Judge Intimidation - Pizza Delivery

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a perfect world, no one would protest in front of judge’s homes in any way shape or form.

But we don’t live in a perfect world. And when people started protesting in front of the homes of the conservative Supreme Court justices, that forever moved the Overton Window of what was considered acceptable behavior.

So like it or not, it’s now acceptable to protest in front of the homes of judges. ANY judges.

The is the world we live in now. Conservatives didn’t make this happen, but we’re going to play by the rules of engagement as they’ve been established by the liberals.


Y’all have no one to blame but yourselves. You shoulda stayed away from those Justices. But you didn’t. Now we’re playing by your own rules. So stop whining.

Drink! MAGA false equivalency! Protesting equal sending veiled threats about a judge's dead kid? Yeah. Exactly the same. And please..who set a worse precedent? people protesting in front of homes after rulings or a mob trespassing, trashing, and injuring/killing people at the capitol?

Take a seat, my friend.

Please stay on-topic. You can debate the merits or negatives of the J6 protest on one of the dozens of J6 threads. This thread is about protests or first amendment activism in front of the homes of judges.


Also, please learn what “false equivalency” means so you can avoid further embarrassment in the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. This is bad.

2. When they tried to kill Kavanaugh and the press didn't care, that was worse.

Who is "they"?

Democrats ----> Schumer (elite communist) -----> release the whirlwind!!! -----> Nicholas Roske (street communist) -----> arrested as a threat to Justice Kavanaugh

Comprende vous?

LMAO look at this clown poster, who thinks Schumer is a "communist."

Correct. He’s a Stalinist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sending pizzas is a pretty benign form of protest. I’d have no problem with it if they weren’t ordering the pizzas under the name of the judge’s son who was murdered by someone who was angry at her rulings. This is an implicit threat, which makes it different from ordinary protesting.

Carrying signs and chanting non violent slogans on the public sidewalks near a SC justice’s home is okay.

Plotting to assassinate them is not.

Ordering pizzas to judges homes is okay.

Issuing a threat by invoking the name of the murdered son of a judge is not.

It's actually not.

The law in question prohibits the “picketing and parading” of federal judges and court facilities with the intent of interfering or obstructing the administration of justice or with the intent of influencing a judge.

“The entire country has seen hundreds of protesters outside the homes of Supreme Court justices night after night after night. You turn on your TV and you see violations of this criminal statute over and over and over again,” Sen. Ted Cruz, a Texas Republian, said at a Senate hearing last month.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-cour...ervative-s-rcna78678

Yup. Which is why people have no effs to give now that some judge is getting pizza deliveries.

Too bad, so sad.

Yep.

Zero F’s to give. None. Zippy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a perfect world, no one would protest in front of judge’s homes in any way shape or form.

But we don’t live in a perfect world. And when people started protesting in front of the homes of the conservative Supreme Court justices, that forever moved the Overton Window of what was considered acceptable behavior.

So like it or not, it’s now acceptable to protest in front of the homes of judges. ANY judges.

The is the world we live in now. Conservatives didn’t make this happen, but we’re going to play by the rules of engagement as they’ve been established by the liberals.


Y’all have no one to blame but yourselves. You shoulda stayed away from those Justices. But you didn’t. Now we’re playing by your own rules. So stop whining.

Drink! MAGA false equivalency! Protesting equal sending veiled threats about a judge's dead kid? Yeah. Exactly the same. And please..who set a worse precedent? people protesting in front of homes after rulings or a mob trespassing, trashing, and injuring/killing people at the capitol?

Take a seat, my friend.

Please stay on-topic. You can debate the merits or negatives of the J6 protest on one of the dozens of J6 threads. This thread is about protests or first amendment activism in front of the homes of judges.


Also, please learn what “false equivalency” means so you can avoid further embarrassment in the future.

You are trying to analogize nonviolent protests with clearly intimidating actions. False equivalency

Also, since you brought up liberals making the rules, I am pretty sure you opened the door.

You have no argument and not enough intelligence to even try formulate one that sounds good.

But I'm sure it feels victorious in your head. Out here in reality land, you are outclassed by logic and facts and people who can separate truth from lies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. This is bad.

2. When they tried to kill Kavanaugh and the press didn't care, that was worse.

Who is "they"?

Democrats ----> Schumer (elite communist) -----> release the whirlwind!!! -----> Nicholas Roske (street communist) -----> arrested as a threat to Justice Kavanaugh

Comprende vous?

LMAO look at this clown poster, who thinks Schumer is a "communist."

Correct. He’s a Stalinist.

Lord, you've gone full on Bozo. You clearly do not know the meaning of 'communist or 'Stalinist.'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a perfect world, no one would protest in front of judge’s homes in any way shape or form.

But we don’t live in a perfect world. And when people started protesting in front of the homes of the conservative Supreme Court justices, that forever moved the Overton Window of what was considered acceptable behavior.

So like it or not, it’s now acceptable to protest in front of the homes of judges. ANY judges.

The is the world we live in now. Conservatives didn’t make this happen, but we’re going to play by the rules of engagement as they’ve been established by the liberals.


Y’all have no one to blame but yourselves. You shoulda stayed away from those Justices. But you didn’t. Now we’re playing by your own rules. So stop whining.

Drink! MAGA false equivalency! Protesting equal sending veiled threats about a judge's dead kid? Yeah. Exactly the same. And please..who set a worse precedent? people protesting in front of homes after rulings or a mob trespassing, trashing, and injuring/killing people at the capitol?

Take a seat, my friend.

Please stay on-topic. You can debate the merits or negatives of the J6 protest on one of the dozens of J6 threads. This thread is about protests or first amendment activism in front of the homes of judges.


Also, please learn what “false equivalency” means so you can avoid further embarrassment in the future.

You are trying to analogize nonviolent protests with clearly intimidating actions. False equivalency

Also, since you brought up liberals making the rules, I am pretty sure you opened the door.

You have no argument and not enough intelligence to even try formulate one that sounds good.

But I'm sure it feels victorious in your head. Out here in reality land, you are outclassed by logic and facts and people who can separate truth from lies.

J6 was violent and intended to intimidate Congress, just as replicating a violent murder invoking the name of the murdered is meant to intimidate and threaten judges and their families.

Another distinction is that MAGA has engaged in these violent and threatening actions as a collective, whereas anything MAGA finds to point at like Hodgkinson shooting at a Congressional ball game is lone-wolf, and arson at BLM turned out to be outside provocateurs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a perfect world, no one would protest in front of judge’s homes in any way shape or form.

But we don’t live in a perfect world. And when people started protesting in front of the homes of the conservative Supreme Court justices, that forever moved the Overton Window of what was considered acceptable behavior.

So like it or not, it’s now acceptable to protest in front of the homes of judges. ANY judges.

The is the world we live in now. Conservatives didn’t make this happen, but we’re going to play by the rules of engagement as they’ve been established by the liberals.


Y’all have no one to blame but yourselves. You shoulda stayed away from those Justices. But you didn’t. Now we’re playing by your own rules. So stop whining.

Drink! MAGA false equivalency! Protesting equal sending veiled threats about a judge's dead kid? Yeah. Exactly the same. And please..who set a worse precedent? people protesting in front of homes after rulings or a mob trespassing, trashing, and injuring/killing people at the capitol?

Take a seat, my friend.

I’ll see your J6 and raise you with at least 25 people died during the protests and related unrest in 2020. These deaths occurred under various circumstances, including confrontations during protests, incidents involving vehicles driving into crowds.

Extensive property damage nationwide. In the Minneapolis–Saint Paul area alone, over 1,500 properties were damaged, with estimated costs exceeding $500 million, making it the second-most destructive period of civil unrest in U.S. history after the 1992 Los Angeles riots. Nationally, insurance claims related to the unrest are estimated to be between $1 billion and $2 billion, marking it as the most expensive civil disturbance in U.S. insurance history.

Back at ‘cha

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In a perfect world, no one would protest in front of judge’s homes in any way shape or form.

But we don’t live in a perfect world. And when people started protesting in front of the homes of the conservative Supreme Court justices, that forever moved the Overton Window of what was considered acceptable behavior.

So like it or not, it’s now acceptable to protest in front of the homes of judges. ANY judges.

The is the world we live in now. Conservatives didn’t make this happen, but we’re going to play by the rules of engagement as they’ve been established by the liberals.


Y’all have no one to blame but yourselves. You shoulda stayed away from those Justices. But you didn’t. Now we’re playing by your own rules. So stop whining.

Drink! MAGA false equivalency! Protesting equal sending veiled threats about a judge's dead kid? Yeah. Exactly the same. And please..who set a worse precedent? people protesting in front of homes after rulings or a mob trespassing, trashing, and injuring/killing people at the capitol?

Take a seat, my friend.

I’ll see your J6 and raise you with at least 25 people died during the protests and related unrest in 2020. These deaths occurred under various circumstances, including confrontations during protests, incidents involving vehicles driving into crowds.

Extensive property damage nationwide. In the Minneapolis–Saint Paul area alone, over 1,500 properties were damaged, with estimated costs exceeding $500 million, making it the second-most destructive period of civil unrest in U.S. history after the 1992 Los Angeles riots. Nationally, insurance claims related to the unrest are estimated to be between $1 billion and $2 billion, marking it as the most expensive civil disturbance in U.S. insurance history.

Back at ‘cha

Many of the arsons and shooting incidents during the BLM protests were tied back to right wing accelerationists. Look it up. It's not just some wild claim to say this, there were numerous arrests, trials and convictions, with perpetrators with names, faces and affiliations like Boogaloo Bois.

[Anonymous]

Even if you’re a morally bankrupt person who views everything through an “us vs them” lens, you should be alarmed anytime anyone is trying to tamper with the administration of justice via threats of death and violence. If it can be done *by* your side, it can be done *to* your side. Make signs, go to protests, make phone calls, write letters, donate money, vote — but we all need to draw the line at threatening judges and their families.

President Trump has voiced a lot of criticism of judges who have ruled against him. It would be nice if, in this instance, he would do the grown up, ethical, presidential thing and condemn these threats and ask people not to do this on his behalf because it’s wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Even if you’re a morally bankrupt person who views everything through an “us vs them” lens, you should be alarmed anytime anyone is trying to tamper with the administration of justice via threats of death and violence. If it can be done *by* your side, it can be done *to* your side. Make signs, go to protests, make phone calls, write letters, donate money, vote — but we all need to draw the line at threatening judges and their families.

President Trump has voiced a lot of criticism of judges who have ruled against him. It would be nice if, in this instance, he would do the grown up, ethical, presidential thing and condemn these threats and ask people not to do this on his behalf because it’s wrong.

Libs changed the rules about what is acceptable conduct. There’s no going back. Live with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if you’re a morally bankrupt person who views everything through an “us vs them” lens, you should be alarmed anytime anyone is trying to tamper with the administration of justice via threats of death and violence. If it can be done *by* your side, it can be done *to* your side. Make signs, go to protests, make phone calls, write letters, donate money, vote — but we all need to draw the line at threatening judges and their families.

President Trump has voiced a lot of criticism of judges who have ruled against him. It would be nice if, in this instance, he would do the grown up, ethical, presidential thing and condemn these threats and ask people not to do this on his behalf because it’s wrong.

Libs changed the rules about what is acceptable conduct. There’s no going back. Live with it.

