This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
newjaninev2 · 56-60, F
@BigGuy2 The Administration is one of the three branches of government, and the Presidency is part of that branch.
That particular office happens to be currently filled by trump, but it's not his office... he's just some old guy who's passing through, and will soon be gone.
He's simply not important enough that the video would be directed at him personally - nobody cares about him.
That particular office happens to be currently filled by trump, but it's not his office... he's just some old guy who's passing through, and will soon be gone.
He's simply not important enough that the video would be directed at him personally - nobody cares about him.
Swoop62 · M
Sure, they were as like it is necessary to do that. The Military and Intelligence people were schooled on this thoroughly. The intent of doing this was disruption between the Military and Intelligence and the President. Sure they may make it pass as legal but why they did this is obvious and dangerous. .
Swoop62 · M
@MoveAlong Yep, and nothing can change my mind as to why they did that. They can't name any illegal order he gave when asked so it was about disruption they hoped they could cause.,
And I still said nothing about a trial as likely they would make it come out legal so I am satisfied with as many who see it for what it is. And they know what they did as well.
Hey, been a lot of fun as on MSN homepage. they censor hard on conservatives' but here said what I thought.
And I still said nothing about a trial as likely they would make it come out legal so I am satisfied with as many who see it for what it is. And they know what they did as well.
Hey, been a lot of fun as on MSN homepage. they censor hard on conservatives' but here said what I thought.
SomeMichGuy · M
@Swoop62
Where to start?
1)"English"
It isn't English, it's math. The units have never made sense, and even people who really ought to known don't.
2) "victim"
I guess you can't read yet again. You said
That is the language of a threat, but, like most bullies, you retreat when called out.
3) more not reading...
I never said that you did. RIF--please learn.
But I reminded you that their oath is NOT to DJT, which IS true. This fits a very clear pattern--you hate the truth.
4) even more not reading...
I never said nor do I believe that "the Military would be lost without their input".
A second pattern you have is the inability to reproduce what has actually been said.
5) 2nd Amendment
No. I'm on the side of the Second Amendment...the WHOLE second amendment. Most people who are rabidly pro-gun can't see the first phrase.
And "your 'side' " has always blocked common-sense moves to be more thorough in vetting gun owners, etc.‐-moves long supported by a large majority of the populace.
6) 1st Amendment
Again, you can't read and don't understand.
The First Amendment applies only to PUBLIC fora. Not to PRIVATE fora.
The problem is that the private fora were spreading lies to help keep people like you on those sites...but reinforcing lies.
If they were tiny rather than market giants, this might not be an issue.
Again you seem afraid of the truth. It's clear you aren't from STEM and you don't know English, but the truth doesn't depend upon the politics of a person... Why do you think having a duty to the truth is a bad thing?
"riff"
You mean "rift". THAT is English.
If you are going to discuss things, you ought to be able to comprehend what you read well enough to accurately quote/represent what someone who has a different viewpoint is expressing.
I've quoted you, and directly discussed your own words.
However, you have been unable to reciprocate; while accusing me of "making things up", you have consistently misquoted me.
You have difficulties reading, thinking (logicn for instance), and have only memorized slurs and tropes.
Your local library can likely suggest resources to further your reading ability, as an adult student; from there, you can learn logic, read about units, the Constitution, etc.
Let me know when you can read with enough comprehension to accurately represent what others express.
Where to start?
1)"English"
It isn't English, it's math. The units have never made sense, and even people who really ought to known don't.
2) "victim"
Democrats love to play the victim
I guess you can't read yet again. You said
They probably escape legally but you may ought to beware of what you wish for.
That is the language of a threat, but, like most bullies, you retreat when called out.
3) more not reading...
You just make stuff up, I never said they take an oath to the President
I never said that you did. RIF--please learn.
But I reminded you that their oath is NOT to DJT, which IS true. This fits a very clear pattern--you hate the truth.
4) even more not reading...
Love the defense of what they did and you thinking the Military would be lost without their input.
I never said nor do I believe that "the Military would be lost without their input".
A second pattern you have is the inability to reproduce what has actually been said.
5) 2nd Amendment
well as I recall your bunch wants to weaken the second amendment.
No. I'm on the side of the Second Amendment...the WHOLE second amendment. Most people who are rabidly pro-gun can't see the first phrase.
And "your 'side' " has always blocked common-sense moves to be more thorough in vetting gun owners, etc.‐-moves long supported by a large majority of the populace.
6) 1st Amendment
And Biden was doing it in the first amendment for people who disagreed. Google, Facebook and Twitter at the time all were told to censor information not agreeing with their narrative. They all admitted to that. Hey MSN does it now still on my home page. So tell me about the Constitution.
Again, you can't read and don't understand.
The First Amendment applies only to PUBLIC fora. Not to PRIVATE fora.
The problem is that the private fora were spreading lies to help keep people like you on those sites...but reinforcing lies.
If they were tiny rather than market giants, this might not be an issue.
Again you seem afraid of the truth. It's clear you aren't from STEM and you don't know English, but the truth doesn't depend upon the politics of a person... Why do you think having a duty to the truth is a bad thing?
"riff"
I said it would probably pass off as legal but the intent was to cause a riff between the Military and Intelligence against Trump.
You mean "rift". THAT is English.
If you are going to discuss things, you ought to be able to comprehend what you read well enough to accurately quote/represent what someone who has a different viewpoint is expressing.
I've quoted you, and directly discussed your own words.
However, you have been unable to reciprocate; while accusing me of "making things up", you have consistently misquoted me.
You have difficulties reading, thinking (logicn for instance), and have only memorized slurs and tropes.
Your local library can likely suggest resources to further your reading ability, as an adult student; from there, you can learn logic, read about units, the Constitution, etc.
Let me know when you can read with enough comprehension to accurately represent what others express.
Swoop62 · M
@SomeMichGuy Hey Happy Thanksgiving and not only a professor of Math and English, a Judge as well. Nice job of twisting the truth to suit your narrative. I know what I believe in and what you are selling is none of that. Please check spelling and punctuation and interpret and judge my message to suit what you want it to say to make worthless points.
Neoerectus · M
ElwoodBlues · M
It's amazing how triggered tRumpsters can get just by statements of longstanding law!!
Almost as triggered as tRump got when a Canadian ad repeated Reagan's words about tariffs🤣😂
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/fact-checking-claims-that-a-canadian-ad-was-misleading-about-reagans-tariff-warning
Almost as triggered as tRump got when a Canadian ad repeated Reagan's words about tariffs🤣😂
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/fact-checking-claims-that-a-canadian-ad-was-misleading-about-reagans-tariff-warning
SomeMichGuy · M
SomeMichGuy · M
JohnnySpot · 56-60, M
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
SomeMichGuy · M
@ItsMeMorgue Yes. Any single person being above all law is always dangerous.