Trump Violates Federal Law

Just to be clear, you are going on the record of saying the words of the President do not influence, correct?

 

Of course the words of the president are influential. That is his ****ing job.

 

Correction: Hard to prosecute a sitting president for merely stating an opinion.

 

How is it bordering on unconstitutional?

 

Because some of them have been killing law officers.

 

"progressives" violate the law, they only care about the law when it suites their agenda.

Trump should be even more forceful.

 

Are you serious? This is what your life has become? Get a hobby, or a job, but don't embarrass yourself by bringing this to the soapbox.

 

I like what the Cowboys did last night. They had their little kneeling session before the anthem, and then they stood for the anthem. If other professional sports follow suit, then this will have been worth it. The Cowboys got it right. There is a time and place for everything.

 

And this is the code the anti patriotic scumbags are breaking




36 U.S. Code § 301 - National anthem


a)Designation.—
The composition consisting of the words and music known as the Star-Spangled Banner is the national anthem.

(b)Conduct During Playing.—During a rendition of the national anthem—

(1) when the flag is displayed—

(A) individuals in uniform should give the military salute at the first note of the anthem and maintain that position until the last note;

(B) members of the Armed Forces and veterans who are present but not in uniform may render the military salute in the manner provided for individuals in uniform; and

(C) all other persons present should face the flag and stand at attention with their right hand over the heart, and men not in uniform, if applicable, should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart; and

(2) when the flag is not displayed, all present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed


.

 

Ya know people critize my spelling and grammar, but at least I know the definition of words ...


should
SHo͝od,SHəd/
verb
modal verb: should

1. 1.
   used to indicate obligation, duty, or correctness, typically when criticizing someone's actions.
   "he should have been careful"
   • indicating a desirable or expected state.
     "by now students should be able to read with a large degree of independence"
   • used to give or ask advice or suggestions.
     "you should go back to bed"
   • used to give advice.
     "I should hold out if I were you

.

 

He indicated the removal of rights or at a minimum retribution for using them.

 

Actually, I am dreaming. It was fun to speculate on that possibility.

Trump's tryst with the NFL could be background for a future attempt to invoke the 25th. He is getting that bad. When it comes to North Korea, Trump is totally irresponsible and that could prove disastrous.

But that is another subject.

 

Which rights and what retribution?

 

Show me an SAP document on Jared's or Ivanka's machine, and I will join in your chant. Show me thousands of messages deleted from the record, and I will be supportive of your position. Until then? Just a rather dumb comparison between apples and cheesecake...

 

How many of these athletes have killed law officers?

 

And what are the criminal penalties for not following that one?

 

They are both codes no? You tell me because you thought you were so clever yet failed to look up both.

 

They are by implication supporting the BLM movement, which has led some to do what I stated.

 

One has criminal penalties and the other doesn't. Violating one is a crime and the other is not.

Still to hard to understand? I could make a chart in crayon if you need me to.

 

So I can fairly say that any Rightwingers who protest in support of preserving Confederate statues are supporters of running over protestors with cars, right?

 

No one was verbally advocating for that before it happened. In the case of murdered police officers, there was verbal advocation prior to many of the occurrences.

 

Well, my guess is we're not going to see any of the above because the GOP won't have any Congressional hearings on this-Why,you ask--because it is no big deal----Unless of course, it was HILLARY-----just pointing out the hypocrisy----
Uh,sorry,it is not dumb----it is "what's good for the goose is good for the gander"---if you can't read between the lines on that-well then,guess your a trump fan---

 

Well, riddle me this. Is the GOP allowing Mueller's investigation to proceed? Tell me, why wasn't a similar person put in place to look into Hillary Clinton's illegal activities with her private email server, huh? I mean, the removal of some 30000 messages from the record, insecure housing of sensitive information, etc. While we're at it, why wasn't someone put in place to investigate the use of the IRS as a blunt instrument against conservative groups, hmmm? I suppose you of all people would appreciate the hypocrisy in all of this, right? I mean, if you're so concerned about maintaining a level playing field and all. How about you read between those lines?

 

My,my,my--Well, I don't think it is up to the GOP as far as "them" "letting" the Mueller investigation to proceed---
And what 'illegal' activities are you referring to? As far as I know,there wasn't any convictions--can you provide a link that says otherwise?
And also,I do believe at the time HILLARY was in office,there wasn't a law that stated one couldn't use a private e-mail,Colin Powell & Condi Rice both used private e-mail-So,there's that--
However,now that there is a statute kushner & Ivanka are violating it-----just saying----
Oh,boy here we go with the IRS saga again, but the good thing that came out of that is, the wording in the law got put back to where it should have been-however that being said,it was not a "blunt" instrument against conservative groups,talk about sour grapes ---
Riddle me this----Is there any "secure housing" anymore? mmmm---Why don't we ask the Russians or trump that question---

 

Not in the sense that was being discussed. Trump can exercise his right to free speech, and that can be influential, but no more or less than anyone else with a large following and access to various media platforms...