The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on July 20, 2017, 02:42:06 pm
-
Sessions: No plans to resign after Trump attack
'I plan to continue to do so as long as that is appropriate,' the attorney general says.
By POLITICO Staff
07/20/2017 10:32 AM EDT
Attorney General Jeff Sessions said on Thursday he plans to stay on in his current job, even after President Donald Trump harshly criticized him a day earlier for recusing himself from the ongoing Russia investigation.
"I plan to continue to do so as long as that is appropriate," Sessions said at a Department of Justice press conference.
Trump told The New York Times in an interview Wednesday that he would not have hired Sessions if he'd known his attorney general would recuse himself from the Russia probe. "How do you take a job and then recuse yourself? If he would have recused himself before the job, I would have said, ‘Thanks, Jeff, but I’m not going to take you,'" Trump told the paper.
more
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/20/sessions-says-he-plans-to-stay-on-as-attorney-general-after-trump-criticism-240755?cmpid=sf
-
Someone needs to explain America to Trump.
-
Someone needs to explain America to Trump.
What the H is that supposed to mean? Sounds like something CNN would say!
-
Someone needs to explain America to Trump.
Everywhere he turns someone disagrees with him because he's so wrong about so much. Even his pick to run the FBI is saying that he supports Mueller and says the Russia investigation is no witch hunt.
-
Someone needs to explain America to Trump.
Better yet someone needs to explain the proper role of the AG to the ethically challenged Trump.
-
What the H is that supposed to mean? Sounds like something CNN would say!
There's these things called honesty...integrity...ethics...Americans living in Real-ville tend to look at those things as important and something to be proud of.
-
Better yet someone needs to explain the proper role of the AG to the ethically challenged Trump.
He's not supposed to be the president's personal prosecutor/defense attorney. Its been a problem through multiple presidencies and was made exponentially worse under Obama and Trump appears to be trying to double down on that.
Its the primary reason I'm glad our AG in MI is elected in his own right rather than appointed by the governor. GOP AG Bill Schuette has repeatedly been on the opposite side as GOP Governor Rick Snyder.
-
There's these things called honesty...integrity...ethics...Americans living in Real-ville tend to look at those things as important and something to be proud of.
In reality Trump's own duplicity has brought him to this point. He has continually obfuscated on readily verifiable matters. His statement something to the effect that he didn't have any deals with Russia will most likely be exposed as a bald-faced lie and perhaps be the tipping point that moves the House toward impeachment proceedings.
-
In reality Trump's own duplicity has brought him to this point. He has continually obfuscated on readily verifiable matters. His statement something to the effect that he didn't have any deals with Russia will most likely be exposed as a bald-faced lie and perhaps be the tipping point that moves the House toward impeachment proceedings.
You might be correct about that. But I think Trump was a fool to choose Sessions in the first place. All the rah-rah stuff surrounding Sessions' nomination was pretty disgusting to me when I learned about Sessions' position on assets forfeiture. That position makes Sessions the worst sort of anti-Constitutional monster.
-
You might be correct about that. But I think Trump was a fool to choose Sessions in the first place. All the rah-rah stuff surrounding Sessions' nomination was pretty disgusting to me when I learned about Sessions' position on assets forfeiture. That position makes Sessions the worst sort of anti-Constitutional monster.
Considering the fact that Trump thinks eminent domain is a great tool for making property profitable, I doubt Sessions position on CAF was a big problem. After all, both are forms of using the power of government to seize property which inevitably ends up in the hands of someone else.
-
Sessions is garbage and needs to go. Surprised so many here have a fetish for civil asset forfeiture.
-
What the H is that supposed to mean? Sounds like something CNN would say!
@RetBobbyMI
This is what it was supposed to mean:
Better yet someone needs to explain the proper role of the AG to the ethically challenged Trump.
@Gov Bean CounterThere's these things called honesty...integrity...ethics...Americans living in Real-ville tend to look at those things as important and something to be proud of.
@txradioguy He's not supposed to be the president's personal prosecutor/defense attorney. Its been a problem through multiple presidencies and was made exponentially worse under Obama and Trump appears to be trying to double down on that.
@Cripplecreek
-
Sessions is garbage and needs to go. Surprised so many here have a fetish for civil asset forfeiture.
Not in favor of CAF.
Neither am I in favor of the AG supposed to be more loyal to the president than his proper role.
-
Considering the fact that Trump thinks eminent domain is a great tool for making property profitable, I doubt Sessions position on CAF was a big problem. After all, both are forms of using the power of government to seize property which inevitably ends up in the hands of someone else.
Exactly!
-
The office of the Attorney General was established by the Judiciary Act of 1789 as a part-time job for one person, but grew with the bureaucracy. At one time the Attorney General gave legal advice to the U.S. Congress as well as the President, but in 1819 the Attorney General began advising Congress alone to ensure a manageable workload. Until March 3, 1853, the salary of the Attorney General was set by statute at less than the amount paid to other Cabinet members. Early Attorneys General supplemented their salaries by running private law practices, often arguing cases before the courts as attorneys for paying litigants.
Following unsuccessful efforts (in 1830 and 1846) to make Attorney General a full-time job, in 1869, the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary, led by Congressman William Lawrence, conducted an inquiry into the creation of a "law department" headed by the Attorney General and also composed of the various department solicitors and United States attorneys. On February 19, 1868, Lawrence introduced a bill in Congress to create the Department of Justice. President Ulysses S. Grant signed the bill into law on June 22, 1870.
-
The office of the Attorney General was established by the Judiciary Act of 1789 as a part-time job for one person, but grew with the bureaucracy. At one time the Attorney General gave legal advice to the U.S. Congress as well as the President, but in 1819 the Attorney General began advising Congress alone to ensure a manageable workload. Until March 3, 1853, the salary of the Attorney General was set by statute at less than the amount paid to other Cabinet members. Early Attorneys General supplemented their salaries by running private law practices, often arguing cases before the courts as attorneys for paying litigants.
Following unsuccessful efforts (in 1830 and 1846) to make Attorney General a full-time job, in 1869, the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary, led by Congressman William Lawrence, conducted an inquiry into the creation of a "law department" headed by the Attorney General and also composed of the various department solicitors and United States attorneys. On February 19, 1868, Lawrence introduced a bill in Congress to create the Department of Justice. President Ulysses S. Grant signed the bill into law on June 22, 1870.
The role of a Congressman or Senator was never supposed to be a full time life long profession either :whistle:
-
Sessions is garbage and needs to go. Surprised so many here have a fetish for civil asset forfeiture.
You've said that about everyone Trump has issue with.
It's becoming a very noticeable pattern.
-
@Frank Cannon
You've said that about everyone Trump has issue with.
It's becoming a very noticeable pattern.
???
Are you accusing Frank Cannon of being a pro-Trump diehard? Well, I am a NeverTrumper trying my very best to be supportive of our clumsy POTUS. I agree with Frank Cannon--but I cannot help but let it slip out that Trump has a bad moral compass that shows up as bad judgment, among other things.
-
@Frank Cannon
???
Are you accusing Frank Cannon of being a pro-Trump diehard? Well, I am a NeverTrumper trying my very best to be supportive of our clumsy POTUS. I agree with Frank Cannon--but I cannot help but let it slip out that Trump has a bad moral compass that shows up as bad judgment, among other things.
You and me both on the " Well, I am a NeverTrumper trying my very best to be supportive of our clumsy POTUS."
But it's wearing me down. He hasn't exactly done anything wrong that matters but he says the wrong things EVERY SINGLE DAY.
-
Trump could turn it around but so far, I see him as the GOP version of Jimmy Carter.
And I think his stink will last for generations.
-
@Frank Cannon
???
Are you accusing Frank Cannon of being a pro-Trump diehard? Well, I am a NeverTrumper trying my very best to be supportive of our clumsy POTUS. I agree with Frank Cannon--but I cannot help but let it slip out that Trump has a bad moral compass that shows up as bad judgment, among other things.
He's said the same with Comey and Mueller, immediately after Trump tweeted negative comments about them.
That's why I said it's becoming a pattern.
@Frank Cannon
-
You might be correct about that. But I think Trump was a fool to choose Sessions in the first place. All the rah-rah stuff surrounding Sessions' nomination was pretty disgusting to me when I learned about Sessions' position on assets forfeiture. That position makes Sessions the worst sort of anti-Constitutional monster.
It was known from the start. http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,243741.msg1189607.html#msg1189607
-
"As long as that is appropriate"....in politician-speak, that means he could resign tomorrow.
A president going after his own attorney general is pretty incredible. I agree with the person on Twitter who said that Sessions bought this ticket when he endorsed Trump over Cruz, and now he should sit back and enjoy the ride.
-
In reality Trump's own duplicity has brought him to this point. He has continually obfuscated on readily verifiable matters. His statement something to the effect that he didn't have any deals with Russia will most likely be exposed as a bald-faced lie and perhaps be the tipping point that moves the House toward impeachment proceedings.
@Gov Bean Counter
The same is true of his son, Donald Jr. If the Russian meeting was so innocent, I don't understand why he had to lie repeatedly about what went on there.
-
Sessions: No plans to resign after Trump attack
Of course not. He just nationalized a federal program to make unConstitutional asset and property seizures without being convicted of any crime -"legal".
The Federal approval of Highwaymen was just green-lit by Sessions.
So I imagine he will want a cut of the spoils before he takes a leave from Trump's regime to spend more time with his family.
-
You've said that about everyone Trump has issue with.
It's becoming a very noticeable pattern.
@HonestJohn
Well Jackson you have no idea what you are talking about. I have always hated Sessions. He is an azzhole who votes loves govt' programs while pretending he is a Conservative. Just look at is great interest in getting involved in state deciding to legalize pot. He loves eminent domain. He love subsidies. He is also a piss poor lawyer.
-
Finally, common ground amongst brothers @Frank Cannon I don't like him either.
He lost all credibility for me when he bought the club car on the Trump Train, EARLY! unlike most of us who struggled through the election, some up to the last day, depending on the State.
-
You've said that about everyone Trump has issue with.
It's becoming a very noticeable pattern.
Don't make this about Frank.
-
@HonestJohn
Well Jackson you have no idea what you are talking about. I have always hated Sessions. He is an azzhole who votes loves govt' programs while pretending he is a Conservative. Just look at is great interest in getting involved in state deciding to legalize pot. He loves eminent domain. He love subsidies. He is also a piss poor lawyer.
I think Sessions sucks too, and I could list a bunch more reasons, but not this thread. Sessions acted ethically and prudently by recusing himself. Trump is a scumbag for humiliating him in front of the damn fake news. I don't know how Sessions finds the will to go back to work tomorrow. He could make more money, and keep more of his dignity, by starting a new career in pus sucking when our healthcare system collapses.
-
Finally, common ground amongst brothers @Frank Cannon I don't like him either.
He lost all credibility for me when he bought the club car on the Trump Train, EARLY! unlike most of us who struggled through the election, some up to the last day, depending on the State.
He was one of the reasons I disliked Donny in the Primaries. I don't like anything about him.
And for the record, I dislike the Kushners too. That whole pack of effing losers and sleazebags can die a slow death.
-
I think Sessions sucks too, and I could list a bunch more reasons, but not this thread. Sessions acted ethically and prudently by recusing himself. Trump is a scumbag for humiliating him in front of the damn fake news. I don't know how Sessions finds the will to go back to work tomorrow. He could make more money, and keep more of his dignity, by starting a new career in pus sucking when our healthcare system collapses.
Baloney. Sessions should have been up front about this grand stand move of recusing himself from a non issue. Because of him we now have a multi decade investigation in the works run by proven Clinton/DNC/Obama hacks like Mueller and his band of Clinton fundraising lawyers.
We're over a year into a full anal exam and no one has been indicted, arrested, grand juried, convicted, tried or even fined....but yet it keeps on rolling to oblivion. Than you Progressive hack Sessions for you bullshit move.
-
Baloney. Sessions should have been up front about this grand stand move of recusing himself from a non issue.
I don't want to argue, I just wanted to give my opinion. You say Sessions is grand standing, I think he wants to avoid prison. I'm ok if we disagree my friend.
Because of him we now have a multi decade investigation in the works run by proven Clinton/DNC/Obama hacks like Mueller and his band of Clinton fundraising lawyers.
and I understand how you could feel that way, and yet I blame Trump. Trump appointed Sessions. Trump appointed Rosenstein. Every time a story loses legs Trump tweets out the next cycle of embarrassment. Trump fires Comey. Trump secretly meets with a Russian Ambassador and a Russian Spy hours after firing Comey. Trump tweets out threats to Comey.
I believe Trump created the urine soaked bed he lies in, and his only saving grace is rats are more inept than he is. Beam Me Up.
We're over a year into a full anal exam and no one has been indicted, arrested, grand juried, convicted, tried or even fined....but yet it keeps on rolling to oblivion. Than you Progressive hack Sessions for you bullshit move.
Mmmm a year of anal.
(http://images.usatoday.com/life/_photos/2006/04/03/simpsons.jpg)
-
We use words like "honor", "code", "loyalty". We use these words as the backbone of a life spent defending something. You use them as a punchline.
#MAGA
(http://images.latinpost.com/data/images/full/99263/jeff-sessions-donald-trump.jpg)
MADISON, Ala. — Jeff Sessions on Sunday became the first U.S. senator to endorse Donald Trump for president.
"We need to make America great again," the Alabama Republican announced here at a Trump rally, citing Trump's campaign slogan. "I am pleased to endorse Donald Trump for the presidency of the United States."
Trump pointed out at the rally that Sunday's announcement was the first time that Sessions has endorsed a candidate in a presidential campaign.
"I told Donald Trump this isn't a campaign, this is a movement," Sessions said at the rally. "The American people are not happy with their government."
-
He just nationalized a federal program to make unConstitutional asset and property seizures without being convicted of any crime -"legal".
It would be more correct to blame Reagan for that.
-
It would be more correct to blame Reagan for that.
Yes, it started long ago. But Sessions has done all he can to expand it over the years.
-
"As long as that is appropriate"....in politician-speak, that means he could resign tomorrow.
A president going after his own attorney general is pretty incredible. I agree with the person on Twitter who said that Sessions bought this ticket when he endorsed Trump over Cruz, and now he should sit back and enjoy the ride.
Evidently Session knows that Cruz not being a natural born citizen is ineligible to be President of the United States.
-
Sessions: No plans to resign after Trump attack
Of course not. He just nationalized a federal program to make unConstitutional asset and property seizures without being convicted of any crime -"legal".
The Federal approval of Highwaymen was just green-lit by Sessions.
So I imagine he will want a cut of the spoils before he takes a leave from Trump's regime to spend more time with his family.
You can thank President Reagan (War on Drugs) for our current Civil Foreiture Laws
wiki
According to journalist Sarah Stillman, a major turning point in forfeiture activity was the passage of the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984.[11] This law permitted local and federal law enforcement agencies to divvy up the seized assets and cash.[7] Civil forfeiture allowed federal and local governments to "extract swift penalties from white-collar criminals and offer restitution to victims of fraud", according to Stillman.[7] From 1985 to 1993, authorities confiscated $3 billion of cash and other property based on the federal Asset Forfeiture Program which included both civil and criminal forfeitures.[11]
-
@HonestJohn
Well Jackson you have no idea what you are talking about. I have always hated Sessions. He is an azzhole who votes loves govt' programs while pretending he is a Conservative. Just look at is great interest in getting involved in state deciding to legalize pot. He loves eminent domain. He love subsidies. He is also a piss poor lawyer.
Wonder how the TOS is taking this Sessions fray. They used him like 10 c whore trying to tie Trump to Session's conservative values.
Sessions is a sell out as far I am concerned anyway. F him.
-
Evidently Session knows that Cruz not being a natural born citizen is ineligible to be President of the United States.
Still pushing that tired debunked mythical slander about Cruz huh?
Are you that incapable of coming up with something new?
-
Still pushing that tired debunked mythical slander about Cruz huh?
Are you that incapable of coming up with something new?
The alt right is all about lying.
I see on twitter they're pimping a "scoop" that Ted Cruz will be the next AG as soon as Sessions is gone. In reality its just an attempt to get help to Push Sessions out.
I'm not thrilled with Sessions but they brought this pig to market and they can ride it all the way home.
-
The alt right is all about lying.
I see on twitter they're pimping a "scoop" that Ted Cruz will be the next AG as soon as Sessions is gone. In reality its just an attempt to get help to Push Sessions out.
I'm not thrilled with Sessions but they brought this pig to market and they can ride it all the way home.
@Cripplecreek
I guess they think that since so much time has passed since the last time they went full birther on Ted we'd all forget.
I agree about the propaganda about Cruz being the next AG and why.
-
Evidently Session knows that Cruz not being a natural born citizen is ineligible to be President of the United States.
What is your Harpie rank at TOS soldier?
-
Sen. Cruz as Trumps AG, that is just phenomenally stupid on two levels, it would be suicide for the Trump Presidency, Cruz wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. Besides the last Trump Supporter (better, @DCPatriot ?) talking point was we need him in the Senate, if I recall correctly.
-
What is your Harpie rank at TOS soldier?
Funny thing is that it was only about 2 years ago when JimKnob threatened to ban anyone who said Cruz was ineligible.
-
Evidently Session knows that Cruz not being a natural born citizen is ineligible to be President of the United States.
@jpsb
I thought the morons at TOS were the only ones who believed that.
Tell us about Rafael Cruz the murder conspirator and the perils of Pizzagate.
-
Still pushing that tired debunked mythical slander about Cruz huh?
Are you that incapable of coming up with something new?
If I had a nickel for every time I saw that stupid Canadian idea pushed hard and continually on TOS, I could buy groceries at Safeway at least once.
I thought I'd left it behind but .... guess not.
-
He was one of the reasons I disliked Donny in the Primaries. I don't like anything about him.
And for the record, I dislike the Kushners too. That whole pack of effing losers and sleazebags can die a slow death.
The Kushners are like the camel in the fable. They have their nose in the door of the tent now.
-
The alt right is all about lying.
I see on twitter they're pimping a "scoop" that Ted Cruz will be the next AG as soon as Sessions is gone. In reality its just an attempt to get help to Push Sessions out.
I'm not thrilled with Sessions but they brought this pig to market and they can ride it all the way home.
Ted Cruz would have to be insane to take any position in the Trump administration.
Ted Cruz is not insane.
-
If I had a nickel for every time I saw that stupid Canadian idea pushed hard and continually on TOS, I could buy groceries at Safeway at least once.
I thought I'd left it behind but .... guess not.
You and me both.
I could go ahead and put in my retirement paperwork!
-
You can thank President Reagan (War on Drugs) for our current Civil Foreiture Laws
Seizure of private property without due process is a violation of the Constitution, I do not care what Administration, court, Congress or Police Pension Fund says otherwise.
The 1999 SCOTUS case and the 2000 CAFRA act dialed back the scope and reach of Federales seizing assets without criminal charges.
Sessions is blowing right through both brakes and opening the throttle full tilt in an industry that is growing thanks to the fact no one is governed by morality anymore, and theft under color of law is "legal".
-
@HonestJohn
Well Jackson you have no idea what you are talking about. I have always hated Sessions. He is an azzhole who votes loves govt' programs while pretending he is a Conservative. Just look at is great interest in getting involved in state deciding to legalize pot. He loves eminent domain. He love subsidies. He is also a piss poor lawyer.
You're right and I was mistaken.
Please accept my apologies.
m(._.)m
-
The alt right is all about lying.
I see on twitter they're pimping a "scoop" that Ted Cruz will be the next AG as soon as Sessions is gone. In reality its just an attempt to get help to Push Sessions out.
