RIGOLO wrote: » Another good win for the Trump administration . They have had quite a few this week , add this to the opioid bill passing thru the house, NK returning US remains from the war and the Dems self-imploding over the RedHen-Sarah Saunders-Maxine Waters restaurant debacle . Democrats are putting all their eggs in one basket, win the house and impeach, whilst the Trump administration is constantly moving forward implementing its program taking the small wins as well as the big ones and in doing so winning over the moderates and destroying any chance the Dems have of achiving their one and only objective. .
everlast75 wrote: » RIGOLO wrote: » Another good win for the Trump administration . They have had quite a few this week , add this to the opioid bill passing thru the house, NK returning US remains from the war and the Dems self-imploding over the RedHen-Sarah Saunders-Maxine Waters restaurant debacle . Democrats are putting all their eggs in one basket, win the house and impeach, whilst the Trump administration is constantly moving forward implementing its program taking the small wins as well as the big ones and in doing so winning over the moderates and destroying any chance the Dems have of achiving their one and only objective. . What happened to the Bill ?Again, I do not agree. Most of the pro-Trump stance posts are generic info dumps. Those that are, and others, are challenged in a respectful way, using fact based comments. It most certainly doesn't flow the other way, present company excluded.
Manic Moran wrote: » Sure you can. You can waive almost anything. You can waive your fourth amendment protection against being searched without a warrant. You can waive your sixth amendment right to an attorney. You can waive your fifth amendment right to silence. You don't need to write anything down, just make the conscious decision not to exercise the right. And since at least 1896, it's established law that you don't have a right to a day in court for deportation. On other matters, a minor Supreme Court action on gerrymandering.https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/25/politics/supreme-court-north-carolina-gerrymandering/index.html
RIGOLO wrote: » Im not sure where your question fits into your self-assertion that posts are challenged in a respectful way using fact based comments. I dont see much respect or fact base in your comments. But anyways just to remind you , again, the bill was passed by an overwhelming majority, with bipartisan Democratic support, 396 to 14. More a package than a single bill as it encompassed 58 other bills. https://www.cnbc.com/video/2018/06/22/house-passes-largest-opioid-bill-in-recent-history-epidemic-drugs.html
U.S. cruises toward record-breaking debt on Trump's watch
The nation’s fiscal outlook looks ever bleaker, thanks in part to deficit spending during President Donald Trump’s first term, Congress’ nonpartisan budget scorekeeper projected Tuesday. Within 16 years, the federal deficit is expected to be the largest in history, outpacing even the fiscal shortfalls that followed World War II, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates.
Igotadose wrote: » 45. "So, Canada, 'Oh, Canada,' I love their national anthem, 'Oh, Canada,' I like ours better, however."
Leroy42 wrote: » https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/26/cbo-federal-deficit-break-records-651929 How can anyone think this is even close to conservative values. MAGA!
Igotadose wrote: » But, you have to consciously wave it. Sure, I can wave my right to an attorney when I'm arrested - but I have to be asked (Miranda decision) and decide. By entering into the US at a non-designated port of entry, do I wave my right to a trial/representation/etc. I doubt it - why else have immigration courts?
This I do not get. Trump has conducted himself in an awful manner - probably the worst in US history. The Dems may be bad in part, but seriously - they are not comparable. Therefore the logic of deeming a pox on both their houses, to me, seems seriously flawed.
Manic Moran wrote: » Immigration judges exist for those who are undertaking the asylum process, or those who have been in the US at least two years prior to deportation proceedings. The decision to cross at a non-designated point of entry (i.e. anywhere but where one is supposed to cross) is in itself a conscious decision, though. Actions alone can be enough without being asked. For example, I do not need to fill out any form or make any notification to the US government in order to lose my citizenship if I take up foreign citizenship, see Title 8, US Code, S 1481 (As a matter of policy, it isn't normally done, but the legal authority is there). Losing citizenship without a trial is far more significant than merely being kicked right back out of the country. The mere action alone indicates a choice has been made which will have consequences. It's a subjective difference. I acknowledge that at some point one has to make the decision that "It's good enough", that absolute parity with one's own positions is an unrealistic expectation. However, I do not accept that "less bad" is in itself an automatic reason for support either. I see no reason to 'reward' "less bad", even if the difference is significant, and will only take such a position when there is no better alternative. For the purposes of discussions on policy, there is no pressing reason to support it.
