this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2026
80 points (96.5% liked)

politics

28424 readers
2750 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Post ContentTo show you how ridiculous the opinion is, the Court said that I’m not allowed to charge even $1 DOLLAR to any Country under IEEPA, I assume to protect other Countries, not the United States which they should be interested in protecting — But I am allowed to cut off any and all Trade or Business with that same Country, even imposing a Foreign Country destroying embargo, and do anything else I want to do to them — How nonsensical is that? They are saying that I have the absolute right to license, but not the right to charge a license fee. What license has ever been issued without the right to charge a fee? But now the Court has given me the unquestioned right to ban all sorts of things from coming into our Country, a much more powerful Right than many people thought we had.

Our Country is the “HOTTEST” anywhere in the World, but now, I am going in a different direction, which is even stronger than our original choice. As Justice Kavanaugh wrote in his Dissent:

“Although I firmly disagree with the Court's holding today, the decision might not substantially constrain a President's ability to order tariffs going forward. That is because numerous other federal statutes authorize the President to impose tariffs and might justify most (if not all) of the tariffs issued in this case...Those statutes include, for example, the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (Section 232); the Trade Act of 1974 (Sections 122, 201, and 301); and the Tariff Act of 1930 (Section 338).”

Thank you Justice Kavanaugh!

In actuality, while I am sure they did not mean to do so, the Supreme Court’s decision today made a President’s ability to both regulate Trade, and impose TARIFFS, more powerful and crystal clear, rather than less. There will no longer be any doubt, and the Income coming in, and the protection of our Companies and Country, will actually increase because of this decision. Based on longstanding Law and Hundreds of Victories to the contrary, the Supreme Court did not overrule TARIFFS, they merely overruled a particular use of IEEPA TARIFFS. The ability to block, embargo, restrict, license, or impose any other condition on a Foreign Country’s ability to conduct Trade with the United States under IEEPA, has been fully confirmed by this decision. In order to protect our Country, a President can actually charge more TARIFFS than I was charging in the past under the various other TARIFF authorities, which have also been confirmed, and fully allowed.

Therefore, effective immediately, all National Security TARIFFS, Section 232 and existing Section 301 TARIFFS, remain in place, and in full force and effect. Today I will sign an Order to impose a 10% GLOBAL TARIFF, under Section 122, over and above our normal TARIFFS already being charged, and we are also initiating several Section 301 and other Investigations to protect our Country from unfair Trading practices. Thank you for your attention to this matter. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!

PRESIDENT DONALD J. TRUMP

top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 16 points 2 hours ago (4 children)

I… what? Didn’t the Supreme Court just say he couldn’t do this exact thing?

[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 3 points 1 hour ago

They said that he couldn't use as arguments an emergency economic law from the 70's, but if he can find other law then it could do it.

[–] HumanOnEarth@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Welcome back! How long were you in that coma for?

[–] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 6 points 2 hours ago

I didn’t think my nap during my lunch break was THAT long, geez.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

WTF does he care about worthless opinions of other people? /s, just in case

[–] rozodru@piefed.world 7 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

my guy out of ALL the illegal shit he's done you honestly thought THIS was the thing that would stop him? no. He has literally killed children. He could do it on live TV right now and nothing would happen to him. He could round up all the people he doesn't like, go on fox news, and put a gun to the back of each of their heads and pull the trigger on live TV and nothing would happen.

You're in a fascist dictatorship. Laws don't apply to fascist dictators. he's murdered and raped people, children even, he rigged the last election, he has a gestapo that kills american citizens with zero consequences, he has concentration camps.

There's only 3 ways he's going to be stopped, only 3.

  1. the Military coups
  2. the US people rise up and storm the capital
  3. he dies. and this option is the worst because they'll just replace him with someone younger and worse.

that's it.

[–] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 2 points 2 hours ago

Oh believe me, I’m aware.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 43 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Remember how we were all wondering this morning if he'd take the W, claim he "fixed" the economy (the great Biden economy that he's actually been working to break for over a year now) and stop talking like an idiot?

