BillsFanNC Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 5 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said: So your logic is that the two are the same. but you support one and attack the other. Yes. A hallmark of useful idiocy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 9 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: KGB and Soto were making a fool of themselves by referencing MSM and emotional stories. Then again, still remember Soto saying "there are 100K kids on ventilators right now" in the covid mandate case. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Be careful folks. If the mob doesn't get their way they have a history of violence. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted February 8 Author Share Posted February 8 4 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said: Be careful folks. If the mob doesn't get their way they have a history of violence. Not exactly - this just paves the way for Biden and all other presidents to do the same. And be careful what you wish for when this court rules that Trump has full immunity. Biden will, too. Fortunately for Biden - he is in office. Trump? A term late. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Just now, BillStime said: Not exactly - this just paves the way for Biden and all other presidents to do the same. And be careful what you wish for when this court rules that Trump has full immunity. Biden will, too. Fortunately for Biden - he is in office. Trump? A term late. Biden is going to do what? Storm the capitol? Most likely he'll fall down the steps and sue. And a guy that said just this week in public statements that he spoke to Mitterrand of France and Kohl of Germany a few years ago when both have been long dead isn't mentally up to the task of doing anything but choosing his pudding flavor for the day. If you're putting faith in this guy you might want to get a mental health evaluation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted February 8 Author Share Posted February 8 (edited) 32 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: Biden is going to do what? Storm the capitol? Most likely he'll fall down the steps and sue. And a guy that said just this week in public statements that he spoke to Mitterrand of France and Kohl of Germany a few years ago when both have been long dead isn't mentally up to the task of doing anything but choosing his pudding flavor for the day. If you're putting faith in this guy you might want to get a mental health evaluation. And Trump told us about the battle for airports during the revolutionary war. Last - you put your faith in this: Enough said. Edited February 8 by BillStime 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Been saying this. If there isn't even a charge. It's impossible to say he is guilty of it. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Like clockwork Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted February 8 Author Share Posted February 8 Oh ok Conald Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Just now, Tommy Callahan said: Like clockwork They should start cracking skulls. 4 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 11 minutes ago, Tommy Callahan said: Been saying this. If there isn't even a charge. It's impossible to say he is guilty of it. You'd think a justice on the SCOTUS would know there's no legal interpretation/definition of insurrection in the US code. It simply states that it's a crime, and who would have to decide how to interpret that? The SCOTUS of course. Lay off the booze Brett. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Meh. Sounds like an MSNBC narrative. If one does not have the evidence to even charge him with it. He is not guilty of it. We are a nation of laws. Words have meanings 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 Some of the arguments are practically saying, FAFO if the seal team 6 theory works, and we'll deal with that after the fact. If your party refuses to punish the president, then it's a fair, sound legal strategy. heck why not go the full 9 yards, and say they have full immunity from all crimes after their terms to almost ensure that they could not only do it, but do it without any chance whatsoever of repercussion. I don't think anyone is fully grasping the significance of what is happening right now. Trumps attorney LITERALLY threw that example out there, and the SC is basically saying, yeah I guess that could happen, and be perfectly legal and safe from their standpoint. Well leave the future of our country in the hands of a political party. This has already been done in Nazi Germany, and how'd that work out???? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted February 8 Author Share Posted February 8 7 minutes ago, daz28 said: Some of the arguments are practically saying, FAFO if the seal team 6 theory works, and we'll deal with that after the fact. If your party refuses to punish the president, then it's a fair, sound legal strategy. heck why not go the full 9 yards, and say they have full immunity from all crimes after their terms to almost ensure that they could not only do it, but do it without any chance whatsoever of repercussion. I don't think anyone is fully grasping the significance of what is happening right now. Trumps attorney LITERALLY threw that example out there, and the SC is basically saying, yeah I guess that could happen, and be perfectly legal and safe from their standpoint. Well leave the future of our country in the hands of a political party. This has already been done in Nazi Germany, and how'd that work out???? Exactly - what comes around goes around. Just now, BillsFanNC said: Not when he has full immunity. See how this works? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daz28 Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 7 minutes ago, BillStime said: Exactly - what comes around goes around. Not when he has full immunity. See how this works? I think they know how it works, and they're perfectly fine with it. There may come a day when someone calls them a fascist, and they'll turn around and finally smugly admit it, and say, "yeah, but what are you going to do about it". Most Americans aren't smart enough to see this, but I'd hope Supreme Court justices are. People are basically championing clear threats to our democracy, and they will eventually find out that it was a horribly bad idea. These people do not understand that history is basically dramatic mathematics. This plus this gets you this EVERY TIME. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 8 Share Posted February 8 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts