67RModel

I assume you mean January 6, 2021? Those folks breached and entered the US Capitol Building not the whitehouse. If so where were you living during the first half of 2021? lol. It was nonstop coverage, conspiracy theories, trials, hearings, witnesses. The works. A little something for everyone.

Yea I get it but I guess I was meaning more along the lines of reciprocity. Basically saying “the USA will not impose tariffs on any country unless other countries impose them first at which point the USA will impose the exact same tariff on them. As a baseline, starting now, all tariffs will be adjusted up or down to match what any other nation has imposed on USA”. Something like that to start. Then with some type of language to quickly bring to the floor and vote on a long term deal with another nation should such a deal be negotiated. What we got on “liberation day” (😂) was preposterous to say the least.

I don’t get why the President didn't codify the tariffs into the “One Big Beautiful Bill” but instead chose a haphazard path that was doomed from the start. He had the political system by the balls a year ago and squandered it IMO. Supreme Court got it right. I’m not a constitutional scholar but from the looks of it it’s pretty straight forward. The Constitution is quite clear on which entity can impose tariffs. now the big India trade deal is in limbo and probably dead at this point…..

yea that is a whole different can of worms. I’ve ready through the files quite a bit. Very problematic. That’s all I’ll say.

I agree. I personally wouldn't have said anything and not given the reporter any satisfaction. But based on the one sentence he did say I find it problematic he was publicly called a real looser by the POTUS in front of the entire world. Not a good look at all. The man is his own worst enemy.

I’m not defending the guy in any way. He made a statement after being asked a question that was loaded. He answered it in a very much sidestepping manner while probably still being honest. If you want to criticize him I understand the reasons given.

Two things can be true at the same time. Also your conflating people and the MSM. I don’t know a single person who isn’t appalled at the blatant fraud that takes place at every level of government. Tariffs are a mixed bag. Some people like em some people hate em. Some people haven’t got a clue.

Maybe. maybe not. Not for us to say. The man has free will and the United States and Italy have free speech laws. The reporter asked him a question that was political. The answer given was very vague and accused nobody of anything. He never mentioned Trumps name or anything specific. I wouldn’t consider his one or two sentence answer a rant at all. Not even close. Nothing he said was offensive. He didn’t volunteer anything unprompted. He was asked the exact same question every other athlete on the team was and provided a one sentence response. I don’t know Hunter Hess so I can’t say if he is out of touch or not. I doubt it though. He’s probably just a normal guy from Oregon that spent his last 20 years trying to become the best skier on earth. Probably makes no real money and has no real influence over anybody. My guess is nobody even knew who he was prior to the Olympics. He could have lied. He could have declined to answer the question. But he didn’t. He gave the answer he did. Heck he could have praised the admirations policies and we wouldn’t even be having this conversation. Either way I wouldn’t fault him. Sorry but there is nothing patriotic about not standing up for what you believe. But all of this is beside the point. The point of my original post was how unbecoming Trump’s truth social post is. If anything here can be considered unpatriotic it’s probably that. The world watched a guy answer a question that was asked of him then saw his president publicly call him a loser. I guess that’s on me though. I keep forgetting that’s normal behavior now.

I’m curious why he says it will need to be litigated. I’m not familiar with the procedural aspects of who would actually litigate the issue. But fundamentally the executive branch illegally collected $1.75 billion from companies and/or importers so saying that is essentially the same as saying he thinks the Executive branch should not voluntarily return it.

I bought my White Road Boss from a salvage yard in Southern Delaware. It had been owned for many years by a poultry farm in Maryland on the Delmarva peninsula. When I was driving through that area it was nothing but chicken farm after chicken farm. Mile after mile of poultry operations. The guy at the salvage yard said all the farms around were either owned by Purdue or private farms that had contracts with Purdue.

I don’t know what the specific question asked of him was but I think it had something to do with immigration policy. To which he replied: “There's obviously a lot going on that I'm not the biggest fan of, wearing the flag doesn't mean I represent everything that's going on in the U.S. I'm representing my friends and family back home, the people that represented it before me, all the things that I believe are good about the U.S. I just think if it aligns with my moral values, I feel like I'm representing it." I don’t see how that could mean he has no desire to represent the US in the Olympics. If someone loves their country probably one of the most patriotic things one could do is question and speak out about their government. Especially when it’s corrupt to the core and has not served its citizens in any meaningful way in decades. Hess went on to say after being called a real loser: "I’m not going to let controversy like that get in my way. I love the United States of America. I cannot say that enough. My original statement, I felt like I said that, but apparently, people didn’t take it that way. I’m so happy to be here, so happy to represent Team USA." it’s hard to believe the POTUS would publicly call one of the US’ Olympians a real loser for the whole world to see but honestly nothing surprises me anymore.

