Trump Admin Says It's Cutting Welfare Funds To Blue States Over Alleged Minnesota Fraud
The cuts to several states come amid an escalating fraud fallout fueled by a dubious YouTube investigation of Minnesota day cares.
US 2024 Presidential Election
- Thread starter gorfias
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Can the blue states just withold taxes to the federal government then? See how well the red states do without the blue states doing all their funding for them.Aw yeah baby, maybe they'll stop pussyfooting around.Trump Admin Says It's Cutting Welfare Funds To Blue States Over Alleged Minnesota Fraud
The cuts to several states come amid an escalating fraud fallout fueled by a dubious YouTube investigation of Minnesota day cares.www.huffpost.com
Fuck off, Trump.Aw yeah baby, maybe they'll stop pussyfooting around.Trump Admin Says It's Cutting Welfare Funds To Blue States Over Alleged Minnesota Fraud
The cuts to several states come amid an escalating fraud fallout fueled by a dubious YouTube investigation of Minnesota day cares.
Its kinda fun seeing the MAGA hypocrisy on display again.
Now that ICE murdered a civilian their stance is ''Trump and Vance say she's a domestic terrorist despite nothing supporting this and therefore she deserved it''
But when actual domestic terrorist Ashly Babbit was shot when trying to break down a door so she could lynch the people behind it they found it unforgivible and are still mad.
So what's the difference? Aside from Babbit actually having been a domestic terrorist?
Now that ICE murdered a civilian their stance is ''Trump and Vance say she's a domestic terrorist despite nothing supporting this and therefore she deserved it''
But when actual domestic terrorist Ashly Babbit was shot when trying to break down a door so she could lynch the people behind it they found it unforgivible and are still mad.
So what's the difference? Aside from Babbit actually having been a domestic terrorist?
What I understand is that you are a right-wing authoritarian affronted by challenge to authority, whereas most of the users here do not have the same submissiveness towards authority. This is the the same sort of reason you want to tackle Silvanus for exaggeration, but have nothing to say about the infinitely more egregious exaggeration of the federal executive describing the incident.
Given you seem to hold to your view that this was actually an unjustified killing, your argument isn't so much a factual difference as a psychological one.
Wow, it's like nobody saw or learned anything from Pluribus, the season finale is more and more apt everyday.
Trump: ‘We are going to do something on Greenland whether they like it or not’
Trump said that if the U.S. doesn't take action on Greenland, "Russia or China will take over" the Danish island territory.
www.cnbc.com
But Russia already is a neighbor
Seriously, try harder. You are trying to win an argument I'm not longer having with you. Seriously think for yourself, and consider what others might think and feel.
It's not more egregious, it's the exact counterweight of wrong, but the important difference is that they aren't talking in this thread for me to respond to.
Domino theory all over again.View attachment 14145
Trump: ‘We are going to do something on Greenland whether they like it or not’
Trump said that if the U.S. doesn't take action on Greenland, "Russia or China will take over" the Danish island territory.
But Russia already is a neighbor
Oh look, I'm an other
Silvanus is doing fine
Morals are about the community and what they think is good, not what the leader tells you
I can empathize someone feeling scared and the situation might be tough. I dont know why the response to feeling scared is a shooting. I can empathise that they think this is the correct response. That does not make it a correct response
I know the US no longer believes in proportional response. You can shoot anyone if you have enough money or power. I know you have thrown the constitution out the window but this is THE type of violence the constituion protect the citzens from state violence. You had a whole Revolutionary War about it
Her last words to the ICE officer was, 'That's fine dude. I'm not mad at you,' with a massive smile on yout face
I can express to everyone how threatening this clearly was /s
I would also suggest to all ICE officers to stop looping around cars if your so threatened by them
I can express to everyone how threatening this clearly was /s
I would also suggest to all ICE officers to stop looping around cars if your so threatened by them
Body cam merged with prior footage viewpoint -
Larger view -
The shots were in reaction to being hit, and it would appear the protesters had no intention of complying with the officers.
Larger view -
The shots were in reaction to being hit, and it would appear the protesters had no intention of complying with the officers.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the federal service collect tax and give it back to state, maybe state could push the cop to not enforce any consequence on individual who wouldn't pay tax, but thats pretty limited.
Car was maybe, like, 1 feet away from the officer. Even if he stood in the path he would suffer no damage whatsoever, once he makes contact with the car, it would just move him harmlessly. Since he was on the side, he would just be pushed aside after that. Essentially shooting did nothing to help him, even if she was heel bent on killing him, car don't work that way.
The other way to see this is that, he did actually get hit... and took no damage. In which case, why is he shooting her? What threat is he preventing by killing her? Car can't turn on a dime to try and hit them again.
Anyway, you can see her wheel pointing away from the officer
For a car obsesses culture, its shocking how few people know how car work.
He should have done first aid, which he didn't, he ran away.
In theory, this could help a lot of people pay off their debts. However, I can also see two potential adverse outcomes from this:
1) Banks will not offer credit to riskier clients, thereby meaning many poor people will find it harder to borrow and be worse off, even have to go to more predatory lenders
2) Some people might actually borrow more thinking they can pay it off, and be saddled with high debts when the cap comes off
Of course, that would all depend on the banks going along with this. Nor does it actually do anything for affordability. Not that I believe there's any desire to.