President Joe Biden held a press event to brag about a major accomplishment this week. That itself is hardly surprising in an election year, but the boast itself was rather curious. In announcing the writing off of another $1.2 billion owed to the government in student loans, Biden gloated that the Supreme Court could not stop him from acting unilaterally to cancel the debt. For an Administration running on saving democracy from his political opponent, the chest-thumping brag that no one can stop him was a moment of impressive political dissonance.
Biden spoke at the Julian Dixon Library in Culver City, California and noted that his effort to cancel billions in debt was initially halted by the Supreme Court. It has also been opposed by many in Congress and polls show that the public is split on the idea with 47 percent in favor and 41 percent opposed. It is doubtful that the plan could ever make it through Congress.
So Biden, again, acted alone to write off a massive amount of debt owed to the public.
“Early in my term, I announced a major plan to provide millions of working families with debt relief for their college student debt. Tens of millions of people in debt were literally about to be canceled in debts. But my MAGA Republican friends in the Congress, elected officials and special interests stepped in and sued us. And the Supreme Court blocked it. But that didn’t stop me.”
Bragging that the courts cannot stop you is hardly a testament to the democratic process.
Biden has been found to have violated the Constitution with impunity in the past. This includes rulings that his administration has exceeded his authority and engaged in racial discrimination in federal programs. Indeed, Biden has often displayed a cavalier attitude toward such violations.
For example, the Biden administration was found to have violated the Constitution in its imposition of a nationwide eviction moratorium through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Biden admitted that his White House counsel and most legal experts told him the move was unconstitutional. But he ignored their advice and went with that of Harvard University Professor Laurence Tribe, the one person who would tell him what he wanted to hear. It was, of course, then quickly found to be unconstitutional.
Biden showed the same disregard over the unconstitutionality of his effort to unilaterally forgive roughly half a trillion dollars in student debt.
Recently, Biden blasted Trump for saying that he would be a dictator on the first day in taking unilateral action to close the border. (Trump later said it was a joke, but that he was promising immediate and decisive action on the border on his first day back in office).
Biden warned donors “he’s saying it out loud.” The irony is crushing since Biden has been repeatedly found to have violated the Constitution through similar unilateral actions using executive action. He is now bragging that not even the Supreme Court can prevent him from doing so on student debt.
The President is running on his claim that “democracy is on the ballot.” Yet, the no-one-can-stop-me boast makes him seem like the source and not the solution of the problem.
Shame the DOJ, IRS, FBI, DC, etc are 100% corrupt for Democrats
Defund the Uniparty and Wall Street(5% tax on the Gross of all wall street transactions, make it about investing not gambling)
too much power in too small an area!
what about the $100 Billion for the Ukraine War…which is ALL about Bribery…remind us why Hunter Biden was BRIBED by China, Ukraine, etc?
The Ukraine war is not all about bribery.
We’re helping Ukraine in large part because it weakens a dangerous adversary, Russia, without costing US lives.
Yeah, better to kill tens of thousands of Ukrainians for Biden’s bribes.
There could of been peace back in March of 2020, but Biden the butcher said no.
There isn’t peace because Russia invaded Ukraine and started the war. Not sure what peace you think could have been had in March of 2020.
You appear to be ignorant of the initialed peace deal negotiated between Russia and Ukraine in the Spring of 2022 that Boris Jordan went to Ukraine to derail.
You mean the talks that fell apart because “Russian President Vladimir Putin has vowed to continue the conflict until all his demands are met”?
https://web.archive.org/web/20220314110854/https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-and-russia-hold-third-round-of-talks/a-61039008
I await your linking to this so-called initialed Spring 2022 peace deal. I’d be happy to learn of it if, in fact, it’s true.
You lack critical thinking skills. Russia and Ukraine each had lots of demands, which were reasons to negotiate.
As an example, one of Russia’s demands was for Ukraine to add neutrality to its Constitution. That was a legitimate request since Ukraine had already agreed to its neutrality. All powers, including the Russians, after World War 2 accepted that type of compromise.
Boris Johnson should have been there to help the negotiations reach a viable conclusion acceptable to all so people on both sides didn’t have to be slaughtered.
