Court filing: 284 DOE grants canceled, all but one were in states Trump lost. Fair or political?

SEEMEFIRST
Posts
13951
Joined
8/21/2006
Location
Arlington, TX, USA
7/27/2026 7:50pm

Where's Judge Roy Bean when you need him?

1
7/27/2026 8:06pm
APLMAN99 wrote:

If birthright citizenship were rescinded and it was enforced retroactively, we could deport Kash Patel!!!!

MoogenKen wrote:

If only, I can not stand that clown, or Dan Mangina.

SEEMEFIRST wrote:

Se la gaer....

Honneur et Fidelite! 
 

R66
Posts
1396
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
7/28/2026 6:30am
APLMAN99 wrote:
So that still didn't answer the original question of the thread, but I guess it 'sorta' answered the other question.  So who should decide whether a...

So that still didn't answer the original question of the thread, but I guess it 'sorta' answered the other question.  

So who should decide whether a state is violating federal law, the President alone or the courts? If a president can simply declare a state non-compliant and cut off funding, that seems like a power that could/would be abused by either party, doesn't it?

It’s a loaded question. It’s like asking someone if they still beat their wife. To answer the question to your satisfaction, one must agree with your premise. 

4
APLMAN99
Posts
12653
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR, USA
Fantasy
7/28/2026 6:34am
APLMAN99 wrote:
So that still didn't answer the original question of the thread, but I guess it 'sorta' answered the other question.  So who should decide whether a...

So that still didn't answer the original question of the thread, but I guess it 'sorta' answered the other question.  

So who should decide whether a state is violating federal law, the President alone or the courts? If a president can simply declare a state non-compliant and cut off funding, that seems like a power that could/would be abused by either party, doesn't it?

R66 wrote:
It’s a loaded question. It’s like asking someone if they still beat their wife. To answer the question to your satisfaction, one must agree with your...

It’s a loaded question. It’s like asking someone if they still beat their wife. To answer the question to your satisfaction, one must agree with your premise. 

Nothing loaded about it. Are you claiming that the administration withholding funding because of the voting record of the state’s citizens is a ‘premise’?  

 

1
4

The Shop

APLMAN99
Posts
12653
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR, USA
Fantasy
7/28/2026 6:36am
MoogenKen wrote:

If only, I can not stand that clown, or Dan Mangina.

MoogenKen wrote:
Please allow me to extrapolate. “We’re getting Epstein”. “Epstein evidence is on my desk”. “They’re going down”. To, “these are not the droids you’re looking for”.Find it...

Please allow me to extrapolate. “We’re getting Epstein”. “Epstein evidence is on my desk”. “They’re going down”. 

To, “these are not the droids you’re looking for”.

Find it interesting that Pam Blondi and Kash “Klown Show” Patel came out of the same Florida Legal System that gave Epstein the sweet heart deal back in 2007.

Congress passed a law to require them to release “ALL” information. To date which they have not released half.
Citizenry, is starting to get suspect and angry. “Release the UFO files”! Yet, the majority of us didn’t quite fall for that shit either. 

Next, it’s “War on Iran” alongside Israel. Yes, without a doubt Jeffrey was a Mossad agent. Who has the most to lose from the “Epstein Files” being released? 

………and I don’t think Trump is directly culpable in Epstein, ie; not a child predator. Credible evidence could change my mind. 

There ya’ go, now I’ll be labeled a “crazy conspiracist” and hated by both sides of the aisle. It’s ok, I’ve got big shoulders. 

And I really don’t care that Biden didn’t release the files, never expected anything remotely resembling transparency out of his administration. Trump was going to tell us “the truth”. 

So yeah, once again I feel over sold and under delivered. 
 

A lesser person would probably say, “Told you so all along”, but I would never do that…..!

1
3
7/28/2026 6:45am
APLMAN99 wrote:

A lesser person would probably say, “Told you so all along”, but I would never do that…..!

I see what you did there! 😉

1
R66
Posts
1396
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
7/28/2026 6:47am
APLMAN99 wrote:
So that still didn't answer the original question of the thread, but I guess it 'sorta' answered the other question.  So who should decide whether a...

So that still didn't answer the original question of the thread, but I guess it 'sorta' answered the other question.  

So who should decide whether a state is violating federal law, the President alone or the courts? If a president can simply declare a state non-compliant and cut off funding, that seems like a power that could/would be abused by either party, doesn't it?

R66 wrote:
It’s a loaded question. It’s like asking someone if they still beat their wife. To answer the question to your satisfaction, one must agree with your...

It’s a loaded question. It’s like asking someone if they still beat their wife. To answer the question to your satisfaction, one must agree with your premise. 

APLMAN99 wrote:

Nothing loaded about it. Are you claiming that the administration withholding funding because of the voting record of the state’s citizens is a ‘premise’?  

 

Are you proud to belong to a political party that has members embracing communism and socialism?

1
9
matt.3150
Posts
806
Joined
3/20/2015
Location
San Jose, CA, USA
7/28/2026 7:00am
MoogenKen wrote:
Well, let’s start with your National Guard claim. We’ll unpack one at a time. Not to cloud the issue with insignificant facts and trivia, but……”The federalization of...

Well, let’s start with your National Guard claim. We’ll unpack one at a time. Not to cloud the issue with insignificant facts and trivia, but……

The federalization of the California National Guard is rooted in the U.S. Constitution's Militia Clauses and federal statutes like 10 U.S.C. § 12406, though its application remains heavily contested in federal courts. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

 
Constitutional Basis
  • Militia Clauses: Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to provide for organizing and governing the militia when employed in the service of the United States, while reserving officer appointments and training to the states. [1, 2]
  • Commander-in-Chief Power: Article II, Section 2 designates the President as Commander-in-Chief of the state militias when they are called into actual federal service.
 
Statutory Authority and Limits
  • Title 10 Powers: Congress delegated federalization authority through 10 U.S.C. § 12406, allowing the President to call forth the Guard during invasions, rebellions, or when unable to execute federal laws with regular forces
matt.3150 wrote:
The statutory conditions in § 12406 were not met because there was no rebellion or inability to enforce federal law.The deployment exceeded the President’s statutory authority...

The statutory conditions in § 12406 were not met because there was no rebellion or inability to enforce federal law.

The deployment exceeded the President’s statutory authority and infringed on California’s authority over its National Guard.


Federalized Guard members were being used in ways that conflicted with laws limiting military involvement in civilian law enforcement. 


Trump lost in court with these. But you will say it was by an Activist judges.  Which is typical MAGA blame others for there incompetence.



 

MoogenKen wrote:
By your standard, what’s going on now in Madison is not insurrection? Rebellion? Sedition? LA violent riots in the streets? It’s clearly not peaceful assembly, nor redress...

By your standard, what’s going on now in Madison is not insurrection? Rebellion? Sedition? LA violent riots in the streets? 

It’s clearly not peaceful assembly, nor redress of grievances. 

 

Not by my standard by the Federal courts. The presidency has limits, meaning that he can’t just claim something he has to show the proof.  Even if you want to use LA violent riots as your example it doesn’t mean he can just federalize the National guard, he would have to show that the state and local law enforcement couldn’t deal with it. 
Insurrection has to be proven and since he didn’t deploy the National Guard on Washington DC on. Jan 6th when there was an insurrection creates another problem for Trump because in Washington he does control the National Guard.  Then when he try’s to use it in Liberal states,  it then causes an issue with the courts. But that a whole nothing issue. 

In your mind it’s not peaceful protest , nor redress of grievances. 

1
6
mvd61
Posts
1301
Joined
10/15/2021
Location
Brandon, SD, USA
7/28/2026 7:08am
MoogenKen wrote:

If only, I can not stand that clown, or Dan Mangina.

