tvc184

I am sure the Facebook fact checkers came in and declared her as putting out false information.….

Yep. Freedom of information act does not mean you can walk into a government agency and walk out with the information. Any person can ask for required paperwork, recording, etc., (everything is not open to discovery) but the government entity has 10 days to respond.

School at any level doesn’t make a person intelligent. School gives a person knowledge. It is like the difference between ignorance and stupidity.

I think that was B13’s intent on this page. Not necessarily specifically Crime but anything local. I know crime could keep it busy…..

To maybe explain it further; states do not enforce federal law, the federal government does. That is why you have federal special agents such as FBI, DEA, ATFetc., and the United States Attorney offices. The federals prosecute what they want under their law and the state prosecutes what it wants under state law. One does not generally cross into the other. If Colorado does not want to prosecute people under Colorado state law for possession of marijuana, great. The federal government still retains the right under their law to prosecute. In most cases, as a state police officer I cannot enforce federal laws and federal agents cannot enforce state laws. An FBI agent has no authority in Texas to pull you over for speeding yet I can pull you over for a license plate light out at night and put you in jail and tow your car. It is not because a state police officer has more authority than a federal agent but he simply enforcing the laws of his state whereas the federal agent is enforcing the laws of the United States. That is the dual sovereignty. So….. The federal law says that we have an income tax and you will pay it. The state police do not enforce that as it is not a state law. The federal government has the authority to enforce that laws. The state of Texas has no authority to tell its citizens, don’t pay attention to federal law. Clear as mud?

No. It is not even in the same ballpark. Both the state and federal governments independently have the right to make criminal and civil laws. The supremacy clause of the Constitution only comes into play if a federal law says basically “you will comply with this”. Both governments have the right independently to prosecute or sue. It is called dual sovereignty.

Yep, it is good to be the king.

I don’t think legally there is a difference. Politically there is. I have not taken the vaccine and do not plan on it. I think that it certainly is effective to some extent and it also poses a danger to many people. I am more worried about the danger it poses to people regardless of how effective it may be. But I don’t see where that negates federal authority. I do think what OSHA did is unconstitutional and or doesn’t follow federal law. I just don’t think under the constitution you can separate statutory authority whether under OSHA or income tax under Article VI.

I think the whole concept is pretty scary.

I would actually venture to guess that the majority of democratic voters are what we would call moderate or not extreme left. The problem is that they are so eaten up with party affiliation, just like pulling for your favorite football team, but they are blinded to what is happening. There was a time going back to the Great Depression that the Democrats claimed to be the party of the “working man”. They were for unionization and the Republicans were for a big business and not having forced unions. My best friend growing up and his family were absolutely Democrats and I heard his father say how could a working man ever vote for a Republican. I think that much of that thought continues through this day even with evidence to the contrary. I think the problem is not what the average working democrat believes but what he is told is the truth. Like in the Wizard of Oz, ignore the man behind the curtain….

And I am not against what he said, I just don’t think it’s legal.

If I understood it correctly, I believe Prather said that Abbott’s executive orders or mandates were not effective. He was not complaining about the Texas governor right to issue such mandates. I believe he is referring to the fact that the governor issued an executive order saying that people would not lose their job due to not being vaccinated. That was not complaining about the governor, it was saying that it was ineffective because the Biden administration, through himself, CDC, OSHA, etc., has issued mandates to the contrary of the Texas governor. Prather wants a special legislative session for the Texas Congress to pass a law that says federal mandates are not allowed in Texas. Basically the governor mandate is not good enough, it needs a full weight of the Texas legislature. That however contradicts Article VI of the United States Constitution.

People have long since said that 1984 is upon us. That was because of technology such as facial recognition, heat imaging that can track movement, license plate readers etc. That is not 1984, that is really progress. What is going on now is the beginning of 1984. It is becoming Newspeak that will replaced oldspeak and blackwhite will (currently) be used frequently. I am fairly certain that we are currently seeing miniplenty and recdep.

Jim Jordan should probably be the next Speaker of the House but he will not be and I don’t think he wants it.

That sounds good but if you read the title it seems like he is talking about mandates issued by the Texas governor. , Watching the video we see that he was talking about mandates on the United States law. The problem is that it would be a conflict with Article VI of the United States Constitution. He had just as well call a special session and say people living in Texas no longer have to pay federal income tax.

One strike called for not being in the box (one foot outside of the line) and out if he his it? Not an umpire but coached Little League for a few years… about 40 years ago. Just taking a wild guess for fun.

I typed something similar last night but never posted it. YEAR: 2075, the children who were in 1st grade at WOS in 2022 are now grandparents and… WOSHS is looking for a new head football coach. There is concern in the community however because Dan Hooks scheme might change if an “outsider” is brought in. But…. wasn’t Hooks an outsider?

The fair way to do it is to eliminate the property tax and go with an income tax. That thought however it’s repugnant to most people, especially those who do not own property. I believe the Texas Constitution forbids an income tax so it’s not merely a matter of enacting a law, the Constitution have to be changed. That would take an election of the people and I can just about guarantee that people will not want any income tax and again, especially those who do not own properties.

About?

It is highly unlikely. Percentage wise it was not that many people and generally speaking, the homicide rates dropped after Katrina and then Rita. The other major crimes have remain virtually unchanged from 2006 to today.

Because homicide is the most violent it is what everybody thinks about when mentioning crime, not shoplifting at Walmart. However….. If you read my post I mentioned all major crime. Beaumont has a 200% higher than the national average and Port Arthur has a home 150% higher than the national average. That is not homicide but burglaries, sexual assaults, arson, etc.

I started to make a comment about that possibility…….. As in, what was the motive?

I have to wonder at the level of stupidity. It isn’t because some teenagers got something to drink. OMG!! Shocking!! Uhhhhhh……. No. For two people in their position however, what were they thinking? Let’s see, surely these teenagers will keep their mouths’ shut and not talk to anyone about what’s happening and thereby causing us to lose our careers and become criminals. It should be a crime just to be that stupid……. They should have been charged with two crimes. One for giving alcohol to minors and a second for being an almost unbelievable level of stupidity.

Apparently it is not widely accepted because that half of the argument all along. If a person had Covid and it was confirmed by both diagnoses and antibodies, why should a vaccine be forced to keep a job? I am against the force 100% anyway but the federal government makes no exception for a person that has had Covid and recovered. So if they inject you with a created serum so that your body will produce antibodies to fight off the disease, why are the same antibodies naturally created no good? It sure gives a strong argument that it is about people control, not disease survivability.

Insurrection in this case is hard to prove because it didn’t exist. The analogy makes no sense because both examples given are the same crime which is a class C misdemeanor or the equivalent of a traffic citation.