7 hours ago, Old Croc said:

The UK has blocked the US from using RAF bases in his upcoming Iran war. All the erstwhle friends no longer automatically follow America into conflict.

Its not the first time. The UK blocked use of bases in 2012 and 2013 as well. Then, as now, isn't about personality politics, but points of law. Notably, the UK, at least openly, didn't follow the US into Vietnam. And in 1982, the US government hesitated over whether it would back a democratic NATO ally over a viscious military dictatorship, It took a then young opposition senator to speak some sense.

People like Jeane Kirkpatrick were urging Reagan to back the Argies. Astonishing.

But friends can disagree from time to time.

2 hours ago, Slowhand225 said:

The point of them is to drive manufacturing back home and its done that in spades so far.

You' must be kidding us. U.S. manufacturing employment saw a decline in 2025, dropping by approximately 108,000 jobs by the end of the year, with continued volatility into early 2026.

While 5,000 jobs were added in January 2026, the sector has faced 13 consecutive months of declines prior to that. The industry is experiencing headwinds from high input costs and policy uncertainties.

The data source is the Trump administration itself, through its Current Employment Statistics (CES) program, which provides monthly, seasonally adjusted, and detailed industry-level employment figures.

Only FoxNews diehard loyalists ignore this simple fact.

7 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Dont whine when the Russians come calling

7 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Hilarious!

The Russians can't even get to Kiev, how will they start calling anywhere else?

Their only strength these days is nuclear and they have enough sense not to use that. Unless of course, some madman starts WW3 by invading Iran in an attempt to detract from Epstein!

Who are all you blind followers going to attach yourself to after the inevitable and looming demise of the fascist - JD or perhaps the closeted speaker?

2 hours ago, Slowhand225 said:

The point of them is to drive manufacturing back home and its done that in spades so far.

Per Gemini AI:

Spades are manufactured globally, with high-volume production centered in China and India, while premium, forged, or specialized brands are crafted in Germany (e.g., IDEALSPATEN), the Netherlands (e.g., Sneeboer), the UK (e.g., Bulldog Tools), and the USA (e.g., King of Spades).

25 minutes ago, Roadsternut said:

Its not the first time. The UK blocked use of bases in 2012 and 2013 as well. Then, as now, isn't about personality politics, but points of law. Notably, the UK, at least openly, didn't follow the US into Vietnam. And in 1982, the US government hesitated over whether it would back a democratic NATO ally over a viscious military dictatorship, It took a then young opposition senator to speak some sense.

People like Jeane Kirkpatrick were urging Reagan to back the Argies. Astonishing.

But friends can disagree from time to time.

Thanks for the history lesson.

It is much more specific than my second sentence which you seem to think was all about the UK.

10 hours ago, TedG said:

This sort of blows up the left's narrative of fascism, kings, etc.

The Supreme Court's decision indeed reinforces the constitutional checks on executive power, showing that even bold presidential actions like these tariffs can be reined in by the judiciary. It highlights a functioning democracy rather than unchecked authority, which can undercut hyperbolic claims of fascism or king-like rule—narratives often amplified in polarized discourse but grounded more in perception and the minds of the polarised than institutional reality.

50 minutes ago, Old Croc said:

If the dictator believes SCOTUS rulings can just be ignored does that apply to his Presidential immunity?

Trump truly believes that he has the final say on everything. For him, SCOTUS is just an inconvenience that he can circumvent.

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

The state of the union address coming up soon should be very interesting.

It will be even more interesting the response when the SCOTUS shuts down birthright citizenship. Probably not before the Stae of the Union however.

10 hours ago, tomazbodner said:

Wouldn't be surprised if administration simply ignored the ruling...

No need to ignore the ruling. There are other statutes in place. Tariffs which have brought in hundreds of billions will continue.

8 hours ago, Yagoda said:

Dont whine when the Russians come calling

Russia is struggling 3 years into a "2 week" war with frigging Ukrainian. You think they have any chance against the entire EU 🤔😂😂😂

I remember this from the first (losing) tariff case against Trump:

NEW YORK, May 13 (Reuters)

Trump's interpretation, (plaintiff attorney) Schwab said, would allow him to impose tariffs "at any rate, at any time, simply by declaring a national emergency." No law gives the president the unilateral tariff authority that Trump has claimed, Schwab said. (my italics)

They asked (DoJ attorney) Hamilton whether there are any limits of a president's tariff power.

"We have a national shortage of peanut butter. Can the president declare an extraordinary emergency?" (Reagan appointee) U.S. District Judge Jane Restani asked. "What you're saying is there's no limit."

