Latest Breaking News

BigmanPigman

(51,590 posts)

30. That is inspired thinking.

Reply to moonseller66 (Reply #7)

Fri Jul 26, 2019, 08:58 PM

Jul 2019

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

45 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court says Trump can proceed with plan to spend military funds for border wall construction [View all] BumRushDaShow Jul 2019 OP

I think this is Texas . . . Iliyah Jul 2019 #1

Give it about 5 or 10 years vercetti2021 Jul 2019 #22

Now now, just because military installations need serious infrastructure work and base housing is Leghorn21 Jul 2019 #2

More FEDERALIST SOCIETY BULLSHIT............................... turbinetree Jul 2019 #3

Damn it. sinkingfeeling Jul 2019 #4

Silver lining: it is 2.5 billion and that is a drop in the bucket for what a real wall would take hlthe2b Jul 2019 #5

don't you mean they are now free to sdfernando Jul 2019 #12

I'm speaking from the standpoint of actually achieving a border-wide wall. No way in hell. hlthe2b Jul 2019 #15

This is a very scary decision to me! bluestarone Jul 2019 #6

Agree. We are definitely "down the rabbit hole" with this SC Va Lefty Jul 2019 #8

yea no kidding bluestarone Jul 2019 #9

This is why.... Wuddles440 Jul 2019 #25

The law of unintended consequences may play out. A Dem President could then declare hlthe2b Jul 2019 #38

Whoa! You mean the military doesn't really NEED all that money? moonseller66 Jul 2019 #7

That is inspired thinking. BigmanPigman Jul 2019 #30

well, well, well.... Grasswire2 Jul 2019 #10

I'm so glad that Hillary and Trump were similar enough to sit out 2016. RandySF Jul 2019 #11

Loss on lack of legal standing is almost always never mentioned in a title. Not dramatic. FredSanderson Jul 2019 #13

A S.Ct 5-4 party line vote allowing the wall to proceed, even based on standing, is a big deal. JudyM Jul 2019 #39

Just SMDH iluvtennis Jul 2019 #14

wondering here bluestarone Jul 2019 #16

I would think Congress BumRushDaShow Jul 2019 #17

I guess i assumed the House was party to the suit? bluestarone Jul 2019 #18

For this particular case, the House had filed a brief in support BumRushDaShow Jul 2019 #19

maybe we still have a shot at stopping this! TY bluestarone Jul 2019 #20

You are welcome! BumRushDaShow Jul 2019 #21

Congress can take away Scalded Nun Jul 2019 #23

The House could do that but of course the Senate would have to agree BumRushDaShow Jul 2019 #24

And the US takes another step towards Nazi Germany. Initech Jul 2019 #26

Is it time yet to shut this fucking shitstain government down yet? maxrandb Jul 2019 #27

There are other cases pending BumRushDaShow Jul 2019 #28

another good reason why dems shouldn't be working with the fascists on the budget deal. nt yaesu Jul 2019 #29

His base has already forgotten about his promise that Mexico would pay for it... crimycarny Jul 2019 #31

The importance of controlling the Supreme Court rears its ugly head again jcmaine72 Jul 2019 #32

I guess this means the next Democrat can fund medicare for all then without seeking Congressional cstanleytech Jul 2019 #33

But the Supreme Court is in recess Polybius Jul 2019 #34

They always have justices designated to be "on call" for emergencies year round. nt BumRushDaShow Jul 2019 #37

All 9 ruled in this one Polybius Jul 2019 #40

I don't think they have to literally "come to work" to rule BumRushDaShow Jul 2019 #41

Group Skype? YOHABLO Jul 2019 #43

Before I retired working for the federal government BumRushDaShow Jul 2019 #44

This sets a precedent that the executive can use the federal budget as a slush fund Moral Compass Jul 2019 #35

Let's go full 'Puerto Rico' on Trump. If it worked for Puerto Rico it might work for us. YOHABLO Jul 2019 #36

Looks like that's what it's going to come to. ElementaryPenguin Jul 2019 #42

Great. So our next President, a Democrat, in approximately 18 months... Yeehah Jul 2019 #45