MoogenKen wrote:
Please allow me to extrapolate. “We’re getting Epstein”. “Epstein evidence is on my desk”. “They’re going down”. To, “these are not the droids you’re looking for”.Find it...

Please allow me to extrapolate. “We’re getting Epstein”. “Epstein evidence is on my desk”. “They’re going down”. 

To, “these are not the droids you’re looking for”.

Find it interesting that Pam Blondi and Kash “Klown Show” Patel came out of the same Florida Legal System that gave Epstein the sweet heart deal back in 2007.

Congress passed a law to require them to release “ALL” information. To date which they have not released half.
Citizenry, is starting to get suspect and angry. “Release the UFO files”! Yet, the majority of us didn’t quite fall for that shit either. 

Next, it’s “War on Iran” alongside Israel. Yes, without a doubt Jeffrey was a Mossad agent. Who has the most to lose from the “Epstein Files” being released? 

………and I don’t think Trump is directly culpable in Epstein, ie; not a child predator. Credible evidence could change my mind. 

There ya’ go, now I’ll be labeled a “crazy conspiracist” and hated by both sides of the aisle. It’s ok, I’ve got big shoulders. 

And I really don’t care that Biden didn’t release the files, never expected anything remotely resembling transparency out of his administration. Trump was going to tell us “the truth”. 

So yeah, once again I feel over sold and under delivered. 
 

Well said. Patel is a fucking moron. 

APLMAN99
Posts
12653
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR, USA
Fantasy
7/28/2026 7:28am
R66 wrote:
It’s a loaded question. It’s like asking someone if they still beat their wife. To answer the question to your satisfaction, one must agree with your...

It’s a loaded question. It’s like asking someone if they still beat their wife. To answer the question to your satisfaction, one must agree with your premise. 

APLMAN99 wrote:

Nothing loaded about it. Are you claiming that the administration withholding funding because of the voting record of the state’s citizens is a ‘premise’?  

 

R66 wrote:

Are you proud to belong to a political party that has members embracing communism and socialism?

Sorry, little fella.  Not a member of any political party. 

Not going to answer the question about the actual topic?  Your cognitive dissonance just a little too much right now?

1
4
APLMAN99
Posts
12653
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR, USA
Fantasy
7/28/2026 7:37am
APLMAN99 wrote:

A lesser person would probably say, “Told you so all along”, but I would never do that…..!

MoogenKen wrote:

I see what you did there! 😉

Damn, I was really trying to be subtle too!!!!

3
R66
Posts
1396
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
7/28/2026 8:38am
APLMAN99 wrote:

Nothing loaded about it. Are you claiming that the administration withholding funding because of the voting record of the state’s citizens is a ‘premise’?  

 

R66 wrote:

Are you proud to belong to a political party that has members embracing communism and socialism?

APLMAN99 wrote:
Sorry, little fella.  Not a member of any political party. Not going to answer the question about the actual topic?  Your cognitive dissonance just a little too...

Sorry, little fella.  Not a member of any political party. 

Not going to answer the question about the actual topic?  Your cognitive dissonance just a little too much right now?

Well it’s pretty obvious who you are aligned with politically, and that party has communists and socialists in it. I bet your dad is proud of you. 

9
APLMAN99
Posts
12653
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR, USA
Fantasy
7/28/2026 8:45am
R66 wrote:

Are you proud to belong to a political party that has members embracing communism and socialism?

APLMAN99 wrote:
Sorry, little fella.  Not a member of any political party. Not going to answer the question about the actual topic?  Your cognitive dissonance just a little too...

Sorry, little fella.  Not a member of any political party. 

Not going to answer the question about the actual topic?  Your cognitive dissonance just a little too much right now?

R66 wrote:
Well it’s pretty obvious who you are aligned with politically, and that party has communists and socialists in it. I bet your dad is proud of...

Well it’s pretty obvious who you are aligned with politically, and that party has communists and socialists in it. I bet your dad is proud of you. 

I don't align with any one party politically.  

Why aren't you answering the question?  

4
SKlein
Posts
1492
Joined
3/25/2014
Location
MN, MN, USA
7/28/2026 9:09am
APLMAN99 wrote:

I don't align with any one party politically.  

Why aren't you answering the question?  

It's pretty obvious he's a Red Delicious fan, you can't expect much from them.

1
3
ShellyMX
Posts
860
Joined
3/22/2026
Location
Smyrna, GA, USA
7/28/2026 9:42am
APLMAN99 wrote:

I don't align with any one party politically.  

Why aren't you answering the question?  

Lmfao 🤣🤣🤣🤣

1
2
R66
Posts
1396
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
7/28/2026 9:58am
APLMAN99 wrote:
Sorry, little fella.  Not a member of any political party. Not going to answer the question about the actual topic?  Your cognitive dissonance just a little too...

Sorry, little fella.  Not a member of any political party. 

Not going to answer the question about the actual topic?  Your cognitive dissonance just a little too much right now?

R66 wrote:
Well it’s pretty obvious who you are aligned with politically, and that party has communists and socialists in it. I bet your dad is proud of...

Well it’s pretty obvious who you are aligned with politically, and that party has communists and socialists in it. I bet your dad is proud of you. 

APLMAN99 wrote:

I don't align with any one party politically.  

Why aren't you answering the question?  

I know, I named 3 that you align with. 

1
7
soggy
Posts
8809
Joined
12/3/2018
Location
USA
7/28/2026 11:37am
R66 wrote:
Well it’s pretty obvious who you are aligned with politically, and that party has communists and socialists in it. I bet your dad is proud of...

Well it’s pretty obvious who you are aligned with politically, and that party has communists and socialists in it. I bet your dad is proud of you. 

APLMAN99 wrote:

I don't align with any one party politically.  

Why aren't you answering the question?  

R66 wrote:

I know, I named 3 that you align with. 

Just take the L and move on. 

2
8
matt.3150
Posts
806
Joined
3/20/2015
Location
San Jose, CA, USA
7/28/2026 11:39am
R66 wrote:
Well it’s pretty obvious who you are aligned with politically, and that party has communists and socialists in it. I bet your dad is proud of...

Well it’s pretty obvious who you are aligned with politically, and that party has communists and socialists in it. I bet your dad is proud of you. 

APLMAN99 wrote:

I don't align with any one party politically.  

Why aren't you answering the question?  

R66 wrote:

I know, I named 3 that you align with. 

To put in “I bet your bad is proud of you” is pretty pathetic.  Even the trolling is incompetent.  Socialism and Communism is now people who think everyone should have healthcare that doesn’t cost a future or wanting a good education that doesn’t put them in debt or actually caring about the welfare of others.  We do seem to have Socialism for billionaires and corporations though but just not for everyone. 

6
5
soggy
Posts
8809
Joined
12/3/2018
Location
USA
7/28/2026 11:46am
APLMAN99 wrote:

I don't align with any one party politically.  

Why aren't you answering the question?  

R66 wrote:

I know, I named 3 that you align with. 

matt.3150 wrote:
To put in “I bet your bad is proud of you” is pretty pathetic.  Even the trolling is incompetent.  Socialism and Communism is now people who...

To put in “I bet your bad is proud of you” is pretty pathetic.  Even the trolling is incompetent.  Socialism and Communism is now people who think everyone should have healthcare that doesn’t cost a future or wanting a good education that doesn’t put them in debt or actually caring about the welfare of others.  We do seem to have Socialism for billionaires and corporations though but just not for everyone. 

Yep. 

1
5
APLMAN99
Posts
12653
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR, USA
Fantasy
7/28/2026 11:47am
R66 wrote:
Well it’s pretty obvious who you are aligned with politically, and that party has communists and socialists in it. I bet your dad is proud of...

Well it’s pretty obvious who you are aligned with politically, and that party has communists and socialists in it. I bet your dad is proud of you. 

