afransen
Senior Member
It probably just reads out of touch and elitist. Kinda surprised with Trump it not being chicken nuggets and tater tots.
- Thread starter Monarch Butterfly
- Start date
urbanclient
Senior Member
The problem isn't A or B issue that's come up in the last few years. It's the fact that much of the "law" in the USA hinges on the ideological composition of the courts. Too much substantive law is from court rulings that can be overturned overnight, instead of statutory law which is slower to repeal.
Monarch Butterfly
Superstar
PL1
Senior Member
I saw an explanation on IG that I can't find that explains the Virginia decision as being due to the Virginia constitution. Basically, certain conditions must be met and were deemed not to. I wish I could recall who it was (they are a left-ish lawyer)...
urbanclient
Senior Member
Other thing I forgot to add is American federalism. Their federal government is more powerful than the states in some ways (more so than feds. vs. provinces), but the states have more independence with criminal law, and as you mentioned, their state constitution. Federal elections are subject to the whims of the states, something that cannot happen in Canada.
UtakataNoAnnex
Superstar
Florida has a similar law that the state can't redistrict unfairly...to which their government plans to completely ignore...
...but if SCOTUS can override everything, seems to be bit pointless enforcing state law in this matter. If they're going to do it anyway, might as well join in the fun. /s
...but if SCOTUS can override everything, seems to be bit pointless enforcing state law in this matter. If they're going to do it anyway, might as well join in the fun. /s
Mihairokov
Senior Member
Here's the US delegation going to Beijing this week:
Among those set to join the president on his official trip to Beijing are Tim Cook of Apple, Elon Musk of Tesla and SpaceX, Larry Fink of BlackRock, as well as other executives from Meta, Visa, JP Morgan, Boeing, Cargill and more.
In total, 17 US executives will join Trump on the trip, a White House official with knowledge of the plans told the BBC.
The trip is seen as important for the US, as Trump will meet with President Xi Jinping at a time of growing economic and technological animosity between the two countries.
In addition to Musk, Cook and Fink, the full list of the executives set to join Trump as part of the official US delegation to China is as follows:
www.bbc.com
Seems pretty obvious what their aims are
Among those set to join the president on his official trip to Beijing are Tim Cook of Apple, Elon Musk of Tesla and SpaceX, Larry Fink of BlackRock, as well as other executives from Meta, Visa, JP Morgan, Boeing, Cargill and more.
In total, 17 US executives will join Trump on the trip, a White House official with knowledge of the plans told the BBC.
The trip is seen as important for the US, as Trump will meet with President Xi Jinping at a time of growing economic and technological animosity between the two countries.
In addition to Musk, Cook and Fink, the full list of the executives set to join Trump as part of the official US delegation to China is as follows:
- Dina Powell McCormick, president and vice chair of Meta
- Kelly Ortberg, president and chief executive of Boeing
- Ryan McInerney, chief executive of Visa
- Stephen Schwarzman, chief executive of Blackstone
- Brian Sikes, chief executive and chairman of Cargill
- Jane Fraser, chief executive of Citi
- Jim Anderson, chief executive of Coherent
- Henry Lawrence Culp, chief executive of GE Aerospace
- David Solomon, chief executive of Goldman Sachs
- Jacob Thaysen, chief executive of Illumina
- Michael Miebach, president of Mastercard
Elon Musk and Jensen Huang among CEOs joining Trump on China trip
More than a dozen US executives have joined the president on his visit, where he will meet his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping.
www.bbc.com
Seems pretty obvious what their aims are
thettctransitfanatic
Senior Member
Australia’s Trump Tower plans scrapped as developer says brand has become ‘toxic’
Plans to build Australia’s first Trump Tower have been scrapped just three months after it was announced, with the local developer saying the Trump brand has become “toxic.”
“Let’s just say that with the Iran war and everything else, the Trump brand was increasingly unpopular in Australia,” David Young, CEO of Altus Property Group, told CNN in a statement.
The 91-story Trump International Hotel & Tower Gold Coast was billed as Australia’s tallest tower, featuring a 285-room luxury hotel, high-end retail plaza, restaurants and residential apartments finished to Trump specifications, according to a February press release from Altus announcing the deal.
The project sparked backlash after it was announced by Altus and the Trump Organization, which is owned by US President Donald Trump but run by his sons Donald Jr. and Eric.
