US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

Status
Not open for further replies.
BidenGIF.gif
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Informative
Reactions: ThisIsGonnaBeGood, The Shredder, ActualCracker and 120 others
Click to expand...
Did anyone watch the Ashleigh Merchant testimony today? Merchant did an amazing job, holy fuck this woman went to town on that ass. The amount of crime, corruption, fraud and grift condensed and squeezed in to such a short time frame is unreal. Fani is looking at disqualification, disbarment, loss of license and anything else that comes with it. She’s put all prior felony convictions she ever achieved in to question. It’s nuts the amount of corruption and dishonesty we’re looking at here. What the fuck was she thinking?
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: 6thRanger, Confused Doggo, World Famous Quasi Payer and 34 others
chainer said:
Did anyone watch the Ashleigh Merchant testimony today? Merchant did an amazing job, holy fuck this woman went to town on that ass. The amount of crime, corruption, fraud and grift condensed and squeezed in to such a short time frame is unreal. Fani is looking at disqualification, disbarment, loss of license and anything else that comes with it. She’s put all prior felony convictions she ever achieved in to question. It’s nuts the amount of corruption and dishonesty we’re looking at here. What the fuck was she thinking?
Click to expand...
I am watching it on Potentially Criminal and this woman is unfathomably based.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: World Famous Quasi Payer, Rainbow Idiot, suzieQQ and 15 others
chainer said:
Did anyone watch the Ashleigh Merchant testimony today? Merchant did an amazing job, holy fuck this woman went to town on that ass. The amount of crime, corruption, fraud and grift condensed and squeezed in to such a short time frame is unreal. Fani is looking at disqualification, disbarment, loss of license and anything else that comes with it. She’s put all prior felony convictions she ever achieved in to question. It’s nuts the amount of corruption and dishonesty we’re looking at here. What the fuck was she thinking?
Click to expand...
did you catch the end when the dem tried to trip her up?
 
  • Like
Reactions: World Famous Quasi Payer, Yamma Damma, DicksOutForKiwigglers and 1 other person
AnotherPleb said:
I still find it to be absolutely hilarious how decades of Alzheimer's medicine was based off a fraudulent study and it's come back to skullfuck Congress without any mercy. Cutting edge medicine doesn't do jack shit if it's based off something worthless.
Click to expand...
Care to expand on this or send me a DM with info? I'm not familiar with what you're referencing, but I'm definitely interested.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Rainbow Idiot, Nate Scully 025, Backpack Knight and 5 others
holyhandgrenade said:
maybe the SCOTUS decision being 9-0 spooked
Click to expand...

Yes, they were anticipating a reversal, but not such a broad decision. As mentioned, they are throwing spaghetti at the wall, and were expecting a narrow reversal that would allow bring it up again in the general election. Or, as was indicated in oral argument, trying to disqualify after Trump wins, in state courts or Congress. They considered this case as just the first salvo in what they anticipated, and having this entire strategy closed off to them so suddenly and unexpectedly is making them REEEEEE!

Gehenna said:
There is none of that in this, in fact the decision reads as Alito's handwriting. Roberts can barely be read in it. yet he supported such a massive., sweeping decision with no additional words. I would have expected him to at least sign on to Barret's.
Click to expand...

I think we know why Roberts would sign off on this decision, and it comes down to his ability to make some basic predictions and his desire to play pretend as a neutral party. As I noted in my post where I summarized the oral arguments and made predictions, correctly I might add, one of the most remarkable elements of the oral arguments is every Justice's fear of dealing with more of these cases. Every one of them had questions on this topic, sometimes coming back to the topic multiple times in different rounds of questioning.

John.Doe said:
If I had to opine, I'd say the Court's biggest concerns were about the state court's authority in the first instance, and secondly the prospect of possibly deciding 40+ more cases like this.

So, adding together what I heard in these arguments and what I know about the Court, I think that they will:
1) Make no FACTUAL determination (whether an insurrection happened, or if Trump was involved)
2) Make no Due Process determinations about the bullshit Colorado pulled (if it was fair or not)
3) Make no determination about Trump's eligibility to be on the ballot OR hold office

What they WILL likely do is:
A) Hold that the states cannot unilaterally make determinations about disqualification under section 3
B) Hold that the power to make said determination is up to a method designed by Congress passing specific legislation
C) Hold that Colorado's decision must therefore be reversed.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, Roberts wants to be as low-impact and is obsessed with the reputation of the court as being neutral, as I noted prior. What I did not anticipate is the boldness of the ruling, which I agree is in Alito's style, but Roberts would cling to it for the same reasons. This ruling forecloses the SC from being involved in any respect in a question of disqualification - as the 'concurrences' mention, they may have been alternative ways to disqualify Trump. Maybe a resolution in Congress, or a certain kind of judicial finding, or perhaps a certain kind of criminal conviction - but this ruling precludes them. Only Congress passing specific legislation - subject to due process, judicial review, etc, can do it. That isn't going to occur before November, so that moots an entire array of legal issues.

Roberts, seeing a cowardly way to avoid a lot of politically charged decisions, pressured the rest of the justices to go along with it. Hence the meta-data showing the concurrences may have started as partial dissents, the snarky tone in them, etc. That doesn't matter, he doesn't want to deal with it, and he'll go to extremes to do as little of his duty as possible, especially if it allows him to polish up his self-righteous bullshit veneer.

