Trump is acting like a King.

He has to.  He's trying to fix the country after 4 years of the autopen.

Drastic times require Drastic Measures.

The communist/socialist hordes are scared shitless.

And therefore, talking shit.

That logic justifies any person in power to abuse their power.
What happens when a democrat violates the 2nd amendment because he is trying to fix gun crime? There is a reason we place limits on the power of the president.

Holy crap man!

“he has tried to balloon the authority of the president with more executive orders that have reached farther than ever before.”

Joe Biden’s fucking auto pen ruled this country with unquestioned authority, and the meat puppets screaming “King!” sat contentedly on the floor licking their balls.  It conducted a full scale treasonous invasion of this country, and the meat puppets ordered Mexican takeout while trying on their new dresses, girls did too.

…. and for months we have seen that what some anonymous staffer could do with Joe Biden’s auto pen, the elected President of the United States, according to you and all the rest, DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO UNDO.

Trumps response to this judicial tyranny?  He waits for the fucking Supreme Court to get around to restoring the separation of powers.

Acting like a King???

Look, you guys are playing with real fire here.  When you so fucking in-your-face push for the extinction of the rule of law in this country, you are hastening the day when decent men will have no choice left to them to restore it, other than by force.

You folks seem to think this is some political game, like you can propagandize, subvert institutions, and then slip the noose of tyranny over the people’s heads when they aren’t looking, and clap your hands and say “We win the game - you must submit to the government we just stole!”

Read your history - it’s not a game.  You folks always end up somewhere out in the country with dirt shoveled on your faces.

Politically of course.

#1. There is little more than suspicion that orders were signed by autopen without Biden's knowledge and consent so nothing conclusive can be said of that. Not saying it is impossible or that it never happened but nothing is ever going to come of it because no one is going to admit to such a crime and Biden is never going to come forward and say he didn't authorize the autopen for some/all of the documents.
#2. Biden's handling of the border was absolutely terrible but would not meet the definition of treason. Don't parrot Trump's words just because he throws out that kind of thing.
#3 I am no Biden fan at all, we can point out terrible things he did all day long and be in complete agreement, but that still doesn't justify what Trump is doing.
#4. We either have constitutional principles on rights and the restrictions of power by the government or we don't. Any argument that Trump needs extra power beyond what he is allowed because he needs to fix whatever Democrats screwed up is implicitly saying rights and restrictions on power aren't that important and violations are ok when it is our guy. 

funny that you talk about "little more than suspicion" the same night you make a post about "red flags" about trump-epstein,,,

#1. There is little more than suspicion that orders were signed by autopen without Biden's knowledge and consent so nothing conclusive can be said of that. Not saying it is impossible or that it never happened but nothing is ever going to come of it because no one is going to admit to such a crime and Biden is never going to come forward and say he didn't authorize the autopen for some/all of the documents.
#2. Biden's handling of the border was absolutely terrible but would not meet the definition of treason. Don't parrot Trump's words just because he throws out that kind of thing.
#3 I am no Biden fan at all, we can point out terrible things he did all day long and be in complete agreement, but that still doesn't justify what Trump is doing.
#4. We either have constitutional principles on rights and the restrictions of power by the government or we don't. Any argument that Trump needs extra power beyond what he is allowed because he needs to fix whatever Democrats screwed up is implicitly saying rights and restrictions on power aren't that important and violations are ok when it is our guy.

That logic justifies any person in power to abuse their power.
What happens when a democrat violates the 2nd amendment because he is trying to fix gun crime?

What goes around comes around. 

When Trump does it, he's a King.  A Tyrant.  A Dictator.  A ______(fill in the blank).

When the demorats do it it's ok.  Everything is all flowers and rainbows.

Again.  Drastic times calls for Drastic measures.  It didn't have to be like this.  And it eventually won't.  But "orange man" has to fix it first.

Some people would argue " In Trump we Trust."

