reSee.it - Related Post Feed

lakemonstercl1
Posted - April 24, 2024 at 1:51 PM
Saved - April 24, 2024 at 5:18 PM

@lakemonstercl1 - 🇺🇸Steve2A🇺🇸God🇺🇸Family🇺🇸Country🇺🇸

These judges and DAs are not installed because they’re smart, they’re there because they’re corrupt and they’re bought and paid for! What’s their job, well it’s to get Trump! https://t.co/J0TMAehr94

Video Transcript AI Summary
The judge questioned if $175 million would be available in cash, even if its value changed. The speaker found it absurd, as the money was in a secure account. The judge's lack of understanding was frustrating, leading to a disappointing experience in court. Later, the speaker attended a criminal hearing, which was also deemed disgraceful. Translation: The judge's lack of understanding about cash and secure accounts led to a frustrating court experience for the speaker. The subsequent criminal hearing was also disappointing.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Understanding is that the judge in the case said, well, what happens if the 175,000,000 isn't there at the time it would be necessary to make that payment? And the Trump people said, oh, that would be in cash, sir. He said, but what if it's not worth the same amount of money? That would be in cash, sir. A 175,000,000 is a 175,000,000. Please tell me that didn't happen. Did that happen in that courtroom? They're laughing. So I guess the answer is yes. Speaker 1: Oh, you you have no idea. We had the money in a Charles Schwab money market account, and the judge legitimately said with a straight face with his little team, hey, I I don't think this is secure money because something could happen to the market and it could go below a 175,000,000. To tell you how hard it was for me to keep my face straight in that moment, Sean, you can't make it up. This case should have been in the commercial division. It had no business being in the civil division in front of a judge that today was trying to invalidate any bond and doesn't understand that cash is green. And when cash is held by Charles Schwab, they can't go trade it, they can't move it around. It's not a stock market, but he didn't understand basics. It was one of those moments that I truly didn't feel I could have after 11 weeks in front of this judge, but it just can't stop. He can't stop surprising me. Right. Speaker 0: By the way, Speaker 1: it was a disgrace to be honest. And then after that, I went to the criminal hearing, which is another disgrace.
julie_kelly2
Posted - February 5, 2025 at 2:36 PM
Saved - February 6, 2025 at 12:26 PM

@julie_kelly2 - Julie Kelly 🇺🇸

Hi @elonmusk I think DOGE needs to look at the federal bench in DC. Lots of money being spent to defy the president and torment his supporters.

@cmsdfwnbjv - Pancake Batter

@julie_kelly2 The federal judiciary in DC is out of control and untethered from the constitution. This is a conundrum that is much more difficult to fix than rooting out corruption in other government sectors because the corrupt judges can protect themselves and each other.

amuse
Posted - February 8, 2025 at 7:34 PM
Saved - February 8, 2025 at 11:02 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I am outraged by Judge Paul Engelmayer's ruling that prevents all of Trump's political appointees, including the Treasury Secretary, from accessing Treasury Department data. This decision, made without legal precedent or input from the Trump administration, undermines executive authority and transfers power to unelected bureaucrats. It feels like a blatant judicial power grab, and I believe it sets a dangerous precedent for future cases. The Supreme Court must intervene to restore constitutional governance and prevent further judicial overreach.

@amuse - @amuse

LAWFARE: In an egregious and unconstitutional assault on executive authority, Judge Paul Engelmayer has unilaterally forbidden all of Trump's political appointees—including Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent—from accessing Treasury Department data. This ruling, concocted without legal precedent or constitutional justification, is nothing short of judicial sabotage. Worse, it was issued ex parte—meaning Trump administration lawyers weren’t given notice, weren’t allowed to argue, and weren’t even in the room. Only Democrat attorneys general were heard, ensuring a predetermined outcome. Engelmayer’s order is legally indefensible. He cites no statutory basis because none exists. He offers no constitutional rationale because the Constitution directly contradicts him. Instead, he fabricates a fiction: that the duly appointed Treasury Secretary is nothing more than a ceremonial figurehead, akin to a powerless monarch, while unelected bureaucrats—who answer to no voters—control the nation’s finances. This is judicial tyranny masquerading as jurisprudence. The implications are staggering. By stripping the executive branch of access to its own financial data, this ruling effectively transfers control of the federal purse to the permanent bureaucracy—the so-called “deep state.” That is a direct assault on the Constitution’s separation of powers, which vests executive authority in the elected President and his appointees, not in career government employees. This is lawfare at its most brazen: a raw, partisan power grab dressed up in legalese. If allowed to stand, this decision sets the precedent that any left-wing judge can unilaterally strip the President of his authority and hand it to the administrative state. That is not democracy. It is not law. It is judicial dictatorship. While the order is currently set to last only a week, no serious person believes this won’t be extended if the courts think they can get away with it. The Trump Administration should treat this for what it is—an unconstitutional usurpation—and consider defying it outright. No judge has the authority to cripple the executive branch and hand power to unelected bureaucrats. Beyond that, the Supreme Court must intervene and overturn this blatant violation of constitutional governance. Judge Engelmayer should be barred from hearing any future cases related to executive authority, and every Democrat lawyer who enabled this attack on the Constitution should be sanctioned. This is not a legal dispute—it is a coup by the judiciary against the elected government. And it cannot be allowed to stand.

@amuse - @amuse

LAWFARE: Total BS…

@SenTomCotton - Tom Cotton

Outrageous. Obama Judge Paul Engelmayer didn’t just bar @elonmusk and @doge from Treasury systems, he barred the Secretary of the Treasury himself. Without citing a single law or even allowing Trump admin to appear in court! This outlaw should be reversed immediately and Engelmayer should be forbidden by higher courts from ever hearing another case against the Trump admin. https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/federal-judge-blocks-elon-musks-doge-from-treasury-system-e0f1e55c?st=QQJrvW&reflink=article_imessage_share

SenTomCotton
Posted - February 8, 2025 at 9:12 PM
Saved - February 9, 2025 at 10:14 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I find it outrageous that Judge Paul Engelmayer has not only barred Elon Musk and Doge from Treasury systems but has also excluded the Secretary of the Treasury. This decision was made without citing any law or allowing the Trump administration to present its case in court. I believe this ruling should be reversed immediately, and I think higher courts should prevent Engelmayer from hearing any future cases involving the Trump administration.

@SenTomCotton - Tom Cotton

Outrageous. Obama Judge Paul Engelmayer didn’t just bar @elonmusk and @doge from Treasury systems, he barred the Secretary of the Treasury himself. Without citing a single law or even allowing Trump admin to appear in court! This outlaw should be reversed immediately and Engelmayer should be forbidden by higher courts from ever hearing another case against the Trump admin. https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/federal-judge-blocks-elon-musks-doge-from-treasury-system-e0f1e55c?st=QQJrvW&reflink=article_imessage_share

RepEliCrane
Posted - February 11, 2025 at 2:46 PM
Saved - February 12, 2025 at 10:02 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I'm drafting articles of impeachment for US District Judge Paul Engelmayer, as I believe partisan judges pose a threat to democracy. The left has caused "irreparable harm," and President Trump and his team are working to address this. I see Judge Engelmayer's actions as judicial overreach, trying to prevent White House employees from accessing systems they oversee. I question where in the Constitution it states that a President and his team cannot address waste, fraud, and abuse.

@RepEliCrane - Rep. Eli Crane

🧵 I’m drafting articles of impeachment for US District Judge Paul Engelmayer.   Partisan judges abusing their positions is a threat to democracy. The left has done “irreparable harm” to this country. President Trump and his team at @DOGE are trying to fix it.

