Laniakea
Not of this world
Why? Trump is already going to win. That's why the dems' TDS symptoms are flaring up again.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Supreme Court will decide if Donald Trump can be kept off 2024 presidential ballots
- Thread starter Stevicus
- Start date
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
By not even looking at the immigration bill Lankford spent months putting together that contained the vast majority of what they wanted. That's how they said they wanted open borders. By doing absolutely nothing about it. By just sitting on their hands waiting until Trump becomes President.
"WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republicans on Tuesday walked away from the bipartisan border security and immigration deal clinched after months of painstaking negotiations, siding with their House colleagues and presidential front-runner Donald Trump.
The decision to block the bill released just two days ago not only leaves laws in place that GOP lawmakers say have led to a “crisis” at the southern border, but drags on the stalemate over whether Congress will approve assistance for Ukraine and Israel, which was rolled into the package.
Republicans said months ago that the only way they’d support additional assistance for the two U.S. allies at war was if Democrats worked with them to “secure” the border.
But that requirement fell by the wayside this week after U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, and dozens of GOP lawmakers expressed opposition to the bill that was negotiated by a bipartisan trio of senators. Johnson instead pushed a standalone bill that only provided aid to Israel — and it was rejected on a Tuesday night vote. An attempt to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas also failed.
Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Lankford, one of the three senators who spent months negotiating the immigration language in the measure released Sunday, said he believes there will be “significant” ramifications if the GOP completely walks away from the deal he helped write.
Lankford also expressed dismay that some of the lawmakers opposing the package don’t actually understand how the proposed changes in immigration law would work.
“That’s the part that’s disappointing to me,” Lankford said. “If you’re going to disagree with it, disagree with it based on the facts of the bill, not something that’s actually factually not true.”
Bleak future for immigration action after U.S. Senate GOP abandons border security deal • Nebraska Examiner
U.S. Senate Republicans on Tuesday walked away from the bipartisan border security and immigration deal clinched after months of painstaking negotiations.
nebraskaexaminer.com
Laniakea
Not of this world
More useful would have been the text of the bill.By not even looking at the immigration bill Lankford spent months putting together that contained the vast majority of what they wanted. That's how they said they wanted open borders. By doing absolutely nothing about it. By just sitting on their hands waiting until Trump becomes President.
"WASHINGTON — U.S. Senate Republicans on Tuesday walked away from the bipartisan border security and immigration deal clinched after months of painstaking negotiations, siding with their House colleagues and presidential front-runner Donald Trump.
The decision to block the bill released just two days ago not only leaves laws in place that GOP lawmakers say have led to a “crisis” at the southern border, but drags on the stalemate over whether Congress will approve assistance for Ukraine and Israel, which was rolled into the package.
Republicans said months ago that the only way they’d support additional assistance for the two U.S. allies at war was if Democrats worked with them to “secure” the border.
But that requirement fell by the wayside this week after U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, and dozens of GOP lawmakers expressed opposition to the bill that was negotiated by a bipartisan trio of senators. Johnson instead pushed a standalone bill that only provided aid to Israel — and it was rejected on a Tuesday night vote. An attempt to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas also failed.
Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Lankford, one of the three senators who spent months negotiating the immigration language in the measure released Sunday, said he believes there will be “significant” ramifications if the GOP completely walks away from the deal he helped write.
Lankford also expressed dismay that some of the lawmakers opposing the package don’t actually understand how the proposed changes in immigration law would work.
“That’s the part that’s disappointing to me,” Lankford said. “If you’re going to disagree with it, disagree with it based on the facts of the bill, not something that’s actually factually not true.”
Bleak future for immigration action after U.S. Senate GOP abandons border security deal • Nebraska Examiner
U.S. Senate Republicans on Tuesday walked away from the bipartisan border security and immigration deal clinched after months of painstaking negotiations.
It was an easy prediction, ie, the Trump
loyalists would prevail. Next, if they rule
Trump has absolute immunity (something
they granted to federal law enforcement),
then this could get very very messy.
loyalists would prevail. Next, if they rule
Trump has absolute immunity (something
they granted to federal law enforcement),
then this could get very very messy.
Laniakea
Not of this world
What would be messy about it? If he has absolute immunity, it seems that things would be rather clear cut from this point onward. The endless anti-Trump trials can finally be discontinued, and all those who keep saying he's guilty of this or that can finally be assured that they are wrong.
Then we can get on with having a free and fair election without all the distractions.
As they should. He's ineligible for office and the Supreme Court just ruled that it's up to Congress to deal with that.
Probably better that he be ruled ineligible by Congress on the day of the count than to deal with it the way that the 1870 Enforcement Act would require: once he's taken office, have him removed by the courts.
Absolute immunity would give him formal
free reign to do anything he wants without
fear of prosecution. This has the potential
to inspire extra-judicial civilian sanction.
Do you think the fake electors will work this time?
A President with absolute immunity would
be able to enforce their being legitimate
electors. Oh, the possibilities!
Laniakea
Not of this world
If he's been ruled to be eligible to be on the ballot, he's eligible for office.
Laniakea
Not of this world
No such thing.
So relieved to hear that.
Laniakea
Not of this world
Good. He shouldn't have to fear prosecution for doing his job.
Perhaps you don't know what absolute immunity is.
It differs from qualified immunity, which is about
doing one's job. Absolute immunity allows any act,
eg, persecuting political foes, prosecuting reporters
for offending him, threatening secretaries of state to
"find votes", ordering the VP to over-turn the election,
sexually assaulting women, having minions invade
the Capitol.
Soandso
ᛋᛏᚨᚾᛞ ᛋᚢᚱᛖ
Presidents in the past haven't had this problem, so why should Trump be treated any differently? I mean, we are talking about someone who's had a sordid and shady history since long before he was president. No one should be above the law
SCOTUS might rule otherwise.
Laniakea
Not of this world
Maybe it's accepted that he already has absolute immunity since nobody is prosecuting him for the things you mentioned.
Laniakea
Not of this world
He's treated differently because he doesn't tow the MSM narrative, and democrats are not able to allow Republicans to operate under the same "democracy" that they themselves claim to want.
Here's where all the cases against Trump stand as he campaigns for a return to the White House
From allegations of plotting to overturn an election he lost to illegally stowing classified documents at his Florida estate, former President Donald Trump faces four criminal indictments in four different cities as he vies to reclaim the White House.
Laniakea
Not of this world
Flimsy allegations.
Here's where all the cases against Trump stand as he campaigns for a return to the White House
From allegations of plotting to overturn an election he lost to illegally stowing classified documents at his Florida estate, former President Donald Trump faces four criminal indictments in four different cities as he vies to reclaim the White House.apnews.com
oh, and a fulfilled campaign promise by latoya james.