2980
Comments (937)
sorted by:
744
Leatherwood 744 points ago +751 / -7

John Roberts is worse than any liberal on the court. He needs to step down.

687
goodbeerbetterviews2 687 points ago +691 / -4

Trump needs to start shitting out executive orders. This is now the new precedent.

Nationwide open carry. Repeal all gun control. Goodbye sanctuary cities. Now is the time to start throwing out every executive order you can think of.

314
SpacemanTy 314 points ago +324 / -10

Daddy needs to call us all to DC with our weapons to take back our country and drive out these traitorous fucks

314
RiverRunnerVDB 314 points ago +322 / -8

If anything the last few weeks have taught us is that if you want the government to cater to you you need to be violent.

120
weltbild 120 points ago +121 / -1

this only works since the left got the back of their leaders no matter what tadtics they use

161
HongKongFluey 161 points ago +165 / -4

Well if I’m being honest I back GEOTUS no matter what he does. At this point I’d follow that man into the fires of hell. I think most of the patriots here would say the same.

71
DeepFakeChicken 71 points ago +72 / -1

He is the only same man with enough balls to do anything it seems that hasn't been bought.

109
agile_a 109 points ago +109 / -0

how is it unconstitutional to STOP a govt law that u started?

if it was constitutional to pass it can be constitutional to unpass it..

this is pure legislating from the bench. there is nothing in the Constitution that prevents the government from stopping a service that it started. there's only things in the Constitution that prevent the government from doing certain things or taking away certain basic rights that are enamored in the Constitution..

DACA is neither of those..

this is the same as the supreme Court rejecting putting citizenship on the census. it's purely legislating from the bench because they agree with it. They like DACA because they are all on the payroll of big corporations who benefit from cheap immigrant labor. And so they protected at all costs..

which is why they didn't rule it unconstitutional when Obama passed it

it's time to stop pretending that the supreme Court is above corruption. They take money from donors just like anybody elsee

they want cheap immigrant labor because big corporations pay them for that

... continue reading thread?
21
Satou 21 points ago +21 / -0

I fear that most people like the GEOTUS would be promptly removed. I made up a story that he has his own private security large enough to protect him that the deep state can't remove him. Without billions of dollars and no dirty ties to scumbags (blackmail etc) would it even be possible to do what he's doing?

Not to mention how excessively competent a leader he is. I wouldn't be unhappy with him on the throne of this country, though I'm not sure I support monarchical inheritance.

I can only hope he gets re-elected, and that the next 4 years will be enough to remove the abscesses.

... continue reading thread?
2
PartTimeHick 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's hard to buy a guy with billions and a beautiful woman.

38
Deplorabe_Quijibo 38 points ago +38 / -0

Up to a few months ago I'd have argued you, but what has transpired the last several weeks has made it clear that our republic is infested with the enemies of freedom and they will use the system to destroy everything we love. Thankfully we have a leader who wants to save America and I too will follow him to the gates of hell to stop them from doing so.

23
OhThePower 23 points ago +25 / -2

This comment needs 1000 upvotes. This is about our president Donald J. Trump. I haven't only seen a bunch of trolls from the left on here recently. I've noticed a lot more "alt-right" folks pushing an agenda that is not centered around our president.

Don't only check people's post history to see if they are new trolls. Check to see what they post about.

8
Moviefone_Kramer 8 points ago +8 / -0

At this point he could declare himself emperor and I would support it.

7
StarPlatinum123 7 points ago +10 / -3

That sounded bad at first, but I think I agree. Even if the China and Russia stuff is real, who are we going to support? Trump is better than any of the radical left and Neocons no matter what he does.

11
OhThePower 11 points ago +11 / -0

The China stuff is not true. If it were our entire community would not be able to overcome the wave of haters reminding us how much we shit on China.

10
HongKongFluey 10 points ago +10 / -0

Exactly. He’s doing what he can to win this election and a 2nd term. If it was the left doing it I’d be calling for their heads but this is a means to an end and double standards are party of life. Pull out all the stops.

0
txladyvoter 0 points ago +5 / -5

Or woman!

-1
phate451 -1 points ago +4 / -5

Make a sandwich

-2
deleted -2 points ago +4 / -6
25
N7fury 25 points ago +25 / -0

And the media. It is easy to act like little shits and terrorize with no repercussions when you get nothing but rainbows and butterflies from the media. The second we act the media will wage war but we are rapidly approaching that necessity.

12
NonyaDB 12 points ago +12 / -0

If anyone is going to act, they also need to know exactly how the mainstream media's broadcast feeds work at a network level.
Fun fact: Local on-the-ground video is sent back wirelessly to a local affiliate station which then pushes it over fiber.
West coast is linked to East coast through a single building located in Kansas City.
"But what about local folks using cell phones?"
Enter the Wave Bubble!

16
Slick_Willys_Nutsack 16 points ago +21 / -5

It's beyond time to get violent. All this means is it's time to establish a new SCOTUS once we purge

14
chesswhilehigh 14 points ago +15 / -1

I’m starting a militia group. After all, according to leftists that is what the second amendment is explicitly for (it’s not). If we all form decentralized militias, we can enforce the law in places where the police are too castrated to do anything. We can put pressure on SCOTUS and representatives. These tactics are the only thing that will work at this point. If you want your liberty, be prepared to kill for it.

10
Slick_Willys_Nutsack 10 points ago +11 / -1

I'm fucking ready dude let's do it

5
ignorant_slob 5 points ago +5 / -0

Just make sure to name your group the well regulated militia.

1
Cadastral 1 point ago +5 / -4

You sound like a glowie. Tone down the rhetoric, man. We haven't tried all the tools available to us yet.

9
TheThreeSeashells 9 points ago +9 / -0

Looks like they're starting to lose the backing of the police. It probably won't take long for them to lose the backing of the military either, if they haven't already. I'm sure they didn't take too kindly to the Left telling the National Guard they couldn't bring their weapons with them in the few instances they were called in.

10
weltbild 10 points ago +12 / -2

the police is not a political force they will follow orders and are opressing the right from doing anything while they left the communist insurgence run rampant

3
TheThreeSeashells 3 points ago +3 / -0

They're not following orders right now in Atlanta. I know there were a ton of reports about them being jackbooted thugs during the shutdown, but largely the police didn't bother with most of the bulls*&t orders in most jurisdictions. The media just didn't want to report those stories.

I think the tide turned when the media decided to reward the scattered police's enforcement of the tyrannical orders by trying to take their pensions away and cast them as the worst people in existence.

I know plenty of police officers and they're nothing like what you describe. In general, the police are waiting to be given the green light to do whatever is necessary to stop the unchecked lawlessness we're seeing right now. The last thing they want to do is march around taking away law-abiding citizens' guns.

8
SamQuentin1 8 points ago +8 / -0

The left stays unified no matter what. Murder, racism, rape, pedophilia, genocide...it doesn’t matter...they all cover for each other

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
30
BeauBidenBrainTumor 30 points ago +31 / -1

This is some unpopular truth. Look at the concessions the BLM and Antifa rioters have gotten in the last few weeks: corporate quotas and set-asides have grown, money flowing into BLM (Democrat) hands, and even a small part of a major city has been ceded to Antifa. It's extortion, but it apparently works.

21
GentleGentile 21 points ago +22 / -1

It only works for the left, because the establishment is on their side. They have the billions of dollars in donations, high-powered lawyers, and FBI treating them with kid gloves. It's a trap for the right--we'll never get 1% of the protections the left gets.

6
Rasterblath 6 points ago +6 / -0

Honestly this defeatist nonsense is wrong.

Not saying you wouldn’t get negative attention. Or that you might see more government pressure.

But if dudes can face off with bureau of land management to occupy an area during the Obama years then you could certainly achieve the same right now.

Bottom line the government knows that killing people creates martyrs.

Not saying we need to be violent. Just peacefully occupy areas.

2
GentleGentile 2 points ago +3 / -1

That's fair. I like the idea of intentional communities with a survivalist bent.

3
ignorant_slob 3 points ago +3 / -0

We should call out that they didn’t actually help black lives with their donations. Make them pay up again to a real charity like a historically black college of funds to build schools in black communities.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +2 / -3
1
BeauBidenBrainTumor 1 point ago +3 / -2

Jared or Ivanka for sure. I don't believe Trump, especially as a property developer, has much use for thugs and rioters.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
8
madlad2020 8 points ago +8 / -0

That is good for the left but the moment you become violent towards them they will hunt you down like an animal and won't rest until you are dead. You think that the police going on strike is going to be some big call to action? DC does not care about the police they wouldn't hesitate to declare martial law, deploy the army, what ever is necessary to ensure nothing poses a real threat to their corrupt world order.

The defund the police movement is only serving as the slippery slope towards communist UN soldiers policing our streets. They will justify it to the sheep as being necessary to cull the power vacuum left when precincts get fed up and quit / strike. These are all calculated moves that are happening, not just chance events. The left has been working on this for over 50 years.

5
philandy 5 points ago +5 / -0

Violence is only a form of leverage. Leverage is only a form of control. They think this is about who has control.

4
JohnnyRico69 4 points ago +4 / -0

BINGO!!

-2
Nagger -2 points ago +11 / -13

This comment glows.

9
SpacemanTy 9 points ago +10 / -1

You dont understand what glowing is lol. Calling for riots and assassinations and shit is glowing, saying our very commander and chief needs to call upon us to save the country is glowing how exactly?

1
BIDENSACPADDICT 1 point ago +3 / -2

Yep like Michelle Obama's balls on a nude beach

0
Ramias 0 points ago +1 / -1

Problem is most of us have jobs. And 401ks. And equity in our homes.

4
RiverRunnerVDB 4 points ago +4 / -0

Not when the democrats get back into power.

37
HockeyMom4Trump 37 points ago +37 / -0

Maybe we should just make a conservative autonomous zone, like CHAZ, only litter free and people work

31
spezisacuckold 31 points ago +31 / -0

That’s called America.

26
deleted 26 points ago +26 / -0
1
Rufus_Shinra 1 point ago +1 / -0

Outside of the major leftist cities you'll find that America is still very much America in the rural areas. Not for long if the leftists gain power again, but still where I live it's practically a paradise compared to liberal cities. Trump signs and American flags on every other house, everyone knows everyone and everyone has guns.

0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2
18
DoubleTrumpPumpBump 18 points ago +19 / -1 (edited)

We call it the WHITE COCK.

Western Haven for Independent Thought Emporium and Conservative Open Carry Kingdom

9
grayghost13 9 points ago +10 / -1

So... basically, just a Republican town or city.

5
HockeyMom4Trump 5 points ago +5 / -0

Well, we would be independent and no longer pay any taxes that supports illegal aliens, massive welfare programs, etc.

6
GentleGentile 6 points ago +10 / -4

We damn should. If Zion Biden wins in 2020, it'll be time for massive secession.

4
JesusLovesTrump 4 points ago +4 / -0

A better idea is to start having MAGA rallies inside CHAZ

2
HockeyMom4Trump 2 points ago +2 / -0

I don't know if I want to go anywhere near CHAZ. It sounds like a Hell hole

7
GentleGentile 7 points ago +11 / -4

Half-Globalist Bob Barr's DOJ is busier attacking (and entrapping) patriots than doing anything about violent antifas, LET ALONE the deep state.

5
UsurpTheNarrative 5 points ago +7 / -2

Your more accurate than you may know. Nothing can be resolved through the legal system.