You used a link rather than provide what you thought to be essential, and then the link. That demonstrates you are relying on the conclusions of others, not your own. By the Way, DW is a German government-owned news source, and Germany frequently follows the lead of the US, just like Britain. THAT LEADS both DW and Boris Johnson back to Biden.
You lack critical thinking skills. Russia had a lot of demands and Ukraine had a lot of demands. That is reason to negotiate. For instance should Ukraine place into its constitution that it would be a neutral nation? I think that is a reasonable compromise that was done after World War 2 with the Russians and another country.
Boris Johnson should have been there to help the negotiations reach a viable conclusion acceptable by all so people on both sides didn’t have to be slaughtered.
I note you used a link rather than provide what you thought to be important and then the link. That demonstrates you are relying on the conclusions of others, not your own. By the Way, DW is a German government owned news source and Germany frequently follows the lead of the US just like Britain. That leads both DW and Boris Johnson back to Biden.
Daniel,
Yes, he is willingly ignorant of that deal that was agreed upon by both parties that Boris Johnson derailed.
It was NOT “agreed up by both parties.”
Yes. It was.
And that link you provided, wrong meeting.
Again: I await your linking to this so-called initialed Spring 2022 peace deal. I’d be happy to learn of it if, in fact, it’s true.
You don’t do it, just like Daniel didn’t do it.
‘without costing US lives.’
The hundreds of billions of dollars being used for unwinnable wars could be being used to feed, house, and heal people here.
Could be used for drug rehab programs, paying for medical schools, cleaning up places like Flint and East Palestine. Etc.
But it hasn’t been used that way, and there’s no reason to think it would be used that way. That’s not the trade-off.
The money is already largely spent in the US. And who says that it’s an “unwinnable war”?
And who says that it’s an “unwinnable war”
The actual question. Who has a plan to win the war? Logistically this is lost cause. A week ago I did the quick back of envelope, math on the number of men left, to fight the war.
That single number says the war is unwinnable.
LOL that you refer to some math you cannot show.
its simple Population of ukraine 2020./2, 1/3 of that number fighting age men. subtract the dead and injured. The number left cannot win.
But as always you are too stupid to answer the question. Who has the plan to win? What is that plan
You have a blank piece of paper, and only limited by your imagination. Money is not a bar.
What is YOUR plan to win?
“The number left cannot win. ”
So you simply assert, with no evidence.
And you should be asking what the plan to win is by people who actually have a say in it. Bizarre that you think I’m one of them.
So you simply assert, with no evidence.
I gave you the evidence. The lack of warriors.
BUT. But….but… given a blank sheet of paper, what would it take to win a war with Russia
Just make it up What would be needed?
It’s a little mental exercise, that even you know intuitively, proves Ukraine has lost the war with Russia.
You didn’t give evidence, you made a claim — “The number left cannot win.” — without evidence. How do you determine what number is needed? You don’t say and likely don’t know.
Iowan2,
Logistics. That is how wars are won or lost.
Does not help when military aged, Ukrainian men do not want to fight for their own country.
Zelensky has had to resort to press gangs to get the conscripts he needs.
He has rolled back previous physical exemptions to get the conscripts he needs.
Right now, a bill is making its way through their government to lower the draft age from 27 to 25. There have been protests against this bill, even in areas that are pro-Zelensky.
And now, just his week Zelensky signed a decreed that would allow foreigners and stateless persons to enlist in their National Guard. Includes women too!
Zelensky need another half a million troops to just maintain the current lines.
This war was lost before it began.
Democrats are lawless that has been obvious!
Sen Menendez, Pelosi, Biden, etc
They Break laws take, bribes across their families and cronies…AND NOTHING EVER HAPPENS!
Republican should DEFUND the Federal Government and cut all aid to cities, states, colleges and non-profits where anyone gets $100k
Open border policy and ignoring the SC ruling both equate to high crimes and misdemeanors. Impeach him!
Unfortunately the Constitution relies upon the honesty, integrity, and good faith of the citizens, and in particular those in office. Which is of course a dead loss in the current age.
