POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
they were having some great comedy with this on glen beck this morning.
they were also talking about his 14-year addiction to heroin, which i had never heard about
dog-eating heroin addict in the white house. does not compute. not to mention his brain-eating worm.
What does everyone think about the release of the Epstein documents ?? Pretty disgusting stuff ... to say the least.
www.pbs.org
Newly released Epstein transcripts: Florida prosecutors knew billionaire raped teen girls years before cutting deal
The transcripts show that the grand jury heard testimony that Epstein, who was then in his 40s, had raped teenage girls as young as 14 at his Palm Beach mansion. The teenagers testified and told detectives they were also paid to find him more girls.
www.pbs.org
moonbat
Dem Rep. Lofgren Decries SCOTUS Immunity Decision, Claims Biden 'Could Dispatch the Military to Take Out the Conservative Justices'
On Monday on MSNBC's "Deadline: White House," Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) claimed President Joe Biden could use the Supreme Court decision affirming a degree of immunity for former and current presidents to remove conservative justices from the high court. | Clipswww.breitbart.com
Dem Rep. Lofgren Decries SCOTUS Immunity Decision, Claims Biden 'Could Dispatch the Military to Take Out the Conservative Justices'
On Monday on MSNBC's "Deadline: White House," Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) claimed President Joe Biden could use the Supreme Court decision affirming a degree of immunity for former and current presidents to remove conservative justices from the high court. | Clips
Will the FBI be knocking on any of these Dem...Lib doors after threatening an ex-president or SC Justice?
You know if it was you or I talking about Biden like this...or Clinton...they would be outside in riot gear and dogs.
yeah IF…forty nine states allow voter registration without proof of citizenship. really concerning
How non-citizens are getting voter registration forms across the US — and how Republicans are trying to stop it
Welfare offices and other agencies in 49 US states are providing voter registration forms to migrants without requiring proof of citizenship, leading Republicans and conservatives to call for swift…
nypost.com
Trump race to the bottom continues:
www.newsweek.com
Donald Trump says fake electors scheme was "official act"
The Supreme Court has ruled that former presidents are immune from official acts undertaken during their presidencies.
www.newsweek.com
Huh? Linguistics? Interpretation vs codification?
No. The first sentence of his post was a gentle way of saying you are not saying anything that makes sense.
Both dissents used social media fear language which, IMO, was dangerous and ill-advised.
The medical profession has really gone downhill.
Translation: people you don’t know are running the country and they claim they are defending democracy.
These people are nothing but animals and scum.
What is your point? Seriously, raising a bunch of hypotheticals is not a challenge to whether the law was correctly decided. Issues exist in the law all of the time. New fact patterns create new reasons for interpretation and guidance. So what? Are you pretending a decision should eliminate all future issues of fact and law?
Federal employees have individual immunity, as well, for torts committed in the scope and course of their employment.
Was Clinton charged with a crime? If not, why do you suppose that was?
Unless you're being intentionally obtuse, which you in particular tend to gravitate to, then what are we talking about? Codify probably wasn't the best choice of words (unlike many of you I freely admit when I can word things better). If you're game is to play gotcha, you can stop there. But as is par for the course for this group, you don't actually want to have conversations but deviate every argument into juvenile debates on semantics and linguistics...
And that, of course, is because you want to avoid the actual topic, which is that if your goal is to hold the president accountable for corruption then expanding powers of the government is quite literally antithetical to that cause. But Trump supporters in my experience have zero respect for any type of intellectual integrity. It's about violating whatever power they can get so they can force their views on the public.
You ignore this, however, because your boy may not go to jail before the election. And this is exactly why Turmp is a trash candidate and President. Never ending race to the bottom.
“We care about sex, not the environment.”
It says right in the article that alternate slates of electors have been presented by previous presidents. Is that illegal, or not?Trump race to the bottom continues:
Donald Trump says fake electors scheme was "official act"
The Supreme Court has ruled that former presidents are immune from official acts undertaken during their presidencies.
This right here, everybody, is why they are having trouble removing him.
Well, you're certainly good at echoing the argument of the Trump legal team who attempted to subvert the vote of citizens because he lost the election.
And he very well might have an argument if there was a shred of evidence that the outcome of a single election would've been overturned by fraud. However, despite this gaslighting, quite transparently the intent of Donald J Trump was not to make the right decision, but to subvert an election so he could keep power. This is exactly why the USSC decision is troubling. (And again why Donald Trump is a never ending race to the bottom for America).
Is there a single person here who thinks Joe Biden should be able to overturn election results if he loses in November 24?
It’s not an argument, it’s a fact. It has already been done.
Each case of alternate slates of electors had very specific circumstances. Let's cut the bullshit and stop playing obtuse games.
Answer my simple question.
Would you be okay if Joe Biden overturned election results while alleging unproven fraud?
It's all just stupid narrative. Jan 6 is the cherry on top, a long list of completely delusional hoaxes.
So you're saying Donald Turmp didn't attempt to change election results by subverting the votes of citizens? His own legal team is apparently admitting this now, yet claiming it as an "official" action. Which part of this narrative is incorrect?
Democrats wanted trump as the candidate. There's no avoiding this reality. They played the odds with their friends in the press to elevate him as the nominee, hoping they could then jail their political opponent bc They've been trying to cover their guy is a vegetable.
When you say something that does not make sense and demonstrates you don’t know what you are attempting to discuss, it is not a juvenile debate to tell you that you are not making sense. Then you doubled down and demonstrated even further you were out too deep and over your head.
I won’t address the rest of your post, because it seems to be speaking of someone other than me. Comment on the substance of my posts and we can have a mature conversation. But, if you attempt to use legalese and do so in a manner that defies understanding, don’t be so damn offended when I let you know.
So, your response to substance is to avoid anything of substance and turn to ad hominem. Got it.
Similar threads