Trump won't use violence however.

We lose the country before that happens unfortunately.

4
Taqiyya_Mockingbird 4 points ago +4 / -0

He needs to call us to Silicon Valley first to hand out wedgies to those fucking disgruntled nerds.

3
Spirit_of_Resistance 3 points ago +3 / -0

Lone wolf.

7
RagnarD 7 points ago +7 / -0

Did you know that 95% of random murders go unsolved. It's why serial killers can kill for decades without being caught, unless they get stupid or want to get caught.

4
Spirit_of_Resistance 4 points ago +4 / -0

Now that's an interesting statistic!

2
Rufus_Shinra 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's true. In fact it's something like 90% of all crimes go unsolved. Especially home robberies unless the robber is caught in the act or items show up at a pawn shop and the owner kept serial numbers, which is super rare. It's not like on those crime TV shows where cops are doing all sorts of detective work. Corrupt mayors have turned police departments into tax collector's just making money off tickets and fines.

3
Moviefone_Kramer 3 points ago +3 / -0

When the judges have no one to answer to, how are they held accountable?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
-20
NeverInterruptEnemy -20 points ago +13 / -33

Stop with “daddy”.

31
SpacemanTy 31 points ago +37 / -6

Dont try to compel how i speak, faggot

-16
NeverInterruptEnemy -16 points ago +9 / -25

Be adult man, call another man Daddy, be a cuck all you like.

I kneel for no one, and not even as a joke call another man my Daddy. But yea, you do you.

13
mty_green_go 13 points ago +14 / -1

Listen fat, don't tell the grown ups how to talk.

11
SpacemanTy 11 points ago +15 / -4

K hardo

-2
thepilotofmoya -2 points ago +7 / -9

It's a gross and homosexual term when used like this. It makes me cringe that Milo affected our movement to that degree.

6
Teapot_Gravy 6 points ago +7 / -1

Disruptor. Divider.

1
thepilotofmoya 1 point ago +2 / -1

What exactly are we conserving by mimicking degenerates and their language?

3
MAGA_4EVER 3 points ago +4 / -1

The absolute freedom of speech lol

... continue reading thread?
2
Captain_Triips 2 points ago +2 / -0

District of Columbia Concealed Carry Pistol Licenses (CCPLs) are required in order to concealed carry and are issued to residents and non-residents and require a firearms training course that has been approved by the Metro Police. You must be at least 21 years old to get a concealed carry permit in D.C. Any firearm you plan on carrying in Washington D.C. will also need to be registered in the District. In addition, possession of ammunition for an unregistered firearm is prohibited in the District of Columbia. Some areas are off-limits even with a D.C. CCPL, including schools, public memorials on the National Mall and along the Tidal Basin and the area around the White House. In terms of reciprocity, Washington D.C. does not honor CCW licenses from any other state.

3
MuricaQThroatpuncher 3 points ago +3 / -0

Just a matter of time, I fear.

2
yankmenoodle 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'm in!

-1
deleted -1 points ago +2 / -3
75
Shakakka99 75 points ago +76 / -1

If DACA was created by an executive order, it seems only proper that it gets destroyed by one. The courts never ruled on it to begin with. Obama pulled it straight from his ass.

15
vote_for_MAGA_2020 15 points ago +15 / -0

Yeah but we have a bunch of fuxking commie lovers entrenched in our govt. un fucking-believable. Roberts isn’t the only one....every single one of these liberal fucks who voted with him are pieces of shit too. Fuck them. Rule and logic doesn’t fucking matter to these freaks. The constitution doesn’t matter to these freaks.

67
Freedom4545 67 points ago +69 / -2

I agree just start shitting them out at record pace, the precedent now is make some laws via E.O. and the next admin cant remove them.

23
HongKongFluey 23 points ago +28 / -5

They can still be rolled back or another EO can be created to nullify it. That’s why a 2nd term is critical. The dems will try to wipe him from history.

10
RollWave 10 points ago +11 / -1

They can still be rolled back or another EO can be created to nullify it.

that's not what the supreme court just said.

5
BeefyBelisarius 5 points ago +5 / -0

That's only when republicans do it to a dem EO.

3
iamherefortheluls 3 points ago +3 / -0

no its not. they blocked it on some made up technicality

“We address only whether the agency complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation for its action. Here the agency failed to consider the conspicuous issues of whether to retain forbearance and what if anything to do about the hardship to DACA recipients.

you will find that corrupt bureaucrats miraculously see no such technicality problems in shit they agree with, and an endless sea of them when they want something stopped.

9
astro_eng 9 points ago +10 / -1

Wrong SCOTUS just said you cant do that!

65
TennesseePride 65 points ago +66 / -1

And I think the man keeping any of that from happening is Kushner.

60
Atlis34 60 points ago +60 / -0

100%. I didn’t vote for Jared Kushner. Wish he had less influence in the White House.

20
Kekintosh2020 20 points ago +20 / -0

Is he a foreign national?

29
GentleGentile 29 points ago +35 / -6

Yes, pretty much, an Israeli agent specifically. He boasted that Netanyahu would stay in his bed when he was a kid.

He was a registered Democrat until 2018 but not known to have much of any convictions other than what's good for Israel--certainly NOT a Reagan Democrat/Blue Collar Dem or in any way Conservative.

Kushner's parents are not only Democrats who are very close to Israel and Netanyahu, but they're vocal racists against Gentiles (attacking Gentile women as "sh!ksas", which is a very offensive Hebrew term meaning 'unclean')

Kushner is very close to the Ultra-Orthodox sect Chabad Lubavitch, which openly advocates imposing the "Noahide Laws" onto all Gentiles in the world. Chabad Lubavitch is, unsurprisingly, itself an Israeli lobby.

Chabad Lubavitch's most charismatic rabbi, Rebbe Menachem Mendel Schneerson, participated wholeheartedly in Chabad's supremacist mindset. He once claimed that Gentile souls come from "satanic spheres" (whatever that even means?!?!): "two types of soul exist. A non-Jewish soul comes from three satanic spheres while the Jewish soul stems from holiness. (pg. 92 of Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel by Shahak and Mevzinsky"” He was a big advocate of Noahide Laws and supporter of Israel. (Obviously, and thankfully, there are some amazing Based Jews who reject this horrible supremacism. In fact, it's thanks to the brave dissidents Israel Shahak and Melvin Mevzinsky, who translated Schneerson's writings from Hebrew into English, that we even know what Satanic Schneerson even said. We must never mirror Chabad/Kushner/Schneerson's sick and bizarre racism by hating all Jews, etc.).

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
2
deleted 2 points ago +4 / -2
2
NvJohansson 2 points ago +3 / -1 (edited)

Nothing against jews, but lsreal firsters like any American that puts the interest of his country before America's interest can fuck right off

2
Vulkanian 2 points ago +2 / -0

Of course he’s a Jew.

Every single fucking time.

1
GentleGentile 1 point ago +1 / -0

It is depressing how few of them actually are loyal to America. Despite ALL they've gotten FROM America.

... continue reading thread?
7
ChuckedBeef 7 points ago +8 / -1

None of us voted for Kushner or Ivanka. GET THEM OUT!

1
americathegr888 1 point ago +2 / -1

Guaranteed he has a spot waiting for him in Biden's administration if he does his job of sabotaging Trump well enough to prevent him getting re-elected.

38
HongKongFluey 38 points ago +38 / -0

Kushner is a leftist mole. Make no mistake about it. Just remember whose campaign he was working on before Trump’s.

7
deleted 7 points ago +10 / -3
11
Flyingdeadpool 11 points ago +14 / -3

I see this all the time but nobody actually tells you what he actually has done. Any examples?

31
ADAM_SCHITT 31 points ago +31 / -0

When Trump wanted to stop all immigration because of COVID-19, Kushner was the one who got exceptions for H1-Bs and other temporary workers, basically neutering the entire executive order.

3
TennesseePride 3 points ago +3 / -0

That's the downside of having behind the scenes guys. I don't know what all the man has said to the president about any given topic or decision, or exactly how much influence he has. I simply don't trust him, based on articles I have read over time. But as to one specific example that definitively puts him in the "bad news" category, I don't claim to have one at the ready.

48
rubberkidney 48 points ago +49 / -1

except when those orders are challenged legally the court will magically have a different point of view.

39
ByteKnight321 39 points ago +40 / -1

The "Different Point of View" is in violation of the constitution, activist judges will be our undoing! He is reversing and the DACA EO - they are breaking laws now.

46
Ligersrule1 46 points ago +47 / -1

EO: clarify the "birthright" citizenship debacle, by ending it

29
vote_for_MAGA_2020 29 points ago +29 / -0

Apparently governing by EO is what we need to fucking do. Because clearly voting doesn’t give us fucking shit. Trump needs to fucking go hog wild. I’m so fucking tired of my fucking vote not lettering. I fucking voted to get fucking ILLEGAL alien criminal scumbags out of my beautiful country. A bunch of fucking pieces of shit that I never voted for just told me “fuck ypu, what you want doesn’t matter”. And they aren’t voting with the Constitution here. This is unconstitutional as fuck what these judges did today.

33
TuckerCarlsonsTie 33 points ago +33 / -0

This Supreme Court has read rights into the Constitution that simply do not exist. DACA has been in violation of American law and the Constitution since President Obama issued it as an Executive Order. The Supreme Court became an unreliable, biased arbiter of the law when they began to apply case law post-FDR SCOTUS to the Constitution instead of adhering solely to the Constitution and the reasoning of judicial review laid out in Marbury vs. Madison. The Legislative Branch and the Judicial Branch mean nothing anymore because they’ve become lawless, shirking their responsibility as defenders of the Republic due to their failure to be strict arbiters of the Constitution. The Executive Branch has now become the most powerful branch, contrary to President Madison’s wishes, so it is time for President Trump to exercise his authority and use the DOJ to overrule the SCOTUS by daring the Judicial Branch to enforce their ruling against the rescinding of DACA. It’s time for President Trump to say to hell with you Chief Justice Roberts, you are a snake, and you are fruit of the poisonous tree.

25
Anaconda 25 points ago +29 / -4

👍👍👍

21
terrichris 21 points ago +21 / -0 (edited)

Congress, legislators that Americans voted for office, make laws.

If unelected Supremes can make laws, I'm good with Trump legislating by executive order.

9
mintyfresh 9 points ago +10 / -1

That's why we need to retake the House and hold the Senate, and make Congress do their damn jobs.

2
spezisacuckold 2 points ago +2 / -0

We need that, but we also need ACTION NOW. Trump needs to start cranking out these EO’s DAILY. We are so fucking far past the point of needing to wait for the election. Let the left challenge the EO’s, at least he’d be trying and using the left’s own Supreme Court ruling.

18
vote_for_MAGA_2020 18 points ago +18 / -0

Like a fucking machine gun. Fully automatic. Spit those EOs out.

Why the fuck not? Nothing fucking matters anymore. Fucking Roberts single handedly fucked this entire country over permanently.

9
txladyvoter 9 points ago +9 / -0

Multiple times.

11
DasBurt 11 points ago +11 / -0

Start with nationwide Constitutional carry.

7
TheBusiness 7 points ago +7 / -0

This i truly think will all come after election day when he wins. Right now i think he has to be someone more conservative and then on his remaining last 4 years he is just going to go to pound town. Right now he has to appeal to some people on the fence where as next year an after its no fucks given.

13
clampie 13 points ago +14 / -1

I'm tired of waiting. And he could lose.

8
BIDENSACPADDICT 8 points ago +8 / -0

Then he still has time to cover the country in EOs too.

2
TheBusiness 2 points ago +4 / -2

Welp sounds like your low on testosterone lil soy boi.

1
WowStrongWinning 1 point ago +1 / -0

If he were to lose, he can still crank out XO after XO.

3
not_a_shill 3 points ago +3 / -0

you mis-spelled nationwide concealed carry.

3
johnrambo 3 points ago +3 / -0

Anchor babies

2
itbj2 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think you should be able to just be deputized as a US marshal by taking a two week course and than you can start arresting ANTIFA remembers and carry and own any kind of weapons.

1
physicscat 1 point ago +1 / -0

They're not permanent, though. Next president can undo them.

3
goodbeerbetterviews2 3 points ago +3 / -0

Apparently not or we wouldn't be right where we are.

1
physicscat 1 point ago +1 / -0

Executive orders can easily be wiped out.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38724063

Reagan signed it, Clinton ended it, Bush signed it back in, Obama ended it, Trump signed it back in. It's like the first one each president addresses.

4
goodbeerbetterviews2 4 points ago +4 / -0

Can I point you to the current issue at hand? You just said that Executive orders can easily be wiped out. Why is DACA currently still running? The very thread on which you decided to comment on. They are supposed to be easily wiped out. This one was not.

0
physicscat 0 points ago +1 / -1

Executive orders can be challenged in court if they are deemed to go into the realm of lawmaking instead of executing the law at hand.

When Obama signed an EO giving amnesty to over a million illegal immigrants, it was challenged and the SCOTUS ruled it unconstitutional.

0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2
129
Raindrops1984 129 points ago +133 / -4

John Roberts adopted his kids through illegal means for illicit purposes, allegedly. They’ve got him by the short and curlies.

44
SatanicSoros 44 points ago +46 / -2

Wow I hadn't heard that. Can you link to a source?

61
Raindrops1984 61 points ago +63 / -2

http://spookdblog.blogspot.com/2018/11/chief-justice-roberts-blackmailed.html

This link has a pretty good overview and links to solid sources. Essentially, they wanted Irish kids and got them shipped to a Latin American country via a human trafficking agency to circumvent Irish adoption laws.

21
SmokeyMeadow 21 points ago +22 / -1

People should start singing Irish folk songs whenever they see him in public, as a low key way of trolling him. I've always hated that cunt, even before Obamacare. Just something about him I didn't trust.

17
yurimodin 17 points ago +17 / -0

Bush appointee......all you need to know.

7
Big_Iron 7 points ago +7 / -0

In general but Alito has been good.

6
DocOne 6 points ago +6 / -0

Come out ye black and tans

Come out and fight me like a man

Show your wife how you won medals down in Flanders

4
MyopicVitriol 4 points ago +4 / -0

Damn didn't see someone else posted this. Good show.

4
DocOne 4 points ago +4 / -0

😂😂 it's all good. Honestly, I'm pretty torn about that stuff. I grew up in Boston in an area that was ... lets call it "sympathetic" towards the IRA. The problem is that the IRA, Fine Gael, Fianna Fail, etc were communist as fuck which is antithetical towards basically everything I believe. On the other hand, I like their go get em attitude towards kicking out the Brits. I had friends who had uncles and fathers who were active or "former" IRA.

... continue reading thread?
5
MyopicVitriol 5 points ago +5 / -0

Come out ye black and tans,

Come out and fight me like a man...

3
ronburgandy 3 points ago +3 / -0

Irish folk songs like my little armalite? Obligatory not a call for violence to the glowies and alphabet bois.

1
King6of6the6retards 1 point ago +1 / -0

My little armalite

I'm gonna make it bright

make it bright

make it bright

make it bright

15
Sunnybats2 15 points ago +16 / -1

Closet case no diggety

9
Italians_Invented_2A 9 points ago +9 / -0

Ok, so we should make this public and involve the media. We need to humiliate that cuck and force him to resign with the threat of impeachment.

Probably CNN will help us because he's nominally conservative and they won't be able to help themselves.

So Trump gets one more pick. Hopefully we'll have a better senate next year so we can pass someone truly based

5
DocOne 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yes. All of it, yes. Except CNN will defend him and use to to "prove" impartiality.

6
OhGonzo 6 points ago +15 / -9

Not likely, people are starting to throw shit around here like a CNN anchor

17
TennesseePride 17 points ago +19 / -2

That his adoption process has been used against him isn't new. It's a long standing theory. Now, the "for illicit purposes" part I have not heard before. But yeah, no idea if there is any hard evidence.

5
OhGonzo 5 points ago +6 / -1

Fair enough

27
TruthVelocity 27 points ago +29 / -2

And on Epstein's flight logs.

6
orc_lives_matter 6 points ago +7 / -1

Wow, didn't know

11
vote_for_MAGA_2020 11 points ago +11 / -0

John Roberts will never have to suffer the fucking consequences of his decision today. Roberts lives in a nice ducking neighborhood, paid with our tax dollars, and he will never have to suffer the fucking consequences of an ILLEGAL alien attacking him or his family. Fucking piece of shit.

9
HockeyMom4Trump 9 points ago +9 / -0

Yep. Something is up with this guy

6
labajada 6 points ago +6 / -0

It's not really leverage if everybody knows about it.

4
Raindrops1984 4 points ago +4 / -0

They don’t care if we know about the adoption. I think it’s what he did after (hint: he’s in the Epstein log book) they hold over him.

6
masshole3 6 points ago +7 / -1

I've heard this rumor

My question is why TF would Dubya not have realized this would be an issue... ?? Or Roberts himself?

I mean, really now...!

4
Raindrops1984 4 points ago +4 / -0

Because he was chosen by the uniparty specifically because he was controllable.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
6
txladyvoter 6 points ago +6 / -0

I don't care what they've got him by.

75
BabyTrump 75 points ago +77 / -2

John Roberts is a liberal on the court.

56
ayemfuct 56 points ago +58 / -2

When you consider the low-IQ globalist cunt that appointed him, it really isn't surprising that he sucks.

I will admit that I am surprised by how MUCH he sucks.

42
Unruly-Husker 42 points ago +43 / -1

Exactly, saying he sides with liberals is misleading. He IS A LIBERAL

17
Returningtogod 17 points ago +17 / -0

It’s like calling Romney’s vote bipartisan. No, he’s one of them.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
29
Unicron3 29 points ago +29 / -0

Breitbart agrees.

"Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by his four liberal colleagues..."

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
17
JesusMaga 17 points ago +18 / -1

John Roberts just gave an interview that explains a lot

13
spezisacuckold 13 points ago +13 / -0

I read a Vox article (I know I know, but I keep close tabs on the enemy) earlier today about DACA where they were interviewing some far left freaks and one of them pointed out their worldview was in the hands of the conservative Justices and named them one by one... except for Roberts.

10
vote_for_MAGA_2020 10 points ago +10 / -0

THERE SERIOUSLY HAS TO BE A MECHANISM FOR REMOVING THIS ASSHOLE FROM THE COURT!!!!

0
TimeIsARetardedOval 0 points ago +1 / -1

Ask "Skippy" Podesta.

Wetworks at the vinyard

58
fthecoup 58 points ago +58 / -0

An executive order from a Democrat President becomes irrevocable law.

46
Anaconda 46 points ago +51 / -5

Gorsuch the LGBT+ and violent criminal aliens/naturalized Americans panderer also needs to step down. Gorsuch made it illegal to strip violent criminal naturalized Americans of their citizenship and deport them from our country in 2018.

11
Hillary4Prison2020 11 points ago +22 / -11

A SC judge who votes based on their interpretation of the law and not by party is not a reason to call for them to step down

9
HongKongFluey 9 points ago +16 / -7

Yes. Thank you for this. Too many on here think SC justices should have party loyalty which is not the case.

7
SickPuppy 7 points ago +7 / -0

Cutting the "we are better then them" crap is the first step to sanity. Like the liberal judges voted outside party lines on any issue lately ...

2
teabag4giggles 2 points ago +5 / -3

Right? How the fuck do they think we got INTO this situation?

-1
deleted -1 points ago +2 / -3
0
Hillary4Prison2020 0 points ago +1 / -1

DACA is still up in the air did you not see Trump’s tweet about the vast powers granted under this ruling and his steadfast commitment to use them for the good of the country? Some of us here have wayyy too little patience. Calling to basically impeach independent members of the judiciary (who lean our way already) isn’t just “playing dirty like the Dems” it’s calling to corrupt one of the most sacred institutions of our republic in the name of partisanship

-1
americathegr888 -1 points ago +2 / -3

Be realistic. They just showed they are willing to ignore the law in favor of wokeshit. They aren't going to let him get rid of DACA.

0
TimeIsARetardedOval 0 points ago +1 / -1

DACA is still up in the air

Enjoy 5th grade kid, you're gonna be there awhile.

0
NaCl_Miner 0 points ago +2 / -2

Explain to me how an executive order becomes a f king defacto constitutional amendment then?

26
vote_for_MAGA_2020 26 points ago +26 / -0

YOU GOTTA BE FUCKING KIDDING ME!!!!!!!

Fuck this whole system. It’s been taken over by fucking dirtbag commie scum

9
StarPlatinum123 9 points ago +9 / -0

There is just no way we can get everything we want when ~36% of this country is Democrat.

24
day221 24 points ago +24 / -0

He's obviously corrupt. In the "sex" ruling the other day he used logic which directly contradicts his reasoning for opposing the ruling on same sex marriage. If discrimination based on sexuality is also discrimination based on sex (which it's not, but that's what he argued) then his decision in the same sex marriage case was wrong and illegal.

Honestly it's embarrassing and frankly scary that in a country of 350 million a clown like this ends up at the head of the top court. This guy shouldn't even pass a 101 course in law let alone be in the position he is in today.

19
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 19 points ago +21 / -2

👍👍👍

9
TheThreeSeashells 9 points ago +9 / -0

Makes you wonder what else they have on him besides his illegally adopted children.

4
BakeRatDotWin 4 points ago +4 / -0

his name on the passenger manifest for the lolita express, for one thing

3
TheThreeSeashells 3 points ago +3 / -0

That's right...I forgot about that. Good call friend.

2
JESUSJUGS 2 points ago +2 / -0

So is Bill Clinton’s. ☺️ Totally unrelated: just wanted to remind everyone. Lmao

9
fthecoup 9 points ago +9 / -0

Roberts wrote in the decision that the government failed to give an adequate justification for ending the federal program. WTF!!!!!

7
ChuckedBeef 7 points ago +7 / -0

How about it was never legal to begin with? Fucking A Roberts needs to go down, he's a dirty judge.

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
6
fthecoup 6 points ago +6 / -0

AND WITH THIS SAME SHIT -- oh, we'll allow you to refile/repetition when you think you have a reason that we think is good enough.

8
TaggartCiscontinenta 8 points ago +8 / -0

Dubya’s legacy continues

8
Danmax67 8 points ago +8 / -0

He's compromised. Epstein Island guy.

6
Lockherup2020 6 points ago +6 / -0

he is in the pockets of the deep state. human trafficking and such

6
GernBlanston1 6 points ago +7 / -1

He won't

6
Liberty-Or-Death 6 points ago +7 / -1

He won't. He's doing what the deep state put him there to do.

6
PotentialWizard 6 points ago +6 / -0

Roberts is the Supreme Cuck.

6
JohnnyRico69 6 points ago +6 / -0

After the November election, it's time for patriots to start doing the work that needs to be done.

5
Reev_Jax 5 points ago +5 / -0

Man we have been getting fucked left and right

5
beta-detector 5 points ago +5 / -0

He's fulfilling his role why was he placed as judge of SCOTUS. 5th column.

4
fatstig 4 points ago +4 / -0

Definitely a pedo or otherwise compromised.

4
booblitchutz 4 points ago +4 / -0

All of SCOTUS is compromised now. The mob has scared them into submission.

4
Choppa_Pilot 4 points ago +5 / -1

Step down? He should be left alone in his office with a .357 and told to "do the right thing".

3
Ivleeeg 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yep. A traitor is far worse than the enemy. They do much more damage.

2
deleted 2 points ago +8 / -6
-5
Loyal2Liberty -5 points ago +6 / -11

Fuck that. Violence is the way of the left.

7
tokenninja 7 points ago +9 / -2 (edited)

Tucker Carlson (and I disagree)

The less naive amongst us know that the only opinion that matters is the one belonging to the person who is able and willing to exert force. The rest is theatrics for the masses.

4
ChuckedBeef 4 points ago +4 / -0

The way of the left? How do you think America came to be? It wasn't the left doing the fighting.

1
deleted 1 point ago +7 / -6
5
tokenninja 5 points ago +5 / -0

I’m supporting POTUS. whose side are you on https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1273634152433188865?s=21

1
deleted 1 point ago +3 / -2
3
PosterIsDead 3 points ago +3 / -0

He is owned. He is a slave.

2
TimeIsNow-Maga 2 points ago +3 / -1

((( Roberts )))

385
WalkFastGoHome 385 points ago +387 / -2

Wasn't daca an executive order, anyway?

614
JustHereForTheSalmon 614 points ago +615 / -1

EO to subvert the law: SCOTUS APPROVED

EO to restore the law: UNCONSTITUTIONAL

101
wong 101 points ago +102 / -1

^To the top!

61
AlphaNathan 61 points ago +62 / -1

Are we moving to East America or West America after Civil War II?

60
deleted 60 points ago +62 / -2
21
BIDENSACPADDICT 21 points ago +22 / -1

Still going to be one America. Just fewer communists.

6
BonerDonor 6 points ago +6 / -0

I want the government for starship troopers. Want to be a citizen? Go kill bugs. Then when you're able to vote, you'll think twice before giving a bunch of free shit to non citizens who stayed home and did nothing to help.

7
onelastround 7 points ago +7 / -0

Neither, after we win, whoever is left we send to whatever communist utopia costs the least to ship them to.

8
technologic 8 points ago +8 / -0

Hell is pretty cheap

2
PepeHelicopterTours 2 points ago +2 / -0

I hear Chile has an air freight service that is pretty cheap and extremely effective.

5
Spirit_of_Resistance 5 points ago +5 / -0

Hang them all

3
RocketSurgeon22 3 points ago +3 / -0

President needs to end DACA. That's all that needs to happen here. Instead of saying the program was illegal and framing the design integrity, Trump could EO to end it.

31
deleted 31 points ago +32 / -1
21
fthecoup 21 points ago +22 / -1

This. In a nutshell.

7
El-Duderino 7 points ago +7 / -0

Top comment!

4
RocketSurgeon22 4 points ago +4 / -0

EO an EO

4
LibertyOverSecurity 4 points ago +4 / -0

This isn't much different than the judge saying the prosecutors can't drop the case against Flynn or some random liberal judge blocking a travel ban. Even though it's wrong they still do it because of our WEAK RINOs in congress!

3
BonerDonor 3 points ago +4 / -1

How the fuck are you supposed to rescind EOs? Is there some hidden authority above President that can do it?

121
jasper_db1 121 points ago +124 / -3

It was. The Trump administration needs to revise the order to end DACA and resubmit. The ruling today doesn't mean the President cannot end DACA. From USA Today when the case started:

"The question before the justices Tuesday was not whether the Trump administration can wind down the program, which is undisputed. Rather, they were asked to decide if the administration's initial reason for doing so – that DACA was illegal from the start – was accurate and sufficient."

http://archive.is/WW5oO

113
goodbeerbetterviews2 113 points ago +114 / -1

The bullshit is that you don't need a fucking reason. They have made rulings that have decided that while yes, Trump has every right to do it and it is legal, is he doing it for the wrong reason? That is horseshit and needs to end quickly.

51
STEVE_HUFFMANS_BULL 51 points ago +51 / -0

Trump should just run with the “court said its legal to rescind the order” part and ignore everything else

29
firestorm117 29 points ago +29 / -0

I hate to quote Andrew Jackson because this quote was against my own people (specific nation in question to be exact), but he needs to pull an andrew Jackson. "Justice Roberts has made his decision, now let him enforce it"

6
LamboLimo 6 points ago +7 / -1

You don’t need a reason, but if it’s found illegal it’s a good bargaining tool. Trump already said that he would “try a deal with dems” if the Supreme Court sides with him. Likely to extend DACA in exchange for Border Wall or something else

14
ThomasJefferson1776 14 points ago +14 / -0

Fuck the dems, pass a EO and let's push our shit through.

2
txladyvoter 2 points ago +2 / -0

I don't think so.

6
el-y0y0s 6 points ago +6 / -0

Wait, did conservative groups challenge Obama's EO to start DACA?

If so, what was the reasoning those challenges were thwarted?

Or did the GOP not bother ?

44
weltbild 44 points ago +45 / -1

does he need a reason for EOs?

does the supreme court now vet the reasoning behind every EO?

13
jamesfinmadison 13 points ago +13 / -0

Apparently so.

15
Anaconda 15 points ago +21 / -6

They will just reject and reject again. Today's ruling codified DACA

13
txladyvoter 13 points ago +13 / -0

Supreme Court shredding precedence, law, and logic. Inventing as he goes along.

And he's the Supreme who said elections matter. Unless it's the Election of President Donald John Trump!

11
bovineblitz 11 points ago +11 / -0

Why is the reason relevant?

Can't he just move to rescind without offering a reason?

6
coup13 6 points ago +6 / -0

The reason to end DACA?

Notice how they don't talk about the validity of it, rather, has the president answered a bogus question or not.

How about: I'm the president bitch!

If the found fathers were here, they'd hang most of DC by trees and start over.

3
Peacebears 3 points ago +4 / -1

Aah makes sense thank you

108
weltbild 108 points ago +109 / -1

An unconstitutional one by obamas admission.

42
Anaconda 42 points ago +44 / -2

Now it is constitutional thanks to Roberts

30
weltbild 30 points ago +31 / -1

with the whole redefining words ruling it doesn't matter anyway

37
Anaconda 37 points ago +38 / -1

The Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation need to be forever fired and dismantled for actually endorsing Gorsuch and Roberts

10
mythbusterr 10 points ago +10 / -0

I agree. They have done more damage to this country than any commie could ever do

7
spezisacuckold 7 points ago +7 / -0

Hell, the Heritage Foundation basically came up with Obamacare.

52
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 52 points ago +53 / -1

Yes. It was. A never ending gift from Barry Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah.

23
Raindrops1984 23 points ago +24 / -1

Of Mombasa, Kenya.

9
Sunnybats2 9 points ago +10 / -1

Of Vancouver

6
PraiseBeToScience 6 points ago +6 / -0

De Farrakhan.

11
MLGS 11 points ago +11 / -0

The Supreme Court has ruled that presidents can't rescind a prior president's executive orders if they (the Court) doesn't like the reason behind it, yes.

282
Ct187 282 points ago +283 / -1

So the Supreme Court is rejecting an attempt to enforce the nation's laws. This is where we're at.

81
Anaconda 81 points ago +91 / -10

Right after beta Gorsuch ruled that 'sex' now includes trannies and drag queens.

42
lifeisahologram 42 points ago +43 / -1

How can they even verify that shit? I guess if anything ever happens to me that I don’t like, I’m just gonna yell “IM A TRANNY YOURE GOING TO JAIL” and get whatever I want I guess.

6
HeavyVetting 6 points ago +6 / -0

I can only hope they're bringing that nonsense out into the open so it becomes obvious how ridiculous it all is. Not sure it will work.

And unfortunately "who's a tranny" seems like the least of our problems at the moment.

4
catvideos3 4 points ago +5 / -1

I’m a bearded butch lesbian transsexual.

4
BillionsAndBillions 4 points ago +4 / -0

Stunning, and brave!

1
ChippingToe 1 point ago +1 / -0

This is what we need to do. The society they want to build would have way too many loopholes that could be abused by bad actors, and they're too stupid to see them.

2
plasmaburnz 2 points ago +2 / -0

Well, the whole "discrimination" industry is nothing but thought policing. Thus ruling on it looks a whole lot like priest work. We need to repeal the entire Civil Rights Act to restore free association.

5
maga_2020 5 points ago +7 / -2

I know you’re being an ass on purpose but the ruling basically says that if you have a man and a woman in a workplace that likes men you can’t fire the man because he likes men since that’s discrimination based on sex.

4
IntrepidBurger 4 points ago +6 / -2

That was the argument, but it's a complete bungling of logic. You aren't discriminating by sex, you're discriminating by behavior. A man liking another man is a distinct behavior from a woman liking another man. Just like a hug between men is construed differently than an opposite gender hug. You aren't discriminating because he's a man, you're discriminating against homosexual behavior.

It's a terrible ruling that requires a poor understanding of logic to apply, which is incredible for a SC judge.

-56
Finalfight -56 points ago +6 / -62

Man you're really upset about being uneducated and illiterate.

You should probably get an education soon.

Your zealot puritan bullshit has no place over American Individualism.

20
nutup_orshutup 20 points ago +22 / -2

Hang on there cowboy. XX or XY, that's all you get.

Anything else is a preference or a feeling.

Which is fine, but it isn't biological.

12
koyima 12 points ago +12 / -0

how do we check someone is gay?

11
IntrepidBurger 11 points ago +11 / -0

Check for Biden stickers on their car.

3
AlphaNathan 3 points ago +3 / -0

Worked 8 years ago, tried and tested.

Well, not tested...

5
buildUSgreatagain 5 points ago +6 / -1

In Islam you anally rape the guy and if he enjoys it he's gay.

1
ChippingToe 1 point ago +1 / -0

Nah, we just stone anyone suspected of being gay. We trust that Allah would intervene on behalf of wrongly accused heteros, so we can assure you that there have been exactly zero wrongful executions.

#SandPeopleLogic

1
buildUSgreatagain 1 point ago +1 / -0

how u gonna bust a nut then tho

8
AlphaNathan 8 points ago +8 / -0

Prove he's uneducated.

Prove he's illiterate.

Prove he's a zealot.

I'll wait.

7
El-Duderino 7 points ago +8 / -1

Your denial of basic truths like biological sex has no place ANYWHERE.

3
trump_lsd 3 points ago +3 / -0

"Someone didn't read the same books, written by Marxists, which were spoon fed to me by my Marxist professors, to the tune of thousands of dollars a year? Haha wow so illiterate, go get an education"

2
BathouseBarry 2 points ago +2 / -0

Omg, he used big, bad words like zealot, Puritan, uneducated, illiterate. Watch out!!! Your beliefs have triggered it, and xir has activated xir's shaming protocol. Only it has no effect.

