CousinsCowgirl84

21 minutes ago, Cooked Crack said:

https://www.reviewjournal.com/crime/homicides/video-shows-violent-police-pursuit-near-downtown-las-vegas/

 

Are police really taught this? A residential area doesn't seem like the place to start shooting through moving cas.

im not sure,maybe because they were charged with murder.....  seems dangerous as ****.

6 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

Nah, I listened to Trump.

 

Im looking at the headlines from media outlets in this thread saying something otherwise.

I mean, the media eventually recognized what he did, but not till after your post....

the backtracking backtrack that wasn’t is in a lot of ways worse than the original “screw my intelligence i’m with putin”...

I just don’t get the upside for Trump.....

17 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

Hey Joe Walsh, he said the same stuff he’s been saying over and over and over again for two years.

He wants to become less embarrassed by the Cohen interview....  this has nothing to do with trump.

If your going to say that cops earned mistrust because of some cops behaving badly you how is it different than making the same argument about any particular race, of which consists of some people behaving badly?

When your on the beat, in the hood, and you see a lot of black people doing crime, (a police officer would naturally see a lot of crime) it would be easy to think all blacks are like that...

When you are constantly getting stopped, profiled, fines into prison, it’s easy to think all cops are corrupt.

im not seeing a huge difference there. Both are wrong...

You would expect cops to be held to a higher standard, but they are held to a lesser one... they get the benefit of the doubt.... 

3 hours ago, TryTheBeal! said:

 

Kinda odd, right?

 

And on that note, I’d like to extend an apology to @CousinsCowgirl84.  I did not mean for the “crush you” comment to be interpreted personally towards her.  I intended it as a strongly worded statement of what I believe is really at stake for us with no pretense of civility. In other words, that’s what an actual lack of civility looks like.  As far as the “Becky” thing, I felt it was fairly accurate given the context and my understanding of the term.  If cowgirl took offense, I apologize for that as well.

Hi. No, I did not take offense to it. I understand your frustration. When you use someone’s evil acts to justify your own evil acts you justify theirs in kind. I do not want to justify them.

5 minutes ago, Larry said:

Just admiring the 172nd iteration of "this disaster isn't the fault of us people who knowingly voted for it.  It's the fault of you people not overruling us."

Nope. I think there are better solutions than “if you can’t beat em, join them” though.

41 minutes ago, Mooka said:

So your point is things would be more civil if Hillary Clinton was President right now?

 

 

Maybe.... 

edit: There’s no doubt.

5 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

 

That is not a fact.  That is a half-ass attempt to cast aspersions of laziness upon Americans who don’t enjoy the tremendous privilege of being a suburban Becky, like yourself.

Lets go back to the tape:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/registered-voters-who-stayed-home-probably-cost-clinton-the-election/amp/

Whelp, there it is. 

19 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said:

PLEASE BE CIVIL.

It has nothing to do with being civil. Cursing screaming and kicking your feet is not where I want to be as a society. So I won’t do it.

The fact is that if half the people saying “we ain’t need to be civil” voted, we wouldn’t have to have a discussion about whether or not we need to be civil.

This is not close to the worst passage in our history. Civil war and Japanese interment camps were worse. But you know, hah, facts....

Yeah, because facebook-likeable mantras are gonna get the job done.  Well done.

best way to fight arrogant ignorance is with arrogant ignorance, sounds good. 

2 hours ago, DogofWar1 said:

 

 

So much for the the US giving NK everything and getting nothing in return...

8 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

I kinda want England vs Russia, with all the political hate between those two countries it makes the game even more intriguing.

Would watch but it’s really right in the middle of the work week during a weekday...

what are are the odds on Croatia vs Russia?

45 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

 

Have you met this Congress?  Any previous President would have been impeached on like 20 separate occasions, and convicted on at least a few, thus far.

 

But that's besides the point.  If the President has the power to pardon himself and is barred from being indicted/tried/etc. while in office, he could do it at any point.  It's not like he has to wait to see how Congress acts, the moment the President whiffed any possibility of losing their immunity, they could pardon themselves.  Pardons don't just wear off after a while.

This congress was voted into office. We got to deal with the hand we got and not create precedent for unelected organization being able to remove people from office, that’s my point.

I think of if the president killed someone in the streets, there would be enough votes for impeachment. A president removed from office can’t pardon himself. So he could be indicted.

Iif he kills someone and gets re-elected, the voting public decided the killing was justified,

If impeaching trump was a way to guarantee re-election you would see lines of republican congressmen chomping at the bit to impeach him. 

it would not make the  president above the law, congress could still impeach him under the law, then he could indicted... would put him under the law. Or since a presidency only lasts 4-8 years wait until he is out of office if congress doesn’t impeach.

The other thing is that the people get to decide on who is in congress every two years. So, if congress was a lapdog for the president and the american people wanted justice all they would have to do was vote in people who promised to impeach him, give LEA authority to indict him.

What you are arguing for is the ability for an unelected agency to remove an elected official from office. Im not a fan of that. Even in this case. Thats sort of what Iran has with its "presidential elections".

I know your asking twa, but I don’t think president can be indicted (a long with all the rest) while he is president. He’d have to be impeached first...

I know it’s wrong, but I think that’s what makes the most sense. If he was convicted while he was president he could pardon himself...

Are those tweets about the new trench and and the ac