281
Comments (38)
sorted by:
43
Ridiculousbullschitt 43 points ago +43 / -0

Veto it anyway make them vote for it again.

17
ProphetOfKek 17 points ago +17 / -0

Agree. Make them show they are war mongers.

2
540k-Again 2 points ago +2 / -0

Amen. Fun Facts:

  • 1.) According to the US Constitution, it's not the judiciary's job to play "copy-editor" to congress. So if even 1 thing in a Bill/Law is unconstitutional, than the whole thing should be stricken down. Enforce the Constitution and no more yuuuge bills, that have to be passed before reading to see what's in then

  • 2.) As per US Constitution, POTUS orders US troop movements, not legislative branch. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Clause_1:_Command_of_military;_Opinions_of_cabinet_secretaries;_Pardons

  • 3.) Umm, "the base has been renamed"; 1 second later; "the base has be renamed back again". BTW, in 2017, Stonewall Jackson's stained glass windows were removed from the National Cathedral. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_Jackson

  • 4.) Unconstitutional Section 230 can be immediately, effectively nullified in practice by a 1-page E.O. by simple & effective, enforcement of the Constitution.

  • 5.) Earmarks are also unconstitutional.

::: Focus on State Legislators for Electors! 3 days remaining!

The WIN WIN Plan:

https://thedonald.win/p/11Q8EhtERu/for-everyone-who-wants-djtpence-/

LONG LIVE OUR REPUBLIC!

There is still time for State Legislators to do their Constitutional duty.

Get Republican State Legislatures to appoint their DJT/Pence Electors! WIN&WIN PLAN! Keep it going Pedes. SEND IT ALONG!

1
RussianAgent13 1 point ago +1 / -0

He should definitely veto it to make a point, and then do what he wants anyway. He's the supreme commander. Congress can declare war but they can't press a war or military action without him.

29
garydavis11 29 points ago +29 / -0

trump will veto it

3
RussianAgent13 3 points ago +3 / -0

Well yes he should but they may just pass it again.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
20
BakedBlunts 20 points ago +20 / -0

This shit is infuriating. These motherfuckers get paid to destroy our country. Nobody has a spine, nobody upholds their oath, and they dont represent their constituents.

It has to stop

20
Belac186 20 points ago +20 / -0

When the fraud stands were going to be slaves to the un and china. This is just getting us used to it. Freedom dies with us if we don't stop it.

3
OneBigMaga 3 points ago +4 / -1

Better to die on your feet than live as a slave.

14
deleted 14 points ago +14 / -0
14
deleted 14 points ago +14 / -0
5
lordvon 5 points ago +5 / -0

chinese wife

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
12
Shempy 12 points ago +12 / -0

Vote timing—-he’ll hold off on veto as long as he can and send it back

7
Bonami 7 points ago +7 / -0

Can he hold off until new congress is seated?

7
Shempy 7 points ago +7 / -0

Don’t know

5
ProphetOfKek 5 points ago +5 / -0

That would be amazing.

5
ippwndu 5 points ago +5 / -0

Maybe just long enough to drop the hammer.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
Shempy 2 points ago +2 / -0

Good point. Unsure of what the timeline is before the new Congress is sworn in and whether or not he has enough time to just let it die

11
patriot71 11 points ago +11 / -0

MIC deepstate paid for CONgress. The warparty is in control.

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
6
NorthusMaximus 6 points ago +6 / -0

This can't be blocked by POTUS?

9
AmishMachinist 9 points ago +9 / -0

Not if Congress votes for it with a 2/3 majority. Trump can veto, it goes back to the senate, they can override him with a 60% vote in favor.

6
Kekistancoffee 6 points ago +6 / -0

He has 10 days to decide to veto. That puts us right at Dec 23rd. Of course, we know the house / senate can push a bill through on Christmass Eve as they did with the ACA back in 2010... but honestly would they at that point?

By then things look a lot different in this country than they do right now.

4
couranto 4 points ago +4 / -0

It also excluded removal of section 230.

2
Cdogger 2 points ago +2 / -0

I actually think removing section 230 would be terrible. Big tech wouldn't care, it would just give them more of excuse to censor. But .win for example would now be liable for any content posted, an impossible task for any small platform which was the whole reason for 230 in the first place. Youtube, twatter and fagbook shoukd all be stripped of 230 because they act like publishers not because 230 is a bad idea

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
2
Sun_Tzu 2 points ago +2 / -0

Symobolic Veto inbound. Make the GOP pay!!!

2
Deplorable_Citizen 2 points ago +2 / -0

Trump should veto it and, should it still pass, not enforce it. If the democrats and their RINO allies are flagrantly ignoring our constitution and the law (when the law doesn't go in their treasonous favor), then we should reciprocate it and ignore their forced "bills". Fuck 'em.

2
YaBoiJacob 2 points ago +2 / -0

cOnSeRvAtIvE PaRtY

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
StaryHickory 1 point ago +1 / -0

Agree veto it and let us give them a piece of our minds. I am sick of this shit.

1
WalterJDuke 1 point ago +1 / -0

Is there a full voting list for this? I want to see who the traitors are. Or better, who the patriots are.

1
jb42 1 point ago +1 / -0

The House version of this bill limited the use of the Insurrection Act. Does anyone know if this made it into the final bill?