Funny how retards like this think their bullying is somehow a legitimate argument. Then again when science and reason aren't on their side, it's all they got.

I blame shitty parents and indoctrination at "school."

1
triggernometry 1 point ago +1 / -0

lol that's not what individualism entails. at all.

2
EuropeisFinished 2 points ago +2 / -0

All that means is they can’t be fired only for that reason.

13
deleted 13 points ago +19 / -6
9
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 9 points ago +10 / -1

Yep. They didn’t like the wording.

254
Mass_Deporter 254 points ago +256 / -2

Fuck John Roberts. Bush fucked us harder with him than he did with the camel-jockey wars

48
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 48 points ago +49 / -1

He did

38
slowmotrin 38 points ago +39 / -1

By design. His entire family loves illegal immigrants. Hires them. Marries them. Remember Jeb anyone?

16
Modus_Pwninz 16 points ago +16 / -0

Guac bowl Jeb! Please clap.

14
Cantshadowbanthemall 14 points ago +14 / -0

Bush is part of the same cadre as obama

6
SadPangolin 6 points ago +6 / -0

The whole Bush family is Deep State to the core.

5
MuadDon 5 points ago +5 / -0

Bush Sr was the one who took a small bog and turned it into a massive swamp. Hussein and Bush Jr are like peon children compared to Bush Sr.

11
NO_RINOs 11 points ago +11 / -0

Judge Roberts did the same exact thing to stop trump from putting a question about US citizenship on the 2020 census.

He just said the Trump did the procedure incorrectly. It’s a nice cop out for him to pretend that he’s not 100% against everything Trump is trying to do.

Fool me once, John Roberts, shame on you.

Fool me twice, John Roberts, shame on you.

171
FuckPlebbit 171 points ago +173 / -2

The ruling here is utter horseshit.

They say that they ruled against him "because the procedure to do it wasn't correct".

Opens the fucking door to never being able to rescind an EO ever again if SCOTUS feels it should be law of the land.

Roberts is such a fucking piece of shit, jesus christ.

62
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 62 points ago +63 / -1

because the procedure to do it wasn't correct".

That’s irrelevant. EO’s can be rescinded

34
deleted 34 points ago +38 / -4
17
Italians_Invented_2A 17 points ago +18 / -1

No it isn't. There's a movement to fix America, and the world. A movement that has millions of followers. MAGA.

This movement did not exist until 4 years ago, do things are definitely changing for the better. It just takes time to undo decades of Communist infiltration

6
deleted 6 points ago +7 / -1
8
Italians_Invented_2A 8 points ago +8 / -0

It's not lazy.

With an education system and media controlled by the communists how could people have done it before? Do you think Trump would have won without social media?

The reason this movement exists now is that thanks to the internet you can form your political opinions outside of the media and schools / universities.

4
deleted 4 points ago +5 / -1 (edited)
3
Italians_Invented_2A 3 points ago +3 / -0

Explanation 3): you have an undemocratic system that prevents new parties to rise, forcing people to vote for John Jackson or Jack Johnson.

First past the post system is inherently undemocratic. To defeat it there needs to be a leader so popular to take over one of the two established party.

3
SadPangolin 3 points ago +3 / -0

There wasn't a good Republican candidate to vote for between Reagan and Trump. Pat Buchanan would have been a good one, if he could have got the nomination. People tried with Ron Paul, but the Republican establishment did everything they could to ensure he didn't get the nomination.

The silent majority was literally dumber than a box of nails and "never knew there was a problem" until Trump tweeted about it.

Kind of. Most people were far too busy with their own lives to have much time to spend worrying about politics, and the entire media-entertainment-government complex was telling them that anyone who said anything was wrong was just a 'conspiracy theorist'.

I've been warning people about the communist takeover of the school system for twenty years. Most people just shrugged because they had to use schools as free childcare in order for both of them to go to work to pay their bills.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
14
deleted 14 points ago +15 / -1
0
bsbbtnh 0 points ago +1 / -1

This ruling was right, IMO.

Obama argued DACA was prosecutorial discretion, meaning a President can implement (or remove it) at any time.

Trump removed it as though it was an administrative rule. But Trump did that wrong (or did he..?). Because he didn't follow APA rules (which can take time), he was sued.

Trump admin argued that DACA is an administrative rule. SCOTUS agreed. And they agreed Trump can end it. And they agree that Dreamers have no valid reason to stop it from being rescinded. But they said that 'technically' Trump has to follow the APA procedures to rescind it.

Anybody remember DAPA (Deferred Action for Parents of Americans)? This was just like DACA, but for parents. Obama said this was prosecutorial discretion, as well. It went to court, and they found that no, it's an administrative rule. And since Obama didn't implement DAPA according to APA rules, it was unconstitutional. That decision went to SCOTUS. Scalia had just died (...) so the decision was 4-4 split, which affirmed the lower court. DAPA was ended.

When Trump was elected, he immediately rescinded DAPA, without any issue (it was illegal, after all).

So now we find that DACA, too, is an administrative rule. But Obama didn't implement it according to APA rules. What does that mean? Simple. DACA is unconstitutional.

Now, if Trump had attacked it from that angle, SCOTUS probably would have said some bullshit about how poor illegal immigrants would be adversely affected, and that they can make an exception due to under burden or some shit. But they can't now. They literally struck that argument down today. And they held that DACA is administrative, and that it has to follow APA rules. Essentially SCOTUS has ruled DACA unconstitutional, except that specific issue wasn't in front of them.

Do you remember what Trump said during his campaign, and during the months leading up to him rescinding DACA? He said it was unconstitutional. He said it over and over. And yet, when he rescinded it, he didn't attack that angle.

Now Trump can take down DACA with the claim it is unconstitutional. SCOTUS can't really do shit, unless they want to look like a bunch of fucking morons. And the next President that comes along, they'll have to follow APA rules to implement it, which will be a drawn out process. Trump made it a tiny bit harder for the next President to fuck you over.

Remember that Trump offered Democrats a deal. They get DACA (in legislation), expanded to cover 3x as many people, and a path to citizenship. All in exchange for funding the wall. Remember what Dems said? No. Pelosi rejected the deal.

So when Trump is on the campaign trail, he'll be able to tell everyone how Dems turned their back on dreamers. He'll be able to say all the great things he offered, in exchange for the wall. And he'll be able to point and say 'look, there's the wall I built anyways', because he got his funding.

What do Dems have to offer to get a new DACA deal?

149
goodbeerbetterviews2 149 points ago +150 / -1

This is absolutely ridiculous. An existing president cannot remove an order from a past president??????

President Trump better start shitting executive orders left and right. Nationwide open carry is now legal. Border wall just got 10 feet higher. Executive order against sanctuary cities. Let's ram this shit through

59
Get-schlonged 59 points ago +60 / -1

National Voter ID, 2 scoops of ice cream for everyone

32
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 32 points ago +33 / -1

President Trump better start shitting executive orders left and right. Nationwide open carry is now legal. Border wall just got 10 feet higher. Executive order against sanctuary cities. Let's ram this shit through

Trump should just hand out blank EO forms at the Rally. Every gets one !!

8
559throw 8 points ago +8 / -0

Just put them all into a giant Suggestions box, pull some random ones out and they become EOs instantly. Bing bang boom

5
To2025andbeyond 5 points ago +5 / -0

It’s the same backwards logic they used in the census case. They ruled the president had the authority, but didn’t demonstrate a good enough reason, so it was overturned.

3
warlord1 3 points ago +3 / -0

HELL YEA

3
roscoeSteele 3 points ago +3 / -0

Lol when I suggested this I got lambasted

Now I think everyone is beginning to actually wake the fuck up.

Better late than never I guess

2
triggernometry 2 points ago +2 / -0

You actually think this works both ways? I'm afraid you don't understand. They're not obligated to follow any legal precedent they set. The law is a farce that only our side takes seriously. They can block any Trump EO they don't like, make up a half-ass excuse their supporters will eat up, and we will continue seething impotently in this isolated little corner of the internet.

142
Anaconda 142 points ago +153 / -11

The Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation need to go fuck themselves with Roberts and Gorsuch being endorsed by them

94
FuckPlebbit 94 points ago +98 / -4

Gorsuch didn't cuck out here, it was roberts as usual.

72
Anaconda 72 points ago +81 / -9

Gorsuch cucked out by literally codifying "sex" to now include trannies and drag queens.

Also Gorsuch's first sign of cucking was when he ruled that violent criminal naturalized Americans can't have their citizenship be stripped and can't be deported from the country. That was SOP for all presidents since the 1965 Immigration Act. The POTUS until Gorsuch's ruling had the power to revoke a naturalized American's citizenship and immediately deport if they did violent crimes like murder and rape.

85
Imransgarage 85 points ago +86 / -1

His first sign of cucking was his appointment not being violently opposed by commies. We should have known then.

43
lasmejoresmaga 43 points ago +44 / -1

yep this is the tell

7
NO_RINOs 7 points ago +7 / -0

BIGLY!

11
slowmotrin 11 points ago +11 / -0

I thought it was because he was replacing a right wing vote while kav replaced a left winger. Looks like we had it wrong.

7
Imransgarage 7 points ago +7 / -0

Yes TBF it’s a lot more clear in retrospect.

5
spezisacuckold 5 points ago +6 / -1

I’d say it’s still largely accurate. Kavanaugh, who is objectively more “center” than Gorsuch, was fought against with the full force of the left solely because of his views on abortion. The left needed to neutralize that which is why they asked ad-nauseum how he would rule on Roe v Wade should a new abortion case come up.

0
TimeIsARetardedOval 0 points ago +1 / -1

If that's the case the shitlibs didn't get the memo. Kennedy looks more right wing than Roberts right now.

16
FuckPlebbit 16 points ago +17 / -1

I'm not saying he's not a shit justice, I'm just saying he didn't cuck out in this specific instance.

Which is shocking because immigration is exactly where I expected him to cuck out on.

13
weltbild 13 points ago +14 / -1

he didn't cuck but he knew roberts would

8
Italians_Invented_2A 8 points ago +8 / -0

Exactly. No point in cucking when the outcome is already decided, he just wanted to save appearances

11
Anaconda 11 points ago +13 / -2

He cucked out here in April 2018 on immigration. Even Robert's didn't buy the bullshit Gorsuch was claiming:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sessions_v._Dimaya

-15
Finalfight -15 points ago +14 / -29

You're amazingly illiterate and uneducated if that's what you think he did.

Would you fire a man for dating/fucking/marrying a woman?

No.

Would you fire a woman for wearing a dress, high heels, etc?

No.

If you reverse the roles in either of those situation that means your decision is purely based on the persons Sex/Gender or however you want to say it.

Which we put into law, is wrong to do. Because it's wrong to do.

All you are is some puritan religious zealot who doesn't give a shit about a human beings individual character and want the state to allow you to do whatever you want to people.

13
Italians_Invented_2A 13 points ago +17 / -4

Fuck off faggot. When you're at work you should keep your fetishes for yourself, not parade them around the office. There should not be a special protection for sexual orientation because it's something you should keep out of the workplace, unlike race or sex that are an apparent part of you.

Now faggots will shove it even more down people's throat and we can't say shit. Also if one of them gets fired for unrelated reasons they'll just have the excuse to sue.

