Same Question, Different Day

[PoliticalChic]

The Constitution is the only document that the American people have agreed to be governed by.
There is an element that is taking over the Democrat Party that doesn't care to abide by the Constitution.

I trust you are brave enough to answer this question:
If the direction of the Democrat Party, nationally, mirrors that of Mamdani, Bernie, and AOC, will you vote Democrat?


1. Mamdani proposed increasing taxes on white neighborhoods –
A document on his website explains the policy idea to “shift the tax burden from overtaxed homeowners in the outer boroughs to more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods.”


2. Mamdani is already leaning into his socialist views, telling CNN that he has “many critiques of capitalism.”


3. "Pressed on whether New York’s Jewish population could depend on him to protect them with antisemitic attacks on the rise in the United States, the candidate answered emphatically: “Antisemitism is not simply something that we should talk about."www.the-independent.com

4. "Socialist Zohran Mamdani called for ‘abolition of private property,’​

Socialist Zohran Mamdani called for ‘abolition of private property,’ resurfaced video shows

The Republican National Committee ridiculed New York City socialist Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani, posting a resurfaced video of him supporting “the abolition of private property.…

nypost.com

5. Top Dem senator reveals socialist Mamdani is what her party should look like: 'You bet'​

Top Dem senator reveals socialist Mamdani is what her party should look like: 'You bet'

Senator Elizabeth Warren backs Zohran Mamdani's NYC mayoral campaign, praising his focus on housing, childcare and affordability for working families.

www.foxnews.com

This is the question: are you American or are you a Democrat???

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Constitution is the only document that the American people have agreed to be governed by.
There is an element that is taking over the Democrat Party that doesn't care to abide by the Constitution.

I trust you are brave enough to answer this question:
If the direction of the Democrat Party, nationally, mirrors that of Mamdani, Bernie, and AOC, will you vote Democrat?


1. Mamdani proposed increasing taxes on white neighborhoods –
A document on his website explains the policy idea to “shift the tax burden from overtaxed homeowners in the outer boroughs to more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods.”


2. Mamdani is already leaning into his socialist views, telling CNN that he has “many critiques of capitalism.”


3. "Pressed on whether New York’s Jewish population could depend on him to protect them with antisemitic attacks on the rise in the United States, the candidate answered emphatically: “Antisemitism is not simply something that we should talk about."www.the-independent.com

4. "Socialist Zohran Mamdani called for ‘abolition of private property,’​

Socialist Zohran Mamdani called for ‘abolition of private property,’ resurfaced video shows

The Republican National Committee ridiculed New York City socialist Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani, posting a resurfaced video of him supporting “the abolition of private property.…

nypost.com

5. Top Dem senator reveals socialist Mamdani is what her party should look like: 'You bet'​

Top Dem senator reveals socialist Mamdani is what her party should look like: 'You bet'

Senator Elizabeth Warren backs Zohran Mamdani's NYC mayoral campaign, praising his focus on housing, childcare and affordability for working families.

www.foxnews.com

This is the question: are you American or are you a Democrat???

Pay attention to those Democrats who are afraid to answer the question, and use "funny" as their answer.

Clearly they are not American.

 

[PoliticalChic]

 

[Anomalism]

The Constitution is the only document that the American people have agreed to be governed by.
There is an element that is taking over the Democrat Party that doesn't care to abide by the Constitution.

I trust you are brave enough to answer this question:
If the direction of the Democrat Party, nationally, mirrors that of Mamdani, Bernie, and AOC, will you vote Democrat?


1. Mamdani proposed increasing taxes on white neighborhoods –
A document on his website explains the policy idea to “shift the tax burden from overtaxed homeowners in the outer boroughs to more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods.”


