4
aumone 4 points ago +4 / -0

The way I understand part of it is once you declare yourself a sovereign citizen you will lose ALL government benefits including what you paid into your Social Security and Medicare plans.

2
aumone 2 points ago +2 / -0

I doubt that it would be allowed to happen because the Democrats NEVER think things through. They are so stupid. It would take 5 minutes for the SC to rule the "act" as completely unconstitutional. Especially if, as many of us believe, he is the CIC!

3
aumone 3 points ago +3 / -0

Sure seems as though there are many "first time in our history" things happening in the past 3 years. Now more than ever in the last few months!

17
aumone 17 points ago +18 / -1

Why should he? Would it make a difference? I think not!

2
aumone 2 points ago +2 / -0

And no seeds! If everything is gone how would one farm without seeds?

2
aumone 2 points ago +2 / -0

I would LOVE to see the death penalty for them! But we need a majority of both the House and the Senate, I believe.

1
aumone 1 point ago +1 / -0

Okay, not to make the mods mad, but how in the name of the Almighty, can Trump end this type of crap?

1
aumone 1 point ago +1 / -0

So if he is not in the House does that give us a better ratio?

1
aumone 1 point ago +1 / -0

Without a doubt - he is a demon and obsessed as demons are. 😈

1
aumone 1 point ago +1 / -0

If my prayers are answered, the "election" will occur in the coming days/weeks. There is no way DJT will get the number of electoral votes in an election in Nov. with the blue state votes. He may get the popular vote, but not the electoral votes. He MUST get into office NOW! To make the changes needed. How it will happen? I do not know. Perhaps, GOD?

3
aumone 3 points ago +3 / -0

I will never understand the hype for a total eclipse!

4
aumone 4 points ago +4 / -0

Not sure what everyone expects but I did tell hubby, I am NOT filing our taxes until the eclipse is over.

Just in case.

2
aumone 2 points ago +2 / -0

Aumone winks back! 😉

1
aumone 1 point ago +1 / -0

When asked at any Doctor's office about guns I say I do not own any guns.

I don't.

Hubby does.

So I am not lying.

Do I have access to them? You betcha.

Do I know how to use them? You betcha.

2
aumone 2 points ago +2 / -0

So my love of crab and lobster is okay?

2
aumone 2 points ago +2 / -0

But does it say anything about fish?

1
aumone 1 point ago +3 / -2

When you say GOD laughs, I had to chuckle, also.

I look forward to Lent because I love seafood and hubby does not. So twice year we have crab legs and lobster.

I told hubby on Friday, "I feel so bad about being happy for eating lobster on Good Friday." And his response was classic. " I do not remember reading anywhere in any bible that God said to not eat meat on Friday's during lent."

He was so right. It appears to be a Vatican thing and not a true rule thing of GOD.

So we enjoyed our lobster and still loved GOD and JESUS!

6
aumone 6 points ago +6 / -0

Wouldn't it be interesting to see what these states would do if DJT bans EV mandates!

3
aumone 3 points ago +3 / -0

I have spent hours going over all the things that need to be fixed in order to get our Country back to a Republic.

I'm too tired to go over all the research I have done, and post it here but I will say this tonight.

If you list ALL the things that need to be abolished, reduced, changed; people who need to be arrested, tried, and jailed or executed you must keep in mind that all of it cannot be done if we follow the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

Why? Because we do NOT have the honest, law abiding justices and LEO's to achieve the end game. Too many of the illegal people involved in the corruption will have the illegal and corrupt justice system to free them...hence the Bill of Rights and the Constitution could not apply.

If you read all 10 Amendments you will see that as of today the Deep State has violated all of them against Conservatives. https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/billofrights

Quite simply with regards to the Constitution, just reading article 1 speaks to the election of Congress. Well, we all know that the elections have been rigged for decades, so what we can do to fix it without abiding by the Constitution is way above my research grade.

In reading the rest of it, we simply do not have time to follow the Constitution to the letter of the law. We do not have enough non-corrupt government entities/justices to fix the Country.

May I just interject here the SC Justice who doesn't know what a woman is and the ridiculous John Roberts who we all know is compromised. Do you think we would ever get a non-biased, honest, Constitutional vote from either of them? And who the hell knows how Amy would vote?

Is this where martial law becomes the law of the land? I don't know. I just research and read and come up with my own thoughts on what needs to be done.

4
aumone 4 points ago +4 / -0

I decided to ask Chat and his answer is pretty good.

The authority of a President to directly end electric vehicle (EV) mandates in states is limited. EV mandates are typically implemented through state-level regulations or legislation, and the power to enact or rescind such mandates primarily lies with state governments rather than the federal government.

However, a President could indirectly influence the situation through various means:

Executive Orders: While a President cannot directly overturn state laws or regulations, they can issue executive orders that may impact federal policies related to EVs, such as fuel efficiency standards or federal incentives for EV adoption.

Federal Funding: The President could influence federal funding allocations, grants, or incentives related to EVs, which might indirectly affect the implementation or continuation of state-level mandates.

Advocacy and Persuasion: Presidents often use their platform to advocate for certain policies or priorities. A President could publicly express opposition to state-level EV mandates and attempt to persuade state governments to reconsider or repeal them.

Legal Challenges: In some cases, the federal government may challenge state laws or regulations in court if they believe they conflict with federal law or constitutional principles. However, this approach would likely face significant legal hurdles and may not be successful.

Ultimately, while a President can exert influence on the broader conversation surrounding EV mandates, the ability to directly end such mandates in states is limited by the principles of federalism, which grant significant autonomy to state governments in matters of regulation and legislation.

5
aumone 5 points ago +5 / -0

Pretty sure!

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›