NB "no limit" meaning what is a declared 'emergency' is solely at the President's discretion

23 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

No need to ignore the ruling. There are other statutes in place.

If so then why did he break the law in the first place?

26 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

No need to ignore the ruling. There are other statutes in place. Tariffs which have brought in hundreds of billions will continue.

Do those statutes have limitations, like the amount and duration of the tariffs? If they do, it could limit the total revenues of the tariffs.

Short order to the birthright issue above, the Supreme Court agenda is two part:

• Can the Executive interpret the 14th amendment differently than it has for the last 100+ years

• And, even if so, can the Executive make such change solely by Executive Order.

9 hours ago, Yagoda said:

How. By making the economy worse and people pay more?

Translation : As usual I don't get it because of my MAGA mindset.

9 hours ago, AndreasHG said:

Whether one agrees with SCOTUS, admitting that the president acted illegally, or agrees with POTUS, believing that the Supreme Court has become a court of radical leftists who only want to see the nation fail, the conclusion is that the United States is no longer a state governed by the rule of law.

You mean the 6 republican appointed judges sitting on the bench are lefties?

19 minutes ago, Hawaiian said:

Do those statutes have limitations, like the amount and duration of the tariffs? If they do, it could limit the total revenues of the tariffs.

Not sure but Trump says there are ways as do the dissenting SCOTUS judges. Bit of same same but different.

7 hours ago, NoDisplayName said:

Donald Trump says 'I can do whatever I want' as President imposes 10% global tariffs despite Supreme Court ruling

https://www.gbnews.com/money/donald-trump-tariffs-supreme-court-ruling

The dummy spit is in.

1 hour ago, JerryM said:

Per Gemini AI:

Spades are manufactured globally, with high-volume production centered in China and India, while premium, forged, or specialized brands are crafted in Germany (e.g., IDEALSPATEN), the Netherlands (e.g., Sneeboer), the UK (e.g., Bulldog Tools), and the USA (e.g., King of Spades).

Bulldog Tools shut its doors today

https://www.wigantoday.net/business/tragic-news-as-wigans-oldest-employer-bulldog-tools-announces-its-closure-after-246-years-5605678

Idealspaten, made in China. What "crafted" mean is that the Germans stick on a nice handle, and charge more.

https://www.hahn-kolb.cn/IDEALSPATEN-steel-bow-support-shovel-without-handle/56761045.sku/en/US/CNY/

Asked If He Was Surprised By SCOTUS Loss, Trump Brags About His Reading Ability

Asked by a reporter if he was “surprised” by the Supreme Court’s tariff ruling, President Donald Trump answered in the affirmative by boasting about how well he reads.

“I was surprised because I thought that what we did was … I mean, I read the paragraphs. I read very well. Great comprehension,” he said. ‘We can’t lose this case.’”

...

While the court ruled that tariffs constituted an illegal tax on Americans, Trump repeatedly denied that was the outcome Friday.

“While I’m sure that they did not mean to do so, the Supreme Court’s decision today made the president’s ability to both regulate trade and impose tariffs more powerful and more crystal clear rather than less,” he said, willfully ignoring the substance of the ruling. “I don’t think they meant that. I’m sure they didn’t.”

And there are still people who believe what he is brabbling.

1 hour ago, Old Croc said:

Thanks for the history lesson.

It is much more specific than my second sentence which you seem to think was all about the UK.

Its never been the case that America's Allies "automatically" follow the US into war. Its allies might consider the evidence and come to the same conclusion as the US. re, the controversy during the Yugoslavian War, regarding US actions, NATO leadership and so forth. Not just about the Brits.

I don't think anything has really changed that much, with respect of allies supporting the US. No one has left NATO or any other treaty alliance with the United States, or even threatened to. Allies might disagree with US policy, as they have always done. Still Allies.

The range of opinions regarding US/Iran in 2026 is pretty much the same as in 2013, with a very different President who was in a similar situation. International Law hasn't changed.

If America was attacked or suffered some catastrophe, I think, just like in 2001, there will be friends lining up with offers of help and support.

The U.S. markets all rose Friday after the Supreme Court slapped down President Donald Trump’s “emergency” tariffs

As of noon, the S&P 500, Nasdaq Composite and the Dow Jones Industrial Average were all modestly up, with gains between 0.3% and 1.10%.

Earlier in the day, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis data showed the U.S. GDP grew just 1.4% last quarter, well below expectations of 2.5%.

