TrumPutinGate

#16,626
#16,626
hog88 said:
Restrict congress being in session to 4 months per year except for national emergency.

Term limits of 12 years.

No pension or lifetime health benefits.

They cannot exempt themselves from laws they pass.

Repeal the 17th amendment.

Those should take care of it.
Click to expand...

disagree with the 4 months thing. I think they should be chained to either their desk or their spot in the Capitol and moved around by armed guard. I think they should be forced to stay and work together on issues as identified by the country, and they can't leave until they fix it. If they fail at making adequate progress towards fixing the problems they face a non-commutable jail sentence the lasts for as long as they could possibly continue to keep their office (no term limit or with term limits). we have to start lopping heads and get them moving.

I am fine with term limits, not sure what it should be, 12 seems short for senators, but whatever.

tie it to the VA. whatever our soldiers get, they get. the footsloggers not the guys with stars.

agreed.

direct election doesn't bother me.

bannish the parties

line item voting and vetoes (cut the pork)

require that who ever is the author of the bill that passes Congress has to take to the President and make a face to face (in person) presentation on it and why it is needed. Then do the same for the people. the people won't get a direct input in it, but the Congressperson has to go on record as to why it is happening.

I would also love a simplification law. Bills can be no more than X number of words in plane speak. unless Congress approves with a greater number. Basically if the bill is only getting the bare amount of votes needed it has to be short. If it is long winded and important it needs more than the simple majority.

A review amendment. every Law on the books has to be reviewed and revoted upon by Congress after twenty years. Make them wade through their own ish, and hopefully get rid of a lot of laws. And this would mean Congress actually has to re approve the law for it to stay, if they don't vote if goes away. President have to sign it. no editing allowed here, thats a new bill. simply a yes or no. but remember there is line item voting. so pieces can be taken away.

Tie executive orders, war, appointments to a number of years. they have to have a reasonable time line. they can be reissued towards the conclusion but they expire after a certain time, and typically can not out last the person who issued them. (give like a 6 month grace period for the next person to review)
 
#16,630
#16,630
OuterBanksVol said:
Would love to hear someone refute this article. Nice summation of our sad presidential situation.

What does Trump think Mueller will find? - The Washington Post
Click to expand...


226dwa.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#16,632
#16,632
Data guy implicates both Trump boys. No surprise here, but he obviously is a fool to not understand the legal ramifications of his words.


WaPo:

Parscale was brought on board the campaign by Jared Kushner, and he continues to serve as a presidential adviser and works for the pro-Trump political action group America First Policies.

He insisted that Kushner and Eric Trump — not Steve Bannon and Kellyanne Conway — were responsible for the president’s surprising election win, but his claim could implicate both men in whatever events may have taken place to connect the campaign with Russian efforts to sway the election.

“Truth: Jared Kushner and @EricTrump were joint deputy campaign managers to @realDonaldTrump,” Parscale tweeted. “Nobody else. Not one person made a decision without their approval. Others just took credit for this family’s amazing ability. I’m done with all these lies. They will be embarrassed!”
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#16,633
#16,633
OuterBanksVol said:
Data guy implicates both Trump boys. No surprise here, but he obviously is a fool to not understand the legal ramifications of his words.


WaPo:

Parscale was brought on board the campaign by Jared Kushner, and he continues to serve as a presidential adviser and works for the pro-Trump political action group America First Policies.

He insisted that Kushner and Eric Trump — not Steve Bannon and Kellyanne Conway — were responsible for the president’s surprising election win, but his claim could implicate both men in whatever events may have taken place to connect the campaign with Russian efforts to sway the election.

“Truth: Jared Kushner and @EricTrump were joint deputy campaign managers to @realDonaldTrump,” Parscale tweeted. “Nobody else. Not one person made a decision without their approval. Others just took credit for this family’s amazing ability. I’m done with all these lies. They will be embarrassed!”
Click to expand...

You need to look at the election map again just to refresh your nightmare. Lmao!
 
#16,634
#16,634
AirVol said:
You need to look at the election map again just to refresh your nightmare. Lmao!
Click to expand...

To see what? I'm sure Trump still carries around a copy. It's got colors and a lot more red than blue....Trump can simplemindedly process that and draw comforting yet inaccurate conclusions. I'm guessing you can as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#16,635
#16,635
Trump Says U.S. 'Not Going To Look Foolish As Long As I'm Here' | HuffPost

Asked if he would comply if special counsel Robert Mueller requested to speak with him as part of the investigation into whether Russia interfered with the 2016 election, Trump repeated his assertion that “there’s been no collusion” and said that “there’s been no crime.”

“It’s making our country look foolish,” the president said about the investigation, “and it’s not going to look foolish as long as I’m here.”
 
#16,636
#16,636
Mick said:
Trump Says U.S. 'Not Going To Look Foolish As Long As I'm Here' | HuffPost

Asked if he would comply if special counsel Robert Mueller requested to speak with him as part of the investigation into whether Russia interfered with the 2016 election, Trump repeated his assertion that “there’s been no collusion” and said that “there’s been no crime.”

“It’s making our country look foolish,” the president said about the investigation, “and it’s not going to look foolish as long as I’m here.”
Click to expand...

Well he is right. The investigation is making us look foolish
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#16,637
#16,637
hog88 said:
Well he is right. The investigation is making us look foolish
Click to expand...

The investigation is the only thing that gives the world hope that the American system can do the right thing. They know Trump can't. But I will agree that the fact we have to have one is embarrassing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#16,638
#16,638
Mick said:
The investigation is the only thing that gives the world hope that the American system can do the right thing. They know Trump can't. But I will agree that the fact we have to have one is embarrassing.
Click to expand...

The world wants us to have a feckless week kneed POTUS.
 
#16,641
#16,641
Mick said:
Trump Says U.S. 'Not Going To Look Foolish As Long As I'm Here' | HuffPost

Asked if he would comply if special counsel Robert Mueller requested to speak with him as part of the investigation into whether Russia interfered with the 2016 election, Trump repeated his assertion that “there’s been no collusion” and said that “there’s been no crime.”

“It’s making our country look foolish,” the president said about the investigation, “and it’s not going to look foolish as long as I’m here.”
Click to expand...

Mick, what crime are you accusing President Trump of committing? Be specific.
 
#16,642
#16,642
luthervol said:
To see what? I'm sure Trump still carries around a copy. It's got colors and a lot more red than blue....Trump can simplemindedly process that and draw comforting yet inaccurate conclusions. I'm guessing you can as well.
Click to expand...

Very interesting. What inaccurate conclusions?
 
#16,646
#16,646
BigOrangeTrain said:
Very interesting. What inaccurate conclusions?
Click to expand...

That he had an overwhelming victory.
That he was a beloved and popular choice.
That he had some type of mandate.
That the country wanted what he was offering.
That his support among the US populace mirrored the ratio of red to blue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#16,649
#16,649
Off on a tangent..............


Does a mandate really mean anything? It doesn’t seem to matter how or by what margin they’re elected. They all do what they want. What would anyone consider a mandate ?



But I digress
 
#16,650
#16,650
Orangeslice13 said:
Off on a tangent..............


Does a mandate really mean anything? It doesn’t seem to matter how or by what margin they’re elected. They all do what they want. What would anyone consider a mandate ?



But I digress
Click to expand...

You do digress.....I was simply stating how Trump misinterprets his beloved electoral college map, which was the question asked.

As for the tangent....."mandate" is ambiguous, it has more impact on the willingness of congress to play along.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top