APLMAN99 wrote:

I don't align with any one party politically.  

Why aren't you answering the question?  

R66 wrote:

I know, I named 3 that you align with. 

Where?  Did I miss it?  

Why is it so difficult for you to answer the question that is actually about the topic of the thread?  Is it absolutely impossible for you to be honest about your cult’s behavior?  Seriously?  

2
5
soggy
Posts
8809
Joined
12/3/2018
Location
USA
7/28/2026 11:55am
APLMAN99 wrote:

I don't align with any one party politically.  

Why aren't you answering the question?  

R66 wrote:

I know, I named 3 that you align with. 

APLMAN99 wrote:
Where?  Did I miss it?  Why is it so difficult for you to answer the question that is actually about the topic of the thread?  Is...

Where?  Did I miss it?  

Why is it so difficult for you to answer the question that is actually about the topic of the thread?  Is it absolutely impossible for you to be honest about your cult’s behavior?  Seriously?  

The answer to your question is yes. R66 will posture and pivot and label you a lib so he can feel good about himself. 

8
7
R66
Posts
1396
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
7/28/2026 12:32pm

Now I know Lib means Democrat Communist Socialist. 
Thanks!

1
11
soggy
Posts
8809
Joined
12/3/2018
Location
USA
7/28/2026 2:30pm

for their next trick they post a bunch of memes and photos from their highly curated spank bank. 

2
7
7/28/2026 3:16pm

The Tenth amendment makes it unconstitutional to force states into enforcing federal law.  So wouldn't it be unconstitutional to hold funding back because of it? That would be forcing states to enforce federal laws ,wouldn't it?  

 

 That is how states are able to legalize pot for recreational use.  Same concept. It's still illegal federally, but the federal government cannot force the states to enforce those penalties.  

 

 Being open about it being for political reasons gives them a win with their supporters  even if its changed and the grants are funded. They can say how they punished those evil Dem states.  And there are Trump supporters who will think that it's great. There are trump supporters who support him because he's owning the libs.    Should be more of a wakeup call to established politicians  in both parties, than it has been. Writing it off as a cult or whatever. So many people wouldn't have been so receptive to being a Trump supporter if they were not so fed up with  how things have been going. People knowing that the elected officials are going to lie , enrich themselves,etc.  can look at Trump say that that at least he's saying what we would like to say to those other politicians, even if he's doing all of the same other stuff we hated.  

 

1
1
7/28/2026 10:26pm
The Tenth amendment makes it unconstitutional to force states into enforcing federal law.  So wouldn't it be unconstitutional to hold funding back because of it? That...

The Tenth amendment makes it unconstitutional to force states into enforcing federal law.  So wouldn't it be unconstitutional to hold funding back because of it? That would be forcing states to enforce federal laws ,wouldn't it?  

 

 That is how states are able to legalize pot for recreational use.  Same concept. It's still illegal federally, but the federal government cannot force the states to enforce those penalties.  

 

 Being open about it being for political reasons gives them a win with their supporters  even if its changed and the grants are funded. They can say how they punished those evil Dem states.  And there are Trump supporters who will think that it's great. There are trump supporters who support him because he's owning the libs.    Should be more of a wakeup call to established politicians  in both parties, than it has been. Writing it off as a cult or whatever. So many people wouldn't have been so receptive to being a Trump supporter if they were not so fed up with  how things have been going. People knowing that the elected officials are going to lie , enrich themselves,etc.  can look at Trump say that that at least he's saying what we would like to say to those other politicians, even if he's doing all of the same other stuff we hated.  

 

No. You're thinking of commandeering. Withholding federal moneys from a state is a valid exercise of the federal government's spending power under South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203 (1987). In 1987, Congress passed a bill to withhold 10% of federal money to states if those states did not enforce a 21 year old drinking age. Went to Scotus. Feds won. 

