DonLever

Donald J. Trump, 45th US President of the United States

Recommended Posts

I wonder what they are hiding.  We may not know until after TRUMP!! dies, in much of the same way we didn't learn about Reagan's health issues.  The video goes into a little more detail than the article.  It provides a comparison to the reports that were released from Obama's physicals.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-physical-exam-white-house-health-1328852

WHITE HOUSE IS ‘HIDING’ SOMETHING ABOUT DONALD TRUMP’S PHYSICAL EXAM, SAYS DICK CHENEY’S CARDIOLOGIST

 

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:

I wonder what they are hiding.  We may not know until after TRUMP!! dies, in much of the same way we didn't learn about Reagan's health issues.  The video goes into a little more detail than the article.  It provides a comparison to the reports that were released from Obama's physicals.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-physical-exam-white-house-health-1328852

WHITE HOUSE IS ‘HIDING’ SOMETHING ABOUT DONALD TRUMP’S PHYSICAL EXAM, SAYS DICK CHENEY’S CARDIOLOGIST

 

 

 

 

you mean a guy in his 70s shouldn't eat McDonalds before bed every night? huh. 

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had to laugh at some of the talking heads on TV last night, trying to spin this proposed deal for border security as a "win" for Trump. :rolleyes:

 

This is because (supposedly) "Nancy" (as Trump sometimes calls her) said "Not one dime" for a border wall and the proposed deal includes monies for "a barrier", likely similar to the metal fencing that already exists. This is a common refrain on Faux News and the usual suspects on CNN (Santorum, Cortez, Jennings) are also playing the part of spin doctors...

 

So let that sink in for a minute....

 

A year ago the entire 25 billion was on the table, but the Senate shot it down (after Trump had already promised to veto it, had it passed) because the GOP insisted on cutting back legal immigration, something the Democrats wouldn't agree to.

 

Fast forward 10 months and Trump is now demanding just under 6 billion and tells the world he will be "proud" to shut down the government if he doesn't get it. Of course, everyone but Trump (apparently) understands that threatening to hold your breath until you turn blue and die, doesn't even work for 4 year olds, let alone sitting presidents. Trumps extortion tactic fails and he's left looking like he just spent a drunken night with the Russian women's weightlifting team. That opinion is shared on both sides of the political divide. (with the notable exceptions of the most die-hard nut huggers, like Hannity, Carlson and Jean Pirro)

 

Now we have a proposed deal where the 5.7 billion demand has been met with a 1.375 billion offer and in Trump land, that apparently means, "We win!"

 

Remember during the campaign, when Trump and his supporters were touting his so-called negotiating "skills". Trump was the "deal maker"....only he would be able to get the deals done that were necessary to "Make America great again".

 

So how has he done with that?

 

TPP, Paris Acord, Iran Nuclear Deal, NAFTA.....he's pulled out of more deals than he's made. Even the USMC trade agreement is a one for one swap and although he likes to call it a "great" deal, anyone with eyes can see it's not much different than NAFTA.  Further to that, considering his wish list going into those negotiations, it could be argued that the "great dealmaker" got schooled by a woman with less than 6 years of political experience and a background in journalism.

 

So, in an nut shell, the "great negotiator" has parlayed a 25 billion dollar offer into 1.375 billion.....Tired of "winning"yet?:lol:

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

 

you mean a guy in his 70s shouldn't eat McDonalds before bed every night? huh. 

 

I thought that turd ate his Big Macs IN bed, and used the sheets to wipe the special sauce of his orange jowls.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


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

I thought that turd ate his Big Macs IN bed, and used the sheets to wipe the special sauce of his orange jowls.

Here’s news for you, those stains aren’t just from his bodily fluids but a certain kind of Russian shower.:P

 

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


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

I thought that turd ate his Big Macs IN bed, and used the sheets to wipe the special sauce of his orange jowls.

:sick:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:

I wonder what they are hiding.  We may not know until after TRUMP!! dies, in much of the same way we didn't learn about Reagan's health issues.  The video goes into a little more detail than the article.  It provides a comparison to the reports that were released from Obama's physicals.

 

https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-physical-exam-white-house-health-1328852

WHITE HOUSE IS ‘HIDING’ SOMETHING ABOUT DONALD TRUMP’S PHYSICAL EXAM, SAYS DICK CHENEY’S CARDIOLOGIST

 

 

 

Lol his original crock doctor put him down as 6'3" 239lbs (conveniently 1 lb below an obese BMI). The guy is barely 6 feet tall and is clearly much heavier than 239lbs. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Duodenum said:

Huh?

 

The very first example is from the 1970s where he was sued by the federal government (Richard Nixon's federal government) for racial discrimination. 

 

More on that one:

Testers from the New York City Human Rights Division had found that prospective black renters at Trump buildings were told there were no apartments available, while prospective White renters were offered apartments at the same buildings.[28] During the investigation four of Trump's agents admitted to using a "C" or "9" code to show which applicants were Black and stated that they were told their company "discouraged rental to blacks" or that they were "not allowed to rent to black tenants," and that prospective Black renters should be sent to the central office while White renters could have their applications accepted on site. Three doormen testified to being told to discourage prospective Black renters by lying about the rental prices or claiming no vacancies were available.[29][30] A settlement was reached in 1975 where Trump agreed to familiarize himself with the Fair Housing Act, take out ads stating that Black renters were welcome, give a list of vacancies to the Urban League on a weekly basis, and allow the Urban League to present qualified candidates for 20% of vacancies in properties that were less than 10% non-White.[31][32]

The Trump Organization was sued again in 1978 for violating terms of the 1975 settlement by continuing to refuse to rent to black tenants; Trump and his lawyer Roy Cohn denied the charges.[33][34][35] In 1983 the Metropolitan Action Institute noted that two Trump Village properties were still over 95% White.[36]

 

Regarding the counting example:

 

In his 1991 book Trumped! John O'Donnell quoted Trump as saying:

I've got black accountants at Trump Castle and at Trump Plaza. Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys wearing yarmulkes.... Those are the only kind of people I want counting my money. Nobody else... Besides that, I tell you something else. I think that's guy's lazy. And it's probably not his fault because laziness is a trait in blacks.

In an interview in 1997, he admitted that the information in the book was "probably true". Two years later, when seeking the nomination of the Reform Party for president, he denied having made the statement.[2]

 

Don't forget about his proposal to ban muslim immigrants. 

 

More on
muslims:

 

At a rally in Birmingham, Alabama on November 21, 2015, Trump falsely claimed that he had seen television reports about "thousands and thousands" of Arabs in New Jersey celebrating as the World Trade Center collapsed during the 9/11 attacks. In an interview with George Stephanopoulos, Trump doubled-down on the assertion, insisting that "there were people that were cheering on the other side of New Jersey, where you have large Arab populations".[60][61][62][63]

 

 

On Ted Cruz:

Trump also suggested that evangelicals shouldn't trust Ted Cruz because Cruz is Cuban

 

A bunch of other stuff you can just pull off of
wikipedia:

 

Derogatory statements towards Haiti and Nigeria

In June 2017, Trump called together a staff meeting to complain about the number of immigrants who had entered the country since his inauguration. The New York Times reported that two officials at the meeting state that when Trump read off a sheet stating that 15,000 persons had visited from Haiti, he commented, "They all have AIDS," and when reading that 40,000 persons had visited from Nigeria, he said that after seeing America the Nigerians would never “go back to their huts." Both officials who heard Trump's statements relayed them to other staff members at the time, but the White House has denied that Trump used those words and some of the other officials present claim not to remember them being used.[92]

 

 

 

Trump launched his 2016 presidential campaign with a speech where he stated of Mexican immigrants: "They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people".[13][14] Later, his comments about a Mexican-American judge were criticized as racist. He tweeted fake statistics claiming that black Americans are responsible for the majority of murders of whites, and in some speeches he linked African-Americans and Hispanics with violent crime.[15] During his presidency, comments he made following a far-right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia were perceived as implying a moral equivalence between violence used by white supremacist marchers and violence used by those who protested against them. In 2018, during an Oval Office meeting about immigration reform, he referred to El Salvador, Haiti, and African countries as "$&!#holes"; this comment was internationally condemned as racist.[16][17][18]

 

He regularly retweeted known
neo-nazi's and white supremacists during his campaign. He regularly refers to Warren as Pocahontas, even after being condemned by Native Americans as a derogatory, racist remark. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

You can either admit that he's a racist or think he's a complete moron incapable of understanding that the things he's done and said are unacceptable. There are no other options. There's a bunch of real, recorded quotes of Trump. There's a settled lawsuit. There's repeated twitter and in person remarks. There's second hand information from people. There's a clear and very obvious trend here. This isn't a comprehensive list either, there's plenty more. 

