Is our justice system now gone because of Trump?

[zaangalewa]

Never happened,

Happened - but you do not know. I remember for example a story about an US-American who directly after World War 2 became a citizen of the totally wasted and destroyed country Trizonesia (Germany) - while most Germans would had been happy to live in a save country like the USA. They thought he was a crazy guy. But I think he was not. He was looking for the compassion that he - as an US-American of German heritage - had not found in the US prison camps for US-American "enemies". I hope he found it here in the midst of the German rubble under all the other broken bodies and broken souls.

and BTW, I was one of those men for more than 20 years, you're welcome.

You was what? Criminal or knight?

 

[zaangalewa]

.

... And take solace in the idea your bleeding-heart compassion and distrust of those charged to protect you ...
Is what causes you to leave the door unlocked and invite them in ...
​

.

No idea what you say here. When I was a child, we always left the key in the front door. Reason for: Someone could come. Today no one lefts the key in the front door any longer. Reason for: Someone could come.



La-le-lu
Nur der Mann im Mond schaut zu
Wenn die kleinen Babies schlafen
Drum schlaf' auch du

La-le-lu
Vor dem Bettchen steh'n zwei Schuh'
Die sind genauso müde
Geh'n jetzt zur Ruh'

Dann kommt auch der Sandmann
Leis' tritt er ins Haus
Sucht aus seinen Träumen
Dir den schoensten aus

La-le-lu ...

Sind alle die Sterne
am Himmel erwacht
Dann sing ich es gerne
Dies Lied Dir zur Nacht

La-le-lu ...
...
Geh'n jetzt zur Ruh'

-----


La-le-lu
Only the man in the moon is watching
When the little babies sleep
So you sleep too

La-le-l-lu
There are two shoes in front of the cot
They're just as tired
Going to rest now

Then comes the sandman
Quietly he enters the house
Selects from his dreams
The most beautiful one for you

La-le-lu ...

When all the stars
in the sky have awakened
Then I like to sing it
This song to you at night

La-le-lu ...
...
Go to rest now

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

 

[BlackSand]

As I have clearly stated many times, I am not a political person. I don't try to comment on things I have limited knowledge about. That is the job of the representatives elected by the constituents. They have the information and the job of getting the best for the people they represent.

My expertise is in evaluating people for who they are as people and their capacity, intentions desires that represent what they can do (and not do) and what drives them. Being a people person and having been a salesman for most of my life (and a good one at that), I have the ability to evaluate people. Who is intelligent, who is capable, who is corrupt, who is caring, and who is competent. Evidently and not knowing the people personally, I have to rely on their public actions, their public words, and their public demeanor, meaning that my evaluations will not be all that dependable and can be wrong. Then again, some people are more expressive and the information bigger (such as with Hegseth, RFK, Giuliani and greatly so with Trump. In those cases, my evaluation is about as good as it can be.

This is where I shine and know more than most people. I have been doing this most of my life and done it successfully. I can be considered knowledgeable in that respect.

As far as the politicians and the politics involved, I know that if a person has at least one of these four (morals, ethics, principles or humanity), the damage they can do is limited, given that having any one of those will stop them from going to the extreme and doing big and permanent damage. If they do any damage, they will be gone in 4 years and the country will recover.

Trump will do big damage, it will be long-lastng and we will not recover or if we recover it will take a long time.

.

I am sorry you feel that way ... And partially because I do want him to do lasting damage to the Establishment.
You say you are not a political person ... But you have no problem wanting something from politics or government.
You cannot have one without the other.

You indicated that you believe you are adept at reading people ... Yet your bias doesn't allow an equal evaluation of all.
Furthermore ... The standards you evaluate people against are more about your desires ...
Not necessarily their capabilities or responsibilities ... When those two aspects exceed your approval and desires.
More simply put ... Their capabilities are not bound to your expectations simply because you don't like what they are going to do.

Take a look at where we separate ... You talk about morality, expectations, your gut feelings, and political desires.
I talk about function, processes, expectations and my desires.
You may not understand what I am talking about when I refer to the Establishment ... Or the fact it consists of both parties.
You may not understand why I want to break it ... Turn over the system of endless spending ...
Revolving lies at the expense of your trust in those you wish to believe are not lying to you.

You talk about the law, and our Constitution as if you have some knowledge and understanding ...
And I want you to think about something for me.

I'm sure you are familiar with the 10th Amendment ... But I want you to look again at the last three words in that Amendment.
Then I want you to tell me what you think they mean ... And whether or not you think they were put there on accident.

Thanks

.​

 

[BlackSand]

No idea what you say here. When I was a child, we always left the key in the front door. Reason for: Someone could come. Today no one lefts the key in the front door any longer. Reason for: Someone could come.

.

I was using figurative speech not unlike your original comment ... And you entirely missed the point.
No worries though ... You might have missed it because I am poor communicator.

Or ... You might have missed it because it would suggest there is a fault in the reasoning of your original comment ...
When you compare it to the things you are willing to do for others that could most certainly produce the same results ...
But with a different villain.

Oh well ... It will probably be better if we both agree that I suck at assuming I am capable of conveying a greater thought ...

.​

 

[zaangalewa]

.

I was using figurative speech not unlike your original comment ... And you entirely missed the point.
No worries though ... You might have missed it because I am poor communicator.

Or ... You might have missed it because it would suggest there is a fault in the reasoning of your original comment ...
When you compare it to the things you are willing to do for others that could most certainly produce the same results ...
But with a different villain.

Oh well ... It will probably be better if we both agree that I suck at assuming I am capable of conveying a greater thought ...

.​

Eh? ... One moment ...

-----
... And take solace in the idea your bleeding-heart compassion and distrust of those charged to protect you ...
Is what causes you to leave the door unlocked and invite them in ...

.... Und trösten Sie sich mit dem Gedanken, dass Ihr herzzerreißendes Mitgefühl und Ihr Misstrauen gegenüber denjenigen, die Sie beschützen sollen, ...
der Grund dafür ist, dass Sie die Tür unverschlossen lassen und sie hereinbitten ...
-----

No. Which "herzzerreissendes Mitgefühl" (bleeding-heart compassion)? And sure I mistrust in everyone who says he likes to protect me. Why says an unknown idiot so?

 

[Luckyone]

.

I am sorry you feel that way ... And partially because I do want him to do lasting damage to the Establishment.
You say you are not a political person ... But you have no problem wanting something from politics or government.
You cannot have one without the other.​

Hold on a second. I do not know where you got the idea tat I want or need something from the government. I don't depend on the government at all. I am a stock market analyst and have been one for 47 years and though I do receive social security, I don't need that at all, I have been living off of my trading since I retired and I make more trading than I need.

You indicated that you believe you are adept at reading people ... Yet your bias doesn't allow an equal evaluation of all.ngnn​

I have absolutely no bias other than a bias for communicating with caring, intelligent and knowledgeable people and I give the benefit of the doubt to everyone until they prove otherwise. That is not a bias.

Furthermore ... The standards you evaluate people against are more about your desires ...​

Desires? What desires are you talking about.

Not necessarily their capabilities or responsibilities ... When those two aspects exceed your approval and desires.
More simply put ... Their capabilities are not bound to your expectations simply because you don't like what they are going to do.​

I must admit that I do not like to waste time with someone ignorant, stupid, blind-by-by choice or a debaser/insulter critic but that is not a desire but a guideline that I have developed over my lifetime and that is personal. For example, I don't care whether you talk to someone like that or not

Take a look at where we separate ... You talk about morality, expectations, your gut feelings, and political desires.
I talk about function, processes, expectations and my desires.
You may not understand what I am talking about when I refer to the Establishment ... Or the fact it consists of both parties.
You may not understand why I want to break it ... Turn over the system of endless spending ...
Revolving lies at the expense of your trust in those you wish to believe are not lying to you.​

One question for you. If you are self-sufficient and not affected personally by what happens, why do you care what the politicians do?

You talk about the law, and our Constitution as if you have some knowledge and understanding ...
And I want you to think about something for me.​

In life there are basics that need to exist for anything to work well. For example, everyone has the right to life, liberty and happiness. If you take that away from someone, there is nothing to talk about

I'm sure you are familiar with the 10th Amendment ... But I want you to look again at the last three words in that Amendment.
Then I want you to tell me what you think they mean ... And whether or not you think they were put there on accident.​

Of the people.

I do not know what you think can be said as the whole Constitution needs to b involved as we are a Democratic Republic, meaning that the majority of the people is what decides

Thanks

.​

 

[Contumacious]

Hold on a second. I do not know where you got the idea tat I want or need something from the government. I don't depend on the government at all

Really?


The violent Parasites National Anthem

"Feed Me, Seymour!"​

 

[Leo123]

As I have clearly stated many times, I am not a political person. I don't try to comment on things I have limited knowledge about. That is the job of the representatives elected by the constituents. They have the information and the job of getting the best for the people they represent.

My expertise is in evaluating people for who they are as people and their capacity, intentions desires that represent what they can do (and not do) and what drives them. Being a people person and having been a salesman for most of my life (and a good one at that), I have the ability to evaluate people. Who is intelligent, who is capable, who is corrupt, who is caring, and who is competent. Evidently and not knowing the people personally, I have to rely on their public actions, their public words, and their public demeanor, meaning that my evaluations will not be all that dependable and can be wrong. Then again, some people are more expressive and the information bigger (such as with Hegseth, RFK, Giuliani and greatly so with Trump. In those cases, my evaluation is about as good as it can be.

This is where I shine and know more than most people. I have been doing this most of my life and done it successfully. I can be considered knowledgeable in that respect.

As far as the politicians and the politics involved, I know that if a person has at least one of these four (morals, ethics, principles or humanity), the damage they can do is limited, given that having any one of those will stop them from going to the extreme and doing big and permanent damage. If they do any damage, they will be gone in 4 years and the country will recover.

Trump will do big damage, it will be long-lastng and we will not recover or if we recover it will take a long time.

Biden had none of those virtues and he has done great damage. Luckily we elected the opposite of Biden.

 

[BlackSand]

Hold on a second. I do not know where you got the idea tat I want or need something from the government. I don't depend on the government at all. I am a stock market analyst and have been one for 47 years and though I do receive social security, I don't need that at all, I have been living off of my trading since I retired and I make more trading than I need.


I have absolutely no bias other than a bias for communicating with caring, intelligent and knowledgeable people and I give the benefit of the doubt to everyone until they prove otherwise. That is not a bias.


Desires? What desires are you talking about.


I must admit that I do not like to waste time with someone ignorant, stupid, blind-by-by choice or a debaser/insulter critic but that is not a desire but a guideline that I have developed over my lifetime and that is personal. For example, I don't care whether you talk to someone like that or not


One question for you. If you are self-sufficient and not affected personally by what happens, why do you care what the politicians do?


In life there are basics that need to exist for anything to work well. For example, everyone has the right to life, liberty and happiness. If you take that away from someone, there is nothing to talk about


Of the people.

I do not know what you think can be said as the whole Constitution needs to b involved as we are a Democratic Republic, meaning that the majority of the people is what decides

.

First of all ... I didn't mean subsidies or financial support from the government.
I meant you desire the Federal Government to manage at least some affairs in aspects that influence your life and well-being.
Hence why you are so upset about President Trump, and what you believe to be a ruinous course of action.

Secondly ... We've already covered humans and bias as well as prejudice.
It's natural and if you don't have them, it would be a mental condition ... And not a good one.
In the rawest form ... Some of them help keep you alive ... And to deny them would be foolish.
But again ... That's another topic and we don't need to open that can of worms ... It's not that close to your topic ...

Desires are simply what you want ... I am not trying to identify your desires ... That is not the point.
You have desires ... Again, it would be unhealthy if you didn't ... And I would recommend seeking treatment.
When I speak of your desires ... Stop trying to fight what I am saying ... And simply plug your desires in.
It requires critical thinking ... And a certain amount of self-awareness.

To answer your question ... I don't care what politicians do ... Or more appropriately what they say or want me to believe.
I do care about our Constitution and this Nation ... And the fact that I believe we have strayed too far off the proper course already ...
Where you demonstrate more Presentism ... And the idea a person may save, or at least protect, what I believe we have already lost.

You are correct everyone has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness ... But not simply at the cost of another.
No man is responsible or liable for another man's debt ... That's not what the Constitution allows.
General Welfare is allowed ... But that does not include Individual Welfare ... Again, that's another topic.

In my recollection I made a mistake, and I meant the last four words ... And they are 'or to the People'
That's not 'of the People' ... Nor does it indicate the source of power for the Local, State or Federal Government.
It really has nothing to do with whether or not we are a Republic ... 'Or' indicates an exception to the previous Clauses.

It indicates that all the previously mentioned governmental entities ...
Are still not as far down the chain you can go if you limit government.
The People can choose to govern themselves ... Thus keeping their vision, direction, and desires
governed as close as possible to their freedom ... And as far away as possible from the Federal Government.

To 'govern' anything is not an expression of Freedom ... To 'govern' identifies setting limits, parameters, and boundaries.
And likewise ... I don't think they put it there on accident ... And why?

"A Free person does not have to be told they are Free ...
And Liberty is not granted, only exercised."

Think about it ... Or don't ... Thanks again.

.​

 

[zaangalewa]

Biden had none of those virtues and he has done great damage. Luckily we elected the opposite of Biden.

Virtue is damaging - so you like to be governed from a criminal. Makes sense. We always made good experiences with rulers who had been criminals like Stalin (fist salute) or Hitler (Nazi salute). ´... No, Sheldon Cooper .... that's irony. Irony means to take an iron and to flat some weird thoughts ...

 

[zaangalewa]

Bullshit

K$H Patel will never tell someone who did not break the law to bend over

I'm no native English speaker. Your sentence here makes not any sense in my own language. What means "to bend over" - not verbally.

Donald Trump made out of John McGain - one of the most honorful heroes of the USA who followed his conscience and one of the greatest republicans at all - a so called "persona no grata" under the people who call themselves today republicans. I'm still astonished that this was possible to happen.

And no: I do not discuss now about John McCain - specially not with Trumpericans - but I like to repeat some statements. Sorry for the retranslations from translated German quotes into English quotes - but I have now not the time to find the original English words. Source John McCain ist tot

-----
... Barack Obama: "Wenige von uns wurden so herausgefordert, wie John es einst wurde, oder mussten den Mut zeigen, den er gezeigt hat", teilte der Ex-Präsident mit. "Aber wir alle können den Mut haben, das Wohl der Allgemeinheit über unser eigenes zu stellen." McCain habe in seinen besten Zeiten gezeigt, wie das gehe. "Und dafür stehen wir alle in seiner Schuld", schrieb Obama.

Auch der ehemalige US-Vizepräsident und Demokrat Joe Biden würdigte McCain als Freund. Sein Leben sei der Beweis dafür, dass einige Wahrheiten zeitlos seien, schrieb Biden auf Twitter und fügte hinzu: "Charakter, Mut, Integrität, Ehre." McCain habe nie die Sicht auf das verloren, an was er am meisten geglaubt habe: "Zuerst das Land" ("Country First").

Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel würdigte McCain als "eine der großen politischen Persönlichkeiten unserer Zeit". Der Republikaner sei "ein unermüdlicher Kämpfer für ein starkes transatlantisches Bündnis" gewesen, erklärte Merkel. Sie würdigte zugleich den "persönlichen Mut" und die "Aufrichtigkeit" des Senators. "John McCain war geleitet von der festen Überzeugung, dass der Sinn jeglicher politischer Arbeit im Dienst für Freiheit, Demokratie und Rechtsstaatlichkeit zu finden sei", erklärte Merkel. "Sein Tod ist ein Verlust für alle, die diese Überzeugung teilen."

Bundespräsident Frank-Walter Steinmeier nannte McCain in einem Kondolenzschreiben an dessen Witwe ein "Vorbild für Generationen" und einen "Ausnahmepolitiker". "Auch wenn wir politisch nicht immer derselben Ansicht waren, so habe ich ihn stets als streitbaren, aber überzeugten und unerschütterlichen Transatlantiker erlebt und geschätzt", schrieb Steinmeier nach Angaben des Bundespräsidialamtes. Sein unbeirrter Kampf gegen jede Form von Folter habe ihm großen Respekt auch von politischen Gegnern verschafft. "Seine kraftvolle Stimme, seine Unbestechlichkeit und sein fester Glauben an eine freiere, bessere Welt werden uns allen fehlen."
-----
... Barack Obama: ‘Few of us have been challenged the way John once was, or had to show the courage he did,’ the ex-president said. ‘But we can all have the courage to put the greater good above our own.’ McCain had shown how to do this in his best times. ‘And for that, we are all in his debt,’ wrote Obama.

Former US Vice President and Democrat Joe Biden also paid tribute to McCain as a friend. His life was proof that some truths are timeless, Biden wrote on Twitter, adding: ‘Character, courage, integrity, honour.’ McCain had never lost sight of what he believed in most: ‘Country First’.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel honoured McCain as ‘one of the great political personalities of our time’. The Republican was ‘a tireless fighter for a strong transatlantic alliance’, explained Merkel. She also paid tribute to the senator's ‘personal courage’ and ‘sincerity’. ‘John McCain was guided by the firm conviction that the meaning of all political work was to be found in the service of freedom, democracy and the rule of law,’ explained Merkel. ‘His death is a loss for all those who share this conviction.’

In a letter of condolence to his widow, Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier called McCain a ‘role model for generations’ and an ‘exceptional politician’. ‘Even if we were not always of the same political opinion, I always experienced and appreciated him as a controversial but convinced and unshakeable transatlanticist,’ Steinmeier wrote, according to the Office of the Federal President. His unwavering fight against all forms of torture earned him great respect, even from political opponents. ‘We will all miss his powerful voice, his incorruptibility and his firm belief in a freer, better world.’
-----

 

[OKTexas]

I have no opinion or anything to say about Bondi. Nonetheless, if she is a Trump puppet, then we are screwed. The AG position is supposed to be non-partisan and if the laws and the Constitution are followed, then everything will be fine. It has been fine so far, even when Barr was AG, given that he was more of a believer of the law than of Trump.

As such, this is not a topic that is worth a discussion "at this time".

Yet here you are starting threads on it.

.

 

[OKTexas]

Happened - but you do not know. I remember for example a story about an US-American who directly after World War 2 became a citizen of the totally wasted and destroyed country Trizonesia (Germany) - while most Germans would had been happy to live in a save country like the USA. They thought he was a crazy guy. But I think he was not. He was looking for the compassion that he - as an US-American of German heritage - had not found in the US prison camps for US-American "enemies". I hope he found it here in the midst of the German rubble under all the other broken bodies and broken souls.



You was what? Criminal or knight?

"You" said: "And when you awoke you saw them standing in front of your bed."
Perhaps you should get a US-American dictionary and look up the word "you".

.

 

[zaangalewa]

"You" said: "And when you awoke you saw them standing in front of your bed."

What about this: "And when you woke up, you saw yourself standing in front of your bed and got a heavy shock."?

Perhaps you should get a US-American dictionary and look up the word "you".

"You" ... one moment ...

you​

(pron.)
Das altenglische Wort eow war der Dativ und Akkusativ Plural von þu (siehe thou), dem Objektfall von ge, "ihr" (siehe ye), vom protogermanischen *juz-, *iwwiz (diese Wörter stehen auch im Zusammenhang mit dem altnordischen yor, dem altsächsischen iu, dem altfriesischen iuwe, dem mittelholländischen, niederländischen u, dem althochdeutschen iu, iuwih, dem deutschen euch), vom indogermanischen *yu, dem Pronomen für die zweite Person Plural.

Die Aussprache von you und der Nominativform ye verschmolzen allmählich ab dem 14. Jahrhundert; die Unterscheidung zwischen ihnen verschwand bis 1600 aus dem allgemeinen Gebrauch. Die weite Verbreitung des Französischen in England nach dem 12. Jahrhundert gab dem englischen you dieselbe Bedeutung wie dem französischen vous, und es begann, das singuläre Nominativ thou zu verdrängen. Dies begann als Zeichen des Respekts bei der Ansprache von Vorgesetzten, dann bei Gleichgestellten und Unbekannten und wurde schließlich (circa 1575) zur generellen Anredeform. Bis zum 13. Jahrhundert hatte das Englische auch eine Dualform ink "ihr zwei; euch zwei; einander".
-----

you​

(pron.)

The Old English word eow was the dative and accusative plural of þu (see thou), the object case of ge, “you” (see ye), from Proto-Germanic *juz-, *iwwiz (these words are also related to Old Norse yor, the Old Saxon iu, the Old Frisian iuwe, the Middle Dutch Dutch u, the Old High German iu, iuwih, the German euch), from the Indo-European *yu, the pronoun for the second person plural.

