Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

President attacks 'so political' courts


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> President attacks 'so political' courts Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 1:25:01 PM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline 		US President Donald Trump has taken a swipe at "so political" courts, as his immigration travel ban faces a major legal test.

Mr Trump told a gathering of police chiefs in Washington DC that he has the right to enact his executive order.

His remarks came a day after an appeals court heard a challenge to the Republican president's policy.

Choice for supreme court Neil Gorsuch - defense adjourns. I could of course cite all of orange hairy boy’s faux pas but that’s just about everything he has ever said.
I could of course cite the senate rules were changed to allow a party majority as opposed to 60.

“Safety”:

1. I could cite those seven countries death tally on American soil since 1971 = zero
2. I could cite death tally on American soil from the other 40 Muslim countries since 1971 as being ~4000 – most of that is the twin Towers mainly Saudi nationals. Whats Americashire arm deals worth with the Saudis each year anyone?
3. I could cite death by Americans killing themselves with guns since 1971 ~ 1.3 million souls – that’s sickening

At the end of the day this will end up in the Supreme Court..oh and here is the article--video of him making the usual howling kunt of himself http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38902574
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 2:00:55 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		since the constitution of the united states is concerned with the politics of the united states, it points out even more spectacularly that the nutsucker president voted in by nutsuckers (who want a strict interpretation of the constitution, and shit their pants when it is delivered into their hands) are not aware that the Executive is a political branch, the Legislative is a political branch, and the Judiciary is a political branch (otherwise why are they so interested in getting the SCOTUS packed with conservatives?)

I find these retarded nutsuckers more fascinating every day in that they can walk upright and breathe simultaneously with only a shriveled brain stem.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to WickedsDesire)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 2:06:12 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline 		Actually, to be very honest, your statistics of Americans killing Americans should be "Americans descended from European and Slave parents killing each other with guns."

Strangely enough, Native Americans killing each other is down 98% from historic highs when they killed each other as often as the killed white eyes.

Of course, I am working on the theory that it is a native American conspiracy to let the white eyes kill each other to the point where there are more native Americans than them, and we can take our country back.

A friend of mine who is full Apache recently told me something his great grandfather told him, "If we had been smart, we would have moved to the reservations instead of continuing to fight. White eyes kill themselves faster than we ever did."

Of course, Native Americans have a nasty habit of drinking themselves to death, as the incidence of alcoholism is higher among native Americans than any other segment of society, which has led many reservations to ban the sale of alcohol on reservations.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to WickedsDesire)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 2:23:42 PM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline 		jlf1961 I know. mnottertail nuances of your system still escape me...did his man get elected to the Supreme court? A mere 10 months after senate re Obama man, or women- was a women I seem to think, it was to close to the end of his presidency to consider Obama bint....and they changed that rule swearyman where does te 60 aye come into it?..I seem to think the senate is split 52-48 is this correct?

I only use that figure because he is citing security-safety. The disparity between 0 versus ~1.3 million is shimmering clarity itself. Logically should he not have went after half of the second?

But if you just listen to what he says in that link you should all be afeared World.


(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 2:38:19 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire

jlf1961 I know. mnottertail nuances of your system still escape me...did his man get elected to the Supreme court? A mere 10 months after senate re Obama man, or women- was a women I seem to think, it was to close to the end of his presidency to consider Obama bint....and they changed that rule swearyman where does te 60 aye come into it?..I seem to think the senate is split 52-48 is this correct?

I only use that figure because he is citing security-safety. The disparity between 0 versus ~1.3 million is shimmering clarity itself. Logically should he not have went after half of the second?

But if you just listen to what he says in that link you should all be afeared World.



All federal judges Circuit, Appellate, and Supreme Court are voted by the Senate.

This particular judge was nominated by George W Bush, you may of heard of that rotter, with 99-0 and one not voting in the Senate.

The other fellow who will be voted to the Supreme court either way, needs 51 votes, the nutickers changed the rule of 60, to simple majority.


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to WickedsDesire)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 2:47:47 PM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline 		The other fellow who will be voted to the Supreme court either way, needs 51 votes, the nutickers changed the rule of 60, to simple majority. Now how did president dangerous fukwit do this....Christ dont tell me it was an executive order?

Actually can you explain the 60 rule to me. That's from 100 isn't it, or kinda 60% rule (to low)...whats the origin of that one?

< Message edited by WickedsDesire -- 2/8/2017 2:50:02 PM >

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 3:14:30 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire

The other fellow who will be voted to the Supreme court either way, needs 51 votes, the nutickers changed the rule of 60, to simple majority. Now how did president dangerous fukwit do this....Christ dont tell me it was an executive order?

Actually can you explain the 60 rule to me. That's from 100 isn't it, or kinda 60% rule (to low)...whats the origin of that one?



Actually the Senate did this, the president has no control over senate rules.

In point of fact, when the dems controlled the senate, the republicans raised a major stink, calling it a move to eliminate republican power in the senate, and therefore wrong to do so.

So, the democrats backed off and left the super majority rule (rule of 60) in place.

Now, that the Republicans have control of the senate, then of course if they do it, there is no move to eliminate the voice of the other party.

Basically, it is political hypocrisy in action.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to WickedsDesire)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 3:44:28 PM   
BoscoX


Posts: 11235
Joined: 12/10/2016
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Of course, I am working on the theory that it is a native American conspiracy to let the white eyes kill each other to the point where there are more native Americans than them, and we can take our country back.


Time for the orderlies to take you back to your nice padded room now

_____________________________

Thought Criminal

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 4:38:45 PM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Of course, Native Americans have a nasty habit of drinking themselves to death, as the incidence of alcoholism is higher among native Americans than any other segment of society, which has led many reservations to ban the sale of alcohol on reservations.

This very strange alcoholism problem seem to be the bane of most tribes in any country. Same problem with aboriginals in Australia.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 4:42:07 PM   
vincentML


Posts: 9980
Joined: 10/31/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire

The other fellow who will be voted to the Supreme court either way, needs 51 votes, the nutickers changed the rule of 60, to simple majority. Now how did president dangerous fukwit do this....Christ dont tell me it was an executive order?

Actually can you explain the 60 rule to me. That's from 100 isn't it, or kinda 60% rule (to low)...whats the origin of that one?


Easy peasy . . .when one or more Senators seize the floor and refuse to relinquish it they are staging a filibuster. A tactic by the minority to prevent the majority from voting. Was a time when the minority would keep the floor by speaking the night through or until "debate" was cut off (called cloture) By rule 60 votes were needed to invoke cloture. now the lazy creatures do not actually "take to the mattresses." Instead, they just declare "filibuster." Sixty votes are needed to shut them up.

See the movie . . . Mr Smith Goes to Washington

_____________________________

vML

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ~ MLK Jr.

(in reply to WickedsDesire)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 5:34:22 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

Of course, I am working on the theory that it is a native American conspiracy to let the white eyes kill each other to the point where there are more native Americans than them, and we can take our country back.


Time for the orderlies to take you back to your nice padded room now



You really have no concept of sarcasm, or actually any form of humor that requires an IQ above 50.

Let me guess, you go to family reunions to pick up girls, right?

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 8:03:27 PM   
lovmuffin


Posts: 3759
Joined: 9/28/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire

The other fellow who will be voted to the Supreme court either way, needs 51 votes, the nutickers changed the rule of 60, to simple majority. Now how did president dangerous fukwit do this....Christ dont tell me it was an executive order?

Actually can you explain the 60 rule to me. That's from 100 isn't it, or kinda 60% rule (to low)...whats the origin of that one?



Actually the Senate did this, the president has no control over senate rules.

In point of fact, when the dems controlled the senate, the republicans raised a major stink, calling it a move to eliminate republican power in the senate, and therefore wrong to do so.

So, the democrats backed off and left the super majority rule (rule of 60) in place.

Now, that the Republicans have control of the senate, then of course if they do it, there is no move to eliminate the voice of the other party.

Basically, it is political hypocrisy in action.


I don't recall that the Democrats backed off. I thought it was the Democrats who changed the rule (the nuclear option) for legislation to get Obama care to pass. They changed it for approving judges and cabinet members. The only thing they didn't change it for is SC judges. I wouldn't doubt the Republicans would change it for the SC if necessary. The Democrats are having to swallow their own pill.

_____________________________

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Unknown

"Long hair, short hair—what's the difference once the head's blowed off." - Farmer Yassir

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 8:16:48 PM   
BoscoX


Posts: 11235
Joined: 12/10/2016
Status: online
quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire

The other fellow who will be voted to the Supreme court either way, needs 51 votes, the nutickers changed the rule of 60, to simple majority. Now how did president dangerous fukwit do this....Christ dont tell me it was an executive order?

Actually can you explain the 60 rule to me. That's from 100 isn't it, or kinda 60% rule (to low)...whats the origin of that one?



Actually the Senate did this, the president has no control over senate rules.

In point of fact, when the dems controlled the senate, the republicans raised a major stink, calling it a move to eliminate republican power in the senate, and therefore wrong to do so.

So, the democrats backed off and left the super majority rule (rule of 60) in place.

Now, that the Republicans have control of the senate, then of course if they do it, there is no move to eliminate the voice of the other party.

Basically, it is political hypocrisy in action.