“… Bragging that the courts cannot stop you is hardly a testament to the democratic process. … Indeed, Biden has often displayed a cavalier attitude toward such violations. …”
You must have not gotten the Memo: That’s the Delaware Way! re-enforce it by brute bravado, No-One F’s with the Bidens.
The Bidens play People for stupid-fools, sooner or later it gonna catch up with them, Come November the Biden Cash-for-Access Cow will be Out-of-Office, and there will be No More Free Rides for his Constituents.
I think this article shows that there is a difference between what Democrat politicians and the general public think about the definition of “democracy.”
The Democrat politicians use the word to mean, “Anything the leadership of the Democrat[ic] Party wants to have done,” while the people believe it means, “Fair elections.” In this regard, I have long considered legislators to be the worst category of people to elect as executives.
Not that this is a general criticism against legislators;. When a legislator is part of a larger group of equally stubborn people with strong ideas, they will work toward compromise if they want to achieve anything. But when these same legislators become executives, they believe that they are unstoppable as they implement their ideas dictatorially.
In my 40+ years of active voting, I have always opposed any legislator running for President, for that very reason. And I have always voted against them.
I also find it interesting that one, and ONLY ONE, “legal scholar” in the nation could be found that would green-light President Biden’s executive action.
This is such an ignorant topic! First, the President cannot cancel student debt, and second, the Supreme Court cannot make a ruling on actions made by the President, third all these decisions are the responsibility of the States assembled in Congress as the Union, and only the States as the Union have the legislative, decision making, authority to determine any matter the States as the Union determine collectively.
To say that our governing system is FUBAR is an understatement! Not to understand Article 1 Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States is mind blowing after 240 years since the Constitution was established and ordained for the United States of America.
[Article. I. Section. 1.
All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.]
This does not just mean in article 1, this means throughout the Constitution of the United States, and what exactly is “legislative Powers”, maybe we should look to how the legislative process works to answer that question. A quorum of the States must assemble to put questions, identify and rank choices, and a majority of all the States is is necessary to determine choices by vote, 1 vote per State, which makes the legislative process a democratic process to make choices and decisions by a majority consensus of all the States as the Union.
Therefore “legislative Powers” are collective decision making powers, which does not include the President or the Supreme Court, and those collective decisions are governed by legislative processes to reach a majority consensus of All the States as the Union and Established Government Authority.
There is no individual power or decision making in a democracy, or a democratic or republican form of government!
This is utter garbage. Congress is not the states. The people of the states elect the congressmen, who then vote independently until the next election. There is no such thing as recall, so they are not responsible to anyone for their votes except the voters at the next election, if they choose to run again.
There is no chamber in which each state has one vote. And in the House the states elect a number of members proportional to their population, so it’s very easy to pass a bill that is opposed unanimously by the congressmen from a majority of states.
Biden’s first attempt at loan forgiveness was ruled unconstitutional. Trump’s first attempt at the Muslim ban was ruled unconstitutional. That didn’t prevent either of them from trying again to find a constitutional means to do what they aimed to do.
Trump appealed the so-called “Muslim ban” (wasn’t rally a muslim ban) and won. So, not the same.
No, Trump lost at SCOTUS, then he tried a second, different ban, and lost again. Then he tried a third, different ban, and that one was ruled acceptable.
No one has even filed suit against Biden to test his more recent loan forgiveness.
This is true, which is why I wrote earlier that a better article would examine the constitutionality of what Biden is trying now and consider who might challenge it under “standing” principles. I suggested that the House might be able to do so, but I don’t see any Republicans seeking to do that.
Buy Judges explained they would have ruled differently, if the same action was taken by a different President.
Thus the first time the constitutional section containing the “But Trump” exceptions were revealed in the Emanations and Penumbras.
There was no “But Trump” exception. The judges explained that they would have ruled differently for Trump had he not made it plain that he was acting for an impermissible motive. Had he not openly campaigned on an impermissible motive, thus negating his sudden explanation of why that wasn’t his motive at all. They would have done the same for any president who had campaigned on a similar motive.
It would appear that the Biden administration has the same disdain for our rule of law as the cop-attacking illegal migrant that flipped off the cameras (country) in NY.