@RepEliCrane - Rep. Eli Crane

This is obviously judicial overreach. Judge Engelmayer is attempting to stop White House employees from accessing the very systems they oversee. Where in the constitution does it say a President and his team cannot root out obvious waste, fraud and abuse?

elonmusk
Posted - February 11, 2025 at 6:24 PM
Saved - February 12, 2025 at 2:44 PM

@elonmusk - Elon Musk

Which law firms are pushing these anti-democratic cases to impede the will of the people?

@amuse - @amuse

LAWFARE: Democrat judges across the country are working with Democrat AGs and NGOs to either block/delay president Trump's EOs aimed at reducing fraud, abuse, and waste. This time it is Biden-appointed Judge Angel Kelley from MA ordering Trump to restore DEI funding to the NIH.

elonmusk
Posted - February 12, 2025 at 5:14 AM
Saved - February 12, 2025 at 1:20 PM

@elonmusk - Elon Musk

Bravo! We must impeach judges who are grossly undermining the will of the people and destroying America. It is the only way.

@nayibbukele - Nayib Bukele

That’s exactly what judges were doing in El Salvador in 2021… So we impeached them all and then proceeded to fix the country.

RepMTG
Posted - February 12, 2025 at 10:29 AM
Saved - February 12, 2025 at 8:01 PM

@RepMTG - Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸

This judge is a Trump deranged Democrat activist. Below is proof he is not capable of making good decisions from the bench. He should be impeached.

@nataliegwinters - Natalie Winters

🚨 EXC - I've unearthed footage from 2021 where the judge blocking the Trump spending freeze accuses Trump of being a "tyrant," claims racism is a "white people problem," and insists transgenders need special sentencing privileges. This is an activist not a judge. Watch ⬇️🧵

elonmusk
Posted - February 12, 2025 at 4:13 PM
Saved - February 12, 2025 at 9:56 PM

@elonmusk - Elon Musk

💯 https://t.co/6p8spOtyRP

elonmusk
Posted - February 12, 2025 at 4:23 PM
Saved - February 12, 2025 at 8:56 PM

@elonmusk - Elon Musk

Impeach this activist posing as a judge! Such a person does great discredit to the American justice system.

@amuse - @amuse

LAWFARE: The Obama-appointed judge that threatened the Trump administration with arrest if funding was not restored to USAID previously likened Trump's first term to the Civil War and Jim Crow and compared Trump to a tyrant in 2021 video footage uncovered by @nataliegwinters. Judge McConnell is an activist who has no business sitting in judgement of the president or his administration.

Video Transcript AI Summary
Over the past four years, our nation's core values and institutions have faced a new kind of test, reminiscent of challenges during the Civil War era. It felt like a balloon being inflated to its breaking point. The courts play a crucial role in upholding the rule of law, acting as a safeguard against arbitrary actions and defending our constitutional values. In the legal system, especially during sentencing, it's vital to recognize the individual before you. Whether they are a woman, Black, transgender, poor, rich, or anything else, they bring life experiences that you may not have shared. To apply the law justly, you must understand their perspective and apply the law accordingly.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So, what's happened over the last four years or so, and at other times in our country's history, going back to the Civil War and Reconstruction and Jim Crow laws, the Civil Rights and during the last four years is that the values that we live by, the constitutional values that form the basis of our country have been tested and our institutions have been tested in ways that I don't think a lot of folks thought would survive. It got tested in the 1800s by a war, and we survived the war, sometimes well and sometimes not so well, but that's for another story. So what we saw the last four years in my mind was a new testing of it. And how I think about it is, it's like a balloon, you know, and and you're blowing up a balloon and and you and you keep pushing that air in. Well, at some point, the balloon's gonna pop. Right? And and and and and it feels like over the last four years with the challenges that have occurred to the rule of law in this country, that we came very close to that balloon popping. But where courts stand and enforce the rule of law that is against arbitrary and capricious actions by, what could be a tyrant or could be what happened. We saw plenty of examples of that recently. And it enforces our values. Our values, in a legal sense, the Constitution. And it's that reason that, and we find there are plenty of examples of a history and there's plenty of examples over the last four years through government actions when you're sentencing someone, when we talk about sentencing, that you have to take a moment and realize that this, you know, middle class white male, privileged person, needs to understand the human being that comes before us that maybe a woman and maybe black, maybe transgender, maybe poor, maybe rich, maybe whatever, may have experiences that aren't yours and you have to walk in their shoes and understand that the law applies to them where they are. And then you have to apply the law accordingly.
Rep_Clyde
Posted - February 12, 2025 at 5:15 PM
Saved - February 12, 2025 at 10:38 PM

@Rep_Clyde - Rep. Andrew Clyde

I’m drafting articles of impeachment for U.S. District Judge John McConnell Jr. He’s a partisan activist weaponizing our judicial system to stop President Trump’s funding freeze on woke and wasteful government spending. We must end this abusive overreach. Stay tuned.

@nataliegwinters - Natalie Winters

🚨 EXC - I've unearthed footage from 2021 where the judge blocking the Trump spending freeze accuses Trump of being a "tyrant," claims racism is a "white people problem," and insists transgenders need special sentencing privileges. This is an activist not a judge. Watch ⬇️🧵

nicksortor
Posted - February 12, 2025 at 6:33 PM
Saved - February 13, 2025 at 11:55 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I just slammed the activist judges trying to undermine Trump, calling it an abuse of power. The real crisis is in our judicial branch. With 77 million Americans voting for this President, every injunction is a violation of the rule of law and the people's will. We need to impeach these judges!

@nicksortor - Nick Sortor

🚨 #BREAKING: Karoline Leavitt just SLAMMED the activist judges attempting to thwart Trump, saying they’re “abusing their power” “The REAL Constitutional crisis is taking place within our judicial branch…” “77 MILLION Americans voted for elect this President, and each injunction is an abuse of the rule of law and an attempt to thwart the will of the people.” IMPEACH THESE JUDGES!

Video Transcript AI Summary
I want to address the dishonest narrative that's been emerging. Many outlets are fear-mongering the American people into believing there is a constitutional crisis taking place here at the White House, but the real constitutional crisis is taking place within our judicial branch. District court judges in liberal districts across the country are abusing their power to unilaterally block President Trump's basic executive authority. These judges are acting as judicial activists rather than honest arbiters of the law. They have issued at least 12 injunctions against this administration in the past fourteen days, often without citing any evidence or grounds for their lawsuits. This is a concerted effort by Democrat activists and nothing more than the continuation of the weaponization of justice against President Trump. We will comply with the law in the courts, but we will also continue to seek every legal remedy to ultimately overturn these radical injunctions and ensure President Trump's policies can be enacted.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now before I take questions, I would like to address an extremely dishonest narrative that we've seen emerging over the past few days. Many outlets in this room have been fear mongering the American people into believing there is a constitutional crisis taking place here at the White House. I've been hearing those words a lot lately. But in fact, the real constitutional crisis is taking place within our judicial branch, where district court judges and liberal districts across the country are abusing their power to unilaterally block president Trump's basic executive authority. We believe these judges are acting as judicial activists rather than honest arbiters of the law. And they have issued at least 12 injunctions against this administration in the past fourteen days, Often without citing any evidence or grounds for their lawsuits. This is part of a larger concerted effort by Democrat activists and nothing more than the continuation of the weaponization of justice against president Trump. Quick news flash to these liberal judges who are supporting their obstructionist efforts. 77,000,000 Americans voted to elect this president. And each injunction is an abuse of the rule of law and an attempt to thwart the will of the people. As the president clearly stated in the Oval Office yesterday, we will comply with the law in the courts, but we will also continue to seek every legal remedy to ultimately overturn these radical injunctions and ensure president Trump's policies can be enacted.
RealAlexJones
Posted - February 12, 2025 at 10:17 PM
Saved - February 13, 2025 at 2:11 AM

