Jump to content

Biden expected to announce executive actions on gun control Thursday


LumRaiderFan

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, BS Wildcats said:

And so it begins!!!  The fools that vote for the party of D say they will never come for your guns.  I say this is just the beginning.  Biden is moving his minions so far left that it will be a victorious midterm for the R’s.

So far left for his minions.... these are the ones I blame......the so-called democrats who have not yet converted to communism. I have been told it is the Republicans who have not taken a stand. I have yet to see one democrat vote against any of these communist policies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 5GallonBucket said:

Biden just doing what he s told.  He don’t even know where he s at half the time.

they hand him a document he signs it

every American should be pissed off about this.  Democrats, independents, and republicans 

True story.  Just saw a meme that said:

WITH BIDEN’S 1776th EXECUTIVE ORDER, HE UNKNOWINGLY SIGNS TRUMP BACK INTO OFFICE.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

Fortunately these are token moves that will have no real effect on any of us.  That said, he's definitely pushing congress to take actions that will have a massive effect on legal gun owners.  

Yes, start out lame to get the ball rolling. Then when that does nothing, more drastic measures are needed. Biden is such a puppet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

I wish that a decent conservative candidate would have run against Joe.  Too bad the Rs were willing to overlook all of Trump's BS.  

 

the KOOKS on this website refer to those decent conservatives as.. RINOs. So, not happening. The Republican Party has been hijacked #RIP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, InMAGAWeTrust said:

 

the KOOKS on this website refer to those decent conservatives as.. RINOs. So, not happening. The Republican Party has been hijacked #RIP

So how many DINO’s (Decent Democrats) are there in the Democratic Party?  Uh......... so who’s been hijacked?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bullets13 said:

Fortunately these are token moves that will have no real effect on any of us.  That said, he's definitely pushing congress to take actions that will have a massive effect on legal gun owners.  

And then we ll have what many of us have been saying for years about this progressive liberal movement.....inch by inch they take.

people can only be pushed so far before they react.  The capitol insurrection (though I disagree with that capitol take over) is a prime example of more to come if more and more citizens become sheep and don’t make a stand with their vote and those left will be those that defend the constitution but will be smeared as terrorist on all liberal media outlets that are owned by liberals......so that the sheep will stay sheep.....”nothing to see hear”

No one ever thought that would happen at the capitol and it did because people have lost trust.

integrity has value.....a value that could  change the course of a country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 5GallonBucket said:

And then we ll have what many of us have been saying for years about this progressive liberal movement.....inch by inch they take.

people can only be pushed so far before they react.  The capitol insurrection (though I disagree with that capitol take over) is a prime example of more to come if more and more citizens become sheep and don’t make a stand with their vote and those left will be those that defend the constitution but will be smeared as terrorist on all liberal media outlets that are owned by liberals......so that the sheep will stay sheep.....”nothing to see hear”

No one ever thought that would happen at the capitol and it did because people have lost trust.

integrity has value.....a value that could  change the course of a country.

The problem is with the packaging.  The third round of stimulus (the "$1400 stimulus checks) were almost uniformly welcomed by Americans.  Who cares that barely 9% of the money went to actual Covid relief.... the people wanted those $1400 checks.  My guess is that the 2 Trillion dollar "infrastructure" plan will also have very little to do with "infrastructure" and a whole lot more to do with transgender reassignments, reparations, fighting "systemic racism," inequities in wealth, and "white privilege" than it has to do with rebuilding crumbling roads and bridges.  But there will be nugget or two of goodwill devoted to the masses and the result will be another huge piece of legislation that barely squeaks by congress only by using budget reconciliation to the delight of the ignorant masses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

The problem is with the packaging.  The third round of stimulus (the "$1400 stimulus checks) were almost uniformly welcomed by Americans.  Who cares that barely 9% of the money went to actual Covid relief.... the people wanted those $1400 checks.  My guess is that the 2 Trillion dollar "infrastructure" plan will also have very little to do with "infrastructure" and a whole lot more to do with transgender reassignments, reparations, fighting "systemic racism," inequities in wealth, and "white privilege" than it has to do with rebuilding crumbling roads and bridges.  But there will be nugget or two of goodwill devoted to the masses and the result will be another huge piece of legislation that barely squeaks by congress only by using budget reconciliation to the delight of the ignorant masses.

Exactly 

the stimulus money was fools gold from the beginning.

pretty much like welfare....but on a much grander stage and a more crippling effect.

I’d rather people go thru hard times....there is greater life lessons from those times than from receiving money hand over fist.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Hagar said:

Here’s a comforting thought.  That senile Puppet has only been in office about four months.  Can you imagine the utter devastation he’ll accomplish in four years.

And it seems the only way to combat this nonsense is to have a candidate that is very polite and hurts no feelings.

#growapairyousnowflakelosers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

And it seems the only way to combat this nonsense is to have a candidate that is very polite and hurts no feelings.

#growapairyousnowflakelosers

I’m reminded of one of my favorite memes.  A Dr sitting across from his patient says,

YOU SAY YOUR SUFFERING FROM ANXIETY BECAUSE OF TRUMP.   I’LL WRITE YOU A PRESCRIPTION FOR TWO TESTICLES.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

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...