brandymac27

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

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Hersh said:

 

Yes, you bring so much in the way of substance and truth to this place. Thanks for what you do

You are very welcome my friend :) here is something that may interest you.......https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/06/10/mexican-military-started-rounding-up-illegals-riding-the-beast-train-to-the-united-states-n2547948   As you can see Mexico is NOW ENFORCING LAWS sound familiar?

 

Edited by hailmary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, hailmary said:

You are very welcome my friend :) here is something that may interest you.......https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/06/10/mexican-military-started-rounding-up-illegals-riding-the-beast-train-to-the-united-states-n2547948   As you can see Mexico is NOW ENFORCING LAWS sound familiar?

 

 

I was being sarcastic. I’m sure Mexico will stop illegal immigration though since Trump has a secret deal with them. 

The comment section of the article you posted is filled with stupid.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, hailmary said:

You are very welcome my friend :) here is something that may interest you.......https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2019/06/10/mexican-military-started-rounding-up-illegals-riding-the-beast-train-to-the-united-states-n2547948   As you can see Mexico is NOW ENFORCING LAWS sound familiar?

 

 

None of that is true until you wave a random piece of paper you have in your hand and say it's true.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


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

OK 75% of this thread is from twitter 

 

You're the only plagiarist I've noticed though. If you're going to use something someone else wrote, give proper credit.

19 minutes ago, Llevron said:

No more caravans! Thank you President Donald Trump lol

 

You forgot to call him "sir" and cry even though you're a big tough dude.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, techboy said:

You're the only plagiarist I've noticed though. If you're going to use something someone else wrote, give proper credit.

 

I doubt he’s doing it intentionally. Seems like he doesn’t know how to embed tweets. So we get Charlie Kirks dumb opinions, without having to see his face repeatedly. I see that as a positive. Lol

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

 

I doubt he’s doing it intentionally. Seems like he doesn’t know how to embed tweets. So we get Charlie Kirks dumb opinions, without having to see his face repeatedly. I see that as a positive. Lol

 

Charlie Kirk's base are the juggalo portion of the neo-conservative movement. Dumber than rocks and easily confused by magnets.  So yeah, it's probably intentional. 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/10/2019 at 6:59 PM, hailmary said:

hopefully they look into the financial details of the 1.5 BILLION $$$$$ China paid Biden's son...........

 

No, they didn't.  

 

On 6/10/2019 at 8:29 PM, hailmary said:

An illegal alien in Oregon is charged with creating and distributing over 10,000 fake IDs, voter registration cards, & Social Security cards 

 

No, he's not.  (At least, not according to the seven articles I just read on the case.  Including three from right wing blog sites.)  

 

On 6/10/2019 at 8:41 PM, hailmary said:

It’s amazing to see Democrats within a span of 2 days go from being against Trump’s tariffs on Mexico to now being against the fact Trump negotiated a deal without any tariffs🤔

 

Haven't seen anybody object to "the fact Trump negotiated a deal without any tariffs".  

 

Well, unless you're talking about the people who objected to the fact that Trump negotiated a deal without tarrifs, and then announced that he was imposing tarriffs before the deal could even be ratified.  I assume Mexico objected to that.  

 

On 6/10/2019 at 8:52 PM, hailmary said:

Democrats cheered as (Obama) gave nuclear capabilities to our enemy. 

 

He didn't.  

 

He successfully negotiated a deal in which Iran shut down most of their enrichment capability, and allowed international inspectors to verify that the remainder stopped short of weapons capability.  He literally talked a nation that was on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons into stopping short of achieving it.  And did it without any military action at all, nothing but imposing economic sanctions, getting the rest of the world to go along with those sanctions, and then offering to withdraw the sanctions.  

 

Only been done one other time in history.  Bill Clinton talked NK into shutting down the reactor they were using to make Plutonium, and halting the construction of the other two they were building, in exchange for sending them some foreign aid.  (W came along, withdrew from our side of the deal, called them names while they resumed operations, and waited till they successfully built their bomb.)  