@RealAlexJones - Alex Jones

🚨DOGE BOMBSHELL: Trump Joins Musk In Call For Corrupt Activist Judges Blocking DOGE Investigations Into Massive Fraud, Waste, & Abuse To Be Impeached » WATCH/SHARE THE LIVE X STREAM HERE: https://t.co/CqLb2tSgok https://t.co/Gd48N5Dptu

Video Transcript AI Summary
Elon Musk is calling for the impeachment of activist judges who are obstructing a critical criminal investigation uncovering widespread corruption across 15 agencies. This corruption involves judges' families benefiting from departments Trump is auditing. Our constitutional values are being tested, and our institutions are near a breaking point. Courts must enforce the rule of law against arbitrary actions. I hope those in charge will ensure honesty and competence in agencies like USAID, which is deeply corrupt. We've already found billions in fraud and abuse, potentially reaching a trillion dollars. Judges blocking investigations slow momentum, allowing cover-ups. I always abide by court decisions but will appeal. We were elected to find this corruption, and the court system must allow us to do our job.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Elon Musk calls for the impeachment of these political activist judges that are obstructing this important criminal investigation that as soon as they just went into one agency, it was like spindletop, just the mother load exploding, and they're finding it at the EPA, and they're finding it at the FDA, and they're and they're they're they're in 15 agencies right now. Then you look at all these judges, their wives, their daughters on the payroll, heading up major departments at at at departments Trump is saying he's auditing or shutting down. Speaker 1: The values that we live by, the constitutional values that that form the basis of our our country have been tested, and our institutions have been tested in ways that I don't think a lot of folks thought would survive. It got tested in the eighteen hundreds, by a war, and and we survived the war, sometimes well and sometimes not so well, but that's that's for another story. So so what I we saw the last four years in my mind was a new testing of it. And and and how I think about it is it's like a balloon, you know, and and you're blowing up a balloon and and you and you you keep pushing that air in. Well, at some point, the balloon's gonna pop. Right? And and and and and and it feels like over the last four years with the challenges that have occurred to our rule the rule of law in this country that we came very close to that balloon popping. But where courts stand, and enforce the rule of law that is against arbitrary and capricious actions by by, what could be a tyrant or could be a weapon. We saw plenty of examples of that recently, And and it enforces our values. Our values, in a legal sense, the constitution. Speaker 2: For the sake of the country, I hope that the person that's in charge and the other people that report to me that are in charge are allowed to do the right thing. Namely, make sure everything's honest, legitimate, and competent. But we're looking at just, when you look at USAID, that was that's one. We look at the military. We look at education. They're much bigger areas. But the USAID is really corrupt. I'll tell you, it's corrupt. It's incompetent and it's really corrupt. And I can't imagine a judge saying, well, it may be corrupt, but you don't have the right. You got elected to look over the country and to, as we say, make America great again. But you don't have the right to go and look and see whether or not things are right that they're paying or that things are honest that they're paying. And nobody can even believe this. Other people, law professors, they've been saying, can't how can you take that person's right away? You're supposed to be running the country, but we're not allowed to look at who they're paying it to and what they're paying. We have massive amounts of fraud that we caught. I think we probably caught way over a lot of billions of dollars already in what? Two weeks? Yeah. And it's gonna go, to numbers that you're not gonna believe. And, much as I said, much is incompetence and much is dishonesty. We have to catch it. And the only way we're gonna catch it is to look for it. And if a judge is gonna say you're not allowed to look for it, that's pretty sad for our country. A lot of corruption. Speaker 1: If a judge does block one of your policies, part of your agenda, will you abide by that ruling? Speaker 2: Will you comply by that? Abide by the courts, and then I'll have to appeal it. But then what he's done is he slowed down the momentum, and it gives crooked people more time to cover up the books. You know, if a person's crooked and they get caught, other people see that, and all of a sudden, it becomes harder later on. So Yeah. Yeah. The answer is I always abide by the courts, always abide by them, and we'll appeal. If you have a contract and you're in a regular business, you end the contract in three months, you know it's a consultant. Here's a contract for three months, but it goes on for twenty years. And the guy doesn't say that he got money for twenty years. You know? They don't say it. They just keep getting checks month after month, and you have various things like that. And even much worse than that, actually, much worse. And I guess you call that incompetence, maybe. Yeah. It could be corruption. It could be a deal's made on both sides, you know, where yeah. I guess, the money he kicks I think he has a lot of kickback here. I see a lot of kickback here. Speaker 0: There's a lot of kickback. Speaker 2: Yeah. Tremendous kickback because nobody could be so stupid to give out some of these contracts. So he has to get a kickback. So, that's what I got elected for. That and borders and military and a lot of things, but this is a big part of it. And I hope that the court system is gonna allow us to do what we have to do. We got elected to to, among other things, find all of this fraud, abuse, all of this this horrible stuff going on. And we've already found billions of dollars, not like a little bit, billions, many billions of dollars. And when you get down to it, it's gonna be probably close to a trillion dollars. It could be close to a trillion dollars that we're gonna find. That will have a quite an impact on the budget. Speaker 0: It's trending top of x right now. Elon Musk calls for the impeachment of these political activist judges that are obstructing this important criminal investigation that as soon as they just went into one agency, it was like spindletop, just the mother load exploding, and they're finding it at the EPA, and they're finding it at the FDA, and they're and they're they're they're in 15 agencies right now. And you look at all these judges, their wives, their daughters on the payroll, heading up major departments at at at departments. Trump is saying he's auditing or shutting down. Look at some of these headlines. We'll play a clip of it. What a scammer. Lawfare. Before judge McConnell ordered Trump to restore US aid funding and called him a tyrant, he was accused of buying his lifetime judicial appointment. He spent $700,000 in tribute to Democrats and funded thousands of his state's two senators who recommended him. And then his daughter heads up a major department at the Department of Education. Here he is, you know, praising her, in previous statements. Then we've got him running around, saying white people are a problem. White people are evil. You're creating all this racial, division. And you've got one of the other judges, wife of judge blocking Trump's administration, US aid grant. His wife is a major recipient directly of some of the big grants, and it goes on and on and on. The same judge saying put up all the pedophilic transgender crap. So they're now editing the websites, these, these judges. Absolutely insane. Now this guy's got a terrible microphone, so I'm sorry for the audio, but this is from four years ago. This is, judge Jack McConnell spewing all of this racial garbage. Here it is. Speaker 1: So, you know, what's happened over the last four years or so, and at other times in our in our country's history, you know, going back to, you know, the civil war and reconstruction and, Jim Crow laws and civil rights and and during the last four years is that the the the values that we live by, the constitutional values that that form the basis of our our country have been tested, and our institutions have been tested in ways that I don't think a lot of folks thought would survive. It