Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Jim Crow is to race, as Trumps EO is to religion.
And Jim Crow voting laws didn't mention race. Yet the intent of both were clear, as those making up the laws actually told the people voting for them, what the laws were intended to do.Nope. Trump's EO doesn't mention religion. Furthermore, the president can exclude foreigners for any reason he likes.
Since when are Moslems a race?
I know right? Everything is racism to Democrats.
Is that an actual book?Since when are Moslems a race?
I know right? Everything is racism to Democrats.
View attachment 486036
...
As far as the president excluding foreigners, that is true, but not absolute. As he can't exclude based on race or religion, which is where Trump went wrong with his religious ban.
Actually texturalism throws out constitutional original intent.Original intent applies to the Constitution. You're assumptions about Trump's intent are nothing buy your worthless opinion.
They seriously believe that Americans are dumb enough to vote them in.
Actually texturalism throws out constitutional original intent.
I read the constitution. And where it says "the people" it (texturalism) applies to all human beings.However, religious discrimination against foreigners is perfectly legal. Try actually reading the Constitution for once.
You also show you have no problem with religious discrimination or racism.
That's why I listed two things he doesn't have a problem with.Since when are Moslems a race?
I have to correct that to it doesn't apply to people not under the jurisdiction of the US. independent of where they are located, Just as the constitution holds to people under the jurisdiction of the US, independent of where they are located.The Constitution does not apply to foreigners in foreign lands.
You just have to look up the meaning of the words.Actually texturalism throws out constitutional original intent.
Citation please.
I read the constitution. And where it says "the people" it (texturalism) applies to all human beings.
Where something is restricted to the citizens of the US, it says "citizens"
The people refers to all people under the jurisdiction of the US. independent of their location.And you think that trumps the original intent? You're an idiot. "The poeple" is the people of this nation, not the people of the world you moron.
There's no such thing.It's from the devils "adultery" clock.
There's no such thing.It's from the devils "adultery" clock.
Advice for you: Sometimes it's best to remain silent than remove all doubt.
It didn't ban any religion. Muslims were still free to come to the US, Dummy.Jim Crow is to race, as Trumps EO is to religion.And Jim Crow voting laws didn't mention race. Yet the intent of both were clear, as those making up the laws actually told the people voting for them, what the laws were intended to do.Nope. Trump's EO doesn't mention religion. Furthermore, the president can exclude foreigners for any reason he likes.
As far as the president excluding foreigners, that is true, but not absolute. As he can't exclude based on race or religion, which is where Trump went wrong with his religious ban.
"Texturalism"? WTF is that? The study of wall finishes?Actually texturalism throws out constitutional original intent.Original intent applies to the Constitution. You're assumptions about Trump's intent are nothing buy your worthless opinion.
You may not know it before you die that you've been conned by a con artist....but your kids and grandkids and all future generations, will know he truth....the true History, with actual facts and not "alternative facts" will forever be there, for all to see.We liberals, saw that with Trump, for 4 straight years, 24/7. . . . . .
Another leftist falsehood. If you saw that then your head was stuck in fake news, which I entirely believe.
All I can say to all that excusery, is...For certain. The difference is that we did not take every exaggeration as some sort of malicious lie to manipulate the public, cover up for some utter failure or demagogue all opposition as some malevolent force trying to put every victim group we didn't create into concentration camps and exterminate them.We liberals, saw that with Trump, for 4 straight years, 24/7.... I'm guessing it's all in the eye of the beholder...If that jabbering old idiot is communicating, a lie is being told.
We knew a wall was not the end of illegal immigration. We knew Mexico wasn't going to write a check. We knew he may have fucked some whores. We knew he may have had some shady business dealing but that they paled in comparison to Xiden/hitlery's. We also knew that everything he said or did was going to be scrutinized and condemned by the media, and everything a democrook does is exalted as "progress".
That's the difference between us. We have the capacity to know things, separate fact from bullshit, draw conclusions logically using real data rather than emotion and agitprop, and think independently.
After 8 years of Obozo, I would not have cared if Trump participated in an orgy with 5 russian whores, 2 dwarves, Putin, and a She/Male from Bangkok that ended up in a turd fight. The difference between us again is that you would believe such nonsense.
.
