Complete meltdown with you, your other handles, and cohorts today. Congrats, I guess.
Love the smell of checks and balances in the morning
- Thread starter gcsoccer16
- Start date
It’s better than any show on TV
I hope all you liberals had a great Monday! Love seeing all this crying ITT 😂😂
Nah man, you've shown your cards. You hate the libs more than you love your country.
I love that my country allows me to hate the libs
Thanks for the entertainment!
I have to agree. I can't get enough of reading their unhinged posts and their tears are delicious!
I doubt he has any idea what he want to do unless somebody tells him.
If even half of what you imply about your financial situation is true, you have to have at least a moderate IQ. Working off this assumption you well know there is no possible avenue for trump to have another term as potus after assuming he wins this election.
You are just being deliberately moronic with the same fear mongering talking points by the idiots on the left. Pretty much the entire list of the "end of democracy" hyperbole would have to be a result of constitutional amendments. Evidently you are unaware they have to be voted on and agreed to by 2/3 of congress or the senate and ratified by 3/4 of the states.
SCOTUS majority notes the chilling consequences of Jack Smith's J6 indictment against Donald Trump:
"Criminally prosecuting a President for official conduct undoubtedly poses a far greater threat of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch than simply seeking evidence in his possession, as in Burr and Nixon.
The danger is akin to, indeed greater than, what led us to recognize absolute Presidential immunity from civil damages liability—that the President would be chilled from taking the “bold and unhesitating action” required of an independent Executive. Although the President might be exposed to fewer criminal prosecutions than the range of civil damages suits that might be brought by various plaintiffs, the threat of trial, judgment, and imprisonment is a far greater deterrent. Potential criminal liability, and the peculiar public opprobrium that attaches to criminal proceedings, are plainly more likely to distort Presidential decision-making than the potential payment of civil damages.
The hesitation to execute the duties of his office fearlessly and fairly that might result when a President is making decisions under “a pall of potential prosecution,” McDonnell v. United States, 579 U. S. 550, 575 (2016), raises “unique risks to the effective functioning of government." (LOL this refers to Jack Smith's prosecution of former VA Gov Bob McDonnell, which SCOTUS overturned 8-0)
A President inclined to take one course of action based on the public interest may instead opt for another, apprehensive that criminal penalties may befall him upon his departure from office. And if a former President’s official acts are routinely subjected to scrutiny in criminal prosecutions, “the independence of the Executive Branch” may be significantly undermined. The Framers’ design of the Presidency did not envision such counterproductive burdens on the “vigor” and “energy” of the Executive. The Federalist No. 70."
A
anon_5e8aassgcbjz1
Guest
I’d absolutely have a different opinion about Joe if I were a cattle rancher on the Rio Grande. And I don’t say that to dismiss them; they ought to get the same say as me.
There are plenty of people I’d prefer to Joe, but I still prefer Joe to Trump by some margin. Like I said, that’s a product of my life. I don’t see the disaster and apocalypse Trump goes on about. Inflation went up, I’m getting paid more. Illegal immigration and drugs are bad, but they’re not a problem to me directly. If Trump had been quiet the past four years sipping cocktails at Mar-A-Lago, I’d at least consider the possibility of voting for him over 81 year old Joe. I don’t want Kamala running a Chick Fil A. Those concerns are now secondary to my concerns with Trump. He’s obsessed with his own political ego to the extent that he’ll tear down every other aspect of government to accommodate it. I’ve got zero interest in burning down what I see as a good house.
I think we should be very suspicious of anyone that claims to be a savior. That’s the real substance of Trump’s campaign. It’s not just that everything is suddenly horrible in this country and we’re headed down the tubes. No no no, it’s all of that, and he alone can fix it. We don’t need a king or god. An old man I can live with.
Worth mentioning a good chunk of what Trump purports to want to do makes no sense in the first place. Joe’s been terrible about inflation, but don’t worry America, I’ll tariff the hell out of everyone. Uh huh.
Anyway, let’s say the Dems replace Biden. I like Mark Kelly. It’s not going to matter to the other side. Whoever they choose is going to be a deep state operative that summons demons between meetings with George Soros and Bill Gates. They got to keep fighting that darn deep state that let Trump put his name on a third of the Supreme Court in one term.
I feel as though I’m not on the same planet as a hardcore Trump supporter. I have no clue if that gap will ever be bridged. Which is unfortunate. I think people on the left and right have common ground to push back on some of what neoliberal, corporate America looks like now. I don’t want Blackrock owning neighborhoods. I don’t think Trump’s the guy to do it.
Last edited by a moderator:
This is why there are more conservatives on the court- because you have such inept morons on he liberal side.
You hate Trump more than you love your country.
So do you think the judge in Trumps case should have recused himself bc he was a biden donor and his daughter was part of the dem campaign workforce or are you good with that since it was trump?
Did he do something illegal or show up at an anti-Trump rally or are you just assuming he can't be fair? If he did something publicly that showed he was a never Trumper, then yes, he should recuse himself. He didn't ask for this case, it was assigned to him, just like the documents case got assigned to Aileen Cannon who has shown much more evidence of being a judicai partisan.
Ironic post considering the wage gap between rich/poor as well as white/minorities was lower under trump than it had been in decades. - but don't let facts get in the way of your fear mongering lies.
The fact of the matter is that if his second term goes like his first(sans another pandemic) the people in the shitty little towns in the southeast, as well as everywhere else will actually be better off - just like they were when he was potus the first time.
I would love another pub candidate besides trump, but that does not change the facts about his first term.
When you get your info fron JOURNALISTS who have no command of the English language, that should be your first clue not to listen to what they say.
Read the first sentence. Why/how can a dissent be terrified? What is it afraid of, lol!
That's easy for you to say sitting on a pacific island as a college teacher probably with a nice salary and insulated to a large extent from the effects of illegal immigration and inflation. You are also living so well in part due to guaranteed payment to universities of student loans which pays your salary so you have a vested interest in a large expanding govt. The majority of people are not sitting in your situation.
Which scotus has done something illegal or showed up at an anti biden rally - since that seems to be your measuring stick for bias.
Well bribery used to be until the Supreme Court just legalized it a couple days ago. An upside down flag in support of Trump after the Insurrection is a public display of being a partisan in cases that would come before Alito. If we could include spouses, Ginni Thomas would qualify as an insurrectionist, she even helped organize it, etc....
But donating to the biden campaign shows not partisanship towards him, lol!
I imagine if she were an insurrectionist, she would have been charged with a crime, right? Also, if we are including family, the judges' daughter is/was a dem campaign employee.
The key phrase in this Supreme Court ruling this morning that you want to be paying extra special attention to is the part where it says unofficial acts are not covered by immunity.
Those are you thinking this ruling gives Obama and the Bush’s and the Clintons some kind of protection from prosecution. Haven’t read it very carefully.
I guarantee you every single criminal act committed by these former presidents and many times their spouses also, were not official presidential acts.
Some people make the mistake of thinking that since many of the criminal committed by former presidential administrations were classified to hide them from the public, that means they were official presidential acts.
But that’s not true .
I guess we have different definitions of a good house. A good house has low inflation, high growth, and protects and serves its citizens. Illegal
Immigration is not protecting its citizens. Just because it doesn’t directly affect you seems like a very short sighted answer. Just because you didn’t know them doesn’t mean thousands of people aren’t dying of fentanyl. The homeless drug addicts have literally almost taken over whole cities in our country.
While I don’t think things are apopylicic, we certainly deserve better as a citizenry who pays -%30+ of its income to the gov.
Dude. Everything you say is a fantasy. Again, you idiot, I see the facts and figures, so how about you prove any of the nonsense you spout. Like talking to a third grader with you.
You moving to france, or another EU country that just elected or is about to elect a "right wing" poli?
Agree. Her dissent was absurd.
Sotomayor proves yet again that she's a complete idiot. Let me help her and all the clowns in the media. If a president orders the assassination of a political rival, that is not part of his official duties. He's not immune. Even more, the hysterical examples, which would require the involvement of scores or more conspirators, including civil servants and military, are so insane that none of this should be taken seriously. The Democrat Party, including their jurists, are hellbent on destroying the institutions of this constitutional republic. They say Trump is Hitler, the majority justices are right-wing hacks, and Republicans who support Trump (or anyone else who stands in their way) are cultists, brain dead, white supremacists, etc. Garland and Smith are disfiguring the Constitution, and the Supreme Court, as well as Judge Cannon, are doing their best to set things straight and place things back in the constitutional box. It is Smith, a historically rogue and vile prosecutor, who deserves our contempt, along with his boss, Garland. The January 6 case is a farce. The documents case was utterly unnecessary. He and the Democrats may be in a rush to destroy a constitution they have never admired, and whose authors they hate, in pursuit of their American-Marxist police-state. But the rest of us are not.
Maybe he will move to Hungary. Ooops, they just went right too. Cross that one off. I'm thinking Norway or something like that would fit him well.
I thought you hated SC.
Why not choose Long Island?
You're a renter??
Deer Lowered. At least own a house at the beach if you're going to bring that trashiness down here!
Thanks for clarifying and admitting you are at most, a middle-class renter!
Similar threads
