when Judges said DJT did not have Executive Power to build the wall without legislation and specific appropriation was that a JUDGE ruling by the constitution ?
I bet you thought not at that time
BUT yet both are the same --- both are limiting the solo power of the EXECUTIVE to act without legislation or correct appropriation
Executive Power - to act alone - has grown 100x since Ronald Reagan --- no matter if D or R as next POTUS ------ ??? has it gone too far ? AND ? should we allow courts (who reviews them?) to say what a POTUS Can or Can not do without ....
Nothing here is simple ------ and it is not the issue FHFA WALL ACA STUDENT - whatever ------ it is the overall policy re constitution - if POTUS can do A and B without special law ---- can it then do C D E F --- and I for one do not know . The assumption is that there is a governor on COURT if for example it says no you - POTUS - without legislation for that purpose can not build a wall or can not excuse 10K of loan ----- then the court is also saying -- ok SIR POTUS get such law and you have a full 100% green light
So much money was used by the Govt to control the narrative and influence opinions on both sides of the aisle.
Once the hedge funds took their monies off the table (remember Eaton meeting), the Govt gained less resistance to their c-ship plans. The nws was just icing on the cake for Govt control. Conservatorship can end when Congress recognizes that our shares actually are worth something and are willing to either buy us out or end c-ship and let the markets decide share values.
…Shareholders were never completely destroyed, so they could wipe all our equity and destroy our share price in the hopes of stealing indefinitely…
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
