• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

President Donald J. Trump

Started by The General, February 11, 2011, 01:33:34 AM

Dr. MD MD

Quote from: ACE of CLUBS on November 07, 2017, 11:28:53 AM
Canada has been exporting 'hog sphincters' to the U.S.A. for decades ..... labeled 'Canadian Bacon.
A nice income, and a wonderful source of amusement ......
Eat up Yanks ..... yum, yum .....

Confirmed Canadian!   :D

Canadian bacon is basically just a fatty ham with ground corn and pea meal smushed into it.  ;D

Swishypants

Quote from: ACE of CLUBS on November 07, 2017, 11:28:53 AM
Canada has been exporting 'hog sphincters' to the U.S.A. for decades ..... labeled 'Canadian Bacon.
A nice income, and a wonderful source of amusement ......
Eat up Yanks ..... yum, yum .....


136 or 142

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on November 07, 2017, 11:35:41 AM
Confirmed Canadian!   :D

Canadian bacon is basically just a fatty ham with ground corn and pea meal smushed into it.  ;D

I'm a vegetarian.


WildCard

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on November 07, 2017, 11:35:41 AM
Confirmed Canadian!   :D

Canadian bacon is basically just a fatty ham with ground corn and pea meal smushed into it.  ;D

but =shyder= is a-ok right?

Swishypants

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 07, 2017, 11:45:39 AM
I'm a vegetarian.

136 in High School:

5 bucks in gas
35 bucks for Fajita's for two and Chocolate Shakes at Chili's (thank God for free chips and salsa)
25 bucks for a movie, large popcorn, two medium Mountain Dews, and an Almond Joy (thank God for free refills)

65 dollars total

"Please suck my dick in front of your mothers house! Please suck my dick in front of your mothers house!"

136 or 142

Quote from: Jackstar on November 07, 2017, 11:55:43 AM
What difference does it make?

I was hoping it was a clip of her explaining why the Clinton Foundation isn't subject to the Emoluments Clause.


Dr. MD MD

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 07, 2017, 12:08:08 PM
I was hoping it was a clip of her explaining why the Clinton Foundation isn't subject to the Emoluments Clause.

Hillary deleted it.

ACE of CLUBS

Quote from: Dr. MD MD on November 07, 2017, 11:35:41 AM
Confirmed Canadian!   :D

'Assumption' seems to be your only thought process .....
Again, a wonderful source of amusement.

Is 'The Donald' a homosexual ..... ?
Why the adulation by you and others ..... ?
Just askin' .....


Kidnostad3

Quote from: ACE of CLUBS on November 07, 2017, 11:28:53 AM
Canada has been exporting 'hog sphincters' to the U.S.A. for decades ..... labeled 'Canadian Bacon.
A nice income, and a wonderful source of amusement ......
Eat up Yanks ..... yum, yum .....

Can anyone tell me why 95% of the Canadian population lives huddled up ass-to-nose along the U.S. border?  We’ve got to stop leaving out garbage cans uncovered. 

Swishypants

Quote from: ACE of CLUBS on November 07, 2017, 12:45:01 PM
'Assumption' seems to be your only thought process .....
Again, a wonderful source of amusement.

Is 'The Donald' a homosexual ..... ?
Why the adulation by you and others ..... ?
Just askin' .....

An Ellipsis is THREE DOT, you hooked-on-phonics gooney bitch! You don't use them to convey unspoken meaning. You do it because you don't have anymore thoughts!

Gd5150

Quote from: ItsOver on November 07, 2017, 09:15:18 AM

Feel the love.
Notice the mutual admiration and respect. Then you have the last time Hillary visited soldiers.



Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 07, 2017, 11:16:42 AM
1.Except your explanation here makes no sense because you had previously yourself posted  Section 6 Clause 2 here before I mentioned "Section 6."  So it was clear that you already knew that's what I was referring to.   I don't know why you are even attempting to lie about this now, other than you obviously 'think' it puts me in some bad light.  But, your own posts show you are sleazily lying about this.

2.Except as Section 6 Clause 2 makes clear the 'Office' (not the 'office') referred to in Section 9 Clause 8 is not referring to Congress.  If you are tying in some back door way to get me to state that the 'Office' does not refer to any elected person including the President (or the Vice President) I would personally agree that's possible and there does seem to be some current debate on that, except from what I've read on this from constitutional lawyers and from my readings of the Federalist Papers on this, it does seem clear that the Framers of the Constitution intended for the President to be subject to the Emoluments Clause. However Section 6 Clause 2 also makes it clear they did not mean to include the elected members of Congress as subject to the Emoluments Clause.

If you genuinely don't understand how Section 6 Clause 2 does that, that does not surprise me, because you are, indeed, a hopeless retard.  All you have to do though is see that the term the 'Office' is used in both Section 6 Clause 2 in stating that 'no person holding any Office  under the United States shall be a member of either House during his continuance in Office.  This second reference of Office is a reference to a person holding a position in the Executive Branch and so, as you had previously mentioned when you quoted this Clause here, refers to Separation of Powers.

Section 9 Clause 8 (The Emoluments Clause) then again refers to those holding any Office  If you believe that this 'Office' is different than the 'Office' mentioned in Section 6 Clause 2 then you have to concede that at least this section of the Constitution is poorly written.  My view, and the view of the Constitutional experts I've read, is that the Office referred to in both cases refers to the same Office.

I think I've explained this quite enough.  If you still genuinely can't figure it out, it's not my fault you're a hopeless retard.

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 07, 2017, 12:08:08 PM
I was hoping it was a clip of her explaining why the Clinton Foundation isn't subject to the Emoluments Clause.

Correct:  when one begins by trying to figure out how a disfavored person or group is in violation of certain limits - regardless of the facts of the matter and the actual rule - and why others one does favor who are actually committing crimes under those same provisions are not, this is the tangled mess one ends up with. 

At least I'm not trying to convince you not to kill yourself in order to become germ free.  That might become frustrating.

136 or 142

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on November 07, 2017, 01:01:01 PM
Can anyone tell me why 95% of the Canadian population lives huddled up ass-to-nose on the U.S. border?  We’ve got to stop leaving out garbage cans uncovered.

It's actually 90%

"Canadian Demographics - Accessibility and Remoteness of Population. According to the 2011 Canadian Census, more than 23 million people, almost 70 percent of the population, live in urban areas. Ninety percent of the Canadian population lives within 100 miles of the U.S. border."

Have you been north of 100 miles of the U.S northern border?  (This is awkwardly worded because I'm referencing a Canadian television show called 'North of 60.')

There are some Canadians who are pushing for much larger yearly immigration so that Canada can get to a population of at least 100 million by the end of the century and they believe that a  lot more people could make a living in Yukon, Western Arctic (Northwest Territories) and Nunavut.  With global warming it might be possible relatively soon enough.  Of course, as a response to global warming, it wouldn't surprise me if you Americans invaded to take the part of Canada that is 100 miles north of the U.S northern border if not our entire country.

Swishypants

Canada has a smaller population than Texas. Do you REALLY think Canada is not just America's Norther Mineral Resources Storage Locker?

136 or 142

Quote from: Swishypants on November 07, 2017, 01:23:12 PM
Canada has a smaller population than Texas. Do you REALLY think Canada is not just America's Norther Mineral Resources Storage Locker?

Canada has a larger population than Texas but a slightly smaller population than California.

Swishypants

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 07, 2017, 01:24:31 PM
Canada has a larger population than Texas but a slightly smaller population than California.

No, it doesn't. Texas has 26 Million.

Kidnostad3

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 07, 2017, 01:18:54 PM
It's actually 90%

Canadian Demographics - Accessibility and Remoteness of Population. According to the 2011 Canadian Census, more than 23 million people, almost 70 percent of the population, live in urban areas. Ninety percent of the Canadian population lives within 100 miles of the U.S. border.

