It would be a a bad look for Dems and will make them seem like they are trying to take control of the White House in a shady way. Even if they were justified it would get spun and twisted so much it could turn off some on the fence voters.
Nah, that was textbook for what happens when you truly bully a bully. Same reason why he can't fire anyone directly. Weak and feeble underneath the facade.
Every day in the afternoon, I try to just check in on the news and I just get so angry and depressed and I have zero outlet for it, it just fucking blows.
You’re right, I’m quite confused because I’m trying to use right wing logic. I believe he’s eligible, because like you said the 14th amendment which also applies to Kamala Harris.
my sources are telling me that user IV kidnapped a young schoolboy and stole his social studies book in order to read us the constitution
Bro they sell copies at Barnes and Noble for like 7 bucks? Why would you say that or think it's funny? Also I have my college political science book as well because I keep all my textbooks.
After thinking about it, is it not going to look like sour grapes when it's our only weapon against him if he gets reelected?
2020 and we don't know how to hold a fair election. We pretended '16 didn't happen, and many of us just assume that foreign countries are going to hack into the '20 election in favor of the traitor in the WH.
ok. I feel like I need to preface everything I’m about to say. I DO NOT AGREE WITH THIS ARGUMENT. I AM MERELY SUMMARIZING THE CASE THEYRE TRYING TO MAKE it matters to these people because of the 14th amendment. “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” In particular, what does “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” mean in this context. The anti-birthright movement has latched onto this language and argues that this requires your parents not to be “transient” or with “dual loyalties” and to be in the country legally. For example, Kids born to diplomats of foreign countries stationed here do not have birthright citizenship. Trump’s parents being permanent residents would be “subject to the jurisdiction” regardless of their own citizenship status. Kamala Harris’ parents, I thought I read, were here allegedly on student visas (that could be bullshit). So the argument would be that they were not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States because they were merely temporary residents.
but, her being born in California would make her a citizen every bit as much as trump being born in NY makes him one, right? Unless that has been done away with.
You don’t always have to feel compelled to try to articulate the arguments of assholes, pez Spoiler you asshole
I can see that case, understand the point it's making, and respond that it's based in white nationalist and racist bullshit, and that anyone who truly believes that justification can go scuba diving with concrete flippers.
Don't try to argue this argument. It's too stupid. It is trying to thread a moronic line that would get you tossed from 1L con law class at a school so bad even pez could get in.
Kamala Harris was born in fucking Oakland California. She is a fucking US citizen. I have no desire to hear racist arguments of why idiots think she isn’t eligible for Veep . Motherfuck.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark#Opinion_of_the_Court This is the same court, in effect, that issue Plessy/Ferguson, the separate but equal case that legitimized segregation until Brown/Topeka.
yes the fact that it’s being put out there by an actual con law professor is disturbing. But then that guy basically teaches at California Cooley so it makes sense
I understand it to mean colonies based on the time period in which it was written. Now, I would imagine it applies to army bases, territories, etc.
I know you’re not making it so we should stop but under current law she is a US citizen as much as trump is, right? Only racist assholes don’t see it that way, right? So let’s move on and not take up any more type arguing something neither one of us believes.
Lucky for us China wants Trump to lose, so we just have to hope their hackers are better than Russia’s. So we got that going for us.
except that according to the intelligence reports Russia is actively attempting to do stuff whereas China just said they’d prefer Trump to lose because he makes the US unstable. The media attempt to paint as both nations taking active roles which wasn’t the case.
didn’t susan collins heavily advocate for the bill that now forces the USPS to pre-fund their employee pensions?