US US Politics General 2: Hope Edition - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

General Trump Banner.png

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Última edición por un moderador:
note that actual data on THAAD effectiveness is also incredibly valuable to the US, how do you measure that value?
The data will be invaluable when it comes to planning and building the golden dome, such as estimates for how many interceptors would be needed to destroy an incoming nuclear ballistic missile
 
Because, unlike moralfags who make everything about "WHAT ABOUT CHILDREN??!" some people have been around enough to know how online payment processors are a major battleground for freedom of access to all kinds of things, not JUST porn and there's no compartmentalizing it.

There's this site called "Kiwifarms". You might have heard of it? Anyways, they have almost been choked off the internet more than once because Troons and Puritanical Retards have managed to compel payment processors to not honor payments to it simply because they find the content objectionable.. If you can now legislate how payment services do business ON NO OTHER GROUNDS than moral objections, you've just kicked open the door for the next level of censorship.

Porn will continue to be everywhere on the internet, regardless if you have Age verification on Pornhub. There is no way to capture ALL porn and lock it away from Timmy Dipshit 12 yr old with an Ipad if the parents simply don't give a shit. No, I don't think kids should have free and unfettered access to porn, either.
Like I said, nobody will learn their fucking lesson on this until it's too late. The First Amendment is on its fucking deathbed thanks to these people.
 
Losing 2020- and January 6th- was the best thing that ever happened to Trump and his movement. Massive loyalty test, four years to regroup, Israel chimping out under Biden and not Trump, post-covid economic woes under Biden and not Trump, etc.

Regardless of what happens in the future, if you were trvsting the plan and refilling yuor popcvrn in mid 2021 you were a better political analyst than people with six figure degrees.
You're forgetting the best part; orange man will be the sitting president for America's 250th birthday.
 
Sotomayor seems to have the longest opinion of any of the justices. Dozens of pages decrying how the majority "only focuses on the injunctions and not the clear illegality of the executive order on birthright citizenship" grandstanding and delivering her opinion I now see why people call her retarded. Literally the case brought before them is relief from injunctions and whether the lower courts are over stepping their bounds. She literally just complains abought the merits of the actual birthright case itself. Really seems improper of an SC judge.
Libtard jurisprudence is that rules and process do not matter, only results matter. In libtard legal theory, if a traffic court in Scotland decrees the President of the United States must stop deporting illegal aliens from Eritrea, then that's a valid ruling because it accomplishes a libtard objective. If that very same court issued a ruling that was counter-libtard, then the libtrard judges would laugh at the very notion that a foreign municipal court presumed to bind the US government.
 
So, you believe we should in fact have militarized police forces who are able to cover their faces while policing the community? Do you know how anti-Western that sounds?
We've raised a generation of men who love to be beaten.
Anyone who doxxes them because they don’t want beaners being sent back should be shot
Cunny pfp man, stroking his little one incher and deciding who deserves to live or die from the comfort of his mother's home. Why don't you have a thread on this site?
 
Muslims have more rights in America than Americans, more rights in the UK than the British and more rights across the European Union than the Europeans.

Why did we even fight a war?
 
i still maintain the ultimate fix is to ban all minors from accessing the internet
Because, unlike moralfags who make everything about "WHAT ABOUT CHILDREN??!"
Why is it so hard for parents to grasp this concept? Parent your kids, but no they want to allocate that responsibility to the Gov't. Theres tools out there to secure and turn your home network into a hugbox for your kid, Its so easy. Plus your kid shouldnt be online to begin with
 
Because, unlike moralfags who make everything about "WHAT ABOUT CHILDREN??!" some people have been around enough to know how online payment processors are a major battleground for freedom of access to all kinds of things, not JUST porn and there's no compartmentalizing it.

There's this site called "Kiwifarms". You might have heard of it? Anyways, they have almost been choked off the internet more than once because Troons and Puritanical Retards have managed to compel payment processors to not honor payments to it simply because they find the content objectionable.. If you can now legislate how payment services do business ON NO OTHER GROUNDS than moral objections, you've just kicked open the door for the next level of censorship.

Porn will continue to be everywhere on the internet, regardless if you have Age verification on Pornhub. There is no way to capture ALL porn and lock it away from Timmy Dipshit 12 yr old with an Ipad if the parents simply don't give a shit. No, I don't think kids should have free and unfettered access to porn, either.
We have had 200 years of laws against obscenity and the distribution of pornographic content. These laws have never led to general prohibitions on books, general laws on political speech, general regulations on the distribution of speech, general laws against immoral speech, and so on. In other words, we have centuries of history showing that regulation of pornography does not lead ineluctably to aboloshing the First Amendment. You need a compelling argument for why this time is different.
 
Libtard jurisprudence is that rules and process do not matter, only results matter. In libtard legal theory, if a traffic court in Scotland decrees the President of the United States must stop deporting illegal aliens from Eritrea, then that's a valid ruling because it accomplishes a libtard objective. If that very same court issued a ruling that was counter-libtard, then the libtrard judges would laugh at the very notion that a foreign municipal court presumed to bind the US government.

Ah, my bad. I forgot that rules only apply to people they dont like. I was really hoping it was an exaggeration that Sotomayor and Jackson were partisan hacks, but fuck, they really are. All the conservative judges argued precedent and argued intent of the framers and the English law our courts were born from.

Meanwhile, Sotomayor and Jackson: REEEEEEEEE ORANGE MAN BAD, LE HECKIN DICTATOR, INJUNCTION NOW
 
We have had 200 years of laws against obscenity and the distribution of pornographic content. These laws have never led to general prohibitions on books, general laws on political speech, general regulations on the distribution of speech, general laws against immoral speech, and so on. In other words, we have centuries of history showing that regulation of pornography does not lead ineluctably to aboloshing the First Amendment. You need a compelling argument for why this time is different.
This isn't true. We had loose laws around "disturbing fiction" that would land people jail time or heavy fines.
 
We have had 200 years of laws against obscenity and the distribution of pornographic content. These laws have never led to general prohibitions on books, general laws on political speech, general regulations on the distribution of speech, general laws against immoral speech, and so on. In other words, we have centuries of history showing that regulation of pornography does not lead ineluctably to aboloshing the First Amendment. You need a compelling argument for why this time is different.
The Comstock Act
 
We have had 200 years of laws against obscenity and the distribution of pornographic content. These laws have never led to general prohibitions on books, general laws on political speech, general regulations on the distribution of speech, general laws against immoral speech, and so on. In other words, we have centuries of history showing that regulation of pornography does not lead ineluctably to aboloshing the First Amendment. You need a compelling argument for why this time is different.
Yes, and in those 200 years, said ban on porn was skirted by books and media. There was no shortage of pornographic literature in the Victorian era, and as far back as the latter half of the 1900s, they sold "Tijuana Bibles" which were literal porn comics.

The laws were on the books, but people skirted around them all the time, and that's not even discussing the fact that prostitution used to be a legal institution in the earlier years of the USA.

Also, they did eventually try to censor media, just not specifically porn; the Comics Code Authority went so far as to censor a lot of media that isn't porn, which led to comics being dominated by basic capeshit stories since they were palatable to children.
 
Sotomyer's opinion show how fucking little she actually knows about how the law should work.

She's bitching that the district judges were in the right because Trump's EO is evil. That's what it boils down too. She moans on and on about how what Trump is doing is bad and how the other Justices are overlooking that "fact". IE: I don't like Trump nor his policies but the legal facts are not on my side so lets go with feelings instead. The bog standard Lib approach to anything where facts aren't in their favor.

Bitch that's not what before the court, you Miss High and Mighty Sotomayer don't get to pick what is good and bad for the people of America. That is what elections are for. Your only role is to rule on whether or not a Law is permissible by the Constitution as it was written and how it pertains to it. That's it.

Before you was the issues whether or not district courts could over-rule the POTUS by way of issuing nation wide injuctions affects all of the country of which your dissent said nothing. Because we all know Libs like you love to rule from the bench and see yourself as the real honest and true power in the US so there was never a chance you were going to not agree with your fellow Libs. The path to hell is paved with good intentions and Sotomayer would chop down every tree in dight if it meant her side would win damned the long term conquences.

This cunt is an embarrassment to the SCOTUS even more then the She-boon and I can only begin to imagine the seething anger and hatred that the HNIC Thomas must have for her.

TLDR: Get fucked you Lib cucks, judges are not elected so they don't get to LARP as POTUS just because you have a fancy title and a black robe.
 
After reading some of the opinions issued, liberals are literally soviet era communists.
Republican majority: The State shouldn't have more control than the parent.
Lberal minority: The State should have control for whatever it deems neccessary.
 
Atrás
Top Abajo