(04-18-2025 10:54 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 10:07 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 08:03 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-17-2025 09:09 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(04-17-2025 07:31 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  The Biden approach to the border was horrendous.

And I (and many others) have zero problem with a far stronger border policy, *and* having a far more active deportation regime for illegal aliens.

When it gets to denying due process in full, that is way beyond the line.

And no, your giant whadabout excuse simply is..... a giant whadabout that attempts to retionalize and normalize the Trump excess.

Sorry, there is no fing 'war' with Venezuela that allows deportation of Venezuelans with no due process -- which is precisely what happened with what appears two planeloads last week. I will grant you if there was a war with Venezuela, the Trump actions under the EAA would have been proper and legal. There isnt. And its not.

it looks like Abrego got caught up in the party that the Trump regime kicked off last week with the EAA. In his case, its a triple problem. In addition to the double problem of a blatant thin ass lie to rationalize insta-depoortations, and the insta-deportations under the EAA occurring with a lack of due process, Abrego has the added problem that he had a pre-existing hold, from a competent previous hearing, barring the actions that happened. That is, he had the results of his previous application of due process washed away automatically. Kind of fing grotesque.

Again -- do it correctly. If the detainees were processed in accordance with the standards of due process, thats great. From the record provided in Boasberg's court, that may not have happened.

From the record in Xinis's court, its pretty obvious that Abrego wasnt afforded *any* due process when his 'do not deport' order was violated from what appears to be on a whim.

Look, this isnt a defense of the Biden border policy. Its stupid to use that as the grand whadabout to justify and rationalize executive overreach and what appears to be a pretty stark violation of due process.

I guess the Republican stance should now be 'Fk due process, its not so great.'

And no, being a champion of due process should not be solely a liberal thing. Infortunately that seems to be the trajectory.

The Aliens Enemy Act doesn’t require an actual declaration of war. Just because it was previously used during war and that war is one of the predicates doesn’t mean war is the only use case. One of the use cases is predatory incursion. Ok, what is predatory incursion?

Please use the actual words, not a cherry picked subset.

The actual words that you speak of in the Act are "invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government"

Quote:A "predatory incursion" refers to a form of attack or invasion, typically associated with military or political actions, that involves the aggressive and often harmful entry of one party into the territory or affairs of another. It's often used in contexts where an alien entity is deemed a threat, like a foreign government or a criminal gang.

And per the act, it is limited to those "by any foreign nation or government".

TdA is not a "foreign nation", nor is it a "foreign .... government".

Nor is it an agent of the above.

Quote:This is the context for the Trump adminstration’s use of the Act. The administration has determined that the Maduro regime intentionally emptied its prisons full of TdA members (a criminal gang and now an FTO) with the explicit intent of sowing chaos in the United States.

And it still doesnt meet the terms of the Act, let alone the 'intent' has pretty much zero basis from what I can see.

And yes, Ive read the EO. Did so a few weeks ago.

Quote:You can take umbrage with that if you want but a) you don’t have access to the classified intelligence used to make that determination

And if it there, it should be released. Otherwise it seems to be made up ****. Trump doesnt have a good record with truth telling if you havent noticed. And is seemingly starting a good record of simply making **** up on the fly to meet his own political ends.

So no, I really dont believe the conspiratorial link provided in the EO.

Quote:and b) it’s no different than Obama declaring ISIS fair game under the Authorization for Use of Military Force that was granted only for the war against al-Qa’ida.

I think it is, since the EAA wasnt invoked for the Obama stuff. I dont have a problem with Trump labeling TdA a terrorist organization -- to the extent I agree with the definition of Terrorist Organization in Bush's EO that is the basis for naming.

That definition is amazingly broad, to the extent it potentially covers any criminal conspiracy for any violent act and has any political bent. In that context, one should designate the Proud Boys as a such an organization. (Which for the record, I dont think would be proper..)

And when designated -- again the EO places the 'members' into the class to be removable. Which implicates some level of due process to remove them.

Quote:The executive branch in both cases determined that it was necessary and applicable to use these authorities to address a threat to the United States and American way of life. But you won’t here this from media that’s become nothing but a mouthpiece for the Democratic Party.

Almost no one supports allowing real alien gangbangers and real alien shitbirds to stay in the United States. And application of due process is a fundamental construct of the foundation of this republic.

No problems getting rid of them -- but do it the right way.

I dont know how alarmed I should be hearing a 20 year veteran of a rather well respected LE arm seemingly accepting, and promoting, a system of summary justice.

Want to add -- thank you for the very informative conversations.

So Trump should release classified information because you don't believe it. This is the most absurd argument I've ever heard. I'm sure they'll get right on that.

The correlation of the Maduro regime to TdA is pretty well established in open source. That's why it meets the definition, so you really don't even need the classified. But I assure you there's more.

"correlation" now means 'by a foreign state or government'? Lol.

Ive seen some doozy stretches in my career, and this is a good one.

Id suggest reading the statutory history of the EAA. Its purpose is startingly clear.

When a government declares war -- invoked.

When a government invades without a declaration of war -- invoked.

When a government or state makes a predatory incursion -- invoked.

Not when a government or state may or may not, perhaps could have a some correlation or random relationship with another group of people.

Its not when a group of people that might have some ties with a government or state 'declare war', its not when a group of people that might have some ties with a government or state perform an actual invasion, its not when a group of people that might have some ties with a government or state might be acting bad ---

The entire predicate is that *a state* or *a government* has performed those acts.

If one wants to invoke a piece of legislation that has amazingly onerous implications to bypassing the typical Constitutional protections -- yeah, they should have to back that. Abso-fing-lutely.

Criminy, next thing using that logic and explanation is that Venezualan members of various law firms should be deported, because their work created a 'correlation' with the current Venezuelan government. Sounds fun.

Three, the implications *of* the EAA is massive. Its one of the very few times that a President may directly detain and remove people on his own authority , and bypassing both legislative protections *and* much of the embedded due process protections.

And a 'correlation' is good enough for you for that. Hey, you are more than free to think that and have that calculus. I think it stupid.

The only other time it was invoked in the modern era, the deportees were *actually* afforded due process. And with *much* better basis to simply ship them out -- as a full blown world wide war had been declared, and was still not ended.

Here, you want to rely on 'hey, Trump doesnt have to show beans' to invoke one of the most powerful impositions on the idea of due process, and you want to foist it off on 'correlations'. Cool cool. Not my cup of tea.

Yes. If it's directed and overseen by the head of state of a country particularly one that is clearly known as a declared enemy of the U.S. then absolutely. It's not some fantasy degrees of separation/correlation. It's predicated on specific intent.

TdA is a well armed violent entity capable of carrying causing significant harm to the American population at the behest of the Venezuelan president.

(04-18-2025 07:01 AM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 06:50 AM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  So Gamenole comes in after a somewhat prolonged absence and says a big word salad that amounts to "Orange Man Bad; Republicans Bad; Democrats Good" just like every other leftist who's ever posted in this subforum since 2015. Got it.

Gamenole, your "band" is nothing more than a "tribute/Greatest Hits" band. The problem is you're losing fans more and more, and all due to your doubling down on rhetoric that has been proven to be divisive and even downright dangerous. Now I won't insult you because I still think you're a reasonable person. But remember, your side created this problem. Don't get mad at us for trying to solve it for good. (Even though you will because, well, "ORANGE MAN BAD! REPUBLICANS BAD! REEEEEE! ")

Don't like how we're handling things? Come up with an alternative. Hell, come up with a new idea and quit dragging out the same old tired bullcrap. Until your side does, expect all of the squawking y'all have been doing to fall on deaf ears.

True, the Democratic brand has suffered. But "ORANGE MAN BAD" gains more fans every day thanks to the chaos of this administration, and all we need is to be preferable to the alternative. Trump was re-elected to bring prices down and secure the border, and while he's working on the 2nd his actions have been counter productive on the 1st and most important issue for the electorate. It's the economy, stupid.

Just wait, 4 years like this and we'll be back in the White House itching to solve long term problems that your side has made worse. We'll fight you on fixing immigration in an unconstitutional manner, but if you win it'll provide a usual precedent. For example, without needing to follow that pesky Constitution there's a lot we can do to diminish the scourge of gun violence that the GOP has stymied any efforts to address.

The alternative? That's easy, lets take this issue of illegal immigration. Hire more immigration judges and follow the law, illegal aliens are absolutely deportable after a hearing has provided them due process. The vast majority can and should be sent home, and the administration has shown it knows how to work the levers of power and force most countries to accept their own citizens back. Just don't screw up the easy stuff, like deporting the man in this case to the ONE COUNTRY in the world a court says he can't be sent to. POTUS is perfectly capable of making some phone calls to "shithole countries" and finding one to take this guy, or any other in a similar situation.

What young man with any intellectual thoughts is going to vote for more emasculating by Democrats?

