when i hear trump's "I call my own shots, largely based on an accumulation of data--" i want to end it with "--and partly based on my commitment to being bat shit crazy."

 

The Humane Society threatens to sue the federal government:

http://time.com/4661446/usda-animal-website-humane-society-lawsuit/

"The Humane Society said the Agriculture Department must make its inspection records at animal research facilities public under a court order. The animal organization had sued the government in 2005 over public access to the reports and won a settlement in 2009 that directed the Agriculture Department to post certain data on its website related to research on animals. That information, the Humane Society said, was among the data that was just purged from government website."

Oops, always best to understand the law before deciding to hide information from the public.

 

Stuck in the middle with you

 

Oversight, not attempt to hide anything.

 

Pot, meet kettle.

 

I disagree. They removed all of the specific information related to animal welfare violations from their website. Information that had been included on the website. So if you aren't trying to hide information, why remove it?

The oversight was that it was illegal to do so.

 

The ruling judge is an activist. I dont think the 9th will overturn given they are the most liberal and progressive federal appeals court in the US. On the other hand it is precedent that courts do not have any jurisdiction over immigration law that is a power given specifically to Congress by the Constitution

 

Bwahahahahaha!! That's hilarious! I don't know if you were being serious, but that's the funniest thing I've read all day.



http://usuncut.com

 

Do you mean after they are actually here in the US? Or before? The Supreme Court ruled immigrants have no legal recourse for a visa being denied outside the borders of the US in 2015. Once inside the US everyone all the basic legal rights afforded to them by the Constitution regardless of immigration status. The Constitution does not extend beyond the physical borders of US.

 

No, What purpose does it serve? It is an oversight by whoever is in charge of this now. It will be fixed soon.

 

@Lindigo

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-california-federal-government-money-20170205-story.html

Do you think Caliexit would be a good thing after reading this?

 

i still don't understand the financial ramifictions. for example, the figures here include the federal social security benefits that currently come to california citizens. the calexit people say, don't worry, SSA benefits would follow california citizens because the payments were already earned from the us goverment. that makes sense to me. i think people who go abroad after retirement still get their benefits. would ssa disability benefits follow? i don't know. i suppose they currently do and would do so for a calexit as well. what happens now to people who change citizenship? i don't know. it can't be very many.

bottom line, i don't know how many of the supposed downsides really would be downsides.

the petition i signed was to consider the possibility of a calexit. if that is approved, then we would be educated about the actual financial impacts.

i am inclined to believe this last paragraph in that story:

so, yes, i still think a calexit would benefit californians. i could be wrong, but that's what i still think for now.

 

i think this says spicer said snl is mean to donald (which his boss would make him say). i don't think spicer really minded for himself.

 

i want to play! since we are making guesses, i think the ninth circuit will agree with the stay on the ban. and then it will go en banc and the stay will still be upheld. and then it will go to scotus and the stay will still be upheld. and then it will be remanded back to washington for trial on the merits.