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.
Interfere ? Deporting millions of Mexicans (and other illegals) opens up (creates) millions of jobs for Americans, that those illegals were working in. And I never heard Trump say anything about blowing up a mosque. No reason to destroy the buildings. They can be used as homeless shelters, animal shelters, or just rented out to help pay off the debt. (once they're fully fumigated)He is going to blow up all the mosques, and make ISIS pay for doing it.....
But, I have to wonder if he is going to do that before, or after, deporting 11 million illegal aliens and build a 2,000 mile wall at Mexico's expense? Also, is any of this going to interfere with his creating more jobs than any other president?
I really think that Trump is seeking a way out of the race without quitting. Taking a position such as this is certainly a move in that direction.There is only one opinion that really matters in interpreting the constitution and that's the Supreme Court. One would have to be totally disconnected from reality to believe the court would not block closing American Mosques because they may harbor terrorist.I don't know what you're even talking about. Doesn't make any sense. You think the 1st Amendement stops the Supremacy Clause from outlawing supremacisms ? You think it doesn't do that ? What's the matter ? You don't understand English ? It says > This Constitution and the laws of the United States shall be the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND (Not Islam or its Sharia law)By refuting you mean completely ignored, yeah sure you refuted it.
But if you are using the actual definition then nowhere in your insane ramblings have you refuted it. You cannot deny first amendment protection. Period.
I most certainly CAN cannot deny first amendment protection, and most certainly do just that, when the first amendment activity is illegal and unconstitutional. You are trying to push a very weak argument, which I already thoroughly refuted earlier in the thread. You seem to have not read the earlier posts, or you wouldn't be making such foolish statements. As I said before, (since you're too lazy to read the earlier posts >>
The very weak 1st amendment has numerous exceptions to it, and the main exception to it, is from the Supremacy Clause, that does not allow religion (or anything else) to be supreme over the Constitution. Amendment One - Religion, also is exceeded by US Codes 2384 & 2385, which forbid sedition and overthrowing govt (religion or no religion).
Overall, Amendment One is a joke, compared to the Supremacy Clause. Amendment One is riddled with exceptions every step of the way. Just look at free speech. Exceptions >> Slander, libel, perjury, inciting a riot, yelling fire in a crowded theater, disturbing the peace, fighting words, threats, obscenity laws, child pornography, etc, etc. In contrast, to this very weak part of the Constitution, the strongest part of the Constitution, the Supremacy Clause (Article 6, Section 2), has NEVER had a single exception to it, in all 226 years of its existence.
All you're doing here is adding to the stupidity of other posters who also tried to say the same thing you're saying now. You carry no weight here.
That's the really cool thing about Executive Orders. They can be implemented immediately while SCOTUS cases can take years to work their way up. It's how Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and FDR interned the Japanese... read some fucking history, ass munch.
This is a tiny bit different, colon chewer. Rump is not a POTUS, he's a (pretend) candidate. And by flagrantly exhibiting this level of contempt for as basic a foundation of this country as the First Amendment is, he's just eliminated himself from any legitimate chance of having the office.
Imagine a candidate who declared he might have to have government take over the media (including this message board). Same thing. Or a candidate who declared he'd suspend the Second Amendment and make all guns illegal. Again, same thing. Run down the document anywhere you like -- a candidate that says he would bring back slavery. Or make alcohol illegal again. Or take away the right to vote for women. Etc etc etc.
The first thing, literally the first thing a POTUS has to do is swear to uphold the Constitution; in this statement Rump admits he can't even take the fucking oath of office. And that's literally Day One.
Liberals thinks they can use the 1st Amendment to rule America, and shape it to how they see fit.This is a tiny bit different, colon chewer. Rump is not a POTUS, he's a (pretend) candidate. And by flagrantly exhibiting this level of contempt for as basic a foundation of this country as the First Amendment is, he's just eliminated himself from any legitimate chance of having the office.
