Perhaps he should be in jail for abuse of authority and taking bribes while in a position of power?
twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/803567993036754944
via www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/11/29/president-elect-donald-trump-flag-burners-lose-citizenship-fined/ and as they suggest, we know Trump uses tweet like this to cover up other much more unfortunate events, so what could he be covering for this time?
This issue has already been settled, at least twice in fact. Now personally, I’m not cool with it, but I’m also not cool with white supremacist spouting their bullshit either. Both however are, and should remain, legal forms of speech under the 1st Amendment.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._Johnson
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Eichman
We have a 1st Amendment right to burn the flag. Is it a dick thing to do? You bet it is. But, we have the right to do so. Drumpf has not read the Constitution. He does not understand the law. Drumpf is the least qualified person to be President in the history of the United States of America.
I really wish it were possible to upvote comments here.
…burn a flag?
used to have that, then something with it broke and it turns out that having the comment karma system turned off means people have to actually comment instead of just giving upvotes.
upvote^
Karma provides fast, easy, fly-by (en|dis)couragment feedback.
I liked the option to filter highly down-voted comments.
Having nothing to contribute, silence is golden, over “me too” time-wasting noise. Consider rolling back the pre-broke version or borrow one like Reddits.
Ironically, if karma was enabled, you could see the karma whether others agreed or disagreed with having karma.
I agree, it’s on my list of things to do. Higher than that though is to hire someone to deal with some data entry stuff that desperately needs to happen on some sister sites.
Awesome…thought I may have done something to upset the Tiki-God and got my voting rights taking away. I personal will be upvoting tiki-god in life.
Fire is considered by the Flag Code to be the preferred method of destroying a flag that’s so worn out that flying it is disrespectful to the values for which it stands.
Hmmm. Maybe his advisors are catching him up on the Civic’s classes he missed on the way up the ladder to success? Good plan. Become President & learn about Government for free.
It’s a good thing that the president doesn’t actually get to make laws… though he probably doesn’t know that yet.
Hook, line, sinker. 5D chess.
[img
[/img]
Nope, against that too. And your graphic is misleading.
The actual summary of the bill located here:
www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/senate-bill/1911
“Flag Protection Act of 2005 – Amends the federal criminal code to revise provisions regarding desecration of the flag to prohibit: (1) destroying or damaging a U.S. flag with the primary purpose and intent to incite or produce imminent violence or a breach of the peace; (2) intentionally threatening or intimidating any person, or group of persons, by burning a U.S. flag; or (3) stealing or knowingly converting the use of a U.S. flag belonging to the United States, or belonging to another person on U.S. lands, and intentionally destroying or damaging that flag.”
Huh, if a lawyer were to read that I’m pretty sure flag burning is still legal in some cases. Your cute graphic doesn’t mention that.
It also doesn’t mention that this bill apparently didn’t even make it out of committee. A lot of bullshit terrible bills don’t make it out of committee.
Not very good at 5D chess. Next time read the actual summary.