How can a law matter when “rule of law” is no longer applicable in our world today? If it was, we would not be in the current state of affairs and the globalists would not exist.
4 Likes
Law is actual & provable. Ask Donald Trump why the hell he would ever draw up an Agreement such as USMCA & you’ll have the answer to YOUR question(s). I’ve got the answers to my questions, all in one disgusting document.
That’s not a law. It’s a trade agreement.
2 Likes
Quibble all you want; as you do so often when you’re out of ammo.
The Agreement IS legislation, which means it IS Law; voted in by both Houses.
without going into details, would u be so kind to ‘excerpt’ the USMCA’s real meaning?
read something about it then, but all that stuck to me is the impression that the us-citizens got the wrong end of the rod again. so i did not bother more, since, as far as i can tell, the american politicians almost never think of their constituents or country.
besides i do not think Trump is treasonous. he always sticked to himself, nothing else. and a master manipulator
The only thing I can do is post Gary’s video here again for about the tenth time. He was leader of our reading group. If you do not know Our Constitution, you’ll likely not quite get some of the subtilties, but give it a shot. This document makes Trump & all who voted for it, traitors.
thats it. thanx. take care
agreement (n.)
c. 1400, “mutual understanding” (among persons), also (of things) “mutual conformity,” from Old French agrement, agreement, noun of action from agreer “to please” (see agree). Early 15c. as “formal or documentary agreement, terms of settlement.”
law (n.)
Old English lagu (plural laga, combining form lah-) “ordinance, rule prescribed by authority, regulation; district governed by the same laws;” also sometimes “right, legal privilege,” from Old Norse *lagu “law,” collective plural of lag “layer, measure, stroke,” literally “something laid down, that which is fixed or set.”
legislation (n.)
1650s, “the enacting of laws,” from French législation (14c.), from Late Latin legislationem(nominative legislatio), properly two words, legis latio, “a proposing (literally ‘bearing’) of a law;” see legislator. Meaning “the product of legislative action” is from 1838.
Congress has the constitutional power to pass legislation pertaining to the regulation of commerce and approve appointments. It does not say they have to do the work.
1 Like
When you read the agreement, then, I’ll listen, otherwise, I have a dictionary too.
You can stay with your cult of personality, Bill, that’s up to you.
Next comes Convention of States. You’ll love that one!
Tah tah!
I read the agreement. Nothing wrong with it.
Commerce between countries is not bad.
Blaming Trump or anyone for something one doesn’t like is a bit short sighted to say the least.
A new constitution? No one seems to recognize the the original. Why would any constitution make a difference?
Really? You read that almost 2000 page Agreement by yourself? Well Bill, I’d congratulate you, IF I believed you, which I do not. It took 4 people in our group 4 days to read the entire USMCA, so, take the wool somewhere else & blind them instead. Puuuulease! What a joker you are!
There are plenty of good examples of what is wrong with USMCA. THIS IS NOT ONE OF THEM. I don’t care if you follow this person but simply the use of the word “sustainable” is not a valid argument. As a land planner, I don’t think I ever wrote an environmental impact statement without using the word sustainable in multiple applications.
Try this for an intelligent discussion of the USMCA impacts:
And Gary gave plenty of other examples, if you do not recognize “sustainable development” as being worthy of note. I do not need another video, we read the entire Agreement.
Please stop the ad hominem attacks. It does nothing to your argument and is in poor conduct on this site. I have refrained from saying this, actually have cancelled saying this on many occasions, but this must stop now.
4 Likes
Never read the entire Bible either, just parts, however the essence was clear.
I’ve been attacked more than once here and don’t whine about it so, if you don’t like what I say, you can always not respond. In any case, I’m done responding to you.
Well, that was an adult response. I seriously doubt if that helped any of your comments or opinions here. Good luck.
2 Likes
Dear Bill
have u ever read these lines?
Gospel of John 10:
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
(KJV)
just 2 things:
1: “your law” whose law? not of Jesus it seems…
2: are u a god?
so. is the essence of the Bible clear already?
sure?
u know, ‘the devil is in the details’
do not mix justwhoaman with justwhoawoman. directness is not deadly.
i think what she used is called ‘sarcasm’, which is not ‘nice’, but not an ‘ad hominem’ attack, unless to somebody’s mental capacity, if u will. 
and Bill is quite weatherproof, i think.
wasn’t even here, take care, cleansen and pray. these r heavy times for everybody
in the name of our Lord Jesus:
“Peace be with you.”
1 Like
No not a god, but will defend myself from blasphemy.
“Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me.”
These are rough times. We can at a minimum preserve civility and respect on the forum.
2 Likes