Just a quick refresher on the “democracy” the Democrat’s want to protect:
– lawfare against political opponents.
– no security of the Bill of Rights.
– rule with or without Congress.
– no need to pack the court…just ignore it.
– ignore election laws. No voter ID. Mass mail-in voting.
When you think about it, this whole constitution thingy only works if our government wants it to work.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
John Adams
That is a perfect summation! Thank you Iowan.
That is not really how Madison and the other creators of the Constitution saw things. They generally had a dim view of human nature and behavior and established a constitutional structure designed to contain it. What they did not foresee is that those in power in different institutions would fail to identify their self-interest with those institutions.
They generally had a dim view of human nature and behavior and established a constitutional structure designed to contain it.
Daniel, of course that statement is “mostly” true, but they knew the design was only going to do so much “to contain it”. The rest and most important element to this great experiment was exactly what Adam’s quote describes. Franklin combines both sentiments with one quote:
a republic, if you can keep it.
Daniel: That is one reason our Congress should be highly criticized. They did not restrain the executive branch with the power of the purse and were lazy and sloppy, counting on the Supreme Court to legislate.
Don’t tell Sam. He’s an atheist.
Mr T
You have clearly laid out the case for impeachment, one that does not involve his son.
“. . . the writing off of another $1.2 billion owed to the government in student loans . . .”
That redistribution of wealth is *not* a “writing off.” Guess who pays.
Oops. Sorry for the duplicate.
Forgiving student loans is a kind of reverse bribery. Biden is using public money to buy the loyalty of a group that he sees as part of the Democratic coalition.
It’s ironic that the theory for prosecuting Trump in New York is that his excessive evaluations had a victim because they theoretically caused a loss of tax revenue for New York, while here Biden and the Democrats are actually causing the loss of billions of dollars for the US Treasury to the apparent approval of the MSM. Are Democrats “above the law”? The idea of “law” has become irrelevant.
Are Democrats “above the law”?
Well of course they are. Democrats are about sheer naked power. Period. And they will do anything to get it. What is the mess at the border, but an attempt to stuff the ballot box? Why do Democrats oppose voter ID? Because that will make it harder to cheat. I think most people know that already, but we pretend that we don’t. So, we will get the government that we deserve. Good and hard, like Mencken said.
“Democrats are about sheer naked power. Period.”
BS.
You are apparently so blinded by hatred that you can’t see clearly.
“What is the mess at the border, but an attempt to stuff the ballot box?”
I remind you that Democrats were willing to pass the border legislation that had most of what Republicans wanted, and Republicans are the ones who tanked it. Moreover, if Republicans cannot draw immigrants to their policies, then something is wrong with the policies, not with immigrants.
“Why do Democrats oppose voter ID?”
Because some natural-born citizens have difficulty obtaining them. Consider this case of a child born here whose parents are still having trouble getting a birth certificate: https://reason.com/2024/02/15/they-had-their-baby-at-home-2-years-later-they-still-cant-get-a-birth-certificate/
Provide a way for all citizens to easily get a voter ID, and I’ll support it.
“Provide a way for all citizens to easily get a voter ID, and I’ll support it.”
No, you won’t. That is why you seize on one case like this, and pretend it is a problem all across the country. What this kid isn’t going to be able to buy cigarettes when he is older?
And as far as, “We were willing to fix the border”, again, no you weren’t. Your bill had a lot of poison pill crap in it. Plus, you do not need a “new” law to fix the problem – just enforce the old law.
And instead of “immigrants”, let’s call them what they are – illegal aliens. They should not be voting, period. But you already knew that.
Republicans aren’t funding the existing law sufficiently to deal with the large numbers of people we’re talking about.
And it’s legal to request asylum.
Also, we rely on many of the people here illegally (e.g., picking the food that feeds you), and our immigration laws should recognize that and provide a pathway to a green card.
Republicans aren’t funding the existing law sufficiently to deal with the large numbers of people we’re talking about.
Trump fixed that problem. Biden signed the solution away with executive orders his first day in office.
The law is in place. Biden ordered the law to be ignored
Trump didn’t fix the problem. Millions entered under Trump.
evidence?
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/cbp-enforcement-statistics-fy2020
Add them up.
BTW, stop telling me what I believe. The last time I corrected you on this, you simply called me a paid shill. I pointed out that I’m not and told you that I’m the person that oldmanfromkansas knows as A.N.D., and he and I have had a number of serious extended discussions. Stop making things up about me, especially when you use it as a basis for rejecting what I’ve said.
If you do not like it, then change your name to something else, where you would be more recognizable. If I see that you have something serious and sincere to add, then I will treat you accordingly. Till then, I consider you one of the paid shills.
Consider me however you will, but that doesn’t change the fact that you’ve now repeatedly lied about my beliefs.
Floyd,
Well said and great job of owning anonymoron!
Keep it up! He can never defend his comments in the face of facts.
We don’t need “border legislation”. We already have a defined border, we have laws defining who may enter our country and by what methods, and we have a large body of personell willing to enforce those laws. What we lack is the will of the President and the Democrats to enforce those laws.
Edwardmahl,
Well said.
Interesting how this was never an issue with previous presidential admins but now with this one it is suddenly a crisis and they need “border legislation.”
All Biden has to do is enforce the laws on the books.
Trump did a decent job of it.
Obama actually deported more than Trump IIRC. NPR actually had a article critical of Obama about it. I was shocked.
We do need legislation, because under our current legislation if someone enters illegally and then marches up to a border patrol person and says the magic word “asylum” it becomes illegal to deport him until he has had a hearing. That is the core of the problem, and the only way to fix it is to pass new legislation.
And the Trump tax cuts for the wealthy can also be seen as “buy[ing] the loyalty of a group that [Trump] sees as part of the [Republican] coalition.” “here [Trump] and the [Republicans] are actually causing the loss of billions of dollars for the US Treasury.”
“. . . can also be seen as . . .”
With a huge moral distinction that the Left wishes to evade:
Tax cuts (across the board): You keep more of your own money.
Redistribution scheme: You are looted of your money to pay debts incurred by others.
Taxes always go to pay debts incurred by others (often, but not always, for debts incurred by governments). And our debt increased by more per year under Trump than under any other President, no doubt you approve looting from future generations to pay for tax cuts now.
Sam,
That right there.
The tax cuts put more money into our pockets.
A good friend of ours, with no dependents, in a higher tax bracket had to pay more.
It worked just as it was supposed to.
And you are absolutely right! If Trump had suggested Tax Cuts ONLY for the rich, he would be guilty of the same thing. But he didn’t. What the spin doctors always spin, is that any tax cut will save more for the people who pay a higher rate. That is simply math.
Trump’s tax cuts were more skewed to lesser income people, than the rich, so there was less of spin that was true.
You are just looking for justification, which is silly considering who Biden’s plan will help.
Look, in my humble opinion, ALL Student Loan debt should be cancelled period. And the whole program shut down. Student loans have become a sop to mostly liberal white people, who work at universities. Look and compare the rise in the cost of education compared to the rise in inflation:
“College expenses have escalated in recent years, but the rising costs are even more notable when accounting for inflation. The price tag of a college education has risen at about 4.6 times the rate of inflation over the past 50 years, according to a recent report from My eLearning World.”
Universities have become the new consumer rip-off folks, like the medical/pharma industry. So, I say get rid of the student loan program entirely, and while you are at it, write off all outstanding tax debt. Give people a chance to start over. If you do keep student loans, make them dischargeable in bankruptcy, like any other consumer debt. Reform Bankruptcy to let EVERYBODY be able to take Chapter 7, and quit protecting the loan sharks at the credit card companies. Quit taxing unemployment, and quit taxing social security, but if not, then start taxing welfare benefits and food stamps, too.
“any tax cut will save more for the people who pay a higher rate. That is simply math.”
No, that’s the math when you cut the **rate** but not when you increase the **deductible**.
That is what I meant, if not what I said. Thanks!