More and more youth see the destruction Democrats have brought to their world

Broken homes and the lifting up of Radicals and Racists is always the answer according to Gamenole and Democrats

Democrats = Big Corporations = working class last

But sure people want that abuse

If Iran directs Hezbollah or IRGC to infiltrate the U.S. in a similar fashion then same thing.

If Russian sent Wagner same thing.

If any foreign adversary was involved or engaged in decisions with intent to utilize violent proxies to infiltrate the U.S. then this law would be applicable.

(04-18-2025 08:16 AM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 08:09 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 08:06 AM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 08:03 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  No problems getting rid of them -- but do it the right way.

This sums up the entirety of the issue. It isn't hard, which makes me suspect that flouting the law is part of the point.

Throw em all out. Anyway is the right way.

Jail those who help them.

We're gonna have some fun and get some great stuff done someday with that attitude, if this kind of behavior stands. A couple that spring to mind -

Reduce gun violence, anyway is the right way.
Protect the environment, anyway is the right way.

Cheer and squeal for your Dear Leader now, enjoy your time in the sun. Our day will come again.

As long as we send people like yourself to collect the guns from said individual’s home.

Yup, that’s the real fun

End result despite all the whining.

(04-18-2025 11:04 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 10:54 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 10:07 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 08:03 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-17-2025 09:09 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  The Aliens Enemy Act doesn’t require an actual declaration of war. Just because it was previously used during war and that war is one of the predicates doesn’t mean war is the only use case. One of the use cases is predatory incursion. Ok, what is predatory incursion?

Please use the actual words, not a cherry picked subset.

The actual words that you speak of in the Act are "invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government"

Quote:A "predatory incursion" refers to a form of attack or invasion, typically associated with military or political actions, that involves the aggressive and often harmful entry of one party into the territory or affairs of another. It's often used in contexts where an alien entity is deemed a threat, like a foreign government or a criminal gang.

And per the act, it is limited to those "by any foreign nation or government".

TdA is not a "foreign nation", nor is it a "foreign .... government".

Nor is it an agent of the above.

Quote:This is the context for the Trump adminstration’s use of the Act. The administration has determined that the Maduro regime intentionally emptied its prisons full of TdA members (a criminal gang and now an FTO) with the explicit intent of sowing chaos in the United States.

And it still doesnt meet the terms of the Act, let alone the 'intent' has pretty much zero basis from what I can see.

And yes, Ive read the EO. Did so a few weeks ago.

Quote:You can take umbrage with that if you want but a) you don’t have access to the classified intelligence used to make that determination

And if it there, it should be released. Otherwise it seems to be made up ****. Trump doesnt have a good record with truth telling if you havent noticed. And is seemingly starting a good record of simply making **** up on the fly to meet his own political ends.

So no, I really dont believe the conspiratorial link provided in the EO.

Quote:and b) it’s no different than Obama declaring ISIS fair game under the Authorization for Use of Military Force that was granted only for the war against al-Qa’ida.

I think it is, since the EAA wasnt invoked for the Obama stuff. I dont have a problem with Trump labeling TdA a terrorist organization -- to the extent I agree with the definition of Terrorist Organization in Bush's EO that is the basis for naming.

That definition is amazingly broad, to the extent it potentially covers any criminal conspiracy for any violent act and has any political bent. In that context, one should designate the Proud Boys as a such an organization. (Which for the record, I dont think would be proper..)

And when designated -- again the EO places the 'members' into the class to be removable. Which implicates some level of due process to remove them.

Quote:The executive branch in both cases determined that it was necessary and applicable to use these authorities to address a threat to the United States and American way of life. But you won’t here this from media that’s become nothing but a mouthpiece for the Democratic Party.

Almost no one supports allowing real alien gangbangers and real alien shitbirds to stay in the United States. And application of due process is a fundamental construct of the foundation of this republic.

No problems getting rid of them -- but do it the right way.

I dont know how alarmed I should be hearing a 20 year veteran of a rather well respected LE arm seemingly accepting, and promoting, a system of summary justice.

Want to add -- thank you for the very informative conversations.

So Trump should release classified information because you don't believe it. This is the most absurd argument I've ever heard. I'm sure they'll get right on that.

The correlation of the Maduro regime to TdA is pretty well established in open source. That's why it meets the definition, so you really don't even need the classified. But I assure you there's more.

"correlation" now means 'by a foreign state or government'? Lol.

Ive seen some doozy stretches in my career, and this is a good one.

Id suggest reading the statutory history of the EAA. Its purpose is startingly clear.

When a government declares war -- invoked.

When a government invades without a declaration of war -- invoked.

When a government or state makes a predatory incursion -- invoked.

Not when a government or state may or may not, perhaps could have a some correlation or random relationship with another group of people.

Its not when a group of people that might have some ties with a government or state 'declare war', its not when a group of people that might have some ties with a government or state perform an actual invasion, its not when a group of people that might have some ties with a government or state might be acting bad ---

The entire predicate is that *a state* or *a government* has performed those acts.

If one wants to invoke a piece of legislation that has amazingly onerous implications to bypassing the typical Constitutional protections -- yeah, they should have to back that. Abso-fing-lutely.

Criminy, next thing using that logic and explanation is that Venezualan members of various law firms should be deported, because their work created a 'correlation' with the current Venezuelan government. Sounds fun.

Three, the implications *of* the EAA is massive. Its one of the very few times that a President may directly detain and remove people on his own authority , and bypassing both legislative protections *and* much of the embedded due process protections.

And a 'correlation' is good enough for you for that. Hey, you are more than free to think that and have that calculus. I think it stupid.

The only other time it was invoked in the modern era, the deportees were *actually* afforded due process. And with *much* better basis to simply ship them out -- as a full blown world wide war had been declared, and was still not ended.

Here, you want to rely on 'hey, Trump doesnt have to show beans' to invoke one of the most powerful impositions on the idea of due process, and you want to foist it off on 'correlations'. Cool cool. Not my cup of tea.

Yes. If it's directed and overseen by the head of state of a country particularly one that is clearly known as a declared enemy of the U.S. then absolutely. It's not some fantasy degrees of separation/correlation. It's predicated on specific intent.

TdA is a well armed violent entity capable of carrying causing significant harm to the American population at the behest of the Venezuelan president.

Intent <> causation.

And the 'directed' by is pure supposition at this stage.

ANd if you want to race down the rabbit hole os 'state secret' -- then I will present to you the demonstrable lie of 'state secret' that the Trump administration presented to Boasberg when they refused to answer questions about timelines of plane flights.

If one wants to invoke a radically powerful civil law that for the most part short circuits most aspects of due process -- then yeah -- I think more than a blanket presumption of 'correlation' followed by a blanket assertion of "[Maduro] direct[s] and oversee[s]" this supposed state action is needed.

(04-18-2025 11:13 AM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  If Iran directs Hezbollah or IRGC to infiltrate the U.S. in a similar fashion then same thing.

If Russian sent Wagner same thing.

If any foreign adversary was involved or engaged in decisions with intent to utilize violent proxies to infiltrate the U.S. then this law would be applicable.

Correct. But assumptions and presumptions dont make the case. Which is *all* that is offered. The direct ties and direct control of Iran to Hezbelloh are well known and documented. Same for Iran -- IRGC (actually even more so, they actually hold government positions). Same for Russia -- Wagner.

No one disputes those massively apparent cases.

This one isnt so apparent. In fact, the government in the litigation on the application of the AEA, hasnt produced **** on those ties. Nor is there any public tie to such control.

In fact, the *one* person the EO mentions as that *very* tenuous tie -- was arreseted and disappeared by Maduro.

Still trying to figure out why Dems are going all-out for this? Simply TDS?

(04-18-2025 10:29 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 10:15 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 10:10 AM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Beautiful

Also, looks like this guy is safer and has faired better in an el salvadoran prison than our young school girls do in a bathroom where libturd politician allow chicks with dicks.

(04-17-2025 09:48 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(04-17-2025 09:41 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(04-17-2025 09:25 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(04-17-2025 09:21 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(04-17-2025 09:07 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  Did you try actually reading it?

nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

Stfu and try and comprehend what he posted dummy

Sure, why doesn't everyone just have namecalling fits and don't DARE answer a question about the Constitution with a Constitutional quote. What a role model you are!

You do understand due process isn't the same for 20 million ******* who were allowed to illegally waltz into our sovereign country.... you do know this right lite brite?

Again, read the Constitution -

nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

Due process is required for any person, including "20 million *******". Not any citizen, not any lawful immigrant, ANY PERSON. If said person has illegally waltzed into our sovereign country, then a hearing before a duly authorized court which finds they entered illegally and orders them removed constitutes that due process. What you want done is entirely possible here, but there is a way to go about it in a society governed by the rule of law. If the rule of law is not respected now, don't expect us to respect it when we're back on top.

