tvc184

I AM NOT GOING TO PARDON MY SON! Just as long as I have a chance to use it as a campaign stunt. 🤣🤣🤣 Anybody that didn’t see this coming…….

I have no issue with that however…. Rick Perry, although seemingly not really popular even with Republicans, was almost impossible to beat. The Texas conservatives just needed that tough, real conservative with an already popular voting base. Someone that has been elected to both Texas state office and federal office. Boom! In 2010 in steps Kay Bailey Hutchison, a popular sitting US Senator and former Texas Treasurer. So she has been elected, statewide in both a state political position and nationally as a senator. A Rasmussen poll in 2009 showed Hutchison with a 40% to 38% lead over Perry. She had high profile endorsements as did Perry. Hutchison was endorsed by the likes of G H W Bush, Nolan Ryan, Roger Staubach, etc. If people are actually going to listen to endorsements, those are some fairly well thought of people in Texas. Primary day was between Perry, Hutchison and Debra Medina. Hutchison was beaten by Perry 51% to 30% and he got enough votes to avoid a runoff. Obviously, that has no bearing on today. It does show that just because a person is very popular and already elected to national office from Texas such as Kay Bailey Hutchison, it does not ensure a good showing in the polls against an incumbent. It will be interesting for sure.

Actually it isn’t propaganda. Do they specifically harbor any gang or criminal? No. Is their policy to not notify ICE that an illegal alien gang member or other illegal alien is in their custody? Yes. This is quote from the official Los Angeles city website of a council member. The newly adopted ordinance permanently enshrines sanctuary policies into municipal law and prohibits the use of City resources, including property and personnel, from being utilized for immigration enforcement or to cooperate with federal immigration agents engaged in immigration enforcement. Critically, the Ordinance also prohibits the direct and indirect sharing of data with federal immigration authorities – an important gap to close in our city’s protections for immigrants. Also: Prohibiting the use of City resources for federal immigration enforcement shouldn’t depend only on executive actions that could be overturned by a future Mayor or Police Chief. This is common sense policy for LA.” So they made it where even a police chief could not make contact with ICE and it doesn’t make exemptions for criminals. To make sure that there was no loopholes, they added no “indirect sharing” of information and no “personal property” to be used. So a chief of police couldn’t simply say, “Okay, I won’t use city resources or do it directly. I can wait until I am off duty and use my personal cell phone”. So as a private citizen and not acting in any official capacity, he is not allowed to contact federal law enforcement and let them know that someone they may be looking for is currently in the city jail. That is intentionally protecting criminals for the sake of politics. Every time one of the illegal alien criminals is released and notice to ICE for deportation or filing of federal charges is denied, every murder, rape, burglary, assault, etc., committed by one of them is the result of protection given to violent criminals by the city of Los Angeles. Imagine a city offering protection to violent criminals because they don’t like election results or for votes. [Hidden Content]

That’s not recording….. right?

That’s what I am missing. Do conservatives consider Soros a bad person because he made billions of dollars or because of what he did with some of that money?

For anyone who wishes to spend as much as 15 minutes (but the first 7 minutes or so tells the tale) watching a youtube video, this explains the outcome by a lawyer. Kim Foxx unethical and probably illegal advised Smollett and his family. The prosecutor was in effect also playing defense attorney against her office and herself. That’s right folks. The prosecutor told the defendant how to proceed. She the recused herself and then violated Illinois law. By state law, it supposed to go to an outside prosecutor with no ties to the DA. Unlawfully Foxx created a position that did not exist and appointed her first assistant as special prosecutor. Again, this was a violation of state law. She then made a deal with a defense attorney where Smollett would forfeit his bond in lieu of prosecution. Again, this was a violation of law as she was not allowed to make a deal or dismiss the case after she had recused herself. Smollett’s attorney is in the video basically saying that forfeiting his $10,000 bail was a gift to the state although she doesn’t use those words. The state stepped in and said all of this was unlawful. Since it was unlawful and Foxx had no authority to dismiss the case, double Jeopardy did not apply and they could still try Smollett with the facts. As we all know, they then got a conviction by presenting the evidence to a jury. His lawyers appealed and it went to the Illinois Supreme Court. They ruled that even virtually though everything that Kim Foxx did was unlawful, they were stuck with the fact that he did take a plea deal in open court, even if unlawful, so the state cannot come back and try him again.

Musk didn’t even misspeak. He was commenting on a false meme.

There are no state laws that prevent people from being deported Carry on…..

Are you now wanting the Holy Bible to set our laws? I believe that most people believe that the correct translation should be….. Thou shall not murder In any case of your new conversion…. Genesis 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man. I don’t think unborn children have shed a man’s blood. I am also assuming by your response that self-defense is a sin. Good to know.

MSX

No, I am looking forward to every logical fallacy that the left can conjure up.

So you have deemed what peoples’ limitations are? I am pro life of innocent unborn children. I am pro death penalty for heinous murderers who have been convicted and appealed their verdict. There is no either/or to it.

I briefly heard Pam Bondi‘s name mentioned on the radio this afternoon and wasn’t sure what it was in reference to. Now I know. 👍🏼

Now what? Four more years of TDS…..