 

Don't be purposefully obtuse.

So scrape together a few jokes, a few uncomfortable facts and a few ex employees over the course of 50 years and bingo, you've got yourself a racist.

 

The case against Fred Trump was weak in 1973 and even weaker against DJT. All landlords were under scrutiny. Trumps buildings tenants matched the areas for diversity.

 

http://www.newstandardpress.com/did-trump-not-rent-to-black-people/

 

MEDIA MEME:

Donald Trump was a racist landlord who was sued by the U.S. Justice Department for not renting to African Americans. After he didn’t change his racist rental policies, the Dept. of Justice sued him again.

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED:

Fred Trump created a rental company, ran it for decades, and by 1973 it managed 14,382 apartments. By then, 17 African Americans had filed 15 complaints of discrimination in the application process. Also, four “testers” were sent to five Trump properties. They found that four rental employees discriminated. So in 1973, the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Fred Trump, Trump Management, and its new president, young Donald. At properties operated by them, almost 4.5% of tenants were black. One building had 40% black tenants. But five buildings had none. By 1974, the DOJ had collected accusations (formal, informal, and hearsay) by 43 accusers (named and unnamed) against 38 employees (out of hundreds) of Trump Management in 20 properties (out of 39), during 14 years. Three of them blamed Fred Trump. None of the 43 accusers blamed Donald Trump; there’s no evidence that he created or carried out discriminatory policies. In 1975, the Trumps began policies of affirmative action renting, to reach 10% black occupancy. By 1977, they exceeded this requirement. Finally, the DOJ closed the case for “lack of evidence” or new complaints.

This is why...

 

trump-is-so-racist-that-ali-rosa-parks-and-trump-4979915.png

Edited by Bernards
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump will sign funding bill, declare a national emergency, McConnell says

By Kaitlan Collins, Kevin Liptak and Ted Barrett, CNN

Updated 4:11 PM ET, Thu February 14, 2019

 

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump plans to sign a compromise border security measure in conjunction with declaring a national emergency to secure funding for a border wall, ending for now a bitter standoff with Congress over his signature campaign promise but likely sparking a new constitutional dispute.

 

The news of Trump's decision came via Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who said he would drop his opposition to the national emergency move in order to advance the government funding measure.
 
Speaking on the Senate floor Thursday, McConnell sought to reassure lawmakers unsure of the President's position before taking a vote on the plan, which falls short of providing the $5 billion in border wall funding Trump had demanded.
 
"He has indicated he is prepared to sign the bill. He will also be issuing a national emergency declaration at the same time," McConnell said. "I've indicated to him that I'm going to support the national emergency declaration. So for all of my colleagues, the President will sign the bill. We will be voting on it shortly."
 
It provided reassurance amid questions about the President's support for the deal, which was struck by a bipartisan panel of negotiators. Aides had said earlier Thursday they were concerned Trump would reject the spending compromise -- a major shift from earlier this week, when officials indicated privately that he would.

 

McConnell's abrupt announcement Thursday that Trump would sign the spending package -- ahead of any official word from the White House on the President's position -- came after a day of consternation among Republican lawmakers and administration officials about whether the President would sign the bill.
 
The President's only public message was a midday tweet indicating he was still mulling the final text of the bill with his team at the White House. Even after McConnell's announcement, the White House was scrambling to make Trump's intentions official.
 
"President Trump will sign the government funding bill, and as he has stated before, he will also take other executive action -- including a national emergency -- to ensure we stop the national security and humanitarian crisis at the border," press secretary Sarah Sanders wrote in a statement 25 minutes after McConnell spoke. "The President is once again delivering on his promise to build the wall, protect the border, and secure our great country."

 

In the hours leading up to the vote, the President phoned GOP allies on Capitol Hill to ask their advice and vent at some of the bill's shortcomings, leading many to believe he was backing away from his earlier support of the compromise spending legislation, according to people familiar with the calls. Trump told multiple allies he was considering not signing the bill.
 
Concern over the measure's contents extended to the White House, where aides spent all morning trying to digest the details of the 1,100-page bill and flag potential snags both to the President and to Capitol Hill. In briefings about the bill, the President expressed concern that something might be found buried in the bill after he signed it, leading to embarrassment.
 
