mtutiger Posted January 8 Posted January 8 1 hour ago, ewsieg said: It's your basic conspiracy theory believer. Of course he's just trolling Canada, Mexico, and Denmark, he's doing that so those that want to stop him from doing good are distracted from the real work he's doing behind the scenes. There actually might be some truth to that (doing stuff behind the scenes), in fact that's the part I'm scared about. I don't know if there's any truth to that or not, but it's sort of beside the point in that we have assured ourselves yet another four years of inane arguments about what he means and doesn't mean whenever he opens his trap. Just not playing that game.... he should be held accountable for his words just like anyone else would be. 2 2 Quote
ewsieg Posted January 8 Posted January 8 3 hours ago, chasfh said: OK, I’ll bite: what good do “they” want to stop him from doing? Should have worded it differently. I wrote this portion as a statement I would expect from a MAGA person... "Of course he's just trolling Canada, Mexico, and Denmark, he's doing that so those that want to stop him from doing good are distracted from the real work he's doing behind the scenes." Those that believe he wants to annex Canada are going to believe he really wants to do that, until he doesn't, then you'll see that statement from them. Thus the 'conspiracy theory' type mentality. No matter what he does, his folks will claim it's some 4d chess move and not the obvious answer, that he's a ****ing twat. Quote
oblong Posted January 8 Posted January 8 It's to get people riled up and make them bitch and complain about his idiocy then they can say "see, you all have TDS" so that when he and his people actually do the crazy stuff and people get riled up and bitch and complain it gets lost. "The left, they never shut up" Quote
ewsieg Posted January 8 Posted January 8 7 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said: I hope he takes New Mexico from the Mexicans. <clears throat> You mean New America, right? Quote
Motown Bombers Posted January 8 Posted January 8 3 minutes ago, ewsieg said: <clears throat> You mean New America, right? Definitely. He will need to rename it. It's full of meth dealers in RVs, so he'll need to send them to Belize. Quote
Tigeraholic1 Posted January 8 Author Posted January 8 159 on the left voted against this common sense bill. I wonder how many will vote against it in the senate? https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/07/politics/laken-riley-act-house-vote-tally-dg/index.html The bill, known as the “Laken Riley Act,” would require the detention of undocumented migrants charged with theft or burglary. The legislation is named after a Georgia student who was killed last year while she was out for a run. It faces an uncertain future in the Senate. The House vote was 264 to 159, with 48 Democrats voting with Republicans in support. Quote
oblong Posted January 8 Posted January 8 I subscribe to the PJ O'Rourke theory (A conservative from the times when it actually meant something) that any bill or policy named after a person is probably bad bill. 1 Quote
mtutiger Posted January 8 Posted January 8 (edited) Does the incoming administration have a plan to address the looming property insurance crisis that being created vy severe climate events? (lol, rhetorical question) Edited January 8 by mtutiger Quote
CMRivdogs Posted January 8 Posted January 8 42 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: 159 on the left voted against this common sense bill. I wonder how many will vote against it in the senate? https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/07/politics/laken-riley-act-house-vote-tally-dg/index.html The bill, known as the “Laken Riley Act,” would require the detention of undocumented migrants charged with theft or burglary. The legislation is named after a Georgia student who was killed last year while she was out for a run. It faces an uncertain future in the Senate. The House vote was 264 to 159, with 48 Democrats voting with Republicans in support. The bill would hobble the executive branch’s ability to make immigration policy, whether a Democrat or Republican is in the White House. The bill guarantees states standing to sue the federal government over a breathtakingly wide array of immigration-related actions ranging from detention and visa policy to detention and release decisions in individual immigration cases. Federal agencies, under Democrat or Republican control, would face litigation at every turn from states governed by the opposing political party. Administrations would likely stop even trying to issue new immigration policies when faced with endless litigation over every single memo and regulation. https://www.nilc.org/articles/nilc-opposes-the-h-r-29-the-laken-riley-act/?utm_source=chatgpt.com 42 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: 159 on the left voted against this common sense bill. I wonder how many will vote against it in the senate? https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/07/politics/laken-riley-act-house-vote-tally-dg/index.html The bill, known as the “Laken Riley Act,” would require the detention of undocumented migrants charged with theft or burglary. The legislation is named after a Georgia student who was killed last year while she was out for a run. It faces an uncertain future in the Senate. The House vote was 264 to 159, with 48 Democrats voting with Republicans in support. The bill is a recipe for chaos in the federal courts – chaos the Constitution intended to avoid. The doctrine of “standing” is a constitutional doctrine (based on Article III’s requirement that a case or controversy exist for the federal courts to intervene) that guarantees courts are not wasting their time on disputes where there is no potential harm for the courts to ameliorate. Yet the Laken Riley Act provides blanket standing regardless of whether a state has any interest whatsoever in the case or policy being challenged. Without the ability to dismiss for lack of standing, the federal courts would immediately be drowning in immigration lawsuits. https://www.nilc.org/articles/nilc-opposes-the-h-r-29-the-laken-riley-act/?utm_source=chatgpt.com 1 Quote
CMRivdogs Posted January 8 Posted January 8 43 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: 159 on the left voted against this common sense bill. I wonder how many will vote against it in the senate? https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/07/politics/laken-riley-act-house-vote-tally-dg/index.html The bill, known as the “Laken Riley Act,” would require the detention of undocumented migrants charged with theft or burglary. The legislation is named after a Georgia student who was killed last year while she was out for a run. It faces an uncertain future in the Senate. The House vote was 264 to 159, with 48 Democrats voting with Republicans in support. The bill is duplicative – the federal government already has the authority to detain all people facing deportation proceedings. The bill amends the “mandatory detention” provision of federal immigration law to apply to undocumented people who are charged with, arrested for, or convicted of any theft-related offense. But the Department of Homeland Security already has statutory authority to detain any undocumented person facing deportation proceedings including those charged with a criminal offense. What the bill does is apply “mandatory detention,” requiring detention without any opportunity to even request release on bond. In practice, this means the bill would require the government to detain an undocumented mother arrested on charges of shoplifting diapers without even granting her a bond hearing, for the duration of her deportation proceedings. https://www.nilc.org/articles/nilc-opposes-the-h-r-29-the-laken-riley-act/?utm_source=chatgpt.com 1 Quote
CMRivdogs Posted January 8 Posted January 8 44 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: 159 on the left voted against this common sense bill. I wonder how many will vote against it in the senate? https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/07/politics/laken-riley-act-house-vote-tally-dg/index.html The bill, known as the “Laken Riley Act,” would require the detention of undocumented migrants charged with theft or burglary. The legislation is named after a Georgia student who was killed last year while she was out for a run. It faces an uncertain future in the Senate. The House vote was 264 to 159, with 48 Democrats voting with Republicans in support. Requiring no-bond detention solely on the basis of a charge or arrest raises serious due process concerns. Prolonged detention without access to an individualized bail or bond hearing is an extreme measure in American law. Nearly all people facing criminal charges in the criminal justice system are entitled to an individualized bond hearing, even on charges as serious as murder. This bill is particularly extreme because it applies mandatory immigration detention solely on the basis of an arrest or charge, risking the prolonged detention of people innocent of the charges brought against them. These provisions also exacerbate racial disparities because Black and Brown people are arrested at disproportionately high rates throughout the United States. https://www.nilc.org/articles/nilc-opposes-the-h-r-29-the-laken-riley-act/?utm_source=chatgpt.com 1 Quote
CMRivdogs Posted January 8 Posted January 8 45 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: 159 on the left voted against this common sense bill. I wonder how many will vote against it in the senate? https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/07/politics/laken-riley-act-house-vote-tally-dg/index.html The bill, known as the “Laken Riley Act,” would require the detention of undocumented migrants charged with theft or burglary. The legislation is named after a Georgia student who was killed last year while she was out for a run. It faces an uncertain future in the Senate. The House vote was 264 to 159, with 48 Democrats voting with Republicans in support. The bill would significantly disrupt prosecutors’ ability to proceed with criminal charges. Under this bill, immigration authorities would be required to take a person into immigration custody after a theft related arrest, even if a criminal judge found them to present no risk and released them on bail. The person would then be stuck in immigration detention with no ability to request release, even to attend their criminal court hearing on the underlying charges. Prosecutors already frequently face significant challenges in getting people transported from immigration custody to criminal court for ongoing proceedings; the bill would compound this problem greatly. https://www.nilc.org/articles/nilc-opposes-the-h-r-29-the-laken-riley-act/?utm_source=chatgpt.com Maybe Instead of passing laws maybe the Trumpublicans should enforce one's on the books Quote
CMRivdogs Posted January 8 Posted January 8 11 minutes ago, mtutiger said: Does the incoming administration have a plan to address the looming property insurance crisis that being created vy severe climate events? (lol, rhetorical question) They are too busy looking for other countries to invade Quote
Tigeraholic1 Posted January 8 Author Posted January 8 While due process applies, the specific procedures for immigration proceedings can differ for undocumented individuals compared to citizens, and certain restrictions may exist depending on the circumstances. Quote
Tigeraholic1 Posted January 8 Author Posted January 8 38 minutes ago, mtutiger said: Does the incoming administration have a plan to address the looming property insurance crisis that being created vy severe climate events? (lol, rhetorical question) Fema is telling folks that lost their homes in hurricane Helene they can't rebuild due to being in a flood plain. Cali and its environmental awareness should do the same and bring back the natural pacific coast line. Quote
mtutiger Posted January 8 Posted January 8 9 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: Fema is telling folks that lost their homes in hurricane Helene they can't rebuild due to being in a flood plain. Cali and its environmental awareness should do the same and bring back the natural pacific coast line. Translation: he has no plan. Thanks for confirming Quote
mtutiger Posted January 8 Posted January 8 (edited) Also love how certain folks ignore that climate change (and property insurance impacts) are equal opportunity and do not care about partisanship (see: Florida) Is it too much to expect an incoming administration to be able to see incoming crises and maybe have a plan to resolve them? Or have a plan to motivate them at least? Edited January 8 by mtutiger Quote
Tigeraholic1 Posted January 8 Author Posted January 8 (edited) 15 minutes ago, mtutiger said: Translation: he has no plan. Thanks for confirming I hope those houses in Malibu don't have any Harris/Walz signs hanging around.......I would hate for them to get overlooked for political reasons and all. Edited January 8 by Tigeraholic1 Quote
gehringer_2 Posted January 8 Posted January 8 13 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: Fema is telling folks that lost their homes in hurricane Helene they can't rebuild due to being in a flood plain. Cali and its environmental awareness should do the same and bring back the natural pacific coast line. The gov has been too lax about getting people out of flood plains since just about forever. People don't like it when it's finally acted on. OTOH - I don't see any connection to 'natural coastline' in any issue in CA. Drought alternating with atmospheric rivers, windstorms and the resulting fires and landslides are not confined to the coastline at all. Quote
Tigeraholic1 Posted January 8 Author Posted January 8 1 minute ago, gehringer_2 said: The gov has been too lax about getting people out of flood plains since just about forever. People don't like it when it's finally acted on. OTOH - I don't see any connection to 'natural coastline' in any issue in CA. Drought alternating with atmospheric rivers, windstorms and the resulting fires and landslides are not confined to the coastline at all. With global warming and rising sea levels it would not be wise to rebuild along this coast line. Just buy them out, pennies on the dollar like they are doing in the Carolinas and create nature preserves. Quote
gehringer_2 Posted January 8 Posted January 8 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said: With global warming and rising sea levels it would not be wise to rebuild along this coast line. Just buy them out, pennies on the dollar like they are doing in the Carolinas and create nature preserves. sea level is not much an issue in CA, it's not a low coastline. Ironically it's quite possible that climate change may end up benefiting CA in the form of a long term increase in rainfall, but nobody really knows, which is the risk. Increasing atmospheric energy will probably equate to more total rainfall globally but with possibly major changes in where rain falls. If you want to take a purely probabilistic view, if you live somewhere that is more desert like now, the odds of change increasing your rainfall are probably better than of it decreasing it further. Edited January 8 by gehringer_2 Quote
VegasTiger Posted January 8 Posted January 8 You can use critical thinking on a feces flinging chimp but odds are you'll just end uo covered in ****. 1 Quote
Tigeraholic1 Posted January 8 Author Posted January 8 37 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: sea level is not much an issue in CA, it's not a low coastline. Ironically it's quite possible that climate change may end up benefiting CA in the form of a long term increase in rainfall, but nobody really knows, which is the risk. Increasing atmospheric energy will probably equate to more total rainfall globally but with possibly major changes in where rain falls. If you want to take a purely probabilistic view, if you live somewhere that is more desert like now, the odds of change increasing your rainfall are probably better than of it decreasing it further. My buddy lives in Cerritos, CA he had to have three seperate permits to replace his existing overhead garage door last year. I can only imagine what red tape rebuilding up the Palisades will look like. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.