California Lunacy Thread

#3,130
#3,130
dalton_vol said:
Lol, what "free" thinkers are you referring to? You understand that these protests are coordinated by pro-marxist, anti-israel groups. They pray for any reason to protest and burn. What do your "free" thinkers think about all these anti-americans burning cities?
Click to expand...
Step out of the echo chamber for while...........

Do you seek information to confirm your preconceived notions, or do you seek information from a spectrum and truly consider different angles?

I'm right and everyone else is wrong rarely earns a medal.
 
#3,131
#3,131
dalton_vol said:
The fact is the Democrat leaders and their supporters have no problem with illegal aliens killing and raping people. They don't care about the individual only the collective and they feel having all these illegal aliens help the collective. This is why socialism and communism killed millions of individuals over the decades. The individual is nothing it's all for the greater good, whatever that means
Click to expand...
Again, you can't truly at your core believe this. You're just caught up in the hyperbole of American political discourse. Where simple sound bites are shot like daggers and achieve nothing but having two sides screaming at each for the being the worst when they're both absolutely horrible.
 
#3,132
#3,132
At 1:30 PM West Coast time today, a CA federal court will hear Newsom's plea to essentially neuter Trump's federalist power grab.

Honestly, who knows what the judge will find. But, I've gotta back the screw-Trump ruling... The fireworks would be spectacular if the state of CA wins and Donnie's rightfully put back in his corner. That drunk Hedgseth would have to slither back into his bourbon barrel.

Even @hog88 is on board with this one, as much as it pains him.

State's rights, anyone?
 
#3,133
#3,133

How Kamala Harris is processing the LA Unrest​


Deliberations over her political future have collided with the world’s biggest news story unfolding in her backyard.

1749757052256.png
LOS ANGELES — Like many Angelenos, Kamala Harris has spent recent days glued to local TV news and doom-scrolling on the Apple News app.

Unlike most in the city, she’s also been making calls to her mayor, Karen Bass, and Gov. Gavin Newsom, a person close to her told Playbook.


Such is the odd duality of the former vice president’s state of affairs — a civilian who not long ago was the putative leader of the Democratic Party and who could soon be seeking that role again, either in another White House bid or by running for California governor. This will-she-or-won’t-she-phase, described by five people with knowledge of her activities, has now collided with the world’s biggest news story unfolding in her backyard.

 
#3,134
#3,134
MontyPython said:
At 1:30 PM West Coast time today, a CA federal court will hear Newsom's plea to essentially neuter Trump's federalist power grab.

Honestly, who knows what the judge will find. But, I've gotta back the screw-Trump ruling... The fireworks would be spectacular if CA wins and Donnie's rightfully put back in his corner.

Even @hog88 is on board with this one.

State's rights, anyone?
Click to expand...

Nope, I'm not on your side with this one. The commander in chief absolutely has the power to activate any state's NG at anytime, the question is what he is allowed to use them for.

If Newsom's argument is that Trump doesn't have the authority to activate the CA NG, then he's a bigger flucking idiot than I thought. If the argument is that Trump doesn't have the authority to use them for riot control he's probably correct.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#3,135
#3,135
Franklin Pierce said:

How Kamala Harris is processing the LA Unrest​


Deliberations over her political future have collided with the world’s biggest news story unfolding in her backyard.

View attachment 748370
LOS ANGELES — Like many Angelenos, Kamala Harris has spent recent days glued to local TV news and doom-scrolling on the Apple News app.

Unlike most in the city, she’s also been making calls to her mayor, Karen Bass, and Gov. Gavin Newsom, a person close to her told Playbook.


Such is the odd duality of the former vice president’s state of affairs — a civilian who not long ago was the putative leader of the Democratic Party and who could soon be seeking that role again, either in another White House bid or by running for California governor. This will-she-or-won’t-she-phase, described by five people with knowledge of her activities, has now collided with the world’s biggest news story unfolding in her backyard.

Click to expand...
She's done, her on the sideline while Newsome is fighting their fight. Newsome is the lefts star. Harris is damaged goods her political profile took a huge beating. She's done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and NEO
#3,136
#3,136
hog88 said:
Nope, I'm not on your side with this one. The commander in chief absolutely has the power to activate any state's NG at anytime, the question is what he is allowed to use them for.

If Newsom's argument is that Trump doesn't have the authority to activate the CA NG, then he's a bigger flucking idiot than I thought. If the argument is that Trump doesn't have the authority to use them for riot control he's probably correct.
Click to expand...
CA is solely attempting to limit any armed forces (NG and Marines) to protect federal property - not to engage in any local law enforcement actions.

They're right. Only if Trump proclaims an insurrection does the calculus change.

I think CA prevails... Probably.
 
#3,137
#3,137
MontyPython said:
CA is solely attempting to limit any armed forces (NG and Marines) to protect federal property - not to engage in any local law enforcement actions.

They're right. Only if Trump proclaims an insurrection does the calculus change.

I think CA prevails... Probably.
Click to expand...

If that is the basis of the court hearing then yes, the state should win.
 
#3,138
#3,138
MontyPython said:
CA is solely attempting to limit any armed forces (NG and Marines) to protect federal property - not to engage in any local law enforcement actions.

They're right. Only if Trump proclaims an insurrection does the calculus change.

I think CA prevails... Probably.
Click to expand...

Looks like CA is suing on the basis that Trump doesn't have the authority to activate the NG. Dumb lawsuit.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta said Monday that the state seeks an injunction to halt the president’s 60-day federalization of National Guard troops. The president deployed the troops — typically under joint state and federal control — without the approval from state officials by invoking a statute in federal law that lists three specific conditions when the National Guard can come under federal authority. Trump also authorized on Monday the mobilization of 700 active-duty Marines in L.A.
Click to expand...

CA files 24th lawsuit against Trump over National Guard deployment
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and whodeycin85
#3,139
#3,139
MontyPython said:
At 1:30 PM West Coast time today, a CA federal court will hear Newsom's plea to essentially neuter Trump's federalist power grab.

Honestly, who knows what the judge will find. But, I've gotta back the screw-Trump ruling... The fireworks would be spectacular if the state of CA wins and Donnie's rightfully put back in his corner. That drunk Hedgseth would have to slither back into his bourbon barrel.

Even @hog88 is on board with this one, as much as it pains him.

State's rights, anyone?
Click to expand...
Let's pretend this succeeds. What future precedent does this set? One could then argue that the Texas or Arizona governors could call out the National Guard to shut down the border for future illegal crossers, in which their will be many during a future dem administration because they hate America.

Edit: If this is to make sure the NG is there to only protect federal property then like has already been then my argument wouldn't be valid. If this is to remove the NG entirely by de-federalizing then that is the argument I'm making.
 
#3,141
#3,141
norrislakevol said:
Let's pretend this succeeds. What future precedent does this set? One could then argue that the Texas or Arizona governors could call out the National Guard to shut down the border for future illegal crossers, in which their will be many during a future dem administration because they hate America.

Edit: If this is to make sure the NG is there to only protect federal property then like has already been then my argument wouldn't be valid. If this is to remove the NG entirely by de-federalizing then that is the argument I'm making.
Click to expand...
I think you got the situation all vice-versa.
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol
#3,142
#3,142
#3,144
#3,144
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens, marcusluvsvols, dalton_vol and 2 others
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top