They are going after Coney Barrett now

16,697 Views | 173 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by fka ftc
javajaws
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:18p, 6/9/22
AG
Serious question: can a SCOTUS judge sue the DOJ for failure to enforce the law (for protesters protesting at their house, etc)?
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Ben Franklin
Reply Quote
6
El Chupacabra
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:19p, 6/9/22
They know nothing will happen. Untouchables.

The person who puts a bullet through a SCJ's head will mysteriously disappear in the system.

And imagine that...we already have a radical lefty judge confirmed to take the open seat.
Reply Quote
1
BaileyAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:20p, 6/9/22
AG
This is really terrifying.
And what a clear example of the treatment conservatives vs liberals receive in this country
Reply Quote
9
Bobaloo
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:22p, 6/9/22
Enforce the law and it stops. Somehow the fake insurrection of January 6 is a bigger deal than a killer hanging outside the home of a SCJ to murder him.
Reply Quote
16
Cromagnum
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:23p, 6/9/22
AG
January 6 was an attempted coup, but all of this is business as usual. Guess it's just (D)ifferent.
Reply Quote
6
1 edit
sonnysixkiller
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:25p, 6/9/22
AG
History is going to repeat itself once again as the common man is going to have stop these mfers.
Reply Quote
9
Carolin_Gallego
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to javajaws • 2:26p, 6/9/22
javajaws said:
Serious question: can a SCOTUS judge sue the DOJ for failure to enforce the law (for protesters protesting at their house, etc)?
They are protesting in their neighborhoods and not staying stationary in front of the judge's houses. That is legal.
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
Reply Quote
3
Jbob04
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:27p, 6/9/22
AG
Of course you are defending them
Reply Quote
27
Frederick Palowaski
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:28p, 6/9/22
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:
javajaws said:
Serious question: can a SCOTUS judge sue the DOJ for failure to enforce the law (for protesters protesting at their house, etc)?
They are protesting in their neighborhoods and not staying stationary in front of the judge's houses. That is legal.


The party you vote for have been encouraging violence against Supreme Court members. Doesn't surprise me you are okay with this.

You should star your own reply again. It's only makes it that much more laughable.
Reply Quote
24
1 edit
Tony Franklins Other Shoe
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:31p, 6/9/22
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:
javajaws said:
Serious question: can a SCOTUS judge sue the DOJ for failure to enforce the law (for protesters protesting at their house, etc)?
They are protesting in their neighborhoods and not staying stationary in front of the judge's houses. That is legal.
Got some video of that?

Person Not Capable of Pregnancy
Reply Quote
3
Carolin_Gallego
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Frederick Palowaski • 2:31p, 6/9/22
Frederick Palowaski said:
Carolin_Gallego said:
javajaws said:
Serious question: can a SCOTUS judge sue the DOJ for failure to enforce the law (for protesters protesting at their house, etc)?
They are protesting in their neighborhoods and not staying stationary in front of the judge's houses. That is legal.


The party you vote for have been encouraging violence against Supreme Court members. Doesn't surprise me you are okay with this.

You should star your own reply again. It's only makes it that much more laughable.

It's laughable that your willed blindness is so strong.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-condemns-actions-armed-man-arrested-near-kavanaughs-home-supports-increased-security-justices
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
Reply Quote
3
zoneag
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:32p, 6/9/22
Carolin_Gallego said:
javajaws said:
Serious question: can a SCOTUS judge sue the DOJ for failure to enforce the law (for protesters protesting at their house, etc)?
They are protesting in their neighborhoods and not staying stationary in front of the judge's houses. That is legal.


Yeah we know democrats supported the attempted assassination and are hoping for a successful attempt to protect their vile bloodlust for baby murder. Sick. No surprise you're goaltending for it.
Reply Quote
20
American Hardwood
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to oldarmyjess66 • 2:32p, 6/9/22
AG
oldarmyjess66 said:
What has her going to church got to do with it?
Last time I heard, we still had freedom of religion.
They were informing their operatives where and when they could find the justice to do whatever they would like to do to her.
Reply Quote
4
FriscoKid
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:33p, 6/9/22
AG
Quote:
It's laughable that your willed blindness is so strong.
Reply Quote
7
Marcus Brutus
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:33p, 6/9/22
Carolin_Gallego said:
Frederick Palowaski said:
Carolin_Gallego said:
javajaws said:
Serious question: can a SCOTUS judge sue the DOJ for failure to enforce the law (for protesters protesting at their house, etc)?
They are protesting in their neighborhoods and not staying stationary in front of the judge's houses. That is legal.


The party you vote for have been encouraging violence against Supreme Court members. Doesn't surprise me you are okay with this.

You should star your own reply again. It's only makes it that much more laughable.

It's laughable that your willed blindness is so strong.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-condemns-actions-armed-man-arrested-near-kavanaughs-home-supports-increased-security-justices


Now do Schumer.
Reply Quote
11
nortex97
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FIDO95 • 2:34p, 6/9/22
AG
Elon doesn't own twitter...yet.

But he will. At that point, meta/facebook/instagram will gain more power on the left, but it will be ignored more by the middle/right.
Reply Quote
1
FriscoKid
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:34p, 6/9/22
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:
javajaws said:
Serious question: can a SCOTUS judge sue the DOJ for failure to enforce the law (for protesters protesting at their house, etc)?
They are protesting in their neighborhoods and not staying stationary in front of the judge's houses. That is legal.
Did you get this from some liberal think tank site? Just because they say that, doesn't make it true. They aren't just protesting in random neighborhoods. They are protesting in front of judges with the intent to intimidate and influence the outcome of a decision. That is against federal law.
Reply Quote
22
1 edit
Jason C.
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rockdoc • 2:35p, 6/9/22
AG
Rockdoc said:
Where are the Republican politicians in all this? They're not making enough noise and it ticks me off. Get out there and do something even if illegal like the dems.


Most are probably sad that their one "carrot" issue to dangle in front of donors and voters is going away. They'll be revealed to be even more of the Uniparty that we know they are.
Reply Quote
5
Frederick Palowaski
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:35p, 6/9/22
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:
Frederick Palowaski said:
Carolin_Gallego said:
javajaws said:
Serious question: can a SCOTUS judge sue the DOJ for failure to enforce the law (for protesters protesting at their house, etc)?
They are protesting in their neighborhoods and not staying stationary in front of the judge's houses. That is legal.


The party you vote for have been encouraging violence against Supreme Court members. Doesn't surprise me you are okay with this.

You should star your own reply again. It's only makes it that much more laughable.

It's laughable that your willed blindness is so strong.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-condemns-actions-armed-man-arrested-near-kavanaughs-home-supports-increased-security-justices


Just two examples for you since you apparently are being willfully ignorant, even though we know the real reason.





Reply Quote
5
annie88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Tom Kazansky 2012 • 2:37p, 6/9/22
AG
Tom Kazansky 2012 said:
disgusting animals
These are the SAME *******s still trying to sell the Jan. BS.

And we all know that if a Democrat had been threatened, they'd be blaming every Republican and Trump still. They simply don't care.

These evil people can go to hell.

Our media is just as complicit.
Currently a happy listless vessel and deplorable. #FDEMS TRUMP 2024.
Fight Fight Fight.
Reply Quote
8
ChemEAg08
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:38p, 6/9/22
AG
It's kinda funny. This is proving that when things get hot in this cold civil war, you can guaran-damn-tee it won't be the right that first the first shot.


It'll be the psychotic left.
Reply Quote
5
Carolin_Gallego
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Frederick Palowaski • 2:38p, 6/9/22
Sorry. IMHO that is not a threat of violence. The argument against Schumer is partisan pearl clutching. Nothing more.
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
Reply Quote
4
Frederick Palowaski
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:38p, 6/9/22
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:
Sorry. IMHO that is not a threat of violence. The argument against Schumer is partisan pearl clutching. Nothing more.


Of course not. Nobody ever accused you of being logical or smart.
Reply Quote
26
annie88
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:39p, 6/9/22
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:
javajaws said:
Serious question: can a SCOTUS judge sue the DOJ for failure to enforce the law (for protesters protesting at their house, etc)?
They are protesting in their neighborhoods and not staying stationary in front of the judge's houses. That is legal.
Disgusting.
Currently a happy listless vessel and deplorable. #FDEMS TRUMP 2024.
Fight Fight Fight.
Reply Quote
20
1 edit
El Chupacabra
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Wabs • 2:39p, 6/9/22
Wabs said:
Why are they so sexist? Targeting women like this.....
Conservative white women aren't really women. HTH
Reply Quote
3
Proc92
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:39p, 6/9/22
Carolin_Gallego said:
Sorry. IMHO that is not a threat of violence. The argument against Schumer is partisan pearl clutching. Nothing more.
But trump ordered the coup?
Reply Quote
12
ChemEAg08
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:40p, 6/9/22
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:
Sorry. IMHO that is not a threat of violence. The argument against Schumer is partisan pearl clutching. Nothing more.


