CousinsCowgirl84

Why would he ask congress to vote on enacting a national emergency? Why would he ask congress to vote on enacting a national emergency?

looks like i’m in great shape to loose all my bets. edit: games fixed anyhow 😎

i put 40 on the patriots to win, bet the rams to have the most passing yards, bet the over on 56 points, and a small bet on patriots to win by 8 or more points. i would have bet 100 on the win but the payoff is bet 100 to win 60... so i bet 40 for a chance at 22... but still,, edit: should have bet the under

I hate all unions, they had a time and place but as mobile as the work force is now they are mostly used to protect incompetent people.

I think the first one the odds change depending on who wins. If the patriots win it’s a lock they will visit... if it’s the rams i say it drops to 50/50.

Sorry, it posted twice.

Story is also highlights a problem with unions. It’s pretty obvious that the police wanted to fire him right away. But it took over a year for the process to play out, then, once he did get fired, because of the police union, they felt they had to pay him an extra hundred thousand dollars to make sure he was never a cop in their city again. lol... “All the whites”... The author goes for the most narrative supporting assumption of motives. 1) From what i can find about the shooting, it doesn’t seem justified though i wasn’t able to find video. He was wanted in connection for robbery and car jacking. Was hiding in some bushes, got out on his knees and was shot in the head. 2) The guy made a racist joke (or was it a joke) about shooting black people. 3) Cops immediately complained to their supervisors. 4) Police officers unions make firing crappy police offers difficult. It took a year for the process to play out. 5) The racist cop was fired, but because he was in a union and could fight the firing, he did. 6) The city chose to settle rather than pay their lawyers, and risk paying all his court fees, (which would add up to several hundred thousand of dollars) and be stuck with having to rehire a racist cop because, as the author of the story already wrote about, the juries who would hear the case are mostly sympathetic white people who might find in the racists favor, again. 7) He didn’t hire a lawyer, the police union did. Here is a less racist account of what actually happened: https://reason.com/blog/2019/01/31/portland-cop-told-subordinates-to-shoot But, with all that being said, it is actually refreshing for someone to stand up and call bull****, so Hardesty deserves a lot of credit.

National emergency is 100 percent the wrong move and won’t work anyway.

Biden said that they wanted a bipartisan condemnation of Russian meddling and McConnell said no. Not verifiable, but even if it were true, McConnell isn’t the president. Hard spot though.

He has to sign the bill in order for it to pass. Checks and balances. Executive branch has a right to check the legislative... He definitely should of... in fact Obama’s passiveness was one of the reasons Russians were able to meddle in our elections. I get it, it was a tough spot, but a little more aggressiveness could have done him (and the country) a lot of good. Gun violence is more a national emergency than a border wall is...

I mean, as long as we agree that both tactics are legitimate negotiating strategies then I definitely agree with you.

I didn’t say trump was offering something..but I think he is more desperate for a deal. Everyone including him knows a national emergency won’t work... democrats are a little narrow minded. If trump does want to bring the border wall into the budget debate, why shouldn’t the dems bring up every issue they can’t.

Politico article in this thread: e.g. not negotiating Its a bad metaphore premised on false premise...

The whole “you don’t negotiate with terrorist” tact some have been pushing on here as an excuse to support pelosis unwillingness to negotiate is complete laughable. Trump, don’t like it or not, is the president. Not a terrorist. He has the authority to make demands of the legislature, terrorists don’t. argue about the merits of a wall, or whether a shut down is justified. Trump clearly has the authority to shut down the government over a border wall, it’s him exercising his “right” to share power. Foolishly...

Sharing power means he is justified in not signing a bill unless it includes at least some of what he wants... pelosi said she’s not negotiating... who isn’t sharing power with who?

Someone dying because you play Russian roulette is not a “tragic accident”

The “im not agreeing to take on more debt unless we spend more money” angle doesn’t seem to make logical sense.... on the other hand if the shut down did cost 11 billion and pelosi could have settled with trump for something less than 6 billion aren’t you supposed to take the deal? oth rallying the base probably worth way more than the remaining balance..

It wasn’t even worth covering to begin with...

Shutting down the government over sending trump to mars?

Cnn has an article online “did trump cave or was it a master stroke”... my mind wonders between brain hemorrhage and self pleasure... Dont act like taking out the trash was some masterful conquest... this is trump we are talking about....

No wonder trump beat him....

Brodenksi, I said she agreed to negotiate money.

If trump was going to shut down the government over a wall he should have kept it shut till he got the wall. My guess is republican senators told him they had the votes to override the veto. I agree with culter...