tvc184

Oh yeah, at least another 4 more years of TDS….. leaning towards 8-12 years but at least 4. Maybe you didn’t notice but things were so bad as you claimed in his first term that Trump was able to be convicted of felonies, put Supreme Court justices in that overturned Roe v. Wade (which supposedly made every woman in the country angry with my body my choice) and yet for the first time in two decades was the first Republican to actually get a majority of the vote… and did so convincingly. Progress will be made. You probably like it. I think that I just saw a news story that the border crossing in El Paso, Texas was closed down …..

I feel like Trump will do enough in the first 30 days to keep TDS going for four more years. Headlines June, 2036 leading up to the presidential elections: Trump convicted of 34 felonies stated that………

Elizabeth Warren: For the post 12 years you have said that women don’t belong in combat. Exactly. Quit lowering the standards.

Like all such cases, the Facebook comments are entertaining. I like the comments (so many) where people are demanding answers, we need to be made aware of the circumstances, the police won’t tell us why, this needs to be looked into further, they haven’t said why so something is being covered up, there’s more to the story, etc. No, you don’t need to know what happened. The police probably aren’t going to tell you why and if they do eventually after an arrest, they aren’t likely to give details. It’s on a need to know basis and you don’t need to know. There is always more to the story because neither the police nor the DA typically release such information. The police and DA nightmare is when a justice of the peace releases the information which is legal but can sometimes hamper the investigation.

Anyone watch the video of the Los Angeles Assistant Fire Chief saying that if a person responds to your emergency, you want someone who looks like you? This premise she claims is based on if we look the same, the firefighter would better understand your situation. What situation? Let’s see, a heterosexual White male firefighter finds a woman in a burning house who is suffering smoke inhalation and at risk of death. But wait? Is she a race other than White? What are her pronouns? Is she actually a born female or a transgender female? How long should the male firefighter question her before he can tell if he understands her situation? “I realize that you are at risk of death but I really need to understand your situation”. When answering a follow up situation that the Assistant Fire Chief brought up about whether a woman firefighter could drag a person out of a burning building, her response was, “He got himself in the wrong place if I have to carry him out of a fire”. I wonder if the police could use the same rationale? Maybe the police could say, we realize that you are a victim of a violent assault but before we can assist you, are you concerned that we have a different ethnicity or our pronouns are different? Also note that you should not have gotten yourself into the situation where you were assaulted! So by the Assistant Fire Chief’s own words, the ability to do the job physically is not important. It is knowing and understanding that people being rescued (or perhaps a weak and failed attempt at a rescue) are concerned if the person saving his/her life either looks the same or has the same lifestyle. Heck, maybe a straight Black woman would reject having her life saved if the only rescuer was a transgender male. DEI at its finest….. 😳

Nailed it!

Bucket of Blue Bell? We can call it The Bucket for short.

If overturned, the conviction goes away but the arrest record doesn’t. That is why some people seek to have the record expunged. To get it expunged basically means that it never happened. The record is removed and possibly sealed according to state law.

I am thinking Gulf of Blue Bell…

No, a conviction cannot be expunged for a conviction, depending on state law. I am fairly certain that there is no way to remove a standing conviction If it is overturned on appeal he probably can but it if more like a formality. A person who is arrested for DWI in the case is Dropped or a find a person, not guilty, might want his record expunged because it might look bad on a future job application. Everybody knows what happened to Trump and he is not going to be applying for a job anywhere. A person could choose to believe or not believe in the conviction but merely having a court say ignore this really won’t matter to him. in my opinion ….

I feel the need.. The need for spe…. uhhh, TDS incoming.

Yes. Get ready for the rebuttal.

They got what they wanted. A political kangaroo court in order to say that he was a convicted felon to try and sway the election. It was no different than Nancy Pelosi’s scam impeachment after Trump had left office, in another attempt to keep him out of the White House. They knew back then that he would probably win again and used every trick play to keep him out. Obviously neither worked and might have actually fueled his return to office. WTG Democrats!! 🤣🤣🤣

No fine No prison No probation [Hidden Content]

Yeah, that’s all he if doing is trolling. TDS is alive and well. You act like Trump isn’t planning on shutting down the border, start deporting people by US law, start negotiations with other countries over the economy, opening up US offshore oil exploration that Biden conveniently closed in almost the last week of his presidency, closing some of Biden’s electric vehicle mandates, opening up more fossil fuel production and refilling our strategic oil reserves that Biden depleted in an effort to make gasoline prices fall a few cents per gallon when it was his policies that created the problem, continuing the income tax cuts that will expire this year, etc. 😂😂😂 Apparently his trolling, which takes about 30 seconds out of his day and a lot less time that it takes me to post this, is paying dividends. Thanks for playing.

