How did we get this far before anyone will challenge the original argument about it not being legal according to federal law and all they do is continue to not follow the law?
Why is their only answer 🤔 another law that ultimately also will not be followed?!?!?
How did we get this far before anyone will challenge the original argument about it not being legal according to federal law and all they do is continue to not follow the law?
Why is their only answer 🤔 another law that ultimately also will not be followed?!?!?
It’s like our immigration laws aren’t really laws anymore. The Dems want immigration reform, now I ask myself why? What difference would it make to pass different laws? They don’t need no stinking laws to fly in illegals, assist them to cross our borders which are both criminal offenses in violation of law. Our borders are wide open, come on in, sign up for freebies, here’s your voter registration. Citizens don’t like it, who cares, the DC communists certainly don’t care, they want to hasten the end of the Republic.
Agree. I've gotten the sense that they don't use the law for its intended purpose, but rather as a tactic to control people, "We can do it, because see? It's the law." When they break it, they do it because they know it's either going to take a long time to stop them in the courts, or because they have prosecutors/courts in their pocket.
I haven't heard them say "apologize later." I've actually seen them say, "Let's pass this bill. Let the Supreme Court settle whether it's constitutional or not," basically, "That's not our job." Yes, it is! The Supreme Court is not just there to clean up Congress's mess. Members of Congress swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. They act like it's a formality that means nothing, because, "We're only here to respond to political pressure."
That's a fair point. Something that's been very disappointing to me is the courts have not wanted to even hear cases on election fraud. It feels like what's the point of having election law if the courts don't want to touch controversies around elections?
One rationale that makes sense is courts are squeamish about stepping into election controversies, because they don't want the appearance of preferring one candidate over another, one side over another; they don't want to seem political. However, enough courts have consistently made excuses for why election controversies can't be tried in them that I also think some of them are corrupt. I think that's plausible, given what we've seen with how judges in certain locales have behaved with Trump.
How did we get this far before anyone will challenge the original argument about it not being legal according to federal law and all they do is continue to not follow the law?
Why is their only answer 🤔 another law that ultimately also will not be followed?!?!?
Ana,
It’s like our immigration laws aren’t really laws anymore. The Dems want immigration reform, now I ask myself why? What difference would it make to pass different laws? They don’t need no stinking laws to fly in illegals, assist them to cross our borders which are both criminal offenses in violation of law. Our borders are wide open, come on in, sign up for freebies, here’s your voter registration. Citizens don’t like it, who cares, the DC communists certainly don’t care, they want to hasten the end of the Republic.
GMoody, Exactly, they're brazenly breaking so many of our laws because they can do it with absolutely 💯 no negative consequences.
We need to hold their feet to the fire! Enough of all of the new bills or laws that they'll ignore 🙄 anyway!!
Agree. I've gotten the sense that they don't use the law for its intended purpose, but rather as a tactic to control people, "We can do it, because see? It's the law." When they break it, they do it because they know it's either going to take a long time to stop them in the courts, or because they have prosecutors/courts in their pocket.
Mark, I agree 👍
They operate on the premise of: do it now and apologize later!! However lately I've not seen any apologies!!!!
I haven't heard them say "apologize later." I've actually seen them say, "Let's pass this bill. Let the Supreme Court settle whether it's constitutional or not," basically, "That's not our job." Yes, it is! The Supreme Court is not just there to clean up Congress's mess. Members of Congress swear an oath to protect and defend the Constitution. They act like it's a formality that means nothing, because, "We're only here to respond to political pressure."
Exactly!
Hence my statement of: I haven't heard any apologies lately.
You're right ✅️ no attempts of righting any of their transgressions.
You're also SPOT ON about the Supreme Court's job isn't and wasn't designed to perform the: "Cleanup on aisle 13!"
The bloody SOCUS is why.
That's a fair point. Something that's been very disappointing to me is the courts have not wanted to even hear cases on election fraud. It feels like what's the point of having election law if the courts don't want to touch controversies around elections?
One rationale that makes sense is courts are squeamish about stepping into election controversies, because they don't want the appearance of preferring one candidate over another, one side over another; they don't want to seem political. However, enough courts have consistently made excuses for why election controversies can't be tried in them that I also think some of them are corrupt. I think that's plausible, given what we've seen with how judges in certain locales have behaved with Trump.