stevestojan Posted 8 hours ago Posted 8 hours ago The spin even in this thread is marvelous. I even see some whataboutism peppered in. 😂 “I will reveal all the names on the list.” Oh this is so good. 1
Big Blitz Posted 8 hours ago Posted 8 hours ago 1 hour ago, ChiGoose said: This coming from the guy who believes that laws supersede the Constitution… I know where the power of the purse belongs thank you. The same judge that tried to block Trumps deportation order is saying a group having its funding cut by Congress could be a violation of their constitutional rights via a TRO. So in addition to having your Democrat leaders calling for violence, they continue to try and use the courts to disrupt the agenda that has wiped Obama’s existence from the planet. It’s not surprising at all that you think Trump can be an autocrat by activist judges cannot. There was ZERO legal rationale for her TRO. The complaint was essentially “Trump can’t do this.” He didn’t. Congress did. That’s a judicial coup.
ChiGoose Posted 8 hours ago Posted 8 hours ago Just now, Big Blitz said: I know where the power of the purse belongs thank you. The same judge that tried to block Trumps deportation order is saying a group having its funding cut by Congress could be a violation of their constitutional rights via a TRO. So in addition to having your Democrat leaders calling for violence, they continue to try and use the courts to disrupt the agenda that has wiped Obama’s existence from the planet. It’s not surprising at all that you think Trump can be an autocrat by activist judges cannot. There was ZERO legal rationale for her TRO. The complaint was essentially “Trump can’t do this.” He didn’t. Congress did. That’s a judicial coup. What is the claim being made by the plaintiffs in the case? 53 minutes ago, Homelander said: Cope You're shocked the same ‘deep state’ you think is all-powerful somehow can’t manage to take down the guy they allegedly hate most? Sounds less like a conspiracy and more like you realizing the grift doesn’t come with closure. Epstein’s black book wasn’t buried by the ‘bureaucracy’ it was buried by the people you worship. and seethe. “Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.” 2
K D Posted 8 hours ago Posted 8 hours ago I don't know how the Libs have any say in this. They were never going to release this with them in power. Crawl back in your holes. We were at least hopeful with Republicans. Unfortunately it appears the uniparty strikes again. Time to get rid of all of these beuroRATS
Big Blitz Posted 8 hours ago Posted 8 hours ago Just now, ChiGoose said: What is the claim being made by the plaintiffs in the case? That Trump is punishing them. People will die. Thus, their rights are being violated. No one said it couldn’t exist and continue doing the work of baby killing. They should no longer count on tax payer dollars to do so.
ChiGoose Posted 8 hours ago Posted 8 hours ago 6 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: That Trump is punishing them. People will die. Thus, their rights are being violated. No one said it couldn’t exist and continue doing the work of baby killing. They should no longer count on tax payer dollars to do so. Wrong (but nobody is surprised at this). They claim that the provisions are constructed as a bill of attainder. 1
stevestojan Posted 8 hours ago Posted 8 hours ago 14 minutes ago, K D said: I don't know how the Libs have any say in this. They were never going to release this with them in power. Crawl back in your holes. We were at least hopeful with Republicans. Unfortunately it appears the uniparty strikes again. Time to get rid of all of these beuroRATS Release WHAT? 😂😂😂 1
K D Posted 8 hours ago Posted 8 hours ago 7 minutes ago, stevestojan said: Release WHAT? 😂😂😂 We at least had hope Republicans would. I'm definitely not for any side that wouldn't release this so the Dems had already disqualified themselves as pedos and yet you voted for them
Taro T Posted 7 hours ago Posted 7 hours ago 5 minutes ago, stevestojan said: Release WHAT? 😂😂😂 Well, either Bondi is as dumb as her detractors claim she is, she horribly misspoke months ago and never walked it back, or the administratin still has the "Epstein client list" but isn't releasing it for "reasons." We are almost certain that the list was real; you don't get a John Doe filing an emergency motion which ends up getting upheld by a judge to keep the list under wraps if it doesn't exist. It would make a lot of sense for the list to have disappeared sometime around December; but if it did, Bondi shouldn't have been claiming it was on her desk back in February and Patel and Bongnino shouldn't have been implying the FBI still has the list. And all 3 were doing so. Still believe that several good things have been accomplished in 47's term and none of them would've happened had 46 or his VP won in November. Closing the border, getting several countries interested in signing onto the Abraham Accords, peace in the Congo-Rwanda war, peace (for now) in the India-Pakistan perpetual skirmish, etc. But this is an unforced error and should not be happening. Don't say for months that you have the list and will release it and then flat out say you don't have it without explaining the earlier statements. Is it gone? Was it used to "herd the cats" and get the BBB over the finish line? Will it be used for future indictments if it does still exist? Right now this looks like a W for the "deep state" and it didn't need to be so. 1
BillsFanNC Posted 7 hours ago Posted 7 hours ago We were all scammed!!!!! In other news Kamala is still polling ahead of Trump in Iowa, 51 former intel agents still believe the Hunter laptop is Russian disinformation and those Joe Biden dementia moments? Cheap fakes.
Big Blitz Posted 7 hours ago Posted 7 hours ago 43 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: Wrong (but nobody is surprised at this). They claim that the provisions are constructed as a bill of attainder. What individual was punished or jailed?
ChiGoose Posted 7 hours ago Posted 7 hours ago (edited) 15 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: What individual was punished or jailed? The allegation is that a section of the bill is written to specifically target Planned Parenthood in violation of the Constitution's prohibition of bills of attainder. You can read the filing here. Edited 7 hours ago by ChiGoose
Big Blitz Posted 6 hours ago Posted 6 hours ago 40 minutes ago, ChiGoose said: The allegation is that a section of the bill is written to specifically target Planned Parenthood in violation of the Constitution's prohibition of bills of attainder. You can read the filing here. Sorry I missed that. I was just going over how this would apply to all gun owners and manufacturers.
ChiGoose Posted 6 hours ago Posted 6 hours ago 23 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: Sorry I missed that. I was just going over how this would apply to all gun owners and manufacturers. That's a good thought exercise. Imagine Congress passed a law that nobody was allowed to own a gun unless they were a registered member of a state-regulated militia. All gunowners who did not meet this standard were to turn over their guns which would then be melted down. The NRA (and others) would sue, saying that this law violated the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution. They would also likely ask the court to enjoin the enforcement of this law until the constitutionality was resolved. I think it's more than reasonable for the court to grant that injunction. Confiscating and destroying people's property would cause harm that wouldn't be easily reversed should the law later be found to be unconstitutional. Therefore, preventing the enforcement of the law until the constitutional issue is resolved makes a lot of sense. Same in the case you provided: there is a suit alleging a provision of the law is unconstitutional (violating the prohibition of bills of attainder as opposed to 2nd Amendment violation) so the court is preventing enforcement of that specific provision until it can address the constitutional issue. Seems incredibly reasonable to me. Not a deep state thing, just a logical way to work through the issue. 2
stevestojan Posted 4 hours ago Posted 4 hours ago 3 hours ago, K D said: We at least had hope Republicans would. I'm definitely not for any side that wouldn't release this so the Dems had already disqualified themselves as pedos and yet you voted for them Durr hurr… all dems love pedos… durr hurr. My post was a joke… “release what?” since Pammy just told us there is NO LIST! 😂 What a total embarrassment. 1
SectionC3 Posted 4 hours ago Posted 4 hours ago 3 hours ago, K D said: We at least had hope Republicans would. I'm definitely not for any side that wouldn't release this so the Dems had already disqualified themselves as pedos and yet you voted for them Looks like MAGA are the pedos now. Sick. And you voted for them! 2 hours ago, B-Man said: Now MAGA is staring to coalesce around its excuse! There is no list, so this scumbag should be pardoned! The only plot hole here is Pam’s promise to release the list. So it looks like she’s going to have to get fired for her “mistake” in saying that there is a list.
stevestojan Posted 4 hours ago Posted 4 hours ago 5 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: Looks like MAGA are the pedos now. Sick. And you voted for them! I know we’re both on the same side of the aisle but can we just all stop with this nonsense? No one supports known pedos. No one would vote for one. We want to know if there were any on the list because that would certainly be cause for concern on both sides; I think we can all agree on that? The thing we can judge MAGAs on in this case is the hurricane speed spin and whataboutism they are putting on this. “It’s sitting on my desk right now to review. That’s been a directive by President Trump. I’m reviewing that.” - The Attorney General of the United States, February 1, 2025. 1
SectionC3 Posted 3 hours ago Posted 3 hours ago 1 hour ago, stevestojan said: I know we’re both on the same side of the aisle but can we just all stop with this nonsense? No one supports known pedos. No one would vote for one. We want to know if there were any on the list because that would certainly be cause for concern on both sides; I think we can all agree on that? The thing we can judge MAGAs on in this case is the hurricane speed spin and whataboutism they are putting on this. “It’s sitting on my desk right now to review. That’s been a directive by President Trump. I’m reviewing that.” - The Attorney General of the United States, February 1, 2025. You’re right; of course it’s highly unlikely the people here are pedos or support pedos. It is, however, fun and a little cathartic to anonymously needle them with the same nonsense they’ve spouted off for years. I’ll have my fun for a little bit longer and eventually lay off.
Recommended Posts