-1
flashersenpai -1 points ago +4 / -5

you're talking out of both sides of you mouth. Either protected classes are good or they are not.

7
Italians_Invented_2A 7 points ago +7 / -0

I'd prefer no protected class. But there's a big reason to protect someone for e.g. national origin.

The difference is that it's something that is always with you and it's apparent to everyone. I'm not shoving it down your throat, you understand my national origin from my accent, face, etc. So I come to work to do a good job and I'm protected against assholes who would judge me differently only because of who I am.

Homosexuals are different because I should not know what you do in your private time. You should keep it to yourself, just like heterosexuals who enjoy being pissed on by their girlfriends don't go around the office telling people.

So this absurd judgement effectively allows one political movement in the workplace with no repercussions.

0
flashersenpai 0 points ago +1 / -1

Is it protected speech for someone to dislike you for who you are?

... continue reading thread?
4
BlackToof_Grin 4 points ago +6 / -2

Because it's wrong to do

Why? What if as a business your male employee decides 'hey I'm gonna start transitioning' and then they start wearing a dress to work and insisting people call them by their now chosen female name and as a result you lose business over it?

Is it ok to fire that person? Or, because 'muh personal freedoms!' (no one is saying they can't not be that thing they want to be) you have to eat shit and watch your business tank?

Is it OK to NOT hire a person you know is trans because you know or reasonably believe that decision will harm your business?

Where does your ridiculousness end?

6
sun_wolf 6 points ago +6 / -0

And what prevents male bodies with penises from entering the change rooms for female bodies now that their “subjective perception” of themselves as “women” is codified into law?

3
rabdargab 3 points ago +7 / -4

With that same logic you could make a case for pedophilia. Are you saying if I oppose pedophilia its because I am a puritan religious zealot?

-1
deleted -1 points ago +2 / -3
1
flashersenpai 1 point ago +3 / -2

pedophilia is illegal sodomy is not

6
rabdargab 6 points ago +6 / -0

Yah no shit dumbass, sodomy used to be illegal too. All it takes is for another freakshow to lower the age of consent and with this ruling there would not be a damn thing anyone can do about it.

1
flashersenpai 1 point ago +1 / -0

In order for that to be a useful point, you have to prove that sodomy should be illegal. In which case, it will probably make you seem more like a "zealot" than not.

Second, it's already quasi-legal to have sex with minors in some states given that a person can marry them.

So now what?

3
nutup_orshutup 3 points ago +4 / -1

EO already exists. His ruling extended beyond that to effectively recognize more than 2 sexes.

That is what everyone here is pissed about.

1
Cadastral 1 point ago +2 / -1

This kind of thinking presumes the answer to the question. It assumes that the appropriateness of any kind of behavior cannot depend on sex, when that is essentially the question we are trying to answer. That is why Gorsuch's vote is shady, because as a Supreme Court Justice, he should be well aware of the fallacy of this kind of reasoning.

2
UserGen1776 2 points ago +2 / -0

Hey Final,

I'm sorry you getting alot of rage. There are alot of "pedes" in this thread that are pretty ignorant. Plants trying to cause strife? Meh. For what its worth I agree with you.

https://thedonald.win/p/FzFv5GRZ/x/c/12izpeVTDk

3
flashersenpai 3 points ago +4 / -1

moron sex is a protected class in the civil rights act, if you have problems with that then you have to kill the CRA not bet on a supreme court justice

18
deleted 18 points ago +20 / -2
-26
Finalfight -26 points ago +5 / -31

Again... An uneducated and an illiterate opinion.

It's to bad there are vocal Trump Supporters like you that bring down the I.Q. Of the entire movement.

Understanding you're a puritan zealot who cares nothing for American Individualism and want nothing more than to be legally allowed to discriminate against people who have opposing views to yours (which is funny on this forum how people whine about Big Tech Censorship/Discrimination).

If you wouldnt fire a Man for dating/kissing/fucking a woman.

Or fire a woman for wearing a dress, heels, and makeup.

And you would fire the reversed gender for doing any of that... You are discriminating against that person simply because of their Sex which is completely illegal... You know... Cause that whole discrimination against women thing happened.

It's not rocket science... You're just to uneducated and illiterate to understand and that's OK... Cause you could never be in a position where your opinion on things matter to a greater society.

14
deleted 14 points ago +17 / -3
7
Kekistanirefugee 7 points ago +10 / -3

Man we never had pussy users like you over on reddit, we got our own site to be more free and instead we got more people like you caught up in their fefes.

5
Yucky 5 points ago +6 / -1

This faulty reasoning has already been debunked. Consider a lifeguard. A female lifeguard could be fired for not wearing a top bathing suit, whereas a man would not need to. That's not sex discrimination, that's an acknowledgement of the differences between sexes:

https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/06/symposium-the-simplistic-logic-of-justice-neil-gorsuchs-account-of-sex-discrimination/

His logic is so simplistic, it's fucking absurdly childish. He can't figure out that a man and woman would have different requirements, without calling it "discrimination".

5
BrakeRemovalMechanic 5 points ago +6 / -1 (edited)

So using your logic you can't fire a man for using the woman's restroom. Irrelevant to the sex they currently identify as because you would be discriminating based on the sex of the offender. This also would apparently allow girls to go topless at schools because boys are allowed to.

Edit: Public swimming pools can no longer legally require women to wear tops without requiring men to wear tops.

6
559throw 6 points ago +6 / -0

This also would apparently allow girls to go topless at schools because boys are allowed to.

Joe Biden has entered the chat.

3
flashersenpai 3 points ago +3 / -0

yeah that's right. Are you seeing the problem with protected classes now? Do you see that "protecting" race, sex, etc is an infringement on individual rights?

2
maleitch 2 points ago +4 / -2

You are not educated or literate. You are simply a child who is ruled by emotion and their sex organs. You are joke cultist. You don't get to simply redefine normal to accommodate every sexual related birth defect on the planet. It is worthless trash like you who want kids having anal sex and are the direct result of the garbage culture this country is suffering through today. Go cry back to your single mother.

3
Spirit_of_Resistance 3 points ago +3 / -0

Lol fuck off faggot

-1
TimeIsNow-Maga -1 points ago +1 / -2

Yes! Faggot

3
el-y0y0s 3 points ago +3 / -0

You define the haphazad conditions in which you live.

We will define the terms under which we live.

Get ready for a big clash, because these values are irreconcilable.

12
weltbild 12 points ago +13 / -1

people say that he might just done nothing since it was not necessary

10
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 10 points ago +11 / -1

Barry Barack Hussein Obama Soetoro Sobarkah must have something on him

14
therepublica 14 points ago +16 / -2

We need something else from now on. The federalist society sucks.

11
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 11 points ago +12 / -1

Exactly. Check their funding !!!

7
1
TimeIsNow-Maga 1 point ago +2 / -1

And we know who bought them , I know everybody knows, damn them

6
Get-schlonged 6 points ago +7 / -1

the same Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation that the left screams and cries about.

4
arobins222 4 points ago +5 / -1

(202) 822-8138 The Federalist Society 202-546-4400 The heritage foundation

3
Grief 3 points ago +3 / -0

Their endorsement officially means nothing.

103
deleted 103 points ago +106 / -3
15
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 15 points ago +16 / -1

Yep. It is.

10
SupremeSpez 10 points ago +10 / -0

Not for Killary though

96
d3plor4ble 96 points ago +98 / -2

What the literal fuck? Obama's executive order just somehow became law?

25
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 25 points ago +27 / -2

Yep.

23
commonsenseprevails 23 points ago +24 / -1

No. Trump is just going to rescind it again.

13
Modus_Pwninz 13 points ago +13 / -0

*Properly

Whatever that means

16
spezisacuckold 16 points ago +16 / -0

It means the left has carved themselves a loophole to designate anything Republicans want as “not proper.”

0
TimeIsARetardedOval 0 points ago +1 / -1

It's cope. Watch the """proper""" way get blocked yet a-fucking-gain!

7
Alpha 7 points ago +7 / -0

Not just law. An unremovable law.

I didn't know Obama could override The Constitution.

5
MAGA_Master 5 points ago +5 / -0

King Obama declared it, so let it be so.

5
TrumpBhakt 5 points ago +6 / -1

What the liberal fuck

1
Cup_O_Covfefe 1 point ago +1 / -0

No, they threw out the first rescind-ing because the right forms weren't filled out, essentially.

A White House attorney will have this corrected within a week and DACA will be gone again.

2
OkieFromMuskogee 2 points ago +2 / -0

And it’ll take another two years to reach the SC.

1
Cup_O_Covfefe 1 point ago +1 / -0

It would remain in effect until someone else challenged it and won an injunction in Court.

Given the specifics of this ruling, a lower court is unlikely to grant an injunction if the administration very clearly fixed the deficiencies in the paperwork. SCOTUS completely affirmed Trump's purview to terminate the program by executive order. Its unlikely it would make it to the SC again.

86
deleted 86 points ago +87 / -1
17
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 17 points ago +18 / -1

🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

15
deleted 15 points ago +16 / -1
4
slimcoat 4 points ago +4 / -0

Bingo.

3
NO_RINOs 3 points ago +3 / -0

Love the Andrew Jackson reference. Trump’s favorite president!

79
therepublica 79 points ago +81 / -2

The legal profession is dead

15
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 15 points ago +16 / -1

Yep

8
idonthaveahobby 8 points ago +8 / -0

There are many based lawyers. But they did not go to elite indoctrination centers like Harvard or Yale so they won't be considered. They do not even really give out Cs at those schools so everyone has an excellent GPA. It is well known that merely getting in those schools makes your career.

Meanwhile, other Tier 1 and 2 law schools have curves that are brutal. My school's was 2.78. There has only been one person to graduate summa cum laude in 40 years (it was not Mark Levin). She is the only person who would be considered for the Supreme Court, but it would only be the slimmest possibility. But she is a liberal and they have plenty of others to choose from Top 10 law schools.

Law still has a serious class system. Repblicans need to be looking at people that did not go to a T10 school if they want to find true patriots. My favorite justice went to the University of Cincinnati. He would not be on any list today. Also, go back to appointing Senators and others working with the public. They have a better grasp of where the public is since they actually interact with them. Put a stay on appointing professional judges. That has been a disaster for us. We need fighters for the Constitution. Not people who try to make compromises day in and day out to make cases go away.

2
therepublica 2 points ago +2 / -0

I hope to be as optimistic as you. I haven’t found many :(

3
idonthaveahobby 3 points ago +3 / -0 (edited)

We are being drowned out by the super liberal ABA, which is mainly only trial lawyers from big cities. If you are not a Democrat you don't join because your membership is going to advocate against your interests. Much like unions these days.

One of the most beloved Supreme Court Chief Justices was not a lawyer. That is always an option.

3
Data 3 points ago +3 / -0

I guess it's time to start ignoring the decrees of the SCOTUS. If they won't allow a program created (illegally) by executive order to be lawfully ended by executive order, then they are an illegitimate court.

78
NCovidismybitch 78 points ago +80 / -2

Fuck Roberts

"The court’s four conservative justices dissented. Justice Clarence Thomas, in a dissent joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, wrote that DACA was illegal from the moment it was created under the Obama administration in 2012.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in a separate dissent that he was satisfied that the administration acted appropriately in trying to end the program."

39
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 39 points ago +40 / -1

"The court’s four conservative justices dissented. Justice Clarence Thomas, in a dissent joined by Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, wrote that DACA was illegal from the moment it was created under the Obama administration in 2012.

Yep. It was illegal from the beginning

6
spezisacuckold 6 points ago +6 / -0

Unconstitutional, even.

3
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yep

57
stevejobs871 57 points ago +58 / -1

Apparently DHS still can rescind it, but they must provide a batter reason for doing so according to the article. "We didn't rule on whether DACA is a sound policy... DHS can try again." ~Roberts

Regardless, it is paramount that Trump wins reelection and can pick RBG's successor. I hope every last one of you on this website, for all the screaming and shouting you guys do go out and vote in November and do your part to ensure that Trump wins reelection. Because if there's low turnout on our end and Biden wins, get ready for a shit ton more of these decisions.

23
PITSWL 23 points ago +23 / -0

Regardless, it is paramount that Trump wins reelection and can pick RBG's successor.

Qualifications:

  • No older than early 40s
  • In pristine health
  • Ideologically, he or she must be Scalia on steroids
  • A true hanging judge with fire in his or her belly

After that, let Clarence Thomas retire and insert someone exactly the same as above, but kick up the Scalia factor.

10
BrakeRemovalMechanic 10 points ago +10 / -0

I'd prefer him to be right of Pinochet, but I guess we can compromise.

6
Italians_Invented_2A 6 points ago +6 / -0

We need a good senate for that. Clarence Thomas should pull an RBG and stay with us for the next 20 years.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +2 / -3
3
Mustangmark83 3 points ago +3 / -0

We also need to keep the senate, or a conservative justice will never be confirmed.

10
weltbild 10 points ago +12 / -2

no it is about having to win reelection that is the play

now daca is law of the land if Trump loses that is the big game here

7
JimmyJam 7 points ago +7 / -0

they didn't make any ruling on DACA's legality, only the reasoning that DHS used in trying to reverse it. It is clown world logic, but here we are.

2
weltbild 2 points ago +2 / -0

they moved it past the election after not blocking obama

that means they canonized it for all I care

5
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 5 points ago +6 / -1

Regardless, it is paramount that Trump wins reelection and can pick RBG's successor. I hope every last one of you on this website, for all the screaming and shouting you guys do go out and vote in November and do your part to ensure that Trump wins reelection. Because if there's low turnout on our end and Biden wins, get ready for a shit ton more of these decisions.

TRUMP 2020

4
Ladimir_Wewtin 4 points ago +4 / -0

If Biden wins it will be because of fraud, not low turnout. Get real. Saturday’s rally will show this.

3
trumplandslide 3 points ago +3 / -0

AND vote Republican, especially the Senate.

Republicans are NOT the solution to all of our problems, but the Democrats are the source of all of them - Dan Bongino

2
NO_RINOs 2 points ago +2 / -0

Even better, participate in GOP primaries! Vote out all RINOs!!

If the GOP party in your state is compromised, join a third-party!

1
triggernometry 1 point ago +1 / -0

it is paramount that Trump wins reelection and can pick RBG's successor.

Nobody wants to address the elephant in the room here: What is the point to getting conservative SC's if they can be threatened or blackmailed into compliance? Aren't CIA, FBI, and other 3 letter agencies pro-globalist? You don't think they're used to muscle elected officials and civil servants?

The conservative movement will continue losing ground until they form their own muscle that can protect those who would protect our interests. It's that simple.

53
keepwinning 53 points ago +54 / -1

iow, Trump is guilty of being president while republican

7
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 7 points ago +8 / -1

Yep

48
GenericInsult 48 points ago +51 / -3

Trump should just write an EO that reads: "$50.00 a head for any illegal alien detained and turned over to ICE".

31
zettapede 31 points ago +32 / -1

Make it $5000. You know how much that saves us?

24
RiverFenix 24 points ago +25 / -1

How about if you catch 10 here illegally, you get an Income Tax Free Year.

If you catch 100, you get to meet POTUS for a meet & greet and honourary Deputisation.

8
weltbild 8 points ago +9 / -1

no citizenship for anybody who doesn't enter a port of entry without lying on their visa

46
DrWeeGee 46 points ago +47 / -1

John Benedict Roberts

8
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 8 points ago +9 / -1

Yep. Exactly

46
NADSAQ 46 points ago +50 / -4

I know demoralization is the goal, but damn if I don’t think we should burn it all down and start over at this point.

14
deleted 14 points ago +16 / -2
3
Journey95 3 points ago +4 / -1

Thats the only way we will win, leftists simply control too much

43
Wal_Mart_Security 43 points ago +44 / -1

John Roberts flew with Epstein

14
RiverFenix 14 points ago +15 / -1

He's been hiding behind the 'commonality' of his name for a long time...

Like a John Smith with plausible deniability.

9
Get-schlonged 9 points ago +10 / -1

Yep he is probably up to his neck in greasy pedo stuff.

6
HongKongFluey 6 points ago +7 / -1

Him and Alan Dershowitz

7
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 7 points ago +7 / -0

John Roberts flew with Epstein

For real ??

7
Wal_Mart_Security 7 points ago +7 / -0

I mean it’s a fairly common name, but there’s a John Roberts on his flight logs. Considering the other names on the logs, and the number of government officials on them as well, it wouldn’t surprise me if it was really the SC Judge.

2
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Oh. I forgot about that. Yep. Could be that or who knows???

5
SonOfABaconator 5 points ago +5 / -0

Well there’s no proof he didn’t fly with Epstein

2
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Correct. !!

43
VaPnut 43 points ago +44 / -1

too many republicans are anti America just like democrats, America is finished sans the bloodshed. pick your targets wisely

14
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 14 points ago +16 / -2

They want that New World Order !!! They all think they are gonn be in charge

3
deleted 3 points ago +4 / -1
3
spezisacuckold 3 points ago +3 / -0

When you remove the means of peaceful revolution...

33
GreatestAmericanEver 33 points ago +34 / -1

Well, time to make a new America.

5
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 5 points ago +6 / -1

👍👍👍

30
deleted 30 points ago +32 / -2
13
deleted 13 points ago +14 / -1
3
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 3 points ago +5 / -2

They are clearly blackmailing Roberts

Yep. They are.

1
ThurstonHowell3rd 1 point ago +1 / -0

You know, you'd think with a lifetime appointment, a Chief Justice is pretty much untouchable. He basically answers to no one for the rest of his life.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
28
Cheesygorditacrunch2 28 points ago +29 / -1

Doesn’t this set the precedent that they cannot rescind Trumps EOs in the future?

24
SquidThrowFaux 24 points ago +25 / -1

SCOTUS it's a Logic Free Zone! Get out of here with that malarkey

2
Cheesygorditacrunch2 2 points ago +3 / -1

😂

6
spezisacuckold 6 points ago +6 / -0 (edited)

Precedent only “matters” when it logically protects leftist doctrine. When it logically protects something conservatives want, then it “needs to evolve”, “be reinterpreted”, “living constitution” etc etc

It’s blatant hypocrisy and spitting right in the faces of everybody that wants equally applied justice.

3
Cheesygorditacrunch2 3 points ago +3 / -0

I agree, we live in a time of selective justice due to corruption and buying out public servants. Unfortunately it’s going to take nothing short of clearing house and putting in new people.

5
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 5 points ago +6 / -1

Doesn’t this set the precedent that they cannot rescind Trumps EOs in the future?

Yes it does.

3
Brenmcel 3 points ago +4 / -1

Precedent? Lol

3
commonsenseprevails 3 points ago +3 / -0

They only ruled on the procedure they followed to rescind it. Trump will just rescind again and it will go through another drawn out court battle.

23
MAGA4Ever 23 points ago +24 / -1

I’m not a doom and gloom kind of guy, but this one is truly anti-constitution. Didn’t have sufficient reason?! Obama said he didn’t have authority when he did it. They are not here legally. I thought this was a slam dunk, even for our Supreme Court.

15
Get-schlonged 15 points ago +16 / -1

same shit when Roberts whiffed on Obamacare

8
NewUser1758 8 points ago +10 / -2

Turns out it wasn't a whiff, Roberts is just a communist that needs forcibly removed from the court with the other traitors on it.

9
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 9 points ago +10 / -1

I thought this was a slam dunk, even for our Supreme Court.

So did I. Looks like it has to be resubmitted. With better intent. Lol. What the hell does that even mean.

2
spezisacuckold 2 points ago +2 / -0

Intent doesn’t even matter. The Supreme Court doesn’t get to add words that aren’t in the Constitution.

1
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Intent doesn’t even matter.

Yep

23
Shayhawk 23 points ago +25 / -2

Fuck fuck fuckity fuck these justices! Why did we fight so hard for them?

God DAMMIT I'm tired of losing to these leftist fucks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

6
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 6 points ago +7 / -1

Leftis are tricky

4
deleted 4 points ago +6 / -2
1
Shayhawk 1 point ago +1 / -0

Our willingness to follow the law is currently outweighing our willingness to murder every liberal asshole on the planet...

18
SatanicSoros 18 points ago +20 / -2

Damn, being a country loving conservative has felt so disheartening lately :(

6
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 6 points ago +7 / -1

Yes. But we can still sleep with our windows open !!!

2
Journey95 2 points ago +2 / -0

Liberals want to make sure we have no power anymore and are silenced completely

18
aussie_maga 18 points ago +19 / -1

Isn't this the same strategy they did for the census ruling?

"We are not ruling for or against it, we just think you should follow the process. Try again next time (and back to the end of the line you go) ".

3
flashersenpai 3 points ago +3 / -0

yes

17
45forever 17 points ago +19 / -2

Slap in the face to American citizens of all colors. Keep working to pay for illegals and their families. Compete for government services with illegals. Compete at the ballot box with illegals (no voter ID).

Americans of all color better wake the f up. Stop the damn virtue signaling BLM, LGBTQ, women, climate changers, and on and on. Pick America, you bastards.

9
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 9 points ago +10 / -1

Pick America

FIRST!!!

17
AnalogDevice 17 points ago +18 / -1

John Roberts again. Why is he sucking off Liberals so much? What’s he gonna be outed about? Fucking epileptic

7
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 7 points ago +8 / -1

John Roberts again

Must have something on him

1
Trumps2ndTerm 1 point ago +1 / -0

Or he's a natural born turncoat piece of shit.

15
DanWang 15 points ago +16 / -1

OK, EO to end all entries from southern border (an enumerated power of the Executive) until DACA is killed.

If Trump had the balls to do it DACA would be over in a week.

8
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 8 points ago +8 / -0

OK, EO to end all entries from southern border (an enumerated power of the Executive) until DACA is killed.

👍👍👍

13
Zero_Six_Two 13 points ago +14 / -1

cool, so we can do whatever executive orders we want and they can't be rescinded. Nice!

11
weltbild 11 points ago +12 / -1

just pass 2k EOs then let them walk all through em

2
Zero_Six_Two 2 points ago +3 / -1

i like it

1
altaG12 1 point ago +2 / -1 (edited)

That's great! So, Trump just needs a second term and to make an executive order regarding DACA!!

(edit) He also needs a second term to finish the wall.

2
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 2 points ago +3 / -1

cool, so we can do whatever executive orders we want and they can't be rescinded. Nice!

I want Trump,to,hand out blank EO’s at rally. 1 million new EO’s on Monday in DC!!

