Stuff you just can't make up

Michael Everett wrote:

Annachie wrote:The powerful armada that President Trump was sending to the Korean Peninsula to send a message? Actually went to the north coast of Australia.

Well it's a message of sorts.

Both countries have a coastline, end in a and have an r in them... easy mistake to make.

Guess Ivanka wasn´t there to provide the basic geography corrections that day...

Arkansas is having a run of executions. Apparently they have to as their supply of medazolan is nearing its use by date. Glad they are health conscious.

Daryl wrote:Arkansas is having a run of executions. Apparently they have to as their supply of medazolan is nearing its use by date. Glad they are health conscious.

It's probably more legal. If they inject a prisoner and he doesn't die, he might sue them for negligence...

A One Nation candidate in Queensland withdrew recently.

Strangely it wasn't because he mowed a swastika into his lawn.

http://www.news.com.au/national/queensl ... 570f9d608a
Newscorp article. That's Rupert's paper. He who also owns Fox.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... l-employee

Which is part of the guardian group.

Vastly different presentations.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

I think I should have named this thread "Stuff you didn't think could be made up but fuck me if it doesn't keep happening"

Spicer saying that the Obama administration was responsible for vetting Flynn.

True from a certain point of view, but a complete fucking lie from any objective view point.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

From: https://personalliberty.com/scotus-reje ... -innocent/

This smacks to me of the old Star Chamber proceeding where an accused was forced to confess and then hanged or put on the rack for his confession.

This should suggest to everyone that seizures and forfeiture under obscure laws that require no evidence of illegal activity for their enforcement is tyranny by any definition.

Big Brother at work

DDHv wrote:From: https://personalliberty.com/scotus-reje ... -innocent/

This smacks to me of the old Star Chamber proceeding where an accused was forced to confess and then hanged or put on the rack for his confession.

This should suggest to everyone that seizures and forfeiture under obscure laws that require no evidence of illegal activity for their enforcement is tyranny by any definition.

Big Brother at work

Too bad we've gone from a president trying to reign that in to a president who hears about anyone trying to do so and declares their career should be destroyed for it...

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/t ... xas-234740

“On asset forfeiture, we’ve got a state senator in Texas that was talking about introducing legislation to require conviction before we could receive that forfeiture money,” Eavenson said.

“Can you believe that?” Trump interjected.

“And I told him that the cartel would build a monument to him in Mexico if he could get that legislation passed,” the Texas sheriff continued.

“Who is the state senator? Do you want to give his name? We’ll destroy his career,” Trump replied, presumably suggesting that the lawmaker would suffer for holding a position contrary to the president’s."

From: https://personalliberty.com/scotus-reje ... -innocent/

This smacks to me of the old Star Chamber proceeding where an accused was forced to confess and then hanged or put on the rack for his confession.

This should suggest to everyone that seizures and forfeiture under obscure laws that require no evidence of illegal activity for their enforcement is tyranny by any definition.

Big Brother at work


Too bad we've gone from a president trying to reign that in to a president who hears about anyone trying to do so and declares their career should be destroyed for it...

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/t ... xas-234740

“On asset forfeiture, we’ve got a state senator in Texas that was talking about introducing legislation to require conviction before we could receive that forfeiture money,” Eavenson said.

“Can you believe that?” Trump interjected.

“And I told him that the cartel would build a monument to him in Mexico if he could get that legislation passed,” the Texas sheriff continued.

“Who is the state senator? Do you want to give his name? We’ll destroy his career,” Trump replied, presumably suggesting that the lawmaker would suffer for holding a position contrary to the president’s."

This is one of those issues that doesn't break along party lines. Both sides oppose it booth sides support it. Trump is actually joking here. He may or may not be willing to make some reforms. Everything is negotiable with him. Offer him something that he wants more and he'll support reforms. This isn't an issue he cares much about so he'll be willing to trade on it.

Obama's reform is just that when the Feds seize something they won't share it (or will at least share less of it) with local law enforcement. Not much of a reform.

This is one of those good intentions gone bad stories. The idea was that people shouldn't benefit from crime and that the government should seize the stuff purchased with illegal money (usually drug money). The civil standard is more likely than not vs the criminal standard of beyond reasonable doubt standard, which is why they made it a civil program rather than a criminal program. It also puts a due diligance on property owners since the program will seize assets that have been used in a crime even if the owner claims ignorance of the crime. The idea was that the owners knew full well what was going on but were deliberately ignoring it. What could go wrong? (Sarcasm)

Personally I think politicians of both parties are too addicted to the money to do anything real. It's going to take a Supreme Court ruling to rein it in.

Apparently Trump's new budget proposal has a 2 TRILLION dollar math error in it that makes it claim to balance the budget when it doesn't actually come close.


I can't even act surprised. Basically they blew a 2 Trillion dollar hole in the nation's finances with their proposal and either didn't even notice, or were trying not to have anyone else notice.

This was supposed to be the economic genius president... RIGHT? I mean, if we believe Trump supporters anyway?

Pauline Hanson, Australia's answer to Sarah Palin, said today that she was advised that animals are alive before they are slaughtered.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk