tvc184

🤣🤣🤣 A candidate has some personal life issues and that equates to being “okay with” whatever it is? If you want to start throwing stones, okay. Do you want to start with Clinton having an affair in the Oval Office while the Secret Service plays lookout? Is the DNC okay with that? Your premise is silly. If I was moral guidance I will seek out a church, not a political candidate.

Now people will be complaining that they are pushing sugar and obesity on children…..

…. of course you probably realize that from your former life.

The year after Hurricane Ike, Port Arthur had 4 or 5 murders in January. I was the on scene supervisor on 3 of them. At that pace we were on schedule for about 100 per 100,000 people which is almost 20 times the national average. I think we had 3 or 4 the rest of the year. They come in spurts.

Back to the actual topic of the thread, listed below is an Emerson College poll from three weeks ago, Pacton and Cornyn are at 27% and 26% respectively. Hunt is at 17% and the rest undecided. That generally follows the trend of the last few months with a dead heat within the margin of error and a likely runoff. An interesting part of the poll however shows Cornyn beating Talarico by 3% and Crockett by 5%. Paxton shows a tie with both. That seems to address the negativity toward Paxton who carries baggage. Where Cornyn is seen as the RINO who doesn’t work an play well with others, he doesn’t have the corruption factor attached to him like Paxton. That could possibly win Paxton the primary but the more likely possibility of losing in the general election. [Hidden Content]

None of which addresses the topic of the thread or my comment. The thread is about Paxton v. Cornyn and my comment was about RINOs. All of the claimed RINOs almost always end up voting in lockstep with the party. Your response is, Orange Man Bad!! Stunning! I never saw that coming. 🤣

That’s a lot to unpack…… 🤔 The students have no right to walk out of class as free speech. If the students are at least 15 years old, they are not children under assault laws in Texas. At 15 years old, they lose their protection as children.

Not guilty of murder, but 10 years for the marijuana. Not knowing exactly what evidence they had at the trial, it looks like if you’re going to claim this was a drug deal gone bad and it was self-defense, you’ve pretty much got to admit to the drug deal.

Not guilty for Murder. [Hidden Content]

I agree completely of the Supreme Court will allow executive orders to do so If Trump can strip the states and cities from federal funding, that would be awesome. Let them put their money where their mouth is.

1. Yes. The Minnesota protests and others similar are not protected speech. They are criminal acts with some being a felony. People standing on the sidewalk and shouting their disapproval are not included but anyone that interferes with the law enforcement, any government operation or denying citizen access including blocking roads, trying to slow down government vehicles, etc., are committing a crime. 2. Agree however, the Fourth Amendment doesn’t take a lot to reach reasonable suspicion for a detention but it requires at least some facts and circumstances. I am not sure what ICE/CBP are using as justification for detentions. It would have to be on a case by case basis and I never see enough to make a decision one way or the other. Certainly a policy itself can be wrong such as instructing agents that reasonable suspicion is not required. The Supreme Court disagrees, 3. Agree. 4. Agree. 5. Agree. 6. Agree. Actually ties into 2. 7. Agree. 8. Agree however, the Supreme Court can rule against sanctuary policies of states or cities but they have no legislative authority so cannot set penalties or judgments. Their only recourse in my opinion is to rule that sanctuary policies or laws might violate the Supremacy Clause. There then has to be a USC section making it a criminal and/or civil offense. Any enforcement action would have to be prosecuted by the DOJ. Is there such a law that specifically makes sanctuary state governments or political subdivision sanctuary actions an offense? If there isn’t, Congress surely isn’t going to pass one. I agree that the children are being used as indoctrination pawns and it is despicable.

Notwithstanding whatever that document says, what does that have to do with with thread or my comment? It was a trick question. The answer is nothing. 🤣 I guess when you are ready to spit out some more rhetoric, the thread doesn’t matter.

She has no worry…… probably. The judge didn’t side with Trump or immigration enforcement. She merely noted that the appeals court has already ruled.

At least she was smart enough not to go with her own opinion and accept the precedent. From the article, the judge said that the Minnesota AG made a strong showing on shutting down the immigration operation… but noted that the appeals court has already ruled on a similar issue.

That’s the new mantra of the left. Throwing an F bomb on any scenario shows just how angry they are!! 🤣