I'm not thrilled with Sessions but they brought this pig to market and they can ride it all the way home.
But of course the son of a Cuban born in Canada is a natural born citizen of the United States \s
The founders of this country would not even consider Cruz a citizen! You have no respect what so ever for our Constitution. You're willing to crap all over it when it suits your purpose.
-
But of course the son of a Cuban born in Canada is a natural born citizen of the United States \s
The founders of this country would not even consider Cruz a citizen! You have no respect what so ever for our Constitution. You're willing to crap all over it when it suits your purpose.
And alt r poster boys like you think an insane person like Trump should be POTUS. Your posts just drip of irony.
-
There's these things called honesty...integrity...ethics...Americans living in Real-ville tend to look at those things as important and something to be proud of.
You are 100% correct! Unfortunately, honesty, integrity, ethics, morality are a rarity these days. It used to be 'deals' were made with simple handshakes and one's word. That was when people valued their honor and integrity was everything.
-
The alt right is all about lying.
I see on twitter they're pimping a "scoop" that Ted Cruz will be the next AG as soon as Sessions is gone. In reality its just an attempt to get help to Push Sessions out.
I'm not thrilled with Sessions but they brought this pig to market and they can ride it all the way home.
First of all, Trump isn't going to appoint Cruz to anything and secondly Cruz wouldn't destroy his political career accepting Trump's appointment. Being in the Senate is where he can do the most good right now and hopefully is gearing up to run in 2020. IMHO in looking at what is happening right now to the Trump administration, if he challenges Trump and Pence in 2020 and someone like Maxine Waters runs on the DEM side, Cruz will be our next president.
-
But of course the son of a Cuban born in Canada is a natural born citizen of the United States \s
The founders of this country would not even consider Cruz a citizen! You have no respect what so ever for our Constitution. You're willing to crap all over it when it suits your purpose.
You do realize that he had two parents, don't you?
-
But of course the son of a Cuban born in Canada is a natural born citizen of the United States \s
The founders of this country would not even consider Cruz a citizen! You have no respect what so ever for our Constitution. You're willing to crap all over it when it suits your purpose.
:odrama: :bs:
-
You do realize that he had two parents, don't you?
@Sanguine...we're supposed to forget the fact his mom was an American.
-
@Sanguine...we're supposed to forget the fact his mom was an American.
:shrug:
-
You do realize that he had two parents, don't you?
Don't confuse a Cruz hater with facts. It hurts their brains.
-
You're right and I was mistaken.
Please accept my apologies.
m(._.)m
Frank usually knows what he's talking about. I was praising Sessions a few days ago for going after the doctors who have become virtual drug dealers, but now he's acting like he knows something about marijuana and he doesn't. He thinks legalizing pot increases crime and it doesn't.
-
@Sanguine...we're supposed to forget the fact his mom was an American.
(https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/079/852/large_v3/7141d711.jpg?1455858870)
@txradioguy
-
(https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/079/852/large_v3/7141d711.jpg?1455858870)
@txradioguy
Oh, c'mon. Give up the Cruz hate. He's a good guy.
-
(https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/079/852/large_v3/7141d711.jpg?1455858870)
@txradioguy
Probably not, @Right_in_Virginia, he has dual citizenship and may have renounced his American citizenship. What's your point? Or, did you have one?
-
Oh, c'mon. Give up the Cruz hate. He's a good guy.
Emjay, that's one reason for all the backbiting around here - they just can't give it up. Got to destroy the one (past tense) serious alternative. I don't understand it.
-
Emjay, that's one reason for all the backbiting around here - they just can't give it up. Got to destroy the one (past tense) serious alternative. I don't understand it.
I hope everyone realizes that Cruz is maybe the most conservative member in the senate.
Really have to question where on the political spectrum these orange Cruz haters lie. I am guessing significantly left.
-
Emjay, that's one reason for all the backbiting around here - they just can't give it up. Got to destroy the one (past tense) serious alternative. I don't understand it.
I recognize and appreciate the Founders' wisdom in Article II, Section 1 of the US Constitution. Being a principled Constitutionalist I apply it equally to all candidates for the Office of the President of the United States, even when it's uncomfortable and painful; even when I dearly want the reality and circumstances to meet my personal desires. :shrug:
@Sanguine @Emjay @catfish1957
-
Emjay, that's one reason for all the backbiting around here - they just can't give it up. Got to destroy the one (past tense) serious alternative. I don't understand it.
Neither can I. I mean Cruz has been something of a strong ally to Trump and has tried hard to make the healthcare reform palatable so that it could pass .... which would be a great boon to Trump.
Trump was horribly cruel to Cruz during the primaries but Cruz has been pretty gracious about it. I like Melania a lot now, but posting her picture next to an unflattering screen grab of Heidi Cruz was really bad.
It must be fear and jealousy. Cruz is ten times the man Trump will ever be.
-
I recognize and appreciate the Founders' wisdom in Article II, Section 1 of the US Constitution. Being a principled Constitutionalist I apply it equally to all candidates for the Office of the President of the United States, even when it's uncomfortable and painful; even when I dearly want the reality and circumstances to meet my personal desires. :shrug:
@Sanguine @Emjay @catfish1957
So, why did you bring up an example that doesn't apply? You're not making sense, @Right_in_Virginia
-
So, why did you bring up an example that doesn't apply? You're not making sense, @Right_in_Virginia
I'm afraid we hit a nerve.
-
So, why did you bring up an example that doesn't apply? You're not making sense, @Right_in_Virginia
Of course it applies @Sanguine and of course it's uncomfortable to admit. The question raised in the picture I posted is the question that matters ... are we willing to corrupt the Constitution to permit a favorite son to run for President? And how would that corruption not apply to all who are foreign born with one American parent?
If we go down this road, Prince Hashim of Jordan is but one example of who would be eligible to be POTUS/CIC--he is foreign born with an American mother. Are we okay with this?
@Emjay
-
@Sanguine ... I've got to "bolt". So, if you reply, I'll respond first chance I get.
Thanks! :beer:
-
(https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/079/852/large_v3/7141d711.jpg?1455858870)
@txradioguy
His mother reliquinshed her American citizenship when she married the king, so she was not an American citizen when the prince was born.
-
It would be more correct to blame Reagan for that.
We have had that program, in California for decades.
-
Still pushing that tired debunked mythical slander about Cruz huh?
Are you that incapable of coming up with something new?
You call it "slander" to describe a legal opinion that Calgary born Cruz is not eligible to be President.
It is an opinion, not a slander.
-
But of course the son of a Cuban born in Canada is a natural born citizen of the United States \s
The founders of this country would not even consider Cruz a citizen! You have no respect what so ever for our Constitution. You're willing to crap all over it when it suits your purpose.
Mitt Romney's father George was born in Mexico, and ran in 1968.
An extensive legal opinion was written at the time, that he was NOT ELIGIBLE. He did not do well, and dropped out before the issue of his eligibility became an issue.
Mexico or Cuba, are not like Hawaii.
So it is a very well informed position to take that Cruz is not eligible, and believing this is not "alt right" or any other childish BS that Cruz ardent supporters can push.
I don't make claims to be a legal expert. But the ones writing the Romney opinion WERE legal experts.
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/five-other-presidential-birther-controversies-from-american-history
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/03/23/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-ted-cruz-birther-movement/?utm_term=.8fdd6640bbba
-
A number of courts have already ruled him eligible.
-
Sessions is garbage and needs to go. Surprised so many here have a fetish for civil asset forfeiture.
:beer: I have felt at times that Sessions may have been one of the "leakers" ... also Trump selected Rosenstein as deputy AG .... I question why the heck he keeps picking people from the swamp.
-
A number of courts have already ruled him eligible.
A number of courts and supervisors of elections who allowed him to qualify to be on the ballot in all 50 states. Done deal.
-
Mitt Romney's father George was born in Mexico, and ran in 1968.
An extensive legal opinion was written at the time, that he was NOT ELIGIBLE. He did not do well, and dropped out before the issue of his eligibility became an issue.
Mexico or Cuba, are not like Hawaii.
So it is a very well informed position to take that Cruz is not eligible, and believing this is not "alt right" or any other childish BS that Cruz ardent supporters can push.
I don't make claims to be a legal expert. But the ones writing the Romney opinion WERE legal experts.
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/five-other-presidential-birther-controversies-from-american-history
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/03/23/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-ted-cruz-birther-movement/?utm_term=.8fdd6640bbba
The constitution gave the authority to congress to define citizenship. Congress has made adjustments to the citizenship laws over the years and sets the legal definition. Ted Cruz was a citizen at birth under US law at the time making him "natural born" because no other action was required to give him citizenship. Canadian law nor any other country's law matters in that determination. And I'll add, the courts have affirmed that.
-
You call it "slander" to describe a legal opinion that Calgary born Cruz is not eligible to be President.
It is an opinion, not a slander.
It is an opinion... and it is a wrong opinion and it is used to Slander.
-
:beer: I have felt at times that Sessions may have been one of the "leakers" ... also Trump selected Rosenstein as deputy AG .... I question why the heck he keeps picking people from the swamp.
And, didn't Rosenstein select Mueller? With no clearly defined parameters as to what he could investigate?
-
Mitt Romney's father George was born in Mexico, and ran in 1968.
An extensive legal opinion was written at the time, that he was NOT ELIGIBLE. He did not do well, and dropped out before the issue of his eligibility became an issue.
Mexico or Cuba, are not like Hawaii.
So it is a very well informed position to take that Cruz is not eligible, and believing this is not "alt right" or any other childish BS that Cruz ardent supporters can push.
I don't make claims to be a legal expert. But the ones writing the Romney opinion WERE legal experts.
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/five-other-presidential-birther-controversies-from-american-history
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/03/23/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-ted-cruz-birther-movement/?utm_term=.8fdd6640bbba
Why are fanatic Trumpers still clinging to this. It doesn't matter anymore and they can bring it up again in 2020 when Cruz runs against Trump.
-
Why are fanatic Trumpers still clinging to this. It doesn't matter anymore and they can bring it up again in 2020 when Cruz runs against Trump.
I don't think Trump will run again. I think the rigors of the job are already getting to him. It will be interesting - what will the anti-Cruzers do then?
-
Why are fanatic Trumpers still clinging to this. It doesn't matter anymore and they can bring it up again in 2020 when Cruz runs against Trump.
I see no indication that Cruz will run for President in 2020. He's focused on reelection to the Senate, and thumping the Democrat from El Paso. To my knowledge, I can't recall an El Pasoan ever winning a state wide seat.
-
Why are fanatic Trumpers still clinging to this. It doesn't matter anymore and they can bring it up again in 2020 when Cruz runs against Trump.
This is what they do, the hate for Sen. Cruz is beyond skin deep, BUT, Trump will have to screw up pretty BAD for Ted to primary him in 2020, and I don't see that happening, the GOP is still functional and will go down with him if he (Trump) requests it.
@Emjay
I've been wrong before.
-
I see no indication that Cruz will run for President in 2020. He's focused on reelection to the Senate, and thumping the Democrat from El Paso. To my knowledge, I can't recall an El Pasoan ever winning a state wide seat.
I think Ted Cruz wants to be president and I think he will be. Not sure about 2020. Depends on what happens with Trump.
-
This is what they do, the hate for Sen. Cruz is beyond skin deep, BUT, Trump will have to screw up pretty BAD for Ted to primary him in 2020, and I don't see that happening, the GOP is still functional and will go down with him if he (Trump) requests it.
@Emjay
I've been wrong before.
Oh, I agree with that. It totally depends on how Trump fares and if he decides to run again. But Ted is quite young and he will run again. Maybe not in 2020
-
I think Ted Cruz wants to be president and I think he will be. Not sure about 2020. Depends on what happens with Trump.
When Trump is done I doubt any Republican will win the Presidency for some time to come.
-
Canada may be pretty tired of Trudeau by 2020, He may have a better chance of being Prime Minister up there.
I hate the cold (107 in Texas today), but I'll move up there, screw this oligarchy.
-
Canada may be pretty tired of Trudeau by 2020, He may have a better chance of being Prime Minister up there.
I hate the cold (107 in Texas today), but I'll move up there, screw this oligarchy.
Where is it 107? I only saw a reading of 100. Overall, we've had a mild summer IMO.
-
Where is it 107? I only saw a reading of 100. Overall, we've had a mild summer IMO.
Where are you? It was 103 here today!
-
New Braunfels, between Austin and San Antonio, where the Comal and the Guadalupe meet, that alone should give me a -5 degrees here, but my small lawn (Grass, don't read into that) keeps screaming.
It may just be those old Germans were incorrect in their R-Value of stacked sandstone blocks in my walls (1894), but at these temps, it's difficult for everyone here, I would think.
*Heat Index @Night Hides Not
-
I don't think Trump will run again. I think the rigors of the job are already getting to him. It will be interesting - what will the anti-Cruzers do then?
Interesting viewpoint but I'm not sure the rigors of the job are getting to Trump. They are getting to me, Big Time.
I don't think stuff gets through to Trump... I think he wears a bubble of righteousness. In spite of his two hour twitter fit this morning, I think he's okay with things.
Cruz will have a big advantage if and when he runs again. He now has fame and name recognition that he didn't have when he entered the primaries this time.
And what the bloody heck is the drill with the anti-Cruzers. It's beginning to tick me off.
-
New Braunfels, between Austin and San Antonio, where the Comal and the Guadalupe meet, that alone should give me a -5 degrees here, but my small lawn (Grass, don't read into that) keeps screaming.
It may just be those old Germans were incorrect in their R-Value of stacked sandstone blocks in my walls (1894), but at these temps, it's difficult for everyone here, I would think.
*Heat Index @Night Hides Not
It's hotter than the hot place in Kihei. Don't laugh but with a high of 88/89 and a humidity about the same, it's heatstroke weather.
-
Dershowitz "Shocked" How Far the Left Is 'Stretching Existing Laws,' (https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2017/07/17/dershowitz-shocked-how-far-the-left-is-talking-about-treason-with-no-evidence-n2355809) |
Townhall.com
Dershowitz on Trump Jr Meeting: 'A Candidate Has the Right to Get Information From Whatever Source' (http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/07/16/dershowitz-on-trump-jr-meeting-a-candidate-has-the-right-to-get-information-from-whatever-source/) | Breitbart
-
Dershowitz "Shocked" How Far the Left Is 'Stretching Existing Laws,' (https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2017/07/17/dershowitz-shocked-how-far-the-left-is-talking-about-treason-with-no-evidence-n2355809) |
Townhall.com
Dershowitz on Trump Jr Meeting: 'A Candidate Has the Right to Get Information From Whatever Source' (http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/07/16/dershowitz-on-trump-jr-meeting-a-candidate-has-the-right-to-get-information-from-whatever-source/) | Breitbart
The truth hasn't mattered to the left for some time. Anything it takes to get the desired goal is a-okay. Unfortunately that practice has also been accepted by many of today's Republicans. Trump is the embodiment of that.
-
Where are you? It was 103 here today!
Apologies for the late reply. We're up in Spokane on vacation. Just got back from "The Kennel", where Gonzaga plays... my first time back in over 15 years. My 15 YO son is honing his skills at a basketball camp, and getting a taste of campus life...3 nights in a dorm. My 6 YO grandson is keeping us busy. He's a big Zag fan, more so after getting autographs and pictures with a half dozen players. They couldn't have been more accommodating.
We're heading back to Texas tomorrow, with stops at Little Big Horn and Mount Rushmore.
-
Apologies for the late reply. We're up in Spokane on vacation. Just got back from "The Kennel", where Gonzaga plays... my first time back in over 15 years. My 15 YO son is honing his skills at a basketball camp, and getting a taste of campus life...3 nights in a dorm. My 6 YO grandson is keeping us busy. He's a big Zag fan, more so after getting autographs and pictures with a half dozen players. They couldn't have been more accommodating.
We're heading back to Texas tomorrow, with stops at Little Big Horn and Mount Rushmore.
Sounds like a great trip!
-
Why are fanatic Trumpers still clinging to this. .../
Why are whining snowflakes making this all about Ted Cruz @Emjay? Where is the defense of the US Constitution among these people? Or is love of the Constitution another fly-by-night "principle" to be discarded to fit the star of their cult of personality?
-
Why are whining snowflakes making this all about Ted Cruz @Emjay? Where is the defense of the US Constitution among these people? Or is love of the Constitution another fly-by-night "principle" to be discarded to fit the star of their cult of personality?
OK, well enlighten us, @Right_in_Virginia. You are making it "all about Cruz". Why?
-
OK, well enlighten us, @Right_in_Virginia. You are making it "all about Cruz". Why?
Because snowflakes do @Sanguine ... they cannot see the Constitution for love of one politician.
While I don't expect it, step away from the cult, and we can discuss Section 1 article 2 of the US Constitution rationally, minus the tsunami of accusation and emotion.
Clear enough?
-
The constitution gave the authority to congress to define citizenship. Congress has made adjustments to the citizenship laws over the years and sets the legal definition. Ted Cruz was a citizen at birth under US law at the time making him "natural born" because no other action was required to give him citizenship. Canadian law nor any other country's law matters in that determination. And I'll add, the courts have affirmed that.
Concise and correct.
-
Because snowflakes do @Sanguine ... they cannot see the Constitution for love of one politician.
While I don't expect it, step away from the cult, and we can discuss Section 1 article 2 of the US Constitution rationally, minus the tsunami of accusation and emotion.
Clear enough?
No, not really. You are the one who keeps bring up Cruz. So, you're admitting you're a snowflake? I do admire your honesty.
-
No, not really. .../
Well, since nothing I post is clear enough for you @Sanguine , there isn't any point to continuing our conversation... :seeya:
-
Why are whining snowflakes making this all about Ted Cruz @Emjay? Where is the defense of the US Constitution among these people? Or is love of the Constitution another fly-by-night "principle" to be discarded to fit the star of their cult of personality?
Because Ted Cruz has been the Man in the Senate. He has devised a way to make the Health Care plan palatable to most of us.
If you want to cling to the hope that he is not qualified to be President, well, cling on, but you know it's been decided by many courts.
And you are an odd person to talk about the Cult of Personality.
-
Because Ted Cruz has been the Man in the Senate. He has devised a way to make the Health Care plan palatable to most of us.
If you want to cling to the hope that he is not qualified to be President, well, cling on, but you know it's been decided by many courts.
And you are an odd person to talk about the Cult of Personality.
Yes, I was a bit surprised by that too..
-
Because Ted Cruz has been the Man in the Senate. He has devised a way to make the Health Care plan palatable to most of us.
Agree. I'm very glad he's there. And I'm equally happy there's no Constitutional conflict with it.
If you want to cling to the hope that he is not qualified to be President, well, cling on, but you know it's been decided by many courts.
I'm not clinging to that @Emjay. It saddens me. And there has been no definitive court decision on the definition of NBC. If the times comes when this is litigated by the highest court, I hope our side removes emotion and devotion to one politician and is able to see the future ramifications of dumbing down the definition to include naturalized citizens from around the world.
And you are an odd person to talk about the Cult of Personality.
Well, in all candor Emjay, my being labeled a "cultist" by members of the Cult of Ted Cruz has always amused me....and it feels good to finally share this. Thanks for the opportunity. :laugh:
-
Agree. I'm very glad he's there. And I'm equally happy there's no Constitutional conflict with it.
I'm not clinging to that @Emjay. It saddens me. And there has been no definitive court decision on the definition of NBC. If the times comes when this is litigated by the highest court, I hope our side removes emotion and devotion to one politician and is able to see the future ramifications of dumbing down the definition to include naturalized citizens from around the world.
