Recent Posts
“Maybe it’s because I’m gay, but pettiness is a thing. We’re not going to forget these crimes.” —Rep. Robert Garcia on prosecuting Trump’s administration
An illegal alien with two prior deportations on his record was somehow allowed to fly United, and he enlivened his flight by storming the cockpit and claiming he had a bomb.
Rony Alexander Gomez-Alberto must have had a government-issued ID adequate for getting through airport security, which raises its own host of questions. He was taking a United Airlines flight from Newark, N.J., which is a sanctuary state, to New Orleans, La. The Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office arrested Gomez-Alberto when the flight landed in New Orleans after his crazed hijacking attempt. Oh, yes, and Gomez-Alberto barely speaks any English, because why bother to learn the language of the country you’ve invaded three times?
Gomez-Alberto now faces charges of terroristic threats, disorderly conduct, and felony bomb threat, according to Fox News correspondent Bill Melugin. The New York Post reported that the bomb threat turned out to be a hoax. Local authorities also confirmed that Gomez-Alberto changed into all-black before making his run for the cockpit to lend credence to his threat.
As of Tuesday, Gomez-Alberto is in jail without bail. He is a Honduran illegal alien who spent over a decade repeatedlycrossing into the United States, being arrested, and then receiving either deportation or temporary release.
4bonhoffer (360 posts)
This is how you really want to start WTF ?
If I am understanding this correctly, 11 Democrats are the reason why Hegseth was not impeached! According to congresswoman Kamlager-Dove 11 Democratic no-shows caused this to happen.
If she is correct then WT FLYING F ...
4bonhoffer (360 posts)
This is how you really want to start WTF ?
If I am understanding this correctly, 11 Democrats are the reason why Hegseth was not impeached! According to congresswoman Kamlager-Dove 11 Democratic no-shows caused this to happen.
If she is correct then WT FLYING F , holding people accountable and passing legislation. BLUE TSUNAMI, remember that? Back to middle of the road, don’t do what people obviously want already? Of course it would have failed in the senate, but to not do the right thing, especially after the election results? WT FLYING F
Orrex (68,173 posts)
1. They're keeping their powder dry
Bettie (20,479 posts)
8. They must have multiple giant warehouses full of dry powder by now
enough to do some major things.
Or, they'll get some more warehouses to hold even more dry powder to ensure that if there is ever a dictatorship beginning in the US they will be ready....oh, wait.
I can't find the video clip, but this immediately came to my mind from a 1985 movie....
When they try to find shelter and encounter a padlocked trailer in the middle of nowhere, a classic comedic exchange happens:
• Alison: "I might have a nail file... I have a credit card. I have a credit card!"
• Gib: "Credit cards work on a completely different kind of lock."
• Alison: "No, you don't seem to understand. I have a credit card!"
• Gib: (Relieved) "You have a credit card?"
• Alison: (Suddenly crestfallen) "Oh. My dad told me specifically I can only use it in case of an emergency."
• Gib: (Sarcastically) "Well, maybe one will come up."
I suppose an emergency might come up, eventually.
https://democraticunderground.com/100221636564
Every generation of Americans is told that some emergency justifies setting the Constitution aside just this once. Today’s “emergency” comes with a slogan: saving democracy. Strip away the branding, and the Democrat Party’s structural agenda looks like something entirely different—and reminiscent of the old Bolsheviki power play 100 years ago but recast for gaining control of U.S. institutions. Two new states, a packed Supreme Court, the end of the filibuster, an end run around the Electoral College, federal control of elections, and a government apparatus for policing “disinformation” are not a plan to save democracy. Taken together, they are a plan to make a future Democrat Party majority permanent. That was the Bolsheviki goal, too.
Let’s examine their plan in detail.
THE DESIGN THEY WANT TO DISMANTLE
The Framers did not trust majorities, and they did not trust themselves. James Madison put it plainly in Federalist No. 51: “Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.” The Senate’s equal representation (the “Great Compromise”), the Electoral College, life tenure for judges, and the states’ control of their own elections were all built to slow down any faction that captured a temporary majority. The Constitution also supplies legitimate ways to change those rules via the constitutional amendment process and Article V, both of which require broad agreement across the states. Nearly every item on the Democrat agenda is designed to bypass it.
Democrats have wanted to impeach President Donald Trump since before he was even elected the first time. They drew up plans before his first inauguration in 2017, followed through twice, and never let go of the idea after voters sent him back to the White House in 2025. Plenty of Democrats are salivating over the prospect of a third round. Yet incoming House Speaker Hakeem Jeffries keeps publicly downplaying the talk.
"The American people don't want us to get even. They want us to get things done on their behalf because life is way too expensive," Jeffries insisted last week.
I don’t buy it, but the fact he’s downplaying impeachment talk against Trump is telling. While Jeffries has stayed coy about Trump himself, there’s a lot more willingness to openly talk about going after the people around the president. Health and Human Services Secretary RFK Jr. and Todd Blanche have both come up. Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Calif.) has already introduced articles of impeachment against White House Budget Director Russell Vought over a budget dispute.
And then there's the big one, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth.
...
Massie's effort, Hegseth argued, would "shred" that standard.
"That's what it is. Policy disagreements. Not high crimes. Not misdemeanors. Not treason. Not bribery," he said. He called the Iran campaign, the strikes on the Houthis, and the capture of Nicolás Maduro "historic" accomplishments by the troops. "If you want to take issue with what we did in Epic Fury or Rough Rider or nabbing Nicolás Maduro, you're taking issue with the troops and what they accomplished," he added.
...
Democrats are weaponizing impeachment over policy disagreements. So why is Jeffries playing it so cool on Trump? Let's be honest, here. Trump remains the ultimate goal. Everyone in Washington knows it.
Here's why Jeffries is publicly circling the cabinet first.
Let’s start with the math. Democrats may have the votes to impeach in the House, but they lack the votes to convict in the Senate. They could potentially pick off a few weak Republicans against a cabinet secretary. Against Trump, those votes vanish, and the whole exercise backfires the way it did twice before.
Targeting Trump officials carries less risk. At the very least, the pressure could potentially force personnel changes and give the base something to point to as proof that the Democrat majority is doing what it wants. ...
Still too close for comfort.
And you all are well aware that this shit is going national and the Lib-tards aren't even hiding it.
