They have become big spenders (like Dems), they want pre-existing conditions covered and allow 26 yr old adults to be on mommys plan, and many are very squeemish on illegals. Boy, they have just jumped right! You repeat whatever your talking heads say without even questioning it. Cite some examples of Pubs being farther right than they used to be.
Dropping like flies
- Thread starter Expect2Win
- Start date
He is only interested in what is good for HIM, not so much about the country or the constitution.
Maybe they're just farther Trump cause they sure don't carer about the deficit or debt, if they ever did. They do ANYTHING he wants because for some reason they're scared to death of him.
The pubs only talk about deficit or debt when the Dem's are driving it up, however that is no different than the Dem's they only care about it when the pubs are driving it up. I don't remember seeing andy Dem's calling out Obama when he was adding to the deficit and or debt. Neither party can claim any high ground when it comes to certain things, it only bothers them when the other party is in charge.
You are an absolute joke. The firing of Comey, Sessions, and Tillerson the hiring of Barr, and Pompeo. The firings of all of the people who testified in the Ukraine scandal. Barr's joke of an explanation of the Mueller investigation. The rest of the Republicans repeating it. They turning of heads to the Russian influence in everything because Trump has a business or wants businesses in Russia. The love shown to Kim Jong Un. When did Tariffs become a Republican thing? How about bailouts for the farmers? Trump hasn't fundamentally changed the Republican party.
It will be interesting. Personally, the only way Bernie wins the nomination is to get her to endorse him. How he does that? I think the only way Warren would endorse Bernie is if he offered her the VP position with him.
If he does not, she will back Biden IMO.
Bernie has to offer her the VP. Biden needs to offer a cabinet post.
DNC wants Biden and have all along. Neither gets a majority on the first vote at convention. The machine throws all the super delegates to Biden in second vote to put him over the top.
Super delegates - what a sham!!
Super delegates - what a sham!!
Yeah you cannot have it both ways. There are just as many Pubs. It takes two to dance.
Not following how these are "Trump being about Trump".
Yes, Trump does a LOT of not Republican things. Why is that bad? I don't like everything Trump does but there are things Trump does that "moderates" should applaud.
Some of that had to happen, to be sure, but we should want our leaders to want people who are loyal to the country. They take an oath of office to the Constitution, not to the President for a reason. The head of the FBI, the Attorney General, etc, they serve the American people, not the President. It's a grave thing for them to place loyalty to a President above loyalty to the rule of law.
It's fundamentally different when we talk about something like a Senator...the President can and probably should advocate for people who support their political beliefs.
They actually went way to the right back in the Tea Party days. Those folks had the old guard pubs about a scared as Trump has them now.
Duke is a Democrat. He says Democrats are easier to flip at race/class warfare time. Bernie is indicative of the Democrat party. He has been a commie since the 50's.
- The firing of Comey Sessions Awesome
- Hiring Bar Pompeo Awesome
- Firing Bureaucrats over Ukraine Awesome
- Barrs explanation of Russia Hoax Awesome
- Kim Jung Un attempted nuclear disarmament Awesome
- Farmer Bailout Socialism that feeds the hungry Awesome
- Smacking around radical Democrats Awesome
Trolling is defined as creating discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people by posting inflammatory or off-topic messages in an online community. Basically, a social media troll is someone who purposely says something controversial in order to get a rise out of other users.
Trolling is defined as creating discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people by posting inflammatory or off-topic messages in an online community. Basically, a social media troll is someone who purposely says something controversial in order to get a rise out of other users.
Ukraine was not a hoax. You can argue that it wasn't impeachable. To a point, I agree that it did not rise to the level of being impeachable. The abuse of power that followed it was impeachable. To call it a hoax is misleading. He did make the call and he did ask for a favor and he did hold up the payment to Ukraine. Those were not hoaxes.
Duke is not a Democrat. It's been all of four years since he ran for Senate as a Republican!
Article 2 does not let him do "whatever I want." He can not use executive privilege to cover up a crime. According to the ultra-liberal Heritage Foundation.
https://www.heritage.org/the-constitution/commentary/executive-privilege-cant-shield-wrongdoing
It does not cover decision-making regarding the implementation of laws that delegate policymaking authority to the heads of departments and agencies, or which allow presidential delegations of authority.
The Presidential Communications Privilege Is Constitutionally Based, but Qualified, and May Be Overcome by a Substantial Showing of Need and Unavailability
A Presidential Claim of Privilege Cannot Provide Absolute Immunity to Congressional Subpoenas
The executive argued to the district court that present and past senior advisers to the president are absolutely immune from compelled congressional process. The district court unequivocally rejected this position:
The Executive cannot identify a single judicial opinion that recognizes absolute immunity for senior presidential advisors in this or any other context …. In fact, there is Supreme Court authority that is all but conclusive on this question and that powerfully suggests that such advisors do not enjoy absolute immunity. The Court therefore rejects the Executive’s claim of absolute immunity for senior presidential aides.35
https://www.pogo.org/report/2019/05/the-limits-of-executive-privilege/
https://www.heritage.org/the-constitution/commentary/executive-privilege-cant-shield-wrongdoing
It does not cover decision-making regarding the implementation of laws that delegate policymaking authority to the heads of departments and agencies, or which allow presidential delegations of authority.
The Presidential Communications Privilege Is Constitutionally Based, but Qualified, and May Be Overcome by a Substantial Showing of Need and Unavailability
A Presidential Claim of Privilege Cannot Provide Absolute Immunity to Congressional Subpoenas
The executive argued to the district court that present and past senior advisers to the president are absolutely immune from compelled congressional process. The district court unequivocally rejected this position:
The Executive cannot identify a single judicial opinion that recognizes absolute immunity for senior presidential advisors in this or any other context …. In fact, there is Supreme Court authority that is all but conclusive on this question and that powerfully suggests that such advisors do not enjoy absolute immunity. The Court therefore rejects the Executive’s claim of absolute immunity for senior presidential aides.35
https://www.pogo.org/report/2019/05/the-limits-of-executive-privilege/
You said it wasn’t a crime? Or at least it didn’t rise to the level of impeachment. Which I would assume mean it wasn’t a crime.
I said you could argue it wasn't impeachable. That is up to congress and we as the voters that send them to Washington to decide if every crime is impeachable, and what is or is not a level of criminality. It is pretty clear he broke the law.
Unless you are telling us he didn't withhold the funding to Ukraine. He did it and without consent of congress and that is very clearly against the law.
Unless you are telling us he didn't withhold the funding to Ukraine. He did it and without consent of congress and that is very clearly against the law.
To a point. That was not a crime I would consider disqualifying. However, the cover-up after the fact was an abuse of power that was most definitely disqualifying.
And more evidence may have shown more that it was disqualifying. He still broke the law and you can't argue he didn't.
Understandable. But whether you like it or not, executive privilege kicks in at certain points. You have no idea what those guys knew and could/couldn’t say. There’s sensitive information that if exposed, could do harm to the country. I know it looks bad on it’s surface but the guy has a right to it.
Executive privilege is not all-encompassing, and most of that investigation should have been behind closed doors anyway.
Why don't women brag about having children? I'm not saying that women can't do men things but dam, having a kid, naturally feeding and raising a baby is an actual superpower.
My wife is awesome, thank God she didn't believe in this BS. She works in corporate world too. 4 kids. She's wonderwoman and there are plenty out there just like her.
That isn't when you were referring to though.
I would agree we moved back right at that time but only to a traditional Conservative point. Overall, the country as a whole including Republicans have moved left.
I guess i'd like to see the LAW that says the POTUS can't withhold funds from another country to fulfill a requirement IN THE FUNDING BILL.
