Doc Posted October 26, 2023 Share Posted October 26, 2023 7 minutes ago, John from Riverside said: It’s amazing how the bar of wrong shifts depending on who the person is Yes it is. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted October 31, 2023 Author Share Posted October 31, 2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted November 21, 2023 Share Posted November 21, 2023 Push play. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted November 21, 2023 Share Posted November 21, 2023 1 hour ago, B-Man said: Push play. Well, I'm sure his super wealthy "friends" help him stand tall while his wife attempts to overthrow the republic Pure scum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted November 23, 2023 Share Posted November 23, 2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted November 23, 2023 Share Posted November 23, 2023 He's been bought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted November 23, 2023 Share Posted November 23, 2023 2 hours ago, Tiberius said: He's been bought. Joke? We know... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted November 23, 2023 Share Posted November 23, 2023 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12777789/trammell-crow-brother-harlan-crow-sex-trafficking-network.html Oh, Clarence. Look where your bribes are coming from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted November 23, 2023 Share Posted November 23, 2023 (edited) REMINDER: On 8/12/2023 at 12:10 AM, B-Man said: This IS very simple. Is there ANY shred of evidence that Justice Thomas has ever changed ANY Supreme Court decision because of outside influences ? or has he done as he always has , brilliantly outlined the constitutional originalism that got him on the court in the first place. NO ? Then keep your whining about gifts to yourself or at the very least admit that you are applying a standard to Thomas that you don’t to others that you favor. Edited November 23, 2023 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted November 23, 2023 Author Share Posted November 23, 2023 8 minutes ago, B-Man said: REMINDER: Hoax - this has already been discussed… but you keep trying Bonnie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted November 23, 2023 Share Posted November 23, 2023 10 minutes ago, BillStime said: So, you can't name any decision changed. Just as when it was "discussed before" No one can name anything that can show Justice Thomas or ANY other justice has had a Supreme Court decision "influenced". But you keep trying. It demonstrates so well what your real issue with Clarence Thomas is. 😎 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted November 23, 2023 Author Share Posted November 23, 2023 Just now, B-Man said: So, you can't name any decision changed. Just as when it was "discussed before" No one can name anything that can show Justice Thomas or ANY other justice has had a Supreme Court decision "influenced". But you keep trying. It demonstrates so well what your real issue with Clarence Thomas is. 😎 Citizens United is laughing at you Bonnie. Ever question why Clarence has ruled against donor disclosures? Contribution limits? Why does Clarence want political donations to remain anonymous and has ruled against having any contribution limits in politics at all. Who benefits? Go look up Doe v. Reed - you won’t - because of your preprogrammed nature but you should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted November 23, 2023 Author Share Posted November 23, 2023 Where did @B-Man go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted November 23, 2023 Share Posted November 23, 2023 2 hours ago, BillStime said: Nothing to do with changing his legal opinions (again) broken wheel answering 5 minutes ago, BillStime said: Where did @B-Man go? I ate Thanksgiving dinner with my family and helped with the cleanup. I just wish that for once you would take your own advice. Sad. . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted November 24, 2023 Author Share Posted November 24, 2023 10 minutes ago, B-Man said: Nothing to do with changing his legal opinions (again) broken wheel answering I ate Thanksgiving dinner with my family and helped with the cleanup. I just wish that for once you would take your own advice. Sad. . Of course you wouldn’t find an issue with a Supreme Court judge paving the way to line his pockets without repercussions. idiots 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted November 24, 2023 Share Posted November 24, 2023 3 hours ago, BillStime said: You can keep talking about "lining his pockets" but you (and no one else) can name any court decision that has been changed. It is hard to follow your illogic always, i can only assume you looked up the Doe vs Reed decision case because it was the only one that you could find with an 8 - 1 decision. 😆 Justice Thomas's dissent is consistent with his conservative concerns. Just as "confidence in the integrity of our electoral processes is essential to the functioning of our participatory democracy," so too is citizen participation in those processes, which necessarily entails political speech and association under the First Amendment. In my view, compelled disclosure of signed referendum and initiative petitions under the Washington Public Records Act (PRA) severely burdens those rights and chills citizen participation in the referendum process. Given those burdens, I would hold that Washington's decision to subject all referendum petitions to public disclosure is unconstitutional because there will always be a less restrictive means by which Washington can vindicate its stated interest in preserving the integrity of its referendum process. I respectfully dissent.... Justice Thomas is a great man. Billstime, you are a lightweight and a fool. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted November 30, 2023 Author Share Posted November 30, 2023 On 11/28/2023 at 10:08 PM, leh-nerd skin-erd said: a subpoena is a subpoena 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted November 30, 2023 Share Posted November 30, 2023 On 11/23/2023 at 10:57 PM, B-Man said: You can keep talking about "lining his pockets" but you (and no one else) can name any court decision that has been changed. It is hard to follow your illogic always, i can only assume you looked up the Doe vs Reed decision case because it was the only one that you could find with an 8 - 1 decision. 😆 Justice Thomas's dissent is consistent with his conservative concerns. Just as "confidence in the integrity of our electoral processes is essential to the functioning of our participatory democracy," so too is citizen participation in those processes, which necessarily entails political speech and association under the First Amendment. In my view, compelled disclosure of signed referendum and initiative petitions under the Washington Public Records Act (PRA) severely burdens those rights and chills citizen participation in the referendum process. Given those burdens, I would hold that Washington's decision to subject all referendum petitions to public disclosure is unconstitutional because there will always be a less restrictive means by which Washington can vindicate its stated interest in preserving the integrity of its referendum process. I respectfully dissent.... Justice Thomas is a great man. Billstime, you are a lightweight and a fool. In a unanimous vote, BillSy’s next comment would be he voted in lockstep with the conservatives on the court. A one trick pony is limited to one trick (it’s in the name, that’s how I know). 2 hours ago, BillStime said: There’s a process to deal with this, but certainly a subpoena is a subpoena. We agree, yes or no? 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted November 30, 2023 Share Posted November 30, 2023 True. Justice Thomas committed the grave offense — recognized only by the left — of being conservative while Black. https://twitter.com/BasedMikeLee/status/1730257929629012258 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted November 30, 2023 Author Share Posted November 30, 2023 4 minutes ago, B-Man said: True. Justice Thomas committed the grave offense — recognized only by the left — of being conservative while Black. https://twitter.com/BasedMikeLee/status/1730257929629012258 Hoax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts