Not if you kill 500,000 bosses.

Hey Sushy, you're needed for some Sebastian Gorka updates in alpha!

Gorka storms out of panel discussion at Georgetown on Monday after questions on his ties to Nazi group

I'm not allowed in alpha anymore dude. The snowflakes got too upset at my presence there.

LOOOOOL

Well, allow me to fill you in:

Old news goofy. I've heard it all before. Doesn't prove anything.

Let me know when you come up with some conclusive evidence OK.

Welcome to the clubhouse, sushi!

Hey pdox, have you reconsidered your sanctuary city stance at all yet?

This NYT article has more about the judge's order: https://nyti.ms/2q2kjiC
- in addition to what I wrote above the judge said the executive can't control spending, Congress does (I missed that in my NMDAA comparison, one of the reasons it was allowed was the Spending Clause which doesn't apply here)
- the judge cited the Sebelius case too, which is one of the cases mentioned by the Atlantic article I linked above

Trump, for his part, has the same infantile "See you in court" response here as he did to the Muslim ban lolol

I know goofy and bert (& a few other liberals) love posting washington posts articles ITT. We are almost to the point that I can say there hasn't been a WaPo article written that I haven't seen in the past 3 months and I think we are past the point where the mods need to ask these two if they work for WaPo and are spamming that trash to increase views.

Either way, I wanted to post an article from WaPo that you all may find interesting.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.6d0fb9923837

btw if the software even lets you read posts from the main forum anymore you'll note that just yesterday we were discussing what a moron Cillizza is. I tend to avoid opinion pieces on top of that. Pretty bad trolling attempt.

As we approach the 100 day marker conservatives still just want to talk about the election. I guess that despite holding all 3 branches of government, it's still the last time they remember winning anything.

so for pretty much no reason at all, trump is gonna drive up the prices of new homes and cost the country over 8k jobs.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/25/news...an-lumber-tax/

National Association of Home Builders-
and his defenders dont even deny it. they just say that 3k isnt much and that there are plenty of jobs still.

Mistaken. I do.

Wrong. I didn't have time yesterday. Prolly won't today either, maybe not til the weekend. But that means I said F that noise, I ain't learning ****?

Sounds like you just want to make fun of someone you disagree with.

Thanks, but, no, I haven't. Hopefully I'll have more time this weekend.

That puts you on stronger ground than Trump's EO, which discusses but doesn't define what a "sanctuary jurisdiction" is and basically allows DHS to decide.

9th Circuit seems super unlikely to reverse this, probably goes to SCOTUS and the states rights concerns probably win out, imo. (assuming it doesn't go the way of the Muslim ban where Trump's DOJ seems to have just given up on defending it)

To be fair the only reason Trump is charging the tariff is because he's an idiot that doesn't understand the economy or the effects of what he is proposing.




EDIT: I forgot I'm supposed to be die hard Trump so I retract this post and want to remind everyone Trump = GOATrump.

Just like almost every president before him Trump is up there mashing buttons when it comes to the economy. I was really hoping he was different from past presidents and he was just talking up the bad trade deals as a way to negotiate better deals. The possibility of a trade war with any major player is scary enough for me to want to ask Trump to stop talking about trade all together. In saying this the chance he starts a real trade war that matters is somewhere around 1%.

I haven't done any in-depth reading on the Trump tax plan yet, but this is a pretty lol start

Hot off the press: Trump admin drafting executive order to withdraw U.S. from NAFTA

Canada and Mexico are our 2nd and 3rd largest trading partners, respectively. lol mickey, lol Trump supporters, this is what you voted for

I'm not sure an "in-depth" reading of a 1 page document is really possible :P

It appears to be similar enough to his campaign proposal, but there's not enough detail to get very concrete with, I wouldn't think. Like the campaign proposal it seems likely enough that it would almost entirely benefit the very wealthy and blow a huge hole in the deficit, while possibly even raising taxes on some swath of the middle class.

I hadn't even seen the document yet when I wrote that, didn't realize how scant the details are that the administration has released so far. "There will be 3 income brackets: 10%, 25%, 35%" and don't even say what the cutoffs are, lol great tax plan!

And yeah, I think I figured out during the campaign that Trump's tax plan would raise my taxes slightly.

I'll be like awval levels of salty if Trump raises my taxes, ldo :P

Then the Comey letter happened, etc etc, yada yada yada, MAGAbitches.


p.s. That was you idea of a sweet-ass sick-ass zinger?
Good God man have some self-respect.


p.p.s. Ahahahah I was about to ask you if you know what 'approaching zero' means but you're The World's Greatest Accountant, of course you know.

You said the cities are breaking the law. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.


You didn't connect how those two statements of mine were related. You're barely ****ing literate. I know that makes you the smart one in your group (The Wil Maxim) but this is Real Life.

A pretty small group of people have a grasp on the legal feasibility of that. No one on the planet knows exactly what the economic consequences would be under different withdrawal scenarios. It could conceivably be a good thing, but no one can know with any decent level of certainty.

You don't think it is funny that a semi-respected new sources thought trump was such a dog?

Thank you.