Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
58% approval? Jesus this is North Korean levels of shameless propaganda.And down goes Vermont in Civiqs, leaving Hawaii as the most pro-Biden state. Will it last? Probably not since while the approval gets lower, Civiqs plays with the numbers to keep him from total collapse.
View attachment 3487946
View attachment 3487947
View attachment 3487948
You do bring up one of the many disgusting lizard person traits that led to Clinton's self-own. She cannot stop being shady as fuck, and it seems impossible to make her cultists recognize that.It could not be understated how much America despised Hillary:
She is a truly and uniquely unlikeable cunt. It’s how a guy with no political experience was able to beat her in 2016. To act like there was a conspiracy to keep her from the presidency is truly laughable.
Yeah, the constant seething contempt that she could not conceal at all was a big turn off. I'd say that it was a big part of Hillary's anti-charisma. It's very similar to Kamala, who also unsettles people with her inhuman behavior.There was also that infamous picture of Hillary visiting a rural voters home and she has the most pronounced look of disgust and contempt on her face.
That probably didn't help.
Everyone born after 1988 or so has only known a world where she was a living punchline about being a power hungry politician.You do bring up one of the many disgusting lizard person traits that led to Clinton's self-own. She cannot stop being shady as fuck, and it seems impossible to make her cultists recognize that.
Even when she had absolutely positively no need to do anything underhanded to win the primary, she couldn't resist the temptation to cheat. Now, being a lawyer she can corkscrew her way through a line of logic wherein the DNC is not legally bound to actually hold a fair primary so technically it wasn't illegal and therefore perfectly okay, right? Except the American people aren't a group of legal scholars that will coolly nod their heads at the clever use of loopholes, but instead normal people that know a fucking rat when they see one and will respond by hating and distrusting that fucker.
Or with those speeches she gave to the big corporations and banks that she fought for months to keep secret. (Doing paid speeches when she knew she would be running for President is another matter of stupid.) Now, those speech transcripts weren't super flattering according to the documents from Wikileaks but what was infinitely more damaging was her stonewalling. It gave the appearance that she was hiding something, and let everyone spin the narrative that the transcripts would be her swearing allegiance to Satan. I mean, why else fight so hard to hide them? End result - nobody trusts your shady ass.
Then the email situation, which was an endless source of self-ownage so hard that we still are pulling apart that rat-king of a shady clusterfuck!
The lesson is: Don't act like you are a big cheating shady ratfink lizard bitch if you want to be President.
P.S. Also campaigning in the mid-west might have been a good idea.
A Taco according to "Dr not a real doctor Jill Biden."What's the brown version of an "Uncle Tom"?
View attachment 3488017
Auntie TacoWhat's the brown version of an "Uncle Tom"?
View attachment 3488017
Uncle Juan?What's the brown version of an "Uncle Tom"?
View attachment 3488017
Chiquita Banana.What's the brown version of an "Uncle Tom"?
View attachment 3488017
Decreased demand because of gas costs and general living cost. Increased supply from strategic reserve sell-offWe are seeing the same thing with gas prices. They are somehow going down, but there is no logical reason for that to be happening.
Tio TomásWhat's the brown version of an "Uncle Tom"?
View attachment 3488017
A Taco according to "Dr not a real doctor Jill Biden."
Congresswoman Mayra Flores knows how to swing back.Auntie Taco
lmao I wish she'd gone to an actual rural home, that shit was her being flabbergasted at your average East Harlem apartment.There was also that infamous picture of Hillary visiting a rural voters home and she has the most pronounced look of disgust and contempt on her face.
That probably didn't help.
The Supreme Court's next target is the executive branch
View attachment 3487650
Illustration: Lindsey Bailey/Axios
Battles over the federal government's power will likely define a lot of the conservative Supreme Court's future.
The big picture: Abortion has been the single biggest animating force in the conservative legal movement for decades. Now that the Supreme Court has overturned Roe v. Wade — sooner than some advocates expected — other long-term projects will absorb much of the right’s legal and political energy.
Why it matters: These cases may not always feel like blockbusters in isolation, but they can constrain federal power in ways that are almost impossible to reverse, with dramatic implications that cut across multiple policy areas.
- That will likely include voting rights as well as a sustained effort to restrict the authority of regulatory agencies in the executive branch.
Driving the news: Just in the past few months, the court …
Some of those issues are bigger than others, but each of those cases raised questions about overarching legal principles related to executive-branch authority.
- Prevented the CDC from enforcing an eviction moratorium due to COVID.
- Prevented OSHA from enforcing a vaccine mandate in workplaces.
- Prevented the EPA from carrying out some of its most aggressive proposed limits on greenhouse gasses.
How it works: Several of the court's conservative justices are highly skeptical of “Chevron deference” — the principle that, if a particular law isn’t clear on its face, the courts will generally defer to the interpretation of the agency tasked with implementing that law.
- Taken together, it's clear which direction things are headed — the federal government is going to be able to do a lot less than it has been able to do in the past.
- But the justices are not necessarily united on the specifics of how best to get there or how far to go.
- In striking down EPA regulations, the OSHA vaccine mandate and the CDC’s eviction moratorium, the court leaned heavily on a different but related legal test, known as the "major questions" doctrine.
- It holds that executive-branch agencies can’t rely on the general authority they’ve received from Congress in order to justify particularly sweeping actions. If Congress had intended for the CDC to be able to halt evictions all across the country, the court said, it would have needed to say so explicitly.
At the outer bound of this campaign is the "nondelegation doctrine" — a theory that Congress cannot delegate to the executive branch any of the powers the Constitution gives to Congress.
The bottom line: There are many ways for the conservative court to rein in federal agencies, and while there may not be a clear consensus on precisely which of those avenues to take at any given moment, one way or another, federal agencies exerting broad-based powers are already losing — and are almost certainly going to keep losing.
- It's not carrying the day right now, but at least three justices seem to want to bring it back. When the court struck down OSHA's vaccine mandate, Justice Neil Gorsuch — joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito — said that even if Congress had expressly given OSHA the power to impose a vaccine mandate, that likely would have been unconstitutional.
Article Link
Archive
He's been releasing reserves for the past eight months, and most recently as I'm sure everyone knows, started selling some of it to China. The reserves were slowing the rise of prices, that's all. And if/when we run out, the problem increases exponentially.Decreased demand because of gas costs and general living cost. Increased supply from strategic reserve sell-off