tvc184

He might actually have a good case for the Insurrection Act.

1. I was clearly referring to the rights in the US Constitution. The article that you listed was about the Texas Constitution. 2. Even so and again, what right in the US or Texas Constitutions been denied to you by illegal aliens? In Paxton’s challenge he is bringing up that there is a Texas Constitution section that prohibits using public funds for something that doesn’t help the public. So if the court rules that spending to defend illegal aliens is unconstitutional, they will have to spend the money elsewhere. Do you think that tax money is going to you instead? If not (and it’s obvious not) going to you, how has an illegal alien taken away a right that you were guaranteed in either Constitution? For the sake of argument (I think the legal term is arguendo) let’s say that somehow you would benefit from some tax dollars not going to an illegal alien. What part of either Constitution guarantees that you will receive government money?

What rights are you guaranteed in the Constitution that has been violated by illegal aliens? Your rights to religion? Free speech? Go armed? Have a public trial? Remain silent? Be represented by an attorney? If you get a case to the Supreme Court, what constitutionally guaranteed right are you going to ask them to uphold? Illegal aliens have stopped me from….. what?

None of that answers my question of what crime unless a conspiracy to commit a felony can be proven. So again, what is the crime of paying people to protest? If I pay you $50 to go to a pro Trump rally and hold a sign for two hours that says MAGA, what crime have I committed?

A pardon cannot be for a future crime.

You can expose the payers if you want. What’s the crime though? OMG, it’s the George Soros group! We can prove it! Charge them with…. uhhh….. charge them with…. Let me get back to you.

They might be able to stretch it into some kind of conspiracy but they crime would not be the pay but the plan to commit (at least in Texas) a felony. Merely planning a crime is not in itself a crime. It would have to be proven that 3 or more people got together and planned on committing a felony and at least one person in the conspiracy did an overt act to further the felony. At least under Texas law, saying that I’ll give you $50 if you go stand on the corner with a sign saying whatever I want like the police are there gestapo, is in itself not a crime that I know of.

Is it a crime to pay a person to protest?

Indoctrination is always best when started at a young age.

I hardly ever understand the RINO claims when it comes to votes. Cornyn will vote to confirm any Republican nominee, etc. Cornyn supports a few issues that I don’t agree with like red flag laws. For that reason I want another Republican senator if possible. But if he get it again, he isn’t going to be caucusing with the Democrats. As far as the Trump claims, the term RINO and its meaning did not start nor will it end with Trump. For some reason (maybe it’s all the have left) the left side of the aisle claims that Trump supporters are a cult and blah blah blah. No, they are not. It’s not like pro Second Amendment, shutting down the border, having a strong military, heavy support for law enforcement, doing away with business restrictions and so on started with Trump. On some social media platforms that I read, you would think that the Republicans and Democrats were nearly in a lockstep and only had minor differences. Poof! Along came Trump and all of a sudden there were huge divides and differences! Uhhhh….. no.

Looking at criminal records and such, the left finds some questionable people to support. I think the “mother of 3” had at least 2 of her children taken away. Surely being a possible terrible mother doesn’t justify any use of force but there sometimes seems to be a pattern of who is supported.

The local police chiefs in some cities have been disgusting. They are an embarrassment to the profession. That’s because police chiefs are often chosen for political reasons and not law enforcement reasons.

Okay, some new information to look at. I watched a video from Nate the Lawyer on YouTube. It covered the view from the a cell phone that the agent was holding (not a body cam). We probably all have seen it. But, looking at it again, it changes part of the narrative. The officer is did not step in front the vehicle as some on social media have claimed. He was being taunted by the wife as she was trying to get in the vehicle. The driver turned her wheels to the left and backed up. That swung her vehicle to the right and pointed her car at the officer. She then put it in gear and drove at him. Intentional? Accidental? I don’t think it matters. There have been so many claims, however, that the officer stepped in front of the vehicle in order to justify shooting. Looking at it again, it does not appear to be true. He was standing near the headlight to the passenger side of the vehicle. The driver backed up the vehicle, pointing it at the agent and then turned into him and drove forward. So many of the accusations from the start seem to be jumping the gun or wishful thinking to make ICE look bad. I know that for the people who have made up their minds, it will not matter. The decision on fault was likely made immediately and it won’t change. We sometimes get the qualifying comments of, I support the police but the agent should not have stepped in front of her. Well…. it turns out that he didn’t.

What you posted says nothing about trouncing Cornyn (not made by you) and the article that you posted was there site’s believe in a win and but the poll numbers. I remember on election night in 2024 the NY Times kept an updated likelihood of who was going to win. Later in the night as the swing states started coming in, the “likelihood” of a Harris win kept going down. It wasn’t the point spread but the odds of winning. I don’t doubt that Paxton has a better chance of winning. The latest poll that I saw from 3 weeks ago had Paxton at 29% and Cornyn and Hunt both having 25%. If anything neat that holds, there will be a runoff. I have seen no poll showing Paxton with 50% in the last several months. So a company thinks that there is a 2/3 chance that Paxton holds onto his lead. Probably. However, Paxton’s biggest challenge might be if Hunt edges by Cornyn and sets up a Paxton and Hunt runoff. Psrt of Paxton’s negatives certainly come from the perception of his legal dealings, accusations of corruption including bribery, impeachment and divorce. In fact that is probably keeping Cornyn close. Paxton likely isn’t seen as favorable as much as Cornyn being a bigger negative. Hunt could potentially upset the applecart if he can gain some late traction. Paxton and Cornyn are probably seen like Hillary Clinton vs Trump in 2020. Both were unpopular but who was seen with the least amount of negatives. If it comes down to Paxton and Hunt, Hunt might be seen as the shing light Just points to ponder…. .

It seems like he is upset that the people shot weren’t citizens heading to work. Oh my gosh, it’s horrible! The agents didn’t shoot innocent citizens! 🤣🤣🤣

In Plumhoff v. Rickard, the Supreme Court issued a ruling on a police vehicle chase that ended up in a parking lot with the suspect vehicle stopped briefly and surrounded by police cars or officers. The driver backed up in a U-turn and took off again, almost striking officers. The vehicle was then past all officers so none were in direct danger. Officers opened fire into the back of the fleeing vehicle, killing the driver and passenger. The ruling was unanimous that the use of force was lawful. Even though no officers were in direct line of the vehicle at that time, to continue the chase would endanger the public and officers. In Graham v. Connor the police mistakenly thought that Graham might have been involved in an armed robbery. When they stopped him, he was acting irrationally and jumping around outside of the car. The officers used force on Graham and I believe broke his foot. It turns out that Graham was having a diabetic crisis and was completely innocent. So the officers mistakenly stopped the vehicle that he was riding in and then mistook his serious medical crisis as resistance. Graham sued all the way to the Supreme Court. A unanimous Supreme Court ruling said that the officers’ use the force was reasonable under the circumstances as they appeared to be to the officers actually at the scene. In their writing, the Supreme Court said that the officers had to make split second decisions and it was not something that could be decided calmly months later in a judge’s chambers. It’s not difficult. If you use force against officers or if you are told to stop and you don’t, you might be opening yourself up to having lawful force or deadly force used against you. The Supreme Court does not appear to be sympathetic to people who resist because they believe in a cause. The First Amendment guarantees the right of the people peaceably to assemble. Blocking or obstructing the police or using force against them is not a peaceable assembly. Just sayin’…..

I think it was a Stevens manufactured and marketed under J. C. Higgins. At about 16 years old my parents bought me a Sears .22 tube fed Ted Williams rifle which was a Winchester. A friend had the Winchester Model 190 and mine was the Sears M90. Both were destroyed in a house fire.

I made a comment on Reddit which is absolutely the worst social media but it is entertaining. It is so far left that it fell off the left side of the Earth. A person call me a murdering Nazi pig. My comment in response was, check FBI statistics. There was no profanity, no threats and not even a snide comment. It was literally just, check the FBI statistics. I got a warning and my comment was removed as hate speech. I sent a note to moderators and asked about being called a murdering Nazi pig and was told that is not hate speech. 🤣 They can’t help themselves….

A friend bought the Marlin 1895 45-70 from Gibson’s in Beaumont. I bought the Marlin 1894 in .357. I still have it. I think that I bought it in 1976 so it’s probably 50 years old this year.

I had a break open .410 that belonged to my grandfather and then father. My father would hunt with it probably around 1935 during the Depression. I loaned it to my cousin so that he hunt rabbits. His father was an alcoholic and got drunk and traded it for a bottle of whiskey. It would probably by about 100 years old by now.

My first was a Sears .22 single shot when I was about 6 years old.

My first shotguns had paper shells. When they came out with plastic shells, I thought technology in the world had come to a peak.

What’s wrong with a gun discussion? I was referring to the KFDM article and seeing all the judge and city manager defenders. I saw yesterday that attorney and Beaumont city council member Cory Crenshaw posted on his Facebook page that paraphrased said, clearly this gun buy back is against the law. But I’m up for a gun discussion. I have shot one or two of them.

Just when the World can’t get crazier, a grave robber in Pennsylvania found with hundreds of skeletons on his home….. 😳 [Hidden Content]

What is a plato and who cares if it’s banned?