Eventually you might figure out why a smaller, more limited, Federal Government is a good idea.

#186 | Posted by visitor_

Says the sycophant for the most intrusive, anti-Constitution administration of our lifetimes...

If they were going to pick a face of this issue, maybe they should have gone with someone who wasn't handed their billions and their massive company when they were 30 simply for being a lucky birth...

So they'll continue to leech off the state while refusing to give anything back...

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

F*&^ them. Because $8.2 billion isn't enough and she's already gotten everything she wants from the state. No need to give back when vanity stands to gain.

Besides, that place sucks.

what does it take to finally push out a person who inherited and expanded a business built in California, raised her family there, and stayed through decades of upheaval?

Unmitigated vanity and greed. Especially for someone who was handed what they have.

Made all the richer that she's a fake Christian who puts bible verses on the food containers.

Like I said, f*&^ her. Good bye.

bell- google "supremacy clause"

Under the U.S. Constitution ratified treaties become federal law.

#169 | Posted by Alexandrit

I already spoon fed him that info.

He still doesn't get it.

Interestingly Rubio is treating this as law enforcement action citing the SDNY indictment. Essentially Maduro was "apprehended". I think it's a weak argument. Extradition law and all of that.

#157 | Posted by BellRinger

Weak argument? It's a nonexistent argument. We have no right to conduct "law enforcement" operations in other countries. Not without their explicit authorization.

Funny how MAGA can't stop blathering about borders and sovereignty when they want to bash illegals but suddenly all that doesn't matter when they want to kidnap a foreign head of state.

Also, most people learn when they're children that five wrongs don't make a right. Our long history of overt and clandestine regime changes used to be something people sneered at as just cause to not trust our government.

Democrats tried to bankrupt him, jail him, have his name removed from the voting ballots to effectively install Biden for a second term and were surprisingly blas about the assassination attempts. They were in possession of the files for 4 years. Given all of the other actions they took I find it almost impossible to believe that if the files had anything of substance they wouldn't have leaked it to the lapdog press.

#31 | Posted by BellRinger

Still blabbering this absolute bulls*&^ like it means something.

STFU idiot.

wow...speaking of dying on a hill.

No hill to die on here.

You have a tendency to posit things as true then continue arguing as if it is. Not in a joking or trolling way, but genuinely. Sometimes you're like a literate and better informed shrimpd*&^.

hurting that bad, are you?

#151 | Posted by eberly

Probably not as bad as those balls.

I agree but international law scholar effeteposer has declared the warrant itself illegal and a big problem.
So I'm confused to hell.......

#149 | Posted by eberly

Probably because you're arguing with us schmucks here instead of finding out real answers.

BTW ballwasher I already posted a link explaining all of this.

You were so far behind on basic civics that I had to quote the Constitution on the force of law of treaties and the conversation has been derailed since.

You're wrong. I don't know what garbage pile you read the s*&^ you're sh&rt(ng into the universe, but it's just poor logic masquerading as an argument.

Of course you did. You can't refute it and it's for one of two reasons that I can think of. It's either you don't understand the UN charter and our treaty obligations or you do but don't want to admit it because orange man bad. The veto power is PART of the charter, moron. Without it, no sane sovereign country with any global power would join the institution. You are once again demonstrating how hat your knowledge and intelligence is limited to studying pathogens and certain other scientific endeavors. When it comes to to things like economics, geopolitics and civics you are way out of your league. Stay in your lane, junior.

#143 | Posted by BellRinger

And there's the tell that you're out of gas and have nothing left but repeating the same stupid s*&^ over and over as if it changes anything.

Of course, the veto power is part of the charter, numbn*&^s. We wouldn't have it if it wasn't.

Nevermind. You've found your out to avoid criticizing Dear Leader so you're sticking to it.

Just as we all knew you would you pathetic turd.

If only that were true, then you'd stop following him around retorting with " orange ji^% off your chin, dips*&^" on every thread and every post.
But we all know you didn't stop reading. You're just left with "orange ji^% off your chin....." to respond with.

