Remember to be courteous and polite in all of your interactions within the gates of Shrewd'm.
- Manlobbi
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy❤
No. of Recommendations: 14
The U.S. Court of International Trade rules unanimously that Trump's tariffs are not a valid exercise of authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act:
https://www.axios.com/2025/05/28/trump-tariffs-tra...Three judge panel, including the Trump appointee, all agreed.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Just read it. I'm happy. Let the chaos ensue.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Trump's tariffs are not a valid exercise of authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act:
Spankee does not care what others think. That is the core of how he now operates.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Well, that sucks.
No. of Recommendations: 7
1 Regan appointed
1 Trump appointed
1 Biden appointed
Unanimous decision
*****
RADICAL LEFT JUDGES JUST NOW ILLEGALLY ORDERED MY ADMINISTRATION TO STOP PROTECTING AMERICA AND STOP DOING MY JOB THAT YOU ELECTED ME TO DO!!!!! THE WHOLE WORLD HAS BEEN RAPING US FOR FAR TOO LONG DUE TO THE WOKE POLICIES OF BARAK HUSSEIN OBAMA AND JOSEPH ROBINETTE BIDEN!!WE KNOW WHAT KIND OF NAME “HUSSEIN “ IS, BUT JOE’S MOTHER MUST HAVE HATED HIM TO GIVE JOE A MIDDLE NAME LIKE THAT!! IAM SURE HE GOT BEAT UP ALOT AS A CHILD!! ALOT, I TELL YOU!! IF I HAD NOT BEEN ELECTED YOUR PRESIDENT, OUR COUNTRY WOULD BE IN THE CRAPPER!!! BUT IT ISN’T IN THE CRAPPER BECAUSE I AM YOUR PRESIDENT, THE SOCIALIST COMIE MARXIST FASCIST WOKE democRATS ARE TELLING THEIR JUDGES TO DESTROY MAGA AND ALL THE GOOD THINGS I HAVE DONE, AND IF THEY SUCCEED, THIS COUNTRY REALLY WILL BE IN THE CRAPPER!! BUT WE WONT LET THAT HAPPEN!!!!
No. of Recommendations: 8
Well, that sucks
A small victory for America and the rule of law.
No. of Recommendations: 7
Well, that sucks
MAGA is sad we still have a Constitution?...
Facepalm.
No. of Recommendations: 2
1 Regan appointed
1 Trump appointed
1 Biden appointed
Unanimous decision
Trump: RADICAL LEFT JUDGES JUST NOW ILLEGALLY ORDERED... blah, blah, blah
Wait a minute. That has to be a parody of Trump. LOL But it's not far off the mark.
No. of Recommendations: 2
MAGA is sad we still have a Constitution?...
To all appearances...yes.
No. of Recommendations: 2
And another judge ruled against him regarding Harvard.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/judge-extends...He continues to lose in court. I don't know why he bothers. He should just take everything he can to enrich himself, and forget about everything else. That's all he cares about anyway. I'm assuming Harvard wronged him in some way in the past, and he's seeking revenge (he cares about revenge, too, so I will have to amend my previous statement).
No. of Recommendations: 9
He continues to lose in court. I don't know why he bothers.
Because it's enormously beneficial for him. It makes him popular with his voters, which maintains his political power within the GOP.
Trump has turned out to be an incredibly canny politician. He knows that it's important to have the right enemies, to have the right opponents...and to be seen as fighting against those opponents. Harvard is one of the most elite institutions in the country, and is perceived by most of the GOP electorate as irredeemably liberal. By fighting tooth and nail against them, Trump pleases his supporters and demonstrates his commitment to doing what they want. That's true regardless of whether his actions hold up in court.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Harvard "liberal"??
My impression of Harvard is that it is wildly conservative, at least their business and law schools.
Berkeley would be another matter, but he doesn't seem to be going after them.
And...again...why does he care? He's a lame duck. He can spend all his time enriching himself, and nobody can do anything about it (thank you, Justice Roberts). His political future is nil. He's done (they'll never pass an amendment in time to benefit him). What does he care about public perceptions as long as he's getting his.
No. of Recommendations: 12
Harvard "liberal"??
My impression of Harvard is that it is wildly conservative, at least their business and law schools.
Not the law school. The business school, sure. But Harvard College (the undergraduate school), and many of the graduate schools in the humanities, are regarded as intensely liberal by virtually all of the GOP. And that assessment is probably more correct than wrong - as a general matter, the faculty and students at Harvard are overall significantly more liberal than the country as a whole.
And...again...why does he care? He's a lame duck. He can spend all his time enriching himself, and nobody can do anything about it (thank you, Justice Roberts).
I can't answer to his psychology, except to point out that he obviously relishes aggressive conflict with people he perceives have wronged him, or even merely challenged him. It's his MO - if anyone takes a swing or a jab at him, he fights back as hard as he can.
But it's obviously in his best interests to have these fights. He wants to keep control of the GOP, so that he can do what he wants. He doesn't want anyone in the GOP delegation in Congress getting any ideas about pushing back on him. And he absolutely is focused on the midterms and trying to make sure the GOP keeps control of the House, so that the Democrats don't have any ability to start investigating all his methods for enriching himself.
Why would he care about Democratic investigations, when he can't be put in jail? Because he can't enrich himself on his own. He needs to have people giving him money, giving him valuable opportunities, giving him planes. Democratic investigations can't really affect Trump, but they can make life much more unpleasant for his counterparties - which makes it harder for him to do the type of deals he wants. It's much easier for him to have his little crypto shindig (for example) when his guests know that there's no chance that they'll get hauled in front of House subcommittee to testify under oath any time soon.
No. of Recommendations: 4
And...again...why does he care?
I've heard a rumor that Harvard refused to admit Baron no matter how big a contribution Trump made to Harvard. It certainly fits his known holding of grudges.
--Peter
No. of Recommendations: 0
No. of Recommendations: 2
Trump has turned out to be an incredibly canny politician. He knows that it's important to have the right enemies, to have the right opponents...and to be seen as fighting against those opponents. Harvard is one of the most elite institutions in the country, and is perceived by most of the GOP electorate as irredeemably liberal. By fighting tooth and nail against them, Trump pleases his supporters and demonstrates his commitment to doing what they want. That's true regardless of whether his actions hold up in court.
This. Plus, it upsets libtards on the way to him being ruled against. Stagflation setting in to dislodge a part of his MAGA base. They might even read about some who voted the same way they did being terminated, or an immigrant friend of 20 years know to all locals and loved being detained by ICE and headed for deportation, but it won't sink in for most. The ability of folks to compartmentalize contrasting thoughts, ideals, actions, is all to human. We do it regularly.
No. of Recommendations: 0
but she is denying he ever applied to Harvard.
That's why I clearly called it a rumor.
On the other hand ... (translation - logic-based speculation follows) ...
It would make sense to me that the child of a sitting or former US President (Trump would have been a former President when Barron would be applying to Universities) would require some special accommodations at any University they were considering attending. As such a young adult child, I suspect Barron would not be mailing in his application blindly as most everyone else would. He might not even complete a formal application until conversations were completed regarding the security and safety needs of such a noteworthy student.
Would it be unreasonable to think that Harvard declined to accommodate the security needs of Barron, and therefore Barron never actually completed a formal application? So Melania could be telling the truth without telling the *whole* truth. She doesn't have to be lying to hide the truth.
Or she could be lying through her teeth. Or even telling the whole truth. We may never know.
But we do know that President Obama earned his JD from Harvard. So that could be enough motivation for Trump to have something against Harvard.
--Peter
No. of Recommendations: 2
Trump has turned out to be an incredibly canny politician.
Agreed.
Terrible President. Canny politician.
--Peter
No. of Recommendations: 2
The Appeals Court stayed the decision while the appeals process spins up.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Berkeley would be another matter, but he doesn't seem to be going after them.
State school in UC system. He'll wait till he smacks Harvard/Columbia etc in line before he goes after state schools.
Harvard is simply the bell sheep.
No. of Recommendations: 2
And Jonathan Turley has an excellent take on this:
https://jonathanturley.org/2025/05/29/liberation-d...The three-judge panel held that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 (IEEPA) does not give the president “such unbounded authority.”
While some have criticized the court as a “judicial coup,” it is a well-reasoned and good-faith decision from judges appointed by Presidents Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama, and Trump.
While the court, in my view, should have issued a stay pending appeal, a wide array of experts have questioned the authority under the IEEPA, which is designed to address a national emergency. The authority does not mention tariffs and has never been used for tariffs. There’s a good chance the Supreme Court upholds the ruling.On the decision itself:
Rejecting Trump’s authority under IEEPA does not mean he lacks all authority for tariffs. The administration is correct in arguing that Congress has repeatedly deferred to presidents on tariffs, granting them sweeping authority.
For example, the ruling does not affect Trump’s “sector tariffs” under the Trade Expansion Act, which impose 25% levies on steel, aluminum, and auto imports.
Likewise, the court acknowledged that Trump has the authority under Section 122 of the Trade Act to impose tariffs of up to 15% for 150 days to address “fundamental international payment problems,” including trade deficits. After conducting further investigation into these problems, he can then impose long-term tariffs under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962.This was my concern, that the ruling removed all tariff authority from the President. It doesn't, and that's a good thing. The chief executive needs to have a tool to use in the event of emergencies.