John.Doe said:
This ruling would accomplish a number of goals, it would let the Court slip out of this situation without making any kind of political statement one way or another, it would prevent this issue from coming up again from 40+ other states, and it would allow the Court to deflect blame to Congress. Its the easiest way for them to try and maintain their status as aloof, neutral arbiters of law. (A status only Roberts believes in.) So I think its pretty likely.
Click to expand...
You can always depend on the cowardice of the unmanly.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: World Famous Quasi Payer, Fatsuit Shinji, argostug and 15 others
chainer said:
Did anyone watch the Ashleigh Merchant testimony today? Merchant did an amazing job, holy fuck this woman went to town on that ass. The amount of crime, corruption, fraud and grift condensed and squeezed in to such a short time frame is unreal. Fani is looking at disqualification, disbarment, loss of license and anything else that comes with it. She’s put all prior felony convictions she ever achieved in to question. It’s nuts the amount of corruption and dishonesty we’re looking at here. What the fuck was she thinking?
Click to expand...
Fanni wasn't thinking, she is a Nigger, just like the stupid Nigger who went full Al Sharpton and repeated "THERES NO REAL CONFICT!" over and over.
 
  • Feels
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: World Famous Quasi Payer, Rainbow Idiot, Fatsuit Shinji and 9 others
Sweeter and Savoury said:
Deploying the Nasty Gurls is a bit extreme

Hey, we can't even be bothered to police our own streets so lets bring in the Army to keep dem joggers under control

I dunno..maybe if you let the po po do their jobs they might, you know, stop crime? Maybe if your DA's didn't release every person with even the slightest tint to their skin without so much as a slap on the wrist crime might, you know, go down?

Nah, break out the NG to scare dem joggers into no killing people in the subways. That's the smart move?

Oy-vey...it's like all the big city mayors are speed ruining Escape from New York.
Click to expand...
What's funny is that I've heard plenty of times that the NYPD would be the world's 7th largest standing army if it were a military force.

General Emílio Médici said:
>sent with empty guns

This is even funnier than I expected
Click to expand...
The standard is to leave the magazines with the officer in charge of the unit. If there's the faintest sniff of lethal force, the mags get distributed. The NG in the subway may just have mags on hand since they're under police authority instead of an NG officer.
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: World Famous Quasi Payer, Bill Evans 45, Fatsuit Shinji and 2 others
General Emílio Médici said:
View attachment 5790285

Lol. Lmao even.

Seems the Weekend Soldiers in NYC have been given magazines at least, though they are likely empty from what we know. Doesn't this just scream FREEDOM Jon Leibowitz? Having almost one soldier brandishing a rifle for every 6 people on public transport? Having to go through fucking TSA bag inspections and access points?

View attachment 5790304
Click to expand...
This is what awaits you when you sign up for the military nowadays. You're basically just America's babysitter for when their policies shit the bed. How depressing. Add insult to injury, you're not even ALLOWED to use lethal force if necessary.
 
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: World Famous Quasi Payer, Shadfan666xxx000, ClackAlAcka and 6 others
The question isn't the magazines.

The Nasty Girls got egg on their face for no mags during Saint Floyd Sitins.

The real thing is: Is the bolt carrier in the weapon?

Standard is drop them in the ammo can with the LT, or put it in your pocket.

Still, how long till some fucking subway crackhead decides that Nasty Girl might taste good?
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: World Famous Quasi Payer, Rainbow Idiot, Slur.EXE and 8 others
Bog-standard Poster said:
Could they get rid of Biden for being a dementia riddled spastic and then impose age limits to stop it happening again?

"You can't run for president if your age reaches X during your term"?
Click to expand...
“Could they”? Yeah, they COULD, and if a frog had wings he wouldn’t bump his ass a-hoppin’
 
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Rainbow Idiot, Bill Evans 45, XYZpdq Jr. and 2 others
Bog-standard Poster said:
Could they get rid of Biden for being a dementia riddled spastic and then impose age limits to stop it happening again?

"You can't run for president if your age reaches X during your term"?
Click to expand...
that’s one of the funniest parts of a Biden Trump rematch for this year. in a magical make-believe world congress could attempt to get age/mental fitness limits added to the presidential election process…except that would do nothing but help Trump

news outlets claim that Trump is the real dementia patient because they know they can just flat out lie and get away with it
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Agree
Reactions: Vic Viper T301, tehpope, The Nothingness and 1 other person
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Dumb
Reactions: Slur.EXE, suzieQQ, UnKillFill and 10 others
Sweeter and Savoury said:
Donny D has issued a challenge to Big B

“It is important, for the Good of our Country, that Joe Biden and I Debate Issues that are so vital to America, and the American People. Therefore, I am calling for Debates, ANYTIME, ANYWHERE, ANYPLACE!” Trump wrote Wednesday on Truth Social.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politi...lenges-biden-debate-super-tuesday-1234982530/

What are the chances Doctor Jill juices Biden up enuff so he can face the Don?

Zero
Click to expand...
Trump knows Biden's handlers will refuse debates, but he also knows Biden himself will demand to do them
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: John.Doe, Slur.EXE, Bill Evans 45 and 24 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back