A large group of people let into the capital by the capital police. peacefully walking through the capitol, with no weapons and peacefully left.

That is also not a threat of violence.




Also you know that it was all for political gain/show when pelosi rejected more capitol police from being there.

You are being fooled by your leftist betters or are in on the coup as well.
Reply Quote
7
zoneag
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:40p, 6/9/22
Carolin_Gallego said:
Sorry. IMHO that is not a threat of violence. The argument against Schumer is partisan pearl clutching. Nothing more.


Dishonest troll who endlessly promotes 1/6 propaganda yet supports calls for violence against Supreme Court justices.
Reply Quote
28
Sims
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ABATTBQ11 • 2:43p, 6/9/22
AG
ABATTBQ11 said:
They'll keep doing this, and liberal arguments will fall on deafer and deafer ears.

I actually think it will provoke retaliation. They'll be able to use the retaliation to further their authoritarian agenda.
Reply Quote
5
javajaws
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:45p, 6/9/22
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:
Frederick Palowaski said:
Carolin_Gallego said:
javajaws said:
Serious question: can a SCOTUS judge sue the DOJ for failure to enforce the law (for protesters protesting at their house, etc)?
They are protesting in their neighborhoods and not staying stationary in front of the judge's houses. That is legal.


The party you vote for have been encouraging violence against Supreme Court members. Doesn't surprise me you are okay with this.

You should star your own reply again. It's only makes it that much more laughable.

It's laughable that your willed blindness is so strong.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-condemns-actions-armed-man-arrested-near-kavanaughs-home-supports-increased-security-justices
Are you stupid or purposefully obtuse?

Maybe you should take your own advice and correct your own willed blindness.


And since you'll just post some stupid retort asking for proof...here's just one to prove you wrong with a 5 second google search:

https://dailycaller.com/2021/09/13/abortion-protest-kavanaugh-home-maryland-activists/



Quote:
Led by activists from ShutDownDC, protesters gathered at a Maryland park before marching about half a mile down the street to the Kavanaugh family home
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Ben Franklin
Reply Quote
7
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:46p, 6/9/22
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:
javajaws said:
Serious question: can a SCOTUS judge sue the DOJ for failure to enforce the law (for protesters protesting at their house, etc)?
They are protesting in their neighborhoods and not staying stationary in front of the judge's houses. That is legal.


Is this the poster whose wife writes fictional fantasy smut about other men? Adds a little context to his posting habits if so.
Reply Quote
9
FriscoKid
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to javajaws • 2:46p, 6/9/22
AG
they are all wearing masks!
Reply Quote
3
Carolin_Gallego
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ChemEAg08 • 2:48p, 6/9/22
ChemEAg08 said:
Carolin_Gallego said:
Sorry. IMHO that is not a threat of violence. The argument against Schumer is partisan pearl clutching. Nothing more.


A large group of people let into the capital by the capital police. peacefully walking through the capitol, with no weapons and peacefully left.

That is also not a threat of violence.




You have a false narrative in direct contradiction with photographic and video evidence.
We believe progress is made through MORE discussion, not LESS, and we believe that to be true even if the topics are uncomfortable and we occasionally disagree with one another. - TexAgs
The name-calling technique making false associations is a child's game. The propagandist who uses this technique hopes that the audience will reject a person and their argument on this false basis.
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
ChemEAg08
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:53p, 6/9/22
AG
Carolin_Gallego said:
ChemEAg08 said:
Carolin_Gallego said:
Sorry. IMHO that is not a threat of violence. The argument against Schumer is partisan pearl clutching. Nothing more.


A large group of people let into the capital by the capital police. peacefully walking through the capitol, with no weapons and peacefully left.

That is also not a threat of violence.




You have a false narrative in direct contradiction with photographic and video evidence.


Overdramatized by your leftist media. And infiltrated with the same BLM anarchists to try to make Trump supporters look bad.

Ok now do BLM "protests". Significantly more people died in those riots than the Capitol protest (which was 1 protest who was shot by police).

Capitol protesters should get the same amount of punishment as BLM protesters got, which is none.

You are being a useful idiot for the left and openly want to destroy this country. You are the enemy.
Reply Quote
22
1 edit
Marcus Brutus
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Carolin_Gallego • 2:54p, 6/9/22
Lol, 4 whole pics including on of a fence being pushed over. That's real dangerous and violent man. Where are all the guns, knives and weapons?

The only person killed was a Trump supporter.
Reply Quote
15
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.