OFFICIAL LRC President Donald Trump SECOND TERM Thread

Hussars 1776.1 wrote:

Not so fast, king-lover. All nat guard troops banned from OR.

Judge Immergut, an appointee of President Trump, called an emergency hearing Sunday, then broadened her restraining order to cover “the relocation, federalization or deployment of members of the National Guard of any state or the District of Columbia in the state of Oregon,” telling Justice Department lawyers that the president was ”in direct contravention” of her order.

Oldrunningguy wrote:

Trump: "Portland is burning to the ground. You have agitators, insurrectionists. It's burning to the ground."

Really ? wrote:

And..the Cult can't hear or see the Dementia !!

"Multiple reports indicate that in 2025, President Trump's rhetoric and decision to deploy or threaten to deploy federal troops to Portland were linked to claims about the city being "war-ravaged" and under attack by "domestic terrorists," and that these claims were, at least in part, based on misleading video footage, including old clips from 2020 protests."

Shoko Asahara wrote:

Noyankee wrote:

MAGA is going into Oregon to protect our citizens whether you like it or not. It’s the government’s primary responsibility.

The only citizens Trump cares about protecting are his fellow pedophiles.

Hussars 1776.1 wrote:

Ghost of Disco Gary wrote:

Not so fast, my libs.

Tweet:x.com/EricLDaugh/status/19751601860808...

Trump wins AGAIN!

Not so fast, king-lover. All nat guard troops banned from OR.

Judge Immergut, an appointee of President Trump, called an emergency hearing Sunday, then broadened her restraining order to cover “the relocation, federalization or deployment of members of the National Guard of any state or the District of Columbia in the state of Oregon,” telling Justice Department lawyers that the president was ”in direct contravention” of her order.

Nnonequals wrote:

Oldrunningguy wrote:

Trump: "Portland is burning to the ground. You have agitators, insurrectionists. It's burning to the ground."

Spitting in the wind, I know, but I'd still like to hear that at least one journalist has or does ask him (and anyone from the GOP): "Why would you make up the fact that a U.S. city is burning? That's completely not true 'Mr. President,' so why would you say it?"

Nnonequals wrote:

It is KIND of funny when all of these pretend constitution-loving patriots claim that a single judge shouldn't be able to stop a president.

Sorry, mo-rans!!

Too bad there's not a time machine, and you could go back and fight for a certain king against a certain group of actual patriots.....

RossiCheated wrote:

Ghost of Disco Gary wrote:

Hey libs, convince me that Democrat leaders don't love crime.

Image:pbs.twimg.com/media/G2lJ3OyWQAA--uW?fo...

If Trump cared about making America more safe for all Americans, where would he be sending troops? Sure, Chicago can make the list. But where do the facts say people are really in danger?

States with the highest violent crime rates per capita in recent analyses include Alaska, Tennessee, Arkansas, and New Mexico, with Louisiana and Mississippi also frequently ranking among the most dangerous states due to high overall crime rates. The FBI data for 2024 shows Alaska with the highest violent crime rate, while other analyses point to Southern states like Mississippi and Louisiana, and Western states like New Mexico for elevated violence.

Red States = Violent, crime-infested, and deadly

RossiCheated wrote:

Ghost of Disco Gary wrote:

Now, break it down to the city level.

Most likely we get blue run sh!t holes. Try again.

The point: If you want to make America more safe, you send troops to the most dangerous cities: So, when is Trump sending troops to Memphis, and to New Orleans, and to St. Louis, and to Little Rock? I could go on. Everyone gets the point.

Further, even if those are cities run by Democrats, why aren't the Governors (you know... the people that control the NATIONAL GUARD in those States) sending in the troops without Trump needing to do it?

Are those Red State Governors failing the people of their States by not doing so?

Sally Vix wrote:

Shoko Asahara wrote:

The only citizens Trump cares about protecting are his fellow pedophiles.

Many of those "citizens" you mention are not citizens but instead illegals who Biden allowed to walk (and sometime flown on taxpayer dime) into the country.

Nnonequals wrote:

Let's not lower the bar so much for the king and the jesters: You DON'T send in troops to solve crime. Maybe to stop rioting, briefly. Not for law enforcement. Hell, we even have a quite famous law against it. But who cares about those silly things anymore?

Rea1 0bvi wrote:

El Runkin wrote:

It's civil war. It's already here, but many don't know it, and the media is in denial. But make no mistake, we are in a state of civil war. People are violent and very angry. Hate. Americans have hate in their hearts for the first time since the 1940s. But now, instead of Americans v. Huns, it's Americans v. Americans. The liberals v. the MAGAs. This is going to get large and deadly. This will actually pit people against their neighbors and their co-workers. No one can be trusted. NO ONE.

Not sure if you are trying to be funny with these posts. Sometimes you are quite amusing. You have talent.

But these types of posts, which you periodically put out there, are not helpful.

AIIigator AIcatraz 1 wrote:

Nnonequals wrote:

Let's not lower the bar so much for the king and the jesters: You DON'T send in troops to solve crime. Maybe to stop rioting, briefly. Not for law enforcement. Hell, we even have a quite famous law against it. But who cares about those silly things anymore?

Trump won by a ton - he has a mandate from the American people to enact his agenda. Making America safe again was part of that.

Sally Vix wrote:

Shoko Asahara wrote:

The only citizens Trump cares about protecting are his fellow pedophiles.

Many of those "citizens" you mention are not citizens but instead illegals who Biden allowed to walk (and sometime flown on taxpayer dime) into the country.

Nnonequals wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

Many of those "citizens" you mention are not citizens but instead illegals who Biden allowed to walk (and sometime flown on taxpayer dime) into the country.

Never thought of it this way: At least a third of the country has been talked into illegals wrecking the country (with no persuasive evidence). While the country those illegals are departing IS, actually, being wrecked (with LOTS of persuasive evidence).

Noyankee wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

Many of those "citizens" you mention are not citizens but instead illegals who Biden allowed to walk (and sometime flown on taxpayer dime) into the country.

Yes, my point exactly. when you have citizens under attack from armed foreigners then that’s a problem.

Amendment 5, Article 4, Section 4.

Get ready to experience the US Constitution in real life libs.

AIIigator AIcatraz 1 wrote:

Nnonequals wrote:

It is KIND of funny when all of these pretend constitution-loving patriots claim that a single judge shouldn't be able to stop a president.

Sorry, mo-rans!!

Too bad there's not a time machine, and you could go back and fight for a certain king against a certain group of actual patriots.....

Who is president? Trump or a random woke judge?