Opinion Musk takes aim at law firms involved in Trump policy challenges

[oldshadow]

What the courts have been involved with are his unilateral spending freezes, not some targeted, specific challenges on money he believes isn’t being spent as intended.

The freez is to stop the misuse of the funding and find that misuse.

He will go through the court system to overturn that judges opinion.

Let's see what the Supreme Court has to say.

 

[Rod1]

The GAO hasn't been doing their job as evidence by what was found.

Based on what? Elon Musk has not released anything concrete of what he is claiming, do you believe that he is incapable of lying? are you that naive?

 

[Rod1]

He will go through the court system to overturn that judges opinion.

Good, that's how checks and balances work, they find something they feel its wrong, they go to the courts to prove its wrong, otherwise what stops president from doing whatever the fuck he wants?

 

[oldshadow]

Based on what? Elon Musk has not released anything concrete of what he is claiming, do you believe that he is incapable of lying? are you that naive?

He has no reason to lie. If he was the democrats would have called him out on it. He admitted it was 50 million on condoms to Gaza to Africa and on other things also.

 

[oldshadow]

Good, that's how checks and balances work, they find something they feel its wrong, they go to the courts to prove its wrong, otherwise what stops president from doing whatever the fuck he wants?

The courts will decide if he is allowed to do what he is doing. If the democrats or others believe he is not then they can go to court to stop him.

It's great they do so voters can see what they are crying about to stop the spending on.

 

[sickc0d3r]

The freez is to stop the misuse of the funding and find that misuse.

He will go through the court system to overturn that judges opinion.

Let's see what the Supreme Court has to say.

That's fine, I was just saying if he doesn't like certain spending for ideological reasons (like money appropriated for some DEI project or whatever), he can ask the house to change it, and they can do so immediately if they agree. It doesn't have to be a court battle.

What you're talking about is a blanket freeze on spending for multiple agencies, for an indefinite period of time, until he's decided which spending he likes or doesn't like. I guess the house's power over spending is just for show at that point. I get that you like the sound of that when your guy is in office, I wonder how it will sound when it's someone else.

But, hey, if he takes it all they way to scotus and they rule in his favor, so be it. We're well on our way to zero checks on the executive branch, just like the founders intended.

 

[Rod1]

The courts will decide if he is allowed to do what he is doing.

If the democrats or others believe he is not then they can go to court to stop him.

It's great they do so voters can see what they are crying about to stop the spending on.

Yes, that's how it works.

So why is Elon crying

"judicial coup"
"We will persecute law firms that dare to present lawsuits against us"

 

[Rod1]

He has no reason to lie.

Naiveness it is.

 

[HOLA]

He has no reason to lie. If he was the democrats would have called him out on it. He admitted it was 50 million on condoms to Gaza to Africa and on other things also.

He had no reason to lie about his video game history, but he did anyway, didn't he? Fucking guy has been lying about the RoboTaxi release date since like 2016.

 

[panamaican]

Do the democrats actually think this is a good look to normal people.

They are going crazy and throwing temper tantrums over exposing waste and corruption of taxpayers money.

Most lawyers have concerns about the "how". The system is designed with checks and balances. Every branch has a check on the other branches. If Congress, for example, won't exercise it's authority over something, the judiciary is the path through which a challenge is supposed to be brought. If the people bringing the case are wrong, so be it. But if they're right then it needs to be addressed.

I don't know how anyone can profess to love this country and its ideals but also be upset when people use the rule of law to question the government's actions. That's what accountability looks like.

We should never be rubber stamping government action if there's even a whiff of concern regarding Constitutionality. The entire nation's founding principle was based around the idea that there should be robust brakes available to halt government action if necessary. I like to assume that none of us want a king, even if it meant we get what we want...

 

[avenue94]

It's impressive how many Electoral College bros are suddenly defending the popular vote.

 

[avenue94]

The GAO hasn't been doing their job as evidence by what was found.

How have they not? That's mostly what Doge has done, read GAO reports.

 

[jk7707]

He has no reason to lie. If he was the democrats would have called him out on it. He admitted it was 50 million on condoms to Gaza to Africa and on other things also.

You're really that gullible? He has billions of reasons directly related to the federal government to lie, and he has, repeatedly to get what he wants.

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

It’s not my party as I am not a democrat. That makes the entire premise of your post empty and meaningless. I get that you’re very stupid and can only post in simply 1st level thoughts. I am all for eliminating waste it just must be done legally and in accordance with the constitution.

yes you are a democrat. Pretending to not support democrats isn't saving you from that destruction.

 

[Andy Capp]

And who exactly is "they"? Rudy is getting what he deserves for attempting to illegally overthrow the 2020 election and defaming 2 completely innocent people amd ruining their lives. Things that he has shown exactly zero remorse for doing.

This was all done in court, and the mountain of evidence to prove what he did was laid out and ruled on.


In this case you have the President and the richest man in the world siccing their millions of cultists on these law firms based on....what? Representing people in court with legitimate Constitutional arguments against what they're both doing.

So again, how the fuck in your mind do these two situations sound even remotely similar?

I'd guess it's because his mother drank during pregnancy. A lot.

 

[Killer Kadoogan]

lol you are all retarded, except for 4-5 posters here. but it's ok.

does funding circumcisions in brazil for millions reflect the interest of the american tax payer? does it benefit the american tax payer? hell no. elon musk is exposing all this shit, all of this data was already open sourced, it's all literally there. its funny, everyone was DOOM when elon bought twitter. gutted it, and guess what? still works fucking fine. same thing with the gov. all of this exposure and the total silence of the left to stick to the facts is hilarious.

 

[Andy Capp]

Most lawyers have concerns about the "how". The system is designed with checks and balances. Every branch has a check on the other branches. If Congress, for example, won't exercise it's authority over something, the judiciary is the path through which a challenge is supposed to be brought. If the people bringing the case are wrong, so be it. But if they're right then it needs to be addressed.

I don't know how anyone can profess to love this country and its ideals but also be upset when people use the rule of law to question the government's actions. That's what accountability looks like.

We should never be rubber stamping government action if there's even a whiff of concern regarding Constitutionality. The entire nation's founding principle was based around the idea that there should be robust brakes available to halt government action if necessary. I like to assume that none of us want a king, even if it meant we get what we want...

Indeed, even the appearance of unconstitutionality should be anathema to the Party of Law and Order, but here we are, a bunch of idiots applauding very obviously illegal actions by the government. It's astounding.

 

[oldshadow]

That's fine, I was just saying if he doesn't like certain spending for ideological reasons (like money appropriated for some DEI project or whatever), he can ask the house to change it, and they can do so immediately if they agree. It doesn't have to be a court battle.

What you're talking about is a blanket freeze on spending for multiple agencies, for an indefinite period of time, until he's decided which spending he likes or doesn't like. I guess the house's power over spending is just for show at that point. I get that you like the sound of that when your guy is in office, I wonder how it will sound when it's someone else.

But, hey, if he takes it all they way to scotus and they rule in his favor, so be it. We're well on our way to zero checks on the executive branch, just like the founders intended.

Let the courts decide if he has the power.

If not so be it at least the democrats spending of taxpayers money will be out in the open. We will see how the taxpayers feel about it come midterm.

 

[oldshadow]

Yes, that's how it works.

So why is Elon crying

"judicial coup"
"We will persecute law firms that dare to present lawsuits against us"

He thinks Trump has the power and he can use the course against them as long as he does it legally.

 

[oldshadow]

Naiveness it is.

So he lied