Conservatives of DCUM - where do you draw the line?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On immigration - are you ok with ICE rounding up all brown people and holding them/deporting them with no due process?

Yes, in fact, the less due process they receive the better. Trump has not gone nearly far enough. Remittances should be taxed at 90% and illegals should all be deported to the Congo.

How about the ones who are here legally on green cards, and get deported anyway (yes it’s happening)? How about the ones who show up to their immigration hearings and are snatched away before any ruling can occur?

What about Trump’s desire to arrest and “deport” US born citizens (like Rosie O’Donnell) who disagree with him politically?

If eggs are broken to make an omelette, so be it. I think deporting all communists is an excellent start.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On immigration - are you ok with ICE rounding up all brown people and holding them/deporting them with no due process?

Yes, in fact, the less due process they receive the better. Trump has not gone nearly far enough. Remittances should be taxed at 90% and illegals should all be deported to the Congo.

How do you know they are here illegally without due process?

Don't care. Biden abandoned the law on the way in, so they don't get it on the way out. No one voted for tens of millions of illegal aliens.

And we lost due process long ago with things like civil forfeiture and Kelo. As a conservative, I'm tired of due process being used as a weapon against me and a shield to thwart me when there is no vote to do such things. My friends on the left don't realize that liberalism's failures are going to create a class of young men who are far more radical than I am.

Who is they? Without due process, you don't know who "they" is. They could be green card holders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On immigration - are you ok with ICE rounding up all brown people and holding them/deporting them with no due process?

Yes, in fact, the less due process they receive the better. Trump has not gone nearly far enough. Remittances should be taxed at 90% and illegals should all be deported to the Congo.

How do you know they are here illegally without due process?

Don't care. Biden abandoned the law on the way in, so they don't get it on the way out. No one voted for tens of millions of illegal aliens.

And we lost due process long ago with things like civil forfeiture and Kelo. As a conservative, I'm tired of due process being used as a weapon against me and a shield to thwart me when there is no vote to do such things. My friends on the left don't realize that liberalism's failures are going to create a class of young men who are far more radical than I am.

Obviously you are a white man.

So anybody who isn’t white or even if you are white and just not MAGA the government is allowed to throw you in a detention center and ship you to the Congo?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On immigration - are you ok with ICE rounding up all brown people and holding them/deporting them with no due process?

Yes, in fact, the less due process they receive the better. Trump has not gone nearly far enough. Remittances should be taxed at 90% and illegals should all be deported to the Congo.

How about the ones who are here legally on green cards, and get deported anyway (yes it’s happening)? How about the ones who show up to their immigration hearings and are snatched away before any ruling can occur?

What about Trump’s desire to arrest and “deport” US born citizens (like Rosie O’Donnell) who disagree with him politically?

If eggs are broken to make an omelette, so be it. I think deporting all communists is an excellent start.

Since Trump is acting as an autocrat that wants to control the means of production, let's start with him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On immigration - are you ok with ICE rounding up all brown people and holding them/deporting them with no due process?

Yes, in fact, the less due process they receive the better. Trump has not gone nearly far enough. Remittances should be taxed at 90% and illegals should all be deported to the Congo.

How about the ones who are here legally on green cards, and get deported anyway (yes it’s happening)? How about the ones who show up to their immigration hearings and are snatched away before any ruling can occur?

What about Trump’s desire to arrest and “deport” US born citizens (like Rosie O’Donnell) who disagree with him politically?

If eggs are broken to make an omelette, so be it. I think deporting all communists is an excellent start.

You probably assume you won't be one of the eggs broken along the way.

[Anonymous]

This is easy to answer: they don’t have a line. They soared past that years ago. Anything he does is good

[Anonymous]

It’s amazing Trump hasn’t exerted droit du seigneur. It seems like this is a no brainer for him

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Their line is whatever dear leader tells them it is.
The pedophilia thing should be dropped though, that’s for 13 and younger.
Maybe “child sexual exploiter” or “predatory criminal sexual assaulter of children” would be more accurate.
But then they’ll just twist themselves into knots explaining away why children that age cannot obtain gender affirming care but can 100% consent to being diddled by old men.

Virginia Guilfier (sic) testified that she saw girls as young as eleven on the island. So why should the pedophilia accusations be dropped, and frankly thirteen, fourteen and maybe fifteen is also pedophilia territory. At least for my children.

Did she see Trump on the island?

No. Because he was never there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Their line is whatever dear leader tells them it is.
The pedophilia thing should be dropped though, that’s for 13 and younger.
Maybe “child sexual exploiter” or “predatory criminal sexual assaulter of children” would be more accurate.
But then they’ll just twist themselves into knots explaining away why children that age cannot obtain gender affirming care but can 100% consent to being diddled by old men.

Virginia Guilfier (sic) testified that she saw girls as young as eleven on the island. So why should the pedophilia accusations be dropped, and frankly thirteen, fourteen and maybe fifteen is also pedophilia territory. At least for my children.

