POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
What I find amazing is the people obsessed with Lot's story and whether to teach it in school, but they are "all in" with the gender-queer "teaching" all the way back to pre-school.
They are insane.
Seems like if the current admin is scared of a future admin putting them in jail for policy disagreements, then there will never be a "future admin" because the current admin will burn it all down to stay in power.
It almost seems familiar ...
Don't know how you get their games, but Bally Sports carries them all for me in NKy.
When have I ever been anything but honest on here? You just don't like my honesty.
Yes, there are historically relevant and significant portions of the Bible that are ALREADY taught in social studies/history/Western Civ classes.
I couldn't tell you how many times that I have taught middle schoolers about the Big 3 religions (Christianity, Islam and Judaism) and their major tenants....including the connection between the 10 Commandments and modern day written law. I taught about the major players in Christianity including Moses, Jesus etc. and their impacts on us today.
This is Already part of Kentucky education curriculum.
But this has always been done via the state board of ed, local schools and teacher input. The difference now is the making of MANDATORY indoctrination of ONE religion over all others.
Nobody is telling you and your kids not to go to church 24/7.... But you wanna force others to listen to your religious beliefs against their will via codified laws. That's BS.
Big difference between an overview of the world's major religions/influence on western civ. and your indoctrination using one above all others.
These are just a few of the actual Ky standards we taught as the basis for all of the lessons regarding religion/cultural influences/and basis for our modern laws. We have ALWAYS done this as long as I've been teaching. It just wasn't law hanging over our heads and wasn't skewed to favor one religion over all others. All of the major religions have had impacts on our civilization.
KY Academic Standards
kystandards.org
Compare the origins and development of
early world religions from River Valley
Civilizations to Classical Empires 3500-BCE-600 CE.
Analyze how historical, economic, geographic and cultural characteristics influence social and government structures in River Valley
Civilizations and Classical Empires between 3500-BCE-600 CE.
Analyze the purposes and effects of laws in River Valley Civilizations and Classical Empires between 3500 BCE-600 CE.
see sam ... that's how it's done!
Trump seeks to postpone sentencing and set aside verdict in his hush money trial after the Supreme Court's immunity ruling
It’s going to be hilarious if the Lib’s favorite talking point (34 felony convictions) gets blown up even faster than expected.
It’s going to be hilarious if the Lib’s favorite talking point (34 felony convictions) gets blown up even faster than expected.
Your question is stupid. First, the president doesn’t order FBI agents.
Second, if the President’s discussions with his vice president aren’t conclusively official acts (when the vp is acting as president of the senate) how do you definitively conclude the president directly ordering fbi agents to raid a house, presumably without a warrant, would be an official act?
He doesn't currently, but under Unitary Executive Theory as laid out in Project 2025 they would be under his purview.
Ok so you're referring to Section 2 of the decision which covers the communications with the VP and specifies that his role in that instance was as President of the Senate and so part of the legislative, not the executive branch. What would be operative though in this hypothetical is Section 1, which covers the president's communications with the Department of Justice officials who were part of the executive. Those were given absolute immunity.
And defend a man who did Lord knows what to his daughter in the shower. At least Lot was too drunk to know what was going down.
Only a matter of time before they start pushing for incest anyway. Already pushing for normalizing pedos or “MAP” (minor attracted persons). We are still a ways from rock bottom yet but well on our way.
Last edited:
I know you know the answer but I'm going to say it anyway. The left knew their insane ideas would never fly with the masses. So they developed the strategy of convincing marginalized groups that they were "there for them" in conjunction with fear tactics, keeping them afraid of everyone else so that they believe their only defense is to vote for them. The left's target audience are the fringe groups because they are the only ones this tactic works on. But instead of calling it what it is, they coined it "inclusion" because hey, that sounds pretty nice. It's actually a genius strategy and has worked well for them. I do think some of these marginalized groups (African Americans and Hispanics) are starting to see through the bullshit though.
I had a gf who once thought it wasn’t fair that the US has nuclear weapons and other countries were not allowed. Same mindset as the above. “It’s not fair society treats pedos harshly; they can’t help how they feel”.
No dumbass… it’s a danger to society. North Korea and the pedos can go to hell.
You just described the communist manifesto of the early 20th century and how they came to power. Being such a small group themselves this is how they separated society into marginalized groups then used the usefuls to take down the establishment.
The part left out is what the communist did these groups once power was achieved. The useful idiots were now useless and not needed so they offed them one by one as a threat to their new society.
The modern day communist need the antifas, blms, lgb's, trannies, along with their own control of agencies to create chaos in an attempt to bring revolution. Once achieved the subgroups through media coercion get turned from heroes to the enemy of the new state. That's what the useful idiots don't understand. They are nothing more than props that will be eliminated once their own side wins.
It's history repeating itself
Yes. Democrats cannot win elections if the African American vote doesn't show up. That's why they call everything racist...they're trying to manipulate that voting bloc. Race relations aren't as bad as democrats portray them either...the only people that think they are are the ultra white libs who feel offended for everyone.