got tested in the eighteen hundreds, by a war, and and we survived the war, sometimes well and sometimes not so well, but that's that's for another story. So so what I we saw the last four years in my mind was a new testing of it. And and and how I think about it is it's like a balloon, you know, how I think about it is it's like a balloon, you know, and and you're blowing up a balloon and and you and you you keep pushing that air in. Well, at some point, the balloon's gonna pop. Right? And and and and and it feels like over the last four years with the challenges that have occurred to our rule the rule of law in this country that we came very close to that balloon popping, but where courts stand, and enforce the rule of law that is against arbitrary and capricious actions by by, what could be a tyrant or could be a weapon. We saw plenty of examples of that recently. And and it enforces our values. Our values, in a legal sense, the constitution. And it's that it's that reason that and and we saw and there are plenty of examples of a history, and there's plenty of examples over the last four year group government actions when you're sentencing someone, when we, talk about sentencing, that you have to take a moment and realize that this, you know, middle class white male, privileged, person, needs to understand the human being that comes before us that maybe a woman, it may be black, it may be transgender, it may be poor, it may be rich, it may be whatever, may may have experiences that aren't yours. And you have to you have to walk in their shoes and understand that the law applies to them where they are, and then you have to apply the law accordingly. Speaker 0: So this is really simple. They hide behind the constitution when the New York Times and others were headlines about get rid of the constitution. Is it time to torch the constitution? New Yorker magazine, all of it. And then they have all their lawfare, and judges take Trump off the ballot in Colorado, and bureaucrats take him off in Maine. We saw who's unconstitutional. And now we elect him. He's mandated, and then he gets his treasury secretary approved by the senate. And then the the, other Obama appointed judge just says, you can't get the computers as a treasury secretary. Well, then, who can? Yeah. New York Times. The constitution is sacred. Is it also dangerous? So these people are disgusting, and you have this kleptocratic class using divide and conquer, try to make us all fight with each other over race while they're robbing all of us. Mark Mitchell, I'm sorry to subject you to two minutes of that guy, but I I wanted to get your take on that and your take because it's not just Musk. I played clips earlier, and, we'll after the show is not live, we'll add the clip in here, because no one's run the headline, Trump calls for impeachment. I played the clips from yesterday. Multiple times, he said, we've gotta look at these judges and do something about them. If they keep blocking our investigation to corruption, well, that's something. The only remedy is impeachment in the house, in the congress, in the senate. And and and so what is your response to him, this activist judge, who's sending money to his family at multiple levels and the rest of them are caught red handed? And what is your response to Trump and Musk calling for us to start moving for impeachment? It's time to use something people forgot we even have because we crave these little emperors out of these federal judges. Speaker 3: Yeah. There's two things, two approaches to looking at this. One is that what we what we see now is selective consumption of information, and that's working against Trump, and it's working for Trump. And the good news is is that right now, Trump's good like, the tailwinds are great. Like, we asked about impression of Elon Musk. And so the blob is trying to shift their focus from Trump to Elon Musk because the attacks on Trump haven't been successful. But right now, Trump's a 53% approval rating, and Elon Musk is 53 per or 52% favorable. So that's almost as positive as Trump's numbers, and that's not what the media would have you believe. And then we also ask, do you approve or disapprove of Elon Musk being in charge of the Department of Government efficiency, cutting waste in the federal government? And that is a 55% approval rating. And it is 44%, disapproval, so that's plus 11. That's even more popular than Donald Trump is. And then 86% of US likely voters say that it's important to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse in the federal government. 66% very important. And then the other thing is that we have a poll in the field right now, and I've only seen one night's results. And we asked about this judge's ruling specifically and whether the Supreme Court should overturn it, and it looks like it's gonna be about, 35%, yes, 40% yes. Maybe it'll change over the next few nights. And so what's weird is that the people listening to this drumbeat of constitutional crisis, the people hanging on the bated breath of that guy, there's a lot of them. We talked about this back in November that the cult was going to get smaller but also purify. And the problem with this cult is that it doesn't have a ton of intellectual honesty. I work with some people like this in the corporate spaces. These people are all over the government. These people are in every one of our institutions, and they're literally willing to don whatever, like, rational intellectual, opinion that is necessary to maintain their personal interest or advance their careers. Speaker 0: They're shape shifting chameleons. Speaker 3: They are intellectual chameleons, shape shifters. Yes. %. And they can do it, and they're gonna do it. They're gonna keep on doing it. So what the problem with a lot of politicians, even the best ones, is that when you talk about managing to public opinion, well, first off, people say that like it's a bad thing. It's like, no. It's a good thing because they voted for you, and you should be representing the will of all the people in America. So, yeah, you should be managing public opinion. But, also, at the end of the day, you have a moral obligation to do the correct thing and be a leader. And let's be clear. Speaker 0: With Trump, it's backwards in the corrupt system the way it's supposed to be. He has his views. He's a rock. He's he when he says something, he means that you vote for him and donate to him because you already agree with him. It's like a restaurant. You go there. They don't change the menu. You like their food. You come there. They don't you don't tell them what to cook. With Democrats' special interest, that's exactly how it's worked. Some of the Republicans in the past. But now with the return of populism and Trump, he believes in what he believes. We agree with it. It's the American system. It works great. So they're chameleons and then try to spin it that Trump wants to do what people want as if he doesn't have morals or something. It's it's it's complete inversion. My fellow patriots, I've got some bad news for you. I've also got some good news. Our number one all time best selling product at the AlexJonesstore.com has sold out. The concentrated Irish sea moss, we call it ultimate sea moss because it's the strongest, most concentrated out there, the superfood, it has sold out. But there is a clone of the site with our same sponsor that runs it, and it has its own inventory right out of the same warehouse in Arkansas. That is realalexjones.com. So not just the sea moss that's not available at the Alex Jones store, but some of the other products that are sold out as well are still available at realalexjones.com. They're incredible products. They empower you, make you healthier, and they fund our operation. So if you love these products, which I know a lot of you do, or if you haven't tried these products, go now to realalexjones.com and find out how amazing these products are.
LauraLoomer
Posted - February 14, 2025 at 4:36 PM
Saved - February 15, 2025 at 11:44 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
Judge Tanya Chutkan has been assigned to the case against DOGE, filed by a coalition of blue states, which raises concerns given her background. Born in Jamaica, she donated over $3,000 to Barack Obama's campaigns and has a reputation as a tough judge in January 6 cases, often imposing harsher sentences than recommended. She also oversaw the investigation led by Jack Smith against President Trump. I believe she is an anti-Trump activist judge and should be impeached.

