Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty

[Biff Tannen 45,478]

1 hour ago, The Dog said:

(SIAP wanted to be sure the free NYT link was provided)

So what are the odds of this being enforced?  It would have to go to SCOTUS I assume?

1 hour ago, Celery Man said:

some, I assume, are good people

 

A gaggle of Karens. Especially that first one.  Good god.

[C-Man 26,992]

Jack Smith wants Trump convicted by Super Tuesday

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/jack-smith-wants-trump-convicted-by-super-tuesday/ar-AA1f6Avk

Quote

Special Counsel Jack Smith’s office wants to put former President Donald Trump on trial for his attempted coup in January next year—a move that, if approved by a judge, could brand him a felon before the biggest GOP presidential primaries.

In a filing on Thursday, the special counsel’s office proposed a trial date of January 2, 2024, which they say would take “no longer than four to six weeks.”

Should U.S. Magistrate Judge Moxila A. Upadhyaya approve that date, Trump’s trial could be done and dusted before the GOP’s primaries in South Carolina and Michigan, with plenty of time before the delegate-rich slate of Super Tuesday states in March.

Trump already faces two other separate criminal trials in March and May in New York and Florida, respectively. However, those trials have been delayed enough that Trump still managed to snag key elections before risking the embarrassing reality of being convicted of felonies while asking voters to make him the Republican nominee.

Prosecutors working on these different cases all wanted earlier dates, but judges gave into Trump’s demands for more time. While his lawyers cited the sheer amount of overwhelming work required to sort through millions of pages of evidence, the former president has used political rallies and online posts to accuse prosecutors of trying to derail his re-election campaign. In the end, judges gave Trump a little extra time.

U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon, whom Trump himself appointed, was the most rewarding by scheduling the trial long after nearly every important primary election. Part of that delay may have to do with the fact that she is overseeing an expanding criminal case involving his mishandling of classified records at his oceanside estate of Mar-a-Lago, an investigation that also resulted in criminal charges against Trump’s Diet Coke valet and his estate’s property manager.

However, Smith’s decision to indict Trump—and none of his alleged Jan. 6 insurrection co-conspirators—was widely perceived by legal scholars as an attempt to streamline the case by making it faster to prosecute.

On top of the Trump legal team seeking delays, the Trump campaign has also been weary of a potential contested convention, readying for a floor fight next summer should factions within the RNC attempt to boot him from the ticket.

 

[Neonmoon 38,127]

6 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

So what are the odds of this being enforced?  It would have to go to SCOTUS I assume?

It is going to happen. 

State official will not allow Trump on ballot because he is disqualified for providing “aid or comfort" to insurrectionists. 

Trump will argue he has never been convicted of insurrection. (even if he has been convicted of Jan 6 charges by then)

It will go all the way to SCOTUS

They will have to answer the legal questions of what constitutes "aid or comfort". Does it require a conviction in a court of law? Does it require a specific conviction of insurrection? 

 

[atomheartbevo 89,362]

4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

So, it's really important to get out and vote.

**He's damaging the fuck out of the GQP right now, so the composition of the Senate in 2025 is unpredictable as is the possibility of enough GQP Senators growing a pair to convict in an impeachment.

I don’t know how much he’s damaging the GQP right now, since many Republicans are not willing to buck him, and way too many embrace the chaos he’s creating and embrace their inner assholes.

But he’s damaging the brand for the future, which could be why Republicans in places like Texas are trying to make it hard for younger and urban people to vote.

I was a kid in the 80s, and I have somewhat rose-tinted glasses about Reagan,  but at the time, I thought he was amazing and somebody to look up to ( in know the outcomes of many of his policies). I was recently talking to a neighbor who was older, in grad school when Reagan took office, and his views as a 20-something back then, as well as those of his family and friends who were around the same age (or younger) were that Reagan had epic things planned and a real love for America, and many of them voted for him or became Republicans because of him, because he inspired them, and just felt like this macho guy straight out of central casting (for Bedtime for Bonzo).  

His grandkids and great nieces and nephews are all teens or in their early 20s, and he mentioned how for the past two years, all they’ve seen of Trump is him being angry and whining about how he’s being wronged, and just looking so incredibly pathetic and weak and crooked. Nothing inspiring at all. For a teen, he comes across as some asshole elderly person screaming at the clouds.  The elderly neighbor who threatens to call the cops if they cut across his lawn.  Biden comes across as the goofy grandpa.  

