Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Solid Member
|
Post by kaz on Feb 7, 2024 16:33:12 GMT -5
Illegal according to who? Another international treaty? The Rivers and Harbors Appropriations Act of 1899. They weren't dumping any refuse, altering the course, dredging the bottom, or building bridges or causeways. |
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Solid Member
|
Post by nu5ncbigred on Feb 7, 2024 16:33:25 GMT -5
Nikki Haley suffered a major embarrassment in Nevada on Tuesday, finishing far behind “none of these candidates” in a presidential primary in which Donald Trump didn’t even compete. Haley’s second-place finish to the disembodied alternative on the Nevada ballot came in an otherwise no-stakes primary that will not award delegates to the Republican Party’s presidential nominating convention. Trump is expected to romp in the contest that will award delegates, the party-run caucus later this week. For Haley’s allies, Tuesday’s setback — she has not yet won a single state in the presidential primary — was already the subject of heavy pre-spinning. Some Trump loyalists in the state had actively encouraged his supporters to mark “none of these candidates” to protest her. That should end her campaign… |
|
Enter your message here...
Godlike Member
|
Post by trnyerheadncough on Feb 7, 2024 16:38:23 GMT -5
The Rivers and Harbors Appropriations Act of 1899. They weren't dumping any refuse, altering the course, dredging the bottom, or building bridges or causeways. So what? Texas, by law, cannot erect any structure in that waterway without permission of the federal government, which they didn’t seek or receive. |
|
|
That's TrnYerHeadnCough...
"Champion Douche -- 2012 AND 2013"
Back to Back...they may have to retire the contest...
"Bowl Champion Douche --2012-2013"
Get it right.
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Solid Member
|
Post by kaz on Feb 7, 2024 16:46:46 GMT -5
They weren't dumping any refuse, altering the course, dredging the bottom, or building bridges or causeways. So what? Texas, by law, cannot erect any structure in that waterway without permission of the federal government, which they didn’t seek or receive. Yay for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. |
|
Enter your message here...
Godlike Member
|
Post by trnyerheadncough on Feb 7, 2024 16:55:35 GMT -5
So what? Texas, by law, cannot erect any structure in that waterway without permission of the federal government, which they didn’t seek or receive. Yay for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. The law says what it says. Texas violated it. |
|
|
That's TrnYerHeadnCough...
"Champion Douche -- 2012 AND 2013"
Back to Back...they may have to retire the contest...
"Bowl Champion Douche --2012-2013"
Get it right.
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Solid Member
|
Post by kaz on Feb 7, 2024 17:04:52 GMT -5
Yay for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. The law says what it says. Texas violated it. Yay for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. |
|
Enter your message here...
Godlike Member
|
Post by trnyerheadncough on Feb 7, 2024 17:24:24 GMT -5
The law says what it says. Texas violated it. Yay for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. Don’t blame them. Take it up with congress from 125 years ago. |
|
|
That's TrnYerHeadnCough...
"Champion Douche -- 2012 AND 2013"
Back to Back...they may have to retire the contest...
"Bowl Champion Douche --2012-2013"
Get it right.
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Administrator
|
Post by Walter on Feb 7, 2024 17:44:22 GMT -5
Perhaps the GOP House can propose a bill that repeals the requirement for states to keep waterways free and navigable and remove the requirement that they receive permission from the feds first to do anything within the waterway.
Can't wait to see the debate about that.
|
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Solid Member
|
Post by kaz on Feb 7, 2024 17:56:09 GMT -5
Perhaps the GOP House can propose a bill that repeals the requirement for states to keep waterways free and navigable and remove the requirement that they receive permission from the feds first to do anything within the waterway. Can't wait to see the debate about that. According to 2 sources Despite its name and length, the Rio Grande is not navigable by ocean-going ships, nor do smaller passenger boats or cargo barges use it as a route. It is barely navigable at all, except by small boats in a few places. |
|
Enter your message here...