@LauraLoomer - Laura Loomer

Judge Tanya Chutkan has been assigned the case against DOGE and @elonmusk filed by a coalition of blue states. Tanya Chutkan was born in Kingston, Jamaica. She’s not even from the US. She donated over $3,000 to Barack Obama's Presidential campaigns between 2008-2012. Chutkan was one of the toughest judges in the J6 cases. She ordered prison time in all J6 cases, and went out of her way to exceed the sentence recommended by prosecutors to inflict more harm on Trump supporters. She’s also the judge who oversaw Jack Smith’s phony J6 witch hunt against President Trump. Chutkan is an anti-Trump, Democrat, ACTIVIST JUDGE. She should be impeached. @realDonaldTrump Receipts 👇🏻

RepEliCrane
Posted - February 15, 2025 at 3:54 PM
Saved - February 16, 2025 at 12:32 AM

@RepEliCrane - Rep. Eli Crane

I’m one of them. Activist judges are out of control.

@LeadingReport - Leading Report

BREAKING: Several House Republicans are preparing articles of impeachment against the federal judges blocking some of President Trump’s and Elon Musk’s key policies.

elonmusk
Posted - February 15, 2025 at 11:15 PM
Saved - February 16, 2025 at 1:06 PM

@elonmusk - Elon Musk

Momentum is growing rapidly to impeach activist judges who repeatedly fail to follow the law

@MarioNawfal - Mario Nawfal

🚨🇺🇸HOUSE REPUBLICANS MOVE TO IMPEACH "ACTIVISTS" JUDGES House Republicans are drafting articles of impeachment against judges who blocked key policies of Trump and Elon’s @DOGE. Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ) targets Judge Paul Engelmayer for halting DOGE’s Treasury access, while Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-GA) aims at Judge John McConnell Jr. for pausing federal funding freezes. @elonmusk is advocating for a “wave of judicial impeachments” to stop activist judges from obstructing much-needed government reforms. Will Congress take action? Sources: Fox News, WSJ, @LeadingReport

RepEliCrane
Posted - February 21, 2025 at 8:41 PM
Saved - February 22, 2025 at 3:22 AM

@RepEliCrane - Rep. Eli Crane

🚨UPDATE: My articles of impeachment for U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer are officially filed. If these partisan judges want to be politicians, they should resign and run for office. Read more in my press release: https://crane.house.gov/2025/02/21/crane-introduces-articles-of-impeachment-for-u-s-district-judge-paul-engelmayer/

Crane Introduces Articles of Impeachment For U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer – Eli Crane crane.house.gov

@RepEliCrane - Rep. Eli Crane

🚨BREAKING - As promised, I'll be filing articles of impeachment for US District Judge Paul Engelmayer. Check them out here before I officially file on Friday: https://t.co/1L8Il5InU6

@RepEliCrane - Rep. Eli Crane

🧵 I’m drafting articles of impeachment for US District Judge Paul Engelmayer.   Partisan judges abusing their positions is a threat to democracy. The left has done “irreparable harm” to this country. President Trump and his team at @DOGE are trying to fix it.

RonDeSNews
Posted - March 4, 2025 at 10:34 PM
Saved - March 6, 2025 at 6:19 AM

@RonDeSNews - Ron De Santins 🇺🇸 NEWS

🚨 BREAKING: Multiple House Republicans are moving to IMPEACH federal judges who are obstructing key policies from President Trump & Elon Musk! Do you support this bold move? 🔴 YES 🔵 NO https://t.co/IcBvIosyCy

elonmusk
Posted - March 14, 2025 at 4:13 AM
Saved - March 14, 2025 at 4:23 AM

@elonmusk - Elon Musk

Without judicial reform, which means at least the absolute worst judges get impeached, we don’t have real democracy in America

@charliekirk11 - Charlie Kirk

Clinton appointee Judge William Alsup says the Trump Admin has to rehire 30,000 laid off probationary hires. He says that trying to cut headcount is a "sham" and actually it's legally mandatory for taxpayers to keep paying them. What will blue judges come up with next? Will they order Trump to declare war on Russia? Micromanage troop movements? Dictate what Trump eats for breakfast? This isn't judicial review. It's dictatorship by a big ego with a gavel. SCOTUS must intervene.

laralogan
Posted - March 18, 2025 at 7:15 PM
Saved - March 18, 2025 at 11:53 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
There are about 5000 District judges in the country, none of whom were elected to govern. I'm questioning what remedies exist for their overreach or unconstitutional actions. If impeachment isn't the answer, what other forms of oversight are appropriate? It's clear they need accountability.

@laralogan - Lara Logan

There are some 5000 Dostrict judges in this country - obviously none of them were elected to rule this country. So what is the remedy for the over-reach or unconstitutional use of their position? If you don’t think impeaching them is correct, then the obvious question is what remedies do exist? Because you can’t argue they do not need oversight. We know that is not true & in itself would be unconstitutional.

@RepEliCrane - Rep. Eli Crane

The articles of impeachment are teed up and ready to go. https://t.co/7NLKdm3ynF

RepLuna
Posted - March 19, 2025 at 4:41 PM
Saved - March 20, 2025 at 4:12 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
America is a Republic, not a judiciary dictatorship. We need to eliminate political activists posing as judges and restore the separation of powers. I'm proud to join my colleagues in impeaching all the activist judges who are unconstitutionally hindering President Trump's agenda.

@RepLuna - Rep. Anna Paulina Luna

America is a Republic, not a dictatorship of the judiciary. It's time to get rid of the political activists masquerading as judges and re-establish proper separation of powers. That's why I'm proud to announce that I will be joining my colleagues in impeaching ALL the activist judges who are unconstitutionally blocking President Trump's agenda.

RodDMartin
Posted - March 19, 2025 at 9:31 PM
Saved - March 20, 2025 at 4:23 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m excited to share that AG Pam Bondi has announced the continuation of deportation flights, defying a federal judge's order. She emphasizes that these flights target foreign terrorists, including members of the Tren de Aragua gang, who are illegally in the U.S. Bondi argues that one judge shouldn't have the power to halt national security measures and criticizes what she sees as judicial overreach. She believes the Trump administration is acting within the law to protect families and is determined to push back against perceived deep state interference. Expect more deportations ahead.

@RodDMartin - Rod D. Martin

🚨 BREAKING: @AGPamBondi DEFIES Federal Judge, Says Deportation Flights WILL Continue Gosh I just love her. ❤️ Here are the details.... 1/🧵

@RodDMartin - Rod D. Martin

@AGPamBondi 2/ Obama-appointed Judge Boasberg tried stopping deportation flights of Venezuelan terrorists. He wants them on OUR STREETS. But AG Bondi just dropped a BOMBSHELL: "We will ABSOLUTELY continue the flights" 🔥

@RodDMartin - Rod D. Martin

@AGPamBondi 3/ “These are foreign terrorists, that the president has identified them, and designated them as such, and we will continue to follow the Alien Enemies Act,” Bondi said Monday

@RodDMartin - Rod D. Martin

@AGPamBondi 4/ Let's be CLEAR what we're dealing with: • Tren de Aragua gang members • Designated TERRORISTS • Illegally in America • Caught committing crimes in OUR country • Trump deporting them according to the law

@RodDMartin - Rod D. Martin

@AGPamBondi 5/ DIRECT QUOTE from Border Czar Tom Homan that'll make your jaw DROP: "I don't care what the judges think. I don't care what the left thinks. We're coming."

@RodDMartin - Rod D. Martin

@AGPamBondi 6/ He's right. Trump is following the law. And the three branches have EQUAL power to interpret and enforce the Constitution. One local judge does NOT have the authority to issue a nationwide injunction, esp on national security. Time to "resist". https://www.rodmartin.org/p/judicial-despotism-how-to-end-nationwide

Judicial Despotism: How to End Nationwide Injunction Abuse Democrats are attempting to win in court what they lost at the ballot box. But their strategy abuses the legal system and upends the Constitution. Here's what to do about it. rodmartin.org

@RodDMartin - Rod D. Martin

@AGPamBondi 7/ 🔥 The real story? Deep state trying to block Trump admin from protecting YOU and YOUR FAMILY. They're also trying to neuter the Presidency through unconstitutional judicial activism. But Bondi isn't backing down. Will Judge Boasberg hold her in contempt? Good luck.

@RodDMartin - Rod D. Martin

@AGPamBondi 8/ And don't forget: this is a dirty judge. He was on the FISA court that authorized domestic spying on a political opponent (Trump 2016). That's Watergate times 1,000. He's been part of the lawfare for a decade. Absolutely corrupt.

@RodDMartin - Rod D. Martin

@AGPamBondi 9/ It's time to stop judges from acting like dictators. The Constitution does NOT give them executive authority. We can't have hundreds of unelected Presidents. The voters elect one. This isn't against legitimate judicial authority. It's against unconstitutional abuse.

@RodDMartin - Rod D. Martin

@AGPamBondi 10/ Expect more flights. More deportations. And more fireworks from Judge Boasberg and John Roberts. It's time to settle some of these issues. Trump has the guts to stand up. No Republican before ever did.

@RodDMartin - Rod D. Martin

@AGPamBondi 11/11 If you enjoyed this content, please like and share; and also, sign up for your FREE subscription to my newsletter at http://RodMartin.org.

The Rod Martin Report | Rod D. Martin | Substack Tech Entrepreneur. Futurist. Christian. "Philosopher Capitalist". Click to read The Rod Martin Report, by Rod D. Martin, a Substack publication with thousands of subscribers. rodmartin.org
RepOgles
Posted - March 25, 2025 at 5:34 PM
Saved - March 26, 2025 at 1:28 AM
reSee.it AI Summary
I believe Federal Judge Theodore Chuang is obstructing President Trump and enabling USAID's questionable spending, which includes extravagant expenditures on controversial projects. I argue that unelected judges like Chuang should not dictate executive actions, as his rulings reflect a blatant power grab. His history as a Democratic activist raises concerns about his impartiality, and his decisions, such as striking down Trump’s travel ban and undermining abortion regulations, demonstrate a pattern of legislating progressive priorities from the bench. Congress needs to hold him accountable.

@RepOgles - Rep. Andy Ogles

Federal Judge Theodore Chuang—a career Democrat operative—is obstructing President Trump and protecting USAID’s reckless spending. Congress must hold him accountable. Here’s the case for impeachment.👇

@RepOgles - Rep. Andy Ogles

1/ Judge Theodore Chuang, Maryland Federal District Court, is mandating President Trump and DOGE defy the American people’s mandate by propping up USAID. This is the same USAID blowing $2 million on Guatemalan sex changes, $1.5 million on DEI in Serbia, and $47,000 for a transgender opera. That’s your tax dollars at work.

@RepOgles - Rep. Andy Ogles

2/ Let’s be clear: unelected district judges have zero constitutional authority to dictate terms to a duly elected President on executive actions. Chuang’s ruling is a blatant power grab—plain and simple.

@RepOgles - Rep. Andy Ogles

3/ No surprise here. Judge Chuang’s history is steeped in Democrat activism. From 1992-1994, as editor of the Harvard Law Review, he championed articles pushing Critical Race Theory, affirmative action, and a Marxist spin on America’s foundations.

@RepOgles - Rep. Andy Ogles

4/ Take “Whiteness As Property,” republished under Chuang’s watch by Cheryl Harris—now on LA’s Reparations Advisory Committee. She argues: “Seeing oneself as ‘white’ assumes white supremacy.” That’s the radical ideology Chuang elevated. https://harvardlawreview.org/print/no-volume/whiteness-as-property/

Whiteness as Property - Harvard Law Review In the lead up to Volume 134, the Harvard Law Review republished five classic Critical Race Theory articles from our archives. This is the first... harvardlawreview.org

@RepOgles - Rep. Andy Ogles

5/ Harris doubles down: "It assumes that Black ancestry in any degree, extending to generations far removed, automatically disqualifies claims to white identity, thereby privileging "white" as unadulterated, exclusive, and rare...The law has played a critical role in legitimating this claim."

@RepOgles - Rep. Andy Ogles

6/ Before Obama put him on the bench in 2013, Chuang was a Democratic Party stalwart. Vice President of Montgomery County’s District 16 Democratic Club in 2009, Board member for the Coalition of Asian-Pacific American Democrats of Maryland, and Precinct Chair for Montgomery Democrats. His Senate Judiciary Questionnaire lays it out. https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Theodore-Chuang-Senate-Judiciary-Questionnaire-Final.pdf

@RepOgles - Rep. Andy Ogles

7/ In 2008, Chuang served on the Steering Committee for Obama’s Maryland Asian Pacific American Coalition, rallying fundraisers and connecting Democrat mega-donors. He was also a delegate at the 2002 Massachusetts Democratic Convention. This isn’t a judge—it’s a partisan resume.

@RepOgles - Rep. Andy Ogles

8/ Chuang’s bias didn’t stop at the bench. In 2017, he struck down Trump’s travel ban, unprofessionally leaning on Trump’s tweets to misconstrue the policy—a flimsy tactic echoed by activist Amir Ali at the Supreme Court. Another rogue Judge I am impeaching. The NPR record shows it. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/10/18/558501163/federal-judge-in-maryland-blocks-trumps-latest-travel-ban-attempt

@RepOgles - Rep. Andy Ogles

9/ In 2020, Chuang gutted a Trump rule requiring doctor visits for chemical abortions, calling it an “infringement” on abortion rights and claiming it caused “irreparable harm” in the COVID era. That decision greenlit mail-order abortions, AKA murder—disgraceful.https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/federal-judge-rules-women-can-get-abortion-pill-without-doctor-visits#:~:text=U.S.%20District%20Judge%20Theodore%20Chuang,the%20circumstances%20of%20the%20pandemic.

Federal judge rules women can get abortion pill without doctor visits A federal judge agreed Monday to suspend a rule that requires women during the COVID-19 pandemic to visit a hospital, clinic or medical office to obtain an abortion pill. pbs.org

@RepOgles - Rep. Andy Ogles

10/ He argued requiring a doctor’s visit would make women “forgo or delay abortion care” or risk COVID exposure. This isn’t judicial restraint—it’s Chuang legislating progressive priorities from the bench.

@RepOgles - Rep. Andy Ogles

11/ Chuang’s latest stunt—an injunction against @elonmusk , @DOGE , and @POTUS is absurd. His deep Democrat ties, aligned with their woke pro-bureaucrat agenda, scream conflict of interest. He’s abusing his robe to thwart the people’s will. Congress must act.

jnottah
Posted - April 12, 2025 at 11:08 PM
Saved - April 13, 2025 at 3:31 PM

@jnottah - Hatton, America is back

DOGE and the DOJ need to look into this immediately, this CORRUPT Judge Boseberg and his other half, have been making out like BANDITS 🤬 https://t.co/StyuUaFhMu

Video Transcript AI Summary
Liddy Madsen, the judge's wife, receives $50,000,000, with $5,000,000 being sent to an unspecified location. Public support pays $15,000,000 a year, enabling travel and honorarium speeches, a tactic learned from the judge. They allegedly took paycheck loans of almost $1,300,000 and an employee retention credit of $801,000. The speaker questions why Liddy is sending $5,000,000 to this location and where the money is going. They also question PPP and ERC loans they allegedly weren't entitled to. Tesla protesters were paid, and the speaker speculates Liddy must have been paid a lot.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The judge's wife, Liddy Madsen. For some reason, Liddy didn't take the judge's name, but she sure takes taxpayer money. 50,000,000, in fact, and 5,000,000 has been sent here. Yes. Here. It's very interesting if you check it out. The public support, that's you, pays there 15,000,000 a year, and they can go traveling on that. And then when you travel, you get an honorarium speech. She learned that trick from the judge. They took paycheck loans that they didn't deserve. Almost 1,300,000.0. On top of that, the employee retention credit, 801,000. And look at that, they inadvertently mislabeled it. What is she doing sending 5,000,000 over here? Where is that money really going to? And PPP and ERC loans that they weren't entitled to? The Tesla protesters were paid. How much was she paid? She must have got paid a lotta.
NextNewsNetwork
Posted - May 16, 2025 at 12:21 AM
Saved - May 16, 2025 at 2:15 PM
reSee.it AI Summary
I’m alarmed by the ongoing judicial battles against Trump, which I believe are undermining our democracy. It seems that unelected judges are sabotaging his presidency and blocking his executive orders, particularly regarding birth tourism and border security. I see a pattern of increased nationwide injunctions since Trump took office, which I view as a coordinated attack on America First policies. The situation feels like a constitutional crisis, and I’m frustrated that Congress isn’t taking action to address this judicial overreach. The stakes are high for our republic.