 

A deal which is still holding, in fact.  Despite Trump's efforts to break it.  Because the rest of the world doesn't want a nuclear Iran, and so the rest of the world is still sticking with the deal.  

 

On 6/10/2019 at 9:01 PM, hailmary said:

Mexico has agreed to: Form new national guard units Deploy 6,000 troops to their southern border Take in deported Guatemalan asylum seekers who step foot into the US It’s despicable that foreign countries are more willing to negotiate with the President than Democrats are🤔

 

Haven't checked, but I assume that those claims are actually true.  

 

Granted, they agreed to all of them before Trump pitched his attention stunt.  But that doesn't make it not true.  

 

On 6/10/2019 at 9:07 PM, hailmary said:

Democrats are trying to hold Attorney General Barr in Contempt of Congress because he is following the law.....🤔 This is your daily reminder that Obama's AG was held in contempt for refusing to turn over documents related to his illegal gun trafficking operation, Fast and Furious😜.

 

Admiring your attempts to be outraged at the thought of an AG being held in Contempt for refusing to furnish documents to congress, by pointing out (approvingly, I'd bet) that an AG can be held in Contempt for refusing to furnish documents to congress.  

 

On 6/10/2019 at 9:12 PM, hailmary said:

 

Nancy Pelosi is blocking $3.3 billion in funding for HHS to address the crisis on the border That's not Wall funding That's $3.3 billion for: Children's beds Diapers for unaccompanied toddlers Kids' medical care. Why are Democrats exploiting children for political gain?
 

 

Actually, she's not blocking it, they're still in negotiations.  The goal is to get it through congress before the 4th.  

 

It's not 3.3B, it's 4.5B, of which the 3.3B is a big part.  

 

And the part they're negotiating about is how to include language that will prevent Trump from diverting the money somewhere else.  Language which, supposedly, the Republicans say they'll vote against, if it's included.  

 

On 6/10/2019 at 9:16 PM, hailmary said:

Bill Clinton was guilty of obstruction of justice ...... wasn't he?😂 

 

 

So many possible responses.  Which one(s) to choose?  

 

How about "It's not obstruction if you obstruct something that you think you're innocent of"?  

 

Or "He wasn't indicted, therefore he was completely exonerated"?  

 

But, I'm actually going to give you a serious, honest, answer, too.  (You don't deserve one.  But I hold myself to higher standards than you do.)  

 

1)  Yes, I think I would say he broke that law.  

 

2)  Although I think there's qualifiers to that.  I would argue that, in orcer to obstruct justice, the thing you're obstructing has to actually be seeking justice.  This wasn't the case.  What Clinton obstructed was the biggest abuse of a constitutional power in our nation's history.  A power granted to congress by the constitution, intentionally without any limitations at all, simply trusting in their integrity not to abuse it, intended for use only in the gravest of cases.  And Congress decided that it was a license to fish for political dirt.  (And the Republican Party also decided to abuse the civil legal system for the same purpose.  The question Bill Clinton lied to was "Have you ever cheated on your wife?"  That's not an attempt to investigate crimes.  That's an attempt to generate a political talking point.)  

 

3)  However, the fact that the investigations were wrong does not justify what Clinton did.  

 

On 6/10/2019 at 9:16 PM, hailmary said:

Joe Biden, Mayor Pete- Julian Castro, Beto Gillibrand, Hickenlooper, Bennett, Delaney, Moulton, Tim Ryan, Andrew Yang ALL went to private schools in K-12.... So why do they want to abolish charter schools and eliminate school choice? 🤔
 

 

They don't.  

 

On 6/10/2019 at 9:47 PM, hailmary said:

Free health care for illegals, Nancy will pay for it............

 

I'd bet that there's probably some cases in which it's not outrageous to twist reality into that claim.  I'd need to know more about what you're claiming, before calling BS.  

 

On 6/10/2019 at 9:41 PM, hailmary said:

FISA abuse US Attorney meeting with Barr "Dialed in" PANIC AT THE DEEP STATE......🤣

Is that like our statues that are being torn down by vandals? 

 

I'm looking forward to the GOP any day now introducing legislation to restrict (or eliminate.  I could go for that.) FISA.  

 

Oh whit.  They only have a problem with it when:  

 

1)  Russian military intelligence conduct illegal acts within the US, in an attempt to help a US political candidate.

 

2)  And the candidate's campaign knew about the crime (and knew it was the Russian military who did it.  And was bragging about it.) seven weeks before the FBI knew about it.  

 

3)  Oh, yeah.  And the campaign that knew about it, and benefited from it, was Republican.  

 

Quote

Is that like our statues that are being torn down by vandals?

 

Having trouble figuring which right wing outrage you're outraged about, here.  

 

2 hours ago, hailmary said:

Just because you or majority don't agree with what I bring doesn't make it lack substance or validity.🤔

 

True.  

 

The fact that your posts lack substance or validity (or reality, actually) makes them lack substance or validity.  

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't think we would ever see a member in here make even twa take pause.   Congrats hailmary. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

OK 75% of this thread is from twitter and as far as bringing "something to the conversation" I did bring plenty of somethings, manly facts. Just because you or majority don't agree with what I bring doesn't make it lack substance or validity.🤔

 

I see you don't follow instructions in threads any better than the rules. I told you not to reply in this thread. That was an instruction not a suggestion. Take some time off to consider if this is a place for you.

 

If you decide it is when you come back read the rules and comply with them and any instruction given to you by MODs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

Trump speaking always sounds like the kid called on to present his book report but he didn't read the book. This one's almost too on the nose.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, @SkinsGoldPants said:

100% promise that he's never read a book

FYP

 

I doubt he read Mein Kempf either, but I do think he believes Hitler had some good ideas.

  • Haha 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Larry said:

He successfully negotiated a deal in which Iran shut down most of their enrichment capability, and allowed international inspectors to verify that the remainder stopped short of weapons capability.  He literally talked a nation that was on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons into stopping short of achieving it.  And did it without any military action at all, nothing but imposing economic sanctions, getting the rest of the world to go along with those sanctions, and then offering to withdraw the sanctions.  

 

The Iran Deal still hanging in there is a global rejection to the GOP foreign policy agenda. There is a worldwide consensus that America is led by a moron and it’s ok to ignore him.  Occasionally flatter him with praise and you’ll even get him to bend over. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AOC doing the work of the people in that clip.  I like how she explains her concerns and justifies her actions. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

 

 

 

 

OK, something that might be worth discussing:  

 

Is this a legitimate use of Executive Privilege?  

 

As I understand it, EP is something that exists absolutely nowhere in law, but which the Executives have asserted is a power which the Executive branch has to have, in order to accomplish their constitutional jobs.  

 

And I have to say, I approve of the notion.  At least in some cases.  

 

For one such case, I'd say matters of personnel.  I would argue that the executive has to be able to interview candidates for jobs, and to not reveal things like who else they interviewed, how the various candidates were ranked, whether they approached someone who turned them down, or matters like that.  When a POTUS nominates a SecState, he has to be able to claim that "this was my first and only choice, all along".  Even if it's not true.  

 

So, question:  Does the administration's discussing proposed future legislation/rules, whatever, fall under that umbrella?  

 

I'll point out, if you say "yes", then for example, things like the WH discussions regarding the talking points about Benghazi become privileged conversations.  

 

But doesn't the EB need the power to discuss issues, so they can arrive at whatever is going to be their unified position?  

 

Or, if you want to argue that this particular matter needs to be exempt from such privilege, then what is it about this matter that makes it special?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

 

OK, something that might be worth discussing:  

 

Is this a legitimate use of Executive Privilege?  

 

 

 

Of course it isn't.  It's absolutely ridiculous.  I think Trump just discovered "executive privilege" was a thing a few months ago, and is just going to keep using it for everything........until someone stops him. 

  • Thanks 2

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   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.