Nox wrote: » Yet another victory for President Donald J Trump. The court decided that the POTUS could follow his Constitutional authority and protect the US. All the whining libs who falsely claimed it was a moslem ban forgot about a couple non-moslem counties … Korea and Venezuela. Yeah, it goes back to the 9th, but yet again the 9th et al got smacked down again.
20Cent wrote: » Interesting piece by Fintan O'Toole in the Irish Times today. If you assume trump is not an idiot but there is reason behind what he does (I'm not convinced of this tbh) the contention is that he is pushing the boundaries of acceptability to test the waters for full blown fascism. Seems his tests are working Fox and Murdock rolled right in supporting caging children. What else will they support him with, will it be too late before someone calls stop? Fintan O’Toole: Trial runs for fascism are in full flowhttps://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/fintan-o-toole-trial-runs-for-fascism-are-in-full-flow-1.3543375
Travel ban allowed by the Supreme court. Will be curious as to how long North Korea remains on the list.
RIGOLO wrote: » Another good win for the Trump administration.
20Cent wrote: » Nox wrote: » Yet another victory for President Donald J Trump. The court decided that the POTUS could follow his Constitutional authority and protect the US. All the whining libs who falsely claimed it was a moslem ban forgot about a couple non-moslem counties … Korea and Venezuela. Yeah, it goes back to the 9th, but yet again the 9th et al got smacked down again. Moslem? Definition of Moslem formerly common but now old-fashioned, increasingly rare, and sometimes offensive variant of muslim
Nox wrote: » For your reading pleasure I present part of a quote from moderator robinph from post # 7029:Whereas for most English speakers, the two words are synonymous in meaning, the Arabic roots of the two words are very different. A Muslim in Arabic means"one who gives himself to God," and is by definition, someone who adheres to Islam. By contrast, a Moslem in Arabic means"one who is evil and unjust" when the word is pronounced, as it is in English, Mozlem with a z. If you care to take the time, you can see my reply at the time. BTW … I stand by moslem, but thank you for your input.
StringerBell wrote: » Nox wrote: » Yet another victory for President Donald J Trump. The court decided that the POTUS could follow his Constitutional authority and protect the US. All the whining libs who falsely claimed it was a moslem ban forgot about a couple non-moslem counties … Korea and Venezuela. Yeah, it goes back to the 9th, but yet again the 9th et al got smacked down again. Did you forget there was a time limit on it when be put it forward? That such time would allow them to make the country safe? Are you saying 18 months later and way, way beyond his proposed time for the ban he has failed to address the security concerns that prompted him to seek this ban? And this is seen as a victory? The in his own words, 'watered down, politically correct" version got through. Yet another poor day for the Trump administration.
astradave wrote: » Nox wrote: » For your reading pleasure I present part of a quote from moderator robinph from post # 7029:Whereas for most English speakers, the two words are synonymous in meaning, the Arabic roots of the two words are very different. A Muslim in Arabic means"one who gives himself to God," and is by definition, someone who adheres to Islam. By contrast, a Moslem in Arabic means"one who is evil and unjust" when the word is pronounced, as it is in English, Mozlem with a z. If you care to take the time, you can see my reply at the time. BTW … I stand by moslem, but thank you for your input. So you are basically calling approx 1.8 billion people evil and unjust? You cannot truly believe that, such generalisation is borderline racist
Nox wrote: » Apparently you did not do your research and read my reply, What a pity. When you look at 1.8 billion people who are required to fulfil the requirements of their prophet (as dictated by God) "Convert or Die. Take your racist crap and sit on it.
Leroy42 wrote: » https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/26/cbo-federal-deficit-break-records-651929 U.S. cruises toward record-breaking debt on Trump's watch. How can anyone think this is even close to conservative values. MAGA!
Leroy42 wrote: » Just going to put this out there:https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/871675245043888128 So its not even a version of the ban that POTUS even agrees with. Some winning that!
20Cent wrote: » Moslem? Definition of Moslem formerly common but now old-fashioned, increasingly rare, and sometimes offensive variant of muslim
astradave wrote: » So you are basically calling approx 1.8 billion people evil and unjust? You cannot truly believe that, such generalisation is borderline racist
jooksavage wrote: » Its not borderline.
