.

According to Sauer, “These are regulatory tariffs, they are not revenue-raising tariffs. The fact that they raise revenue is only incidental.” (my italics/bold)

The problem with Sauer’s claim is that the president and his advisors have repeatedly cited increased federal revenue as one of the reasons for imposing tariffs.

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/5599776-trump-tariffs-supreme-court/

4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

HIS Supreme Court? It's always the same with leftists. They love the court when it goes there way, but it's the end of democracy when it doesn't. They love Executive power when it's in the hands of leftists, but it's the end of democracy when it is not.

And no, you were not stating an opinion, you were stating as fact, that the president applying tariffs is "blatantly illegal". If it were, and if you really cared about the Constitution, you would have railed against Biden and Obama when they applied tariffs.

Biden forgiving student loans was judged unconstitutional, but he did it anyway. Where were you for the Constitution then?

All you care about is getting Trump, and you';; say anything to do it.

This type of attack on me is normal for you. If you had any idea of what my political learnings are you would understand that any president who takes that oath and then ignores the laws therein is a traitor to the country. I have never voted for a Democrat and do not like their policies. However, I have been aware of DJT since the mid 60's and felt and still feel he is unqualified to be our president. I realize he may have gotten more votes but again many just crossed over as they didn't like Harris (also IMHO not qualified to be president of the US. Biden was a lousy president too.

On 2/13/2026 at 11:08 AM, impulse said:

Simples. Buy less imported crap. Make more in the USA, even if the quality costs more. Put more 'Muricans to work in manufacturing.

Do you really think it's a good idea to import almost a $Trillion more than you export every year? How long before your piggy bank breaks?

You obviously have no idea of what it would take to begin manufacturing everything that the US imports - don't have the facilities to even begin, let alone all the necessary skilled workers to man those factories if they were even available. The US was not suffering that bad in the "trade" wars IMHO with services sold around the world. Already there are a multitude of citizens that have huge college loans and no possible jobs that will start their pay at livable wages. My daughter interviews regularly for those with degrees in economics yet says none of those that she talks with are even interested once they hear the benefits as they can't live on that amount of money. They expect salaries equal to workers of 15-20 years of experience and these graduates can't even answer basic questions about economics according to what my daughter says. Been looking a long time for new folks but none coming.

Let's see if the Supreme Court rules in Trump's favor after his temper tantrum against a former Swiss official.

Trump raised tariffs on Switzerland from 30% to 39%, "because I didn't like her attitude".

That sort of childish behavior is unlikely to be given credence by the court. It may well be used against his entire tariff scheme, which has no real basis in anything economic. All were just his "whims".

On 2/13/2026 at 4:08 AM, impulse said:

Simples. Buy less imported crap. Make more in the USA, even if the quality costs more. Put more 'Muricans to work in manufacturing.

Do you really think it's a good idea to import almost a $Trillion more than you export every year? How long before your piggy bank breaks?

Is that your best anti-David Ricardo impersonation?

A couple things that are funny....800,000 new manufacturing jobs were created under Biden. So far, manufacturing jobs, as well as construction spending on new facilities, have fallen under Trump 2.0. It seems corporate America didn't get your message and doesn't think it is economically viable to make current "imported crap" in the US.

You also say "even if quality costs more". I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that if a Dem POTUS enacted your policy, and "quality costs more", you would scream INFLATION !

15 hours ago, Presnock said:

My daughter interviews regularly for those with degrees in economics yet says none of those that she talks with are even interested once they hear the benefits as they can't live on that amount of money. They expect salaries equal to workers of 15-20 years of experience and these graduates can't even answer basic questions about economics according to what my daughter says. Been looking a long time for new folks but none coming.

Isn't that an indictment of the liberal US education system that focuses more on turning out Social Justice Protestors than competent economists?

Maybe that's why Trump wants to withhold federal money from those universities until they change their focus to putting out competent graduates instead of keffiyeh clad SJWs? But that's another topic for a different thread. Still, it's all part of Making America Great Again.

On 2/12/2026 at 8:08 PM, impulse said:

Simples. Buy less imported crap. Make more in the USA, even if the quality costs more. Put more 'Muricans to work in manufacturing.

Do you really think it's a good idea to import almost a $Trillion more than you export every year? How long before your piggy bank breaks?

