Posted on 01/03/2016 9:31:09 AM PST by Lazamataz
Bears repeating.
Time’s a wastin’, and I agree with Travis’ asessment that the lights could very well go off on election day. Congress just gave Obama a full purse and has capitulated to any executive measures he is willing to take. We are on thin ice.
Setting fires on land that does not belong to you, especially during a drought, seems like a bad idea in principle.
Just ain’t the right one. That’s my gut. I have lots of friends I respect who agree.
If Trump wakes up what is left of Americans maybe. However, if Trump really becomes effective he will be shot like old Huey Long in the 1930’s.(I’m not a supporter of Huey Long. He drove the left crazy other than that fact he was a corrupt old time Southern politician.)
I wonder what Samuel Adams and the original Tea Partyiers would think about this. The BLM and EPA are instituting Agenda 21’s Stack and Pack ideology AT THIS TIME. The Fed and State Governments OWN enormous blocks of each and every state. As far as I can see, this is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, but it is part and parcel of The UN’s Agenda 21 push for “Sustainable living.” New World Order, anyone???????????????
I intend to write an editorial about Trump and the dangers he faces, as well.
I’d like to see Trump succeed in getting into office, and I bet a lot of that would be rolled back.
Is there a legal fund, and/or a group of Pro Bono lawyers set up to take this to SCOTUS?
“This is a fight for the court system,”
It’s already been litigated all the way to SCOTUS. Cert was denied.
L
What's so incoherent about "follow the constitution". What part don't you get?
What the reporter was doing, and you clearly fell for it, was putting Bundy on the spot to MAKE HIM APPEAR to be a nut. The reality is this was only a brief interview and the list of grievances and abuses of power would take hours to explain so he had to give the answer in as brief a statement as possible.
Follow the constitution is neither ambiguous or incoherent in any way.
Sir, that is a brilliant suggestion. We need Ammon to stand down, though, or it's all moot.
I look forward to your statements regarding Trump’s dangers.
When asked for exact specifics on how this can be unwound, a general principle is not the correct response. It makes a person look unreasonable. He should have been prepared with a series of bullet points.
Thanks
Really? And just WHO is going to pay the enormous costs of extended litigation in face of imminent actions against Americans by the government? Lawyers, of which there are far too many in America, are the only real winners in any confrontation. Want to cut the crap? Cut the number of lawyers in Washington!
OK but as for me I’m confrontational by nature.
Concord and Lexington,
two distinctly different battles.
Woven together welded the colonies together to utterly defeat the British on there March back to Boston and then became the ‘Call to Arm’s battle cry for the Revolutionary War.
We waited,
we took the Hits.
When We had the case,
We took the Victory.
I understand. I appreciate your agreement that perhaps it is time to hold our fire.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.