I think that he is having more fun than at any time in his life because he is trolling the media and Democrats (same thing). Next he will claim that he will sign an executive order that will combine California, Arizona, Nevada, Idaho, Montana, Utah and Wyoming so that the entire state will be Republican and without California’s 54 electoral college votes, the Democrats will never be able to win. The funny part will be when the media fact checkers, newly out of work from Facebook, will explode trying to explain that only Congress can do it and blah blah blah. 🤣🤣🤣

Or vice president….

Yep, how the World has turned. Much to the chagrin to the TDS crowd, the Trump Effect seems to be far reaching. I was surprised that Zuckerberg actually mentioned censorship from the Biden administration, mentioned Trump coming into office and then using X for a model. How the World has turned….

In an admission that fact checking was wrong and politically biased, Facebook will now essentially use a system like X instituted by Elon Musk.

Also under Texas law of nuisance abatement, the property can be shut down for a year. I am not talking about just a business being removed but the actual property itself being closed for business.

The police per se have no official presence at those venues. The locations are responsible for their own security and they sometimes hire off duty (not OT) police officers. Those establishments that allow such behavior are breaking state law. They cannot stop an incident from happening, which is typically beyond their control, but by law if it cannot be handled like a bouncer removing someone, it has to be turned over to the police. Many of those locations tend to cover up what happens on their property, including outside of the doors which they are also responsible for. If they have an alcohol license, which is almost a certainty, they are violating their license agreement and can be shut down and/or fined. I have personally gotten a couple of alcohol licensed locations, suspended and on one occasion had the bartender sentenced to two weeks in the County Jail.

In what I watched of his speech, I think he asked what their equivalent to our speaker of the house, to suspend parliament on March 23. If I understand the Canada parliamentary system, that would force an early vote to what we would call the midterm elections. Much like our electoral college, they have to have a majority of members vote for the Prime Minister. They have something like five or six political parties plus independence and no one has a clear majority. For that reason they have to put together a coalition, which would be like the American Republicans teaming up with the libertarian party to try and throw out the Democratic party.

…. but not until they name the leader of the Liberal Party. He is still trying to maintain power for the Liberals. It’s like replacing Stalin with Khrushchev.

The Safe Harbor date was huge in G W Bush being elected in 2000 when Gore contested the Florida results and asked for a recount. The Supreme Court ruled that the Florida recount was unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment. That was because Florida had no standard way of recounting the paper ballots. Was the punch tab counted as a vote if dented, partially punched (the famous hanging chad) or completely punched out? What might be a vote for Gore in one county might be a no vote in another. The Supreme Court voted 7-2 that the recount as undertaken was unconstitutional and therefore invalid. This could be rectified by having a meeting to determine a standard by which vote were counted and to get that information to every single person who had to hand count millions of votes with both a Republican and a Democrat representative, looking at each ballot. The Supreme Court voted 5-4 that it was too late in the process because of Safe Harbor to come up with a standard method and to hand count the millions of votes. The way I read the decision, it basically said that had they gotten together and came up with a procedure of a standard way to recount, it would be lawful. The Gore team argued so long in court by contesting the standard for recounting that they ran out of time because of Safe Harbor. Also, if I remember correctly, in dissent the liberal side of the Supreme Court said essentially, to heck with the law. This is so important that we can simply disregard Safe Harbor. 😝 Law? What law? Anyway, that’s the only Safe Harbor story that I can think of at the moment.

Done deal. There are actually four dates for a president to take office. 1. Election Day 2. Safe Harbor day or the date where a state’s electors must be certified. Basically, any court challenges or recount must be settled within the state by the Safe Harbor date. I think they list the Safe Harbor date as the first Tuesday after the second Wednesday in December. There are then about 6 weeks after the election to count the votes in any state and settle any issues. 3. Certification of the election on January 6th at a joint session of Congress. 4. Swearing in of the President.