YDB95
Hopeless Romantic!
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2011
- Posts
- 14,120
What would you call trying to stop the official election of the president-elect and hang the vice president?It's beyond question it wasn't an insurrection, and you know it.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What would you call trying to stop the official election of the president-elect and hang the vice president?It's beyond question it wasn't an insurrection, and you know it.
Did you read the special prosecutors final report shit for brains?What would you call trying to stop the official election of the president-elect and hang the vice president?
Jimmy Dore used to be a voice for the oppressed. Then he saw were the $$ was for his personal gain. Now he’s the one sellout shitty trumpers point to to say their shitty points make sense to many, manyI've never even heard of Jimmy Dore. But that's beside the point. You and I both know what January 6 really was, and no amount of obfuscating on your part will change that - except for people like you who desperately want to believe otherwise.
Link it.Did you read the special prosecutors final report shit for brains?
Imagine my surprise!Jimmy Dore used to be a voice for the oppressed. Then he saw were the $$ was for his personal gain. Now he’s the one sellout shitty trumpers point to to say their shitty points make sense to many, manypeople on the left.
Jimmy Dore:Jimmy Dore used to be a voice for the oppressed. Then he saw were the $$ was for his personal gain. Now he’s the one sellout shitty trumpers point to to say their shitty points make sense to many, manypeople on the left.
I sincerely doubt you have.Did you read the special prosecutors final report shit for brains?
The fictional narrative you were told by the media and you believe without question or independent thought.What would you call trying to stop the official election of the president-elect and hang the vice president?
We all saw it happen on TV. What we all saw was an insurrection.The fictional narrative you were told by the media and you believe without question or independent thought.
Oh, there's no denying things happened on January 6th. Just not the things you believe happened.The problem is, it wasn't fictional. It happened as a matter of fact- whether you like it or not.
What happened was an insurrection. We all saw it.Oh, there's no denying things happened on January 6th. Just not the things you believe happened.
Seeing the exact opposite of what's right before your eyes is not "independent thought", it's delusion.The fictional narrative you were told by the media and you believe without question or independent thought.
You repeatedly telling others what they actually see, know and think is not a valid or rational argument.Seeing the exact opposite of what's right before your eyes is not "independent thought", it's delusion.
Consider it a backhanded compliment, then. I didn't think you were stupid enough to really believe January 6 was just a guided tour. A mistake I will not repeat.You repeatedly telling others what they actually see, know and think is not a valid or rational argument.
What happened was an insurrection. We all saw it.You repeatedly telling others what they actually see, know and think is not a valid or rational argument.
That's right but despite Biden's statements to the contrary that accepting a pardon is not an admission of guilt, according to Burdick v United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915) it is.Any person pardoned can refuse the pardon as well
Nice try, but that commentary is not legally binding. According to a decision involving a pardon from Trump.That's right but despite Biden's statements to the contrary that accepting a pardon is not an admission of guilt, according to Burdick v United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915) it is.
"This brings us to the differences between legislative immunity and a pardon. They are substantial. The latter carries an imputation of guilt; acceptance a confession of it. The former has no such imputation or confession. It is tantamount to the silence of the witness. It is noncommittal. It is the unobtrusive act of the law given protection against a sinister use of his testimony, not like a pardon, requiring him to confess his guilt in order to avoid a conviction of it."
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/236/79/
He isn't my President and I certainly don't care to tell him to stop anything.That's right but despite Biden's statements to the contrary that accepting a pardon is not an admission of guilt, according to Burdick v United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915) it is.
"This brings us to the differences between legislative immunity and a pardon. They are substantial. The latter carries an imputation of guilt; acceptance a confession of it. The former has no such imputation or confession. It is tantamount to the silence of the witness. It is noncommittal. It is the unobtrusive act of the law given protection against a sinister use of his testimony, not like a pardon, requiring him to confess his guilt in order to avoid a conviction of it."
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/236/79/
So tell your crazed President and his media to stop bullshitting us about the ramifications of accepting his Pardons.
It is far, far less disgraceful than Trump pardoning Roger Stone, Joe Arpaio, or the 1/6 insurrectionists.Biden explained his reasoning for the disgraceful pardons in the following statement:.