Did she see Trump on the island?

No. Because he was never there.

This is a proven fact?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Their line is whatever dear leader tells them it is.
The pedophilia thing should be dropped though, that’s for 13 and younger.
Maybe “child sexual exploiter” or “predatory criminal sexual assaulter of children” would be more accurate.
But then they’ll just twist themselves into knots explaining away why children that age cannot obtain gender affirming care but can 100% consent to being diddled by old men.

Virginia Guilfier (sic) testified that she saw girls as young as eleven on the island. So why should the pedophilia accusations be dropped, and frankly thirteen, fourteen and maybe fifteen is also pedophilia territory. At least for my children.

Did she see Trump on the island?

No. Because he was never there.

Listen, I know that this is a surprising revelation that you might not expect today, but I am happy to have found you. I am a Nigerian Prince with $245M US and I need your help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Their line is whatever dear leader tells them it is.
The pedophilia thing should be dropped though, that’s for 13 and younger.
Maybe “child sexual exploiter” or “predatory criminal sexual assaulter of children” would be more accurate.
But then they’ll just twist themselves into knots explaining away why children that age cannot obtain gender affirming care but can 100% consent to being diddled by old men.

Virginia Guilfier (sic) testified that she saw girls as young as eleven on the island. So why should the pedophilia accusations be dropped, and frankly thirteen, fourteen and maybe fifteen is also pedophilia territory. At least for my children.

Did she see Trump on the island?

No. Because he was never there.

He didn't have to be on the island, crimes were committed all over. He was close friends with Epstein for years, Epstein even attended his wedding!!! Trump is pretending he didn't write that doodle or does not draw even though he donated doodles to charity for years (blatantly lied and there are receipts). No doubt Trump benefited from Epstein's trafficking. MAGAs, the party of Pizzagate, voted for a rapist and their only response is deflection and whataboutism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Their line is whatever dear leader tells them it is.
The pedophilia thing should be dropped though, that’s for 13 and younger.
Maybe “child sexual exploiter” or “predatory criminal sexual assaulter of children” would be more accurate.
But then they’ll just twist themselves into knots explaining away why children that age cannot obtain gender affirming care but can 100% consent to being diddled by old men.

Virginia Guilfier (sic) testified that she saw girls as young as eleven on the island. So why should the pedophilia accusations be dropped, and frankly thirteen, fourteen and maybe fifteen is also pedophilia territory. At least for my children.

Did she see Trump on the island?

She worked directly for Trump at Mar-a-Largo before going to the Island. Connect the dots. You can do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On immigration - are you ok with ICE rounding up all brown people and holding them/deporting them with no due process?

Yes, in fact, the less due process they receive the better. Trump has not gone nearly far enough. Remittances should be taxed at 90% and illegals should all be deported to the Congo.

How about the ones who are here legally on green cards, and get deported anyway (yes it’s happening)? How about the ones who show up to their immigration hearings and are snatched away before any ruling can occur?

What about Trump’s desire to arrest and “deport” US born citizens (like Rosie O’Donnell) who disagree with him politically?

If eggs are broken to make an omelette, so be it. I think deporting all communists is an excellent start.

You do realize that not everyone who disagrees with your politics is a "communist," right?

I find that the overwhelming majority of conservatives who make politically charged statements like "deport all the communists" struggle to properly define the word in any way relevant to actual American politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Come on OP.
While it is gross and inappropriate that old men used to openly slaver over young women, that does not equate to being actual pedophiles (who are attracted pre-pubescent children) and when you conflate the two, you dilute the meaning of the word.

I’ve been watching movies from the 80s. We have forgotten what things used to be like. Yes it is gross when men of any age ogle and leer at women, but it used to be accepted as par for the course. Trump is just a dinosaur.

Epstein was literally running a pedophile mill. Do you not get this?

DP
While it's possible that Trump was an accessory to 95% of Epstien's crimes, that doesn't mean he's attracted to young girls.

No, he was just attracted to his underage daughter. Which is worst pedophilia from strange men, or incest from your dad. Disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Their line is whatever dear leader tells them it is.
The pedophilia thing should be dropped though, that’s for 13 and younger.
Maybe “child sexual exploiter” or “predatory criminal sexual assaulter of children” would be more accurate.
But then they’ll just twist themselves into knots explaining away why children that age cannot obtain gender affirming care but can 100% consent to being diddled by old men.

Virginia Guilfier (sic) testified that she saw girls as young as eleven on the island. So why should the pedophilia accusations be dropped, and frankly thirteen, fourteen and maybe fifteen is also pedophilia territory. At least for my children.

Did she see Trump on the island?

No. Because he was never there.

If that was true, he would release those files at lightning speed to exonerate himself. Instead, he is trying to distract us by threatening football teams and such. Lol