His verdict was not overturned on evidence. The unethical prosecutor, whose decision itself was overturned, was allowed to stand. Here is an example. A guy crossed the street and commited jaywalking. A guy driving a car had to swerve to miss the guy who was jaywalking. After getting in an argument, the driver attempted to drive away and the guy who jaywalked shoots and kills him in basically a road rage incident. He was arrested for murder For political reasons, the prosecutor tells the jaywalker, if you plead guilty to the pedestrian traffic charge, we will drop the murder charge. Naturally, he agreed, knowing that he’s been given a gift for appearance. Another prosecutor came along and asked on appeal to reinstate the murder charges. An appeals court agreed saying that there is an ample evidence for such a charge. They went to trial and the prosecution was able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that murder was committed. In steps to state Supreme Court. While it is obvious that all of the evidence was valid and it’s obviously that the murder was proven beyond a reasonable doubt, because the special prosecutor allowed the murder suspect to plead guilty to a traffic ticket, he can’t be charged again for murder under double Jeopardy.

Everyone understands the difference and knows there is no comparison. Some conveniently ignore the obvious.

Auto correct makes some interesting typos……

As far as the experience, what I’d needed? Leon Panetta was a Secretary of Defense under Obama. He sure much had great qualifications! But did he or was he just an insider and trusted ally of the president? According to Wikipedia, Panetta went into the Army in 1964 as a Second Lieutenant and left the service in 1966 as a First Lieutenant. Then he went into private practice as a lawyer and over a decade later entered Congress. Apparently his big breakthrough was chief of staff to Bill Clinton. Fast-forward to Morocco Obama’s presidency, Panetta was named CIA director because…… oh, well connected as a White House chief of staff. And hey, he did two years in the Army. As director of the CIA, Wikipedia says that he supported Barack Obama’s use of drones to strike terrorist. Well, since he supported Obama for using drones, he was picked for Secretary of Defense. So a guy who spent two years in the Army 40 years earlier was picked because he was an insider and chief of staff for Bill Clinton and supported Barack Obama all drone strikes (I did too). I’m not criticizing his pick as Secretary of Defense make compare hair service to a man who spent 20 years in a military, so I have three tours in combat and we’re retired as a Major. He apparently is not qualified but a two year once promoted officer because he was chief of staff for a former president, is qualified. If it’s good for the goose, is it good for the gander? If they have some serious issues, that can be proven with Trump‘s pick, great throw it out there, but when talking about experience, how is that even an issue?

It appears as though the sentencing against Trump for his criminal trial of paying hush money, which was scheduled for later this month, has been adjourned indefinitely. [Hidden Content]

You are stretching that rubber band beyond the breaking point. Now you have God possibly issuing punishment based on Supreme Court picks by presidents. Apparently free will doesn’t exit. When I am before Judgment, I have enough of my own transgressions to answer for. I don’t think that I will have to answer for other people nor they for me.

Coincidence? The school district tried their best to keep God in school by allowing school prayer on campus. They are not the ones who rejected God at school, Supreme Court did that. If it was not a coincidence and there was divine intervention, was SFISD punished by God for fighting it all the way to the Supreme Court to keep Him on campus? Your logic seems flawed.

Maybe that is correct but maybe not. It all comes down to the center…. or maybe even the right side of the aisle. If something like that was allowed to go forward (won’t happen) “most” Republicans are not gonna vote Democrat because there’s a Bible of the classroom. Most Democrats are not going to all of a sudden vote Republican because there’s a Bible in the classroom even if they are Christian and agree with it. It’s probably almost a non-issue for them. How much will the center be offended by such a law dictating Christianity in the classroom? Perhaps enough to throw an election? Perhaps joined by some Republican Christians? Don’t believe it? In Santa Fe ISD v. Doe, the Supreme Court threw out a pre-game prayer over public address system. In that case so as to attempt to make it constitutional, the school district completely backed out of the process. The students were allowed to vote whether they wanted a public address with a prayer. If so, they were allowed to choose their own student representative who would deliver the prayer and what that prayer would be. So in that case, it was completely voluntary by students who are absolutely allowed to pray at school by the Constitution. Since there was no school input at all, they felt that it would pass a constitutional challenge. But no, someone was offended. It was the atheists, right!? Nope. Then it had to be the Muslims who were offended by something like Christian!! Wrong again. It was a Catholics and Mormon who filed the federal lawsuit. So you had two Christians filing on an almost certainly Christian prayers over the public address system although it was supposed to be non-denominational. The Supreme Court ruled that such a prayer was a violation of the Constitution. Because it was at a public school event, on public school property and over a publicly owned PA system, it violated the First Amendment. This isn’t to try to re-litigate the case but just to show that it was two Christians who ended school prayer before football games over the PA system. It wasn’t the evil atheists or someone from an opposing non-Christian religion. So I’m not really sure how a person can claim for that it won’t make no difference. When they put the Bible in the classroom, is it going to be the King James Bible or the Catholic Bible? Don’t be so sure that the opposition won’t be a Christian religion against another Christian religion. Like a bumper sticker that I saw once, my Jesus is better than your Jesus.

This is about keeping the base happy and maybe fulfilling promises. ”We will try to get the Holy Bible back in classrooms!! It won’t happen but….. They can claim the effort was there and the evil opposition killed it.

Conservatives always talk about schools and the Christian religion. The odds of any changes is close to 0%.

I was thinking about that also.