And there’s nobody in the pipeline to inspire the younger groups to want to vote Republican.  

[C-Man 26,992]

1 minute ago, Neonmoon said:

It is going to happen. 

State official will not allow Trump on ballot because he is disqualified for providing “aid or comfort" to insurrectionists. 

Trump will argue he has never been convicted of insurrection. (even if he has been convicted of Jan 6 charges by then)

It will go all the way to SCOTUS

They will have to answer the legal questions of what constitutes "aid or comfort". Does it require a conviction in a court of law? Does it require a specific conviction of insurrection? 

 

I'm sure the FedSoc folks have the purest of intentions here. What they're doing is for the betterment of the country, right? It can't be that they've looked at all the numbers and have determined that Trump on the ballot means certain defeat in 2024, right? It can't be that Trump is potentially going to destroy the GQP before he's all finished, right? Nah, can't be that. (The delicious irony here is that the Turtle could've simply eradicated Trump from US politics back in Jan 2021 by convincing his fellow GOP senators to vote to impeach his ass. And, for some reason, he didn't do it. Maybe he had week-long TIA or something and couldn't pull the trigger.)

[Bullneck 18,976]

Change the headline from "Hip Hop at 50" to "US Politics" and "Competent Black Women Judges and Elected Officials" and I'm good.

Black women are saving the U.S. right now.

 

Quote

HUFFPOST PRESENTS: HIP-HOP AT 50

THE HEALING POWER OF COCKY BLACK WOMEN

 

[Chopper 17,126]

Interesting. Also it should probably have a warning that reading it may cause qnuts' heads to explode.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/10/trumps-truth-social-tipped-fbi-to-man-killed-during-arrest-attempt-for-biden-threats.html

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

49 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Sounds like good stuff from Chutkan in the hearing regarding a protective order in the J6 case. 

 

She did, however, force the gubmint to actually designate things Sensitive that are subject to the protective order, which is what Trump wanted.

Oh noes, she's in the bag!

[C-Man 26,992]

Just now, Chopper said:

Interesting. Also it should probably have a warning that reading it may cause qnuts' heads to explode.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/08/10/trumps-truth-social-tipped-fbi-to-man-killed-during-arrest-attempt-for-biden-threats.html

Countdown until the orange dipshit preens about Truth Social being instrumental in thwarting an assassination attempt on Biden or Bragg or Jack Smith, etc, even though "we all know they deserve to die for their politically-motivated crimes against your favorite president!"

[The Dog 43,771]

6 minutes ago, C-Man said:

I'm sure the FedSoc folks have the purest of intentions here. What they're doing is for the betterment of the country, right? It can't be that they've looked at all the numbers and have determined that Trump on the ballot means certain defeat in 2024, right? It can't be that Trump is potentially going to destroy the GQP before he's all finished, right?

yeah I was thinking the same thing - this story coming out isn't a coincidence IMHO.

 

[Celery Man 20,874]

11 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

 

They will have to answer the legal questions of what constitutes "aid or comfort". Does it require a conviction in a court of law? Does it require a specific conviction of insurrection? 

 

Exhibit A, from the insurrectionists bedrooms

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

11 minutes ago, C-Man said:

I'm sure the FedSoc folks have the purest of intentions here. What they're doing is for the betterment of the country, right? It can't be that they've looked at all the numbers and have determined that Trump on the ballot means certain defeat in 2024, right? It can't be that Trump is potentially going to destroy the GQP before he's all finished, right? Nah, can't be that. (The delicious irony here is that the Turtle could've simply eradicated Trump from US politics back in Jan 2021 by convincing his fellow GOP senators to vote to impeach his ass. And, for some reason, he didn't do it. Maybe he had week-long TIA or something and couldn't pull the trigger.)

That's not the Federalist Society, per se, it is two members of the Fed Soc.

It's not a monolith.  There's probably more than a few members that are merely conservative and not fucking crazy, demagogues, or ideologues, that have just let their dues renew.  Kinda like my voter registration still says Republican on it.

Certainly, those that concern themselves with Supreme Court appointments tend into the fucking crazy demagogue ideologue bracket, but that isn't the whole of the Fed Soc.  And, even the fucking crazies don't have to like Trump:  they would have gotten their judges from just about any GQP Potus.

Edited August 11, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[jimmyjazz 45,513]

If Trump can't (fairly) win the 2024 election, none of the other mouth-breathers the Republicans have to offer up will win it, either.  Trump is their best shot.  (Fair election.  I crack myself up.)

[hpslugga 4,039]

47 minutes ago, The Dog said:

(SIAP wanted to be sure the free NYT link was provided)

I mean sure but you have to understand that most of the dialogue concerning his eligibility is limited to things that range from “unavoidable” to “realistic.”

That’s why you never see anyone mention the fact that, for example, the GQP is a private party that is well within their right to preemptively disqualify him from running as a Republican. That’s not gonna happen, but it theoretically could.

[C-Man 26,992]

11 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

That's not the Federalist Society, per se, it is two members of the Fed Soc.

It's not a monolith.  There's probably more than a few members that are merely conservative and not fucking crazy, demagogues, or ideologues, that have just let their dues renew.  Kinda like my voter registration still says Republican on it.

Certainly, those that concern themselves with Supreme Court appointments tend into the fucking crazy demagogue ideologue bracket, but that isn't the whole of the Fed Soc.  And, even the fucking crazies don't have to like Trump:  they would have gotten their judges from just about any GQP Potus.

I'm aware it's not the entire group. And it probably is a couple of "non-crazy" members because the crazy ones think Trump was sent by God hisself to save the good 'ol US-of-A!

[C-Man 26,992]

10 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

If Trump can't (fairly) win the 2024 election, none of the other mouth-breathers the Republicans have to offer up will win it, either.  Trump is their best shot.  (Fair election.  I crack myself up.)

Certainly none who have declared as of yet. But there are probably more moderate Republicans (LOL) who could potentially eke out an Electoral College win if some things happen between now and Nov 2024. Remember at this point in Trump's term he looked damn near unbeatable until COVID hit.

[Rimbo 25,752]

3 hours ago, BamaATL said:

Not so fast.  Actually, the constitution in Georgia is difficult to change, even with a super majority, which they don't have.  Combine that with vulnerable Republicans not being willing to put themselves further on the line, that's not realistic.  I don't know how this all ends, but I do know the notion of the Georgia Constitution being changed is very unlikely.  

Georgia has been purple for a while, and it's only getting more blue.

[Fudge Nuggets 19,118]

2 hours ago, Js1 said:

Making shit up is so fun and easy! 

 

2 hours ago, dcbc said:

It's like a psychotic mad-lib.

You're both adorable and don't seem to get nuance at all.  Here, I'll be more specific... the Repubs will bribe a few Dems to get their way.  See Munchkin, Dangerous Creature, the South Carolina state democratic leader that signed off on their terrible re-districting map, and the North Carolina state rep that switched parties a few weeks ago.

Edited August 11, 2023 by Fudge Nuggets

[Rimbo 25,752]

1 hour ago, The Dog said:

^LOL

"He has shown a tenancy to desire to hold onto material he knows he should not have."

I wonder where Chutkan got THAT idea.

[Rimbo 25,752]

1 hour ago, Pig Bellmont said:

i think I'm literally in love with this woman

definite future ex wife material here

Edited August 11, 2023 by Rimbo

[Chooky 13,292]

1 minute ago, Rimbo said:

i think I'm literally in love with this woman

definite future ex wife material here

[BamaATL 16,592]

9 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

 

You're both adorable and don't seem to get nuance at all.  Here, I'll be more specific... the Repubs will bribe a few Dems to get their way.  See Munchkin, Dangerous Creature, the South Carolina state democratic leader that signed off on their terrible re-districting map, and the North Carolina state rep that switched parties a few weeks ago.

It is realistic to maybe get one or two people to flip in this corrupt way, but what you are describing in Georgia would require 30 or 40 people to flip.  That isn't realistic.  

[Gatorubet 30,064]

7 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

 

You're both adorable and don't seem to get nuance at all.  Here, I'll be more specific... the Repubs will bribe a few Dems to get their way.  See Munchkin, Dangerous Creature, the South Carolina state democratic leader that signed off on their terrible re-districting map, and the North Carolina state rep that switched parties a few weeks ago.

