Jump to content

Attention : Lawman


stevenash

Recommended Posts

The democrats could end this as easily as Trump could. Furthermore, The dems could agree to fund the wall and attach just about anything they wanted to get passed. The liberals could actually get a lot accomplished by funding the wall but it's all about making Trump look bad. 

With that being said, Trump could have put this much pressure on Mexico for funding like he promised rather than his own citizens. 

I'm not happy with anyone in Washington.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Law Man said:

You make it seem as if we are only missing one pay check.  I can only assume you know when this will end. Many people live pay check to paycheck. Many people have maxed out cards and established new line of credit during the holidays.  My question about how long can your household can go without funds was not a jab. I wanted to know under the circumstances how long can your family survive. Mind you, I can not apply for unemployment. Your Mortgage is due and you have kids in College. You must still find a way to work. 

If I could afford to fly I wouldn't do it now. 

I feel for you and all the others that are directly affected. Me and other posters can give our opinions but we are not feeling the direct affects of this political power play. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On January 7, 2019 at 5:22 PM, Law Man said:

This is the hidden content, please
.    Watch the video with Sarah Sanders.  Their is no reason to hold the other right agency's hostage.  I'd vote for you as President. I am a Republican and always have been. This guy is a joke. He is not a President for all. He doesn't know how to Unite the Country.  We all know he lies and yes all politicians do. Federal workers are Americans and some live pay check bro pay check. No, it doesn't appear he wants to help. Try talking to a local Federal worker Republican or Democrat and tell me if they feel he has helped them. I'll wait. (Watch Video)

 

 

On January 7, 2019 at 5:22 PM, Law Man said:

This is the hidden content, please
.    Watch the video with Sarah Sanders.  Their is no reason to hold the other right agency's hostage.  I'd vote for you as President. I am a Republican and always have been. This guy is a joke. He is not a President for all. He doesn't know how to Unite the Country.  We all know he lies and yes all politicians do. Federal workers are Americans and some live pay check bro pay check. No, it doesn't appear he wants to help. Try talking to a local Federal worker Republican or Democrat and tell me if they feel he has helped them. I'll wait. (Watch Video)

 

Despite any negative comments from Chris Wallace directed at Sarah Sanders, we need a wall.  Again, it is illegal to cross our borders unless you've gone through the proper channels.  You can build a wall and curtail a vast majority of illegals, or hire 10,000 more border patrol agents, build hugh facilities to house the captured illegals, & furnish food, clothing, & medical for the hundreds of thousands of illegals until their eventual deportation.  And this cost goes on forever.  It's a no-brainer we need the wall.  It's sad politicians, in this case the Democrats, won't do what's right for America, & is making Govt employees suffer.  

Btw, I have a relative who is a Govt worker, and he & his wife are behind Trump 100%.  Difference between you & them, you're not affected by illegal immigrants as much as we are in Texas.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Hagar said:

 

Despite any negative comments from Chris Wallace directed at Sarah Sanders, we need a wall.  Again, it is illegal to cross our borders unless you've gone through the proper channels.  You can build a wall and curtail a vast majority of illegals, or hire 10,000 more border patrol agents, build hugh facilities to house the captured illegals, & furnish food, clothing, & medical for the hundreds of thousands of illegals until their eventual deportation.  And this cost goes on forever.  It's a no-brainer we need the wall.  It's sad politicians, in this case the Democrats, won't do what's right for America, & is making Govt employees suffer.  

Btw, I have a relative who is a Govt worker, and he & his wife are behind Trump 100%.  Difference between you & them, you're not affected by illegal immigrants as much as we are in Texas.  

Early May of 2018, Coast Guard made "historic" bust of cocaine, intercepting at least three tons of drug on a ship 300 nautical miles off Central American country's coast in international waters. Among the detained were citizens of Columbia, Ecuador and Peru. The ship was not headed for a wall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Law Man said:

Early May of 2018, Coast Guard made "historic" bust of cocaine, intercepting at least three tons of drug on a ship 300 nautical miles off Central American country's coast in international waters. Among the detained were citizens of Columbia, Ecuador and Peru. The ship was not headed for a wall.

A wall, nor 10,000 more Border Patrol agents are going to completely stop illegal immigration.  No doubt boats full of them will attempt to enter, but it will slow it down.  There coming in now by the thousands, bringing and spreading diseases.  Once in, they’re costing the American taxpayers billions.  If you’re against the wall, why?  And then, what is your suggestion to protect our borders?

I just read this a few minutes ago.

This is the hidden content, please

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a country that was having issues with Rhino poachers. The horn is rather expensive on the black market. To fend off the poachers, they instituted a "shoot on site" approach. Needless to say, the poaching problem in this particular park has been drastically reduced...

Shoot on site. Don't want to die, don't break the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Hagar said:

A wall, nor 10,000 more Border Patrol agents are going to completely stop illegal immigration.  No doubt boats full of them will attempt to enter, but it will slow it down.  There coming in now by the thousands, bringing and spreading diseases.  Once in, they’re costing the American taxpayers billions.  If you’re against the wall, why?  And then, what is your suggestion to protect our borders?

I just read this a few minutes ago.

This is the hidden content, please

Mr. Hagar

before the shut down essential (essential) Law Enforcement workers complained about shortage of staff. We really need more boots on the ground. What good is a wall if you don't have staffing. I am all for border security. I work in the field. We were burned out before the shut down. The President cut essential staffing by a lot in the last two years. There are plans to cut more essential staffing. The truth, is we are short on staffing and are required to do more with less. My issue is with prioritization. American men and women who swore to protect are being punished. Freezing pay, freezing locality pay, and shutting down Government for months or years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw Lawman, if this is about your job, I totally understand your anger and frustration.  Many of us have had financial setbacks.  I lost my job of 32 years to company downsizing at 54.  After a long search, I found another job (making much less).  I then had to work until I was 70 to retire, so yes, I feel your pain.  What I don’t understand is why it’s directed at Trump.  Yes he had a Repub Congress his first two years, and he concentrated on what he knows best, putting America back to work.  You’re a pawn to politicians who are putting Party ahead of our border security, and our Govt workers.  And I haven’t heard one viable solution from them for anything.  Their whole current platform can be condensed into a few words - Hate Trump and Tax the rich (rich = a Dem euphemism for anyone not on welfare).  Jmo but your anger/frustration should be directed at the democrats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Law Man said:

Mr. Hagar

before the shut down essential (essential) Law Enforcement workers complained about shortage of staff. We really need more boots on the ground. What good is a wall if you don't have staffing. I am all for border security. I work in the field. We were burned out before the shut down. The President cut essential staffing by a lot in the last two years. There are plans to cut more essential staffing. The truth, is we are short on staffing and are required to do more with less. My issue is with prioritization. American men and women who swore to protect are being punished. Freezing pay, freezing locality pay, and shutting down Government for months or years. 

No reason for Trump to be blamed. Democrats have supported measure that gave away 10 and 20 times more than what Trump has asked for. Democrats are blocking this to prevent Trump from "winning". 5 million dollars is nothing compared to money they have voted to spend on non-essentials. Why is it Trumps fault? Why is not blame on Democrats holding everything. Democrats approve the bill, it is over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Tigers2010 said:

No reason for Trump to be blamed. Democrats have supported measure that gave away 10 and 20 times more than what Trump has asked for. Democrats are blocking this to prevent Trump from "winning". 5 million dollars is nothing compared to money they have voted to spend on non-essentials. Why is it Trumps fault? Why is not blame on Democrats holding everything. Democrats approve the bill, it is over.

Democrats are not my President. Trump is the President. Let's not forget for the last two years we controlled the White House, Congress, and Senate. We can go on all day pointing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Law Man said:

Mr. Hagar

before the shut down essential (essential) Law Enforcement workers complained about shortage of staff. We really need more boots on the ground. What good is a wall if you don't have staffing. I am all for border security. I work in the field. We were burned out before the shut down. The President cut essential staffing by a lot in the last two years. There are plans to cut more essential staffing. The truth, is we are short on staffing and are required to do more with less. My issue is with prioritization. American men and women who swore to protect are being punished. Freezing pay, freezing locality pay, and shutting down Government for months or years. 

I agree we’re short on staffing.  According to what I’ve read, we’ve been short for a long time.  But with a wall, the current number of agents should be plenty.  One area our Govt is needed is in security.  That would be military and Federal Law Enforcement.  Idiot politicians, on both sides, are to blame for inadequate staffing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hagar said:

I agree we’re short on staffing.  According to what I’ve read, we’ve been short for a long time.  But with a wall, the current number of agents should be plenty.  One area our Govt is needed is in security.  That would be military and Federal Law Enforcement.  Idiot politicians, on both sides, are to blame for inadequate staffing.

I agree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Law Man said:

Democrats are not my President. Trump is the President. Let's not forget for the last two years we controlled the White House, Congress, and Senate. We can go on all day pointing.

Trump is trying to do his job. Democrats are doing anything they can to prevent him from doing his job. So blame the person actually trying to do his job, and ignore the children just trying to be hindrances. That makes perfect sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Law Man said:

Democrats are not my President. Trump is the President. Let's not forget for the last two years we controlled the White House, Congress, and Senate. We can go on all day pointing.

He put judges in the bench in the last two years when we controlled everything but they couldn't come together on a wall. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Tigers2010 said:

Trump is trying to do his job. Democrats are doing anything they can to prevent him from doing his job. So blame the person actually trying to do his job, and ignore the children just trying to be hindrances. That makes perfect sense.

