Comprehension and attention to details are not your strong suits. Sigh.
I was referring to “women”, not “white women”. Women voted against Trump 54-44 in 2024. While white women voted in favor of Trump their contribution was overwhelmed by non white women’s preference for Democrats.
So women did not help pull Trump across the line anywhere.
Your comment about the largest difference between Democrats and Republicans being the LGBT+ voters points out the weakness is your argument. While you are correct in the percentages within that group, it is a small part of the overall population. Women are the largest part and, as you pointed out, are more likely to vote than men. That makes them a very powerful voting group, unlike the LGBT group, and women prefer Democrats.
I am neither frustrated nor disappointed. I feel some projection going on there. As I said before, this is not blaming you or other women who voted for Trump. It is just pointing out how better the election results could be for all of us.
Face it - if women didn’t vote, the Senate, House, and state legislatures would be significantly more conservative.
Without overthinking it I would say that anything he (or anyone) could be compelled to testify about would have to be something that was guaranteed couldn’t be used against him.
And conversely, if it can be used against him then he can’t be compelled to testify about it.
So yes - I believe we agree on this.
I said: "If you are granted immunity you can not use the fifth amendment to not testify. That is well established."
You asked me: "Says who or what? Why do you think this is true? What laws or part of the Constitution says this?"
I was answering the question in that context.
The Immunity Act of 1954 explicitly codified that once given immunity a person may be compelled to testify. This was upheld in 1956 (Ullmann v United States) and later in 1973 (Kastigar v United States).
The Constitution does not grant the right to remain silent. That is a common misconception. It grants the right to not have to provide evidence in a case against your self.
And yes - the method of compelling is contempt charges. But the example you gave doesn’t make sense. If a person was facing treason charges then they could not be compelled to testify. If, on the other hand, they were given immunity for their testimony, thus no longer facing treason charges, then they could be compelled to testify.
To understand this you have to first look at what the fifth amendment actually says. It is commonly said that the fifth amendment provides the right to stay silent. This is not true. What it actually says is “nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself”.
The trap here is that if you testify, even if the current case is not against you, could that testimony be used against you in the future, violating your fifth amendment rights.
The Immunity Act of 1954 codified that if a person is granted immunity, then they may be compelled to testify or face contempt charges. This was upheld in 1956 by the Supreme Court in Ullmann v United States.
This was further clarified in Kastigar v United States (1972) the Supreme Court decided that the 5th amendment protections can be overcome by granting immunity from “use and derivative use” of their testimony.
It doesn’t eliminate property tax on commercial and rental properties. The counties can set the millage rates and will increase them to make up for the reduction elsewhere.
Also the proposals thus far have not eliminated school taxes which account for 40-50% of the property taxes.
They are also talking about increasing the state sales tax from 6% to 12% to offset the revenue.
There is a lot of smoke and mirrors going on here.
All in all I think this is very unlikely to pass the Florida legislature and less likely to pass the amendment vote with the required 60%.
It is being posted to make people here look like idiots. This goes on all the time. Some troll posts something that people want to hear. A bunch of people get excited and cheer it with no idea that it isn’t real. This crap should result in instant perma bans.
Iran started sending a military presence to the canal under Biden.
It was floating after he took a boxcutter to it.