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.
Does yer Rascal hovers round have enough battery power to propel you into the front lines of another civil war?This decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable.
The US Constitution has no provisions for how states run an election.
The Elections Clause is the primary source of constitutional authority to regulate elections for the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate. The Clause directs and empowers states to determine the “Times, Places, and Manner” of congressional elections, subject to Congress’s authority to “make or alter” state regulations. It grants each level of government the authority to enact a complete code for such elections, including rules concerning public notices, voter registration, voter protection, fraud prevention, vote counting, and determination of election results. Whenever a state enacts a law relating to a congressional election, it is exercising power under the Elections Clause; states do not have any inherent authority to enact such measures.
Interpretation: Elections Clause | Constitution Center
Interpretations of Elections Clause by constitutional scholarsconstitutioncenter.org
I never was able to complete my law degree and I take great offence to the state AG who is ignorant of just how the Constitution works along with state control of elections....
that is not what the ruling was about. they ruled that Texas and the other states did not have standing to bring the suit. look up lack of standing, you might learn something and stop posting like an idiot.
Yeah, about 100 posters here told the cult that TX didn’t have standing. But the poorly educated cultists really thought TX could win. The ruling was effectively 9-0 as Thomas and Alito said there were no remedies.
It was all Kabuki Theater. But cults gonna cult.
like your fellow libs, you also do not understand what lack of standing means in a court of american law. It is not the final straw. It is certainly a set back, but not the end of the fight. It may be that the only workable remedy is secession or breaking up the country into conservative and liberal separate countries. None of us want that, but with the country so divided philosophically it may be the only solution. If we cannot live together, lets live separately. Then we can see which system actually works.
I don't have whatever that is, but I have several guns and thousands of rounds of ammo. We would also have the police and the military and you would have the trannys who don't know which bathroom to use. it would be a very short war. A peaceful secession or division would be much better for everyone and would allow each side to live under its own ideology. We would take constitutional freedom and you can have socialist domination. Ready?
I bet you send lots of dough to televangelist also.Trump comes with nothing and will leave the same.In yer wet, wild dreams homeboy...Your bloodlust is showing what will Jesus Christ do with you?Does yer Rascal hovers round have enough battery power to propel you into the front lines of another civil war?This decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable.
The US Constitution has no provisions for how states run an election.
The Elections Clause is the primary source of constitutional authority to regulate elections for the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate. The Clause directs and empowers states to determine the “Times, Places, and Manner” of congressional elections, subject to Congress’s authority to “make or alter” state regulations. It grants each level of government the authority to enact a complete code for such elections, including rules concerning public notices, voter registration, voter protection, fraud prevention, vote counting, and determination of election results. Whenever a state enacts a law relating to a congressional election, it is exercising power under the Elections Clause; states do not have any inherent authority to enact such measures.
Interpretation: Elections Clause | Constitution Center
Interpretations of Elections Clause by constitutional scholarsconstitutioncenter.org
I never was able to complete my law degree and I take great offence to the state AG who is ignorant of just how the Constitution works along with state control of elections....
that is not what the ruling was about. they ruled that Texas and the other states did not have standing to bring the suit. look up lack of standing, you might learn something and stop posting like an idiot.
Yeah, about 100 posters here told the cult that TX didn’t have standing. But the poorly educated cultists really thought TX could win. The ruling was effectively 9-0 as Thomas and Alito said there were no remedies.
It was all Kabuki Theater. But cults gonna cult.
like your fellow libs, you also do not understand what lack of standing means in a court of american law. It is not the final straw. It is certainly a set back, but not the end of the fight. It may be that the only workable remedy is secession or breaking up the country into conservative and liberal separate countries. None of us want that, but with the country so divided philosophically it may be the only solution. If we cannot live together, lets live separately. Then we can see which system actually works.
I don't have whatever that is, but I have several guns and thousands of rounds of ammo. We would also have the police and the military and you would have the trannys who don't know which bathroom to use. it would be a very short war. A peaceful secession or division would be much better for everyone and would allow each side to live under its own ideology. We would take constitutional freedom and you can have socialist domination. Ready?
I think he is with me. Right will prevail, it may take a while, but in the end right and truth will win out. the founders knew that when they went against king George and signed the declaration of independence.
LOL, he came in a billionaire successful businessman and will leave exactly the same but now with the respect and admiration of more than half of the USA. His successful term will go down in history as one of the best ever. record low unemployment, no new wars started, mid east peace deals, record stock market, vaccine in record time, NATO paying its fair share, USMCA negotiated, the balance of trade with China fixed. dialog rather than war with North Korea. US companies expanding and relocating in the USA. Troops brought home.
But he had to go because he was exposing the DC corruption in both parties and the media. Truth is the enemy of the left and the power crazed DC deep state.
but now we have an old senile pervert and a power whore in charge. America deserves what it votes for.
