@AverageJoe1 saidSo why don't you in your infinite wisdom tell US stupid democrats why Trump would WANT to fire 17 IG's?
Yeah, well, check out new thread, about press briefings, he is letting every denomination of the media, press, podcasters, the works, to break through the democracy veil!!!!!!!
If you mention dictator anymore, your cred will tumble. But I will click on your posts, I promise. But you gotta give’em some meat!
Tell us oh maven of all things.
@AverageJoe1 saidHey, DEMOCRATS notice. Your repubs with no balls are so fuuking afraid of a negative tweet from Trump they put their political career WAY ahead of actually thinking about the welfare of the US or their constituents. Remember that pesky word Constituents?
What lawmakers think exactly like you do? Why are they not up in arms? Are lawsuits the most smoke that they can make?
Please see my 'Get a Feel for the Nature' thread, do you agree with my post to Kmax. Somethiing new!!! You have certainly disclosed everything that you think about Trump
Do you REALLY think those gutless senators were thinking about national security or what their constituents actually wanted when it came time to vote in an assshole like Hegseth as Defsec?
They were thinking, if I vote against this boob, my career would be over, in spite of the fact they KNEW good and well an alcoholic like Hegseth can cause REAL trouble with our defense if a military crisis happened and heggy just happened to be falling down drunk.
They KNEW that could happen but fear of Trump caused them to fall in place. Democrats already KNOW they are the enemy of the state so they are already in political trouble from Trump so they 100% voted that assshole down. THEY showed balls, repubs showed just their fear.
3 edits
@AverageJoe1 saidbut King….the hat!??!?
I tried to watch this lib video (is that you Sonhouse?) , but King….the hat!??!? I can’t seriously take in, or focus on any info from a guy who wears such a hat, what a queer looking man. His first two sentences were enough for me.
Don’t bother telling me what he said , I most surely do not care
Looks like he had an excellent time with Melania. He took the hat and panties as a token. 🙂 First good time she has had in a long long time because, well you know. I think, maybe.
@Mott-The-Hoople saidUnconstitutional. FOR FUUKING STARTERS killing the idea IN THE FUUKING CONSTITUTION YOU POS, that a person born here is a US CITIZEN.
you use a lot of boo words, all Im seeing from you libs is PROJECTIONS
But there is a process in our constitution for if a president, or any elected official that goes rogue.
What has Trump done that is unconstitutional?
THAT IS IN FACT IN THE CONSTITUTION YOU ASSSHOLE.
1 edit
@sonhouse saidThe constitution does not flatly say that ' a person born here is a citizen'. The paragraph is a bit longer than that,...why? Because, If sets out pesky qualifications. Please apologize to Mott as you are quite wrong.
Unconstitutional. FOR FUUKING STARTERS killing the idea IN THE FUUKING CONSTITUTION YOU POS, that a person born here is a US CITIZEN.
THAT IS IN FACT IN THE CONSTITUTION YOU ASSSHOLE.
Hey, here is a news clip about Fetterman meeting with Trump. Before you take a look at it, 'The View' mavens giving him hell, note that 35%... THIRTY FIVE % ..are voting with Trump on every issue. Go take an aspirin, and they see this video, he finds Trump KIND AND CORDIAL!!! How can a kind man shackle people???
Tell us what you think about Fetterman for saying that.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/john-fetterman-gushes-over-kind-and-cordial-trump-on-the-view/
1 edit
@AverageJoe1 saidAnd just like a guy who wanders into a bridge club is not subject to the laws and by-laws and constitution of the bridge club, the illegal alien is not subject to the laws of the constitution, so,,,,,,,his new born is not a citizen, according to the constitution, which you misquote above. MisQUOTE?? Hell , you tell us it says somethind that it does not say!!!!!!!
The constitution does not flatly say that ' a person born here is a citizen'. The paragraph is a bit longer than that,...why? Because, If sets out pesky qualifications. Please apologize to Mott as you are quite wrong.