Nope, he really just is that fucking stupid and petty. It's not surprising he's this stupid; it's been obvious since at least the 80s that he's a stupid asshole. What's surprising is just how many stupid people are out there that support him. I honestly wonder how many of those morons that still support him would drop support if they were to think he was not a racist, though.

[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 14 points 2 hours ago (4 children)

I think that tariffs is one of the only things he fundamelly believes in. Pretty sure was the only class on college that he wasn't coked up and enjoyed, and since that he based all his economics ideas around that.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 18 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I think it's also a great way for him to completely fuck with the market, allowing him and the Republican Crime Family to financially benefit by buying the (well-timed) dip.

[–] hateisreality@lemmy.world 1 points 1 minute ago

Also also impose a defacto flat tax on everyone, which of course disproportionately taxes the folks who make the least amount.

It's almost as if Americans pay tariffs not the counties he's squabbling with.

[–] tburkhol@lemmy.world 12 points 2 hours ago

Pretty sure he just thinks he, personally, gets all the tariff money, because he's incapable of distinguishing between himself and the organizations he runs.

[–] mr_account@lemmy.world 5 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Aside from the other comments being correct about market manipulation, I don't think this shitstain actually believes in the tariffs. He's like a selfish whiney toddler that found his dad's loaded gun. He doesn't understand the gravity of the situation, but everyone started acting really cautious and listens to his demands when he starts waving it around.

[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

He's being talking about tariffs since the 80's.

[–] Dragomus@lemmy.world 1 points 46 minutes ago

I think he never understood how tariffs work.
As an inheritance he got his hands on a lot of real estate but never had to deal with paying tariffs on items personally, so he's easily stuck on the story someone else told him that the country of origin always pays tariffs.

And on the side he probably does think he is entitled to earnings from "his" tariffs. Just as he said the members on his board of peace are paying "him" $1Billion...

[–] cranakis@reddthat.com 2 points 2 hours ago

I imagine he got fixated on Tariffs after doing blow with one of those right wing economists who wouldn't shut up about how much America used to use them, back when "men were men!"

[–] Asafum@lemmy.world 56 points 3 hours ago

AKA: a 10% tax on Americans.

[–] ThanksObama@sh.itjust.works 33 points 3 hours ago
[–] stylusmobilus@aussie.zone 1 points 1 hour ago

Aah yep, throwing the toys from the cot like their tech and defence companies are doing over Europe shopping at home and their citizens when told to vote.

Fits the country like a glove he does.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 13 points 3 hours ago

What a Stable Genius

[–] PedroMaldonado@lemmy.world 8 points 2 hours ago

Somehow a dottering old man AND a goddammit child at the same time. Way to go, America. You sure picked a winner.

[–] dizzle18@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 hours ago

Why can’t the agencies that enforce these tariffs just ignore this executive order? For fucks sake, someone grow a goddamn backbone. It’s fucking pathetic.

[–] Talaraine@fedia.io 6 points 2 hours ago

That German opera "Monster's Paradise" had a scene with a building sized baby in a diaper with a human sized head on top and I've never seen something so on point in my life.

[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 10 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

It was time to someone to sanctions the US. Thanks Mr. President!

[–] thesohoriots@lemmy.world 3 points 3 hours ago

He’s gotta figure out how to make money off this thing!

[–] Blueliner@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago
[–] DaddleDew@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Baby didn't get his way and is now throwing a tantrum.

[–] espentan@lemmy.world 4 points 3 hours ago (3 children)

He says the people of countries that have been ripping off the US for decades are dancing in the streets.. all quiet in Norway.

So sorry about ripping you guys off over there for all these years (I didn't even know) /s

[–] TipRing@lemmy.world 7 points 3 hours ago

Well Trump is definitely going to stick it to y'all by raising my taxes.

[–] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 5 points 2 hours ago

Reporting from Brazil, people are indeed dancing on the streets, but we're still in carnival so it could be just a coincidence.

[–] School_Lunch@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

... so the US is constantly getting ripped off by trade deals, but somehow is still the richest country the world has ever known... make it make sense..

[–] crusa187@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 hours ago

Little whiny baby poopie pants can’t stand being told NO, even when it’s meant to save his ass.

We are so lucky he’s this incompetent.