Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that one side is salivating at the thought that they could have a candidate be king while the other side is heartbroken because of what it means for democracy and this country is all you really need to know about who you should vote for this election.... I'm talking up and down the ticket not just the president.

Oh give it a rest. We’ve been rightly saying that the media and DNC has been lying about a lot of things over the past several years from Covid to Russia and now Biden’s state of mind. And we have been right. You say you fear for our democracy; well having a political party keeping such important information about Biden from voters is not democracy, it’s oligarchy.

Maybe start listening to the other side of the aisle and aim for some common ground instead of the dark demonization.

Nope. Never dance with the devil and his spawns.

Enjoy the loss.

You're so tunnel vision that you don't realize that nobody wins, at least not people who have to work for a living and have nowhere else to go. Maybe this doesn't apply to you and you can be so myopic.

The economy was significantly better under Trump. I enjoyed going to the grocery store in a pre inflation era.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that one side is salivating at the thought that they could have a candidate be king while the other side is heartbroken because of what it means for democracy and this country is all you really need to know about who you should vote for this election.... I'm talking up and down the ticket not just the president.

Oh give it a rest. We’ve been rightly saying that the media and DNC has been lying about a lot of things over the past several years from Covid to Russia and now Biden’s state of mind. And we have been right. You say you fear for our democracy; well having a political party keeping such important information about Biden from voters is not democracy, it’s oligarchy.

Maybe start listening to the other side of the aisle and aim for some common ground instead of the dark demonization.

Nope. Never dance with the devil and his spawns.

Enjoy the loss.

You're so tunnel vision that you don't realize that nobody wins, at least not people who have to work for a living and have nowhere else to go. Maybe this doesn't apply to you and you can be so myopic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd be fascinated to see how this court would rule under a radical progressive president who attempts to assassinate his opponents and openly take bribes. I am also tired of justices pretending they're historians and have any good thumb on the history of this country-follow plain text if you want to be originalists but don't conjure up convenient analyses of history

Neither of these actions is covered by this ruling. Those are not "official" duties. Those are crimes, regardless of who is doing them.

If a crime has no enforcement possibility then is it really a crime?

Crime absolutely has enforcement possibility.
Tell me exactly how assassinating Justices on SCOTUS is an official act.

The President can order the military to assassinate anyone - he is the Commander-in-Chief so any order he gives is an official act - and no one is allowed to look at the President's motive and the evidence of the official act is inadmissible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd be fascinated to see how this court would rule under a radical progressive president who attempts to assassinate his opponents and openly take bribes. I am also tired of justices pretending they're historians and have any good thumb on the history of this country-follow plain text if you want to be originalists but don't conjure up convenient analyses of history

Neither of these actions is covered by this ruling. Those are not "official" duties. Those are crimes, regardless of who is doing them.

If a crime has no enforcement possibility then is it really a crime?

Crime absolutely has enforcement possibility.
Tell me exactly how assassinating Justices on SCOTUS is an official act.

The President can order the military to assassinate anyone - he is the Commander-in-Chief so any order he gives is an official act - and no one is allowed to look at the President's motive and the evidence of the official act is inadmissible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Biden is speaking on this decision tonight. Wonder how many lies he will tell about what this ruling covers?

I don't think it was forceful enough. He should have said I can do this, this and that, but I will not. At least not right now.

No respect.
This court is a banana republic court. Their decisions are based on the highest payer.

The court ruled properly in this case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that one side is salivating at the thought that they could have a candidate be king while the other side is heartbroken because of what it means for democracy and this country is all you really need to know about who you should vote for this election.... I'm talking up and down the ticket not just the president.

Oh give it a rest. We’ve been rightly saying that the media and DNC has been lying about a lot of things over the past several years from Covid to Russia and now Biden’s state of mind. And we have been right. You say you fear for our democracy; well having a political party keeping such important information about Biden from voters is not democracy, it’s oligarchy.

Maybe start listening to the other side of the aisle and aim for some common ground instead of the dark demonization.

We have no common ground. None. There’s nothing to talk about when we don’t even agree on what’s real or true or right.

I don’t believe in a unitary executive, and I don’t believe in “originalism,” and I don’t believe even “originalists”actually believe in originalism except as far as it bolsters their personal beliefs, and I sure as sh** don’t believe that the founders believed in a unitary executive, aka, King.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Biden is speaking on this decision tonight. Wonder how many lies he will tell about what this ruling covers?

I don't think it was forceful enough. He should have said I can do this, this and that, but I will not. At least not right now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that one side is salivating at the thought that they could have a candidate be king while the other side is heartbroken because of what it means for democracy and this country is all you really need to know about who you should vote for this election.... I'm talking up and down the ticket not just the president.

Oh give it a rest. We’ve been rightly saying that the media and DNC has been lying about a lot of things over the past several years from Covid to Russia and now Biden’s state of mind. And we have been right. You say you fear for our democracy; well having a political party keeping such important information about Biden from voters is not democracy, it’s oligarchy.

Maybe start listening to the other side of the aisle and aim for some common ground instead of the dark demonization.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd be fascinated to see how this court would rule under a radical progressive president who attempts to assassinate his opponents and openly take bribes. I am also tired of justices pretending they're historians and have any good thumb on the history of this country-follow plain text if you want to be originalists but don't conjure up convenient analyses of history

Neither of these actions is covered by this ruling. Those are not "official" duties. Those are crimes, regardless of who is doing them.

If a crime has no enforcement possibility then is it really a crime?

Crime absolutely has enforcement possibility.
Tell me exactly how assassinating Justices on SCOTUS is an official act.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that one side is salivating at the thought that they could have a candidate be king while the other side is heartbroken because of what it means for democracy and this country is all you really need to know about who you should vote for this election.... I'm talking up and down the ticket not just the president.

Oh give it a rest. We’ve been rightly saying that the media and DNC has been lying about a lot of things over the past several years from Covid to Russia and now Biden’s state of mind. And we have been right. You say you fear for our democracy; well having a political party keeping such important information about Biden from voters is not democracy, it’s oligarchy.

Maybe start listening to the other side of the aisle and aim for some common ground instead of the dark demonization.

Nope. Never dance with the devil and his spawns.

Enjoy the loss.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Biden is speaking on this decision tonight. Wonder how many lies he will tell about what this ruling covers?

I don't think it was forceful enough. He should have said I can do this, this and that, but I will not. At least not right now.

No respect.
This court is a banana republic court. Their decisions are based on the highest payer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Biden is speaking on this decision tonight. Wonder how many lies he will tell about what this ruling covers?

I don't think it was forceful enough. He should have said I can do this, this and that, but I will not. At least not right now.

Anonymous wrote:Ok, can Joe do whatever he wants to Don?

Anonymous wrote:The fact that one side is salivating at the thought that they could have a candidate be king while the other side is heartbroken because of what it means for democracy and this country is all you really need to know about who you should vote for this election.... I'm talking up and down the ticket not just the president.