So - like - when a single Democrat is really a supermajority?

 

[Js1 85,056]

14 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

 

You're both adorable and don't seem to get nuance at all.  Here, I'll be more specific... the Repubs will bribe a few Dems to get their way.  See Munchkin, Dangerous Creature, the South Carolina state democratic leader that signed off on their terrible re-districting map, and the North Carolina state rep that switched parties a few weeks ago.

I’m going to trust the guy who lives in Georgia that just told you it won’t happen 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,118]

8 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

It is realistic to maybe get one or two people to flip in this corrupt way, but what you are describing in Georgia would require 30 or 40 people to flip.  That isn't realistic.  

 

3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I’m going to trust the guy who lives in Georgia that just told you it won’t happen 

That's good to know.  I guess they will just go the easy route and change the law like they did when they made it possible for the Gov to remove any "uppity" prosecutors they don't like.

[C-Man 26,992]

LOL, Trump now adds ‘my opinion’ and ‘what I think’ to stolen-election claims: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-now-adds-my-opinion-and-what-i-think-to-stolen-election-claims/ar-AA1f6oE0

Quote

Donald Trump and his most loyal allies have spent the better part of three years falsely claiming that not only was the 2020 election stolen, but that this was proved.

After his federal indictment over attempts to overturn the election, however — and with another indictment potentially headed his way in Georgia — the former president has seemingly undergone a subtle shift in his messaging.

He has begun to say that this is his opinion.

During a Newsmax interview Wednesday night, Trump added such a qualifier no fewer than six times in the space of 30 seconds.

“I’m telling them that, in my opinion, the election was rigged,” Trump said of the Jan. 2, 2021, call in which he urged Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) to “find” just enough votes to overturn Trump’s deficit.

“I believe I won that election by many, many votes, many, many hundreds of thousands of votes,” Trump said. “That’s what I think.”

“That’s my opinion, and it’s a strong opinion,” he added. “And I think it’s borne out by the facts, and we’ll see that.”

To recap: “In my opinion.” “I believe.” “That’s what I think.” “That’s my opinion.” “It’s a strong opinion.” “I think.”

Trump’s rhetoric is, in one way, a reflection of his legal strategy. Special counsel Jack Smith devoted much of his 45-page indictment to the idea that Trump knew better about his wild claims of voter fraud in Georgia and elsewhere. In each of six key states, Smith pointed to Trump’s being told that a specific claim was false and then continuing to lodge it anyway, including in all six cases on Jan. 6 itself.

Smith’s argument will seemingly be that this helps prove that the entire effort was corrupt. Trump’s lawyers have signaled that they’ll argue, in turn, that Trump actually somehow believed these things. Trump allies have assisted in pushing that line.

But Trump’s legal team has also signaled that it intends to use the proceedings to re-litigate these claims. (Whether it actually does so is another matter; Trump’s claims were in many cases so laughable that few Republicans would echo them.) And Trump is hardly a shrinking violet when it comes to stating false things as unassailable fact.

It’s rare for Trump to couch his views of the 2020 election in this manner. He did so at one point on the then-private Jan. 2 call, but it was narrowly about the idea that ballots were being destroyed. “They are shredding ballots, in my opinion, based on what I’ve heard,” he said on that call.

And even as Trump was saying this, he was floating actual criminal charges for Georgia officials such as Raffensperger if they didn’t go along with what he wanted.

“It is more illegal for you than it is for [the supposed perpetrators] because, you know, what they did and you’re not reporting it,” Trump said. “That’s a criminal, that’s a criminal offense. And you can’t let that happen. That’s a big risk to you and to Ryan [Germany], your lawyer.”

While we should hardly expect Trump to back off his stolen-election claims, it’s a notable development in a long-running evolution for the GOP on these matters.

Trump’s lawyers have repeatedly disowned their own specific stolen-election claims in the face of legal pressure. Trump’s 2024 GOP opponents are increasingly saying, contrary to his claims, that he in fact lost the 2020 election. And while as many as 7 in 10 Republicans continue to tell pollsters that President Biden’s win was illegitimate, the share who say there is “solid evidence” of that has declined. About half of election deniers now say they’re going on “suspicion only.”

