Bartimus: "All protesters are criminals, if I don't agree with the protest."

#21 | POSTED BY SENTINEL AT 2023-05-25 05:09 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Protesting is fine, but January 6th was not just a protest. If you were at the Capitol, you were there illegally, and ARE considered a criminal. Sorry if that hurts your delicate fee fees chump. Every one of those fools that crossed the line, attacked cops, and tried to overthrow the election should rot in jail. Agreed Sentinel? Or were there good people on both sides?

And yes Mother, if BLM protesters crossed the line to criminal trespass and vandalism, they too deserve jail time.

There is a 100% chance that a hate preacher with the name of Jason Grab(b)er is a Groomer.

#17 | POSTED BY SENTINEL AT 2023-05-25 04:34 PM | FLAG: DEFINITELY AT THE CAPITOL ON JAN 6TH

Sentinel: "If 1 protester was non-violent, we should focus on them and not the literal hundreds that have already been convicted of felonies".

Full stop, if someone was at the Capitol that day and breeched the building, they were there to undermine the Democratic process and should be subject to the FULL extent of the law set aside for insurrection and treason. If you were in the Capitol, you got there by committing or witnessing/condoning violence against the State.

"They were referring to the January 6th insurrectionists..."
100% of them? Are you sure?
#14 | POSTED BY SENTINEL AT 2023-05-25 04:28 PM | FLAG:

If you were in the Capitol on January 6th and were not affiliated with the police or Congress, then YES, 100% sure that those people were insurrectionists. Per the concept of "felony murder", every single one of those traitors should have gotten charged with murder after people were killed or died due to the insurrection. Ain't none of 'em were tourists.

Why are you defending these criminals? Were you there?

I understand the judge's reasoning, we already see MTG's, Boebert's, and Gaetz's names in the news enough as it is...

Really? Are you sure they were referring to people like Rhodes?
#5 | POSTED BY SENTINEL AT 2023-05-25 03:48 PM | FLAG:

They were referring to the January 6th insurrectionists... so yeah, referring to people like Rhodes.

But if Donald Trump told them to wear armbands they would and you would, too.
You would not think twice.
#53 | POSTED BY ZED AT 2023-05-24 06:48 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Change armbands to Red Hats and you no longer have to talk about it like it's a hypothetical. One wonders how many Red Hats are owned by the rightwing posters on this site.

Why issue pardons if they did nothing wrong? Why would you need to be pardoned for just being a tourist and walking around DC for 15 minutes...?

Is that what you believe?
#2 | POSTED BY SENTINEL AT 2023-05-25 03:18 PM | REPLY | FLAG

To speak for Redial, no - but certain other posters of the rightwing persuasion have stated those exact words on this site.

Imagine being Rhodes right now - you spend your whole life and set up your whole identity preparing to "defend America", only to realize that YOU are the threat that you've prepared against. I imagine Rhodes will spend his 18 years thinking about what he did and how to support America in the future from his jail cell.

Just kidding, I bet this fool and his followers don't have an ounce of self-reflection and will never realize what treasonous pigs they've become; they and their Congressional enablers will just play the victims as "political prisoners" and wait until someone just like them gets elected to issue a pardon.

I smell --------.
#13 | POSTED BY BOAZ AT 2023-05-23 11:36 AM | FLAG:

Of course you do. Looking for any excuse to avoid feelings of guilt that your political beliefs and desire for subjugation of women cause someone pain and suffering, are we?

There have been literally hundreds of instances of hospitals refusing to do the right thing medically for fear of breaking post-Roe abortion laws (often referred to as a "chilling effect", where organizations don't even want to have the appearance of impropriety). This is no different but for some reason you "smell BS".

"Governor Ron DeSantis formally approved measures to protect Florida's investments from woke environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG), ensuring that all investment decisions focus solely on maximizing the highest rate of return."

So they should have left the dead baby in the womb?
#8 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER AT 2023-05-23 11:13 AM | FLAG:

*Sigh* Just remember it's folks asking these obtuse, ill informed questions like this that are passing these laws.

No, of course not. Before Roe was overturned, this woman would have been able to go to the hospital, receive proper medical information, and make an informed decision as to whether to keep the fetus or have an abortion. Most likely, she would have chosen abortion since there was no chance of survivability outside the womb. The right MEDICAL choice in this case would have been to remove the fetus, again due to lack of viability, but she would have had a choice.

