67RModel

Probably so but the reasons for those terrible economic years were not his doing. The GFC & Great Recession had its seed sown from Clinton era legislation and came to a head in 2007/08. The bad economic years of Obama's first term was the result of a decade or more of disastrous banking practices. That's certainly a possibility. I think there are other more significant contributing factors that compound on one another.

100% delusion. Is It?

Just 14 short years ago. This is not an endorsement of this President or his policies. But rather a look back at the behavior and decorum of the entirety of the Congress. The USA is ripping itself apart from within.

"Countries that were ripping us off for decades are now paying us hundreds of billions of dollars." "And as time goes by I believe the tariffs paid by for by foreign countries will, like in the past, replace the modern day system of income tax...." State of the Union Delusion. Every American schoolchild knows the Constitution gives Congress the authority to levy tariffs and taxes. And The President carries out the execution of the law. Trump is the first President who believes the Constitution gives the President the power to levy taxes while simultaneously thinking other countries are paying said taxes. Also, Can someone explain how a country, specifically the USA, which has 4.25% of the world's population, consumes 28-30% of the world's natural resources annually, produces nothing meaningful other than tech and weapons, is usually ranked in the top 15 out of 193 for highest standard of living, and just about every one of its citizens are in the top 10% of the wealthiest people on the planet is getting ripped off by other countries?

Not a single democrat voted yes to and it passed.

He didn’t need them too. Thats the point.

I assume you mean January 6, 2021? Those folks breached and entered the US Capitol Building not the whitehouse. If so where were you living during the first half of 2021? lol. It was nonstop coverage, conspiracy theories, trials, hearings, witnesses. The works. A little something for everyone.

Yea I get it but I guess I was meaning more along the lines of reciprocity. Basically saying “the USA will not impose tariffs on any country unless other countries impose them first at which point the USA will impose the exact same tariff on them. As a baseline, starting now, all tariffs will be adjusted up or down to match what any other nation has imposed on USA”. Something like that to start. Then with some type of language to quickly bring to the floor and vote on a long term deal with another nation should such a deal be negotiated. What we got on “liberation day” (😂) was preposterous to say the least.

I don’t get why the President didn't codify the tariffs into the “One Big Beautiful Bill” but instead chose a haphazard path that was doomed from the start. He had the political system by the balls a year ago and squandered it IMO. Supreme Court got it right. I’m not a constitutional scholar but from the looks of it it’s pretty straight forward. The Constitution is quite clear on which entity can impose tariffs. now the big India trade deal is in limbo and probably dead at this point…..

yea that is a whole different can of worms. I’ve ready through the files quite a bit. Very problematic. That’s all I’ll say.

I agree. I personally wouldn't have said anything and not given the reporter any satisfaction. But based on the one sentence he did say I find it problematic he was publicly called a real looser by the POTUS in front of the entire world. Not a good look at all. The man is his own worst enemy.

I’m not defending the guy in any way. He made a statement after being asked a question that was loaded. He answered it in a very much sidestepping manner while probably still being honest. If you want to criticize him I understand the reasons given.

Two things can be true at the same time. Also your conflating people and the MSM. I don’t know a single person who isn’t appalled at the blatant fraud that takes place at every level of government. Tariffs are a mixed bag. Some people like em some people hate em. Some people haven’t got a clue.

Maybe. maybe not. Not for us to say. The man has free will and the United States and Italy have free speech laws. The reporter asked him a question that was political. The answer given was very vague and accused nobody of anything. He never mentioned Trumps name or anything specific. I wouldn’t consider his one or two sentence answer a rant at all. Not even close. Nothing he said was offensive. He didn’t volunteer anything unprompted. He was asked the exact same question every other athlete on the team was and provided a one sentence response. I don’t know Hunter Hess so I can’t say if he is out of touch or not. I doubt it though. He’s probably just a normal guy from Oregon that spent his last 20 years trying to become the best skier on earth. Probably makes no real money and has no real influence over anybody. My guess is nobody even knew who he was prior to the Olympics. He could have lied. He could have declined to answer the question. But he didn’t. He gave the answer he did. Heck he could have praised the admirations policies and we wouldn’t even be having this conversation. Either way I wouldn’t fault him. Sorry but there is nothing patriotic about not standing up for what you believe. But all of this is beside the point. The point of my original post was how unbecoming Trump’s truth social post is. If anything here can be considered unpatriotic it’s probably that. The world watched a guy answer a question that was asked of him then saw his president publicly call him a loser. I guess that’s on me though. I keep forgetting that’s normal behavior now.

I’m curious why he says it will need to be litigated. I’m not familiar with the procedural aspects of who would actually litigate the issue. But fundamentally the executive branch illegally collected $1.75 billion from companies and/or importers so saying that is essentially the same as saying he thinks the Executive branch should not voluntarily return it.