The pronunciation of you and the nominative form ye gradually merged from the 14th century onwards; the distinction between them disappeared from common usage by 1600. The wide spread of French in England after the 12th century gave the English you the same meaning as the French vous, and it began to replace the singular nominative thou. This began as a sign of respect when addressing superiors, then peers and strangers, and finally (around 1575) became the general form of address. Until the 13th century, English also had a dual form ink “you two; you two; each other”.
-----

Now I got it. "You" comes from "thou" - in German it's "Du". Your strange "th" comes from an impaired "d". And "you" from the French "vous". How yould you say this? ¿"You" is a french gay british frog from krautmania."?

 

[berg80]

OH HELL Y"ALL DID. Obama, clinton, biden purged the miltary, purged the fbi to make it more reliable for THEIR PURPOSES.

Your proof?

 

[struth]

Your proof?

I think the proof is, Clinton firing the fbi director, Obama firing any general that questioned his warmongering, and xiden putting DEI policies in place to ensure the most qualified didn’t get the jobs

 

[Clyde 154]

Our justice system is being attacked and dismantled by Trump

What to Know​

Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove ordered the firing of several prosecutors involved in the investigation into Trump's alleged attempt to overturn the 2020 election results. Around two dozen employees at the U.S. attorney's office in Washington, D.C., were fired on Bove's order.

Bove, who was Trump's attorney in the Republican's criminal cases, also sought to have several senior FBI executives retire or be fired by Monday. Bove requested the names of all FBI agents assigned to investigate or prosecute January 6 cases—a list that could include thousands—in what is believed to be a step toward terminating them as well.

Trump is working toward getting rid of ANYONE that disagrees with him. In essence, free speech begone..............to be replaced with this

View attachment 1073252

Do this or begone

Cut the head off the beast. 47 is not firing anyone except the corrupt leadership at the FBI that followed the bidding of the DNC. There are over 10K employees and the left is vapor locking because of the .01%, the inept bosses are being fired and replaced? Another lie by the left..........exposed. Once again 47 is doing nothing except fulfilling a campaign promise.......he is doing the bidding of the folk who elected him...........not the deep state fat cat bureaucrats who assumed they would never have to face the consequences of their weaponizing the FBI

99% of the FBI agents are honest hard working individuals........who will not lose their careers because of politics. You play politics with a police force.........don't act surprised when the same politics are used against that politicized police force. The democrats never seem to be able to look to the future.......never wondering what would happen if their own tactics were used against them when they lost political power. Enjoy the show........the grinding and gnashing of teeth and the hissssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssing

Honestly? I don't expect 47 to serve out a full term........regardless, if he is removed by the deep state the MAGA movement has been born and the culture shift is moving over the nation like a TSUNAMI. He will forever be known as its FATHER. You are witnessing HISTORY.

 

[Calypso Jones]

Your proof?

don't ask me to do your damn work for you. You didn't have the fortitude to look it up and you didn't pay attention or give a damn when it happened.

Obama's Military Coup Purges 197 Officers In Five Years

Defense: What the president calls "my military" is being cleansed of any officer suspected of disloyalty to or disagreement with the administration on matters of policy or force structure, leaving... Read More

www.investors.com

 

[Contumacious]

You are correct everyone has the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness ... But not simply at the cost of another.
No man is responsible or liable for another man's debt ... That's not what the Constitution allows.
General Welfare is allowed ... But that does not include Individual Welfare ... Again, that's another topic.

That principle has been true since we became a nation

SCOTUS HAS RULED

United States v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1 (1936)​

A tax, in the general understanding and in the strict constitutional sense, is an exaction for the support of Government; the term does not connote the expropriation of money from one group to be expended for another, . 297 U. S. 61.

 

[BlackSand]

That principle has been true since we became a nation

SCOTUS HAS RULED

United States v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1 (1936)​

A tax, in the general understanding and in the strict constitutional sense, is an exaction for the support of Government; the term does not connote the expropriation of money from one group to be expended for another, . 297 U. S. 61.

.

Which again shows how ludicrous it is when the Progressive Liberals start talking about
their opposition wanting to shred the Constitution or having no respect for the Law.

'Redistribution of Wealth' and a core element of their political platform is based in an effort to thwart
what the Constitution provides for in the protection of the citizen ... And an issue the Supreme Court has already ruled on more than once.

.​