When the federal government decided that more people needed a college degree and decided to help by guaranteeing student loans, indeed, demand for education went up, but not supply. As a result, prices went up. Universities exploited the situation knowing that price increases would not reduce demand because loans are so widely available. You can call that capitalism and free market all you want. However, government loans are not free market; they distort the market, and that’s why we are in this situation. Universities benefiting from this situation are legally allowed to do so, but then we should no longer treat them as a charity. Tax their income, including gifts!
The universities use the inflated incomes not to improve educational services but to add administrators and other overhead – no lean and mean there, for sure – but DEI officers making 300K per year.
I oppose student loan forgiveness. It sends the wrong signal. It removes the consequences of a decision the student made to borrow money. You borrow it, you pay it back. Bad investment? Well bad luck. If I borrow money to buy a house that I cannot afford, there is o forgiveness. And there should not be.
The only way out should be bankruptcy, and I agree with Floyd that student loans should not have been excluded.
DoubleDutch,
Great comment and I agree.
Thank goodness no rich Dems have ever taken advantage of those tax cuts.
You demonstrate tremendous ignorance of the tax cuts under Trump, which, more than any other recent tax plan, placed more money into the lower middle and middle class than any other tax bill.
It hit the upper middle class and those with high incomes and multiple homes. According to you, a lucky person like myself would benefit from the Trump tax cuts, but I didn’t, and neither did a lot of other well-off Americans. The tax cuts do not cover investments where income is unrealized, but the death tax does.
I paid a lot more after the Trump tax cut than I did before, mainly because I could not get the deductions on my homes. Yet, I look at it: why should a poor person pay more taxes to subsidize my property taxes? You don’t have the numbers or the answers because you are an ideologue who doesn’t think.
Keeping the money you earn is exactly like giving someone elses money to collage graduates.
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville
It’s widely attributed to de Tocqueville, but there’s no evidence of him having written or said it.
“In announcing the writing off of another $1.2 billion owed to the government in student loans . . .”
That redistribution scheme is *not* a “writing off.” Guess who pays.
The democrats rule: the heck with the constitution and the laws, we’ll do what we want, if they don’t like it let them take it to court and then we’ll still do what we want.
“We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.” He wasn’t joking.
I’ll vote for him if he can wipe out my credit card debt.
I agree that Biden has systematically undermined the rule of law while hypocritically championing “our democracy.” But it would be helpful to see some actual analysis in this instance of how what he is doing with student debt is beyond his power, and some actual consideration here of who has standing to challenge it. For example, could the Republicans in the House use their majority to have the House bring an action in Federal court to the effect that Biden has unconstitutionally usurped the legislative function?
not just Biden…all of DC
It isn’t beyond his power. He tried using one statute and the court said he couldn’t, because the statute doesn’t mean what he claimed it did. So he accepted that ruling and went looking for other statutes that would let him cancel debt. None of them is as sweeping as the one he tried using, which is why he’s doing it in small stages, each time he finds a statute that gives him some room.
Everything you say is true. But no one can stop him. There are two other checks/balances and a “free” press (you get what you pay for). And nothing stands in his way. He really is a remarkable president. The worst this country has ever seen. But he has accomplished everything he campaigned on (in the day or two he campaigned). A well-informed electorate.
The above was my comment.
In addition, it seems to me that the act of flaunting the SCOTUS ruling on the student debt is more serious than any other act taken by Biden, even above that of potential bribery. His acts show that checks and balances don’t work with a person hell-bent on doing what he wants rather than what is right. The only remedy is impeachment, even if that means we have to deal with Kamala Harris as POTUS for a few months.
He is not flouting the ruling. He is using different statutes.
Our Constitutional Republic is doomed if we don’t take back the Presidency in November. Biden has shown his propensity to do even more with his “pen and phone” than even Obama did. There are a number of things converging with this that make this election, undoubtedly, the most important of our lifetimes:
– Biden’s willingness to ignore the rule of law
– The Trump case on immunity
– The divided nature of the populace
– The censorship based upon the retention of power rather than fact
– The total lack of “Statesmenship” among our elected representatives
Unlike past Presidents who had to steer to the center to win reelection, Biden is making no attempts to do so, and arguably, he and his administration are steering even further to the left. They feel totally unconstrained and, in effect, are.