The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated

Status
Not open for further replies.
Raoul said:
Til the SCOTUS get a chance to rule on it presumably.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what I was thinking too, but they have just overruled the ban being erm,banned. Surely they will vote in favour of it being allowed to stand? oh feck it, never mind. It's almost as ridiculous as the Italian court shambles over the Amanda Knox trial. :wenger:
 
sammsky1 said:
Yeah.

And how the world changed for the worst in so many ways.

Imagine if it had never happened...
Click to expand...

Then something else probably would have at a later date.

It's easy to forget it, but 9/11 wasn't the start of Al-Qaida or the first sign of discontent with American foreign policy in the middle east. Two US embassies were blown up by Al-Qaida in 1998 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_United_States_embassy_bombings) and the USS Cole was bombed in 2000 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing). 9/11 is obviously the most memorable event for a whole host of factors, but the genie was already out of the bottle by 2001 and it was not going back in.
 




Well it took a life threatening illness to happen but he's coming out against Trump big time now. Obviously he wants to do what is right (or what he sees as right) in the time he has left. Long may it continue. There's no way Trump would have the balls to attack a man with brain cancer, well he would, without a seconds thought, but he will just have to suck it up for now.
 
Raoul said:
Til the SCOTUS get a chance to rule on it presumably.
Click to expand...

This doesn't really make sense though. The ban was supposedly for 90 days (iirc). By the time the SCOTUS rules on this, it would have been instated for longer than 90 days. Why haven't they 'figured out what the hell is going on' by now?
 
Sigma said:
This doesn't really make sense though. The ban was supposedly for 90 days (iirc). By the time the SCOTUS rules on this, it would have been instated for longer than 90 days. Why haven't they 'figured out what the hell is going on' by now?
Click to expand...

The 90 day thing was obviously just a time wasting device. The battle now is whether the admin wins this pissing contest with the courts so that precedent is set on future battles.
 
langster said:




Well it took a life threatening illness to happen but he's coming out against Trump big time now. Obviously he wants to do what is right (or what he sees as right) in the time he has left. Long may it continue. There's no way Trump would have the balls to attack a man with brain cancer, well he would, without a seconds thought, but he will just have to suck it up for now.
Click to expand...


The proof is in the pudding -- let's see what happens when these Republicans actually have to sign something.
 
langster said:
Yeah, that's what I was thinking too, but they have just overruled the ban being erm,banned. Surely they will vote in favour of it being allowed to stand? oh feck it, never mind. It's almost as ridiculous as the Italian court shambles over the Amanda Knox trial. :wenger:
Click to expand...

Afaik, the SC have completely banned a ban on the "temporary" (but permanent) ban so they can continue their partial ban on the "temporary" (but permanent) ban until they can discuss a permanent ban on the "temporary" (but permanent) ban.
 
Tyrion said:
Afaik, the SC have completely banned a ban on the "temporary" (but permanent) ban so they can continue their partial ban on the "temporary" (but permanent) ban until they can discuss a permanent ban on the "temporary" (but permanent) ban.
Click to expand...
I'll drink to that.
 
Tyrion said:
Afaik, the SC have completely banned a ban on the "temporary" (but permanent) ban so they can continue their partial ban on the "temporary" (but permanent) ban until they can discuss a permanent ban on the "temporary" (but permanent) ban.
Click to expand...

:lol::lol::lol:
 
Tyrion said:
Afaik, the SC have completely banned a ban on the "temporary" (but permanent) ban so they can continue their partial ban on the "temporary" (but permanent) ban until they can discuss a permanent ban on the "temporary" (but permanent) ban.
Click to expand...
This sentence should be banned.
 
If you go onto Sexuall Posts twitter now they say this in the description...

"Follow for the Same Porn @TedCruz Watches"

Also, if you search "Sexuall Posts" on Twitter, Ted Cruz is now the 5th account to pop up :lol:
 
langster said:
I bet he machine gunned his bacon over that website!
Click to expand...
FO1ipzf.jpg
 
Old article, so sorry if this has been posted already - but v. interesting regarding Twitter botnets here

Twitter Bots Use Likes, RTs for Intimidation
I awoke this morning to find my account on Twitter (@briankrebs) had attracted almost 12,000 new followers overnight. Then I noticed I’d gained almost as many followers as the number of re-tweets (RTs) earned for a tweet I published on Tuesday. The tweet stated how every time I tweet something related to Russian President Vladimir Putin I get a predictable stream of replies that are in support of President Trump — even in cases when neither Trump nor the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign were mentioned.

botcomment-580x619.png
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.