The Trump Presidency

2dcfk1z.jpg
 
Medicare for all is a big money grab from producers to the non-producers.

That is socialism in a nutshell.

Health insurance used to be really good, as long as you could afford it.

ACA changed that to health insurance is mostly bad, far fewer of us can afford it, and those who couldn't afford the good, pre ACA insurance are now gifted the same crappy insurance that everyone else was downgraded to.

Medicare for all would continue the crappy coverage, while making the inefficiency even less transparent than it is now.

I would rather go back to the pre ACA insurance market, so that those willing to pay a reasonable rate can have reasonable insurance, but Republicans don't have the fortitude to ever make that happen. ACA has fulfilled candidate Obama's prophecy of a system so bad that it makes nationalized health care appealing.

So sign me up, let's bring on European style, walk in and don't pay a dime, healthcare. That's the endgame anyway. Just don't make us go through another system that's designed to be so terrible that we want even less control over it. Save the dog and pony show and make it "free."
 
Trump declaring a national emergency for boarder wall undoes so much goodwill he'd gained.

Pathetic abuse of power that Democrats are sure to use when back in power

"so much goodwill he'd gained"?

Could you elaborate on this? I'd truly like to know.
 
[Tw]1096318327935234048[/tw]

Who is actually causing racial tensions in this country? Not trump and his supporters thats for sure
 
Josh Dawsey
‏Verified account @jdawsey1

Trump refused to believe that North Korea had test-fired a missile

in 2017, per Andrew McCabe book. “He thought that North Korea did

not have the capability to launch such missiles. He said he knew this

because Vladimir Putin had told him so.”
 
Two U.S. citizens who say Customs and Border Protection officials detained them for speaking Spanish while they waited in a convenience store line in Havre, Mont., have filed a federal lawsuit arguing that their constitutional rights were violated.

The women — Ana Suda and Martha “Mimi” Hernandez — say the May 16, 2018, incident began after the nursing assistants finished work, put their children to bed and went to the gym together. They then decided to pick up milk and eggs at the Town Pump, a store in the small town about 35 miles south of the Canadian border. That’s when they say a border agent approached them and commented on Hernandez’s accent, asking where they were born, according to the lawsuit, which the American Civil Liberties Union filed against CBP on Thursday in U.S. District Court in Great Falls, Mont.

The women told the agent they were from Texas and California; Suda then made a video of the agent after he sought to see their identification cards.

“Ma’am, the reason I asked you for your ID is because I came in here, and I saw that you guys are speaking Spanish, which is very unheard of up here,” the agent says in the video, which the ACLU has released.

The women allege that the agent then detained them for 45 minutes instead of letting them go when they identified themselves as U.S. citizens. Cody Wofsy, a staff attorney with the ACLU’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, said the unlawful detention amounts to a violation of the Fourth Amendment’s bar on unreasonable searches and seizures.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...a5b113ecd3c_story.html?utm_term=.c921872b2a67
 
I can't wait for a democrat or something other than gaslight trump party to be president

this national emergency thing can come in handy to actually deal with things the republicans refuse to deal with
 
Some of you may remember the line item veto case decided by the Supreme Court in 1998. One of the issues in that case was the non-delegation doctrine, which is that one branch of government may not delegate a power given to it under the Constitution to another branch. I suspect the non-delegation doctrine might come up in the case of Trump's emergency declaration. If Trump uses the Emergency Powers Act, passed after Watergate, legal challenges may succeed on the grounds that even if it wanted to Congress may not give up its constitutional powers over the purse. It will be an interesting case.

The line item veto case did not break along ideological lines. The Supreme Court voted to strike it down 6-3. The dissenters were Breyer, Scalia and O'Connor. A liberal, a conservative, and a centrist. The lack of clear ideological fault lines means there is an additional element of unpredictability to these kinds of cases.
 
Last edited:
Trump declaring a national emergency for boarder wall undoes so much goodwill he'd gained.

Pathetic abuse of power that Democrats are sure to use when back in power

Our only hope is the Supreme Court. I'm reasonably confident they'll rule overwhelmingly to stop him.
 
"so much goodwill he'd gained"?

Could you elaborate on this? I'd truly like to know.

I'm assuming Sturg is referring to the goodwill his actual policies have generated among conservatives, despite the unending clown show he fuels with his mouth. No one with any self awareness can claim to be both conservative and a fan of such an unprecedented power grab. This is the scariest thing I can recall any President doing in my lifetime.
 
I'm assuming Sturg is referring to the goodwill his actual policies have generated among conservatives, despite the unending clown show he fuels with his mouth. No one with any self awareness can claim to be both conservative and a fan of such an unprecedented power grab. This is the scariest thing I can recall any President doing in my lifetime.

Nothing will ever beat Obama's NDAA and assassinating American citizens in my book.

But this precedent will be disastrous especially when the socialists take power
 
Back
Top