.

Here are the lawsuits against Trump's executive orders :

http://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/how-many-of-trumps-executive-orders-are-being-challenged

.

The lawsuits aren't the point - or at least are a different point.

The issue here is that Trump is playing by the rules on these law suits when, if he he saw himself as above the law (Banjo silly claim was "Trump considers himself to be above the law, irreproachable, and able to do whatever he likes, regardless of the law") then he'd ignore these lawsuits and judicial Temporary Restraining Orders and carry on as he wishes. After all he has plenty of precedent to do so if he so desire, the most recent being Biden's bragging about ignoring the Supreme Court rulings. And plenty before that.
But he doesn't act as though he's above the law but instead is using the law to put these activist judges in their place.

"Both Putin and Trump benefit from presidential immunity."
Banjo seems very vexed by the courts confirming US presidential immunity as though it only applies to Trump. But it does and has applied to all presidents. For example, Obama was able to carry out extra-judicial murders of US citizens using his presidential immunity. Its not something new. Equally Biden knows it protects him which is why he didn't feel the need to pardon himself when he (or whoever controlled his autopen) was giving pardons out like they were M&Ms.

Ultimately we have a class of people who utterly misunderstand MAGA and America First and in their ignorance attribute actions and motives to Trump that don't stand the slightest scrutiny.

I wonder if they'll ever catch on.

Ah, there it is - the mhaze special. It's a familiar playbook by now:

- Shift the goalposts a little.
- Reduce the debate to a technicality that happens to suit your point,
- Claim deeper insight into Trump’s motives than anyone else.
- And cap it off with a jab about ignorance.

You're not panicking just yet, mhaze, but the defensive gears are clearly turning. You’re now drawing a razor-thin distinction between “acting above the law” and “disobeying court orders,” as though only the latter could qualify.

But acting as though one is above the law isn’t limited to outright defiance - it also includes publicly attacking judges, demanding loyalty from legal officials, and treating judicial constraints as political obstacles to be discredited or bypassed.

Trump’s done all of that. Repeatedly.

And once again, you dodge by pivoting to Biden, Obama, and this vaguely defined “class” of people who allegedly don’t understand MAGA. That’s not an argument - it’s just misdirection dressed up as insight.

"You’re now drawing a razor-thin distinction between “acting above the law” and “disobeying court orders,” as though only the latter could qualify."

Well there is a difference between the two even if you can't see it. But I never drew the distinction. I never talked about disobeying court orders (even though you put it in quotes!!) because Trump hasn't disobeyed court orders and hasn't, yet, proposed doing so.

Well if "publicly attacking judges", "demanding loyalty from legal officials", "treating judicial constraints as political obstacles" is acting above the law then every president since Washington has acted above the law.

The problem here is that the activist judges are the last line of defence for the deep state as it battles to salvage something of its power and ability to milk the US taxpayer from the MAGA assaults. The deep state has relied for decades on the inaction of the Congress and the Executive to allow it to do as it wishes and now all that is under attack by a democratically elected leader moving against an undemocratic bureaucracy. The judges are its last hope (http://tiny.cc/az6e001).

Trump could have initiated a constitutional crisis by ignoring the judical orders but has taken a different path which his team had mapped out long before taking office. that being to defeat these judicial orders individually and severally in upper courts. At the same time, expect to see Congressional action to fix what clearly is a problem in the US system. That problem being that of one unelected judge overriding the policies of a democratically elected leader who took those policies to the electorate and had them endorsed.

"And once again, you dodge by pivoting to Biden, Obama". Do you not get it deliberately or is it something worse. I'm simply pointing out that people like Banjo are fretting over actions by Trump which aren't in the slightest unusual in the US context. There have been contests between the judiciary and the Executive from the year dot. Trump's travails aren't the slightest unusual and his responses aren't the slightest unusual except that they are less extreme than most - FDR threatened to stack the Supreme Court if it stood in his way.

Banjo's claims were that Trump was acting above the law and you've tried (however ineptly) to support that. But Trump is acting very much within the law and in the traditions of all US presidents.

People can't understand the nuances of Trump's rapprochement with Putin and, due to TDS, apply nefarious motives to it. Trump wants peace and he wants to draw Russia away from the Chinese grip. Nothing more nefarious than that.

Hi Banjo Patterson,

What exactly do you propose that Trump do about Ukraine?

"Putin uses the law and adapts it wherever necessary to fulfill his political goals."
- What makes you assume the war in Ukraine isn't an existential treat to Russia, and that Russia wasn't forced to act after the West overthrew the country in 2014?

Regarding the Brooking poll, how many of those who took part are willing to go to the front lines and fight for Ukraine?

They may want 'something' done, I'm not sure what exactly CAN be done, but I doubt they'd hold the same opinion if offered the opportunity to put their lives where their mouth is.

What do you propose the West do?
Show me an outcome that doesn't result in further conflict, including loss of life and financial cost to everyone involved.

This war, the loss of life and the loss of territory never had to happen, if 1. U.S. with the help of USAID didn't overthrow the country (and spend billions winning the hearts and minds of westerners with it's bought and paid for media campaign which I think effectively fudges those poll results) 2. If they'd entered into the Minsk agreements in good faith, not used it to buy time to build up the military and 3. Enetered into agreements in Istanbul talks in April 2022 when the West convinced Zelensky to continue the war with western support.

Truthfully Ukraine joining NATO and building up it's western military was a recipe for disaster for the entire region including Europe anyway.

As for USAID, they didn't roll back all of the agency programs.
From what I understand there are still some 1000 programs still in effect.

Beyond that, Trump 2.0 is starting to look little better than Trump 1.0. There was hope that tings would not spiral out of hand in the M/E when he first demanded a ceasefire, but he now seems powerless to do anything there other than be pushed towards a war with Iran.
His attacks on the Houthi have been an error of judgement.