2. Mamdani is already leaning into his socialist views, telling CNN that he has “many critiques of capitalism.”


3. "Pressed on whether New York’s Jewish population could depend on him to protect them with antisemitic attacks on the rise in the United States, the candidate answered emphatically: “Antisemitism is not simply something that we should talk about."www.the-independent.com

4. "Socialist Zohran Mamdani called for ‘abolition of private property,’​

Socialist Zohran Mamdani called for ‘abolition of private property,’ resurfaced video shows

The Republican National Committee ridiculed New York City socialist Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani, posting a resurfaced video of him supporting “the abolition of private property.…

nypost.com

5. Top Dem senator reveals socialist Mamdani is what her party should look like: 'You bet'​

Top Dem senator reveals socialist Mamdani is what her party should look like: 'You bet'

Senator Elizabeth Warren backs Zohran Mamdani's NYC mayoral campaign, praising his focus on housing, childcare and affordability for working families.

www.foxnews.com

This is the question: are you American or are you a Democrat???

It’s worth pointing out that the Constitution belongs to all Americans, not just members of one political party. If we start saying one party doesn’t care about it, we’re really just repeating a talking point rather than engaging with facts. Both major parties have had members who’ve tried to push policies that arguably conflict with constitutional principles. That’s why courts exist, and why checks and balances matter.

On the specific examples...

Highlighting a few quotes from one politician and presenting them as the direction of an entire party is exactly the kind of broad brush painting that keeps people divided. Republicans wouldn’t accept it if someone judged the whole GOP based on the most extreme statements from their fringes.

Selectively quoting “abolition of private property” without explaining the full context is an emotional trigger, not an argument. What did he mean? Was it literal? Was it rhetorical? Without context, it’s propaganda, not persuasion.

The “are you American or Democrat” question is pure identity bait. It’s the same tactic extremists in any political movement use to demand loyalty to the group over loyalty to a shared country. If you reverse it “Are you American or Republican?" Most conservatives would instantly recognize it as unfair and manipulative.

The truth is, no political label automatically makes you un-American. The Constitution was written to allow disagreement over policies and direction. That’s the point of a republic. If the test for being American is whether you agree 100% with one faction’s worldview, we’ve already abandoned the pluralism the founders built into the system.

 

[IM2]

Another moronic thread. Meanwhile, you support a president that is shredding up the constitution you say Americans agreed to live by.

 

[BackAgain]

Another moronic thread. Meanwhile, you support a president that is shredding up the constitution you say Americans agreed to live by.

Except that he has never made even the first move to shred the Constitution.

When you must rely on a lie in order to post at all, it isn’t worth the effort, stupid.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It’s worth pointing out that the Constitution belongs to all Americans, not just members of one political party. If we start saying one party doesn’t care about it, we’re really just repeating a talking point rather than engaging with facts. Both major parties have had members who’ve tried to push policies that arguably conflict with constitutional principles. That’s why courts exist, and why checks and balances matter.

On the specific examples...

Highlighting a few quotes from one politician and presenting them as the direction of an entire party is exactly the kind of broad brush painting that keeps people divided. Republicans wouldn’t accept it if someone judged the whole GOP based on the most extreme statements from their fringes.

Selectively quoting “abolition of private property” without explaining the full context is an emotional trigger, not an argument. What did he mean? Was it literal? Was it rhetorical? Without context, it’s propaganda, not persuasion.

The “are you American or Democrat” question is pure identity bait. It’s the same tactic extremists in any political movement use to demand loyalty to the group over loyalty to a shared country. If you reverse it “Are you American or Republican?" Most conservatives would instantly recognize it as unfair and manipulative.

The truth is, no political label automatically makes you un-American. The Constitution was written to allow disagreement over policies and direction. That’s the point of a republic. If the test for being American is whether you agree 100% with one faction’s worldview, we’ve already abandoned the pluralism the founders built into the system.

Are you here to admit that you simply lie?

No?


Get lost.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Another moronic thread. Meanwhile, you support a president that is shredding up the constitution you say Americans agreed to live by.

Another moronic thread. Meanwhile, you support a president that is shredding up the constitution you say Americans agreed to live by.

Possibly you missed this:


\
The Constitution is the only document that the American people have agreed to be governed by.
There is an element that is taking over the Democrat Party that doesn't care to abide by the Constitution.

I trust you are brave enough to answer this question:
If the direction of the Democrat Party, nationally, mirrors that of Mamdani, Bernie, and AOC, will you vote Democrat?


1. Mamdani proposed increasing taxes on white neighborhoods –
A document on his website explains the policy idea to “shift the tax burden from overtaxed homeowners in the outer boroughs to more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods.”


2. Mamdani is already leaning into his socialist views, telling CNN that he has “many critiques of capitalism.”


3. "Pressed on whether New York’s Jewish population could depend on him to protect them with antisemitic attacks on the rise in the United States, the candidate answered emphatically: “Antisemitism is not simply something that we should talk about."www.the-independent.com

Socialist Zohran Mamdani called for ‘abolition of private property,’ resurfaced video shows​

The Republican National Committee ridiculed New York City socialist Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani, posting a resurfaced video of him supporting “the abolition of private property.…

nypost.com

Top Dem senator reveals socialist Mamdani is what her party should look like: 'You bet'​

Senator Elizabeth Warren backs Zohran Mamdani's NYC mayoral campaign, praising his focus on housing, childcare and affordability for working families.

www.foxnews.com






This is the question: are you American or are you a Democrat???

 

[Anomalism]

Are you here to admit that you simply lie?

No?


Get lost.

That's a nice nonresponse, as usual.

 

[Winston]

Except that he has never made even the first move to shred the Constitution.

When you must rely on a lie in order to post at all, it isn’t worth the effort, stupid.

Stick this up your ass moron.

Have the Trump administration’s actions put the US into a constitutional crisis? | Constitutional Accountability Center

Debates on the extent of government authority and the power of the United States Constitution have become commonplace in recent months. The term “constitutional crisis” is used to describe a situation in which the fundamental principles of governance – primarily the Constitution in the U.S. –...

www.theusconstitution.org

David Gans, a director at the Constitutional Accountability Center, said the current administration has threatened aspects of the U.S. Constitution. Since taking office, President Donald Trump has taken executive actions, including a pause on federal spending – violating Congress’ exclusive power to allocate government funds – and an order to ban birthright citizenship – contradicting the 14th Amendment.

Congress allocated the money. Who the **** does Trump thinks he is that he can "claw it back". Hell, he did it in his first administration, taking money away from the military to build his stupid ass wall that never was completed, never will be completed, just show for him and no-bid contracts for those that will throw him some cash to help pay his legal bills. Some ******* sickass shit.

Birthright citizenship, I am tired of hearing about it. I have posted the actual debates in both the House and the Senate from the 19th century. It is clear, those that were in Congress at the time knew precisely what they were passing. There was no "intent" to not let the children of ILLEGALS become citizens.

Trump is openly defying the SCOTUS. He don't give two shits about the Constitution. If anything, he sees it as a hindrance. And if you can't see that, then you got to place calling anyone stupid.

 

[PoliticalChic]

That's a nice nonresponse, as usual.

Did you claim that there is no “substance” in this OP?

A series of indisputable facts leading to an undeniable conclusion.


1.Most of us are old enough to recall that claims that the Democrat Party is socialist/communist were greeted with vehement denials.



2. About half of the Party’s supporter always came from the interchangeable terms socialist/communist/Progressive/ etc. Professor Kengor said this: "The progressive left, and the liberal left, while not themselves communists, share many of the same sympathies, such of redistribution of wealth, and worker’s rights, nationalizations of industry, etc, but are not quite as far left as the communists, and would not go to the same lengths as the communists to achieve their goals. This does not mean, though, that the help of these dupes is not necessary in order for the communists to achieve victory. Even at their peak, in the ‘30’s, the Communist Party of the United States never had more than 100 thousand members: so deception of the ‘dupes’ was critical. Dr. Paul Kengor, Hoover Institution, Stanford “DUPES: How America's Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century




3. Push came to shove when Communist Bernie got more votes than Hillary in 2020, and had the nomination outright stolen because the establishment Democrat couldn’t allow Marxism to be their brand.




4. In a recent thread we found that only one Democrat voter said he would reconsider voting Democrat depending on their agenda (Why Are There No Democrat Intellectuals?). Communism is just fine.




5. Openly communist/Marxist candidates are openly running under the Democrat banner, and winning.

“The socialist movement led Zohran Mamdani to victory.

….easily the most important factor in Zohran’s victory is the movement that Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) has built in New York City since the Bernie Sanders campaign in 2016. I want to stress two elements.”






The Socialist Movement Led Zohran Mamdani to Victory

Pundits have emphasized Zohran Mamdani’s videos and charisma and Andrew Cuomo’s weaknesses in Mamdani’s victory. But easily the most important factor in that victory is the movement that the Democratic Socialists of America have built in New York City.



jacobin.com




So, today’s Democrat Party is not an American party, and if you vote Democrat you are casting aside any American values, heritage, and identity…….comrade.

 

[Anomalism]

Did you claim that there is no “substance” in this OP?

A series of indisputable facts leading to an undeniable conclusion.


1.Most of us are old enough to recall that claims that the Democrat Party is socialist/communist were greeted with vehement denials.



2. About half of the Party’s supporter always came from the interchangeable terms socialist/communist/Progressive/ etc. Professor Kengor said this: "The progressive left, and the liberal left, while not themselves communists, share many of the same sympathies, such of redistribution of wealth, and worker’s rights, nationalizations of industry, etc, but are not quite as far left as the communists, and would not go to the same lengths as the communists to achieve their goals. This does not mean, though, that the help of these dupes is not necessary in order for the communists to achieve victory. Even at their peak, in the ‘30’s, the Communist Party of the United States never had more than 100 thousand members: so deception of the ‘dupes’ was critical. Dr. Paul Kengor, Hoover Institution, Stanford “DUPES: How America's Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century




3. Push came to shove when Communist Bernie got more votes than Hillary in 2020, and had the nomination outright stolen because the establishment Democrat couldn’t allow Marxism to be their brand.




4. In a recent thread we found that only one Democrat voter said he would reconsider voting Democrat depending on their agenda (Why Are There No Democrat Intellectuals?). Communism is just fine.




5. Openly communist/Marxist candidates are openly running under the Democrat banner, and winning.

“The socialist movement led Zohran Mamdani to victory.

….easily the most important factor in Zohran’s victory is the movement that Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) has built in New York City since the Bernie Sanders campaign in 2016. I want to stress two elements.”






The Socialist Movement Led Zohran Mamdani to Victory

Pundits have emphasized Zohran Mamdani’s videos and charisma and Andrew Cuomo’s weaknesses in Mamdani’s victory. But easily the most important factor in that victory is the movement that the Democratic Socialists of America have built in New York City.



jacobin.com




So, today’s Democrat Party is not an American party, and if you vote Democrat you are casting aside any American values, heritage, and identity…….comrade.

You're copy and pasting an older post I've already responded to rather than engaging with my response to your OP, but okay.

--

You’re not presenting facts. You’re presenting ideology masquerading as fact, and the more important question is why do you need the enemy to be that evil to justify your position?

1. “Most of us remember when Democrats denied being socialist/communist.”

Mainstream Democrats support mixed-market capitalism, not state ownership of all production. Words like “communist” are used here not as accurate descriptions, but as weapons, a way to paint your opponents as inherently un-American. That’s Cold War cosplay, not policy analysis.

2. “Progressives share sympathies with communists.”

Sharing some values, like wanting a safety net or worker protections, doesn’t make someone a communist. By that logic, Dwight Eisenhower, who expanded Social Security and built the interstate highway system, was a Marxist. This “guilt by adjacency” tactic is intellectually lazy and historically dishonest. Kengor’s quote is propaganda, not scholarship. Saying “dupes” doesn’t prove people are dupes. It just assumes your worldview is the only valid one.

3. “Communist Bernie got more votes than Hillary in 2020 and had it stolen.”

She wasn’t even running in 2020, and in 2016, she won both the popular vote and the delegate count. If your narrative needs fiction to work, that should tell you something. Also, Bernie is a democratic socialist, not a communist. There’s a massive difference, and you know it. You just don’t care, because precision gets in the way of fear.

4. “Only one Democrat voter said they’d reconsider depending on the agenda.”

That’s not data, it’s anecdote, and if you think your thread proves all Democrats are communists because one anonymous person didn’t express doubt, you’re not arguing; you’re proselytizing.

5. “Openly Marxist candidates are running and winning under the Democrat banner.”

Yes, a handful of DSA-backed candidates have won local or state elections. That doesn’t mean the party as a whole is Marxist. A few libertarian anarchists also run under the GOP. Should I say that proves Republicans are an anti-government insurgency, or do I owe them more intellectual honesty than that?

Your closer “The Democrat Party is not American.”

Here’s where the mask slips. This isn’t about policy. This is about identity, purity, and exclusion. You’re saying half the country isn’t really American if they disagree with you. That’s not patriotism. That’s factionalism taken to a dangerous place. Historically, every authoritarian movement starts by deciding who really belongs. Calling fellow Americans “comrades” as a slur tells me more about your insecurity than your argument.

If your ideology depends on demonizing tens of millions of citizens as enemies of the nation, maybe it’s not actually about loving America. Maybe it’s about fearing change, and maybe what you’re calling “truth” is just an excuse to stop listening.

 

[BackAgain]

Stick this up your ass moron.

Have the Trump administration’s actions put the US into a constitutional crisis? | Constitutional Accountability Center

Debates on the extent of government authority and the power of the United States Constitution have become commonplace in recent months. The term “constitutional crisis” is used to describe a situation in which the fundamental principles of governance – primarily the Constitution in the U.S. –...

www.theusconstitution.org

David Gans, a director at the Constitutional Accountability Center, said the current administration has threatened aspects of the U.S. Constitution. Since taking office, President Donald Trump has taken executive actions, including a pause on federal spending – violating Congress’ exclusive power to allocate government funds – and an order to ban birthright citizenship – contradicting the 14th Amendment.

Congress allocated the money. Who the **** does Trump thinks he is that he can "claw it back". Hell, he did it in his first administration, taking money away from the military to build his stupid ass wall that never was completed, never will be completed, just show for him and no-bid contracts for those that will throw him some cash to help pay his legal bills. Some ******* sickass shit.

Birthright citizenship, I am tired of hearing about it. I have posted the actual debates in both the House and the Senate from the 19th century. It is clear, those that were in Congress at the time knew precisely what they were passing. There was no "intent" to not let the children of ILLEGALS become citizens.

Trump is openly defying the SCOTUS. He don't give two shits about the Constitution. If anything, he sees it as a hindrance. And if you can't see that, then you got to place calling anyone stupid.

You’re a gay asswipe. Your fascination with the asses of males knows no bounds.

On a more substantive level, just because some other person bloviates an opinion about President Trump “shredding” the Constitution doesn’t make it so.

I understand that you’re also a flaming retard. But even you should know that much.

Crawl back into your hole now, Winnie.

You have a mere opinion. And that’s all. And it ain’t worth shit.

 

[PoliticalChic]

What sort of intellect would be a regular on a political message board, yet refuse to offer and opinion or even a rebuttal when given a serious political query about his preferred party???


Isn't this the purpose of the message board????

 

[Winston]

You’re a gay asswipe. Your fascination with the asses of males knows no bounds.

On a more substantive level, just because some other person bloviates an opinion about President Trump “shredding” the Constitution doesn’t make it so.

I understand that you’re also a flaming retard. But even you should know that much.

Crawl back into your hole now, Winnie.

You have a mere opinion. And that’s all. And it ain’t worth shit.

Damn dude, did you not catch the name, "Constitutional Accountability Center". I mean there are opinions, and then there are opinions. Umm, let's see, a flipping dumbass posting on a message board, or real professionals, Yale Law School graduates. I mean I can tell you whose side I am on.

I mean come on, this is really simple. Can a president "claw back" funds that Congress has already allocated? Well yes, yes he can, but he has to follow certain procedures. I mean you think Trump is the first president to try this shit? No, if you would have read the link, and I know you didn't. It ain't that I am infatuated with men's asses, it is just that is where I find the head of most of you dumbass Trump supporters. Up your ass. No, Nixon tried it, and the result, the Impoundment Act of 1974. Bet no one on Trump's staff has even heard of it.

I mean here is another link you won't look at.

