|
Post by d5shark on Mar 4, 2020 9:56:55 GMT -8
He'll go back and cry into his billions of dollars.
|
|
|
Post by Fugazi on Mar 4, 2020 10:13:40 GMT -8
He'll go back and cry into his billions of dollars. One good thing is no more TV ads.
|
|
|
Post by cjelli on Mar 4, 2020 10:45:44 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by HOOCH2173 on Mar 4, 2020 10:45:58 GMT -8
He'll go back and cry into his billions of dollars. One good thing is no more TV ads. you would think, but no, they still run even after the damn election! So annoying!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Fugazi on Mar 4, 2020 13:24:08 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Fugazi on Mar 4, 2020 14:58:05 GMT -8
Whoa
Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts on Wednesday issued a highly unusual and forceful rebuke to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., calling his seemingly threatening remarks directed at Associate Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh "irresponsible" and "dangerous" -- prompting Schumer's office to slam Roberts and accuse him of bias.
The extraordinary back-and-forth began hours earlier at a pro-choice rally hosted by the Center for Reproductive Rights, when Schumer ominously singled out President Trump's two Supreme Court picks: "I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price!" Schumer warned. "You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions."
Roberts replied in his remarkable written statement, obtained by Fox News: "This morning, Senator Schumer spoke at a rally in front of the Supreme Court while a case was being argued inside. Senator Schumer referred to two Members of the Court by name and said he wanted to tell them that 'You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You will not know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.'"
Roberts continued: "Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous. All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter."
Schumer spokesman Justin Goodman quickly responded by accusing Roberts of bias in a statement to Fox News.
“Women’s health care rights are at stake and Americans from every corner of the country are in anguish about what the court might do to them," Goodman said. “Sen. Schumer’s comments were a reference to the political price Senate Republicans will pay for putting these justices on the court, and a warning that the justices will unleash a major grassroots movement on the issue of reproductive rights against the decision."
He added: “For Justice Roberts to follow the right wing’s deliberate misinterpretation of what Sen. Schumer said, while remaining silent when President Trump attacked Justices Sotomayor and Ginsberg last week, shows Justice Roberts does not just call balls and strikes.”
That was an apparent reference to Trump's call for those liberal justices to recuse themselves due to alleged bias.
Video of Schumer's remarks had quickly circulated on social media, with Republicans casting the comments as a clear threat against two sitting Supreme Court justices.
Schumer noted at the rally that an upcoming Supreme Court case, June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, is the first "major" abortion case since President Trump's court picks have been on the bench.
The dispute, dealing with restrictions over who can perform abortions, involves a Louisiana law similar to one in Texas that the court ruled unconstitutional in 2016, before either Trump justice was on the Supreme Court and before conservatives held a 5-4 majority.
Schumer did not explain what "price" this would be as far as the justices are concerned. But reached for comment, his office said in a statement to Fox News: "It’s a reference to the political price [Republicans] will pay for putting them on the court and a warning that the justices will unleash a major grassroots movement on the issue of reproductive rights against the decision."
During the rally, Schumer did go on to describe how Republican lawmakers could be impacted.
"We will tell President Trump and Senate Republicans who have stacked the court with right-wing ideologues that you’re gonna be gone in November, and you will never be able to do what you’re trying to do now ever, ever again!” he said. Earlier in his address, Schumer had accused Republican legislatures of "waging a war on women" and said reproductive rights are "under attack in a way we haven't seen in modern history."
The case before the court is part of a larger effort by red states to pass laws regulating abortion to test how supportive the new justices will be of precedents such as Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which formed the basis for abortion being legal.
The law in question requires abortion doctors in Louisiana to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital in case a patient experiences complications during or after a procedure. Those backing the law argue that it regulates abortion providers similarly to how other medical providers are regulated by the state while also ensuring doctors are competent. Opponents say that it is targeted at abortion providers with the goal of shutting them down, citing a 2016 case out of Texas in which the Supreme Court invalidated a very similar law.
The court's opinion in the 2016 case, Whole Women's Health v. Hellerstedt, said the law placed an undue burden on women seeking abortions because it would significantly reduce the number of available facilities in the state.
During Wednesday's oral arguments, Kavanaugh and Roberts questioned whether Lousiana might be different from Texas in terms of the practical effect the law would have.
