Examples of GOP Leadership
- Thread starter injinji
- Start date
Budzbuddha
Well-Known Member
Hey Trumptards
Budzbuddha
Well-Known Member
That is one ugly bass mouthed bitch. No amount of alcohol on earth .......jus sayin.
it's true..Trump was monitoring social media accounts for those who didn't agree with him.
i've Naziin anything like this since 1940s.
i've Naziin anything like this since 1940s.
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
Qbert. what a vapid dunce. i hope CO does the right thing and sends her packing.
Budzbuddha
Well-Known Member
Republichoes .....
topcat
Well-Known Member
(Q-Rifle)
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
It seems these assholes can't be stupid or embarrassing enough to get unelected in their districts, character doesn't count and neither do facts, only hate and fear matter.
CunningCanuk
Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
May the stupidest bastard win...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noted anti-government activist Ammon Bundy running for governor of Idaho (yahoo.com)
Noted anti-government activist Ammon Bundy running for governor of Idaho
Anti-government provocateur Ammon Bundy filed papers to run for governor in Idaho next year, even though he's not currently registered to vote or legally allowed to set foot on Capitol grounds.
Secretary of State candidacy records show Bundy listing his address as a post-office box in Emmett, with a local contractor, Aaron Welling, acting as treasurer.
He would be seeking the 2022 GOP nomination for the state's top post, currently held by Republican Brad Little. The governor had been unsuccessfully targeted for recall by anti-government activists unhappy with shutdowns he ordered in response to the pandemic.
Bundy told NBC News on Monday he's not yet formally announced a gubernatorial run, but wants to begin building an organization for a potential candidacy.
"The people of Idaho are very freedom-minded," Bundy said. "I had never desired (to run for office), but I knew as early as 2017 that I would run for governor of Idaho."
Bundy is best known for taking part in an armed standoff in 2016 at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, 300 miles southeast of Portland, Oregon.
He and others involved in the 41-day occupation were acquitted of possessing a firearm in a federal facility and conspiring to impede federal workers.
This past fall, Bundy made headlines when he refused to wear a mask at his son's high school football game, leading the contest to be called at halftime.
And a few months earlier, scuffles with state police at the Idaho Capitol grounds led to a 12-month ban enacted last Aug. 26, authorities said.
No one with Bundy's name or birthday is listed as a registered voter in Idaho. He'd have until April 22 of next year to register to vote in the May 17 primary.
Bundy admitted he's not a registered voter, a status he views as an act of protest.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noted anti-government activist Ammon Bundy running for governor of Idaho (yahoo.com)
Noted anti-government activist Ammon Bundy running for governor of Idaho
Anti-government provocateur Ammon Bundy filed papers to run for governor in Idaho next year, even though he's not currently registered to vote or legally allowed to set foot on Capitol grounds.
Secretary of State candidacy records show Bundy listing his address as a post-office box in Emmett, with a local contractor, Aaron Welling, acting as treasurer.
He would be seeking the 2022 GOP nomination for the state's top post, currently held by Republican Brad Little. The governor had been unsuccessfully targeted for recall by anti-government activists unhappy with shutdowns he ordered in response to the pandemic.
Bundy told NBC News on Monday he's not yet formally announced a gubernatorial run, but wants to begin building an organization for a potential candidacy.
"The people of Idaho are very freedom-minded," Bundy said. "I had never desired (to run for office), but I knew as early as 2017 that I would run for governor of Idaho."
Bundy is best known for taking part in an armed standoff in 2016 at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, 300 miles southeast of Portland, Oregon.
He and others involved in the 41-day occupation were acquitted of possessing a firearm in a federal facility and conspiring to impede federal workers.
This past fall, Bundy made headlines when he refused to wear a mask at his son's high school football game, leading the contest to be called at halftime.
And a few months earlier, scuffles with state police at the Idaho Capitol grounds led to a 12-month ban enacted last Aug. 26, authorities said.
No one with Bundy's name or birthday is listed as a registered voter in Idaho. He'd have until April 22 of next year to register to vote in the May 17 primary.
Bundy admitted he's not a registered voter, a status he views as an act of protest.
printer
Well-Known Member
Trump officials changed scientific analyses in pesticide reapproval: EPA watchdog
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) scientists told the agency’s internal watchdog that scientific analyses were changed in favor of top officials’ policy choices in the 2018 reapproval of a pesticide, according to a new report.
