brandymac27

Trump and his cabinet/buffoonery- Get your bunkers ready!

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:
Trump is always on the wrong side of everything.

 

Well hes a Republican soo...

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, visionary said:

 

 

 

 

Come on now,  we know this is another Undoing of Obama thing.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dems should’ve lifted all sanctions and restored normal relations with Cuba when they had the chance. Dumbest foreign policy part of the US.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Assange the self anointed prophet of truth was himself knowingly lying and spreading a false conspiracy theory?

 

If that's your hero then I suspect you were deprived of oxygen as a child.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2019 at 8:37 AM, Hersh said:

Dems should’ve lifted all sanctions and restored normal relations with Cuba when they had the chance. Dumbest foreign policy part of the US.

 

This will happen once the older generation of Cuban Americans are no longer a major political voice in Florida politics. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

These tweets, which are parts 2 and 3 of a single thread (but not threaded, as Trump doesn't do that), were posted 8 hours and 39 minutes apart.

 

What the hell happened?

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:
These tweets, which are parts 2 and 3 of a single thread (but not threaded, as Trump doesn't do that), were posted 8 hours and 39 minutes apart.

 

What the hell happened?

 

 

Executive time. By ET I mean Trump prolly fell asleep on the toilet. Again. 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, DogofWar1 said:

Wait, have we reached the strange moment when a tweet from a President violates the profanity filter?

I'm so proud. POTUS can say bull**** but mine gets censored.

I hate this ****, and I hope he chokes on a ****ing McDonald's cheeseburger.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

Wait, have we reached the strange moment when a tweet from a President violates the profanity filter?

I'm so proud. POTUS can say bull**** but mine gets censored.

I hate this ****, and I hope he chokes on a ****ing McDonald's cheeseburger.

On the bright side his tweeting is becoming less and less effective. If he typed out bull**** in 2017 I'd definitely get a news alert about it. 24+ Hours later and this is my first time seeing it.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I figured this would be a good place to put the question that's been on my mind the last few days. 

 

Assuming Trump is not elected for a 2nd term, and someone young wins it. We know that the age limit constitutionally for a president is 35 (which by research is the same for a vice president). Now, in the event that both the president and the vice president were to resign, that would mean the Speaker of the House takes over. My question is would it be theoretically possible by line of succession for the president to be under 35. Like, if the new guy picks AOC as a cabinet member and AOC ends up being the president at like 30 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2019 at 9:45 PM, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

I’m probably closer to being a Republican than he is.

Trump is the perfect manifestation of the Fox News/Talk Radio Republican. They’ve been cultivating this for decades. The puppy state was the Tea Party. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those that identify as Republicans and join together get to define what it is.

 

Those that don't are just whining losers that hate democracy. :pint:

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, twa said:

Those that identify as Republicans and join together get to define what it is.

 

Those that don't are just whining losers that hate democracy. :pint:

I disagree slightly. Those that vote Republican get to define what it is. 

 

Their votes in primaries and in general elections loudly proclaim what is the face they want to see when they look in the mirror. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/18/2019 at 8:37 AM, Hersh said:

Dems should’ve lifted all sanctions and restored normal relations with Cuba when they had the chance. Dumbest foreign policy part of the US.

It was not a "dumb" policy. It was a rational policy. It only looks foolish because of the reactions of an irrational and illiterate presidency which followed it. 

 

Trump seems inevitable now, but Cuba policy was at a time when it was almost inconceivable such a pathetic, petty, corrupt, incompetent, crooked, childish, immature, ugly, ignorant, despotic, lump of orange putty found between the toes of an ogre one summer morning would be calling the shots for what was once a world power. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ixcuincle said:

I figured this would be a good place to put the question that's been on my mind the last few days. 

 

Assuming Trump is not elected for a 2nd term, and someone young wins it. We know that the age limit constitutionally for a president is 35 (which by research is the same for a vice president). Now, in the event that both the president and the vice president were to resign, that would mean the Speaker of the House takes over. My question is would it be theoretically possible by line of succession for the president to be under 35. Like, if the new guy picks AOC as a cabinet member and AOC ends up being the president at like 30 

 

No, it wouldn't happen, the next age eligible person would be sworn in. Because, the Constitution!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, ixcuincle said:

I figured this would be a good place to put the question that's been on my mind the last few days. 

 

Assuming Trump is not elected for a 2nd term, and someone young wins it. We know that the age limit constitutionally for a president is 35 (which by research is the same for a vice president). Now, in the event that both the president and the vice president were to resign, that would mean the Speaker of the House takes over. My question is would it be theoretically possible by line of succession for the president to be under 35. Like, if the new guy picks AOC as a cabinet member and AOC ends up being the president at like 30 

 

No. She wouldn't meet the age requirement of 35. It's covered by

3 U.S. Code § 19 subsection E.[Vacancy in offices of both President and Vice President; officers eligible to act]

 

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/3/19

 

Quote

e)

Subsections (a), (b), and (d) of this section shall apply only to such officers as are eligible to the office of President under the Constitution. Subsection (d) of this section shall apply only to officers appointed, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, prior to the time of the death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, of the President pro tempore, and only to officers not under impeachment by the House of Representatives at the time the powers and duties of the office of President devolve upon them.

 

 

 

But it's not like Pelosi is going anywhere anyways. She's an effective Speaker (despite what the GOP wants you to think).

 

 

Edited by The Evil Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/19/2019 at 9:45 PM, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

I’m probably closer to being a Republican than he is.

No. The Republican Party is dead. It's Trump's Own Party now. The TOP. The Republicans used to do stuff like read books and write papers and lame crap like that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, twa said:

Those that identify as Republicans and join together get to define what it is.

 

Pointing out that you just stated that you, Skippy, Trump, et al, define "Republican". 

 

I'll state that for me, you have defined "Republican" for more than a decade. Just glad to have it part of the record. 

 

Edited by Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   1 member