Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

That was a corrupt circus, how do you get your whole office disqualified?

https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/amp/rcna184921
 

A Georgia appellate court ruled Thursday that Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and her entire office are disqualified from prosecuting the case that accuses then-President Donald Trump — who lost the 2020 election — of trying to interfere with our state’s election. At issue was a “personal relationship” that the district attorney eventually admitted that she’d had with Nathan Wade, whom she had assigned as a special prosecutor to the case.

Who gives a **** who she ****s

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Posted

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that an op-ed writer for The Hill doesn't speak for the entire Democratic Party or even everyone that didn't vote for Donald Trump.

Holic knows this, but hey, Twitter and meme culture is one hell of a drug 

  • Like 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that an op-ed writer for The Hill doesn't speak for the entire Democratic Party or even everyone that didn't vote for Donald Trump.

Holic knows this, but hey, Twitter and meme culture is one hell of a drug 

Overreacting to everything is the Maga way. They're eating the dogs! They're eating the cats! Billionaires have increased their wealth by unprecedented amounts...err no disregard that one.

  • Thanks 1
Posted
24 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that an op-ed writer for The Hill doesn't speak for the entire Democratic Party or even everyone that didn't vote for Donald Trump.

Holic knows this, but hey, Twitter and meme culture is one hell of a drug 

I am sure we will have a free and happy transition of power. The Hill is a pretty centric news org so was suprised to see they even ran the op-ed. Last thing anyone wants is someone screaming J(add the date) anytime a question is raised.....

Posted
13 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

I am sure we will have a free and happy transition of power. The Hill is a pretty centric news org so was suprised to see they even ran the op-ed. Last thing anyone wants is someone screaming J(add the date) anytime a question is raised.....

I don't know that The Hill has too much of a lean in either direction (they lean a bit conservative as far as I can tell, but not overly so)... But they aren't a quality news organization at all regardless of their lean. And their op-ed page has at times posted some wacky op-eds that are both provocative while being irrelevant to reality at the same time

This is one of them and, more likely than not, they are doing it to drive clicks and get attention. They know what they are doing

  • Like 1
Posted
20 hours ago, Tigerbomb13 said:

The hill opinion person is an election denier? 

This is what supporters of fascism do: they accuse their enemies of the very things they engage in, or plan to engage in very shortly. They project. Trump's red hats went all in on that years ago.

Once they start accusing everyday people who didn't vote for Trump of trying to literally genocide their conservative neighbors off the planet, that's when it's going to be time to make a decision about fighting or fleeing. Seal's been broken already at the top—all they have to do now is push the rhetoric down to neighbor level.

 

  • Haha 1
Posted
On 12/26/2024 at 4:32 PM, Tigeraholic1 said:

I am sure we will have a free and happy transition of power. The Hill is a pretty centric news org so was suprised to see they even ran the op-ed. Last thing anyone wants is someone screaming J(add the date) anytime a question is raised.....

The idea that Trump should be disqualified from the Presidency seems pretty centric to me.  Trying to do so at this point is probably fruitless and may just make matters worse, but it's hardly a radical opinion.  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Posted
On 12/29/2024 at 11:58 AM, Tiger337 said:

The idea that Trump should be disqualified from the Presidency seems pretty centric to me.  Trying to do so at this point is probably fruitless and may just make matters worse, but it's hardly a radical opinion.  

It's a constitutionally sound opinion.   The SCOTUS said it 14 dot 3 couldn't be enforced b/c congress did not pass legislation to serve as an enforcement mechanism which of course isn't necessary for a constitutional amendment.    Remember when you learned about how a ratified  constitutional amendment is subject to the whims of congress?  Me neither. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

Be careful what you wish for.

Doesn't even get into the fact that the 35,000 employees, branch offices all over the US, and deals in all manner of crime (most of which doesn't involve politics, let alone Trump or his personal grievances). 

With how thin Patel's resume is and the fact that he's clearly only being nominated because he's a crony, not sure why anyone should have any confidence there. 

But hey, he's endorsed by a grown-ass man who goes by the handle of catturd lol

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...