daz28 Posted April 25 Posted April 25 Pam Bondi was AGAIN on her private national propaganda channel Fox saying that the guy "did" all these different things. Just exactly how inept would an AG have to be to forget to say 'alleged'. That's the kind of mistake a 2nd semester law student wouldn't make.
JFKjr Posted April 26 Posted April 26 5 hours ago, daz28 said: Pam Bondi was AGAIN on her private national propaganda channel Fox saying that the guy "did" all these different things. Just exactly how inept would an AG have to be to forget to say 'alleged'. That's the kind of mistake a 2nd semester law student wouldn't make. Allegedly the clot shot was "safe and effective." Yeah, not so hard!
daz28 Posted April 26 Posted April 26 6 minutes ago, JFKjr said: Allegedly the clot shot was "safe and effective." Yeah, not so hard! Are you trying to prove that knee jerk reactions are an indicator of denial?
BillsFanNC Posted April 26 Author Posted April 26 This is why you ignore, shun and laugh at the likes of daz-stain. There's no reason to even waste a nanosecond of your time. 2
Homelander Posted April 27 Posted April 27 Interesting that you mention the Harkonnens - they were brutal, power-hungry tyrants. That description aligns much more closely with your side. The projection here is remarkable.
B-Man Posted April 27 Posted April 27 (edited) 10 hours ago, BillsFanNC said: She broke the law, but did they really have to arrest her ? Now compare that to EVERYTHING that they have said over the past 8 years. Jeez. Edited April 28 by B-Man
B-Man Posted April 28 Posted April 28 (edited) Judge Not by Clarice Feldman Another week where America turns its attention to a rotten judiciary, which is fast erasing any respect we once had for it. As the prior outrageous injunctions by a number of (judge-shopped) District Courts make their way up the judicial ladder, even more of them were issued this week. I think everything the President has done is the object of at least one District Court injunction. In the meantime, corruption of the judiciary has become so overt that two judges were placed under arrest this week. The case that particularly caught my attention this week, unsurprisingly, is once again from the District of Columbia. Federal law makes it a crime for non-citizens to vote in federal elections (18 U.S.C. § 611). D.C. federal district court judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued an injunction against an Executive Order requiring proof of citizenship to vote and for welfare applicants to prove their citizenship before being given voter registration forms https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/04/judge_not.html . Edited April 28 by B-Man
All_Pro_Bills Posted April 28 Posted April 28 (edited) On 4/26/2025 at 11:18 PM, Homelander said: Interesting that you mention the Harkonnens - they were brutal, power-hungry tyrants. That description aligns much more closely with your side. The projection here is remarkable. All this judicial malpractice is the result of the Democrats being furious and angry that they are no longer in command. And having more or less no other outlet to obstruct the administrations actions to dismantle their system of control, short of employing street violence. The aim is to goad Trump into doing something "authoritarian" to prove their constant assertions that his objective is some dictatorial regime. Its not like its some big top secret. Its obvious. So far he refuses to take the bait. At some point the SCOTUS is going to have to crap or get off the pot and rule on this judicial activism. Edited April 28 by All_Pro_Bills 1 1
Homelander Posted April 28 Posted April 28 38 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: All this judicial malpractice is the result of the Democrats being furious and angry that they are no longer in command. And having more or less no other outlet to obstruct the administrations actions to dismantle their system of control, short of employing street violence. The aim is to goad Trump into doing something "authoritarian" to prove their constant assertions that his objective is some dictatorial regime. Its not like its some big top secret. Its obvious. So far he refuses to take the bait. At some point the SCOTUS is going to have to crap or get off the pot and rule on this judicial activism. Let’s get one thing straight: the idea that Democrats are somehow staging a coup via “judicial activism” because they’re no longer “in control” is pure projection and impressively unself-aware. Yes, Democrats sue. They challenge policies. They file in court when they believe a law’s being broken or rights are being violated. But so does the GOP with turbocharged aggression. Republicans have elevated judge shopping to an art form, filing every major challenge to Biden policies in places like Amarillo, Texas, where Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump-appointed activist in robes, is basically on standby to deliver whatever ruling they need. One guy has become a veto point for federal immigration law, abortion medication access, and public health. That’s not judicial restraint that’s legal cosplay with real-world consequences. Look at Judge Mark Pittman, who tossed Biden’s student loan forgiveness for “legislating without Congress,” while ignoring the actual law that gave the executive that emergency authority. Or Judge Andrew Hanen, who keeps throwing legal bricks at DACA from the bench. And let’s not forget the OG of ethical negligence, Justice Clarence Thomas, whose idea of judicial transparency is accepting luxury vacations and calling them “personal hospitality.” And yes Democrats have had their moments too. Judges appointed by Obama issued nationwide injunctions against Trump’s travel ban and asylum rules. And Democratic state AGs launched an avalanche of lawsuits over Trump’s environmental rollbacks and immigration policy. Fair play - they used the courts to fight what they saw as unlawful overreach. But they didn’t try to break the system to get their way. They didn’t hunt for handpicked ideologues in single-judge districts just to get favorable headlines. Here’s the thing: both sides play the game, but only one side is trying to rig the table, swap the dealer, and torch the rulebook when the cards don’t go their way. Because at the end of the day, the rule of law only works if judges apply it fairly unlike Judge Aileen Cannon, who bent over backwards to delay Trump’s classified documents trial like she was auditioning for “Judicial Apprentice.” Trump picked her. And boy, did she deliver for him, not for justice. PS: Trump's own hand-picked judges are ruling against him. Perhaps it's the policy - not the judge that's the issue. 1
The Frankish Reich Posted April 28 Posted April 28 13 state AGs sue over illegal use of "Emergency" powers to enact sweeping tariffs. Now will all those "Marxist" judges rule in favor of the constitution (Congress has the sole authority to levy tariffs)? Will they rule in favor of free trade and capitalism over Trump's Marxist-protectionist policies? We shall see.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted April 30 Posted April 30 5 minutes ago, B-Man said: hmmm...why do all your reposts of propagandists always include partial copies of the important stuff. I trust it's a reasonable judgement given that all the kings dollars and all the kings men couldn't obtain a majority for the fascists on the WI supreme court.
Recommended Posts