Trump is not worried about a wall. He is concerned about the investigation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Tigers2010 said:

LOL and I will have to check out on that one. Good conversation. 

Once things heat up me and you won't even be debating the wall. Before midterm elections we were at each other over the ,and after the midterms were over the topic became Comey . Instead of a wall he should be talking about his recent biggest accomplishment with prison reform. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bobcat1 said:

I don't think so, I think it's tomorrow. 

I know the Federal Prison gets paid on Tuesdays and this was their first check to miss.  I thought all of the govt got paid on the same day.  

From my understanding they will get back pay, but not for overtime.  They were already short staffed, but normally had plenty of people willing to pick up shifts. No one is willing to pick up open shifts now for free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let’s get real, this is American politics as it is. Trump controlled every branch of government and while he has the economy on the up and up he has failed on his two biggest campaign promises repeal OC and having Mexico pay for the wall. Will the democrats play fair no . Trump has already championed this as his shutdown. The dems sadly enough will relish this they will force trump to surrender and call it a win or keep this going as long as possible. Every campaign add will start with trump telling chuck. Yes I’ll will own this shutdown. 

Trump can end this shutdown the dems could end this shutdown both won’t because both could care less  about the People it’s all about 2020 from here on out. 

Thats the sad fact.

Should   trump take less yes . 

Should dems throw in daca or something they could win and get this done yes.

The saddest thing is even if they did make a deal dems and Republicans voters alike will cry wolf.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,937
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined



  • Posts

    • There is a difference, but I wouldn't at all put it past Trump to do so if he had the infrastructure in place to get away with it like the Dems currently do.  With the amount of effort he's invested in ruining those republicans who've opposed him, it wouldn't surprise me one bit.
    • I think it will be an interesting case and could potentially come up for appeal on a different constitutional point.  The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that the government doesn’t have to take possession of property in order to take it under the meaning of the Fifth Amendment.  If they take away the enjoyment or use of the property, it is no different than physically seizing it to build a highway for example. In a lawsuit as opposed to a criminal trial, a person/plaintiff doesn’t have to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt but rather by a preponderance of evidence or “more likely” to have happened. Maybe it could be described as more likely yes than no or 51%-49%.  ”IF” it can be shown at a trial by a preponderance of evidence that Texas more likely yes than no caused the flooding with its engineering of the project, the people suing might have a case. But…. Does that alone win the case under the Fifth Amendment taking clause? I am not so sure. In US v Causby the Supreme Court ruled that the US government took a man’s property by flying airplanes over it. It was a public airport lawfully leased by the US in WWII and used to fly heavy bombers from it. Causby had an egg farm and the extremely loud noise of some airplanes under full power and sometimes at night with a landing lights being so close, it bothered and scared the family and damaged his egg farm production. Some chickens died and some quit laying eggs due to the extreme disturbances and lights at night. The Supreme Court ruled in Causby’s favor saying that the US had taken away the enjoyment and use of his land even though they didn’t physically seize it. The use of the land was hampered and that was enough for the taking clause under the Fifth Amendment. So in the IH-10 case, did Texas take away the use or enjoyment of the property?  A point of Causby was that the military bombers at a public airport was certainly for “public use”. The planes were public/taxpayers’ and the airport and lease were taxpayers’ property so the “public” definitely used it   My question in this lawsuit against Texas, even in they can prove the damage, was the damage (like in Causby) for “public use”? If not would it then not be a Fifth Amendment case but rather a state law case?  If Texas law denies such a lawsuit under state sovereignty and the families can’t prove a Fifth Amendment case of “public use”, could they prove the damages but still lose the case under state law? I haven’t read that anywhere and just thinking out loud. I could be way off base. But I think it could be interesting…..
    • Both sides...that is, everyone tries to get their people elected. Trump has not weaponized the government to bankrupt and imprison his political opponents. Night and day difference for me.
    • Surely you're aware of the great lengths Trump has gone to disrupt the elections and destroy the careers of republican politicians who haven't supported some of his most outlandish claims, or dared to question him or disagree with him about January 6.  You and I actually agree on this issue, although it must only go one way for you, because Trump's actions against republicans who didn't fall into lockstep with him is one of my biggest concerns about reelecting him.  The fact that he took action to affect literally hundreds of republican primaries from national elections down to municipal levels across the country, is concerning. It would've been one thing had he done it in an effort to help republicans win. Instead his purpose was to push out his perceived detractors and install MAGA politicians at every level of government in as many places as possible, and has resulted in a fractured republican party.
    • Lmao. No doubt. With a name like that, he would've gotten made fun of even if he was home-schooled.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...