Interesting take on Trump By Bill Bennett: They Will Kill Him Before They Let Him Be President
----
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by James W McQuillan Jr on
-
AHP1081, you are such a naughty little dweeb and so disrespectful to everyone. You need spanked with a willow branch and an ostrich feather. I'm told that if you ask him nicely, your BFF Cliffy might be willing to help you with that.
Cruz Control vs. the Donald, potato vs. potatoe, crispy vs. regular, honey-mustard vs. BBQ ... everyone has a preference and their own reasons for it. You will never change our mind on Trump and I certainly don't wish to change yours. It's your choice alone in that voting booth - JUST MAKE IT.
I suggest we all pray for the future of our children and beyond. There's going to be civil war, race war or WWIII regardless of who or which party takes control in 2017. Obama has guaranteed that. Lock and Load, buy ammo, keep your powder dry and your head down.
-
Permalink Reply by Clifton Baker on -
Sorry to hear you are completely befuddled by the Trumpet, Jimmy Boy.. Have you heard his new theme song. It was written for the gullible. There are other versions,. but this is my favorite. Take a listen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kBj_SiZIrA
-
-
Actually Cliffy, you are rather misinformed yourself. Where did you get your information, from MSNBC or the DNC website? Truth is, the link to the campaign fight song for the Donald is posted below. He asked for and received permission to use it from the original recording artists ... Twisted Sister. This should give you and your twisted brother AHD1081 some material to work with. Be well, try to stay sober.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Clifton Baker on
-
Thanks, I'm still laughing at Jimmy Boy. I got to get my apology on for him. Have a good one yourself, sir.
-
Permalink Reply by Lyn Agre on
-
Oren,
You are correct about the dual citizenship. Cruz denounced his Canadian citizenship before he announced his running for Pres. I believe he did that in the early summer of 2014.
As far as his running out of money.....well I just don't know that what you say is correct. His wife is a Managing Director of Goldman Sachs , managing private wealth division- and she took a leave of absence to manage his campaign.
Previously she worked at Merrill Lynch( a division of bank America) and before that for the G.W Bush administration. So are they Wall Street/bank people or not?
-
Permalink Reply by Ronald A. Nelson Col.USA (Ret) on
-
Not all things appear to be what they are... Cruz's wife's connections with Big Banking and mainstream Republican establishment figures is well established. In fact, Sen. Cruz also worked for the Bush Administration.
Not all things that glitter gold are gold...
-
Permalink Reply by Lyn Agre on
-
Col,
It's hard for some to understand the gravity of your words in this post. Some just don't know any history about what has happened in the last 10 years 15 years etc. so they just speak without much behind it. Let's pray that the majority of voters has more sense and more education about what has brought this country to it's knees so that we can make better choices in our everyday life and our voting. Some just refuse to understand what Big Banking has done to diminish the wealth of this country and put our butts on the line for the bailouts. Some also just don't understand that what Bush did was to essentially clear out a path for obama. Patriot Act anyone? NSA?
I see lot's of sarcasm and snide remarks without much sense.
As you say Col,
WAKE UP AMERICA.
-
Permalink Reply by Tad Taylor on
-
So you wouldn't vote for him because of where his wife works? Really? lol ok...
The law says...agree or not...that if you don't have to go through the naturalization process then you are considered 'natural born'. Hash it and rehash it all you want, like it or not...that's the law.
If he's vetted (which he is) and is on the ticket, I might vote for him. I want someone who will quit playing politics and get our country back! I believe he can, and will, do that. (I've worked at several places that I'm not proud of.. but I learned something at all of them!)
-
Permalink Reply by Ed Watts on
-
You are absolutely wrong about the definition of "natural born"; after going through a naturalization process, one becomes a "naturalized" citizen, not "natural born"! "Natural born", as understood by The Framers of The Constitution, was defined in de Vattel's Law of Nations; I have two copies in English and one in the original eighteenth-century French, and I am very familiar with the definition of "natural born citizen".
"[Natural] born" has to do with one's state at birth, not his condition years afterward when moving from one country to another.
-
Permalink Reply by Tad Taylor on
-
Go back to page 13? of this thread. The law and description has been posted. He IS eligible and it will stand in court.
-
-
Row verses Wade on abortion rights... overturning the Defense of Marriage Act, labeling Obama Care a TAX, permitting Executive Orders to stand on illegal Immigration, and many other bogus decisions have been made by the Courts... Citing the Courts as an authority on Constitutional Law is a JOKE...
The SCOTUS and the Federal Judiciary have become the instruments of leftist and progressives. They are no longer the righteous arm of the law... they have become the corrupt purveyors of judicial tyranny.
-
-
The Law(Immigration and Naturalization Act) in fact required Sen. Cruz to go thru a MODIFIED version of the naturalization process... One, where he simply proclaims by affidavit or 'default' (not turning down citizenship), that he wants to be a US Citizen... He is then GRANTED citizenship by law... the naturalization act. If he were a natural born citizen, he would not need the naturalization act to be declared a citizen. Wake up ... stop drinking the Koolaide.
You either are for the Constitution as written and originally intended or not... Cruz is not. By the way... ones personal affiliations, jobs, friends, neighbors, etc., all become part of ones experience and impact on one's character. Hanging out with Republican establishment figures and being surrounded by major banking concerns does have an impact on ones world view.
LIGHTER SIDE
ALERT ALERT
Horrible: Democrats Set The Constitution On Fire With Fraudulent Impeachment
House Democrats unveiled two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Tuesday morning after an investigation that violated fundamental provisions of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
The investigation of the president began with the complaint of a so-called “whistleblower” who turned out to be a rogue Central Intelligence Agency employee, protected by a lawyer who had called for a “coup” against Trump in early 2017.
Democrats first demanded that the “whistleblower” be allowed to testify. But after House Intelligence Committee chair Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) was found to have lied about his committee’s contact with the “whistleblower,” and after details of the “whistleblower’s” bias began to leak, Democrats reversed course. In violation of the President Trump’s Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser, Democrats refused to allow the “whistleblower” to testify. They argue the president’s procedural rights, even if they existed, would not apply until he was tried in the Senate — but they also invented a fraudulent “right to anonymity” that, they hope, might conceal the whistleblower even then.
Schiff began the “impeachment inquiry” in secret, behind the closed doors of the Sensitive Compartmentalized Information Facility (SCIF) in the basement of the U.S. Capitol, even though none of the testimony was deemed classified. Few members of Congress were allowed access. Schiff allowed selective bits of testimony to leak to friendly media, while withholding transcripts of testimony.
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), having allowed the secret process to unfold, legitimized it with a party-line vote authorizing the inquiry. The House resolution denied President Trump the procedural rights enjoyed by Presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, and denied the minority party the traditional right to object to witnesses called by the majority.
Rather than the House Judiciary Committee, which traditionally handles impeachment, Pelosi also deputized the House Intelligence Committee to conduct fact-finding; the Judiciary Committee was turned into a rubber stamp. Schiff held a few public hearings, but often failed to release transcripts containing exculpatory evidence until after they had passed.
In the course of the Intelligence Committee’s investigation, Schiff quietly spied on the telephone records of his Republican counterpart, Ranking Member Devin Nunes (R-CA). He also snooped on the phone records of a journalist, John Solomon; and on the phone records of former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, acting as President Trump’s personal lawyer.
Schiff’s eavesdropping violated both the First Amendment right to press freedom and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Yet he proceeded undeterred by constitutional rights, publishing the phone logs in his committee’s report without warning, confirmation, or explanation, alleging that Nunes and the others were part of a conspiracy to assist the president’s allegedly impeachable conduct. When Republicans on the Judiciary Committee asked the Intelligence Committee’s majority counsel, Daniel Goldman, to explain the phone logs, he refused to answer,
Ironically, Schiff had done exactly what Democrats accuse Trump of doing: abused his power to dig up dirt on political opponents, then obstructed a congressional investigation into his party’s and his committee’s misconduct.
Democrats’ articles of impeachment include one for the dubious charge of “abuse of power,” which is not mentioned in the Constitution; and one for “obstruction of Congress,” which in this case is an abuse of power in itself.
Alexander Hamilton, writing about impeachment in Federalist 65, warned that “there will always be the greatest danger that the decision will be regulated more by the comparative strength of parties, than by the real demonstrations of innocence or guilt.” Democrats have fulfilled Hamilton’s worst fears.
The Trump impeachment will soon replace the 1868 impeachment of President Andrew Johnson — which the House Judiciary Committee staff actually cited as a positive precedent — as the worst in American history.
In service of their “coup,” Democrats have trampled the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The Republic has never been in greater danger.
You don't get to interrupt me
© 2019 Created by Steve - Ning Creator.
Powered by