The luxury seaside property was the Trump Organization’s “first official project in Australia,” Eric Trump said at the time.
CNN has reached out to the Trump Organization for comment.
One petition aiming to stop the project garnered more than 140,000 signatures.
Young said the tower will still proceed — but without the Trump name.
In a LinkedIn post Tuesday, the Altus CEO called the backlash to the Trump Tower “grossly unfair” but said “the brand in this country has become toxic to Australians.”
“Trump Org is a non-political, free of the President run organization by Eric and Don Jr and run well with over 136 resorts and towers globally yet here in Australia both the media and certain orgs paint a picture of Donald Trump for pure sensationalism,” Young said.
He said there is “no acrimony between the Trump family and myself” and he has been in discussions with “many high-end luxury plans” about the tower.
Young had laid the groundwork for the tower in 2007 with a “cold call to Ivanka Trump,” according to a blog post on the Altus website.
Young recalled introducing himself to Trump’s daughter as a property developer from Australia, who was intent on building “Australia’s finest tourist property at Surfers Paradise.”
Almost 20 years later, when the deal was signed, Young said the tower “will be an Australian, not American project,” according to comments published in The Australian newspaper.
He had anticipated the building could be ready before the Brisbane Olympics in 2032.
But Gold Coast Mayor Tom Tate — who once dined with Trump in Mar-a-Lago and was an enthusiastic supporter of the project — said a development application had never been submitted to City Council.
“This project was an agreement between two private parties,” Tate said in a statement to CNN, adding “we didn’t have a proposal to consider.”
Money could also have been a factor, according to Tate.
“The Trump Organization wants a lot more for their brand on the funding side of things, to operate it and the percentage of return,” Tate told the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
“(Meanwhile) the developer’s going, ‘Well, I’m putting in all of my money in and you’re actually going to take quite a lot of profit’, so I think that’s why they’re parting ways.”
thettctransitfanatic
Senior Member
Exclusive: The FAA is evaluating risks to flights from Trump’s ‘triumphal arch’
The Trump administration has asked the FAA to evaluate the risks of building the president’s “triumphal arch” less than two miles from Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, one of the busiest in the nation.
According to documents obtained by CNN, the Department of Interior has requested a formal aeronautical study from the Federal Aviation Administration for the proposed 250-foot arch, which would be built in a patch of grass at the end of Memorial Bridge, across from the Lincoln Memorial.
The request, submitted by the National Parks Service, a division of the Interior Department, notes that the total height of the structure will be 279 feet when the site elevation beneath the arch itself is considered.
FAA regulations require structures that exceed 200 feet and positioned at a site that potentially interferes with airspace be subject to a review. The FAA has said it aims to complete these types of reviews within 45 to 90 days – but they typically take far longer, up to nine months.
The FAA acknowledged that it had received the request and told CNN it had begun the study, but the agency declined to give a timeline for the review of the arch.
Pilots must already navigate various hazards as they descend or ascent through the “north approach” flight path that requires them to swing to avoid close encounters with the Pentagon, the Washington Monument and other DC landmarks.
The addition of President Donald Trump’s arch will further complicate flying through the corridor, which has been the site of high-profile and much scrutinized accidents, including last year’s midair collision between an American Airlines plane and a Black Hawk helicopter and a 1982 crash into the 14th Street Bridge upon takeoff.
Trump's planned 'triumphal arch' would be built under a busy flight corridor for DCA
On Monday, May 11, 2026, more than 900 flights went into and out of Washington's Reagan National Airport, or DCA. Many of the arriving and departing flights from that typical day flew over the president's would-be new arch.
The airspace is extremely crowded, with more than 900 commercial flights departing and landing through to Reagan National Airport on Monday alone.
Plans for the structure are supposed to be approved by the Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital Planning Commission, two government agencies that oversee federal building in Washington.
As with many projects Trump has proposed, such as the construction of a new ballroom at the White House and the renaming of the Kennedy Center, insiders fear that the panels, which the president has stacked with loyalists, will approve the arch with little regard of risks.
“I fear that regardless of any defects in the arch’s design, it will be rammed through by the government bodies that need to approve it,” a source close to the committees said.
The NCPC said it “regularly works with other agencies that have review roles to ensure that reviews are synchronized.”
“We would expect to follow the same approach here,” the committee told CNN, but said it does not yet have a specific timeline for the review.