Well, in all candor Emjay, my being labeled a "cultist" by members of the Cult of Ted Cruz has always amused me....and it feels good to finally share this. Thanks for the opportunity. :laugh:
There is no Cult of Ted Cruz. There are large numbers of people, getting larger all the time, who finally recognize that Ted Cruz would be as close to a perfect President as we'll ever get.
He knows every inch of the Constitution (you would wrongly hold against him)... in fact, memorized it when he was just a kid.
He's brilliant and able to understand complicated issues and look at them from the viewpoint of a true conservative.
He's funny and personable, honest and a good family man.
And trumpers are absolutely terrified of him.
-
There is no Cult of Ted Cruz. There are large numbers of people, getting larger all the time, who finally recognize that Ted Cruz would be as close to a perfect President as we'll ever get. .../
Silly argument @Emjay ... "Close to prefect" in the political realm is the very essence of "cult" No Membership Chairmanship for you!!! LOL :silly:
-
Silly argument @Emjay ... "Close to prefect" in the political realm is the very essence of "cult" No Membership Chairmanship for you!!! LOL :silly:
Let me see if I have this right.
Admiring Ted Cruz for the genuine qualities he possesses makes one a cultist.
Excusing Trump for every misstep makes one... what ...a rational human being.
Sometimes it seems like you have some sense but I guess the magic words 'Ted Cruz' brings out the flat out crazy in you.
You'll have to continue this ridiculous argument with someone else, though.
Bye now.
-
Bye now.
:bighug: for you @Emjay :laugh:
-
:bighug: for you @Emjay :laugh:
@Right_in_Virginia, now that is weird behavior. First you try to insult and then you want to do a big hug? Why?
-
Had there been a "cult of Ted Cruz," perhaps he'd become the president.
*sigh*
-
@Right_in_Virginia, now that is weird behavior. First you try to insult and then you want to do a big hug? Why?
It's the southern equivalent of 'bless your heart.'
-
IMHO, Sessions recused himself because he's under threat from his former colleagues from across the aisle.
[snip] Last year, after President-elect Trump picked Jeff Sessions to be attorney general, The New York Times editorial page called the Alabama senator "radical" and "extreme" and tarred him as an unrepentant racist and xenophobe.
Last week, after Trump criticized Sessions and others, the same editorial page suddenly discovered a new fondness for Sessions. The Times now insisted that Trump had impugned his "integrity" and that of others "who have spent their careers respecting and protecting" the law. [/snip]
http://nypost.com/2017/07/22/exposing-the-new-york-times-hypocrisy-on-jeff-sessions/
-
It's the southern equivalent of 'bless your heart.'
You certainly proved, to me anyway, that you have big ovaries @Emjay, to argue with RiV, I have to be drunk to do that and the blowback is to high a price, I usually just leave her to her fantasies, they are usually non fatal. @Right_in_Virginia
-
You certainly proved, to me anyway, that you have big ovaries @Emjay, to argue with RiV, I have to be drunk to do that and the blowback is to high a price, I usually just leave her to her fantasies, they are usually non fatal. @Right_in_Virginia
Who knew what the equivalent of Big Balls is? Corbe knew, apparently.
-
Because snowflakes do @Sanguine ... they cannot see the Constitution for love of one politician.
While I don't expect it, step away from the cult, and we can discuss Section 1 article 2 of the US Constitution rationally, minus the tsunami of accusation and emotion.
Clear enough?
You do realize you just described yourself self perfectly don't you?
-
(https://d26horl2n8pviu.cloudfront.net/pictures/images/000/079/852/large_v3/7141d711.jpg?1455858870)
@txradioguy
You're so freaking predictable.
But then most cultists are.
-
You're so freaking predictable.
But then most cultists are.
You would know @txradioguy ...much better than I.
-
It's the southern equivalent of 'bless your heart.'
Actually, it's the northern equivalent ... but close enough @Emjay Close enough. ^-^
-
You do realize you just described yourself self perfectly don't you?
Ah, no @txradioguy I'm not the one willing to discard the Constitution for one politician. You are. :shrug:
-
You certainly proved, to me anyway, that you have big ovaries @Emjay, to argue with RiV, I have to be drunk to do that and the blowback is to high a price, I usually just leave her to her fantasies, they are usually non fatal. @Right_in_Virginia
Were you drunk when you posted this @corbe? :pondering:
-
Ah, no @txradioguy I'm not the one willing to discard the Constitution for one politician. You are. :shrug:
What constitution is that?
Here's the truth since you seemed to have missed it up thread:
The constitution gave the authority to congress to define citizenship. Congress has made adjustments to the citizenship laws over the years and sets the legal definition. Ted Cruz was a citizen at birth under US law at the time making him "natural born" because no other action was required to give him citizenship. Canadian law nor any other country's law matters in that determination. And I'll add, the courts have affirmed that.
-
What constitution is that?
Here's the truth since you seemed to have missed it up thread:
The constitution gave the authority to congress to define citizenship. Congress has made adjustments to the citizenship laws over the years and sets the legal definition. Ted Cruz was a citizen at birth under US law at the time making him "natural born" because no other action was required to give him citizenship. Canadian law nor any other country's law matters in that determination. And I'll add, the courts have affirmed that.
But but but...TRUMP SAID!!!!
-
Were you drunk when you posted this @corbe? :pondering:
You of all people have no right to point that particular finger at anyone here.
-
Ah, no @txradioguy I'm not the one willing to discard the Constitution for one politician. You are. :shrug:
You're projecting more than the local 10 screen movie theater.
You should stop now before you beclown yourself any further.
Only the Blind Trump followers and Alt Right fanatics still believe the fantasy that Cruz isn't eligible.
Even your King said he was eligible.
-
You're projecting more than the local 10 screen movie theater.
You should stop now before you beclown yourself any further.
Only the Blind Trump followers and Alt Right fanatics still believe the fantasy that Cruz isn't eligible.
Even your King said he was eligible.
You know when Trump made the comment boasting that he would not lose support even if he shot someone?
RIV is the poster boy of that faction.
-
You of all people have no right to point that particular finger at anyone here.
Come on sweetie, you're letting your hate get the best of you. Read the post from Corbe that I was replying to and mine will make more sense (hopefully) to you @txradioguy 88finger point
Enjoy your day :seeya:
-
Concise and correct.
Complete Bull, prior to the 1930s Cruz would not even be a citizen of the US. Cruz is a naturalized citizen not a natural born citizen. Anyone that thinks the son of a Cuban born in Canada is a NBC of the USA has zero respect for our Constitution.
-
There is no Cult of Ted Cruz.
:bigsilly:
-
What constitution is that?
Here's the truth since you seemed to have missed it up thread:
The constitution gave the authority to congress to define citizenship. Congress has made adjustments to the citizenship laws over the years and sets the legal definition. Ted Cruz was a citizen at birth under US law at the time making him "natural born" because no other action was required to give him citizenship. Canadian law nor any other country's law matters in that determination. And I'll add, the courts have affirmed that.
If a law passed by Congress makes you a citizen of the USA you are by definition a naturalized citizen. A natural born citizen does not required an act of Congress to make him/her a citizen.
-
Complete Bull, prior to the 1930s Cruz would not even be a citizen of the US. Cruz is a naturalized citizen not a natural born citizen. Anyone that thinks the son of a Cuban born in Canada is a NBC of the USA has zero respect for our Constitution.
So what. Cruz wasn't born before the 1930s. Congress changed the laws of citizenship which they are given the authority to do under the constitution. Cruz was born a US citizen under US law at the time - period. It is you who are twisting the constitution locking in some definition of citizenship that congress has changed - changed under the direct authority of the constitution you claim isn't valid.
-
So what. Cruz wasn't born before the 1930s. Congress changed the laws of citizenship which they are given the authority to do under the constitution. Cruz was born a US citizen under US law at the time - period. It is you who are twisting the constitution locking in some definition of citizenship that congress has changed - changed under the direct authority of the constitution you claim isn't valid.
One more time
If a law passed by Congress makes you a citizen of the USA you are by definition a naturalized citizen. A natural born citizen does not required an act of Congress to make him/her a citizen.
Naturalization (or naturalisation) is the legal act or process by which a non-citizen in a country may acquire citizenship or nationality of that country. It may be done by a statute, without any effort on the part of the individual, or it may involve an application and approval by legal authorities
-
If a law passed by Congress makes you a citizen of the USA you are by definition a naturalized citizen. A natural born citizen does not required an act of Congress to make him/her a citizen.
Wrong.
The constitution gives the express authority to congress to define citizenship, how it is obtained and under what rules. The definition of citizenship isn't locked into when the constitution was written. Multiple courts have ruled on this and it isn't what you claim.
-
One more time
If a law passed by Congress makes you a citizen of the USA you are by definition a naturalized citizen. A natural born citizen does not required an act of Congress to make him/her a citizen.
No.
-
Wrong.
The constitution gives the express authority to congress to define citizenship, how it is obtained and under what rules. The definition of citizenship isn't locked into when the constitution was written. Multiple courts have ruled on this and it isn't what you claim.
Wrong, Congress has the authority to naturalize citizens. Congress has no authority do bestow natural born citizenship on anyone. Nor does Congress have the authority to define natural born citizen.
-
No.
You act say no all you want, Cruz is a naturalized citizen not a nature born citizen and here is the naturalization act that gives him his citizenship.
The Equal Nationality Act of 1934 was an American law which allowed foreign-born children of American mothers and alien fathers who had entered America before age 18 and lived in America for five years to apply for American citizenship for the first time.
-
So what. Cruz wasn't born before the 1930s. Congress changed the laws of citizenship which they are given the authority to do under the constitution. Cruz was born a US citizen under US law at the time - period. It is you who are twisting the constitution locking in some definition of citizenship that congress has changed - changed under the direct authority of the constitution you claim isn't valid.
Cruz's citizenship is not the issue @DB Cruz's status as a natural born citizen is the issue as it relates to meeting the Constitutional requirement to be POTUS.
Cruz was not born on US soil to two American citizens and as such is not natural born to the United States. I am a NBC ... I was born in the US to two American citizens. No one can revoke my citizenship--it is natural and inherent to who I am.
Cruz does not have the same protection.
Cruz is a citizen at the will of Congress. And what Congress has given, Congress can take away. While he is a citizen, he is, by definition, a naturalized citizen. A naturalized citizen, while fully a citizen, is not eligible to hold the office of the President of the United States.
(While Cruz is referred to here as part of this discussion, the above applies to any soul born outside the United States with one parent being a US citizen at the time of birth)
-
You know when Trump made the comment boasting that he would not lose support even if he shot someone?
RIV is the poster boy of that faction.
I'm surprised she doesn't try to say that comment was taken out of context and he never meant that.
-
You act say no all you want, Cruz is a naturalized citizen not a nature born citizen and here is the naturalization act that gives him his citizenship.
The Equal Nationality Act of 1934 was an American law which allowed foreign-born children of American mothers and alien fathers who had entered America before age 18 and lived in America for five years to apply for American citizenship for the first time.
No he's not and all of your birther claims to the contrary won't change the harsh reality that Ted Cruz IS an American citizen.
-
No.
Funny how the birthers never seem to want to admit or fail to comprehend that were Cruz not truly eligible under the Constitution...the FEC would have stepped in a d said he wasn't eligible back during the primaries.
His situation is no different that McCain's back in 2008...except that it's now so called Conservatives bringing the issue on behalf of Hillary 's money man instead of the Clinton campaign bringing it up themselves.
-
No he's not and all of your birthed claims to the contrary won't change the harsh reality that Ted Cruz IS an American citizen.
That's not the issue @txradioguy No one is debating whether or not Cruz is a citizen of the United States. The debate is whether or not he meets the Constitutional requirement to be POTUS of being a natural born citizen. Yes, Congress has made it possible for him to be a citizen. But this is not natural born, this is naturalized citizenship.
-
That's not the issue @txradioguy No one is debating whether or not Cruz is a citizen of the United States. The debate is whether or not he meets the Constitutional requirement to be POTUS of being a natural born citizen. Yes, Congress has made it possible for him to be a citizen. But this is not natural born, this is naturalized citizenship.
You need to learn to actually read the Constitution and quit relying on Breitbart to tell you what to think.
Article II, section 1 of the Constitution provides:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States. (emphasis added)
Under U.S. law, the fact that Cruz was born to a U.S. citizen mother makes him a citizen from birth. In other words, he is a “natural born citizen” (as opposed to a naturalized citizen) and is constitutionally eligible.
If we used the perverted and totally misinterpreted version of Article II that you and the rest of the birthers believe...then most of the Founding Fathers...and a couple of other former Presidents wouldn't have been eligible for office because they weren't born in the United States.
Are you here to tell me that the Founding Fathers that went on to serve as President...who weren't born in this country were in violation of the very Constitution most of them fought for and helped work to bring to fruition?
-
No he's not and all of your birther claims to the contrary won't change the harsh reality that Ted Cruz IS an American citizen.
Look at the year. 1934 - about the time Americans finally noticed that women had slightly more value than a matress.
His Mom's American - he's American. End of, unless you don't think women count for anything.
-
Look at the year. 1934 - about the time Americans finally noticed that women had slightly more value than a matress.
If Cruz were an "anchor baby" you'd never hear a peep from the Birthers about this IMHO.
His Mom's American - he's American. End of, unless you don't think women count for anything.
Well...look at who they are defending :whistle:
-
You need to learn to actually read the Constitution and quit relying on Breitbart to tell you what to think.
Article II, section 1 of the Constitution provides:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States. (emphasis added)
Under U.S. law, the fact that Cruz was born to a U.S. citizen mother makes him a citizen from birth. In other words, he is a “natural born citizen” (as opposed to a naturalized citizen) and is constitutionally eligible.
If we used the perverted and totally misinterpreted version of Article II that you and the rest of the birthers believe...then most of the Founding Fathers...and a couple of other former Presidents wouldn't have been eligible for office because they weren't born in the United States.
Are you here to tell me that the Founding Fathers that went on to serve as President...who weren't born in this country were in violation of the very Constitution most of them fought for and helped work to bring to fruition?
One more time
If an act of Congress makes you a citizen you are a naturalized citizen not a natural born citizen. I was born here to two citizen parents no law passed by congress makes me a citizen, I just am a citizen, a natural born citizen.
Saying anyone born anywhere with one parent holding a US passport is a Natural Born Citizen of the USA is ridiculous. Our Constitution (under original intent) limits the office of President to people born in the USA to a citizen father.
Trashing the constitution just because you like Cruz is not a good idea.
-
One more time
If an act of Congress makes you a citizen you are a naturalized citizen not a natural born citizen. I was born here to two citizen parents no law passed by congress makes me a citizen, I just am a citizen, a natural born citizen.
Once again since you birthers seem to have a hearing and reading comprehension problem...Article II of the U.S. Constitution says he's legit. Whatever Act of Congress you keep babbling about just reinforces what was clearly stated in the Constitution in the 18th Century.
Saying anyone born anywhere with one parent holding a US passport is a Natural Born Citizen of the USA is ridiculous. Our Constitution (under original intent) limits the office of President to people born in the USA to a citizen father.
See this is where you are completely clueless. I have friends...hell I've had soldiers under my leadership...who had one parent that was German...or one Parent that was Korean...or Panamanian born in an overseas hospital...not on a military base...and guess what...they are considered a Natural Born Citizen of the United States...they don't have to check naturalized on any paperwork...show a permanent residence Visa...none of that...they hold American passports and check the box "yes" where it says
"Are you an American Born Citizen".
Now unless you have some secret insight into how immigration works and who is and isn't a citizen that others don't...you're just...as usual...blowing orange smoke.
Otherwise...please share your insider knowledge. Cause I've seen it from the military side and seen how the Government treats and considers American's born with one parent as a U.S. Citizen...and you're full of excrement.
Trashing the constitution just because you like Cruz is not a good idea.
Purposely ignoring what's IN the constitution because of your blind fealty to Trump isn't the wisest move for you.
-
Look at the year. 1934 - about the time Americans finally noticed that women had slightly more value than a matress.
His Mom's American - he's American. End of, unless you don't think women count for anything.
The topic is not the value of a human female the topic is whether Cruz is eligible to hold the office of President of the USA. And he isn't.
Also there is a strong case to be made that when Cruz was born his mom was a Canada citizen.
The out line of the story go something like this.
She married and English man and moved to the UK and acquired UK citizenship. Then she moved to Canada and as a UK citizen she was fast tracked to become a Canadian citizen (one year wait). She was on the voters rolls in Canada and one must hold Canadian citizenship to get on the voter rolls. At the time dual citizenship was not allowed in Canada so she would have to have renouced all prior citizenships to become a Canadian.
-
The topic is not the value of a human female the topic is whether Cruz is eligible to hold the office of President of the USA. And he isn't.
If he isn't eligible then why didn't the FEC declare him that when he first announced he was running?
Why did Trump himself say he was eligible?
You birthers have your heads so firmly planted up your fourth point of contact you eat your own breakfast twice.
Oh and @jpsb by your own weird "logic" on this issue...if we were to believe what you say is true...then Trump shouldn't be sitting in office right now.
His mom was born in Scotland.
:whistle:
-
Once again since you birthers seem to have a hearing and reading comprehension problem...Article II of the U.S. Constitution says he's legit. Whatever Act of Congress you keep babbling about just reinforces what was clearly stated in the Constitution in the 18th Century.
and you're full of excrement.
Purposely ignoring what's IN the constitution because of your blind fealty to Trump isn't the wisest move for you.
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution
A naturalized citizen is a person who was born an alien, but has lawfully become a citizen of the United States under the U.S. Constitution and laws. A naturalized citizen has all the rights of a natural born citizen, except is not eligible as president or vice-president of the United States.
The naturalization act of 1934 makes Cruz a citizen, and naturalized citizen and not eligible to srerve a POTUS. Unlike you I am not willing to trash our constitution.
I may be full of it but you have something in common with a box of rocks.
-
His mom was born in Scotland.
:whistle:
His mom was a US citizen when he was born. But that does not matter. Trump was born in the USA and his father was a US citizen. Under original intent that is enough to make him a NBC. The courts say (and I disagree) that just being born in the USA make one an NBC.
And why is it that you can not have a civil debate, why must to personally insult me in just about every post?
-
His mom was a US citizen when he was born. But that does not matter. Trump was born in the USA and his father was a US citizen. Under original intent that is enough to make him a NBC. The courts say (and I disagree) that just being born in the USA make one an NBC.
And that's why for the most part the people in the black robes are smarter than you. Then know better.
Again by your "logic" and the twisted way you interpret Constitutional law Trump is ineligible base on the fact he has ONLY one parent born in the U.S.
And why is it that you can not have a civil debate, why must to personally insult me in just about every post?
Because I have little time or patience for fools or fanatics and you fall into both categories.
-
His mom was born in Scotland. :whistle:
Yes, Trump's mother was born in Scotland. However, she became a naturalized American citizen (full citizen, not natural born) on March 10, 1942. So, the President meets the NBC eligibility requirements because he was born on June 15, 1946 in the US to two American citizens.
A child born in the US of two naturalized citizens would be a NBC.
Cruz has two strikes against NBC status ... he is foreign born of one American parent.
@txradioguy
@jpsb
-
Because I have little time or patience for fools or fanatics and you fall into both categories.
Well at least I am not willing to trash our constitution unlike you Cruz cultists.
-
His mom was a US citizen when he was born. But that does not matter. Trump was born in the USA and his father was a US citizen. Under original intent that is enough to make him a NBC. The courts say (and I disagree) that just being born in the USA make one an NBC.
Some courts say birth in the US equals NBC. Many do not. If this is taken to the Supreme Court, I suspect the Founders' intent will be corrupted to allow anchor babies from all over the world a claim to the US Presidency.
@jpsb
-
Yes, Trump's mother was born in Scotland. However, she became a naturalized American citizen (full citizen, not natural born) on March 10, 1942. So, the President meets the NBC eligibility requirements because he was born on June 15, 1946 in the US to two American citizens.
A child born in the US of two naturalized citizens would be a NBC.
Cruz has two strikes against NBC status ... he is foreign born of one American parent.
@txradioguy
@jpsb
Under original intent and until 1934 the citizenship of the mother was irreverent.
When the constitution was written citizenship of both the mother (wive) and the child was derived from the father (husband). In the 1790s if an American women married a Frenchman she became French. If a German became a naturalized American then his wife became American too.
There are probably American women have children fathered by ISIS fighters, being raised in ISIS training camps. According to the Cruz cultists these children are NBC of the USA and eligible to be POTUS. The notion that all you need to be POTUS is one parent with a US passport makes a mockery of the NBC clause in our constitution.
-
Well at least I am not willing to trash our constitution unlike you Cruz cultists.
Cruz Cult???? I don't care who you are.... that's the funniest damn thing I've heard today.
What do y'all call your contingent? The Orange Crush?
-
When the constitution was written . . .
. . . it was given to Congress to determine citizenship.
And they defined citizenship such that Ted Cruz did not require being naturalized -- he's a natural-born citizen.
-
. . . it was given to Congress to determine citizenship.
And they defined citizenship such that Ted Cruz did not require being naturalized -- he's a natural-born citizen.
No, they did not define citizenship such that Ted Cruz is a natural born citizen. They defined categories of naturalized citizenship requirements.
Why so hell bent on corrupting a part of the Constitution that has served this nation so well for 230 years simply to accommodate the ambitions of a single politician?
Is Ted Cruz the only conservative politician in America?
-
Under original intent and until 1934 the citizenship of the mother was irreverent.
When the constitution was written citizenship of both the mother (wive) and the child was derived from the father (husband). In the 1790s if an American women married a Frenchman she became French. If a German became a naturalized American then his wife became American too.
There are probably American women have children fathered by ISIS fighters, being raised in ISIS training camps. According to the Cruz cultists these children are NBC of the USA and eligible to be POTUS. The notion that all you need to be POTUS is one parent with a US passport makes a mockery of the NBC clause in our constitution.
My, what a fertile imagination you have!
I'm one of those Cruz cultists that you denigrate. Accordingly, there's not likely to be much common ground between us.
During the 1980 election, I advocated for Reagan with my German neighbors, who were sure he was going to start WWIII, and I did it in their language.
Had I been there last year, I likely would have found a secluded table in that gasthaus, and replied, "Ich kann nicht Deutsch sprechen."
-
No, they did not define citizenship such that Ted Cruz is a natural born citizen. They defined categories of naturalized citizenship requirements.
Why so hell bent on corrupting a part of the Constitution that has served this nation so well for 230 years simply to accommodate the ambitions of a single politician?
Is Ted Cruz the only conservative politician in America?
IMHO, Trump is hell bent on corrupting our government by the influence given to his children and son in law...all liberals from New York.
-
It's an interesting question what the Supreme Court would do with the natural born citizen nonsense if it ever got a case.
-
No, they did not define citizenship such that Ted Cruz is a natural born citizen. They defined categories of naturalized citizenship requirements.
Why so hell bent on corrupting a part of the Constitution that has served this nation so well for 230 years simply to accommodate the ambitions of a single politician?
Is Ted Cruz the only conservative politician in America?
Please describe the description of a citizen at birth that was in effect when Ted Cruz was born.
Please note, he fits it. He did not require being naturalized. He was natural born.
-
What I find most hilarious, is that the anti-Cruz Trump Fanatics and Militants who are insisting and opining that Ted Cruz is not a NB US Citizen, are the very same people who have insisted and opined that Trump is a Conservative even some saying he is a better Conservative than Reagan.
So, needless to say, their opinions are worthless AFAIC.
-
. . . it was given to Congress to determine citizenship.
And they defined citizenship such that Ted Cruz did not require being naturalized -- he's a natural-born citizen.
Wrong I see you did not brother to read the preceding posts were I made it perfectly clear that Cruz is a naturalized citizen. Naturalized by a naturalization act passed by Congress in 1934. Without that naturalization act Cruz would not even be a citizen of the USA.
The constitution gives Congress control over the naturalization process, a natural born citizen (NBC) is not a naturalized citizen. No law makes a NBC a citizen. If a law make you a citizen you are a naturalizes citizen not an NBC. I don't know why so many are struggling with this concept, it is very simple.
And where is Cruz's Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA)? If Cruzs' parents wanted Cruz to be a US citizen they were required to file a CRBA. If they wanted Cruz to be Canadian citizen no action was necessary. Without a CRBA Cruz is technically an illegal alien.
I miss the old days where EVERYONE knew that you had to be born in the USA (or a territory belonging to the USA) to be a natural born citizen. I blame public schools for dumbing down Americans.
-
It's an interesting question what the Supreme Court would do with the natural born citizen nonsense if it ever got a case.
The courts will stay out of it. Nothing will prevent Cruz from running, but the Rats will bound the crap out of Cruz on the NBC issue. He will be painted as a hypocrite claiming to support our constitution and running for POTUS when he knows he is not eligible under our constitution.
However I'll hold my nose and vote for him should he ever be the GOP nominee. And when my Rat friend call him a hypocrite I'll just say "fine what else have you got?"
-
Please describe the description of a citizen at birth that was in effect when Ted Cruz was born.
Please note, he fits it. He did not require being naturalized. He was natural born.
Nah .... this conversation, as usual, is starting to circle and is going nowhere. Complete information is all out there, so please, do your own research.
I hope the Cruz supporters find another conservative candidate to run for POTUS. As a US citizen Cruz can take his place in the Senate and on the SC. But not being a NBC, his place stops at the White House edge. Need more proof than the Constitution and its application for 230 years? Just count the number of hoops needed to pull Cruz through to the brass ring.
I ask my friends in the conservative wing of political thought to think long and hard, sans emotion, before seeking to corrupt the US Constitution to accommodate one politician.
This is where the oft-quoted "principled" is put to the test---the ambitions of one man versus the inviolability of the Constitution of the United States. .
(I'm done with this thread.)
-
Wrong I see you did not brother to read the preceding posts were I made it perfectly clear that Cruz is a naturalized citizen. Naturalized by a naturalization act passed by Congress in 1934. Without that naturalization act Cruz would not even be a citizen of the USA.
The constitution gives Congress control over the naturalization process, a natural born citizen (NBC) is not a naturalized citizen. No law makes a NBC a citizen. If a law make you a citizen you are a naturalizes citizen not an NBC. I don't know why so many are struggling with this concept, it is very simple.
And where is Cruz's Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA)? If Cruzs' parents wanted Cruz to be a US citizen they were required to file a CRBA. If they wanted Cruz to be Canadian citizen no action was necessary. Without a CRBA Cruz is technically an illegal alien.
I miss the old days where EVERYONE knew that you had to be born in the USA (or a territory belonging to the USA) to be a natural born citizen. I blame public schools for dumbing down Americans.
You can blame public schools all you want, but equal dollops are due to parents that take no interest in educating their children outside of school. I'm not perfect, but my wife and I know we are our children's primary teachers.
-
Nah .... this conversation, as usual, is starting to circle and is going nowhere. Complete information is all out there, so please, do your own research.
I hope the Cruz supporters find another conservative candidate to run for POTUS. As a US citizen Cruz can take his place in the Senate and on the SC. But not being a NBC, his place stops at the White House edge. Need more proof than the Constitution and its application for 230 years? Just count the number of hoops needed to pull Cruz through to the brass ring.
I ask my friends in the conservative wing of political thought to think long and hard, sans emotion, before seeking to corrupt the US Constitution to accommodate one politician.
This is where the oft-quoted "principled" is put to the test---the ambitions one man versus the inviolability of the Constitution of the United States. .
(I'm done with this thread.)
Aww, don't run away mad, RIV.
-
Yes, Trump's mother was born in Scotland. However, she became a naturalized American citizen (full citizen, not natural born) on March 10, 1942. So, the President meets the NBC eligibility requirements because he was born on June 15, 1946 in the US to two American citizens.
A child born in the US of two naturalized citizens would be a NBC.
Cruz has two strikes against NBC status ... he is foreign born of one American parent.
@txradioguy
@jpsb
Did she give up her UK citizenship? If not, then she would not have been a US citizen as the US does not formally recognize dual citizenships.
(hoisted on your own petard)
-
Under original intent and until 1934 the citizenship of the mother was irreverent.
When the constitution was written citizenship of both the mother (wive) and the child was derived from the father (husband). In the 1790s if an American women married a Frenchman she became French. If a German became a naturalized American then his wife became American too.
There are probably American women have children fathered by ISIS fighters, being raised in ISIS training camps. According to the Cruz cultists these children are NBC of the USA and eligible to be POTUS. The notion that all you need to be POTUS is one parent with a US passport makes a mockery of the NBC clause in our constitution.
Just a little hint. It's not pre-1934 anymore.
-
Once again, criticizing Trump leads a Trump supporter to believe they are being personally criticized...
-
Please describe the description of a citizen at birth that was in effect when Ted Cruz was born.
Please note, he fits it. He did not require being naturalized. He was natural born.
How many times do I have to tell you that Cruz was naturalized by the 1934 Naturalization Act.
here is a link to relevant laws http://www.americanlaw.com/citabrd.html
Also the constitution says nothing about "citizen at birth" so I don't know why that phrase is even in this conversation.
-
If a law passed by Congress makes you a citizen of the USA you are by definition a naturalized citizen.
Uh, no.
Your fantasies aren't reality. Nor are they law.
-
You do realize you just described yourself self perfectly don't you?
No, she doesn't. That's one thing that makes it so interesting.
-
You can blame public schools all you want, but equal dollops are due to parents that take no interest in educating their children outside of school. I'm not perfect, but my wife and I know we are our children's primary teachers.
:thumbsup:
-
Were you drunk when you posted this @corbe? :pondering:
What a stupid and gratuitously insulting thing to say!
-
What a stupid and gratuitously insulting thing to say!
You pretty much nailed everything RiV posts.
-
No, she doesn't. That's one thing that makes it so interesting.
I bet she'd be flattered that you can't find anything to talk about except her @Sanguine
Maybe if you ask her nicely she'll throw out enough shiny objects to keep you busy all day long. 88devil
-
I ask my friends in the conservative wing of political thought to think long and hard, sans emotion, before seeking to corrupt the US Constitution to accommodate one politician.
That's a funny sentiment coming from the Populist Wing of political thought when admonishing others to think sans emotion before seeking to corrupt foundational principles to accommodate one politician.
I guess it all depends on whether the political messiah is the only one who can 'save us' and whom is called a 'Deliverer from Slavery' and 'The only one who can give you freedom'.
I guess with that kind of power, corrupting principles and constitutions is okay.
-
I bet she'd be flattered that you can't find anything to talk about except her @Sanguine
Maybe if you ask her nicely she'll throw out enough shiny objects to keep you busy all day long. 88devil
@Right_in_Virginia
I'm giving up too, these people are not rational. Now they can all HooRa, High Five and claim they sure showed those Trumpers a thing or two. LOL.
-
@Right_in_Virginia
I'm giving up too, these people are not rational. Now they can all HooRa, High Five and claim they sure showed those Trumpers a thing or two. LOL.
@jpsb I do declare you Trumpers are getting better about deciding which hill to die on and as a Briefer stated earlier 'Don't go away MAD.........'
-
I'm giving up too, these people are not rational. Now they can all HooRa, High Five and claim they sure showed those Trumpers a thing or two. LOL.
We realized some time ago that the EverTrump are True Believers and their definition of 'rational' revolves attacking anyone and any organization that ever gave Trump a bad look or opposed him on anything. Followed by exhaustive arguments supporting, excusing and Trumpsplaining their political savior's behavior, words and actions - no matter what they are or how juvenile and absurd.
-
@Right_in_Virginia
I'm giving up too, these people are not rational. Now they can all HooRa, High Five and claim they sure showed those Trumpers a thing or two. LOL.
000hehehehe
Except the NT's are so trapped in NeverNeverTrumpLand that they can't see NBC and the Constitution have nothing to do with Donald Trump.
But, I agree ... rationality is slim pickins in this discussion.
Enjoy your day @jpsb :beer:
-
Wrong I see you did not brother to read the preceding posts were I made it perfectly clear that Cruz is a naturalized citizen. Naturalized by a naturalization act passed by Congress in 1934. Without that naturalization act Cruz would not even be a citizen of the USA.
The constitution gives Congress control over the naturalization process, a natural born citizen (NBC) is not a naturalized citizen. No law makes a NBC a citizen. If a law make you a citizen you are a naturalizes citizen not an NBC. I don't know why so many are struggling with this concept, it is very simple.
And where is Cruz's Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA)? If Cruzs' parents wanted Cruz to be a US citizen they were required to file a CRBA. If they wanted Cruz to be Canadian citizen no action was necessary. Without a CRBA Cruz is technically an illegal alien.
I miss the old days where EVERYONE knew that you had to be born in the USA (or a territory belonging to the USA) to be a natural born citizen. I blame public schools for dumbing down Americans.
I swore to myself I would never post here again. But, I felt compelled to give my support for your line of reasoning on NBC, jpsb
In the early campaign I had only two reservations about Sen. Cruz. First was the NBC issue--sure to be used by the 'rats to taint his candidacy and result in a certain GOP defeat.
My second reservation was stylistic: ask Sen. Cruz for the time and he'd give you a soaring, 15 minute dissertation on time as it relates to the constitution!
But, this election was too important to get wrong. It was critical to win against Hillary. So, no matter how much I agreed with Sen. Cruz's conservative ideology his personality, I felt, could never win in the America of 2016 against the gimmidats.
Well, as it turned out, Trump was the right man for the job and NeverTrump's been wrong about him at every juncture -- right up to today, plainly clear here at NeverTrump Central.
Anyway, keep up the good work, jpsb -- you, too, RIV. You still rock the politics here!
-
Look at what the kitty dragged in. Would that you would keep your word.
-
Sessions better reconsider given that trump is already floating guiliani as his replacement
-
I, too, feel compelled to say that I didn't particularly miss you, having said that I do value your input here and your compatriots need some help as of late with the heavy lifting. Welcome back @aligncare
-
Offline MOD3
Member
Hero Member
****
Posts: 217
View Profile Email Personal Message (Offline)
I think you are confused
« Sent to: aligncare on: October 31, 2016, 09:31:35 AM » ReplyQuoteDelete
You got a three day posting timeout because you are under the delusion that you are in charge of the forum. We will restrict your speech if you can't stay on topic. You will not be allowed thread jack as you please to turn it into a Trump discussion.
You are also not going to tell the Mods what to do and not do as if you own the place. If you don't like that, you don't have to be here.
We'll start with 3 days. If it continues we can make it a week, month, year, or forever, however you want to roll. Get over your authoritarian delusions.
-
MOD 3. Hmm. Wonder who MOD 3 was...
-
Offline MOD3
Member
Hero Member
****
Posts: 217
View Profile Email Personal Message (Offline)
I think you are confused
« Sent to: aligncare on: October 31, 2016, 09:31:35 AM » ReplyQuoteDelete
You got a three day posting timeout because you are under the delusion that you are in charge of the forum. We will restrict your speech if you can't stay on topic. You will not be allowed thread jack as you please to turn it into a Trump discussion.
You are also not going to tell the Mods what to do and not do as if you own the place. If you don't like that, you don't have to be here.
We'll start with 3 days. If it continues we can make it a week, month, year, or forever, however you want to roll. Get over your authoritarian delusions.
No doubt it was very well deserved.
-
Well, as it turned out, Trump was the right man for the job and NeverTrump's been wrong about him at every juncture -- right up to today, plainly clear here at NeverTrump Central.
Yes, I believed he would never become presidential and give up his childish tweeting. But look at him now -- not a ill-advised tweet to be seen!
Yes, I believed he lacked deal-making skills, and only knew how to bully. But look at him now, able to adroitly work with Congress to get both healthcare and immigration bills passed, without any ill feelings!
Yes, I believed he would have unstable staff relations and internal conflict. But look at him now, with no turnover, confusion, or animosity -- just a well oiled team working together to make big things happen!
Yes, I believed he wouldn't become honest and keep his word. But look at him now, never lying or going back on what he'd previously said.
Etc.
I guess you're right, and I was wrong. (Except that I'm not a NeverTrumper...I am in his corner if/when he does something good and positive.)
-
Complete Bull, prior to the 1930s Cruz would not even be a citizen of the US. Cruz is a naturalized citizen not a natural born citizen. Anyone that thinks the son of a Cuban born in Canada is a NBC of the USA has zero respect for our Constitution.
During my school years,, we were taught a President needed to be born in the USA; only exception being born on foreign embassy grounds.
The Senate made a special consideration, because McCain was born in a civilian hospital while his parents served there (Panama) in the military.
There is not a legal precedent for a person with Cruz' birthplace scenario ever being elected President.
There was an extensive legal research effort for George Romney, who ran but dropped out in 1968.
The study determined he WAS not eligible since he was born in Mexico to US citizen parents. It is NOT settled nor is there a precedent for Cruz' situation.
-
You act say no all you want, Cruz is a naturalized citizen not a nature born citizen and here is the naturalization act that gives him his citizenship.
The Equal Nationality Act of 1934 was an American law which allowed foreign-born children of American mothers and alien fathers who had entered America before age 18 and lived in America for five years to apply for American citizenship for the first time.
OMG .... I feel like I'm back on TOS. Why are we arguing this? Let's wait and argue it (if you must) in 2020 (I hope) or at least 2024.
-
There was an extensive legal research effort for George Romney, who ran but dropped out in 1968.
The study determined he WAS not eligible since he was born in Mexico to US citizen parents. It is NOT settled nor is there a precedent for Cruz' situation.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/01/how-mitt-romneys-mexican-born-father-was-eligible-to-be-president/
-
Some courts say birth in the US equals NBC. Many do not. If this is taken to the Supreme Court, I suspect the Founders' intent will be corrupted to allow anchor babies from all over the world a claim to the US Presidency.
@jpsb
One thing can be certain: If Cruz were ever nominated, his democrat opponents would scream about his foreign birth, make a huge deal of it, and it will impact his eventual defeat.
Cruz has the lack of broad appeal, like Sen. Goldwater. Some call him the "most conservative" in the Senate.
-
What the heck happened. I'll have to go back 4 pages to find out. Someone mentioned Ted Cruz.
That's like Kryptonite to Trumpers. It unleashes emotions sometimes held in check at least for brief periods.
Unbelievable.
Another word is Bush .... any Bush but especially GWB. Unfortunately, they are able to garner some undeserved support regarding GBW ...
But the Bush word is nothing, nothing, nothing to the Cruz word. OMG.
-
OMG .... I feel like I'm back on TOS. Why are we arguing this? Let's wait and argue it (if you must) in 2020 (I hope) or at least 2024.
Because birthers buy tinfoil by the square yard.
-
It's an interesting question what the Supreme Court would do with the natural born citizen nonsense if it ever got a case.
It is an interesting case. There has NOT been a case like this for a President.
George Romney dropped out before his circumstances were considered. And the situation is conside3red in public opinion, and by opponents, long before it gets to court.
-
One thing can be certain: If Cruz were ever nominated, his democrat opponents would scream about his foreign birth, make a huge deal of it, and it will impact his eventual defeat.
Cruz has the lack of broad appeal, like Sen. Goldwater. Some call him the "most conservative" in the Senate.
Cruz does not lack broad appeal. He's actually quite personable and funny.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_mcie4Nasw
-
MOD 3. Hmm. Wonder who MOD 3 was...
So, instead of taking responsibility for your actions you just want to know who called you on them?
-
One thing can be certain: If Cruz were ever nominated, his democrat opponents would scream about his foreign birth, make a huge deal of it, and it will impact his eventual defeat.
When Cruz gets the nomination it will go about as far and die as quickly as it did when the Libs tried this smear on McCain.
If this was seriously a problem then Cruz would have never been allowed by Federal Elections Officials and those at the state level to appear on the ballot in the primaries.
It's an uncomfortable truth the birthers want to ignore.
That and the fact Trump himself said that Cruz was eligible.
-
The courts will stay out of it. Nothing will prevent Cruz from running, but the Rats will bound the crap out of Cruz on the NBC issue. He will be painted as a hypocrite claiming to support our constitution and running for POTUS when he knows he is not eligible under our constitution.
However I'll hold my nose and vote for him should he ever be the GOP nominee. And when my Rat friend call him a hypocrite I'll just say "fine what else have you got?"
I would gladly vote for him. Before the GOP nominates him, the NBC issue will be all over the media. The dems will devour him.
He would lose by Goldwater proportions. He has narrow very deep but narrow appeal.
Legal opinion was divided over George Romney, and his birth in Mexico. He dropped out before it became big news.
-
So, instead of taking responsibility for your actions you just want to know who called you on them?
Seems to be par for the course for some around here.
-
I would gladly vote for him. Before the GOP nominates him, the NBC issue will be all over the media. The dems will devour him.
He would lose by Goldwater proportions. He has narrow very deep but narrow appeal.
....
@truth_seeker, I'm committing right here and now to doing everything I can to give you that chance to vote for him!
-
The rumour I heard was @Frank Cannon was MOD 3, which explains why I'm often in the Dog House.
-
What a stupid and gratuitously insulting thing to say!
One last time @Sanguine @Oceander
Please relax. Here is the quote from @corbe (post 116) that I was responding to--- my reply was neither gratuitous nor stupid. Had you actually read CORBE's post, perhaps your jerking knees could have been controlled. *****rollingeyes*****
Quote from: corbe on July 23, 2017, 05:19:09 PM
You certainly proved, to me anyway, that you have big ovaries @Emjay, to argue with RiV, I have to be drunk to do that and the blowback is to high a price, I usually just leave her to her fantasies, they are usually non fatal. @Right_in_Virginia
Here's the exchange in full:
Quote from: corbe on July 23, 2017, 05:19:09 PM
You certainly proved, to me anyway, that you have big ovaries @Emjay, to argue with RiV, I have to be drunk to do that and the blowback is to high a price, I usually just leave her to her fantasies, they are usually non fatal. @Right_in_Virginia
Reply #123
Quote from: Right_in_Virginia on Today at 05:16:03 AM
Were you drunk when you posted this @corbe? :pondering:
-
When Cruz gets the nomination it will go about as far and die as quickly as it did when the Libs tried this smear on McCain.
If this was seriously a problem then Cruz would have never been allowed by Federal Elections Officials and those at the state level to appear on the ballot in the primaries.
It's an uncomfortable truth the birthers want to ignore.
That and the fact Trump himself said that Cruz was eligible.
If the FEC has any role, surely you will post those regulations. That should be simple for you.
But I seem to recall just a few years ago, during discussions of Obama's birth, there was little or no mention of the FED having any role.
So let's have the regs, and the Congressional laws authorizing them.
-
One last time @Sanguine @Oceander
Please relax. Here is the quote from @corbe (post 116) that I was responding to--- my reply was neither gratuitous nor stupid. Had you actually read CORBE's post, perhaps your jerking knees could have been controlled. *****rollingeyes*****
Here's the exchange in full:
Doesn't change my original comment one iota.
-
If the FEC has any role, surely you will post those regulations. That should be simple for you.
If there was any objection by the FEC it should be easy for you to find.
But I seem to recall just a few years ago, during discussions of Obama's birth, there was little or no mention of the FED having any role.
Don't know don't care...it's a stupid distraction from reality no matter who is pushing the conspiracy. It's just meant to distract from real issues and real problems by people who don't have the mental capacity to engage in the real political problems this country faces or they backed the wrong guy to fix them and this is their cover for that. Take your pick.
So let's have the regs, and the Congressional laws authorizing them.
Article II of the U.S. Constitution.
-
The rumour I heard was @Frank Cannon was MOD 3, which explains why I'm often in the Dog House.
Seriously? That would explain a thing or two.
-
One last time @Sanguine @Oceander
Please relax. Here is the quote from @corbe (post 116) that I was responding to--- my reply was neither gratuitous nor stupid. Had you actually read CORBE's post, perhaps your jerking knees could have been controlled. *****rollingeyes*****
Here's the exchange in full:
Gee, @Right_in_Virginia get over it, obviously it was a stupid thing to say on my part, obviously trolling you with what I thought was acceptable humor, as opposed to insults. If it was the Ovary thing, well I've studied Fetal Development and ovaries become balls or vice versa.
Maybe your mad cause I jacked one of your threads last night (not @RoosGirl) and turned it into a boobie thing, get over your self importance, I got over mine after puberty.
-
I swore to myself I would never post here again. But, I felt compelled to give my support for your line of reasoning on NBC, jpsb
In the early campaign I had only two reservations about Sen. Cruz. First was the NBC issue--sure to be used by the 'rats to taint his candidacy and result in a certain GOP defeat. My second reservation was stylistic: ask Sen. Cruz for the time and he'd give you a soaring, 15 minute dissertation on time as it relates to the constitution!
But, this election was too important to get wrong. It was critical to win against Hillary. So, no matter how much I agreed with Sen. Cruz's conservative ideology his personality, I felt, could never win in the America of 2016 against the gimmidats.
Well, as it turned out, Trump was the right man for the job and NeverTrump's been wrong about him at every juncture -- right up to today, plainly clear here at NeverTrump Central.
Anyway, keep up the good work, jpsb -- you, too, RIV. You still rock the politics here!
Thanks @aligncare Miss you! :bighug:
XOXO,
RIV
-
Gee, @Right_in_Virginia get over it, obviously it was a stupid thing to say on my part, obviously trolling you with what I thought was acceptable humor, as opposed to insults. If it was the Ovary thing, well I've studied Fetal Development and ovaries become balls or vice versa.
No worries, @corbe ... I am over it, it's others that appear stuck.
(I understood your humor ... and answered in kind :laugh: )
-
Doesn't change my original comment one iota.
Color me shocked.
-
OMG .... I feel like I'm back on TOS. Why are we arguing this? Let's wait and argue it (if you must) in 2020 (I hope) or at least 2024.
Amazing. I was going to post that this thread a strong TOS-ish feel to it.
The Cruz haters just couldn't let up after DJT won the nomination. Strange obsession if you ask me.
-
Gee, @Right_in_Virginia get over it, obviously it was a stupid thing to say on my part, obviously trolling you with what I thought was acceptable humor, as opposed to insults. If it was the Ovary thing, well I've studied Fetal Development and ovaries become balls or vice versa.
Maybe your mad cause I jacked one of your threads last night (not @RoosGirl) and turned it into a boobie thing, get over your self importance, I got over mine after puberty.
I think everyone has taken things a little ovary the top with trying to nudge those we disagree with. Tit for tat rarely sways any opinions, it just testes patience.
Now to make Trumpers' heads explode, I agree that Ted Cruz is not NBC. But, that is neither here nor there for the next 3 years at least.
-
The rumour I heard was @Frank Cannon was MOD 3, which explains why I'm often in the Dog House.
Not anymore. I was promoted to MOD 4 3/4 because of being able to keep you down and your soul crushed here at the site.
Cheers!
-
Not anymore. I was promoted to MOD 4 3/4 because of being able to keep you down and your soul crushed here at the site.
Cheers!
LOL
-
If there was any objection by the FEC it should be easy for you to find.
IOW you can't back up your contention that the FEC is involved in determination of eligibility.
Accordingly, I will revise downward my expectations, re. your legal knowledge.
-
http://www.constitution.org/abus/presidential_eligibility_george_romney_mcelwee_1967.html
Concerning Gov. George Romney
"Presidential eligibility of George Romney
by Pinckney G. McElwee of D.C. Bar
June 1967, The Congressional Record 6-14-1967"
snip
"I find no proper legal or historical basis on which to conclude that a person born outside of the United States could ever be eligible to occupy the Office of the President of the United States. In other words, in my opinion, Mr. George Romney of Michigan is ineligible to become President of the United States because he was born in Mexico and is, therefore, not a natural-born citizen as required by the United States Constitution.
...Pinckney G. McElwee "
-
McCain’s Canal Zone Birth Prompts Queries About Whether That Rules Him Out
By CARL HULSEFEB. 28, 2008
read the entire article, which reviews the history, and the fact there is ongoing controversy....
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us/politics/28mccain.html?mcubz=1
-
IOW you can't back up your contention that the FEC is involved in determination of eligibility.
It seems they don't touch anything but campaign finance...they leave the eligibility issue to each individual state...and none of them that I can find declared Cruz ineligible to run for President.
Accordingly, I will revise downward my expectations, re. your legal knowledge.
At the end of the day it is still a higher level of knowledge than yours...as is my knowledge of the Constitution....of which...especially in this instance...you have none.
And unlike you and the rest of the birthers...I at least have the humility to admit when I've made a mistake and correct said mistake.
You on the other hand....
-
To can play at this stupid game.
Donald Trump is NOT Natural Born
Donald John Trump, Senior, was born in Queens, New York on June 14, 1946. He presents himself as a person eligible to the Office of President of the United States, yet, he does not have the parentage necessary to be a "natural born citizen."
His father was American born Frederick Christ Trump, born October 11, 1905, in Woodhaven, New York. Frederick died at age 93, June 25, 1999, in New Hyde Park, New York. From his father, Donald received an American early home education.
Donald's mother was Scottish born immigrant Mary Anne MacLeod, born May 10, 1912, in Stornway, Scotland. She died August 7, 2000 in Hyde Park, New York.
http://natural-borncitizens.com/donaldtrumpnotnaturalborn.html
-
It seems they don't touch anything but campaign finance...they leave the eligibility issue to each individual state...and none of them that I can find declared Cruz ineligible to run for President.
At the end of the day it is still a higher level of knowledge than yours...as is my knowledge of the Constitution....of which...especially in this instance...you have none.
And unlike you and the rest of the birthers...I at least have the humility to admit when I've made a mistake and correct said mistake.
You on the other hand....
I am not nor was ever a "birther," and this case shows your depth stops with name-calling. You were wrong on the FEC as I noticed, and pointed out.
-
There is a strong argument based on the case of Wong Kim Ark v. U.S. that Cruz is not a "natural born citizen" because he was born outside of the U.S. and inside of another country (and his parents weren't part of the U.S. diplomatic mission to that country). That position is not a foregone conclusion based on that case because the case itself dealt with the application of the 14th Amendment to the child of Chinese subjects who at the time of his birth were domiciled in the U.S. in the course of discussion, however, the Court went over the history of citizenship and alienage by birth, noted that the clear common law rule had always been that an individual was a citizen of the country where he was born, even if his parents were not, and held that the 14th Amendment essentially restated the rule as it had always applied to whites and then made that rule's applicstion to everyone mandatory, regardless of race. In other words, the 14th essentially restated the ancient rule that citizenship in the place of birth arose automatically (i.e., "naturally"). The two basic exceptions being for children whose parents were part of a diplomatic mission or an occupying foreign army.
As I said, Cruz' case is the opposite of the facts dealt with in Wong Kim Ark, but the case did rest on what was considered normative common law at the time and therefore is strong persuasive authority for the argument that Cruz is not a "natural born citizen".
Too bad, because look at the white trash "natural born citizen" we have in office now; NBC doesn't provide any guarantee of value.
-
Two can play at this stupid game.
http://natural-borncitizens.com/donaldtrumpnotnaturalborn.html
You can add the fact that 4 of 5 DJT's children had mothers who didn't become citizens until they came to this country.
So thankfully NO POTUS DJT, Jr. Eric, Ivanka, or Baron
-
Not anymore. I was promoted to MOD 4 3/4 because of being able to keep you down and your soul crushed here at the site.
Cheers!
I thought it was 3.14159265... and you had to wait for the site owners to finish entering in the value before you could assume your duties.
-
You can add the fact that 4 of 5 DJT's children had mothers who didn't become citizens until they came to this country.
So thankfully NO POTUS DJT, Jr. Eric, Ivanka, or Baron
If they were born within the geographical confines of the U.S. they're eligible, no matter the citizenship of their mothers.
-
I find it amazing to read all this pretend insistence on fealty to the Constitution over what "natural born" entails.
I notice that the vitriol against Cruz fitting the requirements are being harped upon by the very same people who ridicule the adherence to foundational principles when it comes to Trump.
The other funny fact is that Cruz has not announced a candidacy for President - so this rehashed argument that already has been beaten to death since late 2015 and all of 2016 is pretty stupid.
If ObamaCare can be argued by Republicans to be perfectly "Constitutional", I laugh at the attempt to argue fealty to it in terms of keeping a staunch Conservative they hate off a ballot.
-
I swore to myself I would never post here again. But, I felt compelled to give my support for your line of reasoning on NBC, jpsb
snip
Well, as it turned out, Trump was the right man for the job and NeverTrump's been wrong about him at every juncture -- right up to today, plainly clear here at NeverTrump Central.
Anyway, keep up the good work, jpsb -- you, too, RIV. You still rock the politics here!
Nice to see you again @aligncare and yes this is the NT HQ.
-
Nice to see you again @aligncare and yes this is the NT HQ.
:bigsilly:
-
Nice to see you again @aligncare and yes this is the NT HQ.
It sure is. The CNN version of Fair and Balanced
-
It sure is. The CNN version of Fair and Balanced
Hardly.
-
Hardly.
It's become the mirror image of TOS.
-
It's become the mirror image of TOS.
No, it hasn't. It has succeeded in remaining open to all, despite the best efforts of the Trump-worshippers to turn it into a mini version of TOS.
Edited to remove personal attack. MOD3
-
No, it hasn't. It has succeeded in remaining open to all, despite the best efforts of RiV and the other Trump-worshippers to turn it into a mini version of TOS.
:silly: :silly: :silly:
-
It's become the mirror image of TOS.
@driftdiver I'm really surprised to see you say that. I don't see it that way at all. For one thing, one side or the other would have been banned by now. Judging by just the last few comments, there's no speech being shut down. Why do you think it's like TOS?
-
@driftdiver I'm really surprised to see you say that. I don't see it that way at all. For one thing, one side or the other would have been banned by now. Judging by just the last few comments, there's no speech being shut down. Why do you think it's like TOS?
Vicarious attack dogs to any dissenting views
Nearly every thread turns into a bash Trump thread.
Broad insults against anyone who doesn't toe the bash Trump line.
-
Vicarious attack dogs to any dissenting views
Nearly every thread turns into a bash Trump thread.
Broad insults against anyone who doesn't toe the bash Trump line.
:bigsilly:
-
:bigsilly:
There you go again. Moderation dude.
-
Vicarious attack dogs to any dissenting views
Nearly every thread turns into a bash Trump thread.
Broad insults against anyone who doesn't toe the bash Trump line.
But, you know I could argue exactly the opposite, right? Anything that isn't completely approving of Trump attracts the pro-Trump group who immediately start after the other members instead of discussing the topic.
Sorry, I neglected to ping you @driftdiver.
-
It's become the mirror image of TOS.
Wake us when the Mods and owner start banning you because you are not showing proper fealty to their chosen political savior, then we can talk about mirrors.
-
Wake us when the Mods and owner start banning you because you are not showing proper fealty to their chosen political savior, then we can talk about mirrors.
Exactly
-
Vicarious attack dogs to any dissenting views
Nearly every thread turns into a bash Trump thread.
Broad insults against anyone who doesn't toe the bash Trump line.
It's a shame you have to put up with such persecution.
-
There are quite a few Trump Safe Forums/Blogs out there, TOS, Trumpbart and others, why do they feel the desire to come in here and whine about how unfair we are.
@driftdriver
Apparently, because most NT'ers don't whine much about the flak they get, The Et'ers conclude it's Trump Hate Central.
Shame really, because some of them can bring great thoughts/opinions to Threads.
-
But, you know I could argue exactly the opposite, right? Anything that isn't completely approving of Trump attracts the pro-Trump group who immediately start after the other members instead of discussing the topic.
(http://images.memes.com/meme/829658)
-
There are quite a few Trump Safe Forums/Blogs out there, TOS, Trumpbart and others, why do they feel the desire to come in here and whine about how unfair we are.
@driftdriver
Apparently, because most NT'ers don't whine much about the flak they get, The Et'ers conclude it's Trump Hate Central.
Shame really, because some of them can bring great thoughts/opinions to Threads.
Bears repeating. Snowflakes over in the Trump camp cried and received a safe space during the election season. Therefore they could avoid mean people who rightfully questioned Trump's psychological fitness to be POTUS. All good I guess, in that way they could live in their realm of denial.
-
Someone probably already said it;
The timeline on Sessions really doesn't make sense, he was appointed AG subject to confirmation and then, the farcical Russian scandal broke. Sessions would not have known of this previously.
-
There is a strong argument based on the case of Wong Kim Ark v. U.S. that Cruz is not a "natural born citizen" because he was born outside of the U.S. and inside of another country (and his parents weren't part of the U.S. diplomatic mission to that country). That position is not a foregone conclusion based on that case because the case itself dealt with the application of the 14th Amendment to the child of Chinese subjects who at the time of his birth were domiciled in the U.S. in the course of discussion, however, the Court went over the history of citizenship and alienage by birth, noted that the clear common law rule had always been that an individual was a citizen of the country where he was born, even if his parents were not, and held that the 14th Amendment essentially restated the rule as it had always applied to whites and then made that rule's applicstion to everyone mandatory, regardless of race. In other words, the 14th essentially restated the ancient rule that citizenship in the place of birth arose automatically (i.e., "naturally"). The two basic exceptions being for children whose parents were part of a diplomatic mission or an occupying foreign army.
As I said, Cruz' case is the opposite of the facts dealt with in Wong Kim Ark, but the case did rest on what was considered normative common law at the time and therefore is strong persuasive authority for the argument that Cruz is not a "natural born citizen".
Too bad, because look at the white trash "natural born citizen" we have in office now; NBC doesn't provide any guarantee of value.
http://www.newsday.com/long-island/politics/spin-cycle/ny-judge-rejects-challenge-to-ted-cruz-s-citizenship-status-1.11547629 (http://www.newsday.com/long-island/politics/spin-cycle/ny-judge-rejects-challenge-to-ted-cruz-s-citizenship-status-1.11547629)
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/03/01/judge-dismisses-ted-cruz-illinois-citizenship-lawsuit/81153054/# (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/03/01/judge-dismisses-ted-cruz-illinois-citizenship-lawsuit/81153054/#)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/01/07/why-ted-cruz-is-a-natural-born-citizen/?utm_term=.ec703d700d8f (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/01/07/why-ted-cruz-is-a-natural-born-citizen/?utm_term=.ec703d700d8f)
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/04/cruz_can_appear_onted_cruz_can_appear_on_nj_primary_ballot_judge_rules_nj_primary_ballot_judge_rules.html (http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/04/cruz_can_appear_onted_cruz_can_appear_on_nj_primary_ballot_judge_rules_nj_primary_ballot_judge_rules.html)
http://www.phillymag.com/news/2016/03/11/ted-cruz-pennsylvania-primary/ (http://www.phillymag.com/news/2016/03/11/ted-cruz-pennsylvania-primary/)
NBC has been challenged and upheld for Cruz, in multiple State courts.
-
Smartest thing Sessions has done since jumping on the Trump Train, EARLY, Recusing himself, especially if their is just a 'kernel' of truth in this report.
Trump slams 'illegal' leak alleging Sessions discussed campaign with Russian envoy
By Alicia Cohn - 07/22/17 06:55 AM EDT
President Trump on Saturday morning blasted a Washington Post article based on U.S. intelligence reports claiming Attorney General Jeff Sessions discussed Trump campaign issues with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S.
Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak recounted two such conversations with Sessions to his superiors in Moscow. Kislyak’s version of events was intercepted by U.S. spy agencies that monitor Russian communications, according to the Post.
The report does additional damage to allegations that Trump campaign officials colluded with Russian officials at a time when the Kremlin was seeking to influence the 2016 presidential election.
Trump pushed back on the source rather than the veracity of the Post’s report. (my emphasis)
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/343262-trump-slams-illegal-leak-alleging-sessions-discussed-campaign-with (http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/343262-trump-slams-illegal-leak-alleging-sessions-discussed-campaign-with)
Seems to me he was meeting with Russians as a Campaign Surrogate.
-
Bears repeating. Snowflakes over in the Trump camp cried and received a safe space during the election season. Therefore they could avoid mean people who rightfully questioned Trump's psychological fitness to be POTUS. All good I guess, in that way they could live in their realm of denial.
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRYQlLwM22-6twHW7dYuibuZi8aoKIO41LFOtE7twNKOuVh_Fmv)
-
Nice to see you again @aligncare and yes this is the NT HQ.
Just because that side has the better arguments doesn't mean lesser positions are unwelcome! :laugh:
-
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRYQlLwM22-6twHW7dYuibuZi8aoKIO41LFOtE7twNKOuVh_Fmv)
Cool. I'm glad to finally be able to put a face with your handle.
-
Beautiful curls, BTW.
-
Cool. I'm glad to finally be able to put a face with your handle.
Good one @RoosGirl .... here is yours .... (https://rlv.zcache.com/straight_jacket_postcard-rcad161b8e1be4ad1b6f3aec702d139ee_vgbaq_8byvr_324.jpg)
-
Beautiful curls, BTW.
Nice jacket.
-
I don't have blue eyes though.
-
I don't have blue eyes though.
Neither does your portrait.
-
Neither does your portrait.
My phone shows them as blue. But WTH I'm crazy so maybe they're pink with green polka dots.
-
My phone shows them as blue. But WTH I'm crazy so maybe their pink with green polka dots.
LOL. No, it's black and white.
-
LOL. No, it's black and white.
Independent opinion, very definitely dark blue on my computer, too. "flesh" colored exposed skin, too.
-
Independent opinion, very definitely dark blue on my computer, too.
Time to call in my IT geek! :laugh:
-
Bears repeating. Snowflakes over in the Trump camp cried and received a safe space during the election season. Therefore they could avoid mean people who rightfully questioned Trump's psychological fitness to be POTUS. All good I guess, in that way they could live in their realm of denial.
Been through that before. It was the owners' idea.
-
Independent opinion, very definitely dark blue on my computer, too. "flesh" colored exposed skin, too.
I do see the skin color ... just not the blue.
Edit: Actually when I enlarge the picture, the blue comes through.
Thanks @Smokin Joe
-
Been through that before. It was the owners' idea.
ONE of the owners, not both as I recall.
-
I do see the skin color ... just not the blue.
Edit: Actually when I enlarge the picture, the blue comes through.
Thanks @Smokin Joe
You're welcome, @Right_in_Virginia
-
I can't recall seeing you respond to anyone (with a differing opinion of course) in a civil manner. Are you capable?
I would like to point out that upthread I stated that IMO Ted Cruz was not a NBC and not one person attacked me for it. No one called me an idiot, or made any veiled snarky remark about my intelligence.
Look harder. You will see I am among the most civil when it comes to responses.
I am so civil, I self-censored myself, and deleted that very remark in question a short time later.
You saw it while it was up, but I deleted it before I saw your comment.
If you are leading a movement to be civil here, I support it. And that is the truth.
-
ONE of the owners, not both as I recall.
One owner or two, the point was that it was NOT Trump's supporters asking to be "protected" here.
-
Look harder. You will see I am among the most civil when it comes to responses.
I am so civil, I self-censored myself, and deleted that very remark in question a short time later.
You saw it while it was up, but I deleted it before I saw your comment.
If you are leading a movement to be civil here, I support it. And that is the truth.
Oh hell, I have a hard time being civil at times also. We all make stupid comments out of frustration occassionally. And sometimes we do it just cause we're jerks every now and then. I deleted my comment to you with your quote attached. I look forward to more interesting and less frustrating conversation.
-
One owner or two, the point was that it was NOT Trump's supporters asking to be "protected" here.
Are you certain? It was my understanding that it was a request from Trump supporters. Maybe that wasn't correct.
-
One owner or two, the point was that it was NOT Trump's supporters asking to be "protected" here.
It wasn't the one owner alone asking to be 'protected' from any comments that they did not like about Trump. Trump's fanbase on this board were more than happy to demand "protection" from any 'negative' posts appearing in their "Pro-Trump Only" Safe Space. Replies were removed and the members restricted if comments were deemed to be anti-Trump. I recall the comments made among one another about how 'refreshing' your Pro-Trump Safe Spaces were, free from all the 'noise' and nastiness of NeverTrump.
Yet, at the same time, while the EverTrump bunch could run and hide behind the ramparts of their safe space, they would pop into the open range threads, especially during the Debates - and engage in hit and run insults and scurry back to their safe room to talk about the rest of us haters and delusionals among pals.
They had their cake and they ate it too.
-
Been through that before. It was the owners' idea.
Jim R. totally sold out. He was actually a Cruz supporter very early on. But he was weak and there was a cadre of Trumpers who got together and held a private fund drive to get him to give the Trump appearance threads protection and only allow positive comments on those threads which would go on for hundreds of posts.
Then it just spread to the general population. But the worst thing he did was allow vile, vicious abuse of anyone who said anything negative about Trump or anything positive about the Goldman Sachs Canadian. I was the recipient of stuff I didn't believe a decent human being would say.
Then he started monitoring my posts and right after that I found myself homeless and out on the street. I'm reinstated now but I never go over there. I think he reinstated some people who were previous donors to try to get some more money. Of course, he'll never get another penny from me.
-
It's a shame you have to put up with such persecution.
@RoosGirl
You should be ashamed
-
There are quite a few Trump Safe Forums/Blogs out there, TOS, Trumpbart and others, why do they feel the desire to come in here and whine about how unfair we are.
@driftdriver
Apparently, because most NT'ers don't whine much about the flak they get, The Et'ers conclude it's Trump Hate Central.
Shame really, because some of them can bring great thoughts/opinions to Threads.
@corbe
Yep the same old stuff. If you don't like it leave. I remember that.
You NTs would turn the second coming of Jesus into a bash Trump thread. I don't like him either. Surprisingly he's shown more class since becoming President then many of you
-
What the heck happened. I'll have to go back 4 pages to find out. Someone mentioned Ted Cruz.
That's like Kryptonite to Trumpers. It unleashes emotions sometimes held in check at least for brief periods.
Unbelievable.
Another word is Bush .... any Bush but especially GWB. Unfortunately, they are able to garner some undeserved support regarding GBW ...
But the Bush word is nothing, nothing, nothing to the Cruz word. OMG.
It all started when the claim was made that Cruz supporters rejected the constitution.
-
Sessions should resign... let Rump find another sucker.
-
Sessions should resign... let Rump find another sucker.
Exactly.
The problem is Sessions at least had a shred of decency, honor, and ethics. Everything DJT has not.
-
Sessions should resign... let Rump find another sucker.
@Weird Tolkienish Figure
It's going to be hard to find a replacement. Who would be willing to take the position, knowing Trump will throw them under the bus whenever his ego demands it?
Ted Cruz has already been asked if he's in the running. He shot that down right away. He's of stupid enough to step into Sessions' shoes.
-
@Weird Tolkienish Figure
It's going to be hard to find a replacement. Who would be willing to take the position, knowing Trump will throw them under the bus whenever his ego demands it?
Ted Cruz has already been asked if he's in the running. He shot that down right away. He's of stupid enough to step into Sessions' shoes.
They'll probably have to cycle in and out a bunch of no-name hacks.
They'll find somebody. Just like they found a couple suckers to do Trump's press relations.
-
@Weird Tolkienish Figure
It's going to be hard to find a replacement. Who would be willing to take the position, knowing Trump will throw them under the bus whenever his ego demands it?
Ted Cruz has already been asked if he's in the running. He shot that down right away. He's of stupid enough to step into Sessions' shoes.
@CatherineofAragon he doesn't want someone that will actually do anything other than what he tells them and agrees with everything he says and does and who doles out legal advice 140 characters at a time.
Someone with the same type of job qualifications as his new Communications Director.
I'm betting he knows someone in the Goldman Sachs legal department who fits the bill.
-
(http://images.memes.com/meme/829658)
Awwww. You're so cute when you're defensive!
-
Someone probably already said it;
The timeline on Sessions really doesn't make sense, he was appointed AG subject to confirmation and then, the farcical Russian scandal broke. Sessions would not have known of this previously.
Exactly. How could he know to not recuse himself if he didn't know that there would a (fabricated IMHO) scandal to protect Pres. Trump from? @TomSea
-
They'll probably have to cycle in and out a bunch of no-name hacks.
They'll find somebody. Just like they found a couple suckers to do Trump's press relations.
Hey!!!!! I hear the Donald is looking for a new AG!!!!!
(http://media.aintitcool.com/media/uploads/2013/herc/saul.jpg)
-
Are you certain? It was my understanding that it was a request from Trump supporters. Maybe that wasn't correct.
Yes, that's how I understood it. @Right_in_Virginia, can you clear this up for us?
-
Now Trump is bashing Sessions for not investigating Hillary.
Remind me who it was publicly that declared Hillary had suffered enough and he wasn't going to investigate her?
-
Now Trump is bashing Sessions for not investigating Hillary.
Remind me who it was publicly that declared Hillary had suffered enough and he wasn't going to investigate her?
Yeah.
Trump is once again looking like he has early onset alzheimers.
-
Yeah.
Trump is once again looking like he has early onset alzheimers.
Seems to me the last person you'd want to throw under the bus right now is the very person who actually knows how shaky your legal footing is on a myriad of issues.
Info that could suddenly come to light after he resigns.
-
Now Trump is bashing Sessions for not investigating Hillary.
Remind me who it was publicly that declared Hillary had suffered enough and he wasn't going to investigate her?
And there are those who still try to portray dislike of this man as a negative thing (at best) or deeply shameful (at worst).
What's to like about him? He's a garbage human being. Anything good which comes out of his administration is accomplished in spite of him. It just means his ego or his stupidity didn't happen to get in the way.
@txradioguy
-
They'll probably have to cycle in and out a bunch of no-name hacks.
They'll find somebody. Just like they found a couple suckers to do Trump's press relations.
@Weird Tolkienish Figure
Sounds about right.
-
And there are those who still try to portray dislike of this man as a negative thing (at best) or deeply shameful (at worst).
What's to like about him? He's a garbage human being. Anything good which comes out of his administration is accomplished in spite of him. It just means his ego or his stupidity didn't happen to get in the way.
@txradioguy
Everything is somebody else's fault.
-
Now Trump is bashing Sessions for not investigating Hillary.
Remind me who it was publicly that declared Hillary had suffered enough and he wasn't going to investigate her?
The deep state is undertaking a slow moving coup d'état against President Trump. It is unprecedented for the losing party not to accept the election result and attempt to throw out the duly elected president. All of us, even the NTers should be outraged at this attempt to negate our election and overthrow our president.
Sessions, by recusing himself without consulting the WH, made the stupidest political mistake since HW broke his "read my lips" promise not to raise taxes. An all out war is being waged on President Trump and Attorney General of the United States has been taken out of the game and has yet to fire a single shot in defense of the president.
Session should immediately start an investigation into Hillary, Clinton foundation and those close to Hillary, he should immediately investigate Lynch for obstruction, Comey for leaking classified info, etc. Sessions better get his head out of his ass and join the battle.
-
And there are those who still try to portray dislike of this man as a negative thing (at best) or deeply shameful (at worst).
What's to like about him? He's a garbage human being. Anything good which comes out of his administration is accomplished in spite of him. It just means his ego or his stupidity didn't happen to get in the way.
@txradioguy
All yes the fair, balanced and principled Christian view of President Trump /s
You will no doubt get lots of high fives for your hateful comment here at NT HQ
-
Everything is somebody else's fault.
@Cripplecreek
He knows his supporters won't blame him for anything, so he milks it. At TOS, they want Sessions fired because he's a tool of the global elite who won't go after Hillary, lol. Trump's decision that she'd suffered enough might as well not have happened.
-
All yes the fair, balanced and principled Christian view of President Trump /s
You will no doubt get lots of high fives for your hateful comment here at NT HQ
@jpsb
I'm not looking for high fives. I'm stating my opinion based on Trump's lack of character and integrity. He's a garbage human being, and you can bold it again if you want.
-
The deep state is undertaking a slow moving coup d'état against President Trump. It is unprecedented for the losing party not to accept the election result and attempt to throw out the duly elected president. All of us, even the NTers should be outraged at this attempt to negate our election and overthrow our president.
People who claim evertything bad that happens to trump...or that the reason he can't get stuff done are tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy freaks in total denial of reality and get their "news" from InfoWars.
That and they should never bash anyone ever again for lacking deductive reasoning.
Sessions, by recusing himself without consulting the WH, made the stupidest political mistake since HW broke his "read my lips" promise not to raise taxes. An all out war is being waged on President Trump and Attorney General of the United States has been taken out of the game and has yet to fire a single shot in defense of the president.
Session should immediately start an investigation into Hillary, Clinton foundation and those close to Hillary, he should immediately investigate Lynch for obstruction, Comey for leaking classified info, etc. Sessions better get his head out of his ass and join the battle.
Here let me refresh your memory on something:
But the president-elect struck a very different tone Tuesday, arguing that Mrs. Clinton had suffered enough and the country needed to heal.
“I don’t want to hurt the Clintons, I really don’t,” Mr. Trump said in an interview with the New York Times. “She went through a lot and suffered greatly in many different ways.” He also said the Clinton Foundation has done “good work.”
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/22/donald-trump-wont-pursue-hillary-clinton-investiga/
Please tell me how it's AG Sessions fault that there is no investigation into Hillary Clinton when your boss is saying things like that?
You and some others here would be trashing Sessions and using the very same quote I just posted had he gone ahead and started an investigation without Trump's blessing.
You and a bunch of others got played and fell hook line and sinker for something Trump said that he never intended to follow through on.
And now in typical fashion for those in the Trump Cult of Personality...you're finding reasons to excuse him from his own actions and words.
-
People who claim evertything bad that happens to trump...or that the reason he can't get stuff done are tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy freaks in total denial of reality and get their "news" from InfoWars.
The Orange hoard here just can't come to grips to the fact that 98% of DJT's problems are self inflicted. Meglomaniacs like Trump love taking the credit for success, but always have a steady ready scapegoat if they don't.
To help facilitate this disaster, Trump surrounds himself with brown nosing loyalists who don't have the balls to give him the truth.
This formula is destined to fail.
-
@Cripplecreek
Trump's decision that she'd suffered enough might as well not have happened.
Trump made that comment before Hillary and the other DC/NYC swamp creatures declared war on Trump and started trying to oust him. When circumstances change it is OK to change your mind.
-
Trump made that comment before Hillary and the other DC/NYC swamp creatures declared war on Trump and started trying to oust him. When circumstances change it is OK to change your mind.
And you're ignoring months and months of campaign rhetoric about "Crooked Hillary" and how he was going to toss her in jail and speculating about why she wasn't under investigation.
Not surprising you overlook this though.
-
Ben Shapiro makes some good points at Daily Wire.
If you aren't a sycophant who praises him constantly like Pence, Trump will treat you like trash.
He doesn't have the guts to fire Sessions, so he's trying to force him out and will replace him with some lackey who will be willing to fire Mueller and take the hit for it.
-
And you're ignoring months and months of campaign rhetoric about "Crooked Hillary" and how he was going to toss her in jail and speculating about why she wasn't under investigation.
Not surprising you overlook this though.
Add rings of the wall and how high....... Poor folks were duped badly.
-
People who claim evertything bad that happens to trump...or that the reason he can't get stuff done are tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy freaks in total denial of reality and get their "news" from InfoWars.
And now in typical fashion for those in the Trump Cult of Personality...you're finding reasons to excuse him from his own actions and words.
But of course the NeverTrumpers are fine with a deep state engineered regime change here in the USA. There are fine with turning our Constitution Republic into a 3rd world Banana Republic. Blind hatred of Trump trumps everything else even if it means the end of the republic as we know it.
As for Trumps comments on Hillary see my response to CatherineofAragon above.
-
http://www.dailywire.com/news/18953/trump-tweets-abuse-attorney-general-sessions-ben-shapiro (http://www.dailywire.com/news/18953/trump-tweets-abuse-attorney-general-sessions-ben-shapiro)
-
There are fine with turning our Constitution Republic into a 3rd world Banana Republic.
Funny. Seems Trump himself is already doing a bang up job of that. .
-
@jpsb
I'm not looking for high fives. I'm stating my opinion based on Trump's lack of character and integrity. He's a garbage human being, and you can bold it again if you want.
Not necessary, you have make your hatred of all things Trump well known here.
-
But of course the NeverTrumpers are fine with a deep state engineered regime change here in the USA. There are fine with turning our Constitution Republic into a 3rd world Banana Republic.
Deep state my @ss. That's fantasy world crap for people that are in denial of the real world. That crap might fly at InfoWars and certain delusional Tree Houses...but you're being laughed at by the grown ups on the forum.
Blind hatred of Trump trumps everything else even if it means the end of the republic as we know it.
Yeah that's why I've complimented and said nice things about certain issues and moves he's made as President...it's all the result of my "blind hatred"
*****rollingeyes*****
As for Trumps comments on Hillary see my response to CatherineofAragon above.
Saw them. You're just spinning like a top. People with blind fealty to a person tend to do that.
-
Funny. Seems Trump himself is already doing a bang up job of that. .
And he's got people cheering his efforts.
-
The Orange hoard here just can't come to grips to the fact that 98% of DJT's problems are self inflicted. Meglomaniacs like Trump love taking the credit for success, but always have a steady ready scapegoat if they don't.
To help facilitate this disaster, Trump surrounds himself with brown nosing loyalists who don't have the balls to give him the truth.
This formula is destined to fail.
Michael Jackson is a perfect example of someone who surrounded himself with "yes men"
-
Not necessary, you have make your hatred of all things Trump well known here.
Baloney...
I have said several nice things about some of Trump's moves for the first 6 months. The problem is the man himself. He can or will not stop resorting to juvenile behavior. The best thing this POS could do right now is govern in seclusion, shut up. and let his people do their jobs.
Otherwise his self destruction is imminent.
-
Trump made that comment before Hillary and the other DC/NYC swamp creatures declared war on Trump and started trying to oust him. When circumstances change it is OK to change your mind.
So, it's OK to let her get away with criminal, anti-American acts as long as she's not attacking him? How does that work?
-
But of course the NeverTrumpers are fine with a deep state engineered regime change here in the USA. There are fine with turning our Constitution Republic into a 3rd world Banana Republic. Blind hatred of Trump trumps everything else even if it means the end of the republic as we know it.
As for Trumps comments on Hillary see my response to CatherineofAragon above.
You're saying Trump is part of the deep state? Because all we're discussing here is Trump's own actions.
-
The deep state is undertaking a slow moving coup d'état against President Trump. It is unprecedented for the losing party not to accept the election result and attempt to throw out the duly elected president. All of us, even the NTers should be outraged at this attempt to negate our election and overthrow our president.
Sessions, by recusing himself without consulting the WH, made the stupidest political mistake since HW broke his "read my lips" promise not to raise taxes. An all out war is being waged on President Trump and Attorney General of the United States has been taken out of the game and has yet to fire a single shot in defense of the president.
Session should immediately start an investigation into Hillary, Clinton foundation and those close to Hillary, he should immediately investigate Lynch for obstruction, Comey for leaking classified info, etc. Sessions better get his head out of his ass and join the battle.
Where is the coup d'etat? That is a very strong accusation and you had better have evidence.
-
Not necessary, you have make your hatred of all things Trump well known here.
@jpsb
Re-read my post about that. You aren't going to be allowed to portray dislike of that shameful, shameLESS, no-integrity egomaniacal coward as a negative thing.
In fact, if you're still defending this indefensible man, you are the one who should be examining your motivations.
-
Deep state my @ss. That's fantasy world crap for people that are in denial of the real world. That crap might fly at InfoWars and certain delusional Tree Houses...but you're being laughed at by the grown ups on the forum.
I don't go to InfoWars and rarely watch a vid by the guy that runs that place. Now the Conservative Tree House does excellent analysis, really top notch. As for the NTers laughing at me here, that might just be true, but most of them, like you, have been made irrational by their hatred of Trump. And if you think the deep state (uniparty) does not exist you have not been paying attention.
-
But of course the NeverTrumpers are fine with a deep state engineered regime change here in the USA. There are fine with turning our Constitution Republic into a 3rd world Banana Republic. Blind hatred of Trump trumps everything else even if it means the end of the republic as we know it.
As for Trumps comments on Hillary see my response to CatherineofAragon above.
:bigsilly:
Trying to convince people to use the Constitutionally provided tools to remove a sitting president - impeachment - is not a coup d'etat, no matter who is doing the attempted persuading.
-
Ben Shapiro makes some good points at Daily Wire.
If you aren't a sycophant who praises him constantly like Pence, Trump will treat you like trash.
He doesn't have the guts to fire Sessions, so he's trying to force him out and will replace him with some lackey who will be willing to fire Mueller and take the hit for it.
Its why the alt right scumbags have been pimping the BS about Cruz being Trump's pick to be AG. They hate Ted Cruz and frankly want him dead but think the rest of us are stupid enough to help them force Sessions out and then they can go back to hating Cruz.
-
Deep state? Alt-right? Good grief.
What this thread needs is some more namecalling.
And cowbell.
-
:bigsilly:
Trying to convince people to use the Constitutionally provided tools to remove a sitting president - impeachment - is not a coup d'etat, no matter who is doing the attempted persuading.
@Oceander isn't that the same kind of thing the Libs said when Billy Jeff was impeached? That Republicans were attempting a Coup?
-
Its why the alt right scumbags have been pimping the BS about Cruz being Trump's pick to be AG. They hate Ted Cruz and frankly want him dead but think the rest of us are stupid enough to help them force Sessions out and then they can go back to hating Cruz.
Considering the smears that Trump spread about him and his family last year, I'd think Cruz would be the last person his orangeness would want in that spot.
Lyin' Ted could inflict some serious damage to Humpty.
-
@Oceander isn't that the same kind of thing the Libs said when Billy Jeff was impeached? That Republicans were attempting a Coup?
Don't recall, but it wouldn't surprise me. It wasn't a coup then, and it wouldn't be a coup now.
-
@jpsb
Re-read my post about that. You aren't going to be allowed to portray dislike of that shameful, shameLESS, no-integrity egomaniacal coward as a negative thing.
In fact, if you're still defending this indefensible man, you are the one who should be examining your motivations.
I support Trump because I support his agenda to MAGA.
Enforce immigration laws.
Build a wall where applicable on our southern border.
Tax reform
Regulation reform, removing BS regulations that cost the US jobs.
Renegotiating bad trade deals.
Conservative appointments to the courts.
Bringing jobs back to the USA
Rebuilding our military
Waging a real war on ISIS and ISIS like groups
Better relations with Russia.
etc
-
I support Trump because I support his agenda to MAGA.
Enforce immigration laws.
Build a wall where applicable on our southern border.
Tax reform
Regulation reform, removing BS regulations that cost the US jobs.
Renegotiating bad trade deals.
Conservative appointments to the courts.
Bringing jobs back to the USA
Rebuilding our military
Waging a real war on ISIS and ISIS like groups
Better relations with Russia.
etc
:bigsilly:
And so far all you've received in return for your support is a bill of goods.
-
:bigsilly:
Trying to convince people to use the Constitutionally provided tools to remove a sitting president - impeachment - is not a coup d'etat, no matter who is doing the attempted persuading.
Please name one illegal thing candidate Trump or President Trump has done, and please provide evidence to back up your claim.
-
Funny. Seems Trump himself is already doing a bang up job of that. .
@catfish1957
How so? What action has he taken that is moving us towards 3rd world status?
- Reducing govt regulations?
- Pushing for an increase in military spending?
- Weakening the EPA?
- Proposing we get rid of Federal interference in education?
- Appointing a damn fine Supreme Court Justice?
- Stopping our involvement in the Syrian civil war?
- Pulling out of the Paris boondoggle?
Trumps's got many character flaws and I wish Cruz were President, but its too late for that. Is it his use of twitter to thumb his nose at the media that has you all up in arms?
Cmon what is he doing that is pushing us towards 3rd world status?
-
Baloney...
I have said several nice things about some of Trump's moves for the first 6 months. The problem is the man himself. He can or will not stop resorting to juvenile behavior. The best thing this POS could do right now is govern in seclusion, shut up. and let his people do their jobs.
Otherwise his self destruction is imminent.
@catfish1957
The day after the election I said I would give Trunp a chance to see what he would do. Since then, I've given him credit for the regrettably few decent things he's done.
But that's not good enough for some Trump supporters. They ignore it and they call you a hater anyway. So to hell with it. I'm not going to go out of my way to praise that jerk just to be fair. Like I said, if he accomplishes anything it's because he didn't happen to step on his (self-bleep) at the moment. Or because his next eruption of Twitter malice was still in the queue.
-
Don't recall, but it wouldn't surprise me. It wasn't a coup then, and it wouldn't be a coup now.
Exactly.
"Deep State" is the Alt Right version of "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy".
-
@Oceander isn't that the same kind of thing the Libs said when Billy Jeff was impeached? That Republicans were attempting a Coup?
Huge overreach by the House GOP to impeach Bill over sex. I did not support that.
-
Please name one illegal thing candidate Trump or President Trump has done, and please provide evidence to back up your claim.
The only claim I made is that using the Constitutionally provided tools to remove a president is not a coup d'etat. That seems pretty obvious: if the Constitution - legal authority - permits it, then it cannot be a usurpation of legal authority. Prove otherwise.
-
Huge overreach by the House GOP to impeach Bill over sex. I did not support that.
So the on youd agree with the Democrats that it was an attempted coup d'etat.
-
Please name one illegal thing candidate Trump or President Trump has done, and please provide evidence to back up your claim.
I don't remember anyone here saying he has done anything illegal. Our gripe is he is an unhinged meglomaniac who can't focus outside of being at war with anyone who says anything bad about him.
He is allowing his agenda to be off track due to self inflicted distractions,
-
Huge overreach by the House GOP to impeach Bill over sex. I did not support that.
So that little lying under oath and obstruction thingy just didn't matter huh?
-
So that little lying under oath and obstruction thingy just didn't matter huh?
It didn't rise to the level of an impeachable offense.
-
:bigsilly:
And so far all you've received in return for your support is a bill of goods.
Immigration laws ARE being enforced,
Federal regs Are being reformed (16 old regs removed for every new reg)
Conservatives ARE being appointed to the courts
ISIS and ISIS likes groups ARE being wiped out.
Everything Trump can do on his own authority IS being done as promised.
Oh and refugees coming to the USA HAS been slowed down.
-
Now the Conservative Tree House does excellent analysis, really top notch.
@jpsb, you just convinced me that you're trolling for the fun of it. And I mean that.
Good trolling requires that you maintain some subtlety. That sentence went a little bit too far.
-
Immigration laws ARE being enforced,
Federal regs Are being reformed (16 old regs removed for every new reg)
Conservatives ARE being appointed to the courts
ISIS and ISIS likes groups ARE being wiped out.
Everything Trump can do on his own authority IS being done as promised.
Oh and refugees coming to the USA HAS been slowed down.
The only thing that unambiguously stands to his credit as an accomplishment of his own is Justice Gorsuch. That's a pretty thin reed to rest on. It makes him, at most, just barely marginally competent as a president.
-
It didn't rise to the level of an impeachable offense.
Under those strict guidelines Nixon shouldn't have been railed out too?
-
:bigsilly:
Trying to convince people to use the Constitutionally provided tools to remove a sitting president - impeachment - is not a coup d'etat, no matter who is doing the attempted persuading.
@Oceander
Are you really that blind? Or is it willful?
The Constitutionally provided tools were intended to remove a President who had done what? Cmon you're a lawyer you know this.....committed "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.".
Of which there is no evidence that a sane person would stand behind. So unless you are Howard Dean the Constitutionally provided tool of impeachment is not applicable. Its not intended as a tool to remove a President that you don't agree with, or that used bad words in a locker room 20 years ago.
So the fabrications and lies being used are an effort to depose a sitting President based on political differences. They wish to subvert the wishes of American voters in order to retain their personal political power and agenda. They aren't using much open violence yet but what they are doing is attempting to overthrow a duly elected President.
And the NTs cheer
@jpsb
-
The only claim I made is that using the Constitutionally provided tools to remove a president is not a coup d'etat. That seems pretty obvious: if the Constitution - legal authority - permits it, then it cannot be a usurpation of legal authority. Prove otherwise.
President Trump has not done anything illegal. Appointing a Special Console to conduct a witch hunt, to use the power of the state in collusion with the state media to drive a president out of office. Is not a proper constitutional use of power. Again name the crime? Provide evidence.
-
Huge overreach by the House GOP to impeach Bill over sex. I did not support that.
It wasn't over sex. He was impeached for committing perjury in a trial where he was accused of sexual harassment by a subordinate when he was Attorney General of Arkansas.
-
Tucker Carlson to Trump: ‘For God’s Sake, Lay Off Jeff Sessions’
http://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-to-trump-for-gods-sake-lay-off-jeff-sessions?source=twitter&via=desktop
:silly:
-
@Oceander
Are you really that blind? Or is it willful?
The Constitutionally provided tools were intended to remove a President who had done what? Cmon you're a lawyer you know this.....committed "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.".
Of which there is no evidence that a sane person would stand behind. So unless you are Howard Dean the Constitutionally provided tool of impeachment is not applicable. Its not intended as a tool to remove a President that you don't agree with, or that used bad words in a locker room 20 years ago.
So the fabrications and lies being used are an effort to depose a sitting President based on political differences. They wish to subvert the wishes of American voters in order to retain their personal political power and agenda. They aren't using much open violence yet but what they are doing is attempting to overthrow a duly elected President.
And the NTs cheer
@jpsb
I made no claim that it would be successful or should be successful. I simply said that attempting to persuade the public to use the tools was not a coup d'etat.
"Coup d'etat" does not mean simply that they oppose your beloved Orange God.
-
The only thing that unambiguously stands to his credit as an accomplishment of his own is Justice Gorsuch. That's a pretty thin reed to rest on. It makes him, at most, just barely marginally competent as a president.
@Oceander
So everything that doesn't happen is his fault. But nothing that does happen is his work? Is that what you're saying?
A conservative Supreme Court Justice instead of a leftist is HUGE. Everyone knows its HUGE. So why do you think its a thin reed?
-
I made no claim that it would be successful or should be successful. I simply said that attempting to persuade the public to use the tools was not a coup d'etat.
"Coup d'etat" does not mean simply that they oppose your beloved Orange God.
@Oceander
"Coup d'etat" a sudden and decisive action in politics, especially one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force. (dictionary.com)
****slapping ****slapping ****slapping
Impeachment is pretty darn forceful. Do judges let you get away with this kinda stuff?
-
@catfish1957
How so? What action has he taken that is moving us towards 3rd world status?
- Reducing govt regulations?
- Pushing for an increase in military spending?
- Weakening the EPA?
- Proposing we get rid of Federal interference in education?
- Appointing a damn fine Supreme Court Justice?
- Stopping our involvement in the Syrian civil war?
- Pulling out of the Paris boondoggle?
Trumps's got many character flaws and I wish Cruz were President, but its too late for that. Is it his use of twitter to thumb his nose at the media that has you all up in arms?
Cmon what is he doing that is pushing us towards 3rd world status?
How about right off the bat, quality of leadership. I for one am used to seeing the "mentally ill leaders" as problems of other countries. As far as anything else, he's got 3 1/2 more years to pull it off.
-
@Oceander
So everything that doesn't happen is his fault. But nothing that does happen is his work? Is that what you're saying?
A conservative Supreme Court Justice instead of a leftist is HUGE. Everyone knows its HUGE. So why do you think its a thin reed?
I grant Gorsuch. But in the meantime he is doing so much damage to everything else that it may be irrelevant. He has already done significant damage to the president's unilateral authority over border control with that stupid EO that gave liberals the opening to give standing to individual organizations to sue to overturn presidential immigration controls.
Win a battle, but lose the war is not a viable strategy.
-
So the on youd agree with the Democrats that it was an attempted coup d'etat.
Well no, since there was an actually crime, lying under oath, but the lie was about sex and I agree with you the "crime" did not rise to the level of an impeachable offense.
-
@Oceander
"Coup d'etat" a sudden and decisive action in politics, especially one resulting in a change of government illegally or by force. (dictionary.com)
****slapping ****slapping ****slapping
Impeachment is pretty darn forceful. Do judges let you get away with this kinda stuff?
Ahhh, so using the Constitution is now illegal eh? Is the Constitution unconstitutional now? Or only when needed to protect the Orange God?
-
I made no claim that it would be successful or should be successful. I simply said that attempting to persuade the public to use the tools was not a coup d'etat.
"Coup d'etat" does not mean simply that they oppose your beloved Orange God.
@Oceander
BTW I have one God and his son Jesus Christ is my savior.
Everyone else is imperfect and fallen. Perhaps you worship other men, I do not.
-
Under those strict guidelines Nixon shouldn't have been railed out too?
I agree Nixon was unfairly run out of office too.
-
Ahhh, so using the Constitution is now illegal eh? Is the Constitution unconstitutional now? Or only when needed to protect the Orange God?
:silly: :silly: :silly:
You lose a lot of cases don't you.
-
Well no, since there was an actually crime, lying under oath, but the lie was about sex and I agree with you the "crime" did not rise to the level of an impeachable offense.
Then you do agree that the Republicans attempted a coup d'etat against Clinton because they tried to use the Constitutional power of impeachment to impeach him for something you feel was not impeachable.
I knew you were a closet liberal.
-
@Oceander
BTW I have one God and his son Jesus Christ is my savior.
Everyone else is imperfect and fallen. Perhaps you worship other men, I do not.
One would not know it from your worship of Trump.
-
:silly: :silly: :silly:
You lose a lot of cases don't you.
Not a one. Because I understand that the Constitution is not unconstitutional, unlike you.
-
How about right off the bat, quality of leadership. I for one am used to seeing the "mentally ill leaders" as problems of other countries. As far as anything else, he's got 3 1/2 more years to pull it off.
Quality of leadership?? Compared to what? Obama?
Name one person that could do better when facing the leftists and the GOP establishment.
-
Not a one. Because I understand that the Constitution is not unconstitutional, unlike you.
So sad, and you passed the bar?
-
Huge overreach by the House GOP to impeach Bill over sex. I did not support that.
They didn't impeach him over sex. Again another lie you seem to have bought hook line and sinker.
They impeached him for perjury and obstruction of justice. He lied to a Federal Judge in Arkansas.
He was originally brought up on four charges. Only two passed the House vote.
-
One would not know it from your worship of Trump.
Please show one post where I "worship Trump".
You can't and it burns you doesn't it.
8888crybaby 8888crybaby 8888crybaby
-
Quality of leadership?? Compared to what? Obama?
Name one person that could do better when facing the leftists and the GOP establishment.
Reagan pulled if off. Faced down the liberal dims and the moderate branch of the GOP.
Of course the only similarity between Reagan and Trump is that they were president.
-
The posts are getting ugly.....please stop and move on..
-
I agree Nixon was unfairly run out of office too.
So being investigated for ordering the break in of the DNC headquarters and then abusing your office and your power to try and cover it up is being treated "unfairly"?
-
Awwww. You're so cute when you're defensive!
Ewww...@Sanguine You're so nasty when you try to be cute!
-
Then you do agree that the Republicans attempted a coup d'etat against Clinton because they tried to use the Constitutional power of impeachment to impeach him for something you feel was not impeachable.
I knew you were a closet liberal.
It is sad to see a deliberate attempt to twist my words to the exact opposite of what I said.
One more time re was the impeachment of Bill a Coup d'etat
Well no, since there was an actual crime committed by Bill Clinton
Saying I agree with you (re coup d'etat) when quite plainly stated I did not causes me to doubt your honestest and integrity in these debates.
-
ONE of the owners, not both as I recall.
One suggested it @INVAR the other agreed to it.
-
Well no, since there was an actual crime committed by Bill Clinton
Got it. You don't believe that lying to a Federal Judge and obstruction of justice is a crime.
-
So being investigated for ordering the break in of the DNC headquarters and then abusing your office and your power to try and cover it up is being treated "unfairly"?
I lived though Watergate in HS, and the political junkie I am, I can honestly say that I do not think Nixon ordered that break in. His crime was his loyalty to his people, and yes that led to a coverup.
In Trump's case, he'd throw his mother under the bus, if it made him look good.
-
So being investigated for ordering the break in of the DNC headquarters and then abusing your office and your power to try and cover it up is being treated "unfairly"?
Nixon did not order the breakin and knew nothing about it.
-
I lived though Watergate in HS, and the political junkie I am, I can honestly say that I do not think Nixon ordered that break in. His crime was his loyalty to his people, and yes that led to a coverup.
Firing Archibald Cox and the Saturday Night Massacre didn't help his standing in what was going on either.
In Trump's case, he'd throw his mother under the bus, if it made him look good.
And in that way he and Obama are exactly alike.
-
Nixon did not order the breakin and knew nothing about it.
Sure he didn't. **nononono*
That's why he ignored the subpoena from the special investigator for taped conversations inside his office and the Stennis Compromise.
-
Considering the smears that Trump spread about him and his family last year, I'd think Cruz would be the last person his orangeness would want in that spot.
Lyin' Ted could inflict some serious damage to Humpty.
@catfish1957 Let's take a moment and relive the magic ...
(http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/AP_ted_cruz_2_jt_150810.jpg)
-
Ewww...@Sanguine You're so nasty when you try to be cute!
(https://s17-us2.ixquick.com/cgi-bin/serveimage?url=http:%2F%2Falliantz.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F10%2FInigo-Montoya-WORD-MEANS.jpg&sp=632370ec4a7e464e35ad608217f58737)
-
Reagan pulled if off. Faced down the liberal dims and the moderate branch of the GOP.
Of course the only similarity between Reagan and Trump is that they were president.
@catfish1957
Reagan was a lot more experienced in Govt in addition to being a better communicator. H also had better staff who knew the system and were on his side. While the Republicans didn't like Reagan I don't remember them being quite this nasty with him.
Trump knows how to get unions to build a building but he doesn't know how the govt operates which makes it easier to trip him up.
-
@catfish1957 Let's take a moment and relive the magic ...
@Right_in_Virginia
Is deflection your only means of defense? You never address the issue at hand.
-
Nixon did not order the breakin and knew nothing about it.
Yes, but when he did find out about it, he tried to cover it up.
-
@catfish1957 Let's take a moment and relive the magic ...
(http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/AP_ted_cruz_2_jt_150810.jpg)
Is there a point that you were trying to make here?
-
Is there a point that you were trying to make here?
Yes I don't get it either.
-
Is there a point that you were trying to make here?
Clearly, she doesn't like Conservatives.
-
Yes I don't get it either.
I think he is trying to exploit that meeting at the convention Cruz had with some angry delegates.
And yes, it had nothing to do with the point I was making. RIV is a king deflector
-
One suggested it @INVAR the other agreed to it.
Alice suggested it. She's said so in posts, several times.
Revisionism is ugly - don't do it.
-
RIV is a king deflector
She should be happy now considering that for the first time in over a decade, the Virginia GOP will be working to get the Republican gubernatorial candidate elected.
-
Alice suggested it. She's said so in posts, several times.
Revisionism is ugly - don't do it.
Ah, OK, that makes sense now. Thanks,
-
Well if folks want to relive the magic lets do that shall we.
(http://i.imgur.com/0RNbZnL.jpg)
Proof that Orange Glorious is the same lying, manipulative, degenerate fecal smear he's always been.
-
@RoosGirl
You should be ashamed
Oh really? Of making personal attacks? Calling people names?
-
Nixon did not order the breakin and knew nothing about it.
Nixon knew about the tapes and did nothing about it. Not to mention the idiocy of breaking into the campaign headquarters of the weakest political candidate ever when there was zero need to do so.
And then there's Howard Hunt. He extorts $1 million from Nixon's campaign to keep his mouth shut, then sings like drunk canary. The entire fiasco was brought on by a culture of paranoia emanating directly from Nixon.
-
@Right_in_Virginia
Is deflection your only means of defense? You never address the issue at hand.
But I did @catfish1957 ... you just don't like the answer. 888blackhat
-
Ah, OK, that makes sense now. Thanks,
Yes, @alicewonders suggested it, Tracy liked the idea, @mystery-ak approved it.
Now ... is it possible for y'all to move into the 21st century.... or will this be debated and used as a mudslinging insult until the end of time?
@EC
@Sanguine
-
Is there a point that you were trying to make here?
Of course there is @Sanguine And knowing you as I do, I'm sure you got it.
So, please play the NT game of "gotcha" with someone else.
:kisses2:
-
Of course there is @Sanguine And knowing you as I do, I'm sure you got it.
So, please play the NT game of "gotcha" with someone else.
:kisses2:
@Right_in_Virginia, you've worn that shtick out. Need to get a new act.
-
@Right_in_Virginia, you've worn that shtick out. Need to get a new act.
It still has YOUR attention @Sanguine .... so I'll keep it just the same.
-
It still has YOUR attention @Sanguine .... so I'll keep it just the same.
pas·sive-ag·gres·sive
adjective
adjective: passive-aggressive
of or denoting a type of behavior or personality characterized by indirect resistance to the demands of others and an avoidance of direct confrontation, as in procrastinating, pouting, or misplacing important materials.
-
Not sure when this Thread jumped the Shark, but this is when The Fred Flinstone Cartoon Series did.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7DD-ACix8bc/TwS_AKUb8RI/AAAAAAAAF8U/mocWIS5hBW4/s1600/TW1084-The-Great-Gazoo.jpg)
-
If these attacks don't stop I will lock this thread
-
Huge overreach by the House GOP to impeach Bill over sex. I did not support that.
The charges were Obstruction of Justice and Perjury.
If they had busted someone in Washington for diddlin' an intern, half of D.C. would be looking for new jobs.
(Same thing they were going after Nixon on, ironically).
-
The deep state is undertaking a slow moving coup d'état against President Trump.
With Trump's help. Trump has proven himself wholly incompetent and petulant and he daily hands his 'enemies' what they need to crucify him, even if it's just public opinion.
That said, I am not entirely dismissive of the possibility that the "deep state" wants him gone. I still contend he was supposed to be a Stalking Horse for Hillary - take out all the viable competition and lose the General to Her Thighness. The fact he could actually win stroked his ego enough to refuse to go down in the 10th like he was supposed to (recall he met with Bill Clinton the day before he announced) and the fact he actually 'won' is what totally bewildered the Democrats and the GOP Leadership who expected the 'fix' was in and done.
Trump made that comment before Hillary and the other DC/NYC swamp creatures declared war on Trump and started trying to oust him. When circumstances change it is OK to change your mind.
My supposition is that when you refuse to go down in the tenth as the Mob paid you for, they will come for you in retribution. The fact he made the comment at all shows his total insincerity to the promises he made you dupes.
But of course the NeverTrumpers are fine with a deep state engineered regime change here in the USA. There are fine with turning our Constitution Republic into a 3rd world Banana Republic.
Some of your Trump Fellows at TOS and social media were vocally supportive of Trump acting as a dictator. I guess as long as it's YOUR guy acting like a despot over a 3rd world banana republic - it's okay right?
-
Not sure when this Thread jumped the Shark, but this is when The Fred Flinstone Cartoon Series did.
Gotta admit though, Wilma Flintstone had junk in her trunk.
(https://www.decalsextremeonline.com/assets/images/theflintstones%28wilma%29.jpg)
-
I developed my Brunette Fetish early in life.
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c0/84/c0/c084c0cf13fa8fac27350c5f91f22bd4.jpg)
-
Trump supporters blame everything on the Deep State. Very convenient.
-
The charges were Obstruction of Justice and Perjury.
If they had busted someone in Washington for diddlin' an intern, half of D.C. would be looking for new jobs.
(Same thing they were going after Nixon on, ironically).
They went after Nixon for other things as well, including weaponizing the IRS.
-
Trump supporters blame everything on the Deep State. Very convenient.
"Deep state" is an interchangeable term that can be used against anyone the Alex Jones nutjobs declare to be the enemy of the moment.
There is an entrenched problem but they have to have the courage to name them and the courage to acknowledge that Trump has handpicked some of them for his own administration.
-
I developed my Brunette Fetish early in life.
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c0/84/c0/c084c0cf13fa8fac27350c5f91f22bd4.jpg)
@corbe
Good man.
-
Is there a point that you were trying to make here?
@Sanguine
I believe (though I could be wrong) @Right_in_Virginia was making an indirect reference to crowd size.
Personally I'm not looking for magic in a candidate. Just uphold the Constitution and otherwise stay out of my life.
-
Not sure when this Thread jumped the Shark, but this is when The Fred Flinstone Cartoon Series did.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-7DD-ACix8bc/TwS_AKUb8RI/AAAAAAAAF8U/mocWIS5hBW4/s1600/TW1084-The-Great-Gazoo.jpg)
This thread hasn't jumped the shark until 3 people get time outs. We are only at 2 so far.
MOD 4 3/4
-
Personally I'm not looking for magic in a candidate.
I am. Vote Doug Henning '20!
(https://superradnow.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/doug_henning.jpg)
-
I am. Vote Doug Henning '20!
(https://superradnow.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/doug_henning.jpg)
@Frank Cannon
Is he still alive or did he just float away on fairy wings?
-
@Frank Cannon
Is he still alive or did he just float away on fairy wings?
Died in 2000. He was in Canadian and British politics. (Natural law party)
-
Bears repeating. Snowflakes over in the Trump camp cried and received a safe space during the election season. Therefore they could avoid mean people who rightfully questioned Trump's psychological fitness to be POTUS. All good I guess, in that way they could live in their realm of denial.
Sigh...
"Snowflakes over in the Trump camp cried and received a safe space during the election season."
Not true, no matter how many times it is said here. I know that to be true because I am the first person to bring up having a Trump Caucus Group here, "I" was the person that asked Mystery if we could have one - everyone who was a Mod at the time knows that is true. It wasn't one of the owners, it was little old me.
Not so much to have a "safe space" - more like to have a "club" of Trump supporters. We were excited about our candidate and wanted a place where we could enjoy the camaraderie of meeting with like-minded people. The reason I asked for it to be a place where Trump Negativity wasn't allowed, was because there was so much Trump negativity flowing through the site that we wanted a positive place to enjoy.
Mystery was reluctant, the other owner Tracy - was not involved much in the site - so I don't remember her even being there when it was discussed. She was a Trump supporter, so she was supportive of the idea. I told Mystery that it wouldn't be a bother or more work for her - once she set it up - that I would mod it so that it would be a Trump positive area.
To be fair to everyone - Mystery set up a category so that anyone that wanted to - could set up a Caucus for their candidate of choice. The same rules that our Caucus had. I remember a Ted Cruz Caucus and one for one of the other candidates......but neither of them took off or lasted for long. Our Caucus fared better - although at first - I was busy deleting Sinkspur's and a few others constant attempts to post negative posts and images there, knowing it was against our little Caucus club rules. Kind of like the school bully that throws rocks and otherwise tries to sabotage some kid's club meeting in their treehouse or something......don't know why people are like that, but some are. "Juvenile" in my book.
I mean, no one was restricted anywhere at TBR to say whatever they wanted about Donald Trump and post all of the negative images they wanted. Our Caucus wasn't even splashed all over the front page - if I recall - you kind of had to look for it, in some category up-page. We were not in anyone's face. You didn't have to go there if you didn't like it.
But it bothered a lot of people, the name-calling began ...."snowflakes", etc. All we were doing was minding our own business and lovin' some Trump, just wanted to have our club meeting in peace. As far as us going on the main site and criticizing other candidates and their supporters.......sure we did - that is what everyone did. If you wanted a place where your candidate was nurtured and protected - Mystery set one up for you - where we weren't allowed to go and trash your clubhouse either. Yes, there were incidents of encroachment on both sides and they were quickly taken care of by the Caucus' Mods. Such is human nature.
Somewhere along the way, Mystery thought I needed some help - and I did. One person couldn't watch the place all of the time, so she asked RiV to be a Mod too. I was very happy for the help and I want to express my appreciation to RiV again for being such a great member of our team. I stayed with the Caucus until Trump's victory and I savored that victory, as any of us would. I am still a Trump supporter, I believe he loves this country and he won the election in the only way that I think was possible - considering the cheating and media manipulation that was going on. Trump ran a Reality Show campaign to win in a country that has become a big Reality Show. You've got to speak to the electorate in the language they understand. Constitutional treatises are fine for a somewhat small segment of the voters - but the majority's eyes will glaze over. It just is what it is. Like it or not, Trump connected with people and he was duly elected. Thank God.
I don't know why the Trump Caucus bothers some people here - so much that is it still being brought up. I don't know why the birth status of Ted Cruz is being revived here again....... :shrug: Aren't there more important matters going on in the world to discuss for pages and pages on end?
I don't post much here or anywhere else anymore. So many articles I see discussed are what I catalog as "fake" news. Un-named sources and "close" friends are not verifiable sources, so until I see some other verification on these articles - I'm not going to waste what's left of my precious life debating them. Some people just like to "debate" endlessly, I'm not one of them. I used to love the feeling of camaraderie that I felt here before the 2016 election - not blaming this site specifically - Trump is a polarizing figure, he has changed the political landscape - maybe forever.
But, I'm 61 years old and many times I find myself thanking God that I got to grow up when I did.....the Golden Age of Childhood, the rise of America as the world's superpower and a force for good, the Internet, the Fall of the Berlin Wall - and so many amazing things. I truly feel sorry for those Millennials and Snowflakes that don't even know what they don't know. But, I see so much darkness now.....I won't be around to see what it will be like in 30 years to see where this is going and Biblically speaking, I'm not even sure if God fearing people will be around.
And @corbe mentioned that we Trumpers have other pro-Trump sites to frequent - but we come here to sow discord. (Clearing throat) We were here before Trump was even a blip on the radar. For many of us - TBR was our home page on the Internet. We are members. We know that we are not liked, and frankly - there are those here I do not like. We still have the right to post here until the owner sees fit to say otherwise, just the same as with everyone else.
I too, would like to see more civility here and everywhere else, problem seems to be that we inhabit an uncivil society where these types of exchanges are the norm anymore. Makes this old woman sad to see. I love my country and I am willing to work with anyone that can save her from the certain death she is facing today. Trump makes me wince often, I don't understand why he says some things - but it usually ends up OK. He is wily, but he is not stupid - he is still new to the political swamp - so he is making his way through it in his way. I'm a pragmatic type in my old age, so I'm willing to give him a chance. Most of the other players in this theatre are swamp inhabitants - so hiring Trump for the job is a Hail Mary pass for America. I'm a conservative, and I'm grabbing that big branch with all of my might - to keep from falling down the rest of cliff to certain death.
-
@Frank Cannon
Is he still alive or did he just float away on fairy wings?
Reincarnated...
(http://i.imgur.com/iZcUNxH.gif)
-
If you request a special place within an existing forum where only good things are said about a specific person or subject and any one who is in disagreement has their comments deleted ...then you are indeed a snowflake living in a safe space.
-
Sigh...
"Snowflakes over in the Trump camp cried and received a safe space during the election season."
Not true, no matter how many times it is said here.
Okay. Then you say...
I was busy deleting Sinkspur's and a few others constant attempts to post negative posts and images there, knowing it was against our little Caucus club rules.
So it was a little safe space for snowflakes. I guess the part that wasn't true was the crying.
-
Sigh...
"Snowflakes over in the Trump camp cried and received a safe space during the election season."
Not true, no matter how many times it is said here. I know that to be true because I am the first person to bring up having a Trump Caucus Group here, "I" was the person that asked Mystery if we could have one - everyone who was a Mod at the time knows that is true. It wasn't one of the owners, it was little old me.
Not so much to have a "safe space" - more like to have a "club" of Trump supporters. We were excited about our candidate and wanted a place where we could enjoy the camaraderie of meeting with like-minded people. The reason I asked for it to be a place where Trump Negativity wasn't allowed, was because there was so much Trump negativity flowing through the site that we wanted a positive place to enjoy.
Mystery was reluctant, the other owner Tracy - was not involved much in the site - so I don't remember her even being there when it was discussed. She was a Trump supporter, so she was supportive of the idea. I told Mystery that it wouldn't be a bother or more work for her - once she set it up - that I would mod it so that it would be a Trump positive area.
To be fair to everyone - Mystery set up a category so that anyone that wanted to - could set up a Caucus for their candidate of choice. The same rules that our Caucus had. I remember a Ted Cruz Caucus and one for one of the other candidates......but neither of them took off or lasted for long. Our Caucus fared better - although at first - I was busy deleting Sinkspur's and a few others constant attempts to post negative posts and images there, knowing it was against our little Caucus club rules. Kind of like the school bully that throws rocks and otherwise tries to sabotage some kid's club meeting in their treehouse or something......don't know why people are like that, but some are. "Juvenile" in my book.
I mean, no one was restricted anywhere at TBR to say whatever they wanted about Donald Trump and post all of the negative images they wanted. Our Caucus wasn't even splashed all over the front page - if I recall - you kind of had to look for it, in some category up-page. We were not in anyone's face. You didn't have to go there if you didn't like it.
But it bothered a lot of people, the name-calling began ...."snowflakes", etc. All we were doing was minding our own business and lovin' some Trump, just wanted to have our club meeting in peace. As far as us going on the main site and criticizing other candidates and their supporters.......sure we did - that is what everyone did. If you wanted a place where your candidate was nurtured and protected - Mystery set one up for you - where we weren't allowed to go and trash your clubhouse either. Yes, there were incidents of encroachment on both sides and they were quickly taken care of by the Caucus' Mods. Such is human nature.
Somewhere along the way, Mystery thought I needed some help - and I did. One person couldn't watch the place all of the time, so she asked RiV to be a Mod too. I was very happy for the help and I want to express my appreciation to RiV again for being such a great member of our team. I stayed with the Caucus until Trump's victory and I savored that victory, as any of us would. I am still a Trump supporter, I believe he loves this country and he won the election in the only way that I think was possible - considering the cheating and media manipulation that was going on. Trump ran a Reality Show campaign to win in a country that has become a big Reality Show. You've got to speak to the electorate in the language they understand. Constitutional treatises are fine for a somewhat small segment of the voters - but the majority's eyes will glaze over. It just is what it is. Like it or not, Trump connected with people and he was duly elected. Thank God.
I don't know why the Trump Caucus bothers some people here - so much that is it still being brought up. I don't know why the birth status of Ted Cruz is being revived here again....... :shrug: Aren't there more important matters going on in the world to discuss for pages and pages on end?
I don't post much here or anywhere else anymore. So many articles I see discussed are what I catalog as "fake" news. Un-named sources and "close" friends are not verifiable sources, so until I see some other verification on these articles - I'm not going to waste what's left of my precious life debating them. Some people just like to "debate" endlessly, I'm not one of them. I used to love the feeling of camaraderie that I felt here before the 2016 election - not blaming this site specifically - Trump is a polarizing figure, he has changed the political landscape - maybe forever.
But, I'm 61 years old and many times I find myself thanking God that I got to grow up when I did.....the Golden Age of Childhood, the rise of America as the world's superpower and a force for good, the Internet, the Fall of the Berlin Wall - and so many amazing things. I truly feel sorry for those Millennials and Snowflakes that don't even know what they don't know. But, I see so much darkness now.....I won't be around to see what it will be like in 30 years to see where this is going and Biblically speaking, I'm not even sure if God fearing people will be around.
And @corbe mentioned that we Trumpers have other pro-Trump sites to frequent - but we come here to sow discord. (Clearing throat) We were here before Trump was even a blip on the radar. For many of us - TBR was our home page on the Internet. We are members. We know that we are not liked, and frankly - there are those here I do not like. We still have the right to post here until the owner sees fit to say otherwise, just the same as with everyone else.
I too, would like to see more civility here and everywhere else, problem seems to be that we inhabit an uncivil society where these types of exchanges are the norm anymore. Makes this old woman sad to see. I love my country and I am willing to work with anyone that can save her from the certain death she is facing today. Trump makes me wince often, I don't understand why he says some things - but it usually ends up OK. He is wily, but he is not stupid - he is still new to the political swamp - so he is making his way through it in his way. I'm a pragmatic type in my old age, so I'm willing to give him a chance. Most of the other players in this theatre are swamp inhabitants - so hiring Trump for the job is a Hail Mary pass for America. I'm a conservative, and I'm grabbing that big branch with all of my might - to keep from falling down the rest of cliff to certain death.
Thanks for sharing your version of this...which is 90% false.
I am not going into details line by line but your account is blatantly false.
I did not want to do this and was pressured by the other owner by being reminded that TBR was half hers and she wanted it done....that is all the details I will share that was in private conversations with her.
If this is why you and ac have come back to dredge this all up again you will be disappointed.
subject is closed
-
@catfish1957
Reagan was a lot more experienced in Govt in addition to being a better communicator. H also had better staff who knew the system and were on his side. While the Republicans didn't like Reagan I don't remember them being quite this nasty with him.
And I don't recall Reagan being quite this nasty with Republicans.
Trump knows how to get unions to build a building but he doesn't know how the govt operates which makes it easier to trip him up.
Yes. It was an absolutely foolish idea to put him in that position. It was obvious how clueless he was, and that he didn't have the temperament to overcome his many faults.
@driftdiver
-
And I don't recall Reagan being quite this nasty with Republicans.
Yes. It was an absolutely foolish idea to put him in that position. It was obvious how clueless he was, and that he didn't have the temperament to overcome his many faults.
:thumbsup: