Don gets a pass...........for everything. One could argue it began here.

Trump tweeted this morning, “So interesting to see ‘Progressive’ Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came."

What the hell is he talking about? Wow! He is really losing it. I know he acts like an idiot to draw attention to himself, but this is ridiculous.

Trump appears to have a mental problem.

I usually ignore the radical left wing represented by beginners, but this example of enormous stupidity on the part of our President caught my attention.

 

Well, for one thing, Trump has absolutely nothing to do with the low unemployment.

 

Well, I guess Obama had nothing to do with this economy too huh?

 

"your president" I thought he was "illegitimate" lol.

 

Given your age and background I would assume you remember that Presidents Reagan and George W. Bush were also accused of having "mental problems"?

 

Don not only gets a pass from Trumpette's for a variety of despicable actions, he scores points with them. Illegally trying to get the citizenship question on the census form in order to advantage the GOP.....points. Making racist, xenophobic remarks about Dem congresswomen.....points. Ordering ICE to potentially separate families with a child who is an American citizen and an illegal alien parent......points. Designing immigration policies to ensure squalid conditions at detention centers......points. Doing grave harm to the environment in order to maintain his popularity with the base.......points.

 

Every president except Obama "illegally" had the citizenship question included in the census? BTW I've got some pics of Mexico's Guatemalan refugee facilities. ::

 

Score another one for Don cuz, you know, they're only brown people so why should The Following care?

'No evidence' DHS had database of separated children: Watchdog
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/evidence-dhs-database-separated-children-watchdog/story?id=58237149

"A government watchdog is questioning the existence of a “central database” that the Homeland Security Department told the public was keeping track of children separated from their parents at the border.

A report released Tuesday by the Homeland Security Department’s inspector general “found no evidence that such a database exists,” despite a DHS announcement last June that the agency was relying on one with the help of the Health and Human Services Department."

 

In this photo, the female Policia is holding Mexico's "data base" in her left hand.

 

The question is, did Don tip off the ICE raids out of stupidity or because he really just wanted to use the threat to instill fear after being frustrated with his failure over the census question?

"Immigrants and advocates had been bracing for the arrests, which Trump last warned of on Friday, saying he wanted agents “to take people out and take them back to their countries.” But federal law enforcement officials said they worried that the unusual public disclosure of the plan endangered officers and threatened their effectiveness."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/immi...7f0e60391e9_story.html?utm_term=.957172ea3761

Either way, Don gets a pass.

 

He did it to bring out the open border democrats which worked very well. Now democrats are defending not arresting MS13 members again. LOL

 

Baby Donald gets a pass for setting US policy based on spite. How mature.
Leaked UK memo says Trump axed Iran deal to spite Obama
https://www.apnews.com/7894d6dc1d1c4a3b9747558553ddcdbf

 

I don't remember that. But I recall them being crooked liars. Oh wait.... I think there was some mention of Reagan not seeming to have all his wits about him toward the end as Alzheimer's began to affect him.

 

There are no indications he suffered from Alzheimers while president. And not toward the end of his presidency were some of his biggest accomplishments like the first real nuclear arms elimination treaty with the Soviets.

 

You know, once I look at your picture, then the level of intelligence in your posts makes a lot of sense. The Federal Government wants to know how many Citizens and non-citizens are in each state. And Barr and Trump have determined that they can get this information without the census.

In the Constitution, it is clear that the framers meant to include legal residents who were not citizens for purposes of apportionment. When they wanted to limit some right to “citizens,” they knew the word, and in the apportionment clause they said “persons.” A census question inquiring about citizenship would not produce information on legal versus illegal residents.

However, the citizenship question is relevant to the next round of the fight over the effects of illegal immigrants on legislative apportionment. Neither law no Court decision has mandated that illegals must be counted for purposes of apportioning House seats and electoral votes.

In the Supreme Court case Evenwel v. Abbott (2016), it was ruled that the state of Texas was allowed to apportion its U.S. House and state legislative seats to equalize total population rather than voters or those of voting age. It stopped short of saying that total population is the only allowable basis, rejecting the federal government’s (under Obama) argument for such a conclusion.

Neither the opinion in Evenwel v. Abbott nor the government brief acknowledged the existence of illegal immigrants. Other participants in the case raised the problem, but the court did not directly address the issue. But, under Evenwel, Texas is not barred from changing its laws on apportionment to exclude illegal immigrants.

Curiously, Evenwel failed to reference the only prior Supreme Court language on the issue of illegal residents, from Burns v. Richardson, a 1966 case concerning Hawaii:

“[No] decision [of] this Court [has] suggested that the states are required to include immigrants, transients, short-term or temporary residents, or persons denied the vote for conviction of crime, in the apportionment base by which their legislators are distributed and against which compliance with the Equal Protection Clause is to be measured.”​

For states in which illegal immigrants congregate largely in specific areas, why should representatives of other locales acquiesce in their inclusion? In this battle, information on the geographic distribution of non-citizens would be useful as a start on analyzing the impact and concentration of the illegal population in the United States.

Good on Trump for bringing this discussion to the forefront. This will continue to be an issue. CA likely has 3 extra votes in Congress and 3 extra votes for President, all votes that are taken from other states that do not encourage law breaking by illegals and so are penalized by those who encourage lawless violators enabling them to steal their votes. At some point, the Court is going to have to deal with this, this theft of votes by the lawless states clearly violates the voting rights of the States that respect the rule of law.

There are Congressional districts packs so tight with illegals that registered voter turn out is 9%. And that 9% gets to pick a Congressional representative with the exact same voting rights of a district with 70% registered voter turnout, this violates the One Person- One Vote SCOTUS precedent.

We'll get there and the voting rights currently being violated will be restored.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/12/no-illegal-immigrants-not-included-census/

 

The Trump admin wanted to include a citizenship question on the census in order to advantage the GOP when new district lines are drawn. Your entire argument, therefore, falls flat.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/07/11/trump-census-history-227353
Better luck next time, Zorro. BTW, Tornado needs to be fed.

 

Why would the citizenship question advantage the GOP?

 

Because the citizenship question was actually a central element of a Repub strategy to try to shift political boundaries to the party’s advantage when the states begin using the new census to redraw their district maps in 2021.

 

You mean aside from him being kept at arms length from the media so he didn't have to answer questions off the cuff. His son Ron said he absolutely showed signs of Alzheimer's late in his 1st term.

 

His son Ron was estranged from President Reagan and seldom saw him.

His other son, Michael, has said clearly that Reagan wasn't suffering from Alzheimer's while he was president.

 

Explain yourself: How would the citizenship question "shift political boundaries to the GOP's advantage?"

 

I saw his 1992 speech nominating George HW Bush, in fact, here it is, 4 years after he left the WH

 

The citizenship question was actually a central element of a Repub strategy to try to shift political boundaries to the party’s advantage when the states begin using the new census to redraw their district maps in 2021.

https://news.vice.com/en_us/article...on-on-the-2020-census-to-benefit-white-people

 

Oh really? And how does the citizenship question "shift political boundaries" to the GOP's advantage? You've made this claim several times, yet seem helpless explain your point. Is this just a phrase that you memorized that you have no actual understanding of?

 

Yes. Neither did Roosevelt during the Great Depression. WWII ended the depression, not the New Deal.

All Presidents have very little impact on the economy. Nevertheless, they get credit when the economy is doing well, and they get the blame when the economy is not doing well.

Americans are very bad historians and worse as economists.