It's only matter of time before the right agrees with me that Trump's a left-wing mole who set out to destroy everything Republicans claimed to believe in.
#26 | Posted by sentinel

Lindsay Graham said as much in 2015. Now look at him.

#4 | Posted by humtake

You are one heartless cu n t, dirt rotten cultist!

They can never debate me, I always win. That's why they go to insults.
#495 | Posted by boaz

So narcissistic disorder is one of your innate traits? NO empathy, narcissistic...tell me BOAZ, did you ever bother to read The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness? Or are you still choosing ignorance? LOL

That was a song that Justin Timberlake wrote about Ukraine.
#490 | Posted by sentinel

Justin Timberlake is a piece of sh i t. Why would you bring him up?

#485 | Posted by boaz

HOLY BUTT LOVING CHRIST! I've never seen BOAZ so triggered before!! HAHAHA!!!

#479 | Posted by boaz

And that's why there is now a dead ICU nurse from the VA? He was shot in the back of the neck and you can't even offer HIM the benefit of the doubt. You fall in line with the cult: "He was a domestic terrorist!!!"

GD, zero empathy for your kind, eh?

He had NO reason to be there other than to stir up trouble.
#418 | Posted by boaz

Articulate the crime. You won't because you can't. Neither could the POS ICE agent who shoved the woman to the ground.

#413 | Posted by BellRinger

What was the reasonable suspicion to approach the woman and push her to the ground? You're acting as though ICE has complete impunity to do anything they want. A nurse is going to help someone who falls or is pushed to the ground, which BTW falls under which guiding policy of law enforcement exactly? Read your post once again, slowly. You're claiming there was a probability that a nurse helping a woman up off the ground after being shoved is a criminal offense.

He could have been trying to get the attention of another agent. As for the two claps you are engaging in an act of reading minds.
#352 | Posted by BellRinger

Like he was a dog? HAHAHAHA!!! That's the best you could come up with after avoiding an alternative over numerous posts?!?! HAHAHAHAHA!!! When was the last time you clapped at someone to get their attention. Be specific and you better be fnkcin' honest.

That's what is relevant to this discussion.
#39 | Posted by BellRinger

What's relevant is that you have nothing to offer but a legal opinion that was considered applicable by a Trump toadie. And you're going to hang your hat on that as though it's significant?

HAHAHA!!! JFC JEFF, why do you even bother? Are you that big of a political hack?

#22 | Posted by BellRinger

"He was appointed by Garland as Special Prosecutor." " Essentially accurate (usually styled "Special Counsel" rather than "Special Prosecutor").

"The issue was [that] Special Prosecutor is a creation of Congress." " Oversimplified; the real issue is whether existing statutes Congress passed are sufficient to authorize this kind of appointment, not whether Congress must pass a new, case-specific law.

"Congress didn't create a special prosecutor to prosecute the alleged crimes he was assigned." " Misleading; Congress generally doesn't create case-specific prosecutors, and DOJ says its existing statutory authority covers Smith's role.

"Garland wanted his cake and wanted to eat it too ... " " Purely argumentative; not a factual or legal finding.

"Once he was deemed illegitimate ... " " Not accurate as of now; only one district judge has accepted that argument, and the ruling is on appeal.

"Garland could have assigned his two cases to a number of qualified prosecutors within 5 minutes ... The disruption would have been a mere blip ... " " Partly plausible in concept (he could reassign), but it downplays real legal and practical complications that could follow from an invalid-appointment ruling.

So the paragraph captures one side's critique in strong, rhetorical terms, but it does not accurately reflect the current state of the law or the actual posture of the challenges to Smith's appointment. It is opinion wrapped around some disputed legal premises, rather than a neutral, legally settled description.

Are you lying, or just refusing to address reality?
#157 | Posted by Danforth

What do you think would be the MO for a cultist?

Fmr Pres Biden's record of arresting the "worst of the worst" is better than Pres Trump's?
#155 | Posted by LampLighter

Yes, but don't expect cultists like JEFF to acknowledge such a salient fact.

How else do you suppose the administration that you're carrying water for will deplete the population of the country of 100,000,000 people that they're so excited about?
Own it, bell boi.
Swallow it, bell boi.
#149 | Posted by A_Friend

Holy ----, that's real?!

#144 | Posted by BellRinger

Yet those that you support DO! So why are you still supporting them?!

#146 | Posted by BellRinger

My point is that your response to my post #100 was wrong. Are you willing to admit to that fact?

You're just like the rest of your beloved MAGAts.
#141 | Posted by A_Friend

They're cultists and they refuse to acknowledge this simple fact!

Run away, JEFF. You clearly have some reflection to sit on.

Thats another thing the open borders crowd love to do - conflate legal immigration with illegal.
#121 | Posted by BellRinger

That's literally what you just did, you dirt rotten cultist!!!

JFC you really that dumb! Just projection is all you got?!

Tell me you're part of the cult without actually typing those words out, you dirt rotten cultist!

Then swallow.

#100. It's actually a crime.
#102 | Posted by BellRinger

That's literally not what your link suggested. Why are you ignoring the context of my post, you cultist?!

"Undocumented presence" is not a criminal offense. Your link shows that crossing the border is criminal offense. I didn't say anything about crossing the border. That was context YOU injected into my post.

Why did you do that? Oh, I get it. Because you're stuck in a cult and are commanded to do so.
#114 | Posted by rstybeach11

Well?! We're waiting, JEFF!

Fact of the matter is, Trump won't be president for long (relatively speaking). He will die or won't run for a third term. I'm not saying the Dem candidate will automatically be elected, but when there is a Dem candidate that wins the POTUS election, they will hand Greenland back to Denmark if only to undermine Trump's ridiculous foreign policy reasoning in this instance.

#136 | Posted by snoofy

They're not detaining white people and that's why JEFF is perfectly okay with this status quo.

#53 | Posted by MSgt

HI CULTIST!!