13
ThurstonHowell3rd 13 points ago +14 / -1

Doesn't look good for Texas. 40% of DACA recipents reside in CA and TX. CA will always be blue, but TX could shift red to blue and it's not something I ever wanted to see in my lifetime.

On the plus, perhaps with recent left-wing bent that the SCOTUS has been ruling lately, it will help RBG make the decision to finally retire.

President Trump really needs to put a staunch conservative on that court and not another one of these limp-wristers like Roberts and Gorsuch.

4
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 4 points ago +5 / -1

President Trump really needs to put a staunch conservative on that court and not another one of these limp-wristers like Roberts and Gorsuch.

Exactly!!

1
weltbild 1 point ago +2 / -1

the power politics with SCOTUS show that you can't win

there is no win scenario ever

3
NewUser1758 3 points ago +5 / -2

Maybe our people will finally do something about the state of this country when they realize that there is no electoral path to victory ever again.

when, not if, Texas becomes blue due to mostly legal immigration, there is no further path to victory for anyone but the far left.

12
FlamingRain 12 points ago +13 / -1

Forget disbanding the police; disband the courts.

4
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 4 points ago +5 / -1

Yep. Or let them enforce it

1
ThurstonHowell3rd 1 point ago +1 / -0

DEFUND THE SCOTUS!

Let them buy their own damn robes.

12
Keiichi81 12 points ago +13 / -1

Apparently the new meaning of "deferred" means "permanent".

4
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 4 points ago +5 / -1

Apparently the new meaning of "deferred" means "permanent".

Sure. Let’s just make up new laws ever time some one arrested !!

2
bobobob 2 points ago +2 / -0

Nothing is more permanent than a temporary government solution

11
Thehumancentipede 11 points ago +12 / -1

John Roberts is in on trying to get rid of trump

9
xBuckeyex 9 points ago +10 / -1

Roberts started pulling this bullshit during the Obama Care hearing. That was the first ruling he provided that made absolutely zero sense, legislating from the bench. They have something on him.

1
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 1 point ago +2 / -1

Sure looks that way

11
LeftistsAreInsane 11 points ago +11 / -0

This is insanity. The court has just told the American people that an order made by the executive branch (whether lawful in the first place or not) cannot be ended by the executive branch without the court's permission. This is akin to telling Congress that it has no right, for instance, to end the Communications Decency Act without the court's permission, even though Congress passed that Act in the first place.

John Roberts is a traitor. The leftists in elite positions are trying to destroy us from within.

2
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is akin to telling Congress that it has no right, for instance, to end the Communications Decency Act without the court's permission, even though Congress passed that Act in the first place.

Yep. ThTs what it means. Luckily we can just rewrite it

10
tommichael522 10 points ago +11 / -1

They left the option open to re-file. If this was an Executive Order than HOW THE F is the Supreme Court ruling on this?!

7
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 7 points ago +7 / -0

They left the option open to re-file. If this was an Executive Order than HOW THE F is the Supreme Court ruling on this?!

It should have never been enforced. The Republicans did nothing but talk about it whrn it was originally signed by Barry

3
Anaconda 3 points ago +4 / -1

GOP congress also kept passing a full repeal of Obamacare 5 times before 2017 and then voted against the same exact repeal bill in 2017 and 2018 when they had full power of congress and the presidency

2
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yep. And nothing happened. all the pigs eat at the same trough

10
mythbusterr 10 points ago +11 / -1

This is only a temporary setback. Justice Thomas basically provided a how-to in his dissenting opinion.

11
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 11 points ago +11 / -0

This is only a temporary setback. Justice Thomas basically provided a how-to in his dissenting opinion

This needs to be top priority

3
ohwens 3 points ago +3 / -0

Can you explain?

10
General_Patton 10 points ago +10 / -0 (edited)

Roberts wrote that the administration "failed to consider the conspicuous issues of whether to retain forbearance"

Who the hell cares about the consequences of ending the deferments? That's not the law, and neither is DACA! Those people weren't supposed to be in the US in the first place!

4
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 4 points ago +4 / -0

Who the hell cares about the consequences of ending the deferments?

The court just made it an election issue

10
BabyTrump 10 points ago +11 / -1

That tree of liberty is really starting to look like it needs a refreshment.

10
BurnDownCNN 10 points ago +12 / -2

John Roberts is trying to make Trump and by extension the Presidency irrelevant and powerless in the lead up to the election. He will ofcourse abruptly change course if Biden wins, but this is the reason we need to do everything to get Trump re-elected. The swamp is deeper than we could have ever imagined. These people think they held back Trump and can now do away with him. We have to show them that they miscalculated, and badly

6
altaG12 6 points ago +7 / -1

absolutely, Trump needs to be reelected so Trump can replace Ginsburg with a conservative.

10
shragae 10 points ago +10 / -0

How is this possible? DACA was an Obama EO -- so a Trump EO should be able to reverse it!

1
HeavenlyMystery 1 point ago +2 / -1

It was?

2
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 2 points ago +3 / -1

That’s how it’s supposed to happen

9
MAGAPig 9 points ago +10 / -1

Another raysharded decision courtesy of turncoat John Roberts.

2
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 2 points ago +3 / -1

Yep

9
Grief 9 points ago +9 / -0

If an Executive Order can't be rescinded he needs to just start legislating via EO.

6
EMP2024 6 points ago +6 / -0

I have a love/hate relationship with that idea

1
Grief 1 point ago +1 / -0

I 100% understand your position but you have to remember than the Democrats would abuse it the second they get it so pretending like we're going to take the moral high ground is foolish.

3
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

👍👍👍

8
NonyaDB 8 points ago +8 / -0

What the fuck? So now Executive Orders can't be rescinded by future Presidents?
Fine. I'll be your huckleberry.
Executive Order mandating national reciprocity for concealed-carry permit holders NOW!
Executive Order virtually eliminating the Gun Control Act NOW!
Executive Order defunding Sanctuary Cities NOW!
Issue Executive Order after Executive order until it's all the media and communist left can talk about.
Fuck the do-nothing Congress and jam the fuck out of the SCOTUS schedule with commie-leftist-initiated EO lawsuit after EO lawsuit until SCOTUS realizes just what the fuck they have done and reverses their DACA ruling if just to get back to regular business.

2
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

👍👍

2
Don-O-Mite 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yup, its scorched earth EO time.

8
HolaPendejos 8 points ago +8 / -0

Trump can now make executive orders for whatever fuck Congress.

4
Alphahorizon 4 points ago +4 / -0

And he should. ah....I am normally against this type of comment but what other choice is there. They have neutered congress.

3
someoldcoderguy 3 points ago +3 / -0

The only point I would argue is that Congress neutered themselves. Congress has continued to give away their constitutional power for decades, maybe longer.

2
lefty295 2 points ago +2 / -0

Seriously, Congress is the biggest group of pussies ever that don’t want to be responsible for anything.

1
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 1 point ago +2 / -1

Trump can now make executive orders for whatever fuck Congress.

Yep

8
MerlynTrump 8 points ago +8 / -0

So does this re-activate Texas' suit against the Federal Gov't challenging the legality of the original DACA policy? Maybe a conservative District court or the Fifth Circuit can then rule DACA itself is illegal and DOJ can decline to appeal.

It seems to me conservatives need to get more aggressive in arguing that Obama-era executive orders violate the Administrative Procedures Act since this seems to be the law that leftists use to challenge Trump's policies.

In the meantime, if we can't get rid of DACA can we make the requirements of the program more strict so that less people are eligible. For example current DACA eligibility is for those who entered illegally before their 16th birthday, maybe change that to 14th birthday.

1
Anaconda 1 point ago +2 / -1

"Conservative" district judges are so cucked. They don't do jack shit to fight on our behalf like lib district judges do.

2
MerlynTrump 2 points ago +2 / -0

I mean some must. I think Royce Lamberth has been good, but he's a senior judge. And I think there was some judge in Texas who blocked Obama's transgender policy.

8
TrumpOrTreason 8 points ago +9 / -1

We got problems at SCOTUS. 😡

Of course they’re doing this right before the big rally.

3
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 3 points ago +4 / -1

Of course they’re doing this right before the big rally.

I believe you are on to something !!!

7
TrumpsFavorite 7 points ago +7 / -0

This is a steaming pile of horse shit. Trump should go hog wild with the EOs now. Fuck em.

2
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 2 points ago +3 / -1

Every day write 100

7
redstampede 7 points ago +7 / -0

What the actual fuck? An executive order is just a stroke of a pen and can be undone the same way. Trump needs no justification whatsoever to end DACA and he certainly doesn't need to take hardships of its recipients into account.

He should draft the exact same order but add some token, transparently silly justification to it just to throw this back in the court's face. Their ruling is unconstitutional and he is free to ignore it.

I don't feel a new executive order is free from their scrutiny, but repealing an old one should never be in the court's purview.

1
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yep. But now we have to wait longer

7
StompTheLeft 7 points ago +7 / -0

just say the word Mr President...its time to reboot this country and we are with you.

7
LWGII 7 points ago +7 / -0

Dread Traitor Roberts strikes again.

1
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 1 point ago +2 / -1

Yep. The traitors

7
1776ThereIsaidIt 7 points ago +7 / -0

Scalia should have punched Roberts right in the mouth.

2
ThurstonHowell3rd 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'd buy that for a dollar!

7
dubler6 7 points ago +9 / -2

This isn’t over. Live to win another day.

7
Skywise 7 points ago +9 / -2

Be not discouraged Pedes but resolute. We’ve had almost 4 years of winning and you can’t expect to get some push back and lose a few battles.

We pick ourselves back up, learn from our mistakes and continue the fight to save America.

Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.

The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance.

3
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yep. Great words. Just rewrite this ASAP

6
Mad_Hattie 6 points ago +7 / -1

What is stopping Trump from countering Obamas EO with an EO saying DACA is canceled?

After all, Roberts just set Precedent that Presidential EOs can now be laws.

0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2
2
teabag4giggles 2 points ago +2 / -0

Lol u first

6
fagapede 6 points ago +7 / -1

Well shit. This is it pedes. They are going to cheat in November and we are going to loose. This country is over.

Buy guns and ammo. The end swiftly approaches.

6
PhantomShield72 6 points ago +6 / -0

As Andrew Jackson said - "The Supreme Court has made a decision, so let them try to enforce it."

If they are going to act outside of the bounds of the Constitution and the separation of powers by indicating the executive order of one president cannot be rescinded by a subsequent president, they are not worthy of any respect or reverence. Executive orders are not legislation and this sets a dangerous fucking precedent that should not be obeyed by the Executive branch. They should ignore the Supreme Court on this issue and proceed with their law enforcement plans regardless of what the Supreme Court has ordered, otherwise the Legislative branch is now an extra testicle with no purpose because any President can essentially write laws that will endure regardless of who is elected after their terms are over.

Fuck this shit.

3
ShugDiSano 3 points ago +3 / -0

If this stands the next president can make an executive order banning guns.

1
PhantomShield72 1 point ago +1 / -0

Precisely. The Left calls Trump a dictator, yet they are creating a construct under which an actual dictatorship could be born. Unreal.

6
Irish_Wolfhound 6 points ago +6 / -0

So apparently Executive Orders are unable to be touched by the Supreme Court?

Executive Order mandating Voter ID now, then. National Constitutional Open and Concealed Carry now, then. National ANTIFA is a Terrorist Org now, then. National BLM is a Terrorist Org now, then.

1
YourDaddyKnowsBest [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes. A agree with that !!!