He huddled with his acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and legislative affairs director Shahira Knight in the Oval Office on Thursday afternoon, as they intensely lobbied the President to not back away from the bill.
 
Amid the wrangling, many of the President's senior advisers stressed he should sign the package to avoid another government shutdown, which they said would damage him politically. They said signing a national emergency declaration or some other type of executive action would blunt whatever blowback he received from conservatives.
 
It wasn't immediately clear which path Trump would choose to secure border wall funding through a national emergency declaration. White House aides have said they expect any unilateral action to secure the funding to be met with legal challenges, and McConnell had said previously he would oppose such a move, citing presidential overreach.
 
He dropped that opposition on Thursday after weeks of remaining staunch in his position, revealing just how worried he was over Trump's support.
But Democratic congressional leaders said they could bring legal challenges.
 
"I may," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who asked about the prospect of challenging Trump in court. "That's an option and we will review our options."
"The President is doing an end run around Congress," Pelosi added.
 
Advisers said Trump had grown increasingly concerned about what is contained in the 1,100-page legislation that was released late Wednesday evening.
As more details about the package emerged, conservative figures in Trump's orbit voiced new displeasure at the bill. That included Fox host Laura Ingraham, who tweeted earlier Thursday that Trump should not sign it. The White House had attempted earlier this week to bolster support among Trump's media allies.
 
White House officials have been digesting the text since early morning and have briefed the President as they go along. The President tweeted midday he was "reviewing the funding bill with my team."
 
"1,000 pages filed in the in middle of the night take a little time to go through," one White House official told CNN's Jim Acosta.
 
(more in the link)

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/14/politics/donald-trump-wall-funding-bill/index.html

 

******************************

 

White House has found $2.7B in funding that could go to border wall

Thu 14 Feb 2019 20:20:11 GMT

Reuters report, citing source familiar

  • White House lawyers believe emergency funding would withstand legal challenge
And a legal challenge there will be.
 
 
**************************************
 
Well on the one hand they've managed to avoid another government shutdown.
 
No word on where the White House has dug up this $2.7B. Regardless, it's doing an end around congress who has the power of the purse.
 
IMO it's basically the dumbest thing the administration could do. It will undoubtedly end up in a court challenge. Illegal border crossings are at a 40 year low. So where is the national emergency? Illegals commit crimes at far lower rates than legal citizens. So where is the national emergency?
 
Sooner or later there will be a Democrat president. With this action setting precedent what's to stop them from declaring a national emergency on gun control, climate change or green energy?
 
It's basically the dumbest thing since then Democrat Senate majority leader Harry Reid changed the senate rules regarding the number of votes required to confirm judges.
 
Let the games begin

 

Edited by nuckin_futz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:
Well on the one hand they've managed to avoid another government shutdown.
 
No word on where the White House has dug up this $2.7B. Regardless, it's doing an end around congress who has the power of the purse.
 
IMO it's basically the dumbest thing the administration could do. It will undoubtedly end up in a court challenge. Illegal border crossings are at a 40 year low. So where is the national emergency? Illegals commit crimes at far lower rates than legal citizens. So where is the national emergency?
 
Sooner or later there will be a Democrat president. With this action setting precedent what's to stop them from declaring a national emergency on gun control, climate change or green energy?
 
It's basically the dumbest thing since then Democrat Senate majority leader Harry Reid changed the senate rules regarding the number of votes required to confirm judges.
 
Let the games begin

And there's more to it than that.

 

Congress has the power to override a presidential veto with a 2/3 majority vote in the House and the Senate. While it's unlikely that such a vote would overturn a veto, the real damage would be done by just having the vote take place.

 

Up until now, Republicans have been able to avoid the question of whether they support a physical wall that spans the length of the US - Mexico border, instead, spouting platitudes about "border security" and "keeping Americans safe".....

 

Now each GOP Senator and member of Congress will have to step up and say "yea" or "nay" to the idea of the Wall. It's no secret that many border districts don't want the wall, (at least not the Wall that Trump promised before the election) so many of these Republican politicians will have to choose between their constituents' wants and Trumps. I'm betting that a lot of them won't be happy about that.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

So scrape together a few jokes, a few uncomfortable facts and a few ex employees over the course of 50 years and bingo, you've got yourself a racist.

