Search results

And I am the only one here who actively seems to read all the rules and regs about this

SES can only be fired by congress. That's the way it works. They can also be forced to retire as well. Which has been happening a lot, and they get Pikachu surprise faced when the service members that arnt SES complain and show why retention and recruitment are so low.

Congress can fire them

Had the house done one bill at a time things would be better. But Republicans have control over the house. They could stop any amendment they don't want. But because if establishment ones, they don't.

I do a lot actually. It's nice. Same woth work. It's just here is a cesspool of scum and villainy (joke people joke)

I know. I am not into that trap. We have shown numerous times we can do many things. This site is just full of doom

The optics war that the left controls? And no my plan isn't thay. My plan would be to use the optics the left use against us against them. Make a ukraine bill truly bipartisan and force them to give thing sup in response. Instead they play the right like a fiddle But that takes time.

What obstructionism? Biden has used his EO capabilities to bypass congress numerous times. Stop acting like there is a high horse here.

It wouldn't matter if Hiuse had all due hard MAGA members. Senate would say no.

It's the senate. Anything the house does that the right wants, will never get through congress

How did she ever get through college. She couldn't have been that good at....giving a helping hand

Yes, the political appointee yes. Bit you have others that are stating jts because there was no threat or force.

I am fully against censorship. It is just the argument that is being made to scotus is that they asked, and did not force. And companies can say no to Ontel agencies. Unless warrants are invovled

It's because the argument is that the Government threatened and forced it. Which they find unfounded from what I understand

I concede on my argument. I can see that I can not win this due to the aspect of the general nature. Yall make more sense then me.

I understand that, but it opens the door to mass leftist ideology being shoved more heavily by the companies themselves outside of them being asked too censor the right

The diffrence is, the government did not force them. That is what thw case is about. No forcing. It was voluntary to remove it

The media companies willingly do it. Simple as. They can say no. You are basically saying the media companies can't conduct in thier own buisness. That they have to be open to all.

...so the government should allow stuff that is not illegal, like drag shows, etc, from being restricted on behest of some party, because they do it to the right. Gotcha. The corporation can always so no. Like Rumble did.

It's a private company. They should be able to do what ever. The government would then have to allow grooming of children to be allowed because guess what Stopping it would be going against free speech. Or calling for so many things from the left would be allowed as well. And the right wouldn't...