Asked to evaluate the effectiveness of Trump’s tariffs in light of additional data showing the U.S. trade deficit grew last year, University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers couldn’t stop laughing.

“If the trade deficit this year is bigger than it was last year, and this year we have high tariffs in a trade war, and last year we didn’t, I guess it doesn’t require a lot of fancy statistics to infer that Trump’s tariffs didn’t help the trade deficit.”

3 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

"like we used to"? Well, we don't spend money and run the printing presses "like we used to." Stop living in the past. You sound like Donald Trump!

The point that went right over your head is that it worked. You'd have to know some American history though and thats gonna require reading so no, I don't expect much

11 hours ago, TedG said:

This sort of blows up the left's narrative of fascism, kings, etc.

Also i would advice anyone waiting for their refund check to look for another source of money!

1 hour ago, AndreasHG said:

You' must be kidding us. U.S. manufacturing employment saw a decline in 2025, dropping by approximately 108,000 jobs by the end of the year, with continued volatility into early 2026.

While 5,000 jobs were added in January 2026, the sector has faced 13 consecutive months of declines prior to that. The industry is experiencing headwinds from high input costs and policy uncertainties.

The data source is the Trump administration itself, through its Current Employment Statistics (CES) program, which provides monthly, seasonally adjusted, and detailed industry-level employment figures.

Only FoxNews diehard loyalists ignore this simple fact.

Tell me what 26/27 look like.


You can't be so ill informed as to think it would show right away, seriously ? lol

And then there is this arrogant Trump a*se licker. But of course SCOTUS is playing a dirty game by not ruling on what happens with the already collected tariffs. There will be thousands of lawsuits for refunds by big corporations, which will be granted by the lower courts, and each time the government will appeal, until it reaches SCOTUS again. This will take years.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/bessent-says-tariff-refund-ultimate-223942102.html

(Bloomberg) — Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said any refunds from tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court would amount to “ultimate corporate welfare,” suggesting he sees no benefit flowing to American consumers.

Bessent said litigation over refunds could turn into a months- or years-long process, and “could be a mess.” Earlier Friday, when asked about potential refunds at an Economic Club of Dallas event, the Treasury chief said he had “a feeling the American people won’t see it.”

1 hour ago, dinsdale said:

No need to ignore the ruling. There are other statutes in place. Tariffs which have brought in hundreds of billions will continue.

Hundreds of billions? You must be joking?

Where is all of that money?

Seriously can you show us a bit more insight?

I think this may be a bit more difficult to explain,please show the receipts.

It's incredible how he got so many people to believe that he could bring jobs back to America, reduce America's dependence upon imports, and improve the American economy.

Instead we see massive job losses, tens of thousands of farmers and small businesses going belly up, companies struggling to find laborers and countless other issues that have been a direct result of his whipsaw tariff policies, his inconsistencies, his extremism when it comes to immigration and so many other massive failures from the circus clown.

The United States trade deficit has widened sharply in December amid a surge in imports, and the goods shortfall in 2025 was the highest on record despite US President Donald Trump’s tariffs on foreign-manufactured merchandise.

Trump last year unleashed a barrage of tariffs against trading partners with the aim, among other things, of addressing trade imbalances and protecting US industries. But the punitive duties have not yielded a manufacturing renaissance, with factory employment declining by 83,000 jobs from January 2025 through January 2026.

“There just isn’t any evidence out there in the economic research literature to suggest that tariffs have materially impacted trade deficits historically when countries have implemented them,” said Chad Bown, senior fellow at the

https://share.google/I0CKvpnVtcVckQbOT

4 hours ago, Slowhand225 said:

He didn't lose anything either, in fact they said he could impose tariffs, just not the way he wanted to. Not a big deal, thats the point of the court.

This was a good ruling

Nobody ever said Americans don't pay the tariffs, if you didn't know that was coming you'd have to be stupid.
The point of them is to drive manufacturing back home and its done that in spades so far.
In the end, the goal is to have no income tax and be funded by tariffs, like we used to.

And you all will be riding a horse into town,like you used to.

4 hours ago, Slowhand225 said:

He didn't lose anything either, in fact they said he could impose tariffs, just not the way he wanted to. Not a big deal, thats the point of the court.

This was a good ruling

Nobody ever said Americans don't pay the tariffs, if you didn't know that was coming you'd have to be stupid.
The point of them is to drive manufacturing back home and its done that in spades so far.
In the end, the goal is to have no income tax and be funded by tariffs, like we used to.

Manufacturing jobs decreased in 2025! 🤣

The trade balance deficit also increased in 2025! 😆