CFA, which has already approved a preliminary set of designs for the arch, said it had received a revised concept for review at its meeting on May 21, but could not say whether “whether the Commission members will consider the issue raised by the FAA to affect the timing of their actions.”
Construction obstruction
Since Trump announced his vision for an arch in Washington that would help commemorate America’s 250th birthday, there have been concerns about its size, the impact on its surroundings and the speed with which he promised to build it.
He has previously told reporters that it should be “the biggest one of all” since the US is “the biggest, most powerful nation,” and in December he had said that he wanted construction to start within two months.
Typically, a request to the FAA to conduct an obstruction analysis is made 45 days prior to any construction starting. The president can move ahead with the project without final determination from the FAA.
The FAA’s Obstruction Evaluation Group will look at runway length, the airport elevation, the structure’s exact coordinates, ground elevation and whether temporary cranes to build the structure will exceed the permanent height, among other items.
They’ll consult with numerous other agencies and branches of the armed forces including the Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security, the Army, Air Force and Navy.
The FAA will then issue a “Determination of No Hazard” or a “Determination of Hazard.”
If a hazard is determined, the administration will have 60 days to adjust the project – potentially make height reductions or hazard lightings to make it more visible to aircraft, among other tweaks to make it safer for aviation.
Asked about the evaluation, a White House official claimed that the arch will “have no effect on flights to and from Reagan National.”
lenaitch
Senior Member
Well, that seals it. There is no higher knowledge on flight safety than a "White House official". Probably Leavitt.
If the FAA gets in the way, the simple and common solution is to replace the Director. Problem solved.
Harry Sisson collated a lengthy series of Trump’s posts from a couple of weeks ago. This man is leading a country, and millions of people are apparently ok with that.
hw621
Senior Member
Which is?Here's the US delegation going to Beijing this week:
Among those set to join the president on his official trip to Beijing are Tim Cook of Apple, Elon Musk of Tesla and SpaceX, Larry Fink of BlackRock, as well as other executives from Meta, Visa, JP Morgan, Boeing, Cargill and more.
In total, 17 US executives will join Trump on the trip, a White House official with knowledge of the plans told the BBC.
The trip is seen as important for the US, as Trump will meet with President Xi Jinping at a time of growing economic and technological animosity between the two countries.
In addition to Musk, Cook and Fink, the full list of the executives set to join Trump as part of the official US delegation to China is as follows:
- Dina Powell McCormick, president and vice chair of Meta
- Kelly Ortberg, president and chief executive of Boeing
- Ryan McInerney, chief executive of Visa
- Stephen Schwarzman, chief executive of Blackstone
- Brian Sikes, chief executive and chairman of Cargill
- Jane Fraser, chief executive of Citi
- Jim Anderson, chief executive of Coherent
- Henry Lawrence Culp, chief executive of GE Aerospace
- David Solomon, chief executive of Goldman Sachs
- Jacob Thaysen, chief executive of Illumina
- Michael Miebach, president of Mastercard
Elon Musk and Jensen Huang among CEOs joining Trump on China trip
More than a dozen US executives have joined the president on his visit, where he will meet his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping.
Seems pretty obvious what their aims are
Richard White
Senior Member
Likely US Investment into China.
That said, they will push for access into the Chinese market and then freak out a week later when Trump thinks he is getting a bad deal.
Mihairokov
Senior Member
Business investment in the US, or vice versa. I'm not sure why China would commit to any in the US when the Americans could/would claim international security and seize anything vaguely Chinese once built or invested there, but the goal of the trip is less regarding world security, as many thought it would be, and more about opening investment doors. I believe the Chinese Foreign Minister quashed any questions on Taiwan/Japan/Iran during his press conference.
It's also worth noting that the Chinese allowed Marco Rubio to enter with this delegation despite being under sanction for interfering on Hong Kong-related issues. It was either allowing him to formally enter the country as Secretary of State instead as Marco Rubio the person, or they physically changed his name to allow him entry.
It really speaks to the type of people the US is catering to when the only folks going are those with very deep pockets. Literally capitalism personified lol.
hw621
Senior Member
Any attempts to access into the Chinese market will end up disasters and backfire. People should have learned their lessons from China's entrance into the WTO. China uses their market access as bait in exchange for technology and IP. Once they get a grip of those, they would mass produce with their cheap labor and flood the world markets, e.g., solar panels, EVs, etc., etc...
Last edited: