Jump to content

Another Republican…


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Tommy Callahan said:

Because Joe is just a grifter for simps.

 

will say absolutely anything to get people to donate to her go fraud or Patheon where for 500 bucks, she will say your name. 

 

And the Simp post her garbage daily. probably has a VIP account with her.

 

 

 

LMAO - things you would never say to REDSTATE Bonnie.

 

Do you EVER think before you post?

 

 

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said:

Because Joe is just a grifter for simps.

 

will say absolutely anything to get people to donate to her go fraud or Patheon where for 500 bucks, she will say your name. 

 

And the Simp post her garbage daily. probably has a VIP account with her.

 

 

I don't usually like these Twitter hot take monkeys, but I gotta admit this part nailed it:

"Homophobic Moms for Liberty founder gets caught in a bisexual throuple."

Can't make this crap up ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Frankish Reich said:

I don't usually like these Twitter hot take monkeys, but I gotta admit this part nailed it:

"Homophobic Moms for Liberty founder gets caught in a bisexual throuple."

Can't make this crap up ....

Cause the homophobic part is a lie and can't be proven.  and here its the left attacking her for sexuality.

 

Who is being homophobic?

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I don't usually like these Twitter hot take monkeys, but I gotta admit this part nailed it:

"Homophobic Moms for Liberty founder gets caught in a bisexual throuple."

Can't make this crap up ....

manage a tw(a)t?

Edited by Joe Ferguson forever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tommy Callahan said:

The funny part is how some can't grasp the difference between adults consenting and kids that can't. 

 

Being against kids genial mutilation is different than being homophobic or against adults sexual choices 

 

 

lets finish the homophobic debate first.  is it ok in your eyes?  is the hypocrisy ok?

  • Eyeroll 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Joe Ferguson forever said:

lets finish the homophobic debate first.  is it ok in your eyes?  is the hypocrisy ok?

Being against a child genital mutilation and grooming children is not the same as being against homosexuality as you guys are desperate to ignore  

 

 

Edited by Tommy Callahan
  • Haha (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 12/5/2023 at 2:07 PM, BillStime said:

 

You do have to laugh at somebody, turning into a snowflake, whenever she self followed, a student home, lamenting that the boy was taking away her guns
 

We’re standing outside of another congresswoman office, whenever she was not a congresswoman at the time banging on her door

 

Or

 

16 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

Is this the same Republican who talked about how he had a friend that was married to an underage girl and they were making it work just fine

 

Pig

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
7 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Sick

 

 

Well, I think that characterization - comparing himself to Church sex abusers - isn't fair.

But ... listen to it. It's incoherent. He seems to be mixing up two uses of "immunity." The talk of police has to do with "qualified immunity" -- a much-criticized legal doctrine that a cop accused of violating someone's constitutional rights will be immune UNLESS the Court has previously found that this type of conduct is, in fact, a constitutional violation.

The idea of Presidential immunity would be a whole different thing. No one is arguing that unless a prior President was found to have broken the law by, say, fomenting an insurrection, a current ex-President is immune from prosecution. 

The second part of this clip makes sense - it is a policy argument. The first part, however, is a total mess, and actually implies that a President is free to do all sorts of unconstitutional things so long as a prior Supreme Court decision didn't find them unconstitutional. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...