Every time someone says, Trump can't do it because it's illegal?

[RoeVWade]

"I throw up my hands."

Are we in the same Universe?

[gab13by13]

1. Or when a cable news anchor cites polls

that say what he is doing is very unpopular, I scream.

Some brave state law enforcement DA or AG has to give the OK to arrest these goons when they commit crimes. I have seen people in Minnesota and Pa. talk tough, just do it. Minnesota needs to investigate the murder.

[RoeVWade]

2. "illegal" is more an obstacle to him, appears to me.

nt*

[bigmonk]

3. Why the name?

And why do people call him Trump, repeating his brand and promoting him, when they should be calling him Donald?

[mwmisses4289]

9. Many of us personally know good people who are named

Donald or have Don as a nickname. Not to many of us personally know (or want to know!) someone named trump.

[Katinfl]

12. I never refer to him as president. Can't bring myself to put those two words together.

[mwmisses4289]

18. I usually refer to him as t.

[Katinfl]

22. My husband and I call him the idiot.

[Irish_Dem]

4. People are in total denial and it is impossible to budge them to face reality.

In fact when you try to talk to them about reality they get very angry.
I have noticed this over and over here.

I think being an optimist can be a good trait in general.
But when you are in an emergency situation it can be a big liability.

[RoeVWade]

7. Maybe that's it. Normally, I consider myself optimist. I'm optimistic Trump can eventually be crushed with facts and

reality. You can't give up or give in. You can't normalize it. You can't get used to it. You have to oppose it.

[Irish_Dem]

8. You are a balanced optimist who sees hope that Trump can be defeated.

You don't seem to think that Trump will follow rule of law or that we even still have a rule of law in the US.

But have hope justice will prevail.

[RoeVWade]

10. Pretty much, yup. Hope to stay that way.

For people that need a break from negativity, take one for your own mental health if you need it. No reason to crack. Won't do anyone any good.

[Irish_Dem]

16. What you call negativity I would call reality.

Leaders need to face reality no matter how hard it is or they cannot fight the enemy successfully.

But yes it is hard on the troops who need a softer version perhaps and to take breaks.

[markie]

5. I thought

by now... everyone understood most of what he does is illegal I haven't heard anyone say "Trump can't do it because it's illegal"

[RoeVWade]

13. I kind of got that.

by now... everyone understood most of what he does is illegal I haven't heard anyone say "Trump can't do it because it's illegal"

in my Greenland post, a poster was said, that taking Greenland was "too" illegal. I'm just not sure I know what is "too" illegal for Trump.

[niyad]

14. There was a discussion here on DU just a few days ago with a poster

who actually said the "can't do it" absurdity, and then doubled down repeatedly when the statement was challenged.

[Chasstev365]

6. And when a judge rules against the Trump administration

Does anyone think for a second that this criminal cabal that mascarades a presidential administration cares about a judge's ruling?

To them its an annoyance and not a paramount having a functional democracy. They also know Congressional Republicans and the 6 partisan hacks on the Supreme Court will never stop them.

[EdmondDantes_]

15. Given that they consistently have, yes

With a couple of exceptions like the deportation flights that were in the air and ordered to return, they have whined but obeyed the courts. Do you have a bunch of specific examples where they haven't?

[Chasstev365]

17. Here

https://truthout.org/articles/trump-white-house-refuses-to-abide-by-1-in-3-court-orders-made-against-them/

[Fiendish Thingy]

21. Not as black and white as it seems

From your link:

The Post examined 337 lawsuits in total, finding 165 cases in which judges had ruled against the administration. The Trump White House has been accused of “defying or frustrating court oversight” in 57 cases, or around 35 percent of rulings or orders made against them, the analysis found — an unprecedented amount, according to legal experts speaking to the publication

“Frustrating court oversight” is legalese for playing procedural games as a form of delaying compliance with a court order, which Trump is an expert at as we have seen. That is distinct from openly defying a court order, which has only happened a handful of times.

Note that neither the article at your link, and the WaPo report it references, distinguishes between or defines what the difference is between “frustrating judicial oversight” and open defiance, nor do they give any specific examples of the former.

Despite this administration’s acting with lawless impunity, we must remember this one absolute truth:

Trump is not omnipotent, and the states and the people are not powerless

I think the more interesting, and important, question is: if this administration is truly a wholly unrestrained dictatorship, why do they comply at all?

At the very least Somebody is afraid of going to jail, or more likely, getting disbarred, and so is probably aggressively advocating for compliance with orders that can’t be gamed in court.

[Fiendish Thingy]

20. Actually they have complied with rulings restraining their actions most of the time

Of course they always appeal and seek a stay pending that appeal, but if no stay is issued, with just a few exceptions, they have obeyed the court.

[Orrex]

11. I remember being told that Biden couldn't do anything with the "absolute immunity" granted by SCOTUS

And here we are, with Trump doing everything he wants, with absolute immunity.

[Fiendish Thingy]

19. His administration indeed acts with lawless impunity

But once caught and ordered by the courts to stop or reverse their actions, for whatever reason, most of the time, they comply (of course while appealing and seeking a stay of the ruling, but otherwise they have complied)