- This topic has 25 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
========
Lakota Law Project @lakotalaw
Confirmed by MSNBC and CNN: the Corps have denied the easement for Dakota Access. #NoDAPL========
https://twitter.com/hashtag/StandingRock?src=hash
========
Army Corps Denies Easement and Blocks the Dakota Access Pipeline
As thousands of veterans descended on Standing Rock, the Army Corps announced the $3.7 billion project won’t proceed.http://www.snopes.com/2016/12/04/army-corps-denies-easement-and-blocks-the-dakota-access-pipeline/
The Army Corps of Engineers has denied the easement needed to complete the Dakota Access Pipeline, according Colonel Henderson, who first notified Veterans for Standing Rock co-organizer Michael A. Wood Jr.
More than 3,000 veterans had converged at the Standing Rock camp to support the Sioux in their ongoing opposition to the building of a $3.7 billion pipeline that would cross through disputed land managed by the Army Corps of Engineers.
“This is history,” Wood said, upon learning the news.
Veterans from all branches of the United States Armed Forces arrived on 4 December 2016 by way of chartered buses, cars and planes to offer their support to the tribe in its months-long demonstration to protect its drinking water and sacred sites. The pipeline would have crossed land the tribe says the project violates a treaty that grants them the land and that they have opposed the project from the beginning.
The event, organized by veterans Michael A. Wood, Jr. and Wes Clark Jr., raised more than $1 million dollars after just two weeks, citing desire to protect the Sioux and demonstrators from violence.
Can Trump over-ride all that, if he wants?
w
vYes, if he wants. Would depend upon if the decision had reasonable merit or if it was politically motivated.
Yes because Trump himself would never do anything politically motivated. He’s all about reasonable merit.
Can Trump over-ride all that, if he wants?
w
vYes, if he wants. Would depend upon if the decision had reasonable merit or if it was politically motivated.
Yes because Trump himself would never do anything politically motivated. He’s all about reasonable merit.
Depending upon circumstance certainly he could. I do not know all that would go into a decision to overturn or leave in place the COE opinion.
The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.
Sprinkles are for winners.
Sorry he isn’t mired in poverty for you.
Well that was a gigantic red herring.
I could give a crap about his money.
I DO care, in terms of the subject of this thread, about a president making a fundamentally important policy decision that is clouded by his own direct financial conflict of interest.
Fundamentally important policy decision my ass. Where were you democrats giving a shit about Buffet dangerously shipping oil by the train car directly through towns and at a far higher cost? Was there an EIS or even an EA for that given existing rail lines? Would like to see the safety implications if any that were identified.
Yeah thats right,
Silence.
Trump will look at the merit of the COE decision. Until a decision is made its nothing but conjecture.
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 11 months ago by .
The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.
Sprinkles are for winners.
Sorry he isn’t mired in poverty for you.
Well that was a gigantic red herring.
I could give a crap about his money.
I DO care, in terms of the subject of this thread, about a president making a fundamentally important policy decision that is clouded by his own direct financial conflict of interest.
Fundamentally important policy decision my ass. Where were you democrats giving a shit about Buffet dangerously shipping oil by the train car directly through towns and at a far higher cost? Was there an EIS or even an EA for that given existing rail lines? Would like to see the safety implications if any that were identified.
Yeah thats right,
Silence.
Trump will look at the merit of the COE decision. Until a decision is made its nothing but conjecture.
So you respond to the accusation of using a red herring with another red herring.
Okay.
It really does seem to be your signature rhetorical move.
No red herring though you libs love your labels. How’s it working for you? Election after election with less traction and more loss of representation. More please!
Now for your confusion about what I wrote. If the president had a $5 investment in the pipeline would it matter? No. But if someone has more of an investment it is a dark, foreboding, policy implicating horror. What is the level of investment that twerks your soul? Now do you feel the same about private, state, federal pension fund investments? Just more BS you’re throwing out to try to delegitimize Trump’s election. He’ll make a decision about the COE finding and then perhaps there will be a reason to bitch and whine and moan, or not.
Buffett shipping oil by rail through populated areas, SILENCE.
The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.
Sprinkles are for winners.
-
This reply was modified 7 years, 11 months ago by
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