"Assume all the doctors who currently perform abortions can obtain admitting privileges, could you say that the law still imposes an undue burden, even if there were no effect?" Kavanaugh asked.
Kamala Harris calls to impeach Kavanaugh one year after Blasey-Ford testimonyVideo Roberts suggested other states may have different standards that might be constitutional.
Gorsuch did not speak during the arguments.
Wednesday's statement was not the first time Roberts has felt compelled to issue an unusual public rebuke of a sitting officeholder. In 2018, Roberts defended the judiciary after Trump railed against what he called an "Obama judge."
“We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges,” Roberts said at the time, in a statement also released by the court’s public information office. “What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them.”
Roberts, writing on the eve of Thanksgiving, concluded: “That independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for.”
Trump quickly shot back: "Sorry Chief Justice John Roberts, but you do indeed have ‘Obama judges,' and they have a much different point of view than the people who are charged with the safety of our country.”
|
|
|
Post by carolinasharksfan on Mar 4, 2020 17:33:35 GMT -8
Bye, bye Bernie...and that means bye, bye President Trump. No way he beats Biden; the media will never let that happen. Hide your guns and wallets It looks like you're wrong on the first count; as for the other one, the guy just confused his wife and his sister. Wrong on the first count? So that means you think Bernie is going to comeback and beat Biden for the nomination? I’ve got a bridge for sale...
|
|
|
Post by carolinasharksfan on Mar 4, 2020 17:42:35 GMT -8
Whoa Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts on Wednesday issued a highly unusual and forceful rebuke to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., calling his seemingly threatening remarks directed at Associate Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh "irresponsible" and "dangerous" -- prompting Schumer's office to slam Roberts and accuse him of bias. The extraordinary back-and-forth began hours earlier at a pro-choice rally hosted by the Center for Reproductive Rights, when Schumer ominously singled out President Trump's two Supreme Court picks: "I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price!" Schumer warned. "You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions." Roberts replied in his remarkable written statement, obtained by Fox News: "This morning, Senator Schumer spoke at a rally in front of the Supreme Court while a case was being argued inside. Senator Schumer referred to two Members of the Court by name and said he wanted to tell them that 'You have released the whirlwind, and you will pay the price. You will not know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions.'" Roberts continued: "Justices know that criticism comes with the territory, but threatening statements of this sort from the highest levels of government are not only inappropriate, they are dangerous. All Members of the Court will continue to do their job, without fear or favor, from whatever quarter." Schumer spokesman Justin Goodman quickly responded by accusing Roberts of bias in a statement to Fox News. “Women’s health care rights are at stake and Americans from every corner of the country are in anguish about what the court might do to them," Goodman said. “Sen. Schumer’s comments were a reference to the political price Senate Republicans will pay for putting these justices on the court, and a warning that the justices will unleash a major grassroots movement on the issue of reproductive rights against the decision." He added: “For Justice Roberts to follow the right wing’s deliberate misinterpretation of what Sen. Schumer said, while remaining silent when President Trump attacked Justices Sotomayor and Ginsberg last week, shows Justice Roberts does not just call balls and strikes.” That was an apparent reference to Trump's call for those liberal justices to recuse themselves due to alleged bias. Video of Schumer's remarks had quickly circulated on social media, with Republicans casting the comments as a clear threat against two sitting Supreme Court justices. Schumer noted at the rally that an upcoming Supreme Court case, June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, is the first "major" abortion case since President Trump's court picks have been on the bench. The dispute, dealing with restrictions over who can perform abortions, involves a Louisiana law similar to one in Texas that the court ruled unconstitutional in 2016, before either Trump justice was on the Supreme Court and before conservatives held a 5-4 majority. Schumer did not explain what "price" this would be as far as the justices are concerned. But reached for comment, his office said in a statement to Fox News: "It’s a reference to the political price [Republicans] will pay for putting them on the court and a warning that the justices will unleash a major grassroots movement on the issue of