 
 


 

2
Kenny Banyan
Posts
4589
Joined
6/2/2024
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
7/29/2026 5:13am Edited Date/Time 7/29/2026 5:15am

I think a tool in the tool box, for a president to be able to get his policy's through can be a good thing. 

8
matt.3150
Posts
806
Joined
3/20/2015
Location
San Jose, CA, USA
7/29/2026 7:20am
The Tenth amendment makes it unconstitutional to force states into enforcing federal law.  So wouldn't it be unconstitutional to hold funding back because of it? That...

The Tenth amendment makes it unconstitutional to force states into enforcing federal law.  So wouldn't it be unconstitutional to hold funding back because of it? That would be forcing states to enforce federal laws ,wouldn't it?  

 

 That is how states are able to legalize pot for recreational use.  Same concept. It's still illegal federally, but the federal government cannot force the states to enforce those penalties.  

 

 Being open about it being for political reasons gives them a win with their supporters  even if its changed and the grants are funded. They can say how they punished those evil Dem states.  And there are Trump supporters who will think that it's great. There are trump supporters who support him because he's owning the libs.    Should be more of a wakeup call to established politicians  in both parties, than it has been. Writing it off as a cult or whatever. So many people wouldn't have been so receptive to being a Trump supporter if they were not so fed up with  how things have been going. People knowing that the elected officials are going to lie , enrich themselves,etc.  can look at Trump say that that at least he's saying what we would like to say to those other politicians, even if he's doing all of the same other stuff we hated.  

 

No. You're thinking of commandeering. Withholding federal moneys from a state is a valid exercise of the federal government's spending power under South Dakota v. Dole...

No. You're thinking of commandeering. Withholding federal moneys from a state is a valid exercise of the federal government's spending power under South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203 (1987). In 1987, Congress passed a bill to withhold 10% of federal money to states if those states did not enforce a 21 year old drinking age. Went to Scotus. Feds won. 

 
 


 

The President generally cannot unilaterally impose new conditions or use unrelated federal funds to pressure states into adopting policies Congress did not require.

Congress has the power of the purse not the President/ The executive just facilitates what Congress has given it and has to comply with the laws and constitution 


Congress also can’t impose conditions to bills/funds that are unlawful and unconstitutional 

1
APLMAN99
Posts
12653
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Tualatin, OR, USA
Fantasy
7/29/2026 7:30am

I think a tool in the tool box, for a president to be able to get his policy's through can be a good thing. 

Are you referring to the original situation in this thread?  That the President should have that tool to use for that reason?  

1
matt.3150
Posts
806
Joined
3/20/2015
Location
San Jose, CA, USA
7/29/2026 7:36am

I think a tool in the tool box, for a president to be able to get his policy's through can be a good thing. 

APLMAN99 wrote:

Are you referring to the original situation in this thread?  That the President should have that tool to use for that reason?  

The main point is that the President can’t just redirect or even no spend money that Congress has allocated. The executive is to use the funds in compliance with the laws, bill and constitution.  

1
R66
Posts
1396
Joined
4/16/2021
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
7/29/2026 7:39am
APLMAN99 wrote:

I don't align with any one party politically.  

Why aren't you answering the question?  

R66 wrote:

I know, I named 3 that you align with. 

matt.3150 wrote:
To put in “I bet your bad is proud of you” is pretty pathetic.  Even the trolling is incompetent.  Socialism and Communism is now people who...

To put in “I bet your bad is proud of you” is pretty pathetic.  Even the trolling is incompetent.  Socialism and Communism is now people who think everyone should have healthcare that doesn’t cost a future or wanting a good education that doesn’t put them in debt or actually caring about the welfare of others.  We do seem to have Socialism for billionaires and corporations though but just not for everyone. 

He started it when he called me “little  fella.”  Was that a pathetic response from him? He took a dig at me so I gave him one back. Have a great day!IMG 3361 7

6

Post a reply to: Court filing: 284 DOE grants canceled, all but one were in states Trump lost. Fair or political?

The Latest