Good faith question: what are the chances you are in a very small minority? How will military members who weren’t deployed into combat react?
Good faith question: what are the chances you are in a very small minority? How will military members who weren’t deployed into combat react?
I’ll give jack smith $20 to file charges
Oh no think of all the taxes they suddenly won’t be paying.
/S
See, I never just did things just to do them. Come on, what am I gonna do? Just all of a sudden jump up and grind my feet on somebody’s couch like it’s something to do? Come on. I got a little more sense than that.
Yeah, I remember grinding my feet on Eddie’s couch.
Nah, I believe that Trump is better looking than Harris… In an orange jumpsuit behind bars.
But it’s a play off the popemobile. It’s a solid name.
Can we hold the US government liable when a drug runner uses the interstate to move his shit from A to B?
Either that or it would be so lucrative we could fund universal healthcare
Except we all know it would fund cool new guns and tanks for your local municipality.
And the model I saw proposed would grant them senior status and thus maintain pay as if they were actively sitting.
Paying them to do nothing post term is a very very cheap solution to protect democracy.
The problem is (even currently) they want more money than is being paid directly by the federal govt.
I think the trick with the term limits is the way this also has teeth. My understanding of one way the term limits thing could work is by moving justices to a senior status… Still technically appointed (and for life) but just not in the starting lineup.
I would guess that if the above method is the approach, a binding ethics code could have as punishment moving a justice to senior status, effectively benching them.
As I understood how this would work is the next appointment will be “term limited”. After 18 years they would assume senior justice status. This will do two things. First, allow for someone new to be appointed. Second, ensure they don’t run afoul of the lifetime appointment status.
Under the senior status, the most recent to leave the court can step in again as a sub after a death pending installation of a new “starter”.
So in one way yes, there will be many more justices… But there will be a starting 9, and more in a pseudo retirement. This will be a long road to get there, as they need to wait for the first vacancy, and then the next, etc.
What primaries? They were won by Biden because it wasn’t contested.
Cause she’s not 61 in that picture. Was dated 2015.
Except all of his damning phone calls can be construed as official acts and thus tossed.
But they’re just trying to run out the clock so Trump can win and issue himself a pardon.
Typically 2 or more of: pistol grip, collapsible/folding stock, barrel over x length, semiautomatic firing mechanics, magazines located outside the grip.
See the former Federal Assault Weapons Ban in place from 1994-2004. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban
I think the answer is closer to treating them similarly to automatic weapons. They are not banned completely, they are simply regulated with strict access controls.
We don’t have school shootings with automatic weapons, do we? (Note the Vegas bump stock skirted this ban specifically)
I would assume that banning them would include banning all semiautomatic long guns
They don’t. They have a shoot first, ask questions later mandate. There was retired USSS basically saying they’re given the discretion.
Nobody would be screaming for an agents head if they offed someone with a gun (bb gun or not) setting up on a roof with siteline to a president at a campaign event.
Thanks for sharing your observations. All I had to go on was every former military person I knew was hard core trump in 2016… Talking about they were voting for him because they knew what leadership looked like.
Wasn’t stateside for 2020 so I didn’t have any exposure to these types.