And the rub is:
Moreover, there is strong support for reciprocal tariffs to match the costs and barriers placed on our goods by other countries....which are significant.
Nevertheless, Trump was right about the market barriers and unfair treatment shown by other countries, including some of our closest allies. The resulting deals will be good for the United States and could represent the most significant move toward open markets in a generation.
These are difficult issues, and we need to tamp down the rhetoric. These judges are not the enemy. Neither is Trump. Trump is trying to use every possible law to achieve historic reforms. These judges are trying to guarantee that such priorities do not take precedence over the rule of law.
No. of Recommendations: 7
market barriers and unfair treatment shown by other countries
Those are mostly irrational claims made by Spankee--with no substantiation.
Most countries allow imports of certain goods/products up to a stated amount or volume. Once that limit is reached, then tariffs/barriers are in place for additional imports over the limit. In addition, many countries do not allow a variety of products that do not meet their standards to be imported at all. Think about cars that are driven on the left side of the road rather than on the right side of the road--such as the US. Claiming this type of barrier is unfair publicly documents the irrationality of Spankee and his claims. It could even be public proof of his senility and inability to be in any office.
No. of Recommendations: 2
The Ivy League Schools Ranked: From Most Conservative to Most Liberal
All that being said, if Ivy Coach were to rank the eight Ivy League institutions from most conservative to most liberal, we would do so as follows:
1 Princeton University
2 Dartmouth College
3 Cornell University
4 University of Pennsylvania
5 Harvard University
6 Yale University
7 Columbia University
8 Brown University
the article on it by Ivycoach:
https://www.ivycoach.com/the-ivy-coach-blog/ivy-le...But we're talking about the perception of MAGAdom, which is shaped by JFK, Obama, Bill Gates, Zuckerburg, Niel deGrasse Tyson, Al Gore, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, George Bush, etc.
No. of Recommendations: 14
"Because it's enormously beneficial for him. It makes him popular with his voters, which maintains his political power within the GOP."
While this is certainly true, there are other reasons for Trump to continue with his obviously illegal actions, lawsuits, and executive orders. One of his strategies is to flood the zone with shit. This accomplishes two things:
1. It inures voters to his corruption. There is so much shit in the news that voters become immune to being shocked by it. Every day there is a new story about his corruption and his court cases that it becomes harder and harder to keep it all straight. When selling Teslas on the White House lawn doesn't even break into the top 500 of the worst things he has done since taking the Oval Office, voters tune it out. They begin to lose the ability to tell the difference between real serious stuff (like masked men grabbing people off of the street and throwing them in foreign prisons without due process) and the run of the mill minor stuff (like the Tesla stuff) that might take down a lessor politician who didn't flood the zone with so much shit. Voters are so accustomed to hearing about another Trump court case every single day they tune it out. It all becomes background noise.
2. When the zone is flooded with so much shit, some of it gets through. For example, his lawsuit against Paramount (the owner of CBS). Trump is shaking down Summer Redstone (majority owner of Paramount) who wants to merge Paramount with Skydance. If Trump's lawsuit (over CBS editing an interview of Kamala Harris) ever went to court, he would lose in a heartbeat. His suit would be laughed out of court. Paramount knows it would win; however Paramount also knows if they fight it, they will never get federal approval to merge with Skydance. Trump would block it. So Paramount is trying to settle out of court. Give Trump his bribe and let the merger go through. There has been some reporting on the story, but not a whole lot. It has been drowned out by all of the other shit and the news cannot cover it all. It is blatantly corrupt and if any other presidential candidate did what Trump is doing it would dominate the news every single day and Republicans would have investigated it a dozen times and impeached him already. But it doesn't cost Trump anything (his lawsuit was when he is a candidate so his lawyers are all paid by political doners) and it could net him tens of millions of dollars in bribe money.
No. of Recommendations: 9
Albaby: "Trump has turned out to be an incredibly canny politician. He knows that it's important to have the right enemies, to have the right opponents...and to be seen as fighting against those opponents.
It's no secret that Trump learned that lesson, the kayfabe, from WWE Vince McMahon.
What's depressing is that so many people enjoy the kayfabe that promotes ignorance, violence and conspiracy theories.
No. of Recommendations: 5
But it doesn't cost Trump anything (his lawsuit was when he is a candidate so his lawyers are all paid by political donors) and it could net him tens of millions of dollars in bribe money.
The tandem to this is also what is sooooooo corrupt: using federal agencies/our tax money to either sue someone or some entity, often entirely frivolously, which makes the counter party defend with private money. And, of course, the reverse: defending indefensible suits with our tax money.
That the nation's money should be used wastefully against private parties like this is deplorable.
Pete
