Posts for: The Critical Critic
Jul 31, 2019 16:57:00 #
(Main)
JediKnight wrote:
Per the Constitution, individual states are provid... (show quote)
You guys don’t have to do any of it, it’s just your last fleeting attempt at a “gotcha” moment, ultimately irrelevant, but hey, your team hasn’t accomplished anything else so, why not, right? The funny thing is, your team will fail at this attempt also, just like all the others.
Jul 31, 2019 16:46:02 #
(Main)
Larai wrote:
RENO, Nev. (News 4 & Fox 11) — The owner of a ... (show quote)
Unfortunately I think you’re right. That’s usually what happens after these types of things. I just don’t know how gun dealers are supposed to be able to read the mind of a purchaser. Anyway, after I read the article I thought of you and our other member, Big Mike. I knew it wasn’t his dealership, but the coincidence got my attention.
Jul 31, 2019 15:56:39 #
(Main)
Larai wrote:
Did you happen to notice No F**g at the debates..a... (show quote)
Honestly my friend, I didn’t watch a single second of that debate, but I’m not surprised. And I agree, it does need to stop.
I meant to ask you (this is off topic but) that kid that did the shooting at the festival the other day, purchased the weapon in Fallon? Big Mike’s gun and ammo...
Jul 31, 2019 15:51:01 #
(Main)
Radiance3 wrote:
===============
Nobody is obligated to display her/his tax return, or to force a p**********l candidate to submit his/her tax return to anybody.
Nobody is obligated to display her/his tax return, or to force a p**********l candidate to submit his/her tax return to anybody.
I agree.
Quote:
Here is the Amendment IV of the Constitution.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Another OPP member had this same thing to say earlier on another thread. I just don’t understand how this applies. If a law is passed, generally the understanding is that the law is “just” and or “reasonable”. I think it would be hard to argue a law as passed, is considered unreasonable.
Jul 31, 2019 14:18:54 #
(Main)
proud republican wrote:
https://thefederalist.com/2017/03/10/no-states-dont-get-make-p**********l-candidates-release-tax-returns/?fbclid=IwAR2YR-4nfUIGoIqCeSB3yz2SeSSscYqfH2VwmyO1wulB5LrjbmQJciXIEhU
So Gavin Pukesome can kiss President's ASS!!!
So Gavin Pukesome can kiss President's ASS!!!
A lot of articles out there on this, and I think many of them are still getting this wrong. Gov. ‘Pukesom’s’ law makes no effort to ”change the qualifications for the office of the presidency.” (quoted from your article) His law is adding an additional requirement for a candidate to meet in order to get his/her name on the state b****t; that’s it. Similar to requiring a certain amount of signatures. And according e******n law, this appears to be within their right. See here:https://b****tpedia.org/B****t_access_for_p**********l_candidates
There is no attempt to change the wording of the constitutional requirements for the presidency or vice presidency.
Do I agree with the law? No. I think it’s a slippery slope, but it’s not an effort to change the Constitutional wording unilaterally.
Just my 2¢.
Jul 31, 2019 13:40:45 #
(Main)
Larry the Legend wrote:
Nip it in the bud, and there is no protesting and r**ts and 'goings on'.
Amen to that my friend.
Jul 31, 2019 13:38:59 #
(Main)
Larai wrote:
Thank you!.. In one of my posts I stated that the ... (show quote)
It is a sad thing. Funny thing, recently atheists lost a court battle trying to remove “In God We Trust” from our currency. Wondering when they’ll go after those same words, that are on the wall behind most judges in most courts across the nation. Sure they’ll get shot down there as well.
Cheers! And have a great day, ma’am.
Jul 31, 2019 13:32:25 #
(Main)
Larry the Legend wrote:
Okay, so he lets then preclude him unchallenged. How many more before its a full-blown c**p?
Well then that would set a pattern for e******n tampering and maybe discrimination. There would be a whole lot of protests going on.
Jul 31, 2019 13:22:12 #
(Main)
promilitary wrote:
Trump's name doesn't need to be printed on the b****t
It'll be written in.
It'll be written in.
That’s certainly an option. But in all seriousness, who cares if his name is on the b****t there anyway. In 2016 he only received a little more than 30% of the v**es. Lost that state and still won. And he’ll do it again in 2020.
Jul 31, 2019 13:18:01 #
(Main)
Larry the Legend wrote:
That's not a 'legal requirement' either. Trash it and walk away. They did it to me once, and even left my car seats sitting on the side of the road.
That’s messed up... doesn’t help to garner a favorable view of police officers either.
Jul 31, 2019 12:43:03 #
(Main)
Larry the Legend wrote:
Reminds me of the old cop 'gotcha' where they ask ... (show quote)
Lol so true! An excellent analogy. What gets me is, after they’re done, your vehicle is trashed with your belongings thrown everywhere, they should have to put everything back exactly as they found it.
Jul 31, 2019 12:21:55 #
(Main)
Larry the Legend wrote:
It might be a little difficult to actually 'seize' someone's tax returns. However, searching is another aspect of the 'fourth':
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..."
In my opinion. it is an unreasonable search, as there's no reasonable purpose for it beyond satisfying idle curiosity...
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures..."
In my opinion. it is an unreasonable search, as there's no reasonable purpose for it beyond satisfying idle curiosity...
A very interesting take, Larry. But now we’re getting into defining unreasonable. An argument could be made that a law passed, is a just or reasonable law, deeming said search, reasonable. I do like your mindset though.
Jul 31, 2019 12:01:55 #
(Main)
Larry the Legend wrote:
Surely you mean the fourth. This has nothing to do with freedom of speech or religion, unless you see a church in the IRS organization...
I was meaning freedom of association. It’s not the government’s concern with whom I do business, or how I earn my money, unless and until there’s an accusation of impropriety.
I’m not sure the fourth fits. They don’t want to seize the returns, they want the candidate to provide the returns by law. The candidate doesn’t have to if they don’t want to, however they will not be allowed on the b****t. But, I can almost see that as a form of coercion.
Jul 31, 2019 11:20:47 #
(Main)
byronglimish wrote:
My assumption is noted too.
None the less it will go to the Supreme Court.
None the less it will go to the Supreme Court.
I guess we’ll see... the only way I can see the court dismissing this is under the first amendment. It’s intrusive and unnecessary.
Jul 31, 2019 11:14:52 #
(Main)
Lonewolf wrote:
I'll bet he's broke he's bs his whole life is bs just about every business he run failed!
And to you, this somehow disqualifies him from the presidency....
Lol.
Yeah, he's terrible. He's had a total of 515 businesses and 11 of them have failed (a 98.64% success rate). And he became a billionaire in the process. I wish I was that unsuccessful...