Umm because Hillary C isn't some whack job maniac you fucking idiotQuote:
Originally Posted by Mintjewlips
Printable View
Umm because Hillary C isn't some whack job maniac you fucking idiotQuote:
Originally Posted by Mintjewlips
Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.. ..Quote:
Originally Posted by Mintjewlips
Yeah, that totally didn't happen at all the last 8 years.
You dopey fucks are the biggest hypocrites since Dr. Zhivago
What's even funnier is you think everything has been misconstrued.
Pathetic Dude. At least have the balls to admit this guy is a complete lunatic.
By the way... Do you think this judge put a stop to this ban because he's a liberal too? Or that the AG in Washington had the same liberal agenda? The judge is a Republican and the AG sued the Obama administration TWICE! Their agenda is to uphold the constitution, unlike your Oompa Loompa pucker mouthed pea brain of a leader.
History will judge you dumb fucks, and it will not be a good look... As your boy would say... Trust me.
Please don't confuse paul Ryan or Carl Rowe as republicans. They are globalist neo con's posing as republicans..Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.. ..Quote:
Originally Posted by Mintjewlips
Yeah, that totally didn't happen at all the last 8 years.
You dopey fucks are the biggest hypocrites since Dr. Zhivago.
What's even funnier is you think everything has been misconstrued.
Pathetic Dude. At least have the balls to admit this guy is a conplete lunatic.
By the way... Do you think this judge put a stop to this ban because he's a liberal too? Or that the AG in Washington had the same liberal agenda? The judge is a Republican and the AG sued the Obama administration TWICE! Their agenda is to uphold the constitution, unlike your Oompa Loompa pucker mouthed peace brain of a leader.
History will judge you dumb fucks, and it will not be a good look... As your boy would say... Trust me.
If the judge is "republican", he is probably like them.
When the Ronald Reagan took the party to its nationalistic roots. He brought the party back home but the neo con's took over with bush sr. With his new world order globalist
THOSE FAKE REPUBLICANS KNOW AS BEO CONS ARE NO REPUBLICANS, SIR!!!
Why an alternative attack. Terrorists aren't into nah, nah, got ya plans. Remember the virgins.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord of the Fraud
What peril exactly. The security is seemingly doing it's job. Lengthy screening of potential immigrants is stronger than ever with few if any breaches AFAIK.
What's scary is an administration pushing blanket orders based on religion or origin of birth, ignoring the constitution. Then firing the Attorney General(?) who saw the
legal implications and was correct.
Then they tell us only 109 were inconvenienced by the ban when the number was ten times that amount.
They revoked passports en masse during trials taking away evidence the court might have used with a word to no one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369What's funny is a lot of his supporters are the same people that still swear 911 was a conspiracy set up by the Bush administration. Go figure that one...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord of the Fraud
However...
I actually would not put it past this administration to set up an attack or let one slip through the cracks just to help push their insane agenda. In fact I feel it's probable.
The most frightening part is his attempt to cast doubt on the legitimacy of judges. And by default, the rule of law itself.
Laws that have been put together by America's finest over hundreds of years. It's what keeps a country on solid ground.
Now here you have a lone, unpredictable and erratic individual who trying to rip all that up in order to press home his own 'personal' crazy ideology.
I literally can't fucking believe what he's getting away with... While I find it unfathomable that his huge army of fanatics will back him, regardless of what or who he undermines.
America first my arse
Quote:
Originally Posted by limitlesWhy an alternative attack. Terrorists aren't into nah, nah, got ya plans. Remember the virgins.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord of the Fraud
What peril exactly. The security is seemingly doing it's job. Lengthy screening of potential immigrants is stronger than ever with few if any breaches AFAIK.
What's scary is an administration pushing blanket orders based on religion or origin of birth, ignoring the constitution. Then firing the Attorney General(?) who saw the
legal implications and was correct.
Then they tell us only 109 were inconvenienced by the ban when the number was ten times that amount.
They revoked passports en masse during trials taking away evidence the court might have used with a word to no one.
It's funny that the world (and half of America it has to be said) is repulsed by what is happening, while the dumbest of the dumb are fistpumping the acts of a new fascist regime.
They can blame the left all they want for the reasons why we've ended up here. But this all boils down to the Far Right media and politicians praying on the fears of some of the dumbest people America has to offer.
You think Obama could say that in a TV interview and they just wouldn't show it? Nobody would find out? You are truly retarded.Quote:
Originally Posted by herbertstempleIf Obama had said the same thing, we would never know because the media would cover it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by hongkonger
Besides, Obama is gone. Nothing but a novel footnote in American history. The first social experiment president has come and gone.
Time to restore America.
You're right because Obama didn't have to say anything. Trump supporters spent 8 years just making shit up instead. Like he's a Muslim born in Kenya.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mintjewlips
This. Not only America's finest but our ancestors stretching back 800 years to Magna Carta. It's worked pretty well so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord of the FraudQuote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369
The most frightening part is his attempt to cast doubt on the legitimacy of judges. And by default, the rule of law itself.
Laws that have been put together by America's finest over hundreds of years. It's what keeps a country on solid ground.
Now here you have a lone, unpredictable and erratic individual who trying to rip all that up in order to press home his own 'personal' crazy ideology.
I literally can't fucking believe what he's getting away with... While I find it unfathomable that his huge army of fanatics will back him, regardless of what or who he undermines.
America first my arse
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mintjewlips
hillary wouldnt have shifted the country to a political extreme, so yeah basically youre probably right.
who saw that coming...
Extreme is good. The train is half full. Time for the other 52% Hillary voter to get on board
THE TRUMP TRAIN!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2syR4On4xDI
Love the Irish
Bit much Larry. How about poat each thing once not 20 times in a row.
jiffyban larry
Quote:
Originally Posted by hongkonger
are you really trying to tell me how to troll this thread.
take that fuckin Hillary won shit down if this is your advice to me.
Holy shit...
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/02/0...ww.google.com/Quote:
But for the moment, Mr. Bannon remains the president’s dominant adviser, despite Mr. Trump’s anger that he was not fully briefed on details of the executive order he signed giving his chief strategist a seat on the National Security Council, a greater source of frustration to the president than the fallout from the travel ban.
And Larry, shut it the fuck down you spastic twat.
President not fully briefed? It would be funny if it weren't scary.Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369
Larry...give it a rest dude. Your shit is getting completely out of control. You drunk or something?
Cuckmouse seek help.
Mumbles: I have you on block so really only see your shit when you rep me or get quoted. I am aware of the National debt and here is the thing... Obama was the one who caused that shit to balloon and before you go and blame the big banks, I can promise you that the government/people of the US made more on the bailouts than they know. People blame the bailout and QE for the national debt and the economy but what they fail to realize is that all of that benefited them more than it harmed them. The high national debt has nothing to do with taxes or bailouts it has to do with not being able to manage a proper budget and overspending, and someone who supposedly is so educated / well regarded in finance should know this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369Bahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.. ..Quote:
Originally Posted by Mintjewlips
Yeah, that totally didn't happen at all the last 8 years.
You dopey fucks are the biggest hypocrites since Dr. Zhivago
What's even funnier is you think everything has been misconstrued.
Pathetic Dude. At least have the balls to admit this guy is a complete lunatic.
By the way... Do you think this judge put a stop to this ban because he's a liberal too? Or that the AG in Washington had the same liberal agenda? The judge is a Republican and the AG sued the Obama administration TWICE! Their agenda is to uphold the constitution, unlike your Oompa Loompa pucker mouthed pea brain of a leader.
History will judge you dumb fucks, and it will not be a good look... As your boy would say... Trust me.
Sick diatribe.
The media is lying by omission, but you don't give a fuck, you feel content with just running with any confirmation bias like the spinning faggot that you are.
I just can't imagine anyone growing decent weed being this paranoid.
Is your joint half empty or half full?
druff seriously ban larry or at least post-restrict him. besides being completely awful in substance, he's basically preventing people from posting or even lurking here. it took 10 minutes just to scroll through his posts. i have no idea what anyone else posted on that last page
Larry has been kicked out of this thread for spamming it with junk.
I may let him return in the future, but for now he is out of the thread. If he does return, it will have to be with a promise not to do this again.
I have deleted his spam messages.
The media is lying by omission? Man, you are fucking brainwashed. That quote by you is some of the stupidest shit I have ever heard. I bet you believe it was the largest inauguration ever, that 5,000,000 illegals voted, that this ban is making us safer and is totally in line with the constitution, etc.. Honestly it's not even worth arguing with you anymore, you're simply too far gone and too feeble minded.Quote:
Originally Posted by MintjewlipsQuote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369
Sick diatribe.