Tracking the lawsuits against Donald Trump's executive actions

Hundreds of lawsuits have been filed during President Donald Trump’s second administration. The suits challenge his executive orders as well as actions taken by his administration, including Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency or DOGE. The courts have agreed to block the president in...

apnews.com

Almost 180 lawsuits. Got to be a damn record. Trump is unhinged, has no regard for the Constitution or the rule of law. What fuels that? Idiots like you. You have no respect for the founders. You have never read a single Federalist Paper. You don't know jackshit about the history of this country. Trump laughs at you, every damn night, as he scarves down a Big Mac with a Diet Coke and watches Hannity on Fox. I mean a world class chef right there in the White House, and he is eating a flippin nasty ass Big Mac with two frozen 1.6 ounce patties and some damn French dressing parading as "special sauce".

"You can never underestimate the intelligence of the American public.". PT Barnum nailed it. Trump depends on it. You define it.

 

[Darkwind]

Damn dude, did you not catch the name, "Constitutional Accountability Center". I mean there are opinions, and then there are opinions. Umm, let's see, a flipping dumbass posting on a message board, or real professionals, Yale Law School graduates. I mean I can tell you whose side I am on.

I mean come on, this is really simple. Can a president "claw back" funds that Congress has already allocated? Well yes, yes he can, but he has to follow certain procedures. I mean you think Trump is the first president to try this shit? No, if you would have read the link, and I know you didn't. It ain't that I am infatuated with men's asses, it is just that is where I find the head of most of you dumbass Trump supporters. Up your ass. No, Nixon tried it, and the result, the Impoundment Act of 1974. Bet no one on Trump's staff has even heard of it.

I mean here is another link you won't look at.

Tracking the lawsuits against Donald Trump's executive actions

Hundreds of lawsuits have been filed during President Donald Trump’s second administration. The suits challenge his executive orders as well as actions taken by his administration, including Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency or DOGE. The courts have agreed to block the president in...

apnews.com

Almost 180 lawsuits. Got to be a damn record. Trump is unhinged, has no regard for the Constitution or the rule of law. What fuels that? Idiots like you. You have no respect for the founders. You have never read a single Federalist Paper. You don't know jackshit about the history of this country. Trump laughs at you, every damn night, as he scarves down a Big Mac with a Diet Coke and watches Hannity on Fox. I mean a world class chef right there in the White House, and he is eating a flippin nasty ass Big Mac with two frozen 1.6 ounce patties and some damn French dressing parading as "special sauce".

"You can never underestimate the intelligence of the American public.". PT Barnum nailed it. Trump depends on it. You define it.

Wow.

The Constitutional Accountability Center (CAC) is a nonprofit think tank and law firm based in Washington, D.C. It is dedicated to advancing a progressive interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, emphasizing its text, history, and values. CAC pursues litigation, policy advocacy, and legal scholarship to ensure that constitutional principles reflect justice, equality, and democracy. The organization often files amicus briefs in major Supreme Court cases, focusing on protecting civil rights, voting rights, environmental issues, and social justice1234.

In terms of political bias, CAC is widely regarded as left-of-center or progressive. Media analysis sites rate it as "Left-Center Biased" due to its consistent focus on progressive causes and interpretations of the Constitution, while also rating its reporting and work as highly factual and rooted in legal scholarship and historical constitutional analysis254.

Key points:

• Founded in 2008.
• Promotes a progressive vision of the U.S. Constitution.
• Often files briefs and lawsuits supporting expanded civil rights, voting rights, and social protections.
• Rated by independent sources as "Left-Center Biased" and considered highly credible in legal expertise54.

In summary, the Constitutional Accountability Center is a progressive-leaning, highly credible legal advocacy organization focused on constitutional issues, and is generally rated as having a left-of-center bias.

1. https://www.theusconstitution.org
2. Constitutional Accountability Center - Wikipedia
3. Democracy Fund Job Board
4. Constitutional Accountability Center - Bias and Credibility
5. Constitutional Accountability Center (CAC) - InfluenceWatch
6. Constitutional Accountability Center
7. Constitutional Accountability Center - Summary from LegiStorm
8. Constitutional Accountability Center (CAC) | LinkedIn
9. Remember the Whole Constitution | Constitutional Accountability Center
10. Supremely Conservative | Constitutional Accountability Center
11. Bias Alert: Supreme Court double standard | Constitutional Accountability Center
12. Elizabeth Wydra’s thoughts on Constitutional Accountability
13. #PurpleChairChat Episode 10: 2020 End of Year Highlights | Constitutional Accountability Center
14. About CAC | Constitutional Accountability Center

 

[rightwinger]

Terminate the CONSTITUTION?

 

[BackAgain]

Damn dude, did you not catch the name, "Constitutional Accountability Center". I mean there are opinions, and then there are opinions. Umm, let's see, a flipping dumbass posting on a message board, or real professionals, Yale Law School graduates. I mean I can tell you whose side I am on.

I mean come on, this is really simple. Can a president "claw back" funds that Congress has already allocated? Well yes, yes he can, but he has to follow certain procedures. I mean you think Trump is the first president to try this shit? No, if you would have read the link, and I know you didn't. It ain't that I am infatuated with men's asses, it is just that is where I find the head of most of you dumbass Trump supporters. Up your ass. No, Nixon tried it, and the result, the Impoundment Act of 1974. Bet no one on Trump's staff has even heard of it.

I mean here is another link you won't look at.

Tracking the lawsuits against Donald Trump's executive actions

Hundreds of lawsuits have been filed during President Donald Trump’s second administration. The suits challenge his executive orders as well as actions taken by his administration, including Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency or DOGE. The courts have agreed to block the president in...

apnews.com

Almost 180 lawsuits. Got to be a damn record. Trump is unhinged, has no regard for the Constitution or the rule of law. What fuels that? Idiots like you. You have no respect for the founders. You have never read a single Federalist Paper. You don't know jackshit about the history of this country. Trump laughs at you, every damn night, as he scarves down a Big Mac with a Diet Coke and watches Hannity on Fox. I mean a world class chef right there in the White House, and he is eating a flippin nasty ass Big Mac with two frozen 1.6 ounce patties and some damn French dressing parading as "special sauce".

"You can never underestimate the intelligence of the American public.". PT Barnum nailed it. Trump depends on it. You define it.

Dufus; the People’s “Republic” of North Korea labels itself a “republic.” But it isn’t.

You’re very easily misled. Probably a product of your retardation.

Also, do try for brevity. Someday.

 

[Winston]

Dufus; the People’s “Republic” of North Korea labels itself a “republic.” But it isn’t.

You’re very easily misled. Probably a product of your retardation.

Also, do try for brevity. Someday.

Fine, you want brevity.

Defend Trump's clawing back of various financing already approved by Congress. From research grants to universities, to spending on diversity programs

Second, make an argument as to why birthright citizenship should be eliminated. Trump's policy is now, not where you are born, but who you are born to. Make that argument within the confines of the Constitution and the amendments thereof.

 

[BackAgain]

Fine, you want brevity.

Defend Trump's clawing back of various financing already approved by Congress.

Ok. They authorized spending. Does that always require that the spending be made? What’s your basis for that?

From research grants to universities, to spending on diversity programs

If he finds waste or other spending that violates any of the provisions of the law, any law, isn’t he required under his duties to refrain from such spending?

Second, make an argument as to why birthright citizenship should be eliminated.

This is old stuff. You need to follow along. The 14th Amendment’s framers primary purpose was to give the voting franchise to black people here because, you know, your Dem Party lost the Civil War. There were discussions about the notion of birthright citizenship, as I hope you know (although different terminology was used). Indeed, that’s why they were particular in adding the condition “owing allegiance to.”

Trump’s EO may or may not work. But it certainly does serve as a mechanism to get the matter addressed in our SCOTUS. It would be wonderful if it finally got viewed in the correct way. So far, it hasn’t been.

Trump's policy is now, not where you are born, but who you are born to. Make that argument within the confines of the Constitution and the amendments thereof.

I just did although in the way I believe it should be couched. I’m not interested in the twisted way you prefer to misframe the issue.

Which brings is to this. If those are your examples of President Trump supposedly attempting to “shred” the Constitution, you’ve completely failed. As usual.