@Scooter2000 what hes saying is that the deliberate use of "we must secure" to start off a message, that is exactly 14 words long, on a topic that is crucial to the question of US demographics (immigration and border sec) is a pretty heavy dog whistle, if not a heavy wink and nod about where peoples loyalties actually lie.

i gathered that

@Scooter2000 why not?

i don't think it really tells us anything we don't already understand

@clean That's not a scientifically posed question and your not going to get a scientific answer for it.

ok do you have any links for me?

@clean Why don't you just look at any of the HBD stuff that Ryan Faulk talks about?

I think Trumps response to the 14 words would be "why not? What's wrong with that?"

It literally just says whypipo deserve a future

@NormanLord @Scooter2000 @BottomoftheNinth

who tf counts by 88’s

HH brother

i’m pretty shocked

@bress222 I think you cracked the code <:grug:420405237019443203>

that’s the same article by DHS @Scooter2000

https://forward.com/culture/404371/are-14-and-88-nazi-dog-whistles-in-this-homeland-security-document-or-just/

🤔

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1013181655970873344?s=21

okay, this is epic

Step 1. close the bases

2. bring the boys home

3. save money

Hell yeah. End the occupation.

@bress222 I mean again like I said before. Does this mean that much? Not really, we know the explicit intentions of this administration and any hidden intentions don't seem out of line with those explicit intentions so this is kind of a...quaint and unfruitful pursuit. As long as you don't try to make something out of this that you shouldn't.

I'm really not getting why you are splitting hairs here. This is significant because it shows that there are more people out there than just trump. It shows that there are enough influential people at DHS not only to write this, but to get it approved as well. That doesnt mean that the DHS is making plans to round up anyone with a mexican name, but it is reassuring to realize that people in power stand behind the president, and behind some of the more controversial elements of his base.

@BottomoftheNinth I'm not splitting hairs I'm just shitting all over your parade

I dont think you are. I'm saying it's a good thing, but not anything to be over the moon about. Yet, you are acting like I am over the moon about it. I just consider it another big whitepill.

I don't think it's a whitepill at all it's at worst coincidental and at best trolly

https://www.axios.com/newsletters/axios-sneak-peek-abf8b627-9e9e-4ada-a83c-9a556b9c5f07.html?chunk=0&utm_term=twsocialshare#story0

The details: The bill, titled the "United States Fair and Reciprocal Tariff Act," would give Trump unilateral power to ignore the two most basic principles of the WTO and negotiate one-on-one with any country:

>The "Most Favored Nation" (MFN) principle that countries can't set different tariff rates for different countries outside of free trade agreements;

>The draft legislation is stunning. The bill essentially provides Trump a license to raise U.S. tariffs at will, without congressional consent and international rules be damned.

https://twitter.com/wiredsources/status/1013595478552965120?s=21

We could literally Noriega this guy

Sympathizing with drug dealers

Bring the troops home and station 100k at the border

Get Ready

true

https://nypost.com/2018/06/30/us-could-remove-troops-from-germany/amp/

https://www.axios.com/seattle-first-major-city-ban-plastic-straws-utensils-ec0ea194-e51a-4203-9acf-e7e14b65ecab.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic

What do we think of banning plastic shit

kinda gay tbh

just stop companies from putting the shit in the ocean

can we PLEASE invade Mexico RIGHT NOW

Even if we invade they will never change. I say build the wall, and chem trail the place with bio-weapons. Then send the Americanized ones back when the dust settles.

https://twitter.com/europeelects/status/1013793694187773953?s=21 CHAD

hmm what did John Locke mean by this? http://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/07/immigration-has-consequences.html

@Solipsistic Vinarchy If an election would held today today the current coalition would get nearly 60% Boiiii https://twitter.com/europeelects/status/1013884857439719425?s=21

wew

Im reading about Horatio Nelson rn

hes a total chad

And the Socialist and centre right continue to lose points

Admiral , Napoleonic wars

He’s like one of the only positive white role models we were allowed to learn about in school

https://twitter.com/wiredsources/status/1013886418622574592?s=21

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

TALK THE TALK

CANT WALK THE WALK

frickin LOSER

low energy

This is good midterm optics

Mexico have confirmed themselves as the enemy and Trump is defeating them already

the nigga hasnt even taken office yet

and hes already taking the knee

Lol

Bend the knee or lose the head

looks like he chose wisely

But about Nelson

Im reading about his time fighting Denmark

where he disobeyed his virgin superior's orders to retreat

but he stayed and destroyed the dannish defenses

Yeah good leader needs to be able to challenge authority

We did Battle of the Nile in school

In my school we spent almost a week on andrew jackson

<:dab:402362224527671306>

even watched a video

No chads like that in our school

We learnt of Chad Charles I

But only in the context of OH MUH GAWD HE SHUT DOWN DEMOCRACY IM SO GLAD HE WAS BEHEADED

Under his personal rule England made peace with France and Spain, increased royal income etc

@Solipsistic Vinarchy who is this wired sources? seen everyone RTing them only recently

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/02/us/politics/trump-supreme-court-nomination.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/the-fix/wp/2018/07/02/one-possible-trump-supreme-court-pick-who-makes-too-much-sense/

People saying Barret most likely seems great

Immigration hawk, big white family and very Christian

would be a big win but unfortunately she is a woman

meta i have dumb question for you on how supreme court works

Also she’s got a black adopted kid

What’s the Q

so supreme court doesn’t really get to organically choose to over turn abortion rights obviously. but they pick and choose from a list of thousands of cases before them. so how can we be so sure roe v wade gets over turned with new justice?

Well we can’t exactly. So say a state challenges the law, this would go to SC potentially here they could say the states now decide on abortion

Then you could get states to ban it individually don’t know how many would do that tho

okay so they don’t necessarily have to wait for a case pertaining to abortion to come across their desk then make a ruling that’s broad enough to give states that option, a state can challenge and expedite a lot of that procedure huh

my state would be the first to ban it

As far as I understand yes. States changes law-acting illegally- circuit court shoots it down, goes to SC within 6 months

Won’t get a blanket ban since it’ll be a stated rights argument

hahaaaa interesting. our state leg is packed with pro lifers and our gov is all about it too. hopefully we can lead the fight

Barret was also a Scalia clerk

So fingers crossed , most others seem compromised in some way