I don't recall that the Democrats backed off. I thought it was the Democrats who changed the rule (the nuclear option) for legislation to get Obama care to pass. They changed it for approving judges and cabinet members. The only thing they didn't change it for is SC judges. I wouldn't doubt the Republicans would change it for the SC if necessary. The Democrats are having to swallow their own pill.


It's really a waste of time trying to reason with an oaf like jlf. He makes up his "history" and his "facts" as he goes along. And if you prove something to him one minute, five minutes later he is totally ignorant of that same thing all over again


_____________________________

Thought Criminal

(in reply to lovmuffin)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 9:55:57 PM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline 		Donald creature-god orange hairy boy Trump's nominee for the Supreme Court has described the president's fuking looneys attacks on the judiciary as "demoralising" and "disheartening".
Neil Gorsuch's comments were made to a Democratic senator and confirmed by his spokesman.
The president called a judge who halted his controversial travel ban a "so-called judge", and said any terror attacks on US soil would be his fault.

Well i suppose at least he has plums http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38914598

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igGLXfKASuw

< Message edited by WickedsDesire -- 2/8/2017 9:59:09 PM >

(in reply to BoscoX)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 9:59:04 PM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire
Neil Gorsuch's comments were made to a Democratic senator and confirmed by his spokesman.

I think it's a good move by Neil to show that even though he is appointed by Trump but he can be very independent from Trump.

So to me, this was strategically said to make sure he gets instated as the supreme court judge.

(in reply to WickedsDesire)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 10:02:45 PM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline 		I would expect the supreme court judges & nominees to be impartial on matters that challenge the remnants of the constitution (save the second) - good to see him speak out against the dangerous fuk

< Message edited by WickedsDesire -- 2/8/2017 10:04:11 PM >

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 11:12:43 PM   
WickedsDesire


Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline 		The US Senate has confirmed President Donald Trump's nomination for attorney general, Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions, by a vote of 52 to 47. guffaws

(in reply to WickedsDesire)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 11:23:37 PM   
heavyblinker


Posts: 3623
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Of course, Native Americans have a nasty habit of drinking themselves to death, as the incidence of alcoholism is higher among native Americans than any other segment of society, which has led many reservations to ban the sale of alcohol on reservations.

This very strange alcoholism problem seem to be the bane of most tribes in any country. Same problem with aboriginals in Australia.


I'm sure that being reduced to third class citizens in your own country is pretty collectively traumatic.
Of course it's not like they've suffered the horrors that respectmen has, but it's pretty close.

(in reply to Greta75)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 11:26:44 PM   
tamaka


Posts: 5079
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker


quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Of course, Native Americans have a nasty habit of drinking themselves to death, as the incidence of alcoholism is higher among native Americans than any other segment of society, which has led many reservations to ban the sale of alcohol on reservations.

This very strange alcoholism problem seem to be the bane of most tribes in any country. Same problem with aboriginals in Australia.


I'm sure that being reduced to third class citizens in your own country is pretty collectively traumatic.
Of course it's not like they've suffered the horrors that respectmen has, but it's pretty close.



Victim mentality never got anyone anywhere.

(in reply to heavyblinker)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: President attacks 'so political' courts - 2/8/2017 11:42:26 PM   
Greta75


Posts: 9968
Joined: 2/6/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker
I'm sure that being reduced to third class citizens in your own country is pretty collectively traumatic.
Of course it's not like they've suffered the horrors that respectmen has, but it's pretty close.

Irony is, our natives are traditionally Muslims, so they traditionally are forbidden to drink alcohol, so they never got alcoholism problem within their community ha!

But I always feel like, assuming aboriginals in Australia used to just happily live in the deserts, and Native Americans just live in their forests or whatever.

The west should have done like Brazil. How Brazil got their Natives still happily living self-sustainingly without any modern technology or contact with the modern world in their amazon forest out there.

That was what should have happened with Natives of every country, just leave them alone and give them Territory to live in their natural environment by their own terms.

My country is too small to do that. Although we have one tiny little spot left where the Natives are living in wooden houses,and growing their own food in their own wilderness, but most Natives choose to modernized and join the rest of us in the modern world. But US and Australia has ALOT of land.

Because if I was not wrong, Australia tried to take away aboriginal kids from their parents to assimilate them into western cultures, and they still all end up depressed and alcoholic and struggling in the modern world.

Maybe they are just not meant for the modern world.

I feel like the Brazilian Natives are so happy in their own little bubble. And living a great life.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/12/uncontacted-tribe-amazon-brazil-photos/

< Message edited by Greta75 -- 2/8/2017 11:52:24 PM >

(in reply to heavyblinker)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> President attacks 'so political' courts Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094