Godlike Member
|
Post by trnyerheadncough on Feb 7, 2024 18:09:05 GMT -5
Perhaps the GOP House can propose a bill that repeals the requirement for states to keep waterways free and navigable and remove the requirement that they receive permission from the feds first to do anything within the waterway. Can't wait to see the debate about that. According to 2 sources Despite its name and length, the Rio Grande is not navigable by ocean-going ships, nor do smaller passenger boats or cargo barges use it as a route. It is barely navigable at all, except by small boats in a few places. So “barely navigable” means….navigable. And therefore subject to the Act. Not to mention at least 50 years worth of continued documentation from various government entities determining the Rio Grande, and specifically that area of it, to be navigable. |
|
|
That's TrnYerHeadnCough...
"Champion Douche -- 2012 AND 2013"
Back to Back...they may have to retire the contest...
"Bowl Champion Douche --2012-2013"
Get it right.
|
Woah, this is a default personal text! Edit your profile to change this to what you like!
Solid Member
|
Post by kaz on Feb 7, 2024 19:33:49 GMT -5
Not navigableAccording to 2 sources Despite its name and length, the Rio Grande is not navigable by ocean-going ships, nor do smaller passenger boats or cargo barges use it as a route. It is barely navigable at all, except by small boats in a few places. So “barely navigable” means….navigable. And therefore subject to the Act. Not to mention at least 50 years worth of continued documentation from various government entities determining the Rio Grande, and specifically that area of it, to be navigable. Tell it to the 5th Circuit. They apparently have more brains than other government employees. |
|
Enter your message here...
Godlike Member
|
Post by trnyerheadncough on Feb 7, 2024 19:40:42 GMT -5
So “barely navigable” means….navigable. And therefore subject to the Act. Not to mention at least 50 years worth of continued documentation from various government entities determining the Rio Grande, and specifically that area of it, to be navigable. Tell it to the 5th Circuit. They apparently have more brains than other government employees. The Fifth Circuit agreed with the district court. Texas lost, although it has secured a rehearing with the full court in May. That said, I read the very well reasoned dissent by the judge in the Fifth Circuit decision and found myself persuaded. |
|
|
That's TrnYerHeadnCough...
"Champion Douche -- 2012 AND 2013"
Back to Back...they may have to retire the contest...
"Bowl Champion Douche --2012-2013"
Get it right.
|
Make America Great Again !!!
Supreme Being-like Member
|
Post by Panama pfRedd on Feb 7, 2024 20:33:51 GMT -5
So “barely navigable” means….navigable. And therefore subject to the Act. Not to mention at least 50 years worth of continued documentation from various government entities determining the Rio Grande, and specifically that area of it, to be navigable. Tell it to the 5th Circuit. They apparently have more brains than other government employees. Or the "lawyer". |
|
................................  ................................ = Panama pfRedd - 2021 Regular Season Champion = ...............................  ................................
|
Enter your message here...
Godlike Member
|
Post by trnyerheadncough on Feb 7, 2024 20:50:58 GMT -5
Tell it to the 5th Circuit. They apparently have more brains than other government employees. Or the "lawyer". The Fifth Circuit agreed with the district court. Texas lost, although it has secured a rehearing with the full court in May. |
|
|
That's TrnYerHeadnCough...
"Champion Douche -- 2012 AND 2013"
Back to Back...they may have to retire the contest...
"Bowl Champion Douche --2012-2013"
Get it right.
|
Make America Great Again !!!
Supreme Being-like Member
|
Post by Panama pfRedd on Feb 7, 2024 20:58:09 GMT -5
This thread is about Nikki McCain, not what that fxckin lawyer prick wants to talk about in order to not talk about the topic.
|
|
................................ ................................ = Panama pfRedd - 2021 Regular Season Champion = ............................... ................................
|
Jan 13, 2020 17:38:49 GMT -5
Jan 13, 2020 17:38:49 GMT -5
May 1, 2022 14:04:40 GMT -5
May 1, 2022 14:04:40 GMT -5
