https://spectator.org/scotus-gives-trump-a-big-win-on-immigration/
The notion that Trump is a lawless president fails another test.
American Spectator: SCOTUS Gives Trump a Big Win on Immigration
Published
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum
A place for civil discussion of the events of the day for Tidewater residents without the limitations imposed by media forums.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
I am not sure what you mean by Trump as “lawless” and how that applies to this narrow ruling about arrest for deportation time frame after release from serving time for a deportable offense.
I am not even sure how significant this ruling was, or why.
LikeLike
Grasping at straws. Let’s see . . .
Rule-of-law :63
Trump : 1
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/the-real-reason-president-trump-is-constantly-losing-in-court/2019/03/19/f5ffb056-33a8-11e9-af5b-b51b7ff322e9_story.html?utm_term=.cac32ed3a3cf
LikeLike
I can’t read your WAPO link, but off the top of my head I can think of three Supreme Court actions that favored the president’s position in some matter he was being sued about. Your 63-to-1 loss-win ratio — if that’s what it is — is obviously invalid.
One can only conclude that either you or WAPO is promoting a falsehood, which, as stated, was the reason for my original post.
LikeLike
You cited ONE case where Trump as allowed to proceed. I cited 63 where he wasn’t. There is nothing false about my summation.
Without quibbling about the number of cases, the big picture is that Trump and his administration have been held in check by court decisions far more than any any history. Many of these decisions have to do with their ignoring specific requirements of the law in pursuit of a policy goal. Is this because they are lawless or just incompetent? Probably a mix.
LikeLike
RE: “There is nothing false about my summation.”
Your summation is false because it omits relevant information. You present a fabricated frame of reference for your comments, making them dishonest.
LikeLike
You are very quick to accuse just about everybody else of dishonesty. That makes you a loser.
LikeLike
I’d say name-calling is a better sign of “loser-ness.”
LikeLike
On this thread you called me “dishonest.” And at other times a “commie.”
Too thick to recognize that as name-calling?
LikeLike
I called your comments dishonest, and explained why. You, on the other hand, chose to call me, personally a “loser.” I hope someday you will strive to engage in debate at a higher level than you currently do.
LikeLike