That is correct. The Supreme Court is saying the method in which they are imposed is not legal.

Imagine being the President of the United States and publicly calling an native born Olympian representing the USA a loser. Wild times....

"The justices rejected Trump’s expanded use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) in imposing tariffs on nearly every country. The 1970s-era law allows the president to “regulate” imports when necessary to respond to national emergencies that pose an “unusual and extraordinary” threat. “We claim no special competence in matters of economics or foreign affairs,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote. “We claim only, as we must, the limited role assigned to us by Article III of the Constitution. Fulfilling that role, we hold that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs.” " Supreme Court strikes down bulk of Trump's tariffs The ruling made no mention of the tariff revenues already collected. My guess is that will be a whole different legal battle. Ultimately the citizens are the ones who got the shaft and will never recover the funds they paid in inflated prices. However, my guess is we have not heard the last on this from the Executive Branch.

I'm just happy the Supreme court cut their BS and finally handed down their ruling on tariffs. They heard the arguments back in November. Turns out imposing blanket tariffs on every US trading partner is not legal under the current scheme of an "international economic emergency". What a mess with the billions already collected.

Heck The A model didn't come out until the late 1940s. If anything it should have been a Mack E model. Specifically an EH, which was a variant specifically built for the military.

If I remember correctly from his signature forum member @R.E.D is from Houston. Maybe if he gets on and see this he can point you toward the work. For some reason I remember him having an early style Granite triaxle dump truck.

That would be a good retirement gig for you. Being its a grain truck it probably only operates for a month or two during harvest in the fall. You could show up and be this guys wheelman for a few weeks then go home. From what I hear anymore these big farms are hurting for help especially around harvest. Honestly he’s probably dumping it because nobody can or wants to drive a manual anymore.

Interesting. I never knew this. I never really paid any attention to MHs. In fact I can't recall ever seeing one up close in person. I have never cared for cabovers of any kind and truth be told If I was ever in the presence of an MH at a truck show I most likely walked past it without giving it much attention.

Another pass along. No affiliation. Just a real nice condition neat old MH grain truck. What's interesting is it seems to have an enlarged frame section behind the cab typical of a DM frame. I don't think I have ever noticed or seen that on an MH. Perhaps due to the length of the wheelbase it was required. 1984 Mack MH600 - Commercial Vehicles - Bettsville, Ohio | Facebook Marketplace | Facebook

I notice from Mack's website the MP8 has been renamed the MP13. Or maybe its a "new" engine to be offered alongside the MP8? I can't tell. Looks like max specs are 515hp and 1950 ft*lb.

Years from now I think she will look at her testimony here with great embarrassment and shame. She will wonder how she was manipulated into speaking like that and showing such disdain for the victims.

NAFTA 2.0 or USMCA was Trump's baby going back to 2018. Formally ratified by him in March of 2020. Now he wants to quit his own trade deal. The US Supreme Court needs to issue their ruling on the legality of the tariffs immediately.

Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3: "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three." I'm not a constitutional scholar but I think the phrase "free Persons" refers to non slaves. The 13th amendment abolished slavery, which modified this clause and then the 14th amendment revised the meaning to the number of "whole number of persons in each state" not the "three fifths" of the slaves. 14th Amendment, Section 2: "Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State." I think that is about as clear as mud as to whether or not non citizens, or specifically, illegal aliens should be counted in the enumeration. Moreover how would you count them anyway or discern whether or not the respondents at a specific address were illegal or not. They could just lie. It is just a paper form that a person can fill out any which way they like. I highly doubt there is any system in place to verify based on tax filings, welfare recipient logs, etc that would corroborate whether or not the people residing at a specific address are legal citizens or not. My guess is illegal aliens would never disclose on a census form that they are illegal as that would obviously be very incriminating. I know back in 2020 I didn't fill mine out for many weeks. They sent people to my door several times and I never answered. Finally they sent me certified mail with proof of mailing / signature of receipt threatening legal action if the form was not received for my address. Filled it out. Never heard another word from them. I think they can scare people into submitting the form but verifying whether or not any questions on the form are answered correctly are impossible to verify. For various reasons I think it would be handy information to know how many total people are in a state / district (legals and illegals), however representation should only be determined by legal citizens. If you have voter ID rules in place it should be a moot point. Moreover the entire country has been gerrymandered into oblivion such that even legal citizens votes don't really count. There are 435 congressional districts in the country but only 22 or 25 are contestable.

I wonder what Volvo trucks manufactured elsewhere on the globe use. 12 or 24V? Is it just a North America problem?