 

The case against Fred Trump was weak in 1973 and even weaker against DJT. All landlords were under scrutiny. Trumps buildings tenants matched the areas for diversity.

 

http://www.newstandardpress.com/did-trump-not-rent-to-black-people/

 

MEDIA MEME:

Donald Trump was a racist landlord who was sued by the U.S. Justice Department for not renting to African Americans. After he didn’t change his racist rental policies, the Dept. of Justice sued him again.

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED:

Fred Trump created a rental company, ran it for decades, and by 1973 it managed 14,382 apartments. By then, 17 African Americans had filed 15 complaints of discrimination in the application process. Also, four “testers” were sent to five Trump properties. They found that four rental employees discriminated. So in 1973, the Department of Justice filed a complaint against Fred Trump, Trump Management, and its new president, young Donald. At properties operated by them, almost 4.5% of tenants were black. One building had 40% black tenants. But five buildings had none. By 1974, the DOJ had collected accusations (formal, informal, and hearsay) by 43 accusers (named and unnamed) against 38 employees (out of hundreds) of Trump Management in 20 properties (out of 39), during 14 years. Three of them blamed Fred Trump. None of the 43 accusers blamed Donald Trump; there’s no evidence that he created or carried out discriminatory policies. In 1975, the Trumps began policies of affirmative action renting, to reach 10% black occupancy. By 1977, they exceeded this requirement. Finally, the DOJ closed the case for “lack of evidence” or new complaints.

This is why...

 

trump-is-so-racist-that-ali-rosa-parks-and-trump-4979915.png

What really happened.

 

Lol quality and I do mean quality outlet you managed to scrape that from

 

Here's their front page.

 

Quality

 

http://www.newstandardpress.com/category/media/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, nuckin_futz said:

Trump will sign funding bill, declare a national emergency, McConnell says

By Kaitlan Collins, Kevin Liptak and Ted Barrett, CNN

Updated 4:11 PM ET, Thu February 14, 2019

 

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump plans to sign a compromise border security measure in conjunction with declaring a national emergency to secure funding for a border wall, ending for now a bitter standoff with Congress over his signature campaign promise but likely sparking a new constitutional dispute.

 

The news of Trump's decision came via Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who said he would drop his opposition to the national emergency move in order to advance the government funding measure.
 
Speaking on the Senate floor Thursday, McConnell sought to reassure lawmakers unsure of the President's position before taking a vote on the plan, which falls short of providing the $5 billion in border wall funding Trump had demanded.
 
"He has indicated he is prepared to sign the bill. He will also be issuing a national emergency declaration at the same time," McConnell said. "I've indicated to him that I'm going to support the national emergency declaration. So for all of my colleagues, the President will sign the bill. We will be voting on it shortly."
 
It provided reassurance amid questions about the President's support for the deal, which was struck by a bipartisan panel of negotiators. Aides had said earlier Thursday they were concerned Trump would reject the spending compromise -- a major shift from earlier this week, when officials indicated privately that he would.

 

McConnell's abrupt announcement Thursday that Trump would sign the spending package -- ahead of any official word from the White House on the President's position -- came after a day of consternation among Republican lawmakers and administration officials about whether the President would sign the bill.
 
The President's only public message was a midday tweet indicating he was still mulling the final text of the bill with his team at the White House. Even after McConnell's announcement, the White House was scrambling to make Trump's intentions official.
 
"President Trump will sign the government funding bill, and as he has stated before, he will also take other executive action -- including a national emergency -- to ensure we stop the national security and humanitarian crisis at the border," press secretary Sarah Sanders wrote in a statement 25 minutes after McConnell spoke. "The President is once again delivering on his promise to build the wall, protect the border, and secure our great country."

 

In the hours leading up to the vote, the President phoned GOP allies on Capitol Hill to ask their advice and vent at some of the bill's shortcomings, leading many to believe he was backing away from his earlier support of the compromise spending legislation, according to people familiar with the calls. Trump told multiple allies he was considering not signing the bill.
 
Concern over the measure's contents extended to the White House, where aides spent all morning trying to digest the details of the 1,100-page bill and flag potential snags both to the President and to Capitol Hill. In briefings about the bill, the President expressed concern that something might be found buried in the bill after he signed it, leading to embarrassment.
 
He huddled with his acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and legislative affairs director Shahira Knight in the Oval Office on Thursday afternoon, as they intensely lobbied the President to not back away from the bill.
 
Amid the wrangling, many of the President's senior advisers stressed he should sign the package to avoid another government shutdown, which they said would damage him politically. They said signing a national emergency declaration or some other type of executive action would blunt whatever blowback he received from conservatives.
 
It wasn't immediately clear which path Trump would choose to secure border wall funding through a national emergency declaration. White House aides have said they expect any unilateral action to secure the funding to be met with legal challenges, and McConnell had said previously he would oppose such a move, citing presidential overreach.
 
He dropped that opposition on Thursday after weeks of remaining staunch in his position, revealing just how worried he was over Trump's support.
But Democratic congressional leaders said they could bring legal challenges.
 
"I may," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi who asked about the prospect of challenging Trump in court. "That's an option and we will review our options."
"The President is doing an end run around Congress," Pelosi added.
 
Advisers said Trump had grown increasingly concerned about what is contained in the 1,100-page legislation that was released late Wednesday evening.
As more details about the package emerged, conservative figures in Trump's orbit voiced new displeasure at the bill. That included Fox host Laura Ingraham, who tweeted earlier Thursday that Trump should not sign it. The White House had attempted earlier this week to bolster support among Trump's media allies.
 
White House officials have been digesting the text since early morning and have briefed the President as they go along. The President tweeted midday he was "reviewing the funding bill with my team."
 
"1,000 pages filed in the in middle of the night take a little time to go through," one White House official told CNN's Jim Acosta.
 
(more in the link)

https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/14/politics/donald-trump-wall-funding-bill/index.html

 

******************************

 

White House has found $2.7B in funding that could go to border wall

Thu 14 Feb 2019 20:20:11 GMT

Reuters report, citing source familiar

  • White House lawyers believe emergency funding would withstand legal challenge
And a legal challenge there will be.
 
 
**************************************
 
Well on the one hand they've managed to avoid another government shutdown.
 
No word on where the White House has dug up this $2.7B. Regardless, it's doing an end around congress who has the power of the purse.
 
IMO it's basically the dumbest thing the administration could do. It will undoubtedly end up in a court challenge. Illegal border crossings are at a 40 year low. So where is the national emergency? Illegals commit crimes at far lower rates than legal citizens. So where is the national emergency?
 
Sooner or later there will be a Democrat president. With this action setting precedent what's to stop them from declaring a national emergency on gun control, climate change or green energy?
 
It's basically the dumbest thing since then Democrat Senate majority leader Harry Reid changed the senate rules regarding the number of votes required to confirm judges.
 
Let the games begin

 

OMG I cannot wait for the next Dem president to declare a state of emergency and find money over the ridiculous amount of gun deaths in the US.

 

Wait, no?  No the president can't do that?  That's over reaching?

 

Ok

 

How about the next president finding money to fund healthcare and education after declaring a state of emergency over the quality of and degradation of the US education and health system

 

No?  Over reaching again?

 

hmmmm

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump and his flaccid administration are the enemy of the average American. They, and the majority of Republican 'murica are truly only the friend of the superwealthy, no one else. They've counted on the fact that their base are too stupid to have any independent thought through doing  actual research, and would much prefer a messiah to hang their hopes, prayers, and dream on.

 

Trump's reliance on fairy tales like religion only serve to prove the point even more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, PhillipBlunt said:

Trump and his flaccid administration are the enemy of the average American. They, and the majority of Republican 'murica are truly only the friend of the superwealthy, no one else. They've counted on the fact that their base are too stupid to have any independent thought through doing  actual research, and would much prefer a messiah to hang their hopes, prayers, and dream on.

 

Trump's reliance on fairy tales like religion only serve to prove the point even more.

lol already economists are coming out saying where trump will get his border wall money.

 

Food stamps and underprivileged programs and veterans services are the 1st two to have money taken from them

 

HAHAHAHAHA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

lol already economists are coming out saying where trump will get his border wall money.

 

Food stamps and underprivileged programs and veterans services are the 1st two to have money taken from them

 

HAHAHAHAHA

And I'm sure their are millions of dumb Trumpians who rely on some of those programs who accept losing them, as long as their messiah keeps "winning".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the TRUMP!! and co. go after disaster relief funds as well, wouldn't it be fitting that a disaster occurs, and then they have to go, "oops, no money.  Spent in on that wall thingy."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.