#1. There is little more than suspicion that orders were signed by autopen without Biden's knowledge and consent so nothing conclusive can be said of that. Not saying it is impossible or that it never happened but nothing is ever going to come of it because no one is going to admit to such a crime and Biden is never going to come forward and say he didn't authorize the autopen for some/all of the documents.
#2. Biden's handling of the border was absolutely terrible but would not meet the definition of treason. Don't parrot Trump's words just because he throws out that kind of thing.
#3 I am no Biden fan at all, we can point out terrible things he did all day long and be in complete agreement, but that still doesn't justify what Trump is doing.
#4. We either have constitutional principles on rights and the restrictions of power by the government or we don't. Any argument that Trump needs extra power beyond what he is allowed because he needs to fix whatever Democrats screwed up is implicitly saying rights and restrictions on power aren't that important and violations are ok when it is our guy.

Look, I could use a thousand words here, but I’ll cut to the chase: You folks are enraged at the dismantling of your carefully constructed perversion of our culture and institutions.

All that work insinuating yourselves into power, and laundering your tyranny through our government, such that, I don’t know, for example BORDER AGENTS ARE ORDERED TO CHANNEL ILLEGAL ALIENS INTO OUR COUNTRY INSTEAD OF KEEPING THEM OUT!  MONEY TAKEN FROM OUR INCOMES AT THE THREAT OF IRS PROSECUTION IS USED TO LURE THEM AND PUT THEM UP IN HOTELS WHILE HOMELESS AMERICANS DIE ON OUR STREETS!

Anyway, this picture is a perfect representation of what’s really happening here, and we all fucking know it!  The whole “slandering us with what you actually are” thing is dead baby, but we know it’s all you got.

#1. There is little more than suspicion that orders were signed by autopen without Biden's knowledge and consent so nothing conclusive can be said of that. Not saying it is impossible or that it never happened but nothing is ever going to come of it because no one is going to admit to such a crime and Biden is never going to come forward and say he didn't authorize the autopen for some/all of the documents.
#2. Biden's handling of the border was absolutely terrible but would not meet the definition of treason. Don't parrot Trump's words just because he throws out that kind of thing.
#3 I am no Biden fan at all, we can point out terrible things he did all day long and be in complete agreement, but that still doesn't justify what Trump is doing.
#4. We either have constitutional principles on rights and the restrictions of power by the government or we don't. Any argument that Trump needs extra power beyond what he is allowed because he needs to fix whatever Democrats screwed up is implicitly saying rights and restrictions on power aren't that important and violations are ok when it is our guy.

lul, bruh, healthcare worker.

funny that you talk about "little more than suspicion" the same night you make a post about "red flags" about trump-epstein,,,

Another headshot from the sniper extraordinaire.

Figuratively, of course.

#1. There is little more than suspicion that orders were signed by autopen without Biden's knowledge and consent so nothing conclusive can be said of that. Not saying it is impossible or that it never happened but nothing is ever going to come of it because no one is going to admit to such a crime and Biden is never going to come forward and say he didn't authorize the autopen for some/all of the documents.

Also, just can’t let this absurd statement pass:

“… without Biden’s knowledge and consent so nothing conclusive can be said of that.“

The whole issue for the country was not IF Biden was incompetent during his presidency, but rather, in what part of it WAS HE ACTUALLY COMPETENT?

Putting aside all the video evidence, as well as statements from credible people who interacted with him, let’s go through some steps together:

First they hid it as best the could, then came the debate, then came the firestorm that they hid it, then came the stepping down as a candidate, then came the installation of Harris as candidate - with no vote by any meat puppet - then came the historic loss, remember? 

None of this is not a historic reality that every single one of us lived through, just a few months ago.

Seriously, do you write this stuff after a 24-hour bender or something?

Up your game man! 

Also, just can’t let this absurd statement pass:

“… without Biden’s knowledge and consent so nothing conclusive can be said of that.“

The whole issue for the country was not IF Biden was incompetent during his presidency, but rather, in what part of it WAS HE ACTUALLY COMPETENT?

Putting aside all the video evidence, as well as statements from credible people who interacted with him, let’s go through some steps together:

First they hid it as best the could, then came the debate, then came the firestorm that they hid it, then came the stepping down as a candidate, then came the installation of Harris as candidate - with no vote by any meat puppet - then came the historic loss, remember? 

None of this is not a historic reality that every single one of us lived through, just a few months ago.

Seriously, do you write this stuff after a 24-hour bender or something?

Up your game man!

He sees himself as the pivot point for any topics that interest him.  Once he starts posting, the topic always becomes all about him -- what his words meant outside of the plain English definitions of what he literally said, why he won't answer questions but believes others are required to, why his demonstrably incorrect posts are not wrong, and all the hypothetical things that might exist so as to make everything anyone says wrong.

He's not here to converse, but more to argue and be contrary.  Those of us on his radar for calling out his BS are like magnets -- an irresistible force that requires him to reply often with nothing to add other than his random thoughts.

I just watched Wayne's World, and it reminded me so much of the intellectual degree which EEF's comments tend to mimic.  Just saying whatever random thought crosses his mind so he is included in the conversation with no need to contribute anything of substance.

He sees himself as the pivot point for any topics that interest him.  Once he starts posting, the topic always becomes all about him -- what his words meant outside of the plain English definitions of what he literally said, why he won't answer questions but believes others are required to, why his demonstrably incorrect posts are not wrong, and all the hypothetical things that might exist so as to make everything anyone says wrong.

He's not here to converse, but more to argue and be contrary.  Those of us on his radar for calling out his BS are like magnets -- an irresistible force that requires him to reply often with nothing to add other than his random thoughts.

I just watched Wayne's World, and it reminded me so much of the intellectual degree which EEF's comments tend to mimic.  Just saying whatever random thought crosses his mind so he is included in the conversation with no need to contribute anything of substance.

Way!

Or maybe he does some good buds and then hits the keyboard, yeah!

EEF and friends

funny that you talk about "little more than suspicion" the same night you make a post about "red flags" about trump-epstein,,,

Feel free to post any evidence that the autopen was used without his permission.

What goes around comes around. 

When Trump does it, he's a King.  A Tyrant.  A Dictator.  A ______(fill in the blank).

When the demorats do it it's ok.  Everything is all flowers and rainbows.

Again.  Drastic times calls for Drastic measures.  It didn't have to be like this.  And it eventually won't.  But "orange man" has to fix it first.

Some people would argue " In Trump we Trust."

Personally I don't care if a politician checks every single block for me, I hold the constitution and its checks on power above that. We can't excuse a king president while simultaneously proclaiming the importance of the constitution.

Also, just can’t let this absurd statement pass:

“… without Biden’s knowledge and consent so nothing conclusive can be said of that.“

The whole issue for the country was not IF Biden was incompetent during his presidency, but rather, in what part of it WAS HE ACTUALLY COMPETENT?

Putting aside all the video evidence, as well as statements from credible people who interacted with him, let’s go through some steps together:

First they hid it as best the could, then came the debate, then came the firestorm that they hid it, then came the stepping down as a candidate, then came the installation of Harris as candidate - with no vote by any meat puppet - then came the historic loss, remember? 

None of this is not a historic reality that every single one of us lived through, just a few months ago.

Seriously, do you write this stuff after a 24-hour bender or something?

Up your game man!

If you are seeking to press a criminal charge you need to overcome the presumption of innocence. By that I mean if there is a question whether someone did something illegal or not you can't err on the side of guilt and throw them in jail, you err on the side of innocence.

Additionally you are asking Biden to prove a negative, asking him to prove he wasn't suffering a bad episode on some particular day. There is no way to look back and prove whether he had a good or bad day. A cop can't stop you and arrest you for DUI last weekend with his evidence being that you can't prove you weren't drunk.

Note that I haven't made any argument whatsoever that Biden didn't have periods of clear mental decline, he clearly did so we can already agree on that point. However dementia isn't a constant in the sense that behavior is always the same, they can have good days where they are coherent and bad days where they can't function. To prove a signature or batch of signatures was signed without Biden's mental ability to consent you would need evidence that on that particular day he wasn't cognizant. The SCOTUS isn't going to toss out a bunch of autopen signed documents on without something more substantial.

He sees himself as the pivot point for any topics that interest him.  Once he starts posting, the topic always becomes all about him -- what his words meant outside of the plain English definitions of what he literally said, why he won't answer questions but believes others are required to, why his demonstrably incorrect posts are not wrong, and all the hypothetical things that might exist so as to make everything anyone says wrong.

