President Donald Trump - J.D. Vance Administration

What's the purpose w/these lunatics over at MSDNC? Nobody watches the craziness.


What she is suggesting/implying what she ("we") is doing is a series of federal felonies. The sources of the problem will have to be eliminated, its awesome for her to publicly state what she is doing. She is actually implying its not only immigration law violation but conspiracy (i.e. "we") to defraud the U.S. plus most likely tax law violations.

I am 100% in favor of people coming out and publicly stating what they are doing.
 
False choice. I'd rather do neither as the Saudis are horrible people

If you (we) were reduced to only trading with people we believe are outstanding, you might as well seal up the borders and close the ports down. And they definitely could say the same about us at this point.

I never understood when I was in SA why we supported them, but that doesn't mean I think they should be our enemy.

They said Vietnam was our enemy because they said, one day they said Vietnam is our friend.... what changed with Vietnam? Nothing.

Why do we support Europe at this point? Is Europe our friends? Do these European governments support my values?

hillary-guilty-hrc.gif
 
Last edited:
If you (we) were reduced to only trading with people we believe are outstanding, you might as well seal up the borders and close the ports down. And they definitely could say the same about us at this point.

I never understood when I was in SA why we supported them, but that doesn't mean I think they should be our enemy.

They said Vietnam was our enemy because they said, one day they said Vietnam is our friend.... what changed with Vietnam? Nothing.

Why do we support Europe at this point? Is Europe our friends? Do these European governments support my values?

hillary-guilty-hrc.gif
I'm not saying they have to be outstanding, I'm just saying we shouldn't celebrate countries actively involved in genocide. That seems like a really low bar imo
 
  • Like
Reactions: LSU-SIU
I'm not saying they have to be outstanding, I'm just saying we shouldn't celebrate countries actively involved in genocide. That seems like a really low bar imo

It's tough. Meaning, what most Americans don't have a clue about is that the actual people there (wherever there is) are not the same. For example, who was the best person to run Iraq, Saddam Hussein. I wish I could tell you more as to what he would do to people, but... With that said, he was the only one that could run it in any kind of way. Americans don't want to hear that nor can they comprehend it, but its real. So, do I think Hussein was evil by my standards, absolutely.... but he was probably the best guy for the job i.e. some type of order.

I'm just saying we shouldn't celebrate countries actively involved in genocide.

They're saying the same thing about what we are doing. Logically speaking, we need to clean house, if its possible. Simplify things, if possible. Very selective in our use of force and only when there are no other options, and with a clear goal that is realistically achievable i.e. common sense.

Maybe we can't solve the world's problems, but wouldn't it be nice if we stopped adding to them. (just my take) If nobody traded with the bad guys, there would be no global trade and/or relationships. We're all bad to someone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dovervolz


😂

Whether you like him or hate or don't care either way, he doesn't seem to disappoint in the entertainment arena.

I think he should sell off California next. 🤔

Some other suggestions, rename:

White Sands National Park -> Red, White and Blue National Park
Yellowstone National Park -> OrangeStone National Park
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider


😂

Whether you like him or hate or don't care either way, he doesn't seem to disappoint in the entertainment arena.

I think he should sell off California next. 🤔

Some other suggestions, rename:

White Sands National Park -> Red, White and Blue National Park
Yellowstone National Park -> OrangeStone National Park

If he outlaws ROW TIDE I am officially all in on a third term.
 
why would it matter that innocents are getting caught in the crossfire? Before the election I was told it was impossible that it would happen. then less than a week into it, I have an example. thats an escalation I am uncomfortable with. If that was my lawyer getting raided, I would be worried about my information getting out there and being used against me, even if I am 100% innocent. I imagine all of the people who went through the actual process to gain citizenship or entry feel the same, and I think they should be protected as anyone else.

I don't trust Trump for crap. how he handled Covid was an atrocity. I don't trust him, or anyone in the federal government, to handle a nationwide round up of people any better. throwing money and trusting an "expert" to it failed the last time. I don't see it going any different this time. Americans, and people here legally, will have their rights trampled on in order for the government to sell "they are doing something". It was unacceptable to me during Covid, its unacceptable now. I am just not on my knees turning a blind eye because its Trump this time.

100% agree on his handling of covid, or more accurately his handing over the country to that midget mass murderer.

I share your concerns on governmental overreach and agree on not trusting any of them, but would only say that the previous administration allowed the border problem to get so completely out of hand that more extreme measures are necessary to some degree. But your point is a good one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LSU-SIU
100% agree on his handling of covid, or more accurately his handing over the country to that midget mass murderer.

I share your concerns on governmental overreach and agree on not trusting any of them, but would only say that the previous administration allowed the border problem to get so completely out of hand that more extreme measures are necessary to some degree. But your point is a good one.
An extreme measure is fine, but it has to be managed. It has to be curbed, and checked.

Like a controlled burn to limit wildfires. Its an extreme measure, but its an important tool. but when its done, its managed by people keeping it in check even though it may be faster and easier to just let it run unchecked. I think it should be the same thing here.

and as I started I am not flat out rejecting going after lawyers, but there has to be conditions, there better be some ironclad information/evidence that is going to stand up in court. If we allow the government to take extrajudicial measures there is nothing stopping them from doing it later.
 
Why couldn't the democrats great Joe Biden bring peace or end the war in Ukraine?
Joe Biden was a puppet President and only did what he was told to do by handlers.



I posted a video of the midget Comedian yesterday, this doesn't appear to be the complete facts. The midget is demanding the U.S. supply 200,000 troops to be stationed in the Ukraine for security, and Russia has to agree to this before they can talk. He also doesn't mention how he can sit down as Law in the Ukraine precludes him from doing so, as does their Constitution at the present time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood


Some of what he speaks about here I agree with, some stuff slightly less so. Yes, the government should get of the business of mass subbing this type of energy generation. At scale it was/is just a massive scam. For the record, I think over the next 100-200 years additional types of generation will be needed, but any type of rush is just open for scams and busted promises.
 
Mexico (if it wasn’t a corrupt cartel owned country) could ask for US military assistance in securing their border. That would be perfectly legal for us to deploy troops to operate as a semi police force.
Yeah, but I'd hate to get embroiled in that. Mexico deployed their 21K troops at the U.S. and their extreme southern borders with pressure from Trump; it's a good place to resume. It came later in his term, but was a dandy idea to indeed have Mexico paying for some of our border security.

I haven't delved into what would constitute a constitutional use of the military to secure our borders beyond an emergency declaration of the president.
 
An extreme measure is fine, but it has to be managed. It has to be curbed, and checked.

Like a controlled burn to limit wildfires. Its an extreme measure, but its an important tool. but when its done, its managed by people keeping it in check even though it may be faster and easier to just let it run unchecked. I think it should be the same thing here.

and as I started I am not flat out rejecting going after lawyers, but there has to be conditions, there better be some ironclad information/evidence that is going to stand up in court. If we allow the government to take extrajudicial measures there is nothing stopping them from doing it later.

Why is this lawyer beyond reproach? Who is to say that the lawyer has not been engaging in criminal activity with respect to immigration? I am assuming the raid is warranted by the attorney's activities but that is not something we would be privy to at this point. Or am I missing something?
 
Why is this lawyer beyond reproach? Who is to say that the lawyer has not been engaging in criminal activity with respect to immigration? I am assuming the raid is warranted by the attorney's activities but that is not something we would be privy to at this point. Or am I missing something?

A lot of assumptions being made on both viewpoints.

Doubt this is random. But also don’t trust the heavy hand of government law.

Best to wait and see before making a judgement.
 

VN Store



Back
Top