"Failing Hawaai judge (Democat) unbelievably biased against protecting America, how long before we look at revoking license?"
The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
"Failing Hawaai judge (Democat) unbelievably biased against protecting America, how long before we look at revoking license?"
"I'll meet with the President of Hawaii to discuss this!"
"Obama never once phoned the president of Hawaii, I've heard"
No. Obama never called Hawaii after Pearl Harbor.
This is going to keep happening. The WH needs to just get the Supreme court to rule on this and if they succeed, then they wont have to worry about these judges blocking the ban.
Bush would have been on the phone his entire presidency!
But Trump lived and survived his own personal Vietnam in the 80s NYC dating scene!
This fact is true. He would never say such a thing.
Still 3 years of this shit. Poor USA and world!
well potentially 8 years if the Dem's don't get their house in order.
BOOM!
What a reply that is. An awful subject and as usual the moron with no sensitivity, morality, empathy or sympathy just tramples over everyone else with the most disgusting slurs and accusations or insults. Ugh.
BOOM!
What a reply that is. An awful subject and as usual the moron with no sensitivity, morality, empathy or sympathy just tramples over everyone else with the most disgusting slurs and accusations or insults. Ugh.
That is quite the tweet.
BOOM!
What a reply that is. An awful subject and as usual the moron with no sensitivity, morality, empathy or sympathy just tramples over everyone else with the most disgusting slurs and accusations or insults. Ugh.
He didn’t say “no president has ever called”. He said “most of them” didn’t call. I’ve no idea if this is true or not but I wish people would be more accurate when they’re having a go at him. Getting stuff blatantly wrong like that really feeds the “fake news” narrative.
I think what he said was incredibly needless and insensitive, especially considering his past comments to Gold Star families and ex prisoners of war. Agreed he wasn't specific, but you can't blame people for being upset at his remarks considering his insinuation.
Thing is and it's what Trump does best, why bring it up in the first place? He deflects attention away from his own inadequacies/incompetence and riles people up over it when there was no real need for the conversation/topic to start with anyway but since he so loves the need to be constantly talked about and in the headlines, he does it anyway.... Obama/Bush/Clinton i.e the recent 3 i'm pretty sure did their duties as President especially when it came to injured or dead war heroes, Trump just cannot comprehend that there are and have been better people for the job than him and he tries his hardest to push the narrative he does it all when really he only gives a shit about himself.
Which is a blatant misleading lie. Its a long established thing where presidents get in touch with families of dead soldiers to offer their condolences.
He directly mentioned Obama's name and claimed he never made calls to the families.
Oh he’s lying. I wouldn’t deny that. He’s a bullshitter who seems incapable of telling the truth. I just think the best way to call out a bullshitter is by bejng scrupulously accurate. If you mislead or exaggerate about the extent of his lies you’re just feeding into his constant whining about “fake news”.
Ugh.....
As usual always someone else's fault, never his. Cnut.
Blaming the Dems for healthcare is especially old considering Trump's pitch was that he'd scrap it right away. As of now his attempts to do so have been met with failure. Which is ultimately a failing on his own part considering the standards he set himself.
I'd give everything I have to be a fly on the wall in these interviews.
If you Americans sign up for another 4 years I don't know what to say to ya. Even if it was 'Crooked' Hillary again I'd still be fecking baffled, all sympathy will be gone...
Here's the type of judge the GOP wants to put in federal/high positions.
https://ffrf.org/news/news-releases...locking-of-extremist-federal-judicial-nominee
Article below
https://ffrf.org/news/news-releases...locking-of-extremist-federal-judicial-nominee
Article below
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is urging President Trump and the U.S. Senate to stymie the nomination to a federal judgeship of a person whose extreme views and close ties to a Religious Right organization render him unfit.
Jeffrey C. Mateer, nominated for U.S. district judge for the Eastern District of Texas, has a long history of placing his personal religious beliefs above the Constitution, the rule of law and his duty to clients. Mateer has also made intemperate public comments, such as calling LGBTQ citizens "disgusting," "sinful," and prone to "debauchery" intending to bring about "the complete destruction of marriage" and has deemed the notion of transgenderism to be "part of Satan's plan."
Mateer spent six years at an extremist Christian law firm, First Liberty Institute. While at the Institute from early 2010 to March 2016, Mateer served as executive editor of an annual report called "Undeniable." The report is so deliberately misleading and defective that FFRF is sending Trump and the Senate Judiciary Committee an appendix highlighting some of its worst flaws. Nobody who could edit and publish such a purposefully deceptive report is fit to sit on the federal bench, FFRF contends.
Mateer has a long history of problematic actions and views that FFRF has highlighted for Trump and the Senate Judiciary Committee in a letter co-signed by the Secular Coalition for America. It has also provided the committee questions, urging members to carefully scrutinize Mateer.
Mateer has repeatedly abused his public office to promote the religious agenda of his former employer, FFRF charges. Mateer is a mediocre lawyer with no judicial experience who did not get his current job with the Texas attorney general's office on merit. The job was not publicly posted, as state law 656.001 requires. Instead, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton — who is under indictment for multiple counts of felony fraud — simply appointed Mateer. Paxton is very close with the First Liberty Institute's executive director, Kelly Shackelford, and credits him with encouraging Paxton to run for the state House seat he won in 2002. Mateer has used this public office to promote the Institute's agenda, including having the office intervene into cases the Institute is litigating.
While at the First Liberty Institute, Mateer apparently advised clients to violate the law when it furthered the religious agenda of the Institute, in some cases costing local governments tens of thousands of dollars. FFRF urges the committee to ask him about these various conflict of interests.
Mateer appeared to misrepresent the law when he was at the First Liberty Institute. When the city of Plano, where the Institute is based, was considering amending its nondiscrimination ordinance to protect LGBTQ citizens, Mateer testified angrily before the City Council as an attorney representing the Institute, misrepresenting the state of the law, the Hobby Lobby case and perhaps how many times he had successfully challenged such laws. The Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 4.01 states: "In the course of representing a client a lawyer shall not knowingly: (a) make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person." It appears that Mateer violated this rule.
Mateer has dubious views about basic legal issues affecting innumerable Americans.
For instance, Mateer has called the constitutional separation between state and church a myth because it is not in the Constitution "verbatim." In their letter to the Judiciary Committee, FFRF Co-Presidents Dan Barker and Annie Laurie Gaylor urge members to ask him: Is there or is there not a constitutional separation of church and state? And since the rights to a fair trial, to privacy and of a woman's right to abortion are not explicitly stated verbatim in the Constitution, will Mateer still uphold those rights?
Given his extremist views on LGBTQ citizens and their rights, FFRF is asking the Judiciary Committee to pin him down on whether he can be counted on to afford fair treatment to LGBTQ and transgender individuals.
Mateer also says that adultery, homosexuality and no-fault divorce are against God's law. The question arises whether Mateer will decide legal issues on their merits or will people who're divorced or who have had an affair or are homosexual and have cases before him receive biased treatment.
Mateer has shown contempt for stare decisis or legal precedent and a desire to overturn key cases that protect women's rights and LGBTQ rights. FFRF has provided the Judiciary Committee a slew of hard-hitting questions to probe him about his record.
And Mateer believes "religious liberty" allows believers to impose their beliefs on others, especially women and LGBTQ individuals. FFRF is requesting the committee to grill Mateer about such views.
Mateer also distorts reality about "religious hostility" in America and believes that protecting civil rights is attacking faith. FFRF is petitioning the Judiciary Committee to seek clarification on whether Mateer understands the difference between upholding the First Amendment and "purging religion from public life."
Mateer and Liberty Institute have worked to scrub some of Mateer's most egregious conduct and statements from the Internet, but it has been saved and much of it can be viewed at www.jeffreymateer.com
"Mateer was improperly vetted and should never have been nominated in the first place," Barker and Gaylor write to Trump.
That's why secular organizations are pushing hard to make sure that Mateer doesn't get confirmed.
Jeffrey C. Mateer, nominated for U.S. district judge for the Eastern District of Texas, has a long history of placing his personal religious beliefs above the Constitution, the rule of law and his duty to clients. Mateer has also made intemperate public comments, such as calling LGBTQ citizens "disgusting," "sinful," and prone to "debauchery" intending to bring about "the complete destruction of marriage" and has deemed the notion of transgenderism to be "part of Satan's plan."
Mateer spent six years at an extremist Christian law firm, First Liberty Institute. While at the Institute from early 2010 to March 2016, Mateer served as executive editor of an annual report called "Undeniable." The report is so deliberately misleading and defective that FFRF is sending Trump and the Senate Judiciary Committee an appendix highlighting some of its worst flaws. Nobody who could edit and publish such a purposefully deceptive report is fit to sit on the federal bench, FFRF contends.
Mateer has a long history of problematic actions and views that FFRF has highlighted for Trump and the Senate Judiciary Committee in a letter co-signed by the Secular Coalition for America. It has also provided the committee questions, urging members to carefully scrutinize Mateer.
Mateer has repeatedly abused his public office to promote the religious agenda of his former employer, FFRF charges. Mateer is a mediocre lawyer with no judicial experience who did not get his current job with the Texas attorney general's office on merit. The job was not publicly posted, as state law 656.001 requires. Instead, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton — who is under indictment for multiple counts of felony fraud — simply appointed Mateer. Paxton is very close with the First Liberty Institute's executive director, Kelly Shackelford, and credits him with encouraging Paxton to run for the state House seat he won in 2002. Mateer has used this public office to promote the Institute's agenda, including having the office intervene into cases the Institute is litigating.
While at the First Liberty Institute, Mateer apparently advised clients to violate the law when it furthered the religious agenda of the Institute, in some cases costing local governments tens of thousands of dollars. FFRF urges the committee to ask him about these various conflict of interests.
Mateer appeared to misrepresent the law when he was at the First Liberty Institute. When the city of Plano, where the Institute is based, was considering amending its nondiscrimination ordinance to protect LGBTQ citizens, Mateer testified angrily before the City Council as an attorney representing the Institute, misrepresenting the state of the law, the Hobby Lobby case and perhaps how many times he had successfully challenged such laws. The Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 4.01 states: "In the course of representing a client a lawyer shall not knowingly: (a) make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person." It appears that Mateer violated this rule.
Mateer has dubious views about basic legal issues affecting innumerable Americans.
For instance, Mateer has called the constitutional separation between state and church a myth because it is not in the Constitution "verbatim." In their letter to the Judiciary Committee, FFRF Co-Presidents Dan Barker and Annie Laurie Gaylor urge members to ask him: Is there or is there not a constitutional separation of church and state? And since the rights to a fair trial, to privacy and of a woman's right to abortion are not explicitly stated verbatim in the Constitution, will Mateer still uphold those rights?
Given his extremist views on LGBTQ citizens and their rights, FFRF is asking the Judiciary Committee to pin him down on whether he can be counted on to afford fair treatment to LGBTQ and transgender individuals.
Mateer also says that adultery, homosexuality and no-fault divorce are against God's law. The question arises whether Mateer will decide legal issues on their merits or will people who're divorced or who have had an affair or are homosexual and have cases before him receive biased treatment.
Mateer has shown contempt for stare decisis or legal precedent and a desire to overturn key cases that protect women's rights and LGBTQ rights. FFRF has provided the Judiciary Committee a slew of hard-hitting questions to probe him about his record.
And Mateer believes "religious liberty" allows believers to impose their beliefs on others, especially women and LGBTQ individuals. FFRF is requesting the committee to grill Mateer about such views.
Mateer also distorts reality about "religious hostility" in America and believes that protecting civil rights is attacking faith. FFRF is petitioning the Judiciary Committee to seek clarification on whether Mateer understands the difference between upholding the First Amendment and "purging religion from public life."
Mateer and Liberty Institute have worked to scrub some of Mateer's most egregious conduct and statements from the Internet, but it has been saved and much of it can be viewed at www.jeffreymateer.com
"Mateer was improperly vetted and should never have been nominated in the first place," Barker and Gaylor write to Trump.
That's why secular organizations are pushing hard to make sure that Mateer doesn't get confirmed.
You have to realize he has a hardcore group of followers that think he's Christ reincarnated, plus those who tranditionally vote GOP anyway.
Plus the Dems and the DNC in general can't tell their head from their ass at this point. If the situation today in regards to the Dems was the same 3 years from now, it wouldn't shock me if he was re-elected.