@NextNewsNetwork - Next News Network 🇺🇲

🚨 BREAKING: The DEEP STATE JUDGES trying to BLOCK TRUMP from SAVING AMERICA!! Supreme Court FINALLY fighting back against ROGUE JUDGES who've been running a SHADOW GOVERNMENT! This is the battle for our REPUBLIC! 🔥🔥🔥 1/12 https://t.co/ATj8q3v2BW

@NextNewsNetwork - Next News Network 🇺🇲

The GLOBALIST JUDGE CABAL has been SABOTAGING Trump since DAY ONE! 675 UNELECTED TYRANTS with BLACK ROBES stopping our ELECTED PRESIDENT! These DISTRICT DICTATORS think they can rule from their little COURTROOM KINGDOMS! The SYSTEM is RIGGED! 2/12 https://t.co/KJhLZ2ki7H

Video Transcript AI Summary
Nationwide injunctions allow a single federal judge or a small group to halt Trump administration policies, even with weak legal justification. An injunction issued in one jurisdiction, like Maryland, can halt implementation of a law across the entire country, not just locally. A new parallel court system could be created to specifically handle requests for nationwide injunctions.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Nationwide injunctions mean that one lone federal judge or a small group of them can entirely block everything the Trump administration wants to do even if their legal pretext is somewhat flimsy. And that means if something happens in Maryland, they're not just issuing an injunction of the Maryland jurisdiction. All of America must stop the implementation of said law because what happens in Maryland? It's a nationwide injunction for something where the violation or the thing in question is happening locally. You see, they could create a new parallel court system whose only purpose is handling requests for nationwide injunctions.

@NextNewsNetwork - Next News Network 🇺🇲

There were SIX nationwide injunctions under Bush, TWELVE under Obama, but a STAGGERING 64 under Trump's first term! Now on pace for EVEN MORE! This isn't coincidence - it's COORDINATED JUDICIAL WARFARE against America First! 3/12 [Kirk(4).txt] https://t.co/mc5WEanE1T

Video Transcript AI Summary
Nationwide injunctions occur when a district court judge blocks a law or order from being implemented nationwide, despite their jurisdiction typically covering only one state or part of one state. These injunctions were once uncommon, with six issued during George W. Bush's presidency and twelve during Obama's. However, their frequency increased significantly during Donald Trump's first term, with 64 being issued. At the current rate, this number could be surpassed in the first year of a second Trump term.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The matter of nationwide injunctions. Pretty much instantly after the Trump executive order, a district court judge issued a nationwide injunction. That's where a single district court judge whose jurisdiction is just one state or even part of one state blocks a law or order from being implemented nationwide. You see nationwide injunctions used to be rare. There were just six of them under George W. Bush's term. There were 12 of them during Obama's presidency, but there were 64 of them in Trump's first term. And at this current pace, he might top that figure in the first year of his second term.

@NextNewsNetwork - Next News Network 🇺🇲

BIRTH TOURISM is REAL! Foreign nations SENDING pregnant women to EXPLOIT our laws! They give birth, go back to CHINA, then return YEARS LATER claiming CITIZENSHIP! The 14th Amendment was for SLAVES, not FOREIGN INVADERS! 4/12 https://t.co/GkUYBWFaWU

Video Transcript AI Summary
A birth tourism industry exists where pregnant individuals travel to the US to give birth. Evidence suggests some countries, possibly China, send people to the US for this purpose. The children born in the US are then raised in their home countries for many years. Later, these individuals can return to the US and claim citizenship due to their birthright. Abuses like these led to President Trump's executive order.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: There is a birth tourism industry, where people will pay to come to our shores, in their seventh or eighth month of pregnancy when it's still relatively safe to travel, and they will then stay in hospitals until they give birth, and they will go back into their countries. And and there are certainly evidence out there that there are some countries, surprise me if it was China, that are in fact sending people here to give birth, so that at some point, they can take those children who have been living back in China, for, you know, many, many years and bring them back to The United States and then claim that they are that the people that are coming back to The United States are in fact US citizens by dint of the fact that they were born on our shores. I believe it is exactly abuses like that among many, that led president Trump to enter the executive order that he did. Alright. That's John

@NextNewsNetwork - Next News Network 🇺🇲

Trump's EXECUTIVE ORDER would END this ABUSE! But ACTIVIST JUDGES have BLOCKED it nationwide! One judge in MARYLAND can stop what VOTERS in ALL 50 STATES demanded! This isn't DEMOCRACY - it's JUDICIAL TYRANNY! 5/12 [ABC Subclip(2).txt] https://t.co/LKxCxjvPHl

Video Transcript AI Summary
The Supreme Court is hearing arguments regarding nationwide injunctions blocking President Trump's executive order to end birthright citizenship. Federal appeals courts have maintained the order on hold, suggesting it is likely unconstitutional. President Trump contends that the lower courts overstepped their authority. He is requesting the Supreme Court to lift the injunctions or, at minimum, permit the administration to begin planning for the change.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The supreme court is hearing arguments over nationwide injunctions blocking president Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship. Three federal courts, have kept the federal appeals courts, that is, have kept the order on hold, finding it very likely unconstitutional. But president Trump argues the lower courts exceeded their authority. Now he's asking the supreme court to lift the injunctions or at least allow the administration to start planning for the change.

@NextNewsNetwork - Next News Network 🇺🇲

TRAITORS outside Supreme Court speaking SPANISH while protesting BORDER SECURITY! They're chanting "DOWN WITH DEPORTATION" right in front of our highest court! They're not even HIDING their INVASION AGENDA anymore! 6/12 https://t.co/RFTWcVLtBv

Video Transcript AI Summary
Anti-Trump protesters are demonstrating outside the Supreme Court against Trump's secure border policies. The crowd is chanting "down, down with deportation, up, up with liberation." According to the speaker, the protesters have been chanting in Spanish, which the speaker finds annoying considering the location is outside the United States Supreme Court. More footage is available on Laura Loomis' X account.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We're outside the Supreme Court this morning as the left's anti Trump protesters are now protesting Trump for his secure border policies. As you can hear behind me, the crowd is chanting down, down with deportation, up, up with liberation. The same crowd has been literally chanting things in Spanish all morning, which is kind of annoying considering we're outside the United States Supreme Court. Stay tuned to Laura Loomis' ex account for more exclusive footage of this crazy open borders anti Trump protest at Scott's.

@NextNewsNetwork - Next News Network 🇺🇲

The 14th Amendment was TWISTED and PERVERTED by the GLOBALISTS! It was meant for FREED SLAVES after the Civil War, NOT for illegal aliens sneaking across our border to DROP ANCHOR BABIES! The ORIGINAL INTENT is CLEAR! 7/12 https://t.co/XBmHwaWzAo

Video Transcript AI Summary
The case concerns birthright citizenship and the Trump administration's attempt to reinterpret the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment states that all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction are citizens. The Trump administration announced it would no longer automatically grant citizenship to children of illegal immigrants, tourists, and temporary guest workers. However, this order did not take effect.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The case concerns birthright citizenship. One of the first orders of the Trump administration was an announcement that this administration is henceforth reinterpreting the meaning of the fourteenth amendment. The fourteenth amendment dates back to the end of the civil war. Its first clause reads, quote, all persons born or naturalized in The United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of The United States and of the state wherein they reside. Now the Trump administration announced that from now on, the children of illegal immigrants, tourists, and temporary guest workers are not automatic US citizens. That order didn't take effect, though, and that's the other issue being debated today.

