Since he admitted to Treason on TV, this is nothing but positive. Sadly, they cannot court-martial him thanks to Biden's pardon. https://t.co/Q0zuEJmNS0
— Nexist Xenda'ths 🇺🇸 🇹🇼 ðŸ‡ðŸ‡° (@dar205) January 21, 2025
WOW - Not a single major US government agency is occupying even 50% of their office space. pic.twitter.com/CPcnSVWgDn
— Tucker Carlson Network 🇺🇸 Fan Account (@TCNetworkFans) January 21, 2025
Woke influencer Harry Sisson can't answer how many genders there are on Piers Morgan
— YAF (@yaf) January 22, 2025
The panel has him completely stumped! pic.twitter.com/6ZyfpP3Bv5
Japan looking for alternatives to American beef.
— Dominic Pino (@DominicJPino) January 23, 2025
Maybe taking our allies for granted and insulting them with protectionism isn't such a great idea for American economic interests. https://t.co/eYmNPbSzaR pic.twitter.com/i2dScDY9Hy
Update: Someone is afraid of being held accountable for their actions.
— Tom Homan - Border Czar Commentary and Updates (@TomHoman_) January 21, 2025
Governor Maura Healey now claims Massachusetts is not a sanctuary state and has committed to cooperating with President Trump’s administration on his mass deportation operations.
We all saw this coming,… https://t.co/RCEguAwn0E pic.twitter.com/SEeeqJSezH
How awful and worthless was Joe Biden? Saudi Arabia's state news agency has just announced that the kingdom's crown prince wants to increase trade and investment with the U.S. by at least $600 billion in the coming four years.
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) January 23, 2025
That's more than $1700 for every single American…
Is that the same Saudi Arabia that gave Jared Kushner $2 BILLION for no apparent reason? Hmmmm, someone should look into that. Anyway, that murderous prince must really like Trump for some reason.packgrad said:How awful and worthless was Joe Biden? Saudi Arabia's state news agency has just announced that the kingdom's crown prince wants to increase trade and investment with the U.S. by at least $600 billion in the coming four years.
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) January 23, 2025
That's more than $1700 for every single American…
Well, maybe we'll at least get this issue solved once and for all. Too many illegals are taking advantage of a law written for slaves long ago.
— No2Losers (@NoahTooh) January 21, 2025
18 states challenge Trump's executive order cutting birthright citizenship #DonaldTrump #MelaniaTrump #Visashttps://t.co/RTgCQ0Kqew
lol. 42 decades of precedent, this will be a 9-0 ruling. Maybe DOGE can figure out how much money was wasted on this sillinessWerewolf said:
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866, and ratified July 9, 1868, the 14th Amendment extended liberties and rights granted by the Bill of Rights to formerly enslaved people.
Following the Civil War, Congress submitted to the states three amendments as part of its Reconstruction program to guarantee equal civil and legal rights to Black citizens. A major provision of the 14th Amendment was to grant citizenship to "All persons born or naturalized in the United States," thereby granting citizenship to formerly enslaved people.
Another equally important provision was the statement that "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The right to due process of law and equal protection of the law now applied to both the federal and state governments.
On June 16, 1866, the House Joint Resolution proposing the 14th Amendment to the Constitution was submitted to the states. On July 28, 1868, the 14th amendment was declared, in a certificate of the Secretary of State, ratified by the necessary 28 of the 37 States, and became part of the supreme law of the land.
Congressman John A. Bingham of Ohio, the primary author of the first section of the 14th Amendment, intended that the amendment also nationalize the Bill of Rights by making it binding upon the states. When introducing the amendment, Senator Jacob Howard of Michigan specifically stated that the privileges and immunities clause would extend to the states "the personal rights guaranteed and secured by the first eight amendments." Historians disagree on how widely Bingham's and Howard's views were shared at the time in the Congress, or across the country in general. No one in Congress explicitly contradicted their view of the amendment, but only a few members said anything at all about its meaning on this issue. For many years, the Supreme Court ruled that the amendment did not extend the Bill of Rights to the states.
Not only did the 14th Amendment fail to extend the Bill of Rights to the states; it also failed to protect the rights of Black citizens. A legacy of Reconstruction was the determined struggle of Black and White citizens to make the promise of the 14th Amendment a reality. Citizens petitioned and initiated court cases, Congress enacted legislation, and the executive branch attempted to enforce measures that would guard all citizens' rights. While these citizens did not succeed in empowering the 14th Amendment during Reconstruction, they effectively articulated arguments and offered dissenting opinions that would be the basis for change in the 20th century.Well, maybe we'll at least get this issue solved once and for all. Too many illegals are taking advantage of a law written for slaves long ago.
— No2Losers (@NoahTooh) January 21, 2025
18 states challenge Trump's executive order cutting birthright citizenship #DonaldTrump #MelaniaTrump #Visashttps://t.co/RTgCQ0Kqew
You were just saying that Biden declaring that the ERA was officially an amendment is an impeachable offense.hokiewolf said:lol. 42 decades of precedent, this will be a 9-0 ruling. Maybe DOGE can figure out how much money was wasted on this sillinessWerewolf said:
...
BREAKING:
— Mila Joy (@MilaLovesJoe) January 23, 2025
FEMA said they were out of money and couldn't help North Carolins.
Today Trump moved $2 billion from money used to support illegals to the people of North Carolina.
Trump isn’t wasting any time
— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) January 23, 2025
Rubio’s already en route to Panama https://t.co/IFdqaVjatR
What are you talking about? This country hasn't even been around for 42 decades.hokiewolf said:lol. 42 decades of precedent, this will be a 9-0 ruling. Maybe DOGE can figure out how much money was wasted on this sillinessWerewolf said:
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866, and ratified July 9, 1868, the 14th Amendment extended liberties and rights granted by the Bill of Rights to formerly enslaved people.
Following the Civil War, Congress submitted to the states three amendments as part of its Reconstruction program to guarantee equal civil and legal rights to Black citizens. A major provision of the 14th Amendment was to grant citizenship to "All persons born or naturalized in the United States," thereby granting citizenship to formerly enslaved people.
Another equally important provision was the statement that "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The right to due process of law and equal protection of the law now applied to both the federal and state governments.
On June 16, 1866, the House Joint Resolution proposing the 14th Amendment to the Constitution was submitted to the states. On July 28, 1868, the 14th amendment was declared, in a certificate of the Secretary of State, ratified by the necessary 28 of the 37 States, and became part of the supreme law of the land.
Congressman John A. Bingham of Ohio, the primary author of the first section of the 14th Amendment, intended that the amendment also nationalize the Bill of Rights by making it binding upon the states. When introducing the amendment, Senator Jacob Howard of Michigan specifically stated that the privileges and immunities clause would extend to the states "the personal rights guaranteed and secured by the first eight amendments." Historians disagree on how widely Bingham's and Howard's views were shared at the time in the Congress, or across the country in general. No one in Congress explicitly contradicted their view of the amendment, but only a few members said anything at all about its meaning on this issue. For many years, the Supreme Court ruled that the amendment did not extend the Bill of Rights to the states.
Not only did the 14th Amendment fail to extend the Bill of Rights to the states; it also failed to protect the rights of Black citizens. A legacy of Reconstruction was the determined struggle of Black and White citizens to make the promise of the 14th Amendment a reality. Citizens petitioned and initiated court cases, Congress enacted legislation, and the executive branch attempted to enforce measures that would guard all citizens' rights. While these citizens did not succeed in empowering the 14th Amendment during Reconstruction, they effectively articulated arguments and offered dissenting opinions that would be the basis for change in the 20th century.Well, maybe we'll at least get this issue solved once and for all. Too many illegals are taking advantage of a law written for slaves long ago.
— No2Losers (@NoahTooh) January 21, 2025
18 states challenge Trump's executive order cutting birthright citizenship #DonaldTrump #MelaniaTrump #Visashttps://t.co/RTgCQ0Kqew
I finally saw an all-hands email at 5:30 PM, well after COB, sent out by whomever Trump supposedly has acting as OPM chief until his main man gets confirmed by the Senate. It announced closure of DEIA offices which I expected. It also dropped an email address, a snitch line, for any employee who knows of, and reports covert retention of any DEI personnel or activity, and I expected that. What I didn't expect was blunt language referring to DEI as divisive, racist, and un-American, which was welcome nonetheless and tells me that whomever sent the communique was clearly a Trump person.Gulfstream4 said:Oldsouljer said:
These actions must be carried out by COB today (1/22/25). Today should be an interesting day at my agency.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/federal-dei-workers-placed-on-leave/ar-AA1xEs8e?ocid=BingNewsVerp
Good
English common law included.El Lobo Loco said:What are you talking about? This country hasn't even been around for 42 decades.hokiewolf said:lol. 42 decades of precedent, this will be a 9-0 ruling. Maybe DOGE can figure out how much money was wasted on this sillinessWerewolf said:
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866, and ratified July 9, 1868, the 14th Amendment extended liberties and rights granted by the Bill of Rights to formerly enslaved people.
Following the Civil War, Congress submitted to the states three amendments as part of its Reconstruction program to guarantee equal civil and legal rights to Black citizens. A major provision of the 14th Amendment was to grant citizenship to "All persons born or naturalized in the United States," thereby granting citizenship to formerly enslaved people.
Another equally important provision was the statement that "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The right to due process of law and equal protection of the law now applied to both the federal and state governments.
On June 16, 1866, the House Joint Resolution proposing the 14th Amendment to the Constitution was submitted to the states. On July 28, 1868, the 14th amendment was declared, in a certificate of the Secretary of State, ratified by the necessary 28 of the 37 States, and became part of the supreme law of the land.
Congressman John A. Bingham of Ohio, the primary author of the first section of the 14th Amendment, intended that the amendment also nationalize the Bill of Rights by making it binding upon the states. When introducing the amendment, Senator Jacob Howard of Michigan specifically stated that the privileges and immunities clause would extend to the states "the personal rights guaranteed and secured by the first eight amendments." Historians disagree on how widely Bingham's and Howard's views were shared at the time in the Congress, or across the country in general. No one in Congress explicitly contradicted their view of the amendment, but only a few members said anything at all about its meaning on this issue. For many years, the Supreme Court ruled that the amendment did not extend the Bill of Rights to the states.
Not only did the 14th Amendment fail to extend the Bill of Rights to the states; it also failed to protect the rights of Black citizens. A legacy of Reconstruction was the determined struggle of Black and White citizens to make the promise of the 14th Amendment a reality. Citizens petitioned and initiated court cases, Congress enacted legislation, and the executive branch attempted to enforce measures that would guard all citizens' rights. While these citizens did not succeed in empowering the 14th Amendment during Reconstruction, they effectively articulated arguments and offered dissenting opinions that would be the basis for change in the 20th century.Well, maybe we'll at least get this issue solved once and for all. Too many illegals are taking advantage of a law written for slaves long ago.
— No2Losers (@NoahTooh) January 21, 2025
18 states challenge Trump's executive order cutting birthright citizenship #DonaldTrump #MelaniaTrump #Visashttps://t.co/RTgCQ0Kqew
no, ignoring the law with the TolTok ban is impeachable. He ignored his oath - on day one! Edit: to clarify, I believe this is the case with the TikTok ban.SmaptyWolf said:You were just saying that Biden declaring that the ERA was officially an amendment is an impeachable offense.hokiewolf said:lol. 42 decades of precedent, this will be a 9-0 ruling. Maybe DOGE can figure out how much money was wasted on this sillinessWerewolf said:
...
Is declaring birthright citizenship illegal when you clearly know that's unconstitutional also impeachable? Or explicitly declaring that he wouldn't enforce a law he's legally required to enforce? Or declaring two national emergencies that patently don't exist? Or unilaterally renaming an international body of water he has no authority to rename? Or promising to "take back" the Panama Canal, a clear treaty violation in defiance of both domestic and international law? And that was just DAY ONE. So is all of that impeachable, too? Asking for a friend.
Apparently Trump's relentless daily lawbreaking, just like last time, is totally different.
hey, I'll tell you one I'm very interested in and like - the executive order eliminating DEI offices from federal departments includes provisions to include this order for federal contracts and grants. That is basically aiming the nuclear weapon at higher education . It's potentially massive.packgrad said:
Love seeing the TDS quars cry about all of this winning.
Trump following though on his campaign promises. Working like a machine knocking these suckers out.
Gonna be an extremely entertaining 4 years seeing these guys hyperventilate on a daily basis.packgrad said:
Love seeing the TDS quars cry about all of this winning.
Trump following though on his campaign promises. Working like a machine knocking these suckers out.
I was more commenting about the Biden hyperventilating. Trump being a lawless moron is baked into the cake at this point. I'm only half tuned in to the performative bullsh**, honestly, and most of my lefty friends could care less.jkpackfan said:Gonna be an extremely entertaining 4 years seeing these guys hyperventilate on a daily basis.packgrad said:
Love seeing the TDS quars cry about all of this winning.
Trump following though on his campaign promises. Working like a machine knocking these suckers out.
