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.
Stop saying weird shit. Cant you be a normal person for 1 fucking day?
How ironic. YOU complaining about other people saying "weird shit". You're posts are nothing but "weird shit", and you mocking and laughing about it.
Now that your SC is busy destroying the Constitution, you're having a panic attack at left wing speculation as to what it all means.
Grow the fuck up and stop behaving like a spoilt toddler.
No they don't. They simply use geographic lines. Gerrymandering is specifically placing certain voters in the district. You draw straight lines around an area, or use county and city limits, and that's the district.
You don't take the "urban voters" from one area and split them into 3 and add them to three different Conservatives districts to dilute the "urban" vote and prevent this group from having ANY representation.
This is how you get super majorities of white Republicans in states that have close to a 50% minority population. Alabama has a white population of less than 45%, and yet the members of the state legislature are 75% white and 85% male. Hardly "representative" of the population.
And this is why red states are such a complete disaster in terms of education and infrastructure.
Because the President cannot be prosecuted for conduct within his exclusive constitutional authority, Trump is absolutely immune from prosecution for the
alleged conduct involving his discussions with Justice Department of
-
ficials. Pp. 19–21
When you create "black majority" districts, you don't use geographical lines, you use where the black people live.
And I have a feeling Dems will care about this less and less as Blacks start leaving the Dems because of the hard lefty shit and the empty promises of over half a century.
Education in NYC, Chicago and LA is great throughout the city?
Infrastructure in those cities aren't falling apart in some cases?
Creating districts is about creating a representative democracy, not "black districts" That's why you use geographic lines and city limits.
Until Republican Party disavows racism and white supremacy, black people won't be joining the Republican Party, because they will never be given any real power within a white nationalist party.
Basically you're saying that Nixon did nothing wrong.Yep, and there are precedents cited for that reasoning. All federal law enforcement authority is derived from the president, I've probably said that a hundred times on the forum over the years. The president can establish priorities for the DOJ and if the AG disagrees or refuses to follow the president, the president has every right to fire his/her ass. This is nothing new.
Basically you're saying that Nixon did nothing wrong.
Just because you don't want to make an inference going by the actual language in the ruling doesn't mean you can't make on.
SCOTUS opinions don't work on a case to case basis. They work on establishing certain frameworks by which to judge those cases. This particular framework allows for a president to order the military to kill an opponent. Saying I need a specific circumstance spelled out to make that circumstance legal is simply dishonest.
It is when the cover up consists of the president ordering the CIA or DOJ to squash the investigation. These agencies are under exclusive control of the president and therefore those actions are given absolute immunity.Covering up knowledge of someone else's illegal act isn't an official act.
I support my claims to but there are certain posters who I will not give links to that OK Texas is one of them. He doesn't read links - ever. He never posts links ever. But he demands links to things that are public knowledge,
It is when the cover up consists of the president ordering the CIA or DOJ to squash the investigation. These agencies are under exclusive control of the president and therefore those actions are given absolute immunity.
What did I lie about?
What do you mean the "root cause" is an illegal act? The alleged "crime" was part of his official duties and is granted absolute immunity. The brilliant conservative SCOTUS says that we are not at all allowed to consider his motivation for the act. The fact that this is within his authority is enough to prevent any prosecution.The root cause is an illegal act. Nixon wouldn't have gotten immunity then, nor would he under current rules.
The Republican party of the past wouldn't stand for it. This current Republican party gives us reason to doubt.And Impeachment was inevitable in the case of Nixon, because back then both sides wouldn't stand for it.
How so?An unviable fetus in a danger to the mother.
What do you mean the "root cause" is an illegal act? The alleged "crime" was part of his official duties and is granted absolute immunity. The brilliant conservative SCOTUS says that we are not at all allowed to consider his motivation for the act. The fact that this is within his authority is enough to prevent any prosecution.
The Republican party of the past wouldn't stand for it. This current Republican party gives us reason to doubt.
I already stated. They gave themselves veto power over any policy of the executive they don’t like. The law doesn’t matter. They can just pretend the law doesnt mean what it says.
Are you switching gears from Nixon to Trump now?If he reasonably thought the election was compromised he had a responsibility to figure it out.
Sorry for attempting to educate you. I assumed when you asked a question you were interested in hearing an answer.So you can get specific. Run along child you're wasting my time.
.