Post Roe being overturned, she was not allowed medical information about her own body, she was not allowed to leave the hospital for fear of being arrested, she was not allowed to exercise her right to not have "pastoral care", and she was required to go through a medical procedure that she did not want nor consent to. In other words, several of her rights were violated for literally no reason.

This is a decision that should have been between the Dr and patient, but due to Texas law (which inserts itself in all pregnancy situations), both the Dr and patient are too afraid to make the right call in these cases.

#10 | POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY AT 2023-05-22 01:38 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

If Congress leans on Article 1, Section 6 to keep getting paid, I see no issues with Biden leaning on the 14th Amendment to keep the debts of the US from being questioned.

That last SpaceX rocket thing...didn't achieve orbit, as I recall.
#4 | POSTED BY LEGALLYYOURDEAD AT 2023-05-21 02:40 PM | REPLY

That's OK, it happens to everyone occasionally.

I hate it when I go for a stroll or a tourist visit and end up beating the police and committing assault and all sorts of felonies.

Second Degree Manslaughter seems appropriate (thanks to Joe for posting the legal definition).

Was the ex-Marine trying to kill Neely? Probably not. Shoot, he could even argue that he was trying to do a service to bystanders for restraining him.

But...

His actions resulted in someone's death. THIS is the operational fact for me. He didn't mean to/want to kill Neely (so murder is appropriately ruled out), but the fact is he DID kill someone. The Manslaughter charge was created in law for this very situation. Now we see what a jury says... but hopefully they give a conviction to show that killing people ain't cool, despite what other verdicts may have returned (looking at you Zimmerman and Rittenhouse).

If a Dr. feels it's unethical to treat say, a Trump voter, would they legally be able to deny them care?

And before you ask how they will know, all they need to do is add a checkbox on the medical form that people fill out - "Did you vote for Trump?" Checking Yes or leaving blank would result in automatic non-treatment.

Sounds pretty dumb now, doesn't it?

One could infer from that statement that he may have assaulted so many women that he is no longer able to remember any one individual...
#32 | POSTED BY LAMPLIGHTER AT 2023-05-09 04:17 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Nah, just the dementia setting in.

I prefer the Miracle Whip Beer, but will drink this in a pinch...

3. Give Steve cancer.
4. Lunch.
#3 | POSTED BY NIXON AT 2023-05-08 11:19 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

In between 3 and 4 He helped me find my keys, so I think that balances things out.

I love your willingness to take one for the team.
#18 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER AT 2023-05-08 09:28 PM | REPLY | FLAG

HA! I will make this sacrifice...

The knew Zelda is coming out next month.
#7 | POSTED BY MODER8 AT 2023-05-08 12:27 PM | REPLY | FLAG

Yeah I pre-ordered it last week. FOR THE KIDS of course.

I might have to put down my FFXIV for a few weeks to give this new game a try.

Didn't Obama replace Bush's attorneys?
#39 | POSTED BY ONEIRONAUT AT 2023-05-07 11:29 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

*Sigh. It's like you don't even try to understand the rules.

Here you go - "Bush's attorneys" are federally appointed positions that the President can change out as desired as stated by federal law; they serve at the pleasure of the President.

Local Prosecutors do NOT serve at the pleasure of the governor; rather they serve as elected officials. The PEOPLE decide when the prosecutors stay or go in office.

By taking up powers to remove local prosecutors for "not following the law", the governor is directly stepping on the will of the people.

Side note: All prosecutors utilize prosecutorial discretion. This law will allow the governor to get ride of prosecutors that use prosecutorial discretion that the governor doesn't like .

#1 | POSTED BY BLUEWAFFLES AT 2023-05-08 02:54 PM | REPLY

You... understand that most Hispanic people consider themselves White, right? That is why they ask about both Race and Hispanic Origin on the US Census.

Fun fact - Hispanics have historically been considered white in part to avoid miscegenation and "race mixing" laws. Fun stuff, huh?

Maybe they had intel that Putin was working on the roof...
#6 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2023-05-03 02:34 PM | FLAG:

Putin probably knows better than to go anywhere higher than a one story building these days, what with all the accidental falling deaths occurring to the Russian oligarchy class.