Unfortunately the fact is that every time some country offends dear donald they get the tariff it’s his go to stick to try to bully other countries.A good example is Brazil Donald’s upset because their courts jailed the ex president for an attempted coup ( same as the traitor occupying the White House now)we had a trade surplus with Brazil……Absolutely no reason to tariff except Donnie is ( insert curse word here) the result is now steak is 20$ a pound and coffee is through the roof….THAT COSTS each and every American.now Donnie doesn’t feel that personally he’s on the government teat and grifting bigly selling influence and god knows what else!!kinda part of the reason he’s a bit unpopular lately ehh well that and his bestie Epstein….then Ukraine ….then women’s rights……then ICE……ya da ya da…yup thanks magga tired of winning yet?

1 hour ago, Wingate said:

Let's see if the Supreme Court rules in Trump's favor after his temper tantrum against a former Swiss official.

Trump raised tariffs on Switzerland from 30% to 39%, "because I didn't like her attitude".

As of November 2025, the US and Switzerland have agreed to limit US tariffs on Swiss goods to a maximum of 15 percent, after they had previously been temporarily increased to 39 percent.

Exemptions: Certain products, including specific medications, chemicals, and coffee, were already exempt from the higher tariffs.

TACO, once again.

3 hours ago, Tug said:

Unfortunately the fact is that every time some country offends dear donald they get the tariff it’s his go to stick to try to bully other countries.A good example is Brazil Donald’s upset because their courts jailed the ex president for an attempted coup ( same as the traitor occupying the White House now)we had a trade surplus with Brazil……Absolutely no reason to tariff except Donnie is ( insert curse word here) the result is now steak is 20$ a pound and coffee is through the roof….THAT COSTS each and every American.now Donnie doesn’t feel that personally he’s on the government teat and grifting bigly selling influence and god knows what else!!kinda part of the reason he’s a bit unpopular lately ehh well that and his bestie Epstein….then Ukraine ….then women’s rights……then ICE……ya da ya da…yup thanks magga tired of winning yet?

According to one Wharton graduate with a BS in Economic Science, tariffs are not paid by the American consumer. Technically, he is right. They are paid by the American importer who then passes them on to the American consumer in higher costs.

22 hours ago, Presnock said:

You obviously have no idea of what it would take to begin manufacturing everything that the US imports - don't have the facilities to even begin, let alone all the necessary skilled workers to man those factories if they were even available. The US was not suffering that bad in the "trade" wars IMHO with services sold around the world. Already there are a multitude of citizens that have huge college loans and no possible jobs that will start their pay at livable wages. My daughter interviews regularly for those with degrees in economics yet says none of those that she talks with are even interested once they hear the benefits as they can't live on that amount of money. They expect salaries equal to workers of 15-20 years of experience and these graduates can't even answer basic questions about economics according to what my daughter says. Been looking a long time for new folks but none coming.

Who runs education in the US?

It's so obvious! Only morons may believe that exporting countries are paying tariffs. It's just one of Trump's multiple lies for the gullible!

21 minutes ago, candide said:

It's so obvious! Only morons may believe that exporting countries are paying tariffs. It's just one of Trump's multiple lies for the gullible!

From the nasty little thumb down I got, there's at least one such person on this forum!

I love the way leftists fancy themselves smarter than everyone else, and how the pretend to care about the poor.

The left attacks tariffs, because they claim they will raise prices, and they do, but at the same time the left wants to raise corporate income taxes, which will absolutely raise prices, and again, when anyone says it will drive up prices the left calls them greedy, or stupid or a liar.

Both raise prices, but tariffs benefit domestic manufacturers, while raising taxes benefits foreign companies.

49 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Who runs education in the US?

The same people who taught Trump. That is why he knows so much about the economy. especially about tariffs.

7 hours ago, impulse said:

Isn't that an indictment of the liberal US education system that focuses more on turning out Social Justice Protestors than competent economists?

Maybe that's why Trump wants to withhold federal money from those universities until they change their focus to putting out competent graduates instead of keffiyeh clad SJWs? But that's another topic for a different thread. Still, it's all part of Making America Great Again.

Shirley, the guy who builded "Trump University" is concerned about the quality of edumacation.

On 2/14/2026 at 1:43 PM, Yellowtail said:

Another Trump-obsessed leftist regurgitator.

From the nasty little thumb down I got, there's at least one such person on this forum!

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

From the nasty little thumb down I got, there's at least one such person on this forum!

I don't think it was me, but a nasty post like yours deserves a few thumbs down.

2 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Who runs education in the US?

Obviously iMHO no one who really has any idea or they would have begun training teachers properly so they would know how to teach students. Parents are proportionately IMHO too to blame for lack of desire to learn, and finally cell phones and other AI instruments have dumbed people down in many areas of learning. Luckily my two daughters went to international schools in Chiang Mai, Bangkok, the Philippines, Spain and Italy. Not only did they learn the subjects being taught, they learned to mix with people of all races and nationalities. Having worked as a supervisor for well-schooled people including PHD's, several Masters, many languages, I know the value of well schooled individuals. I have also seen some of those that lacked that great training too. Biggest problem I see is that our society values sports figures, entertainment figures, and the like more than educators. During college, one of my daughters doing college in the US noted that a football star had as his English class book, the same text book she had in the 6th grade. But of course in the 6th grade she took the SAT (part of an Arizona State program for some schools in California) and scored higher than the average for that year in the US. She is a software expert who used to do repairs for BOA and Citibank while she was in college. Now is an Asst CEO for a major property developer. My younger daughter is on an exchange program with top universities and graduated from HS speaking, reading, writing, and even teaching in four totally different languages. One of those was a self-taught in Korean language which she enabled herself to score the highest leave (six) on the Korean international test done each year around the world. She taught beginning Chinese at another HS while in the eleventh grade and was awarded "Highest level Chinese Student" award that year. So yeah I am familiar with education and have seen great and not so great levels of people coming out of US schools.

On 2/14/2026 at 12:18 PM, Yellowtail said:

You claimed the president applying tariffs was "blatantly illegal". Clearly this is not true, because other presidents have applied tariffs. So it's not at lie, it's an untruth? Or you misspoke?

You have an incredibly wonderful day!

Just because other presidents have done it, maybe by Congress passing that on to the president then maybe that is legal but to date, anyone who takes an oath to the US constitution should understand and support those laws and by not doing so IMHO is a traitor to the country and its citizens IMHO. I took that oath several times and understand what it is supposed to mean and I honestly believe that this president feels he is Above that and can do whatever he feels like.

3 hours ago, Presnock said:

Obviously iMHO no one who really has any idea or they would have begun training teachers properly so they would know how to teach students. Parents are proportionately IMHO too to blame for lack of desire to learn, and finally cell phones and other AI instruments have dumbed people down in many areas of learning. Luckily my two daughters went to international schools in Chiang Mai, Bangkok, the Philippines, Spain and Italy. Not only did they learn the subjects being taught, they learned to mix with people of all races and nationalities. Having worked as a supervisor for well-schooled people including PHD's, several Masters, many languages, I know the value of well schooled individuals. I have also seen some of those that lacked that great training too. Biggest problem I see is that our society values sports figures, entertainment figures, and the like more than educators. During college, one of my daughters doing college in the US noted that a football star had as his English class book, the same text book she had in the 6th grade. But of course in the 6th grade she took the SAT (part of an Arizona State program for some schools in California) and scored higher than the average for that year in the US. She is a software expert who used to do repairs for BOA and Citibank while she was in college. Now is an Asst CEO for a major property developer. My younger daughter is on an exchange program with top universities and graduated from HS speaking, reading, writing, and even teaching in four totally different languages. One of those was a self-taught in Korean language which she enabled herself to score the highest leave (six) on the Korean international test done each year around the world. She taught beginning Chinese at another HS while in the eleventh grade and was awarded "Highest level Chinese Student" award that year. So yeah I am familiar with education and have seen great and not so great levels of people coming out of US schools.

The left runs education in the US. Teachers in the US generally make pretty good dough, get great benefits and a have a nice working environment.

Every teacher in the US should have to get a decent score on the SAT every year.

3 hours ago, Presnock said:

Just because other presidents have done it, maybe by Congress passing that on to the president then maybe that is legal but to date, anyone who takes an oath to the US constitution should understand and support those laws and by not doing so IMHO is a traitor to the country and its citizens IMHO. I took that oath several times and understand what it is supposed to mean and I honestly believe that this president feels he is Above that and can do whatever he feels like.

Really? So, as a prerequisite, every President, and for that matter, everyone that swears an oath to the Constitution should have to be a Constitutional scholar, yes? It is silly to expect the president to understand the Constitution completely. In any event, event Constitutional scholars often disagree on different aspects.

I do not think the president believes he is above the law, and at least up until now, he has abided every Supreme Court ruling, and far and away, most of the rulings have gone his way.

If he can do anything he likes, why did Bad Bunny perform at the Superbowl, why is Jimmy Kimmel still on the air, and why have all the prosecutors that went after him not been incarcerated?