Donald Trump 2018

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[WhatTheBuck 28940]

4 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

I would guess the vast majority of his base believe he’s smart only because he’s rich. We know there’s no other reason or evidence to believe it. 

And they believe the reality tv show that made him out to be a better businessman than he actually is. They think reality tv is real. 

Goddammit, I knew it was bad when I saw reality tv take off but I never thought it would come to this. 

[Mo Horn 8939]

6 minutes ago, Pancho Negro said:

 

Time for the two female gop senators to send a message that that's enough. As long as all the dems stay in the fold (which may not happen) the two of them hold Kavenaugh's fate in their hands. 

[4th&Five 42026]

 

[kevwun 16447]

7 minutes ago, Mo Horn said:

Time for the two female gop senators to send a message that that's enough. As long as all the dems stay in the fold (which may not happen) the two of them hold Kavenaugh's fate in their hands. 

If a Dem senator casts a deciding vote for Kavanaugh, they're going to have to go independent or change parties.  This is a vote where that would get them excommunicated.

[RPM 26674]

I really disliked W, but he looks like Thomas Fucking Jefferson compared to Trump.

[WhatTheBuck 28940]

3 hours ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

The only grand slam Trump would be able to hit would be at Denny's

That's a good one. I was always more of an All-American Slam guy, myself. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Better get Kavanaugh on the court quick

 

[Continental Op 3934]

I love the wealth shaming of rich people that people who otherwise would have a conniption fit about body shaming or any other ridiculousness would engage in.
I get that people don’t like trust fund babies, it’s an affront to the hard work and labor and sweat equity 99% of us put in, but who really cares if Trumps dad gives or gave him millions or not?

Can I trust fund shame as long as I'm ok with fat shaming anyone as well?

[WhatTheBuck 28940]

2 hours ago, Aqua Buddha said:

You can write an encyclopedia about how shitty of a businessman Donald Trump is.

Another way in which Dubya foreshadowed Trump. 

[lemonlime 5503]

24 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

 

Fuck him and fuck all his sycophantic, moronic supporters.

[Mo Horn 8939]

16 minutes ago, kevwun said:

If a Dem senator casts a deciding vote for Kavanaugh, they're going to have to go independent or change parties.  This is a vote where that would get them excommunicated.

Joe Manchin will lose votes if he doesn't support Kavanaugh.

[Skyline 325]

26 minutes ago, Mo Horn said:

Time for the two female gop senators to send a message that that's enough. As long as all the dems stay in the fold (which may not happen) the two of them hold Kavenaugh's fate in their hands. 

If the pussy tape didn't do it, or Trump mocking someone with a disability, or Trump mocking a gold star family doesn't do it, this certainly won't.

[kevwun 16447]

And if Kavanaugh needs his vote to get confirmed, he won't get it.

[Mo Horn 8939]

1 minute ago, Skyline said:

If the pussy tape didn't do it, or Trump mocking someone with a disability, or Trump mocking a gold star family doesn't do it, this certainly won't.

Sadly you are probably right. 

[hayden_horn 11402]

2 minutes ago, Skyline said:

If the pussy tape didn't do it, or Trump mocking someone with a disability, or Trump mocking a gold star family doesn't do it, this certainly won't.

Sigh. You're probably right. 

Our president is human trash. 

[WhatTheBuck 28940]

5 minutes ago, Mo Horn said:

Sadly you are probably right. 

 

4 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

Sigh. You're probably right. 

Our president is human trash. 

Of course he's right. 

[DigDug 1738]

Just a complete piece of shit.

[softlynow 1894]

5th Avenue. Murder. Not lose a single vote.

He knows it. We should know it by now. Nothing fucking matters. 

[Hank Kingsley 21809]

Literal pieces of shit are cleaner, sturdier, healthier, and more dignified than Trump. 

 

 

[lemonlime 5503]

Angrier at the pieces of shit behind him cheering him on.  There's no way I could be more disgusted with him.  But the people behind him are the people who pretend to be moral, godly people in our families and neighborhoods while supporting this vile crap.

[Slade 263]

I'm convinced that this piece of shit just congealed in a gutter, an utter disgrace of a human being. Fuck him and his moronic band of sycophants, and fuck his enablers in Congress too. This cake has been baking for 30 years now and the Republicans have made their bed.  

[Bama Chick 28596]

shudder

[joe dirt 285]

5 hours ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

I love the wealth shaming of rich people that people who otherwise would have a conniption fit about body shaming or any other ridiculousness would engage in.

I get that people don’t like trust fund babies, it’s an affront to the hard work and labor and sweat equity 99% of us put in, but who really cares if Trumps dad gives or gave him millions or not?

right, because wealth shaming is only cool when used to characterize athletes who kneel during national anthems. 

[bolverk 30366]

47 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

And they believe the reality tv show that made him out to be a better businessman than he actually is. They think reality tv is real. 

Goddammit, I knew it was bad when I saw reality tv take off but I never thought it would come to this. 

You're, of course, right. But it ain't just reality TV. A year or so ago, my own mother was justifying in a conversation her dislike of the Democratic Party based on what some Dem character did on "Madame President."

I love her dearly, but she's too old to vote - much less drive.

[burntorangebongos 10826]

somebody needs to photoshop his mom's hair on his head. It is funny that his dad used a toupe. No wonder he went that way.

[Aqua Buddha 14809]

27 minutes ago, Mo Horn said:

Joe Manchin will lose votes if he doesn't support Kavanaugh.

He has a huge lead and has votes he can afford to lose.  He can vote against Cavanaugh and still win.  His opponent is a shit head.

If Collins and Murkowski vote against him, it gives Machin cover to vote yes because it doesn't matter.

[bolverk 30366]

3 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

somebody needs to photoshop his mom's hair on his head. It is funny that his dad used a toupe. No wonder he went that way.

It's already been done. Here's just one example.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, Aqua Buddha said:

He has a huge lead and has votes he can afford to lose.  He can vote against Cavanaugh and still win.  His opponent is a shit head.

If Collins and Murkowski vote against him, it gives Machin cover to vote yes because it doesn't matter.

Seems like the FBI could just as easily provide these Senators political cover to vote against Kavanaugh. 

[Aqua Buddha 14809]

15 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

Angrier at the pieces of shit behind him cheering him on.  There's no way I could be more disgusted with him.  But the people behind him are the people who pretend to be moral, godly people in our families and neighborhoods while supporting this vile crap.

I'm not surprised.  Ford could have video of Kavanaugh holding a knife to her throat while raping her and a certain block of people would still support him because, you know, "abortion."

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

9 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

I'm not surprised.  Ford could have video of Kavanaugh holding a knife to her throat while raping her and a certain block of people would still support him because, you know, "abortion."

I’m beginning to question how committed these folks are to the abortion issue.  If Trump came out tomorrow and said he’s pro choice, would it really move the needle? 

I doubt it. 

[Bama Chick 28596]

Dotard has his dad’s figure.

Fred looks like the shrunken head Beetlejuice.

[JimmyJames 12271]

47 minutes ago, Skyline said:

If the pussy tape didn't do it, or Trump mocking someone with a disability, or Trump mocking a gold star family doesn't do it, this certainly won't.

The American people aren’t deciding on Kavanaugh. Collins and Murkowski and their voters are. Trumps little cute insulting rant today won’t help him if he really wants him confirmed. Maybe he doesn’t.

[WhatTheBuck 28940]

40 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

shudder
 

No wonder Fred wore a hood. 

[atomheartbevo 90670]

2 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

I don't think it's ratings, I think they know that with the tax stuff today, and the Kavanaugh stuff threatening to crumble, that Dotard was going to do something really stupid.  And of course, he did.

[atomheartbevo 90670]

2 hours ago, Captainant said:

Trump is going full aggy and calling Dr. Ford a liar at his campaign rally tonight that Fox news isn't covering for some reason. Shit is going to light UP tonight. 

The next few days are gonna be fun reading twitter.

And I bet Cruz cancels the rest of his debates.  No way in hell he wants to try and defend Trump on that, and if he doesn't, Trump won't show up.

[atomheartbevo 90670]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Am I the only one who thinks Warren isn't actually going to run, or rather that she's running without the expectation of winning the primary?  That she is actually more of a stalking horse, looking to draw Trump out into saying or doing stupid shit, and looking to help Dems with the midterms by engaging Trump?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

6 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Am I the only one who thinks Warren isn't actually going to run, 

Yes

[atomheartbevo 90670]

1 hour ago, Bama Chick said:

shudder
 

Did Fred have some kind of wound from the war?

Oh wait, his last name is Trump, there's no way that could be the excuse.

[WhatTheBuck 28940]

19 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Am I the only one who thinks Warren isn't actually going to run, or rather that she's running without the expectation of winning the primary?  That she is actually more of a stalking horse, looking to draw Trump out into saying or doing stupid shit, and looking to help Dems with the midterms by engaging Trump?

I think she's testing the waters and if the support is there then she'll run. Isn't that how it usually works?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Warren isn’t testing the waters. She’s running. She got a lot of pressure to run in 2016.  People that seriously run for President make that decision three to four years out.  She’s been very publicly rolling out her platform, releasing all her taxes, and putting to bed the Pocahontas shit over the last two months.   

She’s among the candidates I’m most certain are running.  Kamala Harris would be the another.

Edited October 3, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[David Dennison 19569]

13 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Warren isn’t testing the waters. She’s running. She got a lot of pressure to run in 2016.  People that seriously run for President make that decision three to four years out.  She’s been very publicly rolling out her platform, releasing all her taxes, and putting to bed the Pocahontas shit over the last two months.   

She’s among the candidates I’m most certain are running.  Kamala Harris would be the another.

I'm voting for a woman in the primary. Just not sure which one.

[yoladu 4191]

2 hours ago, lemonlime said:

Fuck him and fuck all his sycophantic, moronic supporters.

he is a piece of shit

[HornOnTheBayou 9067]

1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

No wonder Fred wore a hood. 

[Skyline 325]

13 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Warren isn’t testing the waters. She’s running. She got a lot of pressure to run in 2016.  People that seriously run for President make that decision three to four years out.  She’s been very publicly rolling out her platform, releasing all her taxes, and putting to bed the Pocahontas shit over the last two months.   

She’s among the candidates I’m most certain are running.  Kamala Harris would be the another.

There's nothing I want more than a Harris vs Warren debate. Both of them are incredibly intelligent and Warren especially has been really highlighting her policies. 

[troph 25247]

Gamble is potentially a big case in that the Supreme Court could hold that double jeopardy applies to state governments because they are not separate sovereigns under the law.  (this is currently an exception to double jeopardy under another case from I think about 60-70 years ago)  I think there are pros and cons for this in that one could argue that a state should not prosecute someone for the same crime that for example has already been convicted under federal law.  Some also argue that there are few federal and state law overlaps and that having no separate sovereign exception would have a fairly low impact overall.  Also keep in mind some states already have a law barring the state from putting on trial a person for the same crime that has already been convicted on the federal level.  On the other hand, in theory this could also mean that if someone receives a pardon from a federal conviction, this could bar states from prosecuting because they had already received a conviction.  This might be relevant in the context of presidential pardons in particular.   

The liberals are likely the ones that wanted the case. This one is a dual sentence, same act, near identical gun laws. I don’t think Kagan, Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Breyer will allow any ruling they give here to extend to an entirely separate fact pattern - presidential pardon of a state law crime. If Trump pardons for a federal crime, and the states bring a case, I see no dual sentencing for the same act, virtually identical law issue that is present in Gamble.

I can see Thomas finding no textual argument for dual sovereignty in the 5th. The words just aren’t there and I think that’s enough - if the liberals vote on the narrow question to get a ruling in favor of Gamble.

So that leaves the question will any justices opine that a ruling of double jeopardy for dual sentences for the same act nearly identical crime applies to the president’s right to pardon both federal and state crimes.

And my question is even if Kavanaugh is a yes and let’s assume he is - what other 4 are going to agree?

I’ll start and end with Roberts - a Bush appointee - it’s his court. He’s already turned on the conservatives for Obamacare. And most Chiefs care immensely about their legacy and reputation - I just don’t see him letting an easy opinion even if he goes with the criminal justice reform minded liberals turn into a contorted presidential pardon case.

I see the issues as completely distinguishable and I would be shocked if Gamble ends up standing for the proposition that trump can pardon state law crimes. I just don’t see it.

[yoladu 4191]

2 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

 

This guy deserves no wins in his life. Flake, Collins, Murkowski, every other Republican, are you listening? 

He is a bad, terrible, terrible, person.

[High Plains Drifter 11192]

2 hours ago, Mo Horn said:

Joe Manchin will lose votes if he doesn't support Kavanaugh.

 

1 hour ago, Aqua Buddha said:

He has a huge lead and has votes he can afford to lose.  He can vote against Cavanaugh and still win.  His opponent is a shit head.

If Collins and Murkowski vote against him, it gives Machin cover to vote yes because it doesn't matter.

 

I don't care if voting against Kavano! costs Manchin his seat. If he votes to confirm, under any circumstanced, fuck him.

[Bruh Man 3160]

 

[UTDD 362]

56 minutes ago, troph said:

 

The liberals are likely the ones that wanted the case. This one is a dual sentence, same act, near identical gun laws. I don’t think Kagan, Ginsburg, Sotomayor and Breyer will allow any ruling they give here to extend to an entirely separate fact pattern - presidential pardon of a state law crime. If Trump pardons for a federal crime, and the states bring a case, I see no dual sentencing for the same act, virtually identical law issue that is present in Gamble.

I can see Thomas finding no textual argument for dual sovereignty in the 5th. The words just aren’t there and I think that’s enough - if the liberals vote on the narrow question to get a ruling in favor of Gamble.

So that leaves the question will any justices opine that a ruling of double jeopardy for dual sentences for the same act nearly identical crime applies to the president’s right to pardon both federal and state crimes.

And my question is even if Kavanaugh is a yes and let’s assume he is - what other 4 are going to agree?

I’ll start and end with Roberts - a Bush appointee - it’s his court. He’s already turned on the conservatives for Obamacare. And most Chiefs care immensely about their legacy and reputation - I just don’t see him letting an easy opinion even if he goes with the criminal justice reform minded liberals turn into a contorted presidential pardon case.

I see the issues as completely distinguishable and I would be shocked if Gamble ends up standing for the proposition that trump can pardon state law crimes. I just don’t see it.

 

Agreed, I think personally it is quite easy to distinguish Gamble's facts from a possible federal presidential pardon scenario.  I don't remember the case, but I remember both Ginsburg and Thomas actually wanted to address the dual sovereignty issue.  Before this whole hearing mess started, I had actually wondered whether Kavanaugh might be a stealth centrist on a few specific issues (not executive power/protection issues obviously) versus say Barrett but now this seems so irrelevant compared to his character issues.