Imagine a candidate who declared he might have to have government take over the media (including this message board). Same thing. Or a candidate who declared he'd suspend the Second Amendment and make all guns illegal. Again, same thing. Run down the document anywhere you like -- a candidate that says he would bring back slavery. Or make alcohol illegal again. Or take away the right to vote for women. Etc etc etc.
The first thing, literally the first thing a POTUS has to do is swear to uphold the Constitution; in this statement Rump admits he can't even take the fucking oath of office. And that's literally Day One.
I really think that Trump is seeking a way out of the race without quitting. Taking a position such as this is certainly a move in that direction.
There is only one opinion that really matters in interpreting the constitution and that's the Supreme Court. One would have to be totally disconnected from reality to believe the court would not block closing American Mosques because they may harbor terrorist.
There is only one opinion that really matters in interpreting the constitution and that's the Supreme Court. One would have to be totally disconnected from reality to believe the court would not block closing American Mosques because they may harbor terrorist.
One would have to be totally disconnected from reality to believe the court SHOULD block closing American Mosques because they may harbor terrorist. Or for that matter, simply because they are Islam, an unconstitutional supremacism, in violation of Article 6, Section 2, the Supremacy clause.
On the other hand, since the court has a number of Obama activist loonies on it, any screwball edict is possible.
I guess that I am a little surprised that Trump has not revealed a plan to make all Muslims wear a yellow badge on their clothes...
He's reserving that for you yellow-bellied liberals who are too afraid to fight terrorism. That way, we can all mock you in public. It also lets us know who not to let into the bunker. Good luck!
Interfere ? Deporting millions of Mexicans (and other illegals) opens up (creates) millions of jobs for Americans, that those illegals were working in. And I never heard Trump say anything about blowing up a mosque. No reason to destroy the buildings. They can be used as homeless shelters, animal shelters, or just rented out to help pay off the debt. (once they're fully fumigated)He is going to blow up all the mosques, and make ISIS pay for doing it.....
But, I have to wonder if he is going to do that before, or after, deporting 11 million illegal aliens and build a 2,000 mile wall at Mexico's expense? Also, is any of this going to interfere with his creating more jobs than any other president?
Interfere ? Deporting millions of Mexicans (and other illegals) opens up (creates) millions of jobs for Americans, that those illegals were working in. And I never heard Trump say anything about blowing up a mosque. No reason to destroy the buildings. They can be used as homeless shelters, animal shelters, or just rented out to help pay off the debt. (once they're fully fumigated)He is going to blow up all the mosques, and make ISIS pay for doing it.....
But, I have to wonder if he is going to do that before, or after, deporting 11 million illegal aliens and build a 2,000 mile wall at Mexico's expense? Also, is any of this going to interfere with his creating more jobs than any other president?
I'm sending in my resume to the grape vineyards right away!
I really think that Trump is seeking a way out of the race without quitting. Taking a position such as this is certainly a move in that direction.There is only one opinion that really matters in interpreting the constitution and that's the Supreme Court. One would have to be totally disconnected from reality to believe the court would not block closing American Mosques because they may harbor terrorist.I don't know what you're even talking about. Doesn't make any sense. You think the 1st Amendement stops the Supremacy Clause from outlawing supremacisms ? You think it doesn't do that ? What's the matter ? You don't understand English ? It says > This Constitution and the laws of the United States shall be the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND (Not Islam or its Sharia law)By refuting you mean completely ignored, yeah sure you refuted it.
But if you are using the actual definition then nowhere in your insane ramblings have you refuted it. You cannot deny first amendment protection. Period.
I most certainly CAN cannot deny first amendment protection, and most certainly do just that, when the first amendment activity is illegal and unconstitutional. You are trying to push a very weak argument, which I already thoroughly refuted earlier in the thread. You seem to have not read the earlier posts, or you wouldn't be making such foolish statements. As I said before, (since you're too lazy to read the earlier posts >>
The very weak 1st amendment has numerous exceptions to it, and the main exception to it, is from the Supremacy Clause, that does not allow religion (or anything else) to be supreme over the Constitution. Amendment One - Religion, also is exceeded by US Codes 2384 & 2385, which forbid sedition and overthrowing govt (religion or no religion).
Overall, Amendment One is a joke, compared to the Supremacy Clause. Amendment One is riddled with exceptions every step of the way. Just look at free speech. Exceptions >> Slander, libel, perjury, inciting a riot, yelling fire in a crowded theater, disturbing the peace, fighting words, threats, obscenity laws, child pornography, etc, etc. In contrast, to this very weak part of the Constitution, the strongest part of the Constitution, the Supremacy Clause (Article 6, Section 2), has NEVER had a single exception to it, in all 226 years of its existence.
All you're doing here is adding to the stupidity of other posters who also tried to say the same thing you're saying now. You carry no weight here.
That's the really cool thing about Executive Orders. They can be implemented immediately while SCOTUS cases can take years to work their way up. It's how Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and FDR interned the Japanese... read some fucking history, ass munch.
This is a tiny bit different, colon chewer. Rump is not a POTUS, he's a (pretend) candidate. And by flagrantly exhibiting this level of contempt for as basic a foundation of this country as the First Amendment is, he's just eliminated himself from any legitimate chance of having the office.
Imagine a candidate who declared he might have to have government take over the media (including this message board). Same thing. Or a candidate who declared he'd suspend the Second Amendment and make all guns illegal. Again, same thing. Run down the document anywhere you like -- a candidate that says he would bring back slavery. Or make alcohol illegal again. Or take away the right to vote for women. Etc etc etc.
The first thing, literally the first thing a POTUS has to do is swear to uphold the Constitution; in this statement Rump admits he can't even take the fucking oath of office. And that's literally Day One.
ALL mosques preach hate. Hatred of all things non-Muslim is the very foundation of the Devil's Cult.
There is only one opinion that really matters in interpreting the constitution and that's the Supreme Court. One would have to be totally disconnected from reality to believe the court would not block closing American Mosques because they may harbor terrorist.
One would have to be totally disconnected from reality to believe the court SHOULD block closing American Mosques because they may harbor terrorist. Or for that matter, simply because they are Islam, an unconstitutional supremacism, in violation of Article 6, Section 2, the Supremacy clause.
On the other hand, since the court has a number of Obama activist loonies on it, any screwball edict is possible.
If you believe the government should be in the business of deciding what is acceptable free speech or religious beliefs then you and Bin Laden have much in common.
There is only one opinion that really matters in interpreting the constitution and that's the Supreme Court. One would have to be totally disconnected from reality to believe the court would not block closing American Mosques because they may harbor terrorist.
One would have to be totally disconnected from reality to believe the court SHOULD block closing American Mosques because they may harbor terrorist. Or for that matter, simply because they are Islam, an unconstitutional supremacism, in violation of Article 6, Section 2, the Supremacy clause.
On the other hand, since the court has a number of Obama activist loonies on it, any screwball edict is possible.
If you believe the government should be in the business of deciding what is acceptable free speech or religious beliefs then you and Bin Laden have much in common. This is exactly what Al Qaeda was doing in Afghanistan and ISIS is doing in Syria.
If you believe the government should be in the business of deciding what is acceptable free speech or religious beliefs then you and Bin Laden have much in common.
Ummmm, they are already doing that...
'PC' Police' anyone? Calls for jailing Global Warming skeptics anyone?
When did the US government call for the jailing of Global Warming skeptics?
That's not the government. Rendering your entire narrative fiction.When did the US government call for the jailing of Global Warming skeptics?
Libs and government Global Warming scientists, dear Skylar. If they had their way anyone who continued to expose their falsified data and bogus claims would be going to jail.
Climate Alarmists to Obama: Use RICO Laws to Jail Skeptics!
LINK: Climate Alarmists To Obama: Use RICO Laws To Jail Skeptics!
not after islam is declared a cult
