That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://garbi.online/forum/
M is for Military? I'd guess his genius plan to make Mexico pay for the wall now includes stealing money from the military budget.
Well, I think there's pretty good odds that he'll be firing Melania soon. Of course, he'll probably replace her with Ivanka, if she can survive a Senate confirmation. Or maybe Sean Hannity.Daehawk wrote: Sun Mar 25, 2018 8:04 am I have had and continue to have this weird feeling that we have an unmarried President. I know he IS married but it just feels like he is a single President.
If that's true, I hope Congress steps up and stops it. The money wasn't appropriated for the wall. He can't just shift it. That would be an outright violation of the Constitution I'd think.
Enemy combatants pouring into our country? Wtf.Fitzy wrote:If that's true, I hope Congress steps up and stops it. The money wasn't appropriated for the wall. He can't just shift it. That would be an outright violation of the Constitution I'd think.
Illegal immigrants are great multitaskers. They smuggle drugs, are terrorists, and take white people jobs!Chaz wrote:See, illegal immigrants are enemy combatants. Conveniently, that lets us bypass a lot of Constitutional protections!
Man, between these enemy combatants and the media being the enemy of the people, we're in a real war for our country!
All while being lazy takers who don't work!$iljanus wrote: Sun Mar 25, 2018 1:01 pmIllegal immigrants are great multitaskers. They smuggle drugs, are terrorists, and take white people jobs!Chaz wrote:See, illegal immigrants are enemy combatants. Conveniently, that lets us bypass a lot of Constitutional protections!
Man, between these enemy combatants and the media being the enemy of the people, we're in a real war for our country!
You see? The best multitaskers!Holman wrote:All while being lazy takers who don't work!$iljanus wrote: Sun Mar 25, 2018 1:01 pmIllegal immigrants are great multitaskers. They smuggle drugs, are terrorists, and take white people jobs!Chaz wrote:See, illegal immigrants are enemy combatants. Conveniently, that lets us bypass a lot of Constitutional protections!
Man, between these enemy combatants and the media being the enemy of the people, we're in a real war for our country!
Donald Trump wrote:Many lawyers and top law firms want to represent me in the Russia case...don’t believe the Fake News narrative that it is hard to find a lawyer who wants to take this on. Fame & fortune will NEVER be turned down by a lawyer, though some are conflicted. Problem is that a new......
"All the best lawyers want to work for me because lawyers are greedy famewhore assholes, but cowards! Also, it is unfair that law is hard! Also I love and am happy with my permanent legal team that keeps quitting! Also NO COLLUSION so who needs lawyers right??"Donald Trump, finishing his sentence in just nine minutes, also wrote:....lawyer or law firm will take months to get up to speed (if for no other reason than they can bill more), which is unfair to our great country - and I am very happy with my existing team. Besides, there was NO COLLUSION with Russia, except by Crooked Hillary and the Dems!
Despite it all, McCabe doesn't regret a thing.GreenGoo wrote: Sat Mar 24, 2018 12:33 amNo, I meant I can't read it because it will piss me off that a hardworking, patriotic man's retirement could be destroyed by a single act of a petty conman who honors nothing, not even himself.
I hope somewhere in the gears of government, they're able to round off his tenure and give him his proper retirement.Article wrote:There is nothing like having the opportunity to be a part of the greatest law-enforcement organization in the world, working every day for goals that you respect and cherish. It is the best job you will ever have. Even if a president decides to attack you and your family. Even if you get fired on a Friday night, one day from your retirement.
Well of course not. Except for the whole "getting fired days before getting his full pension" thing.
So good, he needed to remind us.Holman wrote: Sun Mar 25, 2018 7:43 am https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/sta ... 8364171264
Did he have a stroke?Because of the $700 & $716 Billion Dollars gotten to rebuild our Military, many jobs are created and our Military is again rich. Building a great Border Wall, with drugs (poison) and enemy combatants pouring into our Country, is all about National Defense. Build WALL through M!
The decennial census generally included a citizenship inquiry for more than 100 years through 1950, according to the Commerce Department. And other, smaller population surveys, such as the Current Population Survey and the American Community Survey, continue to ask respondents about it.
“The census numbers provide the backbone for planning how our communities can grow and thrive in the coming decade,” said Mr. Becerra. “What the Trump administration is requesting is not just alarming, it is an unconstitutional attempt to discourage an accurate census count.”
Others argued that an undercount in regions with high immigrant populations would lead not only to unreliable data but also to unfair redistricting, to the benefit of Republicans.
“Adding this question will result in a bad census — deeply flawed population data that will skew public and private sector decisions to ensure equal representation, allocate government resources and anticipate economic growth opportunities — for the next 10 years,” Vanita Gupta, the chief executive of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights and a deputy attorney general in the Obama administration, said in a statement Monday night. “The stakes are too high to allow this. We urge Congress to overturn this error in judgment.”
The announcement of the citizenship question comes at a troublesome time for the Census Bureau: Its top two positions have interim occupants, and it has been forced to skip two of its three trial runs for the 2020 census because of funding shortfalls. If response rates for the census are low, critics worry that the bureau may be unable to adjust the data or deploy enough census takers to low-response communities.
The bureau is required to submit a final list of the 2020 census questions to Congress by the end of March.
eh, I doubt that there's a strong argument that the administration cannot as a constitutional matter include a citizenship question. Not that I doubt the administration's ability to fuck this kind of thing up by admitting that they're doing this for a discriminatory purpose, but at a minimum I wouldn't assume that they'll lose on this.tjg_marantz wrote: Tue Mar 27, 2018 9:17 am They'll get sued and lose. If not... Another way to fuck over a whole bunch of people.
That Fucking Moron wrote:THE SECOND AMENDMENT WILL NEVER BE REPEALED! As much as Democrats would like to see this happen, and despite the words yesterday of former Supreme Court Justice Stevens, NO WAY. We need more Republicans in 2018 and must ALWAYS hold the Supreme Court!
A lot of single issue voters will hold their noses once again and vote R. But it looks like there are a lot of new single issue voters on the other side now.malchior wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 5:56 am https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 0307505153
That Fucking Moron wrote:THE SECOND AMENDMENT WILL NEVER BE REPEALED! As much as Democrats would like to see this happen, and despite the words yesterday of former Supreme Court Justice Stevens, NO WAY. We need more Republicans in 2018 and must ALWAYS hold the Supreme Court!
The Supreme Court has been a selling point of the presidency for as long as I can remember. He's just unabashedly using it as a threat.malchior wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 7:49 am His implication that the Supreme Court needs to be controlled in perpetuity by the Republicans, further establishing it as a partisan institution, is not helpful. Not that the SCOTUS isn't working on that themselves but this is unprecedented for a President. He is a termite chewing away at Democracy.
FDR disagrees.malchior wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 7:49 am Not that the SCOTUS isn't working on that themselves but this is unprecedented for a President.
Fair enough. Though I'll note that FDR's party acted against him whereas the Republican party specifically enables Trump.
I’m more bothered by the fact that he thinks the Supreme Court could find a new amendment unconstitutional.malchior wrote:His implication that the Supreme Court needs to be controlled in perpetuity by the Republicans, further establishing it as a partisan institution, is not helpful. Not that the SCOTUS isn't working on that themselves but this is unprecedented for a President. He is a termite chewing away at Democracy.
), this descriptor gives me fits. "Unprecedented" is not necessarily evil. I am quite open to new ideas and change, on EITHER side, so the implication that he's doing things that no president did before him is weak sauce criticism IMO. Criticize the idiocy of his actions, not the fact that they are different or new. As a president should. I couldn't figure out why that wasn't the topic of discussion in 2016. Even though he never said it out loud, it was for FuckOTUS and his support group and that's what his opponent should have been hammering non stop as Congress was holding up the nomination. Non stop.LawBeefaroni wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 7:59 amThe Supreme Court has been a selling point of the presidency for as long as I can remember. He's just unabashedly using it as a threat.malchior wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 7:49 am His implication that the Supreme Court needs to be controlled in perpetuity by the Republicans, further establishing it as a partisan institution, is not helpful. Not that the SCOTUS isn't working on that themselves but this is unprecedented for a President. He is a termite chewing away at Democracy.
You can make your own Chrome plugin.Zaxxon wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 9:16 am I think we can just use the word rational people tend to mean when they use unprecedented in Trumpian context: unacceptable. Just mentally swap the two and you'll feel better.
Carpet_pissr wrote: Wed Mar 28, 2018 9:11 am 1. That is EXACTLY what his base eats up. It's like fuel for the Trumpster fire. If I were to try to argue with a Trump supporter, and used "but his actions are unprecedented!" Their reaction would likely be "No shit! That's one of the main reasons I voted for him!"
No worries - Zaxxon got it right. Unprecedented in my head at this point when applied to Trump is defined as "no reasonable person much less a President should say these things."Not attaching you, Malchior, sorry, that word just sets me off for some reason.
I love you, man.
Bravo.malchior wrote:They are the sunk cost of Democracy.