He's not here to converse, but more to argue and be contrary.  Those of us on his radar for calling out his BS are like magnets -- an irresistible force that requires him to reply often with nothing to add other than his random thoughts.

Wrong, wrong, and wrong. But trolls don't care about being right so you can take your opinion pleasure yourself with it all you like.

Personally I don't care if a politician checks every single block for me, I hold the constitution and its checks on power above that. We can't excuse a king president while simultaneously proclaiming the importance of the constitution.

Still waiting for you to post a constitutional red flag law.

... Note that I haven't made any argument whatsoever that Biden didn't have periods of clear mental decline, he clearly did so we can already agree on that point. However dementia isn't a constant in the sense that behavior is always the same, they can have good days where they are coherent and bad days where they can't function. To prove a signature or batch of signatures was signed without Biden's mental ability to consent you would need evidence that on that particular day he wasn't cognizant. The SCOTUS isn't going to toss out a bunch of autopen signed documents on without something more substantial.

After reading this it's pretty clear that you don't understand what dementia means,

nor "coherent", for that matter.

I still say that you write these things after doing blow in a parked car somewhere, over a 24 hour period, and then rush to a keyboard before you start coming down hard.

After reading this it's pretty clear that you don't understand what dementia means,

nor "coherent", for that matter.

I still say that you write these things after doing blow in a parked car somewhere, over a 24 hour period, and then rush to a keyboard before you start coming down hard.

True!

I don't think a court would rule that a person with dementia is "mostly competent" or "is competent on indeterminable days and at indeterminable times, but incompetent the other days and times."

When it comes to making decisions that impact the economics, social issues, and national security of the nation, we shouldn't have to guess whether a demonstrably bad call was made on a good day or not.

As for all those pardons, it's been reported that Biden did not approve every one of them.  He supposedly set down some guidelines, and his staff picked the people to pardon or commute their sentences using the autopen.  Biden was never consulted about each name individually. 

Sounds like we've gone beyond "The SCOTUS isn't going to toss out a bunch of autopen signed documents on without something more substantial" and squarely into "his staff made the decisions without Biden's final approval."

Still waiting for you to post a constitutional red flag law.

I did, you had a different opinion. That should be the end of that discussion but you want to keep trolling it along. I am not taking your bait.   

After reading this it's pretty clear that you don't understand what dementia means,

nor "coherent", for that matter.

I still say that you write these things after doing blow in a parked car somewhere, over a 24 hour period, and then rush to a keyboard before you start coming down hard.

Thats a rather odd and baseless assumption. Makes me question what substance lead you to come up with such a unique theory.

I think don't understand what dementia means. Dementia is not a specific disease but a broad term which covers a number of different mental conditions. Dementia usually worsens over time and a person with dementia can have better and worse days in terms of cognitive abilities.

You are the one seeking to undo Biden's orders on question of his mental abilities at the time therefore the burden of proof is on you to make the case that Biden didn't or couldn't have consented to the use of the autopen. The SCOTUS isn't going to overturn any of his orders because you show a dozen clips of Biden confused during speeches.

But lets say we take your argument as a valid reason to overturn Biden's orders. I similar, albeit weaker, case can be made about Trump as well. He has on multiple occasions made comments consistent with early stages of dementia. So play the card at your own risk, if Biden's orders can get overturned this way the democrats will absolutely play the same care against Trump.

Thats a rather odd and baseless assumption. Makes me question what substance lead you to come up with such a unique theory.

I think don't understand what dementia means. Dementia is not a specific disease but a broad term which covers a number of different mental conditions. Dementia usually worsens over time and a person with dementia can have better and worse days in terms of cognitive abilities.

You are the one seeking to undo Biden's orders on question of his mental abilities at the time therefore the burden of proof is on you to make the case that Biden didn't or couldn't have consented to the use of the autopen. The SCOTUS isn't going to overturn any of his orders because you show a dozen clips of Biden confused during speeches.

But lets say we take your argument as a valid reason to overturn Biden's orders. I similar, albeit weaker, case can be made about Trump as well. He has on multiple occasions made comments consistent with early stages of dementia. So play the card at your own risk, if Biden's orders can get overturned this way the democrats will absolutely play the same care against Trump.

Hello Mr. Fish