And Trump wasn’t the only one adding such caveats on Wednesday night. At the end of the interview, Newsmax, the Trump-loyal network which has been sued over its coverage of such claims and has repeatedly offered awkward disclaimers, added another one to the pile.

“All right folks, now just a note,” host Eric Bolling said immediately after the interview aired. “Newsmax has accepted the election results as legal and final.”

In other words: Even if they’re just Trump’s beliefs, we’re not endorsing them.

 

[LCHorn 2,583]

46 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

If Trump can't (fairly) win the 2024 election, none of the other mouth-breathers the Republicans have to offer up will win it, either.  Trump is their best shot.  (Fair election.  I crack myself up.)

I’ve seen this repeated so not just picking on you, but an actuary would likely say that Biden is on borrowed time.  I don’t think an unspecified Democrat or Harris a shoo-in.  

[jimmyjazz 45,513]

2 minutes ago, LCHorn said:

I’ve seen this repeated so not just picking on you, but an actuary would likely say that Biden is on borrowed time.  I don’t think an unspecified Democrat or Harris a shoo-in.  

My post was simply an assertion that Trump is (and will be) their best option.  I'm not saying that Harris or some other Dem will beat all comers.

[hpslugga 4,039]

10 minutes ago, C-Man said:

LOL, Trump now adds ‘my opinion’ and ‘what I think’ to stolen-election claims: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-now-adds-my-opinion-and-what-i-think-to-stolen-election-claims/ar-AA1f6oE0

 

I mean…it’s just as dishonest as when he was flatly asserting his baseless nonsense as if it were a matter of fact

[Rimbo 25,752]

49 minutes ago, Chooky said:

between me and her? SHUT UP I'VE GOT A SHOT

[BamaATL 16,592]

10 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

 

That's good to know.  I guess they will just go the easy route and change the law like they did when they made it possible for the Gov to remove any "uppity" prosecutors they don't like.

Senate bill 92 allows for the removal of a prosecutor based on very specific circumstances, most of all willful breaking of the law.  Despite the hoopla, and the magical thoughts that it would allow the Governor to simply remove a prosecutor, that isn't reality.  Basically, it's lip service to Trump, who is an idiot, to say, "hey, look we are helping you.", when the real powers that be know damn well that it won't apply to Willis in Trump's problems.  Politics is smoke and mirrors, there are things they can realistically do, and then there are bullshit sound bites they can drop to appease other parties, like voters, or in this case, a former President with the mentality of a 7 year old not getting his way.  Additionally, while passing new legislation can be done in Georgia with simple majorities, changing the actual Constitution requires a super majority, which rarely happens.  When it does, it's generally because something is so archaic that it's almost uniformly agree to be changed by both parties.  Ordinarily under this scenario there is something like one hold out for some odd reason or someone simply couldn't make the vote.  Lastly, because of the way our system works, most legislation generally is passed until the last few days of the yearly session.  It's actually exceedingly rare for non bipartisanship legislation not to happen this way; once pass then it heads to the Governor's desk where he has veto power or signature authority.  This is know as Sine Die, and the legislative year 2023 ended on March 29th (session occurs between Jan 9 until then), which means session doesn't open again until next year. 

So it in fact possible that the Republican Party in Georgia could manage to pass a law rigging things in Trump's favor?  The long answer is yes it is, but with a few important caveats.  First is, even if passed, it still has to be signed into law by the Governor, who does have the right to veto (unlikely in this case).  2nd if passed, it won't happen until March 29th of next year, without the ability to take effect at least until then (even then typically it rolls into effect the following calendar year, which would be Jan of 25).  3rd, like all legislation, even if passed, and signed into law, it can be challenged in court, and injunctions can happen pending the legal decisions; which brings us back to Senate Bill 92, the reason that there haven't been any real legal challenges to it is that more or less the legislation is correct in having the ability to remove prosecutors that have acted in either a criminal manner or are in fact incapacitated.  The magical thought that somehow this will allow Kemp to remove Willis over her prosecution of Trump and others (which should be great fun next week), is simply magical thinking from the loony tune right.    