Hey, here is a news clip about Fetterman meeting with Trump. Before you take a look at it, 'The View' mavens giving him hell, note that 35%... THI ...[text shortened]... hat.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/john-fetterman-gushes-over-kind-and-cordial-trump-on-the-view/
OK, go apologize.
3 edits
@AverageJoe1 saidArgue with THIS FUUKER:
The constitution does not flatly say that ' a person born here is a citizen'. The paragraph is a bit longer than that,...why? Because, If sets out pesky qualifications. Please apologize to Mott as you are quite wrong.
Hey, here is a news clip about Fetterman meeting with Trump. Before you take a look at it, 'The View' mavens giving him hell, note that 35%... THI ...[text shortened]... hat.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/john-fetterman-gushes-over-kind-and-cordial-trump-on-the-view/
QUOTE: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
So you will quibble with the 'and subject to the jurisdiction thereof' or the due process of law statement, right? That negates the whole thing, for you I guess.
Or does it just mean it rationalizes for you what Trump wants to do and DAMN those POS Hippy liberal asssholes who thinks someone born here IS a citizen, right? And that last sentence, EQUAL protection under the law, that doesn't concern Trump does it since he is CLEARLY and LITERALLY above the law.
What did we call that bit 300 odd years ago and before. Wait, I will figure it out on my own.
Still thinking.
Still thinking.
OH YEAH, they called them KINGS.
@sonhouse said“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside”
Argue with THIS FUUKER:
QUOTE: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, libert ...[text shortened]... will figure it out on my own.
Still thinking.
Still thinking.
OH YEAH, they called them KINGS.
Since you are thinking answer This…
We’re Indians (native Americans)born on American soil citizens?
@sonhouse saidRe your first comment (the ones following, I don't think you even know what you are saying..)...you are simply saying that we, and SCOTUS in a few months, will quibble about 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof'. Why don't you continue doing that, for several months, while we discuss daily activities,
Argue with THIS FUUKER:
QUOTE: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, libert ...[text shortened]... will figure it out on my own.
Still thinking.
Still thinking.
OH YEAH, they called them KINGS.
But, first, take a breather
@AverageJoe1 saidYou know, Trump does not even have to CALL himself a king, he is very close to being one right now.
Re your first comment (the ones following, I don't think you even know what you are saying..)...you are simply saying that we, and SCOTUS in a few months, will quibble about 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof'. Why don't you continue doing that, for several months, while we discuss daily activities,
But, first, take a breather
@Mott-The-Hoople saidWell why don't you take THAT up with your president or senators.
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside”
Since you are thinking answer This…
We’re Indians (native Americans)born on American soil citizens?
@sonhouse saidAmerican Indians!??! More evience that you are coming apart, all of you little fellers. Look how a few posts back that you chide Trump for having no empathy, when he is loaded with it, really strange, SHouse.
Well why don't you take THAT up with your president or senators.
I have an empahy question. All this crap, you keep dishing out, and you have exactly ZERO EMPATHY FOR THE RAPES AND KILLING OF GIRLS AND MIURDERS by the illegal aliens which you say are welcome to be here. They kill, they rape, and you talk ad nauseum puke about Trump and jan 6, that is all you know. Actually, that you indeed do NOT know.
Prove me wrong and show us where you might have mentioned the sadness brought on by your brothers from Mexico and everywhere else. Do you even know who Laken Riley is, Sonhouse. Such a hypocrite. Mott and MB and I really have our work cut out for us, I feel like I have dirty fingers, but I will keep tryng.
@sonhouse saidTrump's unqualified hires are running the government the same way that I try to figure out which circuit breaker controls the porch light.
One: the ILLEGAL firing of ALL 11 inspectors general in all government offices.
The LAW for firing ONE inspectors general is to first give congress a THIRTY DAY notice and provide reasons for such firing.
Trumps reason: '' they don't line up with Trump POLICY''.
But IN THE DEAD OF NIGHT, firing ALL of them, NO notice to congress and NO reason other than that stated, first ...[text shortened]... there ANYONE on the right with ANY balls to push back against these obvious anti democracy agendas?