daz28 Posted February 12 Posted February 12 6 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: It was about your words. They were wrong. When dunking, it’s critical that one have their sh*t together. You failed miserably. Who were the last 2 Bills QB's? Some would say Allen and Tyrod. Others might say Tyrod and Rob Johnson. When claiming someone fails miserably, it's important to have your shizz together, and not look silly. I use maggat all the time, and my dunks come from the info, not the cuteness.
JDHillFan Posted February 12 Posted February 12 9 minutes ago, daz28 said: Others might say Tyrod and Rob Johnson. Who would say something so idiotic and why? This is an argument you are making in favor of yourself? That’s effing absurd. I’m genuinely sorry that you hit submit reply on this.
daz28 Posted February 12 Posted February 12 (edited) 4 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: Who would say something so idiotic and why? This is an argument you are making in favor of yourself? That’s effing absurd. I’m genuinely sorry that you hit submit reply on this. Oh, so that's the "PREVIOUS" two???🤣 btw, I made one random so you'd realize some things aren't worth bringing up if it makes zero impact on the point. I edited this, because I know you'd never figure that out, and I'd have to explain this after 10 more silly posts about it. Edited February 12 by daz28
JDHillFan Posted February 12 Posted February 12 8 minutes ago, daz28 said: Oh, so that's the "PREVIOUS" two???🤣 btw, I made one random so you'd realize some things aren't worth bringing up if it makes zero impact on the point. I edited this, because I know you'd never figure that out, and I'd have to explain this after 10 more silly posts about it. In your attempted dunk on gqp maggats about fraudulent spending you stated that dems had controlled only 4 of the last 16 sessions. All you had to do was say “I’m including this years budget that’s a work in progress and next year’s that is a fantasy at this point”. As it is, the numbers you put out qualify as the dreaded “disinformation”. That’s your fault. Just get it right next time. 1
daz28 Posted February 12 Posted February 12 1 minute ago, JDHillFan said: In your attempted dunk on gqp maggats about fraudulent spending you stated that dems had controlled only 4 of the last 16 sessions. All you had to do was say “I’m including this years budget that’s a work in progress and next year’s that is a fantasy at this point”. As it is, the numbers you put out qualify as the dreaded “disinformation”. That’s your fault. Just get it right next time. ...or don't get it wrong. I'll try to use previous when I should use previous from now on.
daz28 Posted February 12 Posted February 12 The last time USAID's budget was this high was under Ronald Reagan. Guarantee Ron's not the kind of guy to use corrupt funds.
daz28 Posted February 13 Posted February 13 12 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Roundy level stupidity on Fox! She probably meant considering which parts were actually useful, and that many of the contracts likely went to American businesses as well. They show you fools the $40B number, and you assume it's ALL BAD!!! Elawn said so!
Homelander Posted February 13 Posted February 13 The irony is striking: people on this site cheer for an NFL team in a high-poverty area while celebrating Elon Musk earning $8 million daily from taxpayer money for his "anti-corruption" work. 1
JDHillFan Posted February 13 Posted February 13 Just now, Homelander said: The irony is striking: people on this site cheer for an NFL team in a high-poverty area while celebrating Elon Musk earning $8 million daily from taxpayer money for his "anti-corruption" work. Now that people know he is making 8M/day for DOGE activities there will be outrage!! Thank you for bringing this to light! incredible work 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♀️🤦🏻 1
Pokebball Posted February 13 Posted February 13 2 minutes ago, Homelander said: The irony is striking: people on this site cheer for an NFL team in a high-poverty area while celebrating Elon Musk earning $8 million daily from taxpayer money for his "anti-corruption" work. politics =/= professional sports???
nedboy7 Posted February 13 Posted February 13 55 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Roundy level stupidity on Fox! Shes a moron. So yeah let’s agree the president then can do anything or appoint musk as vice president. lol.
Orlando Buffalo Posted February 13 Posted February 13 4 hours ago, nedboy7 said: You clearly don't get it. Yes. How does an autocrat get absolute power? Like this... JD Vance, the US vice-president, has been accused of threatening the US constitution after telling judges who have issued rulings temporarily blocking some of Donald Trump’s most contentious executive orders that they “aren’t allowed” to control the president’s “legitimate power”. “If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal,” he wrote. “If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that’s also illegal. Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.” In fact, article III of the US constitution confers a power known as judicial review, which gives federal judges the authority to rule on cases involving the president, as well as other branches of government. I understand your point, but this goes beyond a judicial review because he is now telling the president he has to do things that are undeniably political, which is not within the judges rights. If he wants to say that certain parameters have to be met that are definable that is one thing, this is the judge making the decision for the executive branch. 4 hours ago, daz28 said: No. He's going to use it for tax cuts for billionaires and corporations. That's already a known fact. You and I have very different concerns, that is evident from this comment. My concern is that the government is stealing money from me and giving to their friends, I don't worry about what a billionaire pays in taxes, I worry that the money they make is simply from government malfeasance. Personally I would prefer a national sales tax, because every time a billionaire bought a new $20 million jet they would give more tax money than I will for the next 20 years.
nedboy7 Posted February 13 Posted February 13 1 hour ago, Orlando Buffalo said: I understand your point, but this goes beyond a judicial review because he is now telling the president he has to do things that are undeniably political, which is not within the judges rights. If he wants to say that certain parameters have to be met that are definable that is one thing, this is the judge making the decision for the executive branch. You and I have very different concerns, that is evident from this comment. My concern is that the government is stealing money from me and giving to their friends, I don't worry about what a billionaire pays in taxes, I worry that the money they make is simply from government malfeasance. Personally I would prefer a national sales tax, because every time a billionaire bought a new $20 million jet they would give more tax money than I will for the next 20 years. The American Bar Association (ABA) issued a statement Tuesday citing concerns with the Trump administration’s comments condemning court orders that blocked some of the president’s executive actions. “These bold assertions, designed to intimidate judges by threatening removal if they do not rule the government’s way, cross the line. They create a risk to the physical security of judges and have no place in our society,” the ABA wrote. “There have also been suggestions that the executive branch should consider disobeying court orders. These statements threaten the very foundation of our constitutional system.” At some point you have to entertain the possibility that you’re not 100% correct on your perspective 1
Pokebball Posted February 13 Posted February 13 15 minutes ago, nedboy7 said: The American Bar Association (ABA) issued a statement Tuesday citing concerns with the Trump administration’s comments condemning court orders that blocked some of the president’s executive actions. “These bold assertions, designed to intimidate judges by threatening removal if they do not rule the government’s way, cross the line. They create a risk to the physical security of judges and have no place in our society,” the ABA wrote. “There have also been suggestions that the executive branch should consider disobeying court orders. These statements threaten the very foundation of our constitutional system.” At some point you have to entertain the possibility that you’re not 100% correct on your perspective Well, the partisan past of the judges are what they are 1 1
Orlando Buffalo Posted February 13 Posted February 13 6 hours ago, nedboy7 said: The American Bar Association (ABA) issued a statement Tuesday citing concerns with the Trump administration’s comments condemning court orders that blocked some of the president’s executive actions. “These bold assertions, designed to intimidate judges by threatening removal if they do not rule the government’s way, cross the line. They create a risk to the physical security of judges and have no place in our society,” the ABA wrote. “There have also been suggestions that the executive branch should consider disobeying court orders. These statements threaten the very foundation of our constitutional system.” At some point you have to entertain the possibility that you’re not 100% correct on your perspective I will ask it to you this way- if what the judge is doing is illegal and costing tax payers billions what is the proper response from a president? He did not threaten the judge with anything except impeachment, so the ABA is exaggerating the threat. 1
All_Pro_Bills Posted February 13 Posted February 13 1 hour ago, Orlando Buffalo said: I will ask it to you this way- if what the judge is doing is illegal and costing tax payers billions what is the proper response from a president? He did not threaten the judge with anything except impeachment, so the ABA is exaggerating the threat. An equivalency to these "threats" against the judicial might be threats to stack the Supreme Court with additional members if the court keeps ruling against the presiding administrations policies. Anyone remember the ABA raising concerns about that? No, right? Here's the bottom line. And I expect you'll agree. So let's not fool ourselves or pretend. Lots of politicians, the donor class, political party members of democrats and republicans, and a host of other hanger on'ers and vampires sucking the blood of the taxpayers and the US Treasury have been riding the gravy train of taxpayer funded graft and corrupt arrangements to feather their own nest and those of favored causes. These are the people that screwed around with Trump with impeachments and other bogus charges. Trump is going to end the funding of their lifestyles and destroy their ability to exert political power and control. Its a lifestyle they've achieved by working the political system and not producing anything of value of any kind of goods or services people might be willing to pay for. So they're going to push back to keep their free ride funded. My guess is they're going to be willing to tank the entire economy and social system in order to keep the current arrangements in place. And then blame Trump for it all. So be alert.
Recommended Posts