Democrats Add Momentum to G.O.P. Push to Loosen Banking Rules.
Hellworld just keeps getting toastier.
Nevada Dems reveal Mitch McTurtle mascot. What’s up with Dems and corny mascots?
#Resistance liberals are so transparently performative that they’re being called #TheAssistance.
The Russia scaremongering is the stupid liberal idea of the year. I think it’s cool that Democrats have turned into the Tea Party, and the Tea Party turned into schizophrenics. We’re so fucked.
California’s law is in direct violation of the Constitution (Article 1, Section 8, if anyone cares). California’s state law is in direct violation of the U.S. Code as well (8 U.S. Code § 1324, if anyone cares).
The passage of the law by the California Congress and the governor’s signing it into law are all actions, IMNSHO, that constitute a conspiracy to violate 8 U.S. Code § 1324 and they should all be arrested for it.
We’ll see what happens. At any rate, it was a massive act of stupidity committed by liberals.
Every one of my posts is a quality post. That’s why they upset libs so much.
As I pointed out above - the entire state legislature is responsible. It’s not just one person. And yeah, the state is pretty much full of liberals. Damn few conservatives out there.
Do you take meds for those delusions? :dubious:
Maybe you should be.
Pray tell, Mr. Stable Genius, which part of Article I, Section 8, does California law violate? Explain how, and why it violates this particular part of the Constitution.
As for violating the US Code, did you miss the six or seven places in the California law where it explicitly states that the law applies “Except as otherwise required by federal law.” That is, the law explicitly says that it only applies in circumstances where it does not conflict with federal law.
Yeah, hardly any. :rolleyes:
Number of Texans who voted for Donald Trump: 4,685,047
Number of Californians who voted for Donald Trump: 4,483,810
Since you think H. Clinton is a felon, I think we can discount your opinion of the law.
There’s a whole bunch of stuff in Section 8. What part are you claiming?
As far as 8 U.S. Code § 1324, you seem to miss the fact that states have no power to hold someone who has not violated state law or has served their time unless there is a warrant from the feds. If the feds are too lazy to get a warrant or have someone on hand to take custody on release, tough nertz.
The Constitution applies to everyone on US soil, illegally or not.
The Hillary Clinton Question, to me, is a basic question of sanity and reasonability.
If you think a woman who was constantly investigated for over 25 years without a single charge being levied against her is a criminal, murderer, or felon, you are neither sane nor reasonable.
And before you go blathering on about how that doesn’t mean that she isn’t a criminal, I will remind you that by the same standards, YOU ARE A CRIMINAL, since I have to assume that there isn’t a single adult in this nation who has never exceeded the speed limit, jaywalked or done something else so minor as to escape notice but is nevertheless against the law.
And seriously, Hillary is gone. Bill is gone. They’re not hiding under your bed anymore to jump out and rape your children at night.
Get. The. Fuck. Over. It.
Those are questions resolved by the courts, not by random internet people (even someone as obviously brilliant, open minded, intellectually curious, and open to differing opinions as yourself). If the courts decide that it doesn’t violate the Constitution, then you’re incorrect. If they decide that it does, then you are correct. We’ll see what happens, but these disputes are resolved inside the courts, not inside internet message boards.
[quote=“Clothahump, post:6788, topic:579086”]
Since everybody seems to get so bent out of shape if I just post about a single stupid liberal, here’s something different: an entire state full of stupid liberals.
Yeah, a $10,000 fine does seem a little low for completely ruining someone’s life by getting them thrown in jail if they don’t happen to have their birth certificate or passport in their pocket when ICE arrests them, then lose their job for missing work while they’re awaiting a hearing, and possibly get deported if the bureaucracy messes up and doesn’t correctly verify that they’re a U.S. citizen.
All because you suspect they’re an illegal immigrant - IE, they have a skin color you don’t like.
Durbin and Schumer are bragging about how they wanted to give Trump everything he wanted, including the border wall.
