Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Cognitive dissonance. We're supposed to be concerned about the safety of SCOTUS when SCOTUS has members whose wives actively colluded with the violent extremists who attacked the Capitol on 1/6. Who has members who put millions of women at risk. Who has members who increased the likelihood of wild west gun free-for-all violence on American streets.
Clearly YOU are not concerned. In fact, I am betting you would like nothing better than for harm to come to one of them or their families.
I, and millions of other Americans ARE concerned for their safety. They should not be threatened for simply doing their jobs.
Actually, they ruled that other people CAN be threatened for doing their jobs, in the name of free speech. So they certainly should abide these same principles and expect no special treatment.
+1
Not sure why these six christofascists deserve special treatment.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Cognitive dissonance. We're supposed to be concerned about the safety of SCOTUS when SCOTUS has members whose wives actively colluded with the violent extremists who attacked the Capitol on 1/6. Who has members who put millions of women at risk. Who has members who increased the likelihood of wild west gun free-for-all violence on American streets.
Clearly YOU are not concerned. In fact, I am betting you would like nothing better than for harm to come to one of them or their families.
I, and millions of other Americans ARE concerned for their safety. They should not be threatened for simply doing their jobs.
Actually, they ruled that other people CAN be threatened for doing their jobs, in the name of free speech. So they certainly should abide these same principles and expect no special treatment.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Cognitive dissonance. We're supposed to be concerned about the safety of SCOTUS when SCOTUS has members whose wives actively colluded with the violent extremists who attacked the Capitol on 1/6. Who has members who put millions of women at risk. Who has members who increased the likelihood of wild west gun free-for-all violence on American streets.
Clearly YOU are not concerned. In fact, I am betting you would like nothing better than for harm to come to one of them or their families.
I, and millions of other Americans ARE concerned for their safety. They should not be threatened for simply doing their jobs.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Cognitive dissonance. We're supposed to be concerned about the safety of SCOTUS when SCOTUS has members whose wives actively colluded with the violent extremists who attacked the Capitol on 1/6. Who has members who put millions of women at risk. Who has members who increased the likelihood of wild west gun free-for-all violence on American streets.
Clearly YOU are not concerned. In fact, I am betting you would like nothing better than for harm to come to one of them or their families.
I, and millions of other Americans ARE concerned for their safety. They should not be threatened for simply doing their jobs.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And Merrick Garland twiddles his thums.
It's a state's rights issue. I thought y'all were big on that.
Not when there is an F'ing federal law prohibiting it.
You didn't bother to read the responses from Hogan and Youngkin..... it shows.
Anonymous wrote:Cognitive dissonance. We're supposed to be concerned about the safety of SCOTUS when SCOTUS has members whose wives actively colluded with the violent extremists who attacked the Capitol on 1/6. Who has members who put millions of women at risk. Who has members who increased the likelihood of wild west gun free-for-all violence on American streets.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And Merrick Garland twiddles his thums.
It's a state's rights issue. I thought y'all were big on that.
Anonymous wrote:And Merrick Garland twiddles his thums.
Anonymous wrote:Since it got buried 100 plus pages ago, I’ll ask again. So what happens when there is no ruling, will people here feel foolish for the hysterics?