Trump should delay State of the Union until impeachment trial ends

[AzogtheDefiler]

I do? So I have a lot of posts here. Find one that proves your point. Thanks.

i don't have to - your posts speak for themselves.

They do? Then surely you can point to just one that states I am a "Trump Lover".

I'll wait patiently.

oh dear - you still can't decipher what is literal & what is figurative? how'z about cliches?

oh like ummmmmm

if it walks like a duck & talks like a duck, then it's a deplorable.

Nope. Don't hide. You made the claim that I am a Trump sycophant. So show proof. I have all these posts. Surely you can find one that states as such. I'll wait patiently. Or were you lying again?

tell you what - you show proof i drink first.

No sober person would post this:

"if it walks like a duck & talks like a duck, then it's a deplorable"

 

[playtime]

that isn't the point.

is shredding the constitution & totally ignoring the co equal branch's role in this ok with you?

As has been explained to you a million times,the president doesnt need the OK from congress or anyone else for limited strikes.
Go away ya mental midget....

That one just seems especially ineffectual.
The more that he gets his ass handed to him - the more he thinks that he is winning.
It's weird.

It is a she and she is a drunk, old, miserable housewife, whose life has been a failure.

you go boyyyyyeeeeeeEEEeeeeeee

Speaking for myself not about you but if my kid comes home to live in her 30s then I have failed as a parent, especially if it were my only job. Either of my kids that is.

if yer kid was laid up & sick but didn't help out even when you could - then that would make you a miserable parent.

 

[playtime]

i don't have to - your posts speak for themselves.

They do? Then surely you can point to just one that states I am a "Trump Lover".

I'll wait patiently.

oh dear - you still can't decipher what is literal & what is figurative? how'z about cliches?

oh like ummmmmm

if it walks like a duck & talks like a duck, then it's a deplorable.

Nope. Don't hide. You made the claim that I am a Trump sycophant. So show proof. I have all these posts. Surely you can find one that states as such. I'll wait patiently. Or were you lying again?

tell you what - you show proof i drink first.

No sober person would post this:

"if it walks like a duck & talks like a duck, then it's a deplorable"

so you can't decipher sarcasm when it's right in front of you either.

 

[Billiejeens]

Are there any questions that you can answer?
Right now I feel as if you should give me your name, rank, and serial number because you are a fucking casualty here.

the only casualty here is yer brain.

The Constitution of the United States divides the war powers of the federal government between the Executive and Legislative branches: the President is the Commander in Chief of the armed forces (Article II, section 2), while Congress has the power to make declarations of war, and to raise and support the armed forces (Article I, section 8). Over time, questions arose as to the extent of the President's authority to deploy U.S. armed forces into hostile situations abroad without a declaration of war or some other form of Congressional approval. Congress passed the War Powers Resolution in the aftermath of the Vietnam War to address these concerns and provide a set of procedures for both the President and Congress to follow in situations where the introduction of U.S. forces abroad could lead to their involvement in armed conflict.

Conceptually, the War Powers Resolution can be broken down into several distinct parts. The first part states the policy behind the law, namely to "insure that the collective judgment of both the Congress and the President will apply to the introduction of United States Armed Forces into hostilities," and that the President's powers as Commander in Chief are exercised only pursuant to a declaration of war, specific statutory authorization from Congress, or a national emergency created by an attack upon the United States (50 USC Sec. 1541).

The second part requires the President to consult with Congress before introducing U.S. armed forces into hostilities or situations where hostilities are imminent, and to continue such consultations as long as U.S. armed forces remain in such situations (50 USC Sec. 1542). The third part sets forth reporting requirements that the President must comply with any time he introduces U.S. armed forces into existing or imminent hostilities (50 USC Sec. 1543); section 1543(a)(1) is particularly significant because it can trigger a 60 day time limit on the use of U.S. forces under section 1544(b).
War Powers | Law Library of Congress

Are you responding to the right post?

you ask why trump had to justify his strike earlier in the thread.

That doesn't answer it.
You have anything else?

yep it does - - you are just too poorly educated to read.

C&P the relevant part
Right here -------->

 

[Billiejeens]

As has been explained to you a million times,the president doesnt need the OK from congress or anyone else for limited strikes.
Go away ya mental midget....

That one just seems especially ineffectual.
The more that he gets his ass handed to him - the more he thinks that he is winning.
It's weird.

It is a she and she is a drunk, old, miserable housewife, whose life has been a failure.

you go boyyyyyeeeeeeEEEeeeeeee

Speaking for myself not about you but if my kid comes home to live in her 30s then I have failed as a parent, especially if it were my only job. Either of my kids that is.

if yer kid was laid up & sick but didn't help out even when you could - then that would make you a miserable parent.

Is there anything that you're not miserable at?

 

[WEATHER53]

that isn't the point.

is shredding the constitution & totally ignoring the co equal branch's role in this ok with you?

As has been explained to you a million times,the president doesnt need the OK from congress or anyone else for limited strikes.
Go away ya mental midget....

That one just seems especially ineffectual.
The more that he gets his ass handed to him - the more he thinks that he is winning.
It's weird.

It is a she and she is a drunk, old, miserable housewife, whose life has been a failure.

you go boyyyyyeeeeeeEEEeeeeeee

Speaking for myself not about you but if my kid comes home to live in her 30s then I have failed as a parent, especially if it were my only job. Either of my kids that is.

At the least for the boy. Males need preparation to fly the nest . If a son is limp dicking it and living at home under the guise of “saving money” past the age of 30 then life failure is underway.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

As has been explained to you a million times,the president doesnt need the OK from congress or anyone else for limited strikes.
Go away ya mental midget....

That one just seems especially ineffectual.
The more that he gets his ass handed to him - the more he thinks that he is winning.
It's weird.

It is a she and she is a drunk, old, miserable housewife, whose life has been a failure.

you go boyyyyyeeeeeeEEEeeeeeee

Speaking for myself not about you but if my kid comes home to live in her 30s then I have failed as a parent, especially if it were my only job. Either of my kids that is.

if yer kid was laid up & sick but didn't help out even when you could - then that would make you a miserable parent.

At 30+ they are an adult. Speaking for myself only.

 

[playtime]

That one just seems especially ineffectual.
The more that he gets his ass handed to him - the more he thinks that he is winning.
It's weird.

It is a she and she is a drunk, old, miserable housewife, whose life has been a failure.

you go boyyyyyeeeeeeEEEeeeeeee

Speaking for myself not about you but if my kid comes home to live in her 30s then I have failed as a parent, especially if it were my only job. Either of my kids that is.

if yer kid was laid up & sick but didn't help out even when you could - then that would make you a miserable parent.

Is there anything that you're not miserable at?

awwww---- when you gotta deflect & try to turn it personal, it means you lost the debate. you are zoggy have that in common.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

They do? Then surely you can point to just one that states I am a "Trump Lover".

I'll wait patiently.

oh dear - you still can't decipher what is literal & what is figurative? how'z about cliches?

oh like ummmmmm

if it walks like a duck & talks like a duck, then it's a deplorable.

Nope. Don't hide. You made the claim that I am a Trump sycophant. So show proof. I have all these posts. Surely you can find one that states as such. I'll wait patiently. Or were you lying again?

tell you what - you show proof i drink first.

No sober person would post this:

"if it walks like a duck & talks like a duck, then it's a deplorable"

so you can't decipher sarcasm when it's right in front of you either.

Sarcasm is calling someone who is bald, "curly" not messing up a rhyme and not using proper punctuation. That is drunk posting. Now find one post where I worship Trump.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Define “imminent”
So if he coordinates another 9/11 type attack in August he was not worth killing? You’re such a pussy, Lone Leftist.

where's the proof he was planning anything imminently? there isn't any because he didn't.

Trump reportedly authorized the Soleimani strike 7 months ago, throwing a wrench through his argument that there was an 'imminent threat'
Grace Panetta
Jan 13, 2020, 10:25 AM
Trump reportedly authorized the Soleimani strike 7 months ago, throwing a wrench through his argument that there was an 'imminent threat'

^^^ not imminent.

So the blood of 600 Americans is not enough for you?

that isn't the point.

is shredding the constitution & totally ignoring the co equal branch's role in this ok with you?

As has been explained to you a million times,the president doesnt need the OK from congress or anyone else for limited strikes.
Go away ya mental midget....

& yet the constitution says otherwise. i'll go with the law of the land whilst you kneel & stay loyal for yer dotarded prez.

Oh yeah?
I'm sure you can back that up right?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

It is a she and she is a drunk, old, miserable housewife, whose life has been a failure.

you go boyyyyyeeeeeeEEEeeeeeee

Speaking for myself not about you but if my kid comes home to live in her 30s then I have failed as a parent, especially if it were my only job. Either of my kids that is.

if yer kid was laid up & sick but didn't help out even when you could - then that would make you a miserable parent.

Is there anything that you're not miserable at?

awwww---- when you gotta deflect & try to turn it personal, it means you lost the debate. you are zoggy have that in common.

You made it personal when you called me a "Trump Lover" now deal with the consequences. Sucks you're a failure in life and you have to take that out on others.

 

[playtime]

That one just seems especially ineffectual.
The more that he gets his ass handed to him - the more he thinks that he is winning.
It's weird.

It is a she and she is a drunk, old, miserable housewife, whose life has been a failure.

you go boyyyyyeeeeeeEEEeeeeeee

Speaking for myself not about you but if my kid comes home to live in her 30s then I have failed as a parent, especially if it were my only job. Either of my kids that is.

if yer kid was laid up & sick but didn't help out even when you could - then that would make you a miserable parent.

At 30+ they are an adult. Speaking for myself only.

yep, sure are. i'd love for you to tell your kids - yer sick, too bad - go it alone.

 

[playtime]

where's the proof he was planning anything imminently? there isn't any because he didn't.

Trump reportedly authorized the Soleimani strike 7 months ago, throwing a wrench through his argument that there was an 'imminent threat'
Grace Panetta
Jan 13, 2020, 10:25 AM
Trump reportedly authorized the Soleimani strike 7 months ago, throwing a wrench through his argument that there was an 'imminent threat'

^^^ not imminent.

So the blood of 600 Americans is not enough for you?

that isn't the point.

is shredding the constitution & totally ignoring the co equal branch's role in this ok with you?

As has been explained to you a million times,the president doesnt need the OK from congress or anyone else for limited strikes.
Go away ya mental midget....

& yet the constitution says otherwise. i'll go with the law of the land whilst you kneel & stay loyal for yer dotarded prez.

Oh yeah?
I'm sure you can back that up right?

done did. go find it.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Well than surely you can prove your assertions.
Right?

donny has to prove it was a justified strike. he hasn't so far & the story keeps changing, so its unlikely he'll be believed given his history of lying.

He killed a terrorist numbnut.

he has to justify it per the constitution & so far the lies aren't adding up.

No he doesnt.
Limited strikes are in his rights just like they were for barry.

he has to justify why it was carried out with proof to back it up. nothing like that has happened.

The vast majority of Americans consider the deaths of 600 US Servicemen as plenty reason enough.
Even your butt buddy barry had him on the kill list.

 

[playtime]

you go boyyyyyeeeeeeEEEeeeeeee

Speaking for myself not about you but if my kid comes home to live in her 30s then I have failed as a parent, especially if it were my only job. Either of my kids that is.

if yer kid was laid up & sick but didn't help out even when you could - then that would make you a miserable parent.

Is there anything that you're not miserable at?

awwww---- when you gotta deflect & try to turn it personal, it means you lost the debate. you are zoggy have that in common.

You made it personal when you called me a "Trump Lover" now deal with the consequences. Sucks you're a failure in life and you have to take that out on others.

you made it personal long b4 now AND on this very thread saying i drink. don't care if you think that or not & never bothered to get you to back it up cause it is stupid, you are stupid & your projection is stupid.

 

[playtime]

donny has to prove it was a justified strike. he hasn't so far & the story keeps changing, so its unlikely he'll be believed given his history of lying.

He killed a terrorist numbnut.

he has to justify it per the constitution & so far the lies aren't adding up.

No he doesnt.
Limited strikes are in his rights just like they were for barry.

he has to justify why it was carried out with proof to back it up. nothing like that has happened.

The vast majority of Americans consider the deaths of 600 US Servicemen as plenty reason enough.
Even your butt buddy barry had him on the kill list.

well, the law lays out the protocol when a prez takes it upon themselves to carry out a strike & donny hasn't followed it at all. THAT'S the problem thinking bipeds have with this.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So the blood of 600 Americans is not enough for you?

that isn't the point.

is shredding the constitution & totally ignoring the co equal branch's role in this ok with you?

As has been explained to you a million times,the president doesnt need the OK from congress or anyone else for limited strikes.
Go away ya mental midget....

& yet the constitution says otherwise. i'll go with the law of the land whilst you kneel & stay loyal for yer dotarded prez.

Oh yeah?
I'm sure you can back that up right?

done did. go find it.

No you done didnt,because it's not in there.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

He killed a terrorist numbnut.

he has to justify it per the constitution & so far the lies aren't adding up.

No he doesnt.
Limited strikes are in his rights just like they were for barry.

he has to justify why it was carried out with proof to back it up. nothing like that has happened.

The vast majority of Americans consider the deaths of 600 US Servicemen as plenty reason enough.
Even your butt buddy barry had him on the kill list.

well, the law lays out the protocol when a prez takes it upon themselves to carry out a strike & donny hasn't followed it at all. THAT'S the problem thinking bipeds have with this.

So how many drone strikes did barry get approved for?

 

[playtime]

that isn't the point.

is shredding the constitution & totally ignoring the co equal branch's role in this ok with you?

As has been explained to you a million times,the president doesnt need the OK from congress or anyone else for limited strikes.
Go away ya mental midget....

& yet the constitution says otherwise. i'll go with the law of the land whilst you kneel & stay loyal for yer dotarded prez.

Oh yeah?
I'm sure you can back that up right?

done did. go find it.

No you done didnt,because it's not in there.

sure is. i think it's underlined as well.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

It is a she and she is a drunk, old, miserable housewife, whose life has been a failure.

you go boyyyyyeeeeeeEEEeeeeeee

Speaking for myself not about you but if my kid comes home to live in her 30s then I have failed as a parent, especially if it were my only job. Either of my kids that is.

if yer kid was laid up & sick but didn't help out even when you could - then that would make you a miserable parent.

At 30+ they are an adult. Speaking for myself only.

yep, sure are. i'd love for you to tell your kids - yer sick, too bad - go it alone.

At 30 they are no longer kids. Hell I am 39