ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
This was copied from the case of Burdick vs United States. There is a mile of stuff to read if you want. I figure it takes up to much space to post.

After President Gerald Ford left the White House in 1977, close friends said that the President privately justified his pardon of Richard Nixon by carrying in his wallet a portion of the text of the Burdick decision, which stated that a pardon carries an imputation of guilt and that acceptance carries a confession of guilt.[6] Ford made reference to the Burdick decision in his post-pardon written statement furnished to the Judiciary Committee of the United States House of Representatives on October 17, 1974.[7] However, the reference related only to the portion of Burdick that supported the proposition that the Constitution does not limit the pardon power to cases of convicted offenders or even indicted offenders.[7][8]

Justice Joseph McKenna delivered the opinion of the Court in favor of Burdick. The Court ruled Burdick was entitled to reject the pardon for a number of reasons, including the implicit admission of guilt and possibly objectionable terms contained in a conditional pardon. As Burdick was entitled to reject the pardon, he was also entitled to assert his right against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment.

Although theIn Loranc Supreme Court's opinion stated that a pardon carries "an imputation of guilt and acceptance of a confession of it,"[2] this was part of the Court's dictum for the case.[4] Whether the acceptance of a pardon constitutes an admission of guilt by the recipient is disputed. e v. Commandant, USDB (2021) the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that "there is no confession and Lorance does not otherwise lose his right to petition for habeas corpus relief for his court-martial conviction and sentence. The case was remanded for further action not inconsistent with the court’s opinion."[5]

Aaaaaaaand the Democrat hypocrisy is on full display right here.



Pelosi needs to resign. What a POS.
 
This was copied from the case of Burdick vs United States. There is a mile of stuff to read if you want. I figure it takes up to much space to post.

After President Gerald Ford left the White House in 1977, close friends said that the President privately justified his pardon of Richard Nixon by carrying in his wallet a portion of the text of the Burdick decision, which stated that a pardon carries an imputation of guilt and that acceptance carries a confession of guilt.[6] Ford made reference to the Burdick decision in his post-pardon written statement furnished to the Judiciary Committee of the United States House of Representatives on October 17, 1974.[7] However, the reference related only to the portion of Burdick that supported the proposition that the Constitution does not limit the pardon power to cases of convicted offenders or even indicted offenders.[7][8]

Justice Joseph McKenna delivered the opinion of the Court in favor of Burdick. The Court ruled Burdick was entitled to reject the pardon for a number of reasons, including the implicit admission of guilt and possibly objectionable terms contained in a conditional pardon. As Burdick was entitled to reject the pardon, he was also entitled to assert his right against self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment.

Although theIn Loranc Supreme Court's opinion stated that a pardon carries "an imputation of guilt and acceptance of a confession of it,"[2] this was part of the Court's dictum for the case.[4] Whether the acceptance of a pardon constitutes an admission of guilt by the recipient is disputed. e v. Commandant, USDB (2021) the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that "there is no confession and Lorance does not otherwise lose his right to petition for habeas corpus relief for his court-martial conviction and sentence. The case was remanded for further action not inconsistent with the court’s opinion."[5]
Great work, 55. I will personally drive you to TB one time for that!

Back to the question, what CRIME is Milley confessing guilt? What crime is Fauci confessing guilt? What crime is the Biden crime family confessing guilt? J6 committee ... what crime?

The more you look at these pardons, you have to think one of the 20yo staffers conjured them up. They are not backed by legal precedent.
 
Last edited:
LMAO you say that now after Biden shit the bed for 4 years.
Dude, you and your TDS need to just take the L and post less.
You really do.
Biden had 4 straight years of job growth, low unemployment, record stock growth, good GDP growth, and no new wars involving deployment of US soldiers.
But you paid a dollar more for eggs.
We are all getting ready to take an L.
 
I know standing is a bullshit issue, but who would have standing to sue on the birthright citizenship issue at this point?

Assuming it wasn't retroactive, noone should have standing unless they are an illegal and gave birth to a child since the order was entered.

Cant imagine such a person was located that quickly but i suppose its possible. Even so, i doubt thats who even sued.
 
Im not too excited about our new war on drugs. We're never winning this war. Even if we somehow eradicated Mexican cartels, the same need would be filled by others. As long as there is demand, drugs will be an issue.

If we secure the border it would cut down on a ton of this. Then you just have to live with whatever comes through and handle it via law enforcement.
 
