

2·
3 days agoIt’s in there in the section on “emoluments”. Problem is SCOTUS has already ruled “no foul, play on”
It’s in there in the section on “emoluments”. Problem is SCOTUS has already ruled “no foul, play on”
Yes, that’s an cheap shot and an insult to knobs everywhere.
Not bad. I can picture that with the squiggly animation from the Simpsons shorts on the Tracy Ullman show.
We tariff you infinity plus one.
To be clear, this theory doesn’t invalidate what you said.
Why not both?