Trump’s Terrorist Label for Cartels Sparks Judge’s Fury: Watergate 2.0 or Legal Overreach?
Dive into the explosive clash as a federal judge treats Trump’s executive order—labeling cartels and gangs as terrorist organizations—trying to produce a Watergate-level scandal. By redefining these borderless threats, Trump shifted the rules of engagement, empowering military action against them. Yet, a judge’s ruling halts Trump’s order targeting law firm Perkins Coie, accused of full-time Trump opposition, igniting debate over judicial overreach. Is this the setup for a broader attack on Trump using the Alien Enemies Act? We unpack the stakes, plus reactions to Kash Patel’s FBI bid, Trey Gowdy’s endorsement, and Pam Bondi’s DOJ role. Get the latest on this legal and political firestorm shaking the nation.
- This judge is treating this as if it is some sort of Watergate scandal. When Trump signed the executive order and when he labeled these cartels and gangs as terrorist organizations it changed things. Now you can’t go to war with these terrorist groups because they don’t have any borders. They changed the rules of engagement. And when Trump came into office he changed the rules that allowed us to go to war and engage with these gangs. This judge is acting as though he is the commander in chief with his ruling.
- Judge halts Trump order targeting Law firm Perkins Coie. These law firms have full time working on combating Trump.
- This is the groundwork for coming after Trump. They know that the federal judge knows that the rules of engagement and the alien enemies act refers to these gangs.
- How do you feel about Kash Patel, the FBI and Pam Bondi? The concern is when Kash was going for confirmation, Trey Gowdy endorsed him. Will the DOJ be running through Fox News?