The inspector general's office said in a report published Monday that scientists in the Office of Pesticide Programs gave examples of such actions in interviews in the reapproval of the pesticide dicamba.
Multiple scientists said and emails also showed that after a senior management review, the assistant administrator’s office gave scientists an outline for rewriting an impact analysis document that removed several sections of the original, the watchdog said.
One scientist alleged that senior management in the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention told them to use company data for reported dicamba damages instead of EPA data.
Another scientist told the inspector general that senior management and policymakers decided that plant height should be used to measure dicamba’s effects instead of visual signs of plant injury, a standard used in academic and company studies. The report said that this direction changed the scientific conclusions.
The 2018 reapproval was for controlling weeds on cotton and soybeans that had been genetically engineered to tolerate it. Some opponents of the EPA's decision had argued that other crops that aren't resistant to dicamba could be impacted by its usage.
Uses of dicamba were reapproved again in 2020 for five years. A study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology last year linked dicamba use to certain cancers.
thehill.com
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) scientists told the agency’s internal watchdog that scientific analyses were changed in favor of top officials’ policy choices in the 2018 reapproval of a pesticide, according to a new report.
The inspector general's office said in a report published Monday that scientists in the Office of Pesticide Programs gave examples of such actions in interviews in the reapproval of the pesticide dicamba.
Multiple scientists said and emails also showed that after a senior management review, the assistant administrator’s office gave scientists an outline for rewriting an impact analysis document that removed several sections of the original, the watchdog said.
One scientist alleged that senior management in the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention told them to use company data for reported dicamba damages instead of EPA data.
Another scientist told the inspector general that senior management and policymakers decided that plant height should be used to measure dicamba’s effects instead of visual signs of plant injury, a standard used in academic and company studies. The report said that this direction changed the scientific conclusions.
The 2018 reapproval was for controlling weeds on cotton and soybeans that had been genetically engineered to tolerate it. Some opponents of the EPA's decision had argued that other crops that aren't resistant to dicamba could be impacted by its usage.
Uses of dicamba were reapproved again in 2020 for five years. A study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology last year linked dicamba use to certain cancers.
Trump officials changed scientific analyses in pesticide reapproval: EPA watchdog
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) scientists told the agency’s internal watchdog that scientific analyses were changed in favor of top officials’ policy choices in the 2018 reapproval of a pest…
thehill.com
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
the pinnacle of american politics: a high school dropout Qtard whose husband pulled his dong out in front of a minor.
'Murica!!!
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
It looks like Desantis is doing exactly what Trump wants, Donald says jump and he asks how high and through what hoops?
Donald gets a special Casino license for Doral and now he's trying to get back on social media using Florida as his own personal property. I have no doubt, Florida is gonna give Trump special insurance for his properties, if the private insurance companies pull the rug out from under him as they are doing to thousands of others because of climate change issues.
Private companies can de-platform anybody they like and they can tell people who enter their business to wear a mask, or shoes and a shirt, or even a tie. Good luck in the SCOTUS with this bullshit, he should call it "Donald's law".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Florida's ban on bans will test First Amendment rights of social media companies (yahoo.com)
Florida's ban on bans will test First Amendment rights of social media companies
Florida governor Ron DeSantis has signed into law a restriction on social media companies' ability to ban candidates for state offices and news outlets, and in doing so offered a direct challenge to those companies' perceived free speech rights. The law is almost certain to be challenged in court as both unconstitutional and in direct conflict with federal rules.
The law, Florida Senate Bill 7072, provides several new checks on tech and social media companies. Among other things:
While there is a great deal of circumstantial precedent and analysis, the problem of "are moderation practices of social media companies protected by the First Amendment" is as yet unsettled. Legal scholars and existing cases fall strongly on the side of "yes," but there is no single definitive precedent that Facebook or Twitter can point to.
