If Kari Lake's campaigns for office in Arizona disgusted you as much as they did me, what she's been reduced to ought to feel pretty good:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/kari-lake-waited-hours-white-210240021.html 

I hope she keeps failing and further humiliating herself but she'll probably find some deep red hole in another state to dupe like Greene did. 

As an Arizonan, she is absolutely vile. I am thankful that she lost both of her bids for office there. 

Hobbs, Fontes, and Mayes have done an admirable job at sheltering Arizona from the worst excesses of the Trump administration. I spent two years in Oklahoma helping my sister recover from surgery and then noped the hell out of Oklahoma, back to Arizona. I shudder to think what it would be like if Lake, Hamadeh, and Finchem held those same positions. At the same time, state elections are this year, and I am nervous. Biggs and Schweikert are running for governor, and they are two of the worst members of Congress.

Seeing Lake reduced to this is sweet. She got a bullshit position for all of her ass-kissing of Trump.

The last I heard, she was pretty much done with Arizona and was considering a move back to Iowa, which is actually her home state. Good riddance.

In case you missed it, Trump's FCC is in full partisan mode and threatening left leaning voices to fall in line. CBS is all too happy to lick boots and lean on Colbert in turn, so now he's in full on "What are you gonna do? Fire me?" mode (they're already ending his contract, fyi). 

Hopefully this receives some Kimmel level backlash. May all these bootlickers reap the whirlwind. 

Supreme Court Strikes Down Trump’s Global Tariffs

https://www.wsj.com/us-news/law/trump-tariffs-supreme-court-decision-29c26fa2

President Trump’s global tariffs are illegal, the Supreme Court ruled Friday, in a stinging repudiation of a signature White House initiative.

U.S. Supreme Court finds Trump overstepped authority in imposing tariffs under emergency law

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/livestory/scotus-tariff-ruling-9.7099048

As U.S. President Donald Trump looks to expand his use of tariffs to pressure Europe over Greenland, the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down previously imposed tariffs. The Supreme Court found Trump overstepped his authority when he invoked emergency powers to bring the tariffs into effect.

It’s impossible to overstate how big a blow this ruling is to Donald Trump.  The president had previously said it would be an "economic disaster" for the U.S. if the Supreme Court struck down his tariffs. He was primarily talking about the loss of roughly $150 billion a year in revenue to the U.S. Treasury.

But the court's rejection of his claim that he has unfettered authority to impose tariffs by declaring national emergencies is a disaster of another kind for Trump — a political one.

Trump has to face the reality that two justices he appointed ruled against the tariffs. It delivers a clear conservative legal rebuke to his attempt to extend his presidential powers into an area that, according to the U.S. Constitution, is exclusively the domain of Congress.

The ruling comes in the wake of growing political discontent with the tariffs. The Republicans lost a vote in the House last week, with lawmakers condemning the "fentanyl emergency" tariffs against Canadian products. Meanwhile, Trump's approval rating on the economy is in the dumps, with many Americans upset at the rising cost of living, in part a factor of tariffs.  

For Trump, today is arguably the worst day of his second term. Trump's staff will now likely have to rewrite a chunk of his State of the Union address, scheduled for Tuesday evening. 

The U.S. Supreme Court struck down on Friday U.S. President Donald Trump‘s sweeping tariffs that he pursued under a law meant for use in national emergencies, rejecting one of his most contentious assertions of his authority in a ruling with major implications for the global economy. Trump has leveraged tariffs - taxes on imported goods - as a key economic and foreign policy tool.

He's definitely pissed off.

He's also threatening to not only continue the tariffs, in defiance of the court, but he wants to throw another 10 percent on top of them.

I don't get it. Even if you LIKE his policies and for some reason are deluded enough to believe he's good at business, how can anyone want someone so insecure and childish in such a position of power? How can anyone trust someone so prone to tantrums?

'Because it serves them right' is the only excuse I can come up with off the top of my head, which is, of course, a terrible excuse. Also, they probably don't see it as insecurity but as confidence instead.

So, technically adding additional tariffs wouldn't be a defiance of the court. The court specifically struck down tariffs imposed through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), so just based off this ruling, Trump would be within his rights to impose tariffs using a separate justification. Unfortunately, as a means to free up the global economy, the Supreme Court's ruling is virtually useless.

What this might mean though, is refunds. Now, the floodgates have officially been opened for businesses, states, whoever to sue the government to get that illegal money back.

Essentially, we are getting the worst of both worlds. Tariffs stay in place, the higher expenses that we paid because of them aren't going back into our bank accounts, but the government will likely lose a bunch of revenue which will go back to businesses who sure as hell won't pay it forward because there's new tariffs in place...

As far as I know, while Trump might be able to impose new tariffs, his ability to do so will be much more limited. The tariffs he's imposing right away, for example, can be in effect for up to 150 days. It's a long time for sure, but it's also something that has a definite end. He might be able to impose other tariffs, but they will probably be much more limited in scope instead.

Well, that's good at least. We'll see how it plays out, but I didn't know there was a time limit on the new tariffs he was announcing.