#139 | Posted by eberly

Only said that once. But I see you're dumb enough to die on the JeffJ hill today. Did the wife refuse to hand over the key for that little cage on your balls or something?

And I did stop reading. Outside of the three or so posts where he said 'I condemn this' or whatever exact wording he used to indicate supposed disagreement, he's done nothing but deflect and defend, just as we predicted he would. I highly doubt he opened that post with that gem only to turn around and actually criticize this action for real.

If Maduro has simply been available to arrest and we arrested him, would that be a violation of a law or treaty? We issued a warrant for his arrest years and years ago. Was that a violation?
Again, what is illegal/violation?
Try to avoid terms like "aggression" or "attacking" unless you can accurately define them.
#138 | Posted by eberly

If he was in our jurisdiction, then there wouldn't be a problem.

But you can't just bomb your way in to a foreign country, kidnap the head of state and take him back to your own jurisdiction to face trial.

No. The fact that we have veto power means it's not in violation of a treaty agreement.

LOL and I stopped reading right here.

Go wipe the spray tan off your nose and orange ji^% off your chin, dips*&^.

Duhhhhh I'm AgAInStSZ thIsZQ!!!

---- idiot.

Faulty premise. This wasn't illegal.

#4 | Posted by BellRinger

Sure thing, ballwasher.

You pathetic hack.

Awww look, the supposed BiThNisSmAnZS is desperately trying to ingratiate himself with a crows that laughs at him behind his back and thinks he's lower than whale s*&^.

In the end, our world will burn because a pathetic, demented old man sought validation from a crowd he never belonged to but desperately wanted to be an elite member of.

I think the Maduro kidnapping shows quite clearly that we should have zero faith that the military will resist illegal orders.

They will go along with anything they're told to do, and we need to be ready for that when they start patrolling our streets.

I hope this makes sense to you.

#129 | Posted by BellRinger

I got it the first time you stated it.

It's irrelevant.

That we can veto away acknowledgement of illegal action doesn't change the fact that the action is in violation of a treaty agreement we signed.

This is like saying a cop isn't guilty of prostitution and drug dealing because he buries the paperwork from his arrest in a prostitution sting.

The legality/illegality of an action is entirely independent of whether or not one can weasel their way out of consequences.

there isn't now nor has there ever been anything in the "Epstein Files" to implicate Trump in any wrong doing. However, it's not beyond Democrats to fabricate documents such as Dan Rather's Bush National Guard or Hillary's Steele Dossier (fancy word for file folder cause it sounds more legit).

#127 | Posted by visitor_

First statement is bulls*&^.

Second tells me you know that and am worried you'll have a bunch of pedo defender egg on your face.

This is a prime example of the insight the shot callers in this administration had - our system only works if the players act in good faith.

You only need to control a handful of powerful positions to neuter the entire process and, by default, our entire system of governance.

Attorney General is one of them. If your law enforcement mechanism simply refuses to operate or, worse, goes along with corruption, there isn't a damn thing that can be done about it.

Bondi is doing her job. It's just not the job the rest of us think she should be doing.

This isn't even in dispute. Not even by you.
Just stick to justifying it. It's fine.

#122 | Posted by eberly

Sure it is. I'm the one feeling it, you're the one spouting off about it.

It's disgust.

If you want to rationalize that away as "rage," go for it. I'm sure it's easier to justify that someone is unnecessarily "enraged" as opposed to simply disgusted by you.

let's actually drain the swamp.

#6 | Posted by kwrx25

Vote Trump out and send his minions packing.

That will clear out 90% of it.

The information is used to "protect the safety and security of our patrons and employees,"

Probably to a minor degree.

Mostly, though, I'm betting they'll be instituting situational pricing whereby you pay a different price than everyone else depending on whether they think they can get more or less from you for a given item.

The only step left is for ballwasher to say the Constitution is irrelevant because Trump isn't following it.

Of course, that will be said very sternly and will be intended to condemn this administration, not support or deflect for it as it sounds to everyone else...