OK, maybe they didn’t really mean it and they’re playing that famed 4D chess. Building walls to keep Mexicans out is something only stupid racists do, not Democrats.
Jimmy Dore has helpfully gathered several comical interview clips(1:30-5:23) of Hillary Clinton trying to explain her and many other Democrats (including Obama, Schumer) voting for the Secure Fence Act of 2006, which built 700 miles of fencing along the border, among other security measures. I particularly enjoyed her Trumpian explanation of how Mexican government policy is pushing immigration up north.
Remember you silly progressives, there was plenty of money for Trump’s racist wall, the military budget increase, and bombing half the world, but universal healthcare is pie in the sky fairy dust. [slide whistle]
2020 Dem slogan: Build that [del]wall[/del] barrier!
My, my - here’s another one. And amazingly enough…it’s out of California as well.
Seems the city of Los Angeles wanted to put on a big dog and pony show about the government was “going green”, so they shelled out $10 million clams for electric cars for the cops. The only problem is that the cops won’t drive them because they are useless for police work,so they are sitting idle.
The Democrats should introduce a bill that authorizes Trump to build any wall he wants. As long as it’s funded by Mexico.
That was the campaign promise, after all. No one voted for him to get a U.S. funded wall
Is this what you are talking about?
You’re right, that does make no sense.
Especially as to whether or not the cops like them, as it points out in the article
Whether they are talking about speed or range there, does either matter when they are being used for administrative, non-emergency use?
It sounds to me like the LAPD just refuses to try new things. If the numbers are right, then they are paying 10mill for 300 cars, so that’s $33k per car. That’s not a bad price, especially for a BMW.
Depending on the political leaning of the LAPD, you could take the refusal of them to use these cars for their purpose as a stupid idea, but providing police with new updated equipment doesn’t seem to be one. That they are not useful for a purpose they were not intended for does not seem to be the fault of “liberals”.
Gosh, you’d think the lazy cops would be all over that if they let them. Drive around for an hour, go spend a half hour charging it, standing around, shooting the shit. Can’t go out on calls, sorry, car’s charging now.
The way it’s worded, I’m having trouble figuring out whether the car only gets 100 miles per charge, or it can’t go faster than 100 mph. I get a worse impression of the reporter than the car or LAPD.
It’s both. The BMW i3 gets about 100 miles per charge, and also has a top speed of just under 100mph.
I’ll be interested to see whether the LAPD has a more sustained response to the criticisms of this program, because while i’m a big fan of electric vehicles, i’m not sure exactly why a police department needs so many of these particular cars. I’m also interested to know more about exactly what sort of work these cars are supposed to be doing. They would seem ideal for police who patrol the downtown area, and who spend time out of their car on foot. They would also seem to be fine for supervisors who are not patrolling full-time, but who sometimes have to attend a scene in order to coordinate and oversee police procedures, crowd control, etc. And they would also work for the non-patrolling aspects of law enforcement, such as crime scene, witness transport, follow-up interviews, etc., etc.
If they’re not being used for these sorts of tasks, i’d be interested to know why.
If they REALLY were going to give it all away, they were fucking fools. Dump has never honored any “deal” in his life. The proof of it all is, Trump sabotaged it anyway. And then after it was dead, McConnell and company threw their two cents in.
It’s fucking simple. Trump (through his Repub lackeys) controls the White House, Senate, House of Representatives, and Supreme Court. It’s all on THEM.
All they have to do is put chargers at donut shops. 2 birds, one stone.
Nah, they just have to move the chargers around. Known drug house? New charger across the street. Rise in shoplifting or assaults near a grocery store? Move that charger to the spot next to the Handicapped spots. Hell, we have a four way stop about half a mile away that could use a charger nearby. Lots of no stops there. They used to sit in a spot that couldn’t be seen from the other 3 directions until you were right there, but I haven’t seen them do that in over a year.
Good Lord, haven’t you people heard of extension cords?
