All Activity

Some of the debt was ‘supposedly added’ because of parliamentarian rules not allowing some of the offsetting cuts. I say ‘supposedly’ because CBO uses static numbers & doesn’t calculate in possible growth due to cuts in regulation, onshoring, and other investments. It’s been proven throughout American history that lower taxes ALWAYS returns more money to the government’s coffers.

Good Morning - Trump was not a lifelong politician. Based on your above quote you should of voted for Trump in 2016. He was accused of not being a Republican. He stood up against the Republican party, and he certainly stands his ground. He is not afraid to call someone out. The country may be divided, which is really debatable considering he is the first Republican since Regan to win the popular vote.

Back at it at 11am today!!

I respect your view and opinion... as you've stated on here multiple times u didn't vote. Same with me. You'd think if it was a no brainer one would go vote right? Gridlock is definitely good, no it wouldn't shrink deficit. Above it all it wouldn't add to the deficit which is obviously better than the alternative! Add debt to keep us out of recession... smart SMDH

As has been said by others, both sides spend too much. But, the Freedom Caucus—which aligns closest to a limited government/libertarian view—had to be promised more clawbacks to get their support for the OBBB. So, one side is fighting to maintain government control over almost every segment of our lives, and the other side is at least making an attempt to return to federalism. It’s not really a hard choice right now. Might not be ideal. But, a clear difference. Gridlock is typically good. But, it won’t help shrink the deficit—if that’s your concern. It would just maintain status quo. If OBBB hadn’t passed, our economy very likely would have gone into a recession because of the tax increases.

Very surprising! Conservatives today are not really "Conservative" Fiscally Conservative? OBBB, they're excited bout adding debt lol Midterms should be interesting. Hopefully gridlock

Libertarians align more closely with conservatives as far as government is concerned. Shouldn’t be surprising at all.

I personally like candidates from either side who stands up against their party and stand their ground... (very rare) Usually within no time they're on board after they get their backroom kickbacks..

Definitely not 100%!!.. to say hillary,biden, Kamala or conald is anything close and the best America has to offer is honestly sad... lifelong politicians "pedo joe" as he was called, bankrupt felons. Womanizers etc All a joke

Took the detroit series. Pitching was awesome, gave up 3 runs in 3 games. The Las Vegas a’s come to town next.

Do you have anyone in mind that aligns 100% to you and your beliefs….if so please share

[Hidden Content]

Funny how ppl claim to be libertarian, yet defend damn near every move the right makes... sinks that whole "i chose the candidate who aligns best with my views" or the big Ole "lesser of the 2 evils"! America is doomed, blame Obama Biden Conald or whoever... doubt anytime in my lifetime this country will be united. The right is MAGA or get out, even legal ppl. Left pushes nonsense and can't figure it out... yet common sense folks won't neither, blessed to say I work my azz off for mine and dont depend on whoever is in office to get me through... if i want it ima go work for it... both parties divide and conquer and the likes of many on this site want us to get on board with their master lol! Ready for Midterms! Get some new ppl in office

SCOTUS has ruled that motives can’t be questioned for official acts of a POTUS. This was an official act by Obama. It wasn’t an attack on America itself. It was a political hit job. Very different. This doesn’t mean others are protected in the same fashion as the SCOTUS ruling only applies to POTUS. But, I still don’t see treason or sedition being applied. I could see some type of falsifying documents charge for those involved besides Obama. Only the far right fringe would say differently. Just another flashy object that continues to help erode the people’s trust in their government. Trump would do well to take away all their security clearances immediately which is in his authority. I believe he already has for Brennan. Not sure on others. I’d also make sure Obama (and Clinton/s) was not allowed any classified info. He’s a simple civilian now like the rest of us.

"Article III, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution defines treason against the United States as either levying war against them or giving aid and comfort to their enemies. It also states that a person can only be convicted of treason based on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act or a confession in open court, and Congress has the power to declare the punishment for treason." This levying war, not only war but the courts have used rebellion also, could be with bullets are actions taken by individuals against the US (rebellion) through subterfuge. I would think that what obama and his cronies did to sabotage a Presidency and have attempted coup against a sitting President could possibly defined an act of war. I did a little research. Examples: Based on available records, treason convictions in the U.S. have almost always occurred during or in connection with recognized wars or rebellions that courts treated as equivalent to "levying war." For example: Whiskey Rebellion (1794): Two individuals, John Mitchell and Philip Weigel, were convicted of treason for their roles in an armed uprising against federal tax collection in Pennsylvania. This was not a war with a foreign enemy but an internal rebellion, interpreted as "levying war" against the United States. Both were pardoned by President George Washington. Aaron Burr’s Conspiracy (1807): Burr was tried for treason for allegedly plotting to seize territory and form a separate nation. The Supreme Court, under Chief Justice John Marshall, acquitted Burr, ruling that conspiracy alone did not constitute "levying war" unless there was an actual assemblage of armed forces. This case, though not resulting in a conviction, occurred outside a formal war and clarified that treason requires overt acts, not just planning. Shays’ Rebellion (1786-1787): John Bly and Charles Rose were convicted of treason and hanged for participating in an armed uprising in Massachusetts against state authorities. This was prosecuted under state law, not federal, and occurred before the U.S. Constitution was ratified, but it was considered "levying war" against the state. Thomas Dorr (1844): Dorr was convicted of treason against Rhode Island for leading an armed attempt to overthrow the state government during the Dorr Rebellion, a non-war context involving a dispute over suffrage. He was sentenced to life in prison. John Brown (1859): Brown was convicted of treason against Virginia for his raid on Harpers Ferry, an attempt to incite a slave rebellion. This was prosecuted under state law and occurred in a non-war context, though it was treated as "levying war" against the state. While state-level convictions like those of Dorr and Brown occurred in non-war contexts (rebellions treated as "levying war" against the state), federal treason convictions have consistently been tied to wartime or rebellion scenarios. So, yes, either treason or sedition can be used concerning obama and others.

Agree

Trump is a narcissistic, egotistical braggart. That said, I wouldn’t doubt if he cozied up to Epstein because it made him feel ‘part of the crowd.’ He needs attention in the worst way. I’m not sold he REALLY knew everything that was going on at the time. As I’ve said, I look less at personalities and more to policies. He’s attempting to shrink government. Or—at least—redirect many functions back to the States where they belong if you believe in our Constitution. For that, I’m okay with many of his policies, even though they may not personally benefit me and mine. Musk would be better off either supporting independent challengers to vulnerable seats, or supporting the Libertarian Party—which happens to be very closely aligned to the Freedom Caucus as far as government’s role. Ron Paul was basically the forefather of the Tea Party/Freedom Caucus movement, and the Libertarian Party is already sanctioned in all 50 states. Between his obvious views on Mary Jane, limited government, and his desire for personal liberty, he fits in the Libertarian Party better anyway.

The wise part of the ruling maintains the separation of powers. SCOTUS rules on constitutional matters. Lower courts rule on criminality via powers granted. As I edited before your post, this ruling will also be what protects Obama from current accusations. Yes. Broad leeway was given.

I knew all that when I posted. It’s the absolute lunacy of the ruling that concerns me. Will the Supreme Court get to decide “official” presidential duties? It’s all ludicrous.

Needless fears. There are checks and balances aplenty. In the end, there’s the 2nd Amendment. For better or worse, this alone sets America apart from other nations.

SCOTUS specifically ruled POTUS isn’t above the law. Read the actual ruling. SCOTUS specifically ruled POTUS can’t be ‘second guessed’ for official acts performed under his/her duties granted by the Constitution. The decision was sent back to lower courts for further development. Trump was re-elected. Case was closed before further development of what was official and what wasn’t. SCOTUS NEVER gave carte Blanche for any POTUS to perform illegal/criminal acts. But, they set the bar very high as to not infringe on Presidential powers. This ruling will also be what protects Obama from current accusations. Not so for others.

I have a hard time listening to people who want to play hardball, then cry when they get hit by a pitch. As I said, no more or less treasonous than Trump’s play for ballots and destabilization of election security. Lie in that batter’s box and cry for a while, baddog.

We are fast tracking to an oligarchy, Bubba. The “welfare state” is small potatoes to the oligarchs. Small price to pay to keep workers fed and housed and the unemployed/unemployable alive so we don’t look too inhumane.

Gimme a couple of those levels, if you don’t mind.

I believe in your opinion. When you hear others claim that this is all a witch hunt fabricated by the fake news and any body else other than his administration. Trumps administration says he is limited by the courts on what he can release but he has not followed the rule of law when it comes to the courts. He has disregarded the courts quite a few times and now after Bondi inserts foot in mouth Trump now has regards for the rule of law. Those that were involved are guilty of a crime. Hush money is popular on both sides of the isle as it pertains to this matter. I wouldn’t vote for Musk but he maybe on to something creating a new party.