Still looking for that big gig check?

(04-18-2025 09:07 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  Trump isn't maybe too sharp on due process.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli...381145002/

President Trump said Wednesday he favors taking guns away from people who might commit violence before going through legal due process in the courts, one of many startling comments he made in a rambling White House meeting designed to hash out school safety legislation with a bipartisan group of lawmakers.

"I like taking guns away early," Trump said. "Take the guns first, go through due process second."

Trump also said some of his fellow Republicans were "petrified" of the NRA, called on lawmakers to produce a “comprehensive” gun bill, and squelched prospects for a GOP-backed concealed carry proposal as part of a broader gun package.



I would imagine most folks here would object to that method, even if the person was a "bad hombre."

If said person has a criminal record that person has already forfeited gun ownership.

Nice straw man argument

They are ILLEGAL aliens. Thats due process enough.

(04-18-2025 11:43 AM)BlueDragon Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 09:07 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  Trump isn't maybe too sharp on due process.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli...381145002/

President Trump said Wednesday he favors taking guns away from people who might commit violence before going through legal due process in the courts, one of many startling comments he made in a rambling White House meeting designed to hash out school safety legislation with a bipartisan group of lawmakers.

"I like taking guns away early," Trump said. "Take the guns first, go through due process second."

Trump also said some of his fellow Republicans were "petrified" of the NRA, called on lawmakers to produce a “comprehensive” gun bill, and squelched prospects for a GOP-backed concealed carry proposal as part of a broader gun package.



I would imagine most folks here would object to that method, even if the person was a "bad hombre."

If said person has a criminal record that person has already forfeited gun ownership.

Nice straw man argument

Yes, yours was a superb strawman argument.

Trumps statement went to people who "might commit violence". Which you somewhat blithely changed to "if they have a criminal record".

I suggest you look at the original statement, and yours, and do a quick re-review.

Hint: everyone who "might" commit violence does not immediately equate to the set of persons who has a criminal record.

Hint 2: Might is predictive. Has a criminal record is past dependent.

Attention Dems! Please, please, please keep arguing for illegals to stay in the US. Shout it from every rooftop. Post it to social media. Tell everyone you know your stance on illegals. Urge your politicians to take to the streets in support of illegals.

Sincerely,
All Conservatives

(04-18-2025 11:51 AM)oruvoice Wrote:  Attention Dems! Please, please, please keep arguing for illegals to stay in the US. Shout it from every rooftop. Post it to social media. Tell everyone you know your stance on illegals. Urge your politicians to take to the streets in support of illegals.

Sincerely,
All Conservatives

Yes please. Man they are retarded.

Please run on insufficient due process for 3rd world gang banging invaders

Please

Kilmar Abrego Garcia told ICE before he was deported that he didn't fear returning to El Salvador: report

Quote:Before being loaded onto the plane that would deport him to El Salvador by the Trump administration, MS-13 gang member Kilmar Abrego Garcia allegedly told Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers that he did not fear returning to his Central American home nation, sources familiar with the matter told the New York Post.

The revelation differs from the statement he gave in 2019 to the federal government, saying that he feared returning to El Salvador due to the threat of gang violence. An immigration judge ultimately ended up blocking the federal government’s ability to deport him, with Abrego Garcia telling the judge that he was at risk of retaliation from gangs like Barrio 18, which is a rival gang of MS-13.

Abrego Garcia was taken into custody in March 2019, with documents released by the Department of Justice stating that Abrego Garcia was seen wearing "a Chicago Bulls hat and a hoodie with rolls of money covering the eyes, ears and mouth of the presidents on the separate denominations," all symbols associated with Hispanic gang culture.

Officers contacted a "past proven and reliable source" of information, who advised Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia is an active member of MS-13 with the Western clique. The confidential source further advised that he is the rank of "Chequeo" with the moniker of "Chele," the gang field interview document continued.

In April 2019, an immigration court said in a ruling that "the determination that the Respondent is a gang member appears to be trustworthy and is supported by other evidence in the record, namely, information contained in the Gang Field Interview Sheet."

In March, Abrego Garcia was deported alongside 260 other gang members under the Alien Enemies Act to El Salvador. Abrego Garcia’s attorneys have insisted that their client has no criminal record in the US that would justify his removal. The Trump administration has been ordered to take "all available steps to facilitate" his return to the country, though the administration has contended that it cannot force El Salvador to release one of its own citizens.

Abrego Garcia’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, said on Wednesday, after it was revealed that she had filed for a domestic violence protection order against her husband in 2021, that she was "acting out of caution after a disagreement with Kilmar … in case things escalated." She said she had survived a prior relationship with domestic abuse.

"Things did not escalate, and I decided not to follow through with the civil court process. We were able to work through this situation privately as a family, including by going to counseling," she said. "Our marriage only grew stronger in the years that followed. No one is perfect, and no marriage is perfect." The protection order filing claimed that Abrego Garcia had punched, scratched, grabbed and bruised her.

(04-18-2025 11:33 AM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  Still trying to figure out why Dems are going all-out for this? Simply TDS?

ABSOLUTELY NOT. This is just more lawfare with the purpose of gumming up the courts. The grifters like Tanqi Bois just invision an unearned windfall off of the government tax payers while the useful army are just continuing their maniacal hatred of all things they are told to hate.

The end result for the left is simple. Power. They want to win at any stakes and do not give a chit about the constitution or the country.

As Lincoln said “the constitution is not a suicide pact”. The left will use the constitution as a firm binding and unchallengeable document. Until they need it to be a “living and evolving” document. They in the end want it gone. Just as Barry Sotoro said himself.

(04-18-2025 12:12 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 11:33 AM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  Still trying to figure out why Dems are going all-out for this? Simply TDS?

ABSOLUTELY NOT. This is just more lawfare with the purpose of gumming up the courts. The grifters like Tanqi Bois just invision an unearned windfall off of the government tax payers while the useful army are just continuing their maniacal hatred of all things they are told to hate.

The end result for the left is simple. Power. They want to win at any stakes and do not give a chit about the constitution or the country.

As Lincoln said “the constitution is not a suicide pact”. The left will use the constitution as a firm binding and unchallengeable document. Until they need it to be a “living and evolving” document. They in the end want it gone. Just as Barry Sotoro said himself.

Funny, the folks that are actually shitting on the Constitution *right now* in this instance is your tribe of orange hair idolatry. I guess that hasnt sunk in?

(04-18-2025 12:23 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 12:12 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 11:33 AM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  Still trying to figure out why Dems are going all-out for this? Simply TDS?

ABSOLUTELY NOT. This is just more lawfare with the purpose of gumming up the courts. The grifters like Tanqi Bois just invision an unearned windfall off of the government tax payers while the useful army are just continuing their maniacal hatred of all things they are told to hate.

The end result for the left is simple. Power. They want to win at any stakes and do not give a chit about the constitution or the country.

As Lincoln said “the constitution is not a suicide pact”. The left will use the constitution as a firm binding and unchallengeable document. Until they need it to be a “living and evolving” document. They in the end want it gone. Just as Barry Sotoro said himself.

Funny, the folks that are actually shitting on the Constitution *right now* in this instance is your tribe of orange hair idolatry. I guess that hasnt sunk in?

As with all things you’ve had opinion on Clarence , you’re wrong. Again. Repeatable infallible law of the universe. You have been the antimatter of law. Everything you come in contact with explodes in your face.

My only question is how long before you make another bet with anyone about anything? Will anyone here give you an easy out for a while?

(04-18-2025 12:30 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 12:23 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 12:12 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(04-18-2025 11:33 AM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  Still trying to figure out why Dems are going all-out for this? Simply TDS?

ABSOLUTELY NOT. This is just more lawfare with the purpose of gumming up the courts. The grifters like Tanqi Bois just invision an unearned windfall off of the government tax payers while the useful army are just continuing their maniacal hatred of all things they are told to hate.

The end result for the left is simple. Power. They want to win at any stakes and do not give a chit about the constitution or the country.

As Lincoln said “the constitution is not a suicide pact”. The left will use the constitution as a firm binding and unchallengeable document. Until they need it to be a “living and evolving” document. They in the end want it gone. Just as Barry Sotoro said himself.

Funny, the folks that are actually shitting on the Constitution *right now* in this instance is your tribe of orange hair idolatry. I guess that hasnt sunk in?

As with all things you’ve had opinion on Clarence , you’re wrong. Again. Repeatable infallible law of the universe. You have been the antimatter of law. Everything you come in contact with explodes in your face.

My only question is how long before you make another bet with anyone about anything? Will anyone here give you an easy out for a while?

Cool cool, champ. I guess you dont think due process accrues to all persons. You be you.

And yeah, trying to simply wipe that out *is* shitting on the Constitution. I suggest you live with it. Lolz.