Wowzers.
The man is reprehensible and immoral and disgusting. I find this post ridiculous.
Another astute appointment.
http://www.iflscience.com/policy/ex...icked-head-white-house-environmental-council/
She will be responsible for coordinating the government agencies’ responses to environmental efforts. Her current position is at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, which is funded by Koch, the Heartland Institute, and ExxonMobil, among others. She has a degree in Humanities and Religion, and attended a doctoral program focusing on East Asian religion.
http://www.iflscience.com/policy/ex...icked-head-white-house-environmental-council/
She will be responsible for coordinating the government agencies’ responses to environmental efforts. Her current position is at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, which is funded by Koch, the Heartland Institute, and ExxonMobil, among others. She has a degree in Humanities and Religion, and attended a doctoral program focusing on East Asian religion.
To which he then went on to say that was 'what he was told'.
Any President of the United bloody States that says that an opinion he heard was 'what he was told' is an absolute outrage.
1. Have the decency to check the facts yourself
2. Dont spout shite if you don't know if it's true*
*Welcome to the Trump Presidency.
*Shrugs*
Unbelievable. Look at that mechanical wonder, looks like a tunnel will get right under that bit of 2 foot thick concrete.
F***ing foolproof.
What a total wanker.
He's been told nothing. It's all in his head and he's got away with the tactic for decades.
E.g. who on his team told him his EC win was the biggest ever. Nobody did.
I just don't understand who believes his bullshit. I worry that it's the majority of the US.
Do they seriously blindly follow what he says, like it's gospel? Is this a thing? The guy's a fûcking maniac, with an ego the size of a planet. It's seriously concerning how his 'voters' are loving him.
For the sake of sanity, please tell me this isn;t how most people in the US feel? Otherwise I might actually commit suicide because the earth has become far too stupid for it's own kind.
Fortunately it is not. Now we have to figure out how to get them to vote and make their vote count rather than be gerrymandered.
Here's what I would label a decent, non-combative response I saw on a friend's FB page (asking difference in Eminem calling out Bush and Trump). It's nearing a cult mentality.
--Bush was ran by elites, a mere puppet for the establishment. Trump isn't bought out. Spouts at the mouth a bit much, at war with mainstream media for false reporting, and against the establishment. The difference? The people will support the president because he's not a politician. That's why I do. He's not a cookie cutter president.--
Obama's Deputy Chief of Staff responds to Trump's bullshit.
How the GOP can continue to defend and support him is beyond me, the damage this is causing will take decades to correct. I honestly think that the Republicans would be far more respected if they came out and shunned Trump and everything he says and stands for. It's telling that John McCain is yet again the hero and is hugely respected for speaking out against Trump. He's dying and knows he has to do the right thing, he has a conscience and it's commendable how hard he is fighting in more ways than one.
EDIT. Breaking now Trump told the widow of one of the fallen Marines that "he knew what he signed up for" FFS. He's just not right at all. What an utter cnut.
Last edited:
He's at the media for false reporting but blatantly, and unashamedly lies infront of everyone with regards (for one example) President Obama calling falling soldiers?
When called out on this lie, he backtracks.
He's not a politician at all, that is correct. He's a businessman, and a bad one at that. This guy doesn't know what the actual f*** he's doing, in times of vulnerability, he'll call on how shit Obama was or call on his blind supporters to agree how great he's been without having actually done anything at all.
Joke.
I've told myself week after week, "this is the lowest he can sink."
McCain just wants to see another war before he dies. His speech was imperialistic warmongering with a slight dig at Trump. It's completely bizarre that he gets praise for it.
He's always been like that and I will never agree with him politically because he's right wing and a true Republican. I can however admire the fact he's standing up to Trump because he knows it's the right thing to do. I can't agree with the direction he wants things to go, but I can respect that he's doing the right thing by what he believes in, and he's not sitting by and watching and saying nothing like nearly every single one of his fellow Senators and Congressmen and party members.
That's a bizarre interpretation of McCain's narrative with Trump. He, like most rational people, is obviously appalled by Trump's demagoguery and faux nationalism, which was what the swipe at Trump was about.
- Status