reproductive rights against the decision." During the rally, Schumer did go on to describe how Republican lawmakers could be impacted. "We will tell President Trump and Senate Republicans who have stacked the court with right-wing ideologues that you’re gonna be gone in November, and you will never be able to do what you’re trying to do now ever, ever again!” he said. Earlier in his address, Schumer had accused Republican legislatures of "waging a war on women" and said reproductive rights are "under attack in a way we haven't seen in modern history." The case before the court is part of a larger effort by red states to pass laws regulating abortion to test how supportive the new justices will be of precedents such as Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which formed the basis for abortion being legal. The law in question requires abortion doctors in Louisiana to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital in case a patient experiences complications during or after a procedure. Those backing the law argue that it regulates abortion providers similarly to how other medical providers are regulated by the state while also ensuring doctors are competent. Opponents say that it is targeted at abortion providers with the goal of shutting them down, citing a 2016 case out of Texas in which the Supreme Court invalidated a very similar law. The court's opinion in the 2016 case, Whole Women's Health v. Hellerstedt, said the law placed an undue burden on women seeking abortions because it would significantly reduce the number of available facilities in the state. During Wednesday's oral arguments, Kavanaugh and Roberts questioned whether Lousiana might be different from Texas in terms of the practical effect the law would have. "Assume all the doctors who currently perform abortions can obtain admitting privileges, could you say that the law still imposes an undue burden, even if there were no effect?" Kavanaugh asked. Kamala Harris calls to impeach Kavanaugh one year after Blasey-Ford testimonyVideo Roberts suggested other states may have different standards that might be constitutional. Gorsuch did not speak during the arguments. Wednesday's statement was not the first time Roberts has felt compelled to issue an unusual public rebuke of a sitting officeholder. In 2018, Roberts defended the judiciary after Trump railed against what he called an "Obama judge." “We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges,” Roberts said at the time, in a statement also released by the court’s public information office. “What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them.” Roberts, writing on the eve of Thanksgiving, concluded: “That independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for.” Trump quickly shot back: "Sorry Chief Justice John Roberts, but you do indeed have ‘Obama judges,' and they have a much different point of view than the people who are charged with the safety of our country.” Chuck didn’t say “republicans” or “senators.” He named the judges specifically. I can’t say I’m surprised because the radical left will do anything to achieve their ends. Scary. Chuck’s staff comparing this to President Trumps criticism of Soto for her completely inappropriate statement is really out there.
|
|
|
Post by cjelli on Mar 4, 2020 17:44:58 GMT -8
It looks like you're wrong on the first count; as for the other one, the guy just confused his wife and his sister. Wrong on the first count? So that means you think Bernie is going to comeback and beat Biden for the nomination? I’ve got a bridge for sale... I think we're in for an exciting DNC meeting in Wisconsin, and until it, and during it Bernie is going to produce a lot of noise.
|
|
|
Post by carolinasharksfan on Mar 4, 2020 18:26:01 GMT -8
Wrong on the first count? So that means you think Bernie is going to comeback and beat Biden for the nomination? I’ve got a bridge for sale... I think we're in for an exciting DNC meeting in Wisconsin, and until it, and during it Bernie is going to produce a lot of noise. In 2016, once it was clear he wasn’t the one, he endorsed and campaigned for HRC...and that relationship was far more contentious than what he and Biden have. He’ll do the same this time.
|
|
|
Post by cjelli on Mar 4, 2020 19:23:47 GMT -8
There were parents that bore this creature. There were parents that brought it up. What kind of upbringing resulted in this?
|
|
|
Post by cjelli on Mar 4, 2020 21:10:59 GMT -8
I think we're in for an exciting DNC meeting in Wisconsin, and until it, and during it Bernie is going to produce a lot of noise. In 2016, once it was clear he wasn’t the one, he endorsed and campaigned for HRC...and that relationship was far more contentious than what he and Biden have. He’ll do the same this time. First, I am not sure he realizes he isn't the one. Second, regardless of November's outcome he has no chance in 2024. That may make some difference. Third, you should see the level of Twitter's engagement in Bernie's favor. I think 2/3 to 3/4 of the analytics community is pro-Bernie. That creates some kind of illusion.
I think he goes all the way to the convention. He may pick NY, WI, WA, OR (antifa bastion), NM by quite a margin.
|
|
|
Post by Fugazi on Mar 5, 2020 8:46:12 GMT -8
Howdious Elizabeth Warren
|
|
|
Post by danvilleshark on Mar 6, 2020 8:43:15 GMT -8
Some good math here:
|
|
|
Post by danvilleshark on Mar 6, 2020 8:44:25 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by danvilleshark on Mar 6, 2020 8:46:53 GMT -8
The so called community: Video captured a group of teenage boys kicking a 15-year-old girl and stealing her Air Jordan sneakers during a mugging in Brooklyn Thursday afternoon. (NYPD)
|
|
|
Post by danvilleshark on Mar 6, 2020 8:49:06 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by danvilleshark on Mar 6, 2020 9:04:21 GMT -8
There were parents that bore this creature. There were parents that brought it up. What kind of upbringing resulted in this? Are those her meds in her right hand?
|
|
|
Post by cjelli on Mar 6, 2020 21:00:17 GMT -8
The offender is a black Muslim woman (quadruple score on the woke scale)
This is reported by: * Algemeiner * The Jerusalem Post * The Blaze * International Business Times * Fox
Not reported by: * Washington Post * New York Times * CNN * CBS * ABC * MSNBC
|
|
|
Post by danvilleshark on Mar 7, 2020 10:16:30 GMT -8
The offender is a black Muslim woman (quadruple score on the woke scale)
This is reported by: * Algemeiner * The Jerusalem Post * The Blaze * International Business Times * Fox
Not reported by: * Washington Post * New York Times * CNN * CBS * ABC * MSNBC
The so called media.....
|
|
|
Post by danvilleshark on Mar 7, 2020 12:43:57 GMT -8
Long Island police say criminals from Chile are using a visa waiver program to enter the U.S. to burglarize affluent homes before flying back home.
Five members of one such Chilean burglary crew were charged Friday with breaking into 16 “Gold Coast” homes on the north shore of Long Island following their arrests a day earlier at a Bronx motel where they were found in possession of the loot, Nassau County police said.
Police Commissioner Patrick Ryder said the suspects were part of a crime ring sent to the U.S. on 90-day ESTA visas to rob homes.
"We believe all five of these individuals entered through the southwest border, they came up through California, they committed crimes in Beverly Hills in California and came out here to the New York area," Ryder told a news conference Friday, according to Long Island News 12.
ESTA (Electronic System for Travel Authorization) visas allow travel to the U.S for tourism or business purposes for up to 90 days without having to obtain a U.S. visa.
They were identifed as William Jesus Medel-Perez, 23; Amaro Valentino Rosas Rosas, 23; Juan Antonio Hernadez Rosas, 25; Bayron Felipe Cruz Palta, 26; and Fabian Lopez Catalan, 20.
At their court arraignment Friday, a prosecutor said the suspects admitted to arresting officers that their handler recruited them to burglarize New York homes and that the risk of jail was low because of the state’s new bail reform law, Newsday reported.
The law does away with bail for non-violent crimes.
Despite the law, the five suspects were detained as flight risks, the paper reported.
Ryder said they were in possession of false identification documents from Argentina.
Nassau police said they have arrested three Chilean burglary teams since December.
Two Chileans were arrested in December breaking into a home in affluent Saddle Rock, the paper reported. A judge released them and they fled the country.
Three other Chileans were arrested in January accused in a dozen burglaries. Two were jailed; one was released on electronic monitoring, according to the paper. Ryder told reporters burglaries in the county were up 75 percent since Jan. 1 and that the increase was due to the Chilean thieves.
|
|
|
Post by danvilleshark on Mar 7, 2020 18:00:39 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by danvilleshark on Mar 9, 2020 6:22:21 GMT -8
Guess what part of the story the so called media decided not to report on? www.yahoo.com/news/shocking-video-shows-york-city-155353433.htmlTwo videos posted on Facebook on Wednesday showed a New York City subway rider yelling at an Asian man, telling him to move out of his way, and eventually spraying a can of what appears to be Febreze at him. The NYPD is investigating the incident, according to the New York Post. Asian Americans have said they've been the victims of racist attacks because of the coronavirus outbreak that originated in China. The comment section for the win yet again: www.yahoo.com/news/shocking-video-shows-york-city-155353433.html
|
|
|
Post by cjelli on Mar 9, 2020 6:29:01 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by danvilleshark on Mar 9, 2020 6:56:36 GMT -8
She provided a demonstration. How kind.........
|
|
|
Post by danvilleshark on Mar 9, 2020 13:52:43 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by danvilleshark on Mar 9, 2020 13:53:40 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by danvilleshark on Mar 9, 2020 13:54:43 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by carolinasharksfan on Mar 9, 2020 17:35:27 GMT -8
She must be a politician...do what I say, not what I do
|
|
|
Post by mk391419 on Mar 9, 2020 18:33:00 GMT -8
|
|