@NextNewsNetwork - Next News Network 🇺🇲

Trump Administration CORRECTLY argues these nationwide injunctions are a CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS! They "prevent percolation of novel legal questions" and "encourage RAMPANT FORUM SHOPPING"! The LEFT shops for sympathetic judges! 8/12 [ABC Subclip.txt] https://t.co/5kn63ZNS8E

Video Transcript AI Summary
The Trump administration's attorney argues injunctions are a bipartisan problem spanning five presidential administrations. Universal injunctions exceed judicial power granted in Article III, which should only address injury to the complaining party. They transgress the traditional balance of equitable authority and create practical problems. Universal injunctions prevent the percolation of novel and difficult legal questions and encourage rampant forum shopping. Judges are required to make rushed, high-stakes, low-information decisions. They create confrontations between the life-tenured and representative branches of government and disrupt the Constitution's separation of powers.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So far, the Trump administration's attorney has argued the injunctions are a bipartisan problem that has spanned the last five presidential administrations. Speaker 1: Universal injunctions exceed the judicial power granted in Article III, which exists only to address the injury to the complaining party. They transgress the traditional balance of equitable authority, and they create a host of practical problems. Such injunctions prevent the percolation of novel and difficult legal questions. They encourage rampant forum shopping. They require judges to make rushed, high stakes, low information decisions. They create what justice Powell described as repeated and essentially head on confrontations between the life tenured and representative branches of government, and they disrupt the constitution's careful balancing of the separation of powers.

@NextNewsNetwork - Next News Network 🇺🇲

Sotomayor exposed her RADICAL AGENDA with GUN CONFISCATION hypothetical! She's TELEGRAPHING the LEFT'S PLAN to TAKE YOUR GUNS while pretending to defend "judicial power"! These people are SICK and TRANSPARENT! 9/12 https://t.co/hVTz4yuTis

Video Transcript AI Summary
One key question is whether a federal judge can block a presidential policy nationwide. The administration argues this creates an unfair playing field, forcing the government to "win everywhere" while plaintiffs "can win anywhere." Justice Sotomayor responded skeptically, saying the administration's argument "makes no sense whatsoever," and that it would limit the ability of federal courts, and even the Supreme Court, to issue nationwide relief. She asked what would happen if a president issued an executive order to take away everyone's guns, and whether courts would have to "sit back and wait for individuals to sue one by one." The administration also argues that the Fourteenth Amendment's birthright citizenship provision was meant for freed slaves, not immigrants.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Selena, what stands out to you from questioning so far? We never know what justices are are thinking, but sometimes it's interesting to hear the questions they choose to Speaker 1: ask. Yeah, Diane. Well, as you were just outlining, I mean, one of the key questions here is can an individual federal judge then block a presidential policy nationwide? And the administration here is arguing that the ability to do so creates an unfair playing field saying, quote, this forces the government to win everywhere while the plaintiffs can win anywhere. Now justice Sodio So Sodio Mayor had very skeptical response. She had a tough line of questioning. She said that the administration's argument, quote, makes no sense whatsoever, saying that this would not only limit the ability of federal courts, but also the supreme court to issue nationwide relief. She also made an interesting analogy saying, what would happen if a new president issued an executive order to take away everyone's guns? She asked if in that case, the courts would have to, quote, sit back and wait for individuals to sue one by one to challenge the constitutionality of such an order. Now the administration is also arguing that the fourteenth amendment's provision of birthright citizenship at the time of its passage was meant for freed slaves. It was not meant to apply to immigrants to The United States.

@NextNewsNetwork - Next News Network 🇺🇲

We survived until the 1960s WITHOUT nationwide injunctions! They EXPLODED in 2007 when the 9th Circuit started using them for ENVIRONMENTAL CLAIMS! It's the CLIMATE CULT's gift to the DEEP STATE! 10/12 https://t.co/bh57yJ1GRA

Video Transcript AI Summary
Injunctions were not universally applied until the 1960s, with *Wertz* in 1963 identified as the first instance, according to the speaker's interpretation of *Trump v. Hawaii*. A dispute exists regarding *Perkins v. Lukens Oil* from 1940. The speaker cites cases like *National Treasury Employees Union*, *Perkins v. Lukens Oil*, *Frothingham*, *Massachusetts v. Mellon*, and *Scott v. Donald* to show courts have historically limited injunctive relief to the plaintiffs in the case. Universal injunctions were rare even in the 1960s, with a surge occurring around 2007, particularly in the Ninth Circuit concerning environmental claims, as highlighted in a cert petition for *Summers v. Island Institute*. Justice Alito is then addressed.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Injunctions used. We believe that the best reading of that is what you said in Trump against Hawaii, which is that Wertz in 1963 was really the first universal injunction. There's a dispute about Perkins against Lukens Oil going back to 1940. And, of course, we point to the court's opinion that reversed that that that universal injunction issued by the DC circuit and said it's it's profoundly wrong. Now if you look at the the the cases that the either party site, you see a common theme. The cases that we cite, like National Treasury, Treasury's Employment Union, Perkins against Lukens Oil, Frothingham, and and Massachusetts against Mellon, going back to Scott against Donald. And all of those, those are cases where the court considered and addressed the sort of universal, in that case, statewide, issue of provision of injunctive relief. So when the court has considered and addressed this, it has consistently said, you have to limit the remedy to the plaintiffs who are appearing in court in complaining of that remedy. So we survived until the nineteen sixties without universal injunction. That's exactly correct. And in fact, those are very limited very rare even in the nineteen sixties. It really exploded in 02/2007 in our cert petition in Summers against Island Institute. We pointed out that the Ninth Circuit had started doing this in a whole bunch of cases involving environmental claims. Justice Alito? You began by outlining what you

@NextNewsNetwork - Next News Network 🇺🇲

Congress could FIX THIS IMMEDIATELY but they're SITTING ON THEIR TAILS! We control Congress - what are they DOING all day?! The UNIPARTY wants judges to have this power to BLOCK TRUMP when needed! DRAIN THE SWAMP NOW! 11/12 https://t.co/1cidv0N97O

Video Transcript AI Summary
A fundamental question is whether a district court judge's jurisdiction, limited to their district, allows them to issue nationwide orders. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on this issue. It is argued that they shouldn't have this power. Congress could resolve this, and Republicans, who control Congress, should act. Congress should fix this problem.
AI Similar Videos
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: There's a lot they could do. There's a lot of good ideas out there, but they not might not be necessary. Because an obvious question is this, and this is the fundamental question. And I'm glad we're actually getting this out of the way in the first six months of the Trump administration. And I'm glad we're getting it done quick. It's very important. The question is this. If a district court judge's jurisdiction is only over his his or her own district, how can they have the power to issue a nationwide order? Arguably, they shouldn't, and that's what the supreme court just heard in oral arguments today. And, of course, we should be clear. Congress could fix this. We control congress, and we should not let republicans off the hook. What are they doing all day long? Hello? Congress, get off your tail. Fix this.

@NextNewsNetwork - Next News Network 🇺🇲

Wrap-up Tweet: The battle is ON! One lone judge should NOT have power to BLOCK the PRESIDENT! This case will determine if we're a REPUBLIC or a JUDICIAL DICTATORSHIP! Stay tuned for MASSIVE revelations! FOLLOW @NextNewsNetwork for the TRUTH they don't want you to hear! 12/12 https://t.co/uJbN07e9cT

View Full Interactive Feed