3
Sipow 3 points ago +3 / -0

Single mothers don't tend to be good at keeping kids out of the clutches of pedophiles. A stable family unit with a solid Christian man as head of the household is needed to protect the children.

2
Sipow 2 points ago +2 / -0

Of course. But fully depleted uranium refers to U238 with no amount of U235. Fully depleted does not mean non-radioactive.

2
Sipow 2 points ago +2 / -0

That’s actually not true.

Fully depleted uranium is all U238 with no amount of U235.

1
Sipow 1 point ago +1 / -0

There is no way that yes electoral delegates would choose to vote for the VP over the POTUS in that situation. Is that a theoretical possibility? Yes. Is it remotely realistic? No.

Either way, my point was that the statement “DeSantis cannot constitutionally be on the same ticket as Trump.” Is simply not true and a misunderstanding of the Constitution. I believe it is important to not spread misinformation about the Constitution, intentionally or otherwise.

2
Sipow 2 points ago +2 / -0

And since Trump is not a fugitive, the fourth ground for denial of extradition would be valid.

For reference - 18 USC 921 defines fugitive as “any person who has fled from any State to avoid prosecution for a crime or avoid giving testimony in any criminal proceeding.” Since Trump is currently in Florida and will not have fled NY to avoid prosecution, he is not a fugitive. There may be an arrest warrant in another state for him, but that doesn’t mean he is arrested here nor is he a fugitive.

4
Sipow 4 points ago +4 / -0

There is no restriction against VP and POTUS being from the same state.

There is a restriction against electors (electoral college delegates) voting for a POTUS and VP that are both from the same state as the elector.

Technically POTUS and VP are elected independently from each other. In practice the electors always vote for the pair of running mates - but there are actually two separate ballots.

What it would mean would be that Trump could win Florida for POTUS but DeSantis could not win for VP ( or vice versa). Florida would be the only state impacted this way. Theoretically it could lead to Trump winning POTUS and the dem VP pick winning VP.

6
Sipow 6 points ago +6 / -0

You are incorrect. There is nothing that stops the President and Vice President from being from the same state. This is a common misconception.

The Constitution states: “ The Electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; ”

The restriction is that no elector can vote for a President and Vice President that are both from the same state as the elector. That means a Florida electoral college delegate could not vote for Trump for President and DeSantis for Vice President. Electors from all other states could vote for both of them.

The danger would be that Trump could win Florida for President but DeSantis would not win Florida for Vice President. Election coverage and procedures currently hide the fact that President and Vice President are elected independently, not as a pair.

1
Sipow 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yep. Soros wants Meatball DeSantis to win.

2
Sipow 2 points ago +2 / -0

It is the Russian coat of arms.

The two-headed eagle goes back to the Mongols (at least in that area - as a symbol in general it goes back much further). It is associated with the concept of an Empire. Quite a few countries use it.

On its shield is St. George slaying a dragon.

3
Sipow 3 points ago +3 / -0

It takes a majority of those voting to pass. That is true for the election of the speaker or the motion to adjourn.

So if 216 vote to adjourn and 214 vote against it, the motion does pass. When the only options are yay or nay, the result will be one getting a majority or a tie.

The difference with the speaker vote is that there are more than two options so you can end up with no one getting a majority.

3
Sipow 3 points ago +3 / -0

Well Boebert kinda metaphorically cut off Kev's dick - so it fits.

6
Sipow 6 points ago +6 / -0

You are seriously missing the point of that song if you pull that line out of context and concentrate on it.

Even the very next line adds a lot more to the meaning:

“Well maybe not the Russian bear, maybe the Swedes”

The song is from the view of a worker who is a cog in the machine doing what he is told by his masters. John on the other hand sees the truth and wants to do something about it - but is constantly being told “not now John” we’ve gotta keep doing what we are told.

Or look at this part of the song…

“Not now John, we've got to get on with the film show.

Hollywood waits at the end of the rainbow.

Who cares what it's about as long as the kids go.”

Otherwise stated-

It is all a movie.

Hollywood is controlled by fags (rainbow).

They are grooming kids.

They knew what was going on 40 years ago and we’re trying to get the word out.

16
Sipow 16 points ago +16 / -0

It is a great movie.

It was a weird mix of scenes that could be funny or entertaining put into a seriously dark story. As I remember it got criticized for making light of serious things. But I think that is a misinterpretation of it. My take was how society as a whole can ignore serious issues by focusing on the entertainment or glorification factor. If you didn't come out of that movie feeling a little fucked up about things, something was off with you - or you were oblivious.

2
Sipow 2 points ago +5 / -3

Exactly. A new party is what is needed.

1
Sipow 1 point ago +1 / -0

I am sick of this bullshit offering them a chance to surrender. We are way beyond that. Annihilating the deep state is the only solution. No more offerings of a way out. No more offerings of surrender. It is a time for decisive action against these traitors.

10
Sipow 10 points ago +10 / -0

Lol. Has to be photoshopped. There is no way that cow could fit in Melania’s dress.

2
Sipow 2 points ago +2 / -0

Absolutely. I question the motivation of anyone saying otherwise.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›