Have you been north of 100 miles of the U.S border?

I am a documented Blue Nose and have surfaced through ice.  I have gone so far north that I’ve transitioned to going south without changing course.  Fuck off!



Swishypants

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on November 07, 2017, 01:27:10 PM
I am a documented Blue Nose and have surfaced through ice.  I have gone so far north that I’ve transitioned to going south without changing course.  Fuck off!

Yeah! His older brother is the Penguin!

136 or 142

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on November 07, 2017, 01:17:59 PM
Correct:  when one begins by trying to figure out how a disfavored person or group is in violation of certain limits - regardless of the facts of the matter and the actual rule - and why others one does favor who are actually committing crimes under those same provisions are not, this is the tangled mess one ends up with. 

At least I'm not trying to convince you not to kill yourself in order to become germ free.  That might become frustrating.

I never made any prior claim that as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton either was or was not subject to the Emoluments Clause.  The only people who I've said aren't subject to it here are elected members of Congress. 

This is a discussion on Hillary Clinton, the Office of the Secretary of State clearly is subject to the Emoluments Clause: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2016/nov/06/newt-gingrich/gingrich-hillary-clinton-broke-law-foreign-clinton/

and here is another commentary:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/09/23/is-the-emoluments-clause-a-problem-for-hillary-clinton/?utm_term=.a6930901ebf4

I have previously written here that Hillary Clinton certainly had a problem with realizing that even perceptions of conflicts of interest should be avoided.

136 or 142

Quote from: Swishypants on November 07, 2017, 01:26:26 PM
No, it doesn't. Texas has 26 Million.

Canadian population: 36.29 million (2016)

136 or 142

Quote from: Kidnostad3 on November 07, 2017, 01:27:10 PM
I am a documented Blue Nose and have surfaced through ice.  I have gone so far north that I’ve transitioned to going south without changing course.  Fuck off!

That's swishier than anything swishypants would say.   ::)

Swishypants

Fucking Canadians! Damn near as prolific and annoying as the Finns online.


Quote from: Swishypants on November 07, 2017, 01:23:12 PM
Canada has a smaller population than Texas. Do you REALLY think Canada is not just America's Norther Mineral Resources Storage Locker?

You pull up into the parking lot and exhale softly.  After getting settled for the day you're going to send the orderlies up to his room to get him. 

You'll try to build on any progress made the previous day, but overnight, while you were gone - setting the demands of the job aside in order to spend time with friends and family and get a good nights rest - he was up there, restrained and tied onto the wall. 

He again spent his night plotting his resistance, and in the morning you must begin, again, back at square one.

Swishypants

Quote from: 136 or 142 on November 07, 2017, 01:29:09 PM
Canadian population: 36.29 million (2016)

And you JUST SAID 23 million live near the US border! The rest of them are toothless drunks hunting seal pelts and Newfies! That doesn't count!

136 or 142

Quote from: Swishypants on November 07, 2017, 01:35:11 PM
And you JUST SAID 23 million live near the US border! The rest of them are toothless drunks hunting seal pelts and Newfies! That doesn't count!

No, the census data I quoted said 23 million Canadians ('almost 70%') live in 'urban areas.'

136 or 142

Quote from: PB the Deplorable on November 07, 2017, 01:34:28 PM
You pull up into the parking lot and exhale softly.  After getting settled for the day you're going to send the orderlies up to his room to get him. 

You'll try to build on any progress you made the previous day, but overnight, while you were gone, setting the demands of the job aside in order to spend time with friends and family and get a good nights rest, he was up there, restrained and tied to the wall. 

He again spent his night plotting his resistance, and in the morning you must begin, again, back at square one.

Like Swishypants you also seem to be a want-to-be bad fantasy fiction writer.  You two should get together.

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod