JoyV

If so, surely you could itemize ANY constitutional violations he has made, let alone daily ones.

JoyV

You mean like giving $50 million to an enemy? (Obama) You mean like giving nuclear technical and materials assistance to an enemy? (Bill Clinton) You mean like agreeing to UN laws which are anti-constitutional? (Obama) You mean like agreeing to pay China, India and other countries who say in several years they MAY begin working on reducing their CO2 emissions? (Obama) You mean making trade deals which cost us trade deficits and US jobs? (Obama, GW Bush, and Obama)

eagleye13 Loc: Fl

Good examples JoyV;
"Interesting question. We have many people who fit the technical profile; "a troll is a person who starts quarrels or upsets people on the Internet to distract and sow discord by posting inflammatory and digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotions." Just yesterday I caused a person to go into meltdown....so, technically that individual could label me as a troll, although I had no intent of hurting his/her feelings."

BUT I do not think these are the examples Barracuda was referring to.

Cuda2020

No, like I mean stay on my threads TOPIC! You want to discuss this other crap create your own thread!

Cuda2020

How about three, from your buddies on FOX

Fox News' senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano warned that President Donald Trump had continued a "very dangerous trend" by violating the Constitution's "separation of powers" three times in the past week alone.

Napolitano outlined three recent directives from Trump and explained how they violated the Constitution.

The first, was the president's order to Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan to not purchase a missile defense system approved by Congress and instead use the funds to construct a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Second, the former judge cited Trump's order to send troops to secure the border, pointing out how it violated the separation of powers, because the president's oath does not allow military forces to be deployed to deal with domestic issues.

And Third Napolitano also argued that Trump's decision to impose 25 percent tariffs on Chinese goods was akin to levying a "national federal sales tax" on American consumers, which the president did not have power to do under the Constitution.

Cuda2020

Try again, he was sharp as a tack when he said Trump would be charged if not president, that he was NOT exonerated, his crooked executive branch is the only thing that is saving his crooked arse.

The ones who are dazed are the Trumper zombies as yourself... he can do no wrong...he can do no wrong...he can do no wrong. Yadda yadda yadda

Seth

SCOTUS disagrees with Napolitano on the first.

Sending troops to defend the border against what amounts to an invasion is within POTUS' purview: many of those coming across are Homeland security threats, and the executive branch has the authority to protect and defend us against enemies foreign and domestic: the border threat constitutes "foreign," which is in the military's purview.

The tariffs are imposed on a foreign country's exports to the U.S., Napolitano is reaching by associating it with taxation of Americans.

Rose42

Mueller sharp as a tack? No you’ll have to try again.

And weren’t you just telling someone to stop the personal attacks? You’re no different with this moniker than you were with your old. Lol

son of witless

Projection on your part. We are not Obama Zombies. Trump looks good, when compared to those attac king him.

amadjuster Loc: Texas Panhandle

Hey guys, which varieties of Mexican food do you prefer? There's Tex-Mex, New Mexican, Californian, and original. Also, do you prefer Cajun. or Creole? How about it.

Rose42

I like them all except Tex-Mex.

Michael Rich Loc: Lapine Oregon

Original Mexican, except for the manteca.

MR Mister Loc: Washington DC

Your points are your point of view. The President has the right to his opinion.
Lots of crap the Feds do is akin to BS, so live with it.

Cuda2020

Tell me where was I talking about the border? The thread is on indictments, not, where the POTUS went against constitutional law, that was a reference Joyv asked for.

Indictments, where the LIC have declared the president not to be subject to, which is total BS because they wor for and under the president as does the AG, so now our hands are tied aren't they, they have found yet another way to protect and put this corrupt president above the law.

Cuda2020

What you like to live with is a corrupt president that goes against our own constitution.