Clearly... It does not. But you missed the largest point there... Where I told you to fuck off with that.I listened to the TED broadcast. While that does sound nice, it would be a nightmare to administer. I have served on a Jury where the ballots were anon on plain white pieces of paper. Of course, my writing could tell it was me but no one ever looked that close. We can overthink things. The Anon voting has been done since the creation of this Nation. And it works.
True... But a human can't. And that other computer needs to agree with the other computers that have also downloaded the information. That was the point of giving equal access to the voter tabulation.If a computer does the encrypting then another computer can break that encryption.
No you don't. If you didn't vote by ballot you don't even know if your vote was counted, let alone counted correctly. You know you filled out the sheet the way you wanted to. That's the only thing you know.I know who I voted for and what I voted for.
MMMmmm... Obviously can't trust State Legislators to do their jobs. You might agree with what is going on in those four states, I might say you only have faith in them because it came out the way you wanted them to?If a state is doing anything other than that then you need to get on your state Legislators and get it cleaned up. I can't speak for other states, only Colorado. And we have, on an average, about 3 voter frauds per election cycle out of over 2 million and those generally get caught.
Nothing stopping you laughing boy.Yeah, it's time to divvy this mother fucker up and quit pretending we don't want to shoot every fat stormtrooper dyke and fucking soy boy in the face. It's not going to work anymore. It's over.
Chairman Allen West's Response to SCOTUS Decision - Republican Party of Texas
RPT Chairman Allen West's statement regarding the SCOTUS decision to dismiss Texas's constitutionally legitimate and critical lawsuit.www.texasgop.org
YES YES YES! I am ready to pack and move because I know damn well my spineless coward of a governor would sit on his ass and do nothing!
And now another matter may come before the Supreme Court:
Lawmakers Who Backed Texas Lawsuit Should Be Barred From House: NJ Congressman
Democratic Rep. Bill Pascrell cited Section 3 of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, enacted after the Civil War to keep traitors out of the government.www.yahoo.com
View attachment 428161
They naively assume that the military would support their "civil war" (ha ha) just as they assumed the Supreme Court would obediently back up Trump's Silly Circus™.Does yer Rascal hovers round have enough battery power to propel you into the front lines of another civil war?This decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable.
The US Constitution has no provisions for how states run an election.
The Elections Clause is the primary source of constitutional authority to regulate elections for the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate. The Clause directs and empowers states to determine the “Times, Places, and Manner” of congressional elections, subject to Congress’s authority to “make or alter” state regulations. It grants each level of government the authority to enact a complete code for such elections, including rules concerning public notices, voter registration, voter protection, fraud prevention, vote counting, and determination of election results. Whenever a state enacts a law relating to a congressional election, it is exercising power under the Elections Clause; states do not have any inherent authority to enact such measures.
Interpretation: Elections Clause | Constitution Center
Interpretations of Elections Clause by constitutional scholarsconstitutioncenter.org
I never was able to complete my law degree and I take great offence to the state AG who is ignorant of just how the Constitution works along with state control of elections....
that is not what the ruling was about. they ruled that Texas and the other states did not have standing to bring the suit. look up lack of standing, you might learn something and stop posting like an idiot.
Yeah, about 100 posters here told the cult that TX didn’t have standing. But the poorly educated cultists really thought TX could win. The ruling was effectively 9-0 as Thomas and Alito said there were no remedies.
It was all Kabuki Theater. But cults gonna cult.
like your fellow libs, you also do not understand what lack of standing means in a court of american law. It is not the final straw. It is certainly a set back, but not the end of the fight. It may be that the only workable remedy is secession or breaking up the country into conservative and liberal separate countries. None of us want that, but with the country so divided philosophically it may be the only solution. If we cannot live together, lets live separately. Then we can see which system actually works.
I don't have whatever that is, but I have several guns and thousands of rounds of ammo. We would also have the police and the military and you would have the trannys who don't know which bathroom to use. it would be a very short war. A peaceful secession or division would be much better for everyone and would allow each side to live under its own ideology. We would take constitutional freedom and you can have socialist domination. Ready?
Haven't you noticed that the Joint Chiefs of Staff want nothing to do with your Civil War? If you decide to have one, their loyalty is to the Nation as in the United States of America. Yours would be for the newly formed Confederate States of Lower Slobovia. You can stop this fear mongering any time now since sane people aren't buying it.
Don't do it... I strongly suggest you don't do it.Jan 21st may scare the living hell out of at least 126 Congress People. I don't think that they should be prosecuted but I think they should be treated like the Confederates were treated and they have to publicly stand in front of a national camera and repeat their oath of allegiance to the Unites States of America and swear to whatever God they hold dear to not break that oath again or they leave office immediately.
Negative. I do not believe that... I say again... Don't do it. DO NOT BACK ME IN A CORNER.They naively assume that the military would support their "civil war" (ha ha) just as they assumed the Supreme Court would obediently back up Trump's circus.
The reasoning remains about half an inch deep.
Clearly... It does not. But you missed the largest point there... Where I told you to fuck off with that.I listened to the TED broadcast. While that does sound nice, it would be a nightmare to administer. I have served on a Jury where the ballots were anon on plain white pieces of paper. Of course, my writing could tell it was me but no one ever looked that close. We can overthink things. The Anon voting has been done since the creation of this Nation. And it works.
"You have faith in it only if it's in your favor."
Keep in mind that Democrats AND Republicans are NOT IN MY FAVOR.
I'll have more faith in the election process when I don't have volunteers counting votes and I can verify I have voted and it was correctly done.
True... But a human can't. And that other computer needs to agree with the other computers that have also downloaded the information. That was the point of giving equal access to the voter tabulation.If a computer does the encrypting then another computer can break that encryption.
No you don't. If you didn't vote by ballot you don't even know if your vote was counted, let alone counted correctly. You know you filled out the sheet the way you wanted to. That's the only thing you know.I know who I voted for and what I voted for.
MMMmmm... Obviously can't trust State Legislators to do their jobs. You might agree with what is going on in those four states, I might say you only have faith in them because it came out the way you wanted them to?If a state is doing anything other than that then you need to get on your state Legislators and get it cleaned up. I can't speak for other states, only Colorado. And we have, on an average, about 3 voter frauds per election cycle out of over 2 million and those generally get caught.
This decision establishes a precedent that says states can violate the US constitution and not be held accountable.
The US Constitution has no provisions for how states run an election.
The Elections Clause is the primary source of constitutional authority to regulate elections for the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate. The Clause directs and empowers states to determine the “Times, Places, and Manner” of congressional elections, subject to Congress’s authority to “make or alter” state regulations. It grants each level of government the authority to enact a complete code for such elections, including rules concerning public notices, voter registration, voter protection, fraud prevention, vote counting, and determination of election results. Whenever a state enacts a law relating to a congressional election, it is exercising power under the Elections Clause; states do not have any inherent authority to enact such measures.
Interpretation: Elections Clause | Constitution Center
Interpretations of Elections Clause by constitutional scholarsconstitutioncenter.org
I never was able to complete my law degree and I take great offence to the state AG who is ignorant of just how the Constitution works along with state control of elections....
that is not what the ruling was about. they ruled that Texas and the other states did not have standing to bring the suit. look up lack of standing, you might learn something and stop posting like an idiot.
Yeah, about 100 posters here told the cult that TX didn’t have standing. But the poorly educated cultists really thought TX could win. The ruling was effectively 9-0 as Thomas and Alito said there were no remedies.
It was all Kabuki Theater. But cults gonna cult.
like your fellow libs, you also do not understand what lack of standing means in a court of american law. It is not the final straw. It is certainly a set back, but not the end of the fight. It may be that the only workable remedy is secession or breaking up the country into conservative and liberal separate countries. None of us want that, but with the country so divided philosophically it may be the only solution. If we cannot live together, lets live separately. Then we can see which system actually works.
OR WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO?Negative. I do not believe that... I say again... Don't do it. DO NOT BACK ME IN A CORNER.They naively assume that the military would support their "civil war" (ha ha) just as they assumed the Supreme Court would obediently back up Trump's circus.
The reasoning remains about half an inch deep.
Edit: If you treat someone/something as the enemy... There is absolutely no choice, but to become that enemy.
Don't do it... I strongly suggest you don't do it.Jan 21st may scare the living hell out of at least 126 Congress People. I don't think that they should be prosecuted but I think they should be treated like the Confederates were treated and they have to publicly stand in front of a national camera and repeat their oath of allegiance to the Unites States of America and swear to whatever God they hold dear to not break that oath again or they leave office immediately.
The word "enemy" isn't one I even normally use, nor do I consider anyone my "enemy".Negative. I do not believe that... I say again... Don't do it. DO NOT BACK ME IN A CORNER.They naively assume that the military would support their "civil war" (ha ha) just as they assumed the Supreme Court would obediently back up Trump's circus.
The reasoning remains about half an inch deep.
Edit: If you treat someone/something as the enemy... There is absolutely no choice, but to become that enemy.
If you are talking about going after people I've elected for crimes of trying to make others follow their own law... Well...The word "enemy" isn't one I even normally use, nor do I consider anyone my "enemy".
Perhaps your perceptions have become distorted.
babylonbee.com
I'm not.If you are talking about going after people I've elected for crimes of trying to make others follow their own law... Well...The word "enemy" isn't one I even normally use, nor do I consider anyone my "enemy".
Perhaps your perceptions have become distorted.
You are talking to somebody that hasn't voted for either of the two parties since Bush.You get my point yet? It doesn't always go my way and I am not always happy with it.
Do you get my point yet?