I’m a lib who has never rioted, physically assaulted anyone, failed to comply with police orders, vandalized property, committed theft, threatened anyone, attempted to overturn an election or tried to influence a judge. I believe in the rule of law. I have zero issues with prosecuting people for violent skirmishes, destroying property or using the cover of protests to loot businesses.

These pizza deliveries are wrong and must be stopped.

P.S. You’ve got a lot of chutzpah to act like libs alone changed the rules. Trump told protesters to fight like hell and sent them to the Capital, wouldn’t lift a finger to call them off until several hours into their hand-to-hand combat with police officers, ended up pardoning them, and is now talking about giving them reparations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if you’re a morally bankrupt person who views everything through an “us vs them” lens, you should be alarmed anytime anyone is trying to tamper with the administration of justice via threats of death and violence. If it can be done *by* your side, it can be done *to* your side. Make signs, go to protests, make phone calls, write letters, donate money, vote — but we all need to draw the line at threatening judges and their families.

President Trump has voiced a lot of criticism of judges who have ruled against him. It would be nice if, in this instance, he would do the grown up, ethical, presidential thing and condemn these threats and ask people not to do this on his behalf because it’s wrong.

Libs changed the rules about what is acceptable conduct. There’s no going back. Live with it.

I’m a lib who has never rioted, physically assaulted anyone, failed to comply with police orders, vandalized property, committed theft, threatened anyone, attempted to overturn an election or tried to influence a judge. I believe in the rule of law. I have zero issues with prosecuting people for violent skirmishes, destroying property or using the cover of protests to loot businesses.

These pizza deliveries are wrong and must be stopped.

P.S. You’ve got a lot of chutzpah to act like libs alone changed the rules. Trump told protesters to fight like hell and sent them to the Capital, wouldn’t lift a finger to call them off until several hours into their hand-to-hand combat with police officers, ended up pardoning them, and is now talking about giving them reparations.

And I’m a conservative who never went near the Capitol on January 6th. Never stopped you or any of your fellow travelers from accusing me of being an insurrectionist.

You undeserved indignation is falling on my justifiably deaf ears.

[Anonymous]

Our big bold SC Chief Justice is acknowledging that
The rule of law is endangered
Woop dee do! It's endangered because he and his other conservative fools gave trump total immunity!

https://www.politico.com/news/2025/05/12/chief-justice-roberts-speech-georgetown-00343406

[Anonymous]

This thread makes me wanna order pizzas for done judges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even if you’re a morally bankrupt person who views everything through an “us vs them” lens, you should be alarmed anytime anyone is trying to tamper with the administration of justice via threats of death and violence. If it can be done *by* your side, it can be done *to* your side. Make signs, go to protests, make phone calls, write letters, donate money, vote — but we all need to draw the line at threatening judges and their families.

President Trump has voiced a lot of criticism of judges who have ruled against him. It would be nice if, in this instance, he would do the grown up, ethical, presidential thing and condemn these threats and ask people not to do this on his behalf because it’s wrong.

Libs changed the rules about what is acceptable conduct. There’s no going back. Live with it.

I’m a lib who has never rioted, physically assaulted anyone, failed to comply with police orders, vandalized property, committed theft, threatened anyone, attempted to overturn an election or tried to influence a judge. I believe in the rule of law. I have zero issues with prosecuting people for violent skirmishes, destroying property or using the cover of protests to loot businesses.

These pizza deliveries are wrong and must be stopped.

P.S. You’ve got a lot of chutzpah to act like libs alone changed the rules. Trump told protesters to fight like hell and sent them to the Capital, wouldn’t lift a finger to call them off until several hours into their hand-to-hand combat with police officers, ended up pardoning them, and is now talking about giving them reparations.

And I’m a conservative who never went near the Capitol on January 6th. Never stopped you or any of your fellow travelers from accusing me of being an insurrectionist.

You undeserved indignation is falling on my justifiably deaf ears.

Libs hurt your feelings so death threats against judges and their families are fine?

I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt that you, personally, have never and will never issue death threats. Why is it hard to condemn them?