1942

I have a feeling that if we had the strict adherence to (your point), a more strict interpretation of the words in the Constitution, in today's political climate, needless lives could be lost as a result.

It's not just the political climate, I think.
When the constitution was written it would typically take weeks or months to start a war against someone.
Now it's approx. 7 minutes.
 
That’s not a leftist…that’s a President manifested by the Kenyan…the Kenyan your globalist buddies installed.
LMAO yeah right.
You want to talk about globalism while your orange leftist jesus is policing the world. While he tries to set up a new GLOBAL "peace" program. :lol:
Moonbat.
 
The assertion that he is only against the neo-con/neo-lib war mongering when a Republican does it.



Good lord dude, you have been a member for at least seven years, and you don't know that TNHarley is one of the most philosophically/politically consistent posters on this forum, regardless of who is in office? Do you have the memory of a gnat, or are you just really really stoopid?


Jan 25, 2016


Apr 10, 2017


Apr 11, 2017


Aug 22, 2022

He is far to the right of Conservative, by his own definition.

That makes him just fringe and useless - not evil.
 
Authorized by the AUMF

Trump had nothing
Some attacks didnt involve the AUMF. Which is unconstitutional.
Also, there was no AUMF to justify his "anti terrorism" attacks. Obama tried to justify his actions by re-interpreting the AUMF to include "al quada" and "other associates."

Its crazy how your argument is, obama can use the AUMF but trump cant. Absolutely mind blowing.
 
You doubt that Iran would appreciate your efforts on this subject thus far?
By saying there should have been a declaration of war? By saying the president shouldnt have abused his powers?
Yeah, im sure thats irans argument, too. :lol:
 
By saying there should have been a declaration of war? By saying the president shouldnt have abused his powers?
Yeah, im sure thats irans argument, too. :lol:
Did President Trump "abuse his powers" even as he went through the "gang of 8" as the Congress demanded he do - before?
 
15th post
You know whats hilarious about this stuff? When the next D president does the same shit, I will be saying the same thing. The people arguing with me now? They will be agreeing with me then.
 
There is no need to prove the negative when we've already seen the evidence to support the idea in practice for decades now.
Doesn't refute what I said in any way.

What you've seen for decades now is that "living constitution" thing, that "conservatives" (whatever the hell that's supposed to mean anymore) generally decry, except when it's convenient for them to get amnesia...Like right now.
 
Back
Top Bottom