Everything posted by TwiceHorn
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
- Texas vs. Texas A&M - 6:30pm on ABC
-
Trump’s America
I think if it could be proven that a signature on an operative document, EO, legislation, etc. was executed without POTUS's knowledge and consent, that would be a problem, whether an Autopen was involved or straight forgery. But, that would require some form of proof and adjudication, not some deranged demented shitgibbon ranting about it. I think it would have to come up in a judicial challenge to the legislation, which would have to be brought by a party with standing to challenge it.
-
Trump’s America
This is another one of those things that isn't actually regulated by much law. As with many things, it relies on the good faith and restraint of the executive.
-
Trump’s America
They/he was announced as the architect pretty much from the get-go, definitely before the demo. I remember because I looked him up and he seemed credible. But he should have known he was working for a grimy little pimp and that the "visions" would diverge. I suppose the notion of working on an historic project was too tempting.