[Js1 85,056]

31 minutes ago, C-Man said:

LOL, Trump now adds ‘my opinion’ and ‘what I think’ to stolen-election claims: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-now-adds-my-opinion-and-what-i-think-to-stolen-election-claims/ar-AA1f6oE0

 

This is how he’s now going to make the free speech BS claim 

[Mdhorn 5,908]

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

I don’t know how much he’s damaging the GQP right now, since many Republicans are not willing to buck him, and way too many embrace the chaos he’s creating and embrace their inner assholes.

But he’s damaging the brand for the future, which could be why Republicans in places like Texas are trying to make it hard for younger and urban people to vote.

I was a kid in the 80s, and I have somewhat rose-tinted glasses about Reagan,  but at the time, I thought he was amazing and somebody to look up to ( in know the outcomes of many of his policies). I was recently talking to a neighbor who was older, in grad school when Reagan took office, and his views as a 20-something back then, as well as those of his family and friends who were around the same age (or younger) were that Reagan had epic things planned and a real love for America, and many of them voted for him or became Republicans because of him, because he inspired them, and just felt like this macho guy straight out of central casting (for Bedtime for Bonzo).  

His grandkids and great nieces and nephews are all teens or in their early 20s, and he mentioned how for the past two years, all they’ve seen of Trump is him being angry and whining about how he’s being wronged, and just looking so incredibly pathetic and weak and crooked. Nothing inspiring at all. For a teen, he comes across as some asshole elderly person screaming at the clouds.  The elderly neighbor who threatens to call the cops if they cut across his lawn.  Biden comes across as the goofy grandpa.  

And there’s nobody in the pipeline to inspire the younger groups to want to vote Republican.  

Trump would rather talk about his accusers than policy, which doesn't help him much, if at all. But then again, since he's allowed to make shit up, he should be campaigning on Biden's policies.  

[Celery Man 20,874]

many of the best opinions are thinking this

[C-Man 26,992]

46 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

My post was simply an assertion that Trump is (and will be) their best option.  I'm not saying that Harris or some other Dem will beat all comers.

All I'm saying is I agree he's their best option today. No telling what can happen between now and next summer/fall.

[RDCanecutter 26,239]

1 hour ago, Celery Man said:

Exhibit A, from the insurrectionists bedrooms

Nice, but there's no way a Trumpin's sister picks that garish design for her bedroom.

[Red Five 40,593]

1 hour ago, C-Man said:

LOL, Trump now adds ‘my opinion’ and ‘what I think’ to stolen-election claims: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-now-adds-my-opinion-and-what-i-think-to-stolen-election-claims/ar-AA1f6oE0

 

Then plead insanity. If I rob a bank I'm not arguing in court that it's my opinion that all the money is mine. 

[Gatorubet 30,064]

1 hour ago, C-Man said:

LOL, Trump now adds ‘my opinion’ and ‘what I think’ to stolen-election claims: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-now-adds-my-opinion-and-what-i-think-to-stolen-election-claims/ar-AA1f6oE0

 

Well, I ordered something from your company from Amazon and it arrived in a FedEx package. I do admit that I used your company’s FedEx shipping number as the number to charge all of MY business’s FedEx shipping for several months, which, I guess, did run into a six figures. 

But the point here is that, in my opinion, what I strongly thought, was that in that original Amazon purchase contract you promised that I was getting “free shipping”.  So you were giving me free shipping, right?      I thought you were providing me the right to have all the free shipping I wanted. I truly believe that. There may have been the majority of people who worked for me in my shipping department… and the head of my shipping department…and the Fedex office….who said I was wrong. But you said “free shipping.”. Bigly.    I have done nothing wrong.

[TwiceHorn 31,184]

2 hours ago, C-Man said:

I'm aware it's not the entire group. And it probably is a couple of "non-crazy" members because the crazy ones think Trump was sent by God hisself to save the good 'ol US-of-A!

Actually, it is probably worth noting that there probably are not a bunch of Trumptards in the FedSoc.

A lot of them are pretty insidious intellectuals like Integralist Catholics and Dominionists.  Those people are scary and at least individually and in small groups far more dangerous to the country than a gaggle of Q/Trumptards. 

Trump is truly a useful idiot to much of the FedSoc, and they are dangerous with or without Trump.

