Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
But Donald Trump is separate under Citrix. Citrix is a security software.No, not very interesting. Citrix is virtualization software, not necessarily security software.
Interesting, no?
The Constitution doesn't say whether it can be taken away or not. Anything not in the Constitution is for the government to decide. It also doesn't say that Citizenship is a right, like the right to free speech and the right to bare arms. If it were a right it would have been explicitly described that way with the other rights. Instead, it merely outlines who qualifies for citizenship.Perhaps you should take another gander at the 14th amendment:
Fourteenth Amendment
Section 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The keyword is that someone is granted citenship.Citizenship is a right granted by the constitution, therefore only the constitution can revoke citizenship. Please show me where the constitution outlines the process for revoking citizenship.
Further, a US Citizen can choose to give up their US Citizenship, proving that citizenship isn't absolute. If it were absolute you would not be able to give it up.Being able to give up a right is not the same as having that right taken away.
I've read the Constitution. It's not that long. It says who gets citizenship. It doesn't say that anyone specifically has a right to keep their citizenship, or that it can't be stripped away from them. There is nothing about "must be kept" or "must be maintained". This would go to the Supreme Court.Actually, it has gone before the Supreme Court in the birthright citizenship case. You know, Trump’s challenge to the 14th amendment.
If you are a U.S. citizen because of having been born in the United States, you can give up your U.S. citizenship by performing certain acts, but the U.S. government can’t just take it away from you. Citizenship is yours for life.
Trump has had multiple affairs. He’s been adjudicated to be a rapist.But none of that happened while Trump was in office (as far as we know), so none of it counts.
It is Democrats who are extremely dissatisfied with their party, not Republicans.False dichotomy. From what I can tell, people on both sides are varying levels of dissatisfied with their parties.
"Obliterated" or not, unless the enriched uranium has been vapourised, it may still exist in some form.Again, with all of the advance warning, it's fairly likely that the stockpile of enriched uranium was moved as well. The centrifuges might be a different story.
Trump had been talking about the strike for days, so the site was most likely already evacuated, therefore it's doubtful that anybody was trapped or dying in the rubble.From the above PBS article:But the site was obliterated, according to Trump. Shouldn't have BEEN survivors. And if Israel just wanted to kill anyone who tried to assess damage just because they can... yeah, that's a war crime.QuoteThe Israeli military also confirmed it struck roads around Iran’s Fordo enrichment facility to obstruct access to the site.
They took out the roads to prevent emergency responders from trying to help people who may have been trapped or dying in the rubble. This is reprehensible, and likely a war crime. Attacking the survivors of a bombing is distinctly different than the bombing of the infrastructure itself.
But Trump said they did. Hit that site and obliterated it.Trump also said that there was a cease fire. Apparently neither side got the memo.
Then Israel hits the same spot again.The article said that they hit the roads going to that spot, among other targets.
Oh hey, something we all missed.Or, maybe the US and other previous strikes didn’t take out every possible target.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/israel-hits-iranian-government-targets-day-after-u-s-strikes-on-iranian-nuclear-sites
Apparently, Israel wanted to attack an already obliterated site. Weird, right? Almost like Trump is lying about how much damage was done. Probably why he's blocking congress from seeing the reports.
I do have criticisms about Trump...You do? Would you care to share some of them?