What ive taken from today...Democrats dream about killing everyone. Sotomayor dissent is absurd bc no president is immune from being charged with murder.
Everyone else is thinking more along the lines of can biden ignore law and forgive loans or should he go to jail?
Here's a real tell...the decision doesn't say Trump, it says president's. Meaning biden and future Democrat ones. Not a single R lost their mind with that knowledge
Yup. I live in small town Kentucky, a place most libs would probably think is the heart of racism. Nobody cares about skin color here and we all get along fine. Seems like the left are the ones that pay attention to race and are obsessed with it.
Jail
Obama Administration Claims Unchecked Authority To Kill Americans Outside Combat Zones | American Civil Liberties Union
Federal Court Hears Arguments Today In ACLU And CCR Case Challenging Administration's Claimed Authority To Assassinate Americans It Designates Threats...
www.aclu.org
Why not though? SCOTUS just ruled official duties have absolute immunity.
Exactly, this type of conduct is now officially covered. So why would domestic operations not be?Jail
Obama Administration Claims Unchecked Authority To Kill Americans Outside Combat Zones | American Civil Liberties Union
Federal Court Hears Arguments Today In ACLU And CCR Case Challenging Administration's Claimed Authority To Assassinate Americans It Designates Threats...
There wasn’t any doubt in the minds of anyone who can observe and form a critical thought.
Your reading is stupid. No one would think the president going outside the chain of command to tell FBI agents to execute a warranties raid of a Justice’s house would be an official act. Like the VP not acting in his capacity as a member of the executive branch when president of the senate, the president’s Gestapo executing illegal raids is not a function of the executive branch.
Earlier in the day, Dion said “everyone knew” the president has immunity and it was being remanded to the lower courts to determine what were official and unofficial acts.
A couple hours of lefty drive later, and Dion is breathlessly whining about the new Reddit bogeyman, Project 2025, and making up stupid hypotheticals.
It’s amazing how programmed these people are and how quickly they snap back in line.
A couple hours of lefty drive later, and Dion is breathlessly whining about the new Reddit bogeyman, Project 2025, and making up stupid hypotheticals.
It’s amazing how programmed these people are and how quickly they snap back in line.
Codified refers to statutes. This is case law. Case law mind you that existed for probably 100 years. So yes it will apply to all future presidents, even without this decision because this elementary statement of law is far from anything new.
It isnt blanket immunity. Its limited to official acts, as it always was. So the real question as i said in another post, is how to define an official act.
On that note this situation is much different being there was never before lawfare and banana Republic attempts to jail all opposition, so I dont think the question of official act was ever litigated and defined. Maybe they did so in this opinion for guidance/guardrails for undoubtedly a rogue judge. So this very case will probably be back because the lawfare wont stop, the undoubtedly rogue judge will try to find no official act, and scotus will have to once again get involved.
The irony is I'm pretty sure the last time this issue even came up was with Clinton. Bill to be exact. Clarification needed because theyre both criminals but only he won the office. Although i cant remember if it was whitewater, perjury, or one of the other various litany of criminal acts.
Plus the remedy of the ballot box, which iirc was the ultimate remedy in mind when discussing the very few times this was ever litigated.
Of course they could never envision the level of fraud that goes on today.
Because murder isnt an official duty. Its beyond the scope of the office. I know the left want to sensationalize everything, but this is consist case law thats been around forever. It has nothing to do with trump other than he was the one at issue this time.
At least they arent supposed to
How about having your political opponent jailed? Is that covered? White House administration cleverly working with the DA’s in not so secret meetings better not come out. Press not too interested in uncovering facts.
If Trump had actually done the things as president that the crazed left claimed he would (prosecute Hillary, start wars, etc.), Sotomayor and the left would be outraged and decisions like the current one would be different. Their fears are always contextual to Trump. They don’t care about the hypocrisy of it all.
Just like when they changed the rules in the senate and then cried about it when the GOP used their new rules against them.
Your first sentence is an attempt to mire this conversation into linguistics. We don't need to argue about interpretation vs codification.
Secondly, quite clearly, it's not blanket immunity, hence the focus on the term "official". The arguments from dissenting judges aren't that the President has a blank check, but that the probability of abuse and excuse is now increased with this ruling -- which is probably accurate. It removes yet another check and balance in a system predicated on checks and balances.
Thirdly, I'm not sure you know what a Banana Republic is and I find it somewhat ironic you'd bring up Bill Clinton in the same post given that Republicans attempted to remove him from power for lying about blowjob. White Water took place in Arkansas prior to Presidential office and is not relevant to this conversation. Again, I assume you bring this up to bog down the conversation into rhetorical back and forth. But, as always, all politicians who break the law should be found liable (Clinton included).
Last edited:
Let's ask this: if Biden literally bombed a deep red district ... would you and the other lefties cheer or be fumed with outrage? Would there be political consequence? What if Trump bombed New York or San Fran?
If a president surrounded, say a compound, with 50-100 people inside and killed them all in order to save them. Would you cheer that?
It is already a matter of record that big fat fanni and james were on the wh guest list.
Similar threads