The First Amendment argument starts with the idea that although social media are very unlike newspapers or book publishers, they are protected in much the same way by the Constitution from government interference. "Free speech" is a term that is interpreted extremely liberally, but if a company spending money is considered a protected expression of ideas, it's not a stretch to suggest that same company applying a policy of hosting or not hosting content should be as well. If it is, then the government is prohibited from interfering with it beyond very narrow definitions of unprotected speech (think shouting "fire" in a crowded theater). That would sink Florida's law on constitutional grounds.
...
Donald gets a special Casino license for Doral and now he's trying to get back on social media using Florida as his own personal property. I have no doubt, Florida is gonna give Trump special insurance for his properties, if the private insurance companies pull the rug out from under him as they are doing to thousands of others because of climate change issues.
Private companies can de-platform anybody they like and they can tell people who enter their business to wear a mask, or shoes and a shirt, or even a tie. Good luck in the SCOTUS with this bullshit, he should call it "Donald's law".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Florida's ban on bans will test First Amendment rights of social media companies (yahoo.com)
Florida's ban on bans will test First Amendment rights of social media companies
Florida governor Ron DeSantis has signed into law a restriction on social media companies' ability to ban candidates for state offices and news outlets, and in doing so offered a direct challenge to those companies' perceived free speech rights. The law is almost certain to be challenged in court as both unconstitutional and in direct conflict with federal rules.
The law, Florida Senate Bill 7072, provides several new checks on tech and social media companies. Among other things:
- Platforms cannot ban or deprioritize candidates for state office
- Platforms cannot ban or deprioritize any news outlet meeting certain size requirements
- Platforms must be transparent about moderation processes and give users notice of moderation actions
- Users and the state will have the right to sue companies that violate the law
While there is a great deal of circumstantial precedent and analysis, the problem of "are moderation practices of social media companies protected by the First Amendment" is as yet unsettled. Legal scholars and existing cases fall strongly on the side of "yes," but there is no single definitive precedent that Facebook or Twitter can point to.
The First Amendment argument starts with the idea that although social media are very unlike newspapers or book publishers, they are protected in much the same way by the Constitution from government interference. "Free speech" is a term that is interpreted extremely liberally, but if a company spending money is considered a protected expression of ideas, it's not a stretch to suggest that same company applying a policy of hosting or not hosting content should be as well. If it is, then the government is prohibited from interfering with it beyond very narrow definitions of unprotected speech (think shouting "fire" in a crowded theater). That would sink Florida's law on constitutional grounds.
...
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Dicamba is an environmental disaster due to its tendency to drift sometimes for miles and then drop onto another farmers crop or wipe out plants in wild areas. It's a horrible "technology" that came our way when, as was completely predictable, weeds became resistant to roundup and farmers didn't want to switch to older methods.Trump officials changed scientific analyses in pesticide reapproval: EPA watchdog
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) scientists told the agency’s internal watchdog that scientific analyses were changed in favor of top officials’ policy choices in the 2018 reapproval of a pesticide, according to a new report.
The inspector general's office said in a report published Monday that scientists in the Office of Pesticide Programs gave examples of such actions in interviews in the reapproval of the pesticide dicamba.
Multiple scientists said and emails also showed that after a senior management review, the assistant administrator’s office gave scientists an outline for rewriting an impact analysis document that removed several sections of the original, the watchdog said.
One scientist alleged that senior management in the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention told them to use company data for reported dicamba damages instead of EPA data.
Another scientist told the inspector general that senior management and policymakers decided that plant height should be used to measure dicamba’s effects instead of visual signs of plant injury, a standard used in academic and company studies. The report said that this direction changed the scientific conclusions.
The 2018 reapproval was for controlling weeds on cotton and soybeans that had been genetically engineered to tolerate it. Some opponents of the EPA's decision had argued that other crops that aren't resistant to dicamba could be impacted by its usage.
Uses of dicamba were reapproved again in 2020 for five years. A study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology last year linked dicamba use to certain cancers.
Trump officials changed scientific analyses in pesticide reapproval: EPA watchdog
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) scientists told the agency’s internal watchdog that scientific analyses were changed in favor of top officials’ policy choices in the 2018 reapproval of a pest…
Fuck Trump.
and his toadies.
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
nothing more than pandering to the trumptards.
will never hold up in court (maybe state but it will be appealed to federal level and quickly thrown out)
facebook and twitter should proactively ban all accounts of anybody with a florida address
doesn't she belong you you down there?