The media is lying by omission, but you don't give a fuck, you feel content with just running with any confirmation bias like the spinning faggot that you are.
I just can't imagine anyone growing decent weed being this paranoid.
Is your joint half empty or half full?
Larry is the worst poster of all time, even worse then me, everyone of his post should be regarded as spam imo. It's always the same marxist SJW cadence that he pushes on everyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369The media is lying by omission? Man, you are fucking brainwashed. That quote by you is some of the stupidest shit I have ever heard. I bet you believe it was the largest inauguration ever, that 5,000,000 illegals voted, that this ban is making us safer and is totally in line with the constitution, etc.. Honestly it's not even worth arguing with you anymore, you're simply too far gone and too feeble minded.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mintjewlips
Hey if you want to build strawmen in that tiny head of yours then who am i to stop you. You've decided to define what i believe and what i don't without me even telling you.
And you obviously don't know what lying by omission is, but whatever, believe what you want, you always do anyway.
How the fuck does not allowing people into the country that want to kill us not make us safer? You are not making any sense here vegas. Selling weed to stoners all day long and being surrounded by them has muddled your common sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369
Yes we are safer without letting these people into the country. Actually it makes us much safer. Unfortunately, these terrorist want-to-bes will start voting democrat. And that's as far as the left can see on this issue.
Lying by omission means they are leaving out important facts that would not support their stories, and therefore their agendas. That is not the case with the vast majority of the things we are talking about here. I know you would like to believe it is, but it isn't, and all the alternative facts that Kelly Anne Conway, Sean Spitzer or the Twitter God want to throw out there don't make it so.Quote:
Originally Posted by MintjewlipsQuote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369
Hey if you want to build strawmen in that tiny head of yours then who am i to stop you. You've decided to define what i believe and what i don't without me even telling you.
And you obviously don't know what lying by omission is, but whatever, believe what you want, you always do anyway.
BTW, not paranoid at all, I just love America and can't stand to see it turn into a country run by a fascist dictatorship backed by billionaires with far right wing agendas. Again, not worried about the cannabis industry, in fact just last week 2 REPUBLICAN senators introduced a bill to deschedule CBD and reschedule marijuana. Supposedly it has a lot of partisan support too. Even if this bill doesn't pass, eventually one will.
Please name one terrorist from any of the banned countries that has attacked us on American soil. I'll even do you one better... Name one terrorist that came in through one of the banned countries that has carried out an attack on America soil. I'll wait.Quote:
Originally Posted by herbertstempleHow the fuck does not allowing people into the country that want to kill us not make us safer? You are not making any sense here vegas. Selling weed to stoners all day long and being surrounded by them has muddled your common sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369
Yes we are safer without letting these people into the country. Actually it makes us much safer. Unfortunately, these terrorist want-to-bes will start voting democrat. And that's as far as the left can see on this issue.
Keep watching FOX news you lemming.
You are simply too ignorant to understand that this ban undermines our fight against Islamic extremists, that we already have the toughest vetting process in the world, and that we are now basically fucking over the people that have been backing us in the war on terror. Now all of those same people are pissed off at us and could easily be swayed over to the dark side. We just gave ISIS exactly what they were looking for.
You paranoid, delusional, uneducated, ignorant dipshits have put us in the line of fire and you are simply too stupid to understand it.
John Yoo worked in the Justice Dept under W and wrote the infamous memo supporting the legality of torture. Even he thinks Trump is too authoritarian.
Quote:
Berkeley, Calif. — Faced with President Trump’s executive orders suspending immigration from several Muslim nations and ordering the building of a border wall, and his threats to terminate the North American Free Trade Agreement, even Alexander Hamilton, our nation’s most ardent proponent of executive power, would be worried by now.
Article II of the Constitution vests the president with “the executive power,” but does not define it. Most of the Constitution instead limits that power, as with the president’s duty “to take care that the laws are faithfully executed,” or divides that power with Congress, as with making treaties or appointing Supreme Court justices.
Hamilton argued that good government and “energy in the executive” went hand in hand. In The Federalist No. 70, he wrote that the framers, to encourage “decision, activity, secrecy and dispatch,” entrusted the executive power in a unified branch headed by a single person, the president.
Many of Hamilton’s intellectual admirers today endorse the theory of the unitary executive, which holds that the Constitution grants the president all of the remaining executive powers that existed at the time of the founding. These include the powers to conduct foreign affairs, protect the national security, interpret and execute the law and manage all lower-level federal officers.
As an official in the Justice Department, I followed in Hamilton’s footsteps, advising that President George W. Bush could take vigorous, perhaps extreme, measures to protect the nation after the Sept. 11 attacks, including invading Afghanistan, opening the Guantánamo detention center and conducting military trials and enhanced interrogation of terrorist leaders. Likewise, I supported President Barack Obama when he drew on this source of constitutional power for drone attacks and foreign electronic surveillance.
But even I have grave concerns about Mr. Trump’s uses of presidential power.
During the campaign, Mr. Trump gave little sign that he understood the constitutional roles of the three branches, as when he promised to appoint justices to the Supreme Court who would investigate Hillary Clinton. (Judge Neil M. Gorsuch will not see this as part of his job description.) In his Inaugural Address, Mr. Trump did not acknowledge that his highest responsibility, as demanded by his oath of office, is to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.” Instead, he declared his duty to represent the wishes of the people and end “American carnage,” seemingly without any constitutional restraint.
While my robust vision of the presidency supports some of Mr. Trump’s early executive acts — presidents have the power to terminate international agreements like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, for example — others are more dubious. Take his order to build a wall along the border with Mexico, and his suggestion that he will tax Mexican imports or currency transfers to pay for it. The president has no constitutional authority over border control, which the Supreme Court has long found rests in the hands of Congress. Under Article I of the Constitution, only Congress can fund the construction of a wall, a fence or even a walking path along the border. And the president cannot slap a tax or tariff on Mexican imports without Congress.
Nor can Mr. Trump pull the United States out of Nafta, because Congress made the deal with Mexico and Canada by statute. Presidents have no authority to cancel tariff and trade laws unilaterally.
Immigration has driven Mr. Trump even deeper into the constitutional thickets. Even though his executive order halting immigration from seven Muslim nations makes for bad policy, I believe it falls within the law. But after the order was issued, his adviser Rudolph Giuliani disclosed that Mr. Trump had initially asked for “a Muslim ban,” which would most likely violate the Constitution’s protection for freedom of religion or its prohibition on the state establishment of religion, or both — no mean feat. Had Mr. Trump taken advantage of the resources of the executive branch as a whole, not just a few White House advisers, he would not have rushed out an ill-conceived policy made vulnerable to judicial challenge.
Mr. Trump’s firing of the acting attorney general, Sally Yates, for her stated intention not to defend his immigration policy, also raises concerns. Even though the constitutional text is silent on the issue, long historical practice and Supreme Court precedent have recognized a presidential power of removal. Mr. Trump was thus on solid footing, because attorneys general have a duty to defend laws and executive orders, so long as they have a plausible legal grounding. But the White House undermined its valid use of the removal power by accusing Ms. Yates of being “weak on borders and very weak on illegal immigration.” Such irrelevant ad hominem accusations suggest a misconception of the president’s authority of removal.
A successful president need not have a degree in constitutional law. But he should understand the Constitution’s grant of executive power. He should share Hamilton’s vision of an energetic president leading the executive branch in a unified direction, rather than viewing the government as the enemy. He should realize that the Constitution channels the president toward protecting the nation from foreign threats, while cooperating with Congress on matters at home.
Otherwise, our new president will spend his days overreacting to the latest events, dissipating his political capital and haphazardly wasting the executive’s powers.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter (@NYTOpinion), and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.
John Yoo, a law professor at the University of California at Berkeley and a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, is the author of “Crisis and Command: A History of Executive Power From George Washington to George W. Bush.”
I'm not scared of immigrants, didn't vote for Trump, think the EO creates more problems than it solves, and was implemented in fail fashion, but here are two examples:Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369Please name one terrorist from any of the banned countries that has attacked us on American soil. I'll even do you one better... Name one terrorist that came in through one of the banned countries that has carried out an attack on America soil. I'll wait.Quote:
Originally Posted by herbertstemple
Keep watching FOX news you lemming.
You are simply too ignorant to understand that this ban undermines our fight against Islamic extremists, that we already have the toughest vetting process in the world, and that we are now basically fucking over the people that have been backing us in the war on terror. Now all of those same people are pissed off at us and could easily be swayed over to the dark side. We just gave ISIS exactly what they were looking for.
You paranoid, delusional, uneducated, ignorant dipshits have put us in the line of fire and you are simply too stupid to understand it.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/11/28...hio-state.html
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...ants/91099690/
Confirmed just a gaffeQuote:
Originally Posted by GordmanQuote:
Originally Posted by Lord of the Fraud
Dude..get real.
It was a gaffe. It was corrected right away
People act like this is the first time a notable figure has made a gaffe.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/06/medi...tan/index.html
Do you say the same thing about gun control? Lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by herbertstempleHow the fuck does not allowing people into the country that want to kill us not make us safer? You are not making any sense here vegas. Selling weed to stoners all day long and being surrounded by them has muddled your common sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369
Yes we are safer without letting these people into the country. Actually it makes us much safer. Unfortunately, these terrorist want-to-bes will start voting democrat. And that's as far as the left can see on this issue.
Leader of the British Houses of Parliament said in the House today that Trump will be excluded from addressing Parliament. Basically for being a racist & sexist cunt.
It's an honour we grant to respected world leaders, including many past Presidents. And while I fully support this decision, it's also kinda comical considering we allowed the Chinese and other leaders with questionable morals to address our Parliament.
Either way, it's a very public slap in the face from America's so-called closest ally.
ROH ROH
Who are these people? No country has a population dominated by terrorists. Probably a tiny percentage populates the most suspect nation. Of the greater percentage, many are forced to flee their birthplace because the risk of staying is greater than leaving. So, the job in identifying those who pose a threat must be done on the smallest scale possible which is what takes place now. Not perfect, but the alternative is to say no more to the likes of our ancestors who decided to go to Dodge a long time ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by herbertstempleHow the fuck does not allowing people into the country that want to kill us not make us safer? You are not making any sense here vegas. Selling weed to stoners all day long and being surrounded by them has muddled your common sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369
Yes we are safer without letting these people into the country. Actually it makes us much safer. Unfortunately, these terrorist want-to-bes will start voting democrat. And that's as far as the left can see on this issue.
Refugees are very special immigrants. It's a life or death situation basically. If you found yourself in such a position and were allowed to start over in a new country by emigrating, would you not be forever indebted to those who helped you?
So you are willing to wait for people to get killed before we do something? Time to be pro active vegas. This is one of the things Trump was elected to do. This is one of the reason Hillary lost. The people spoke on election day. I'm not talking about a bunch of meaningless ass mexicans in California, but real Americans. This country had better start listening to them.Quote:
Originally Posted by vegas1369Please name one terrorist from any of the banned countries that has attacked us on American soil. I'll even do you one better... Name one terrorist that came in through one of the banned countries that has carried out an attack on America soil. I'll wait.Quote:
Originally Posted by herbertstemple
Keep watching FOX news you lemming.
You are simply too ignorant to understand that this ban undermines our fight against Islamic extremists, that we already have the toughest vetting process in the world, and that we are now basically fucking over the people that have been backing us in the war on terror. Now all of those same people are pissed off at us and could easily be swayed over to the dark side. We just gave ISIS exactly what they were looking for.
You paranoid, delusional, uneducated, ignorant dipshits have put us in the line of fire and you are simply too stupid to understand it.
You can use a form of this argument to justify any and all laws.Quote:
Originally Posted by herbertstemple
Seriously, do you use the same arguments for gun control? You ignored my question...
just FYI, you're attempting to debate someone who thinks hail precedes tornados and that we should murder 10,000,000 Iranians to get them in line.Quote:
Originally Posted by donkdowndonediedYou can use a form of this argument to justify any and all laws.Quote:
Originally Posted by herbertstemple
Seriously, do you use the same arguments for gun control? You ignored my question...
Sorry dude,Quote:
Originally Posted by donkdowndonediedYou can use a form of this argument to justify any and all laws.Quote:
Originally Posted by herbertstemple
Seriously, do you use the same arguments for gun control? You ignored my question...
Could just as easily turn the question around on the pro radical muslim immigration/anti gun crowd.
I'm assuming you are talking about the Constitution here. Gun ownership is protected by the 2nd Amendment. Can you please point out to me where immigration is guaranteed?