Edited August 11, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[dcbc 14,388]

2 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

 

You're both adorable and don't seem to get nuance at all.  Here, I'll be more specific... the Repubs will bribe a few Dems to get their way.  See Munchkin, Dangerous Creature, the South Carolina state democratic leader that signed off on their terrible re-districting map, and the North Carolina state rep that switched parties a few weeks ago.

I appear to have misunderstood the upthread connectivity of the post to which responded.  My "mad-lib" quip was not intended to refer to your your post or your ability to predict shady, future political activities.  I was referring generally to the Trumpesque affinity for proliferating bullshit.  Also, I have no ability to predict the future and, thus, have to response to the substance of your previous post or your clarification thereof.  Be well.

 

Also, I am adorable.

 

And I do so get nuance.  

Edited August 11, 2023 by dcbc

[DDD Dad 14,167]

2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

That's not the Federalist Society, per se, it is two members of the Fed Soc.

Yeah that would be like me writing that article (pretty sure they gave me a free life membership way back when).

[Rimbo 25,752]

3 hours ago, BamaATL said:

The magical thought that somehow this will allow Kemp to remove Willis over her prosecution of Trump and others (which should be great fun next week), is simply magical thinking from the loony tune right.    

AND, by leading their supporters into thinking it actually WILL do something, its failure to do so will provide further justification and support for the coup in progress.

[Brisketexan 104,465]

6 hours ago, Celery Man said:

some, I assume, are good people

 

What I love most about this story is that every single one of those chucklefucks looks EXACTLY like you'd expect them to.

And, to a person, the Venn diagram of those chucklefucks and "people that no waiter EVER wants sat in their section" is a single circle.  For example, bottom row, second from left, is well known in Michigan restaurant circles for her tendency to ostentatiously say grace before the meal, then as she opens her eyes from prayer, she looks at her glass of water with a lemon wedge, and then yells at the waiter "I SAID LEMON SLICE, NOT LEMON WEDGE, YOU IDIOT!", supporting the plan she'd had all along to leave under $1 as her tip.

[Celery Man 20,874]

Guy in the bottom middle went to the retirement home early and is neck deep in pussy.

[Francisco 2.0 32,290]

When you get your hairstyling ideas from Captain Kangaroo:

 

 

 

Also, this:

 

 

 

 

[Brisketexan 104,465]

3 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

Guy in the bottom middle went to the retirement home early and is neck deep in pussy.

Guy on the top right manages to work in, at EVERY single family gathering, his opinion that "I've got nothing against the coloreds, I just wish they'd stick to their own kind," making his niece Becky and her husband Jamaal uncomfortable EVERY.  FUCKING.  TIME.  But does anyone else in the family tell him to cut it out?  No, they just mumble that "arguing with him only makes it worse, just hide the Seagrams so maybe he'll sober up and behave better."

[Francisco 2.0 32,290]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Guy on the top right manages to work in, at EVERY single family gathering, his opinion that "I've got nothing against the coloreds, I just wish they'd stick to their own kind," making his niece Becky and her husband Jamaal uncomfortable EVERY.  FUCKING.  TIME.  But does anyone else in the family tell him to cut it out?  No, they just mumble that "arguing with him only makes it worse, just hide the Seagrams so maybe he'll sober up and behave better."

 

Guy on the top right also has his wife color his hair.  

Unless, of course, that's a wig from Morrie's Wig Shop.

 

 

 

Edited August 11, 2023 by Francisco 2.0

[Biff Tannen 45,478]

1 hour ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

When you get your hairstyling ideas from Captain Kangaroo:

 

 

 

Also, this:

 

 

 

 

It's the same argument they all make about how they are so persecuted! by the left.  They are horrible people who behave horribly and then get mad when they are called out for it.

 

[RDCanecutter 26,239]

They all look like characters from one of those sketches where they're playing dim-witted American tourists.

Look at their photos while you listen to this:

 

Edited August 11, 2023 by RDCanecutter

[Rimbo 25,752]

5 minutes ago, RDCanecutter said:

They all look like characters from one of those sketches where they're playing dim-witted American tourists.

they're basically the SBC delegation from East Bumblefuck

wait

no

I've got it

it's really EVERY HOA BOARD EVER