Liberals.every.frkn.time...
"No dems in congress did X..."

Everyone- "Here's proof they did."

Liberals
"What's a few dems in congress doing X....?"

The biggest hypocrisy hugging MORONS and disingenuous trolls on the planet are LIBERALS. Every frkn time. Never changes. Never any less predictable
 
"It will no longer allow schools, healthcare facilities, places of worship, etc. be "protected areas" where ICE can't detain people."












*No alien will be released from custody on an NTA/OR or otherwise without approval from Deputy Chief (B2). (Exceptions are generally given for medical reasons).

*We will no longer refer to aliens as migrants, noncitizens, etc. The legal term is alien and as law enforcement we will use the legal term.

* #CBPOne app has been disabled, scheduled appointments have been cancelled and no further appointments will be granted.*We will take a border security first approach. Threats should be prioritized based on risk and addressed in order of priority.
 
Last edited:
Im not too excited about our new war on drugs. We're never winning this war. Even if we somehow eradicated Mexican cartels, the same need would be filled by others. As long as there is demand, drugs will be an issue.

If we secure the border it would cut down on a ton of this. Then you just have to live with whatever comes through and handle it via law enforcement.

You do know who facilitated the drug epidemic in this country, right? It was our govt.

You do know who facilitated the violence epidemic in the big cities in this country, right? It was our govt.

You do know who facilitated the homelessness epidemic in this country, right? It was our govt.

Same people that facilitated the violence of illegal immigrants that is an epidemic in this country. It was our govt.

Massive inflation. Our govt.

Unchecked riots. Our govt.

Lack of integrity in media. Our govt.

Censorship of conservative media and speech. Our govt.

Interference in elections. Out govt.

Manipulation of the stock market. Our govt.

Mortgage/banking crisis and bailouts. Our govt.

Savings & loan collapse and scandal. Our govt.

"Covid" deaths and mistreatment. Our govt.

Energy crisis. Out govt.

California wildfires. Our govt.

Disaster of a FEMA "response" to flooding. Our govt.

War in Ukraine. Our govt.

Democrat and Rino policies have been killing this country.
 
Assuming it wasn't retroactive, noone should have standing unless they are an illegal and gave birth to a child since the order was entered.

Cant imagine such a person was located that quickly but i suppose its possible. Even so, i doubt thats who even sued.
Well... there are currently MILLIONS of them here illegally. Statistically speaking, I suppose there's a decent chance a few of them may have given birth to a child within the last 12 hours.

Regardless, it was always known this would be challenged and addressed in the courts. Might as well get the ball rolling and see how it plays out. No matter how it goes, it's going to raise everyone's awareness of the issue and ignite some discussion about what our Constitution should really allow. If it goes to the point of needing to ratify an amendment, the only way that is successful is if a tremendous amount of public support has been built across the country.
 
I’m about to start posting daily egg price drops in here like I’m @Nightwish84 posting daily poll numbers when Kamala was “in the lead”

@sammysdad05 is going to be buying so many eggs even @sambowieshin wouldnt be able to eat them all.
Checked today. Eggs still the same at Kroger. Tomorrows ad doesn’t show “new Trump prices” but maybe I just missed it
 
Well... there are currently MILLIONS of them here illegally. Statistically speaking, I suppose there's a decent chance a few of them may have given birth to a child within the last 12 hours.

Regardless, it was always known this would be challenged and addressed in the courts. Might as well get the ball rolling and see how it plays out. No matter how it goes, it's going to raise everyone's awareness of the issue and ignite some discussion about what our Constitution should really allow. If it goes to the point of needing to ratify an amendment, the only way that is successful is if a tremendous amount of public support has been built across the country.

Someone illegally or temporarily here shouldn't get to just exude on this side of the border "clumps of cells" (as the liberals call them) and that "clump of cells" is suddenly and automatically granted citizenship. That's fkng stupid on its face, and only gets more stupid when you look at it in depth.

Our enemies would simply cross our borders to give birth constantly. No intelligent govt is going to allow that, much less make it part of the foundation of its laws.
 
Im not too excited about our new war on drugs. We're never winning this war.

You should be excited, unless you simply didn't care the last few years about the fentanyl epidemic. And it isn't about "winning this war"....it's about getting a handle on the issue and that starts w/ the cartels and the border. You have to start somewhere which is a helluva bigger start than what Biden did.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT