711–720 of 843 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People? Trump is the only actor here who deserves punishment for these illegal tariffs, but there is no grounds to jail a sitting president.
Ultimately yes. But every one of his enablers is complicit and should be tried if we are ever able to extricate ourselves from this mess.
There was an interesting case in Finland. Finnish customs used to apply a 22% tax (ELV) on top of the car tax for imported used cars from other EU countries. On top of that, Finnish law required VAT to be charged on the car tax itself. There were multiple court cases and this practice was found unlawful (and actually against EU law). But the government did not issue automatic refunds, and instead requested that peopl…
Hmm. The "active request" is quite common though. I agree that this is unfair, since it is theft, IMO, but Finland is not the only one forcing active engagement to get your money back. Even when the government stole that money from the people. > we can and should trust the authorities. Well, Finland has a fairly competent government usually for the most part. That mantra will not work in many other countries though -…
I ordered something from a Chinese company and they quoted me 5USD per unit and 35USD shipping. I accepted and the units were shipped and delivered and of excellent quality. Sometime later FedEx sends me a weird bill for some random seeming amount of money I owed. They had a link or email or something to basically refuse to pay. I did refuse to pay. The shipper ended up communicating with me to determine I was going…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe triple. (1) paid higher prices, (2) the government will issue debt to refund the tariffs to importers who we already reimbursed through higher prices, and then (3) Congress will use the extra debt from the refunds as justification for higher individual taxes to pay for the 2025 tax cuts for businesses.
And the supreme court is to blame for all of this because they decided to invalidate lower court injunctions, reasoning that there was no chance for "irreparable harm"... Yeah, right.
Both the people who voted for the criminal to be president. And the people who supported such a horrible Democratic candidate that she couldn't even win against Trump.
[flagged]
The original sweeping plan that was blocked by the Supreme Court was blocked before it had forgiven any loans. They ruled it exceeded Presidential authority. That was replaced by several programs. Lower courts issued an injunction to halt one of those, and the Supreme Court declined to lift those injunctions. There never was a ruling on the merits, and in late 2025 there was a settlement between the Department of Edu…
The people harmed here were the US public and they are just going to continue to be harmed. The right answer is people go to jail. Until people start going to jail, being disbarred, etc, this will keep happening. This isn't a remedy. This is continuing the cycle.
Thats pretty much every President in the last century.
They all lose court cases.
The people harmed here were the US public and they are just going to continue to be harmed. The right answer is people go to jail. Until people start going to jail, being disbarred, etc, this will keep happening. This isn't a remedy. This is continuing the cycle.
You want to put politicians I. Jail when the courts find their action violated laws? Thats pretty much every President in the last century. They all lose court cases.
Absolutely absurd that we’re at this point. The courts / SCOTUS let the government roll out a massive and obviously illegal tax on citizens for a long time. They should have stepped in earlier. Now we the people probably don’t get our money back….
courts / SCOTUS let the government roll out a massive and obviously illegal tax on citizens for a long time. The don't forget about congress. 216 GOP congressional reps voted to handicap congress's ability to halt tariffs. For much of the current session of congress, their calendar wasn't counting days. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/house-republicans-block-con...
“We live in the age of computers,” Eaton said. “It must be possible for Customs Service to program its computers so it doesn’t need a manual review.” In DHL the link to get tax documents is already broken for a year or so, so I cannot get VAT back on DHL shipments. With FedEx I can but it's a manual process of screenshotting a bank transaction and emailing a specific email address with a shipping number. When tariffs…
If citizens do not have access to high quality tools that allow them to exercise their rights that rights are "de facto" invalidated.
If corporations are allowed to implement regulations in faulty ways the economic system stops working and fraud is easier than ever.
Part of the problem is governments trying to look "pro businesses" have become just "anti regulation". Organized crime is rising in Europe as it is increasingly easy to move money around in uncontrolled ways thru big platforms. But asking big platforms to adhere to standards and If citizens do not have access to high quality tools that allow them to exercise their rights that rights are "de facto" invalidated.
Part of the problem is governments trying to look "pro businesses" have become just "pro fraud". Organized crime is rising in Europe as it is increasingly easy to move money around in uncontrolled ways thru big platforms. But asking big platforms to adhere to standards and regulations is something that corruption does not allow for.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Why not? I have no idea why people were thinking corporations are overpowered when twitter banned trump. I thought it was great and showed nobody is above the law/tos. Likewise if the president has done crimes, he should pay the time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_v._United_States
> the Supreme Court ruled in a 6–3 decision that presidents have absolute immunity for acts committed as president within their core constitutional purview
It turns out that "checks and balances" meant "the president is unchecked and unbalanced".