Get a life. This has gotten beyond pathetic and embarrassing for you.

#61 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Why would YOU care is "Jeff is a ----"?

I'm not Jeff. So. I don't really care.

So. why do u?

Do you not see the problem with mailing everybody a ballot whether it's requested or not?
#105 | POSTED BY BULLBRINGER

No.

The Soviets did not "invade" Poland. They liberated Poland." -DONNERBOY

I clarified that (post 24) and I apologize for the poor wording.

But I was trying to express and emphasize that the war looked very different from other countries. And history is told from a different perspective in Russia.

For more than 75 years now, the Russian people have been taught that World War II was essentially won by the Red Army alone.

While know that is not exactly true there is a measure of truth in it.

And someone destroyed the formatting in this thread which makes it difficult to follow.

California has got your backs.

Be advised that violations of California state law may be investigated by any state or local law enforcement agency, even if the potential violations involve federal agents or officers.

See e.g. Idaho v. Horiuchi (9th Cir. 2000) 215 F.3d 986, vacated as moot by Idaho v. Horiuchi (9th Cir. 2001) 266 F.3d 979.

And where the facts warrant it, state or local prosecutors may file charges against federal agents or officers for violations of state criminal laws.

See In re Neagle (1890) 135 U.S. 1; Wyoming v. Livingston (10th Cir. 2006) 443 F.3d 1211, 1222.

As stated by the United States Supreme Court, "the States possess primary authority for defining and enforcing the criminal law." Engle v. Isaac (1982) 456 U.S. 107, 128; see also U.S. v. Lopez (1995) 514 U.S. 549, 561 fn. 3.

The Court has observed that "the Constitution requires a distinction between what is truly national and what is truly local," and "[in] recognizing this fact we preserve one of the few principles that has been consistent since the [Commerce] Clause was adopted. The regulation and punishment of intrastate violence that is not directed at the instrumentalities, channels, or goods involved in interstate commerce has always been the province of the States."

U.S. v. Morrison (2000) 529 U.S. 598, 599, 617-618; see also Cohens v. I Virginia (1821) 6 Wheat. 264, 426, 428, 5 L.Ed. 257 (Marshall, C.J.) stating that Congress "has no general right
to punish murder committed within any of the States," and that it is "clear ... that congress cannot punish felonies generally").

Where potential criminal conduct occurs while a federal agent or officer is carrying out federal duties, joint-investigations and information sharing agreements continue to be best practices if feasible for investigating such instances. However, in light of the federal government's recent actions, it is important to recognize that the interests of the state are not subordinate to federal interests when it comes to regulating local crime. State and local law enforcement agencies maintain independent authority to investigate all potential violations of California state law even in instances where federal authorities may decline to cooperate.

Re 59

He did say you are a moron.

That pretty much covers it.

83% favor voter ID. This is not controversial

We also know that Background Checks Work and 90 Percent of Americans Support Them.

Why aren't we doing either?

Because Congress is ______. (Fill in the blank)

No one is trying to make sure someone doesnt vote.
#9 | Posted by boaz

I know of two US Citizens who have been illegally prevented from voting in the next election in violation of their civil rights.

So the question now is.. How many do I not know about?