Have liberals ever taken a Civil class?

[CFM]

thyen go get a link to them and lets discuss it

you know I will kick your russian ass huh

You can't kick your own ass.

[CFM]

there is no post where you adressed it huh lying foreskin lips.


yu russians are so easy to kick to the curb

I guess its why you cant get your own democracy

Since you kiss Obama's ass, shall we refer to you as nigger lips?

[evince]

racists are the most hated people on the planet shit box

[evince]

LMAO!

why do you support the party that has been caught over and over again cheating American voters?

[CFM]

racists are the most hated people on the planet shit box

Keep kissing it "lips".

[CFM]

why do you support the party that has been caught over and over again cheating American voters?

Why do you keep claiming a party has cheated yet fail to provide proof of it?

[Huey]

why do you support the party that has been caught over and over again cheating American voters?

Typical loinfo response. Attack when beaten on the topic. I don't support a party. I have voted for dems, pubs, independents, green party, etc.

[evince]

you never gave the post number where you faced the facts given you asshole.

you are mouth pooping


You are at maximum lie factor

[evince]

https://www.brennancenter.org/legal-...consent-decree



DNC v. RNC Consent Decree
November 5, 2016






In 1982, after caging in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods, the Republican National Committee and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree with their Democratic party counterparts. Under that decree and its 1987 successor, the Republican party organizations agreed to allow a federal court to review proposed “ballot security” programs, including any proposed voter caging.
The consent decree has been invoked several times, by the parties to the decree and by others. In late 2008, the Democratic National Committee and Obama for America sought to enforce the consent decree, claiming that the RNC had not submitted alleged ballot security operations for review. After the election, the RNC asked the federal court to vacate or substantially modify the decree. The court denied the RNC's motion to vacate the consent decree and ordered the decree remain in effect until December 2017. The RNC then appealed to the Third Circuit, which unanimously rejected the appeal and affirmed the District Court's decision. *A subsequent petition for rehearing en banc by the full Third Circuit, and a certiorari petition to U.S. Supreme Court, were denied.
On October 26, 2016, the DNC filed a motion asking that the court find the RNC had violated the decree.*On November 5, after abbreviated discovery, the district court denied the DNC’s request, ruling that the DNC had not provided sufficient evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and the RNC on ballot-security operations, but will allow the DNC to offer further evidence after the election.




cold hard court documented ass breathers

[CFM]

https://www.brennancenter.org/legal-...consent-decree



DNC v. RNC Consent Decree
November 5, 2016






In 1982, after caging in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods, the Republican National Committee and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree with their Democratic party counterparts. Under that decree and its 1987 successor, the Republican party organizations agreed to allow a federal court to review proposed “ballot security” programs, including any proposed voter caging.
The consent decree has been invoked several times, by the parties to the decree and by others. In late 2008, the Democratic National Committee and Obama for America sought to enforce the consent decree, claiming that the RNC had not submitted alleged ballot security operations for review. After the election, the RNC asked the federal court to vacate or substantially modify the decree. The court denied the RNC's motion to vacate the consent decree and ordered the decree remain in effect until December 2017. The RNC then appealed to the Third Circuit, which unanimously rejected the appeal and affirmed the District Court's decision. *A subsequent petition for rehearing en banc by the full Third Circuit, and a certiorari petition to U.S. Supreme Court, were denied.
On October 26, 2016, the DNC filed a motion asking that the court find the RNC had violated the decree.*On November 5, after abbreviated discovery, the district court denied the DNC’s request, ruling that the DNC had not provided sufficient evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and the RNC on ballot-security operations, but will allow the DNC to offer further evidence after the election.




cold hard court documented ass breathers

Why do blacks have to get help doing things whites can do on their own?

[Huey]

https://www.brennancenter.org/legal-...consent-decree



DNC v. RNC Consent Decree
November 5, 2016






In 1982, after caging in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods, the Republican National Committee and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree with their Democratic party counterparts. Under that decree and its 1987 successor, the Republican party organizations agreed to allow a federal court to review proposed “ballot security” programs, including any proposed voter caging.
The consent decree has been invoked several times, by the parties to the decree and by others. In late 2008, the Democratic National Committee and Obama for America sought to enforce the consent decree, claiming that the RNC had not submitted alleged ballot security operations for review. After the election, the RNC asked the federal court to vacate or substantially modify the decree. The court denied the RNC's motion to vacate the consent decree and ordered the decree remain in effect until December 2017. The RNC then appealed to the Third Circuit, which unanimously rejected the appeal and affirmed the District Court's decision. *A subsequent petition for rehearing en banc by the full Third Circuit, and a certiorari petition to U.S. Supreme Court, were denied.
On October 26, 2016, the DNC filed a motion asking that the court find the RNC had violated the decree.*On November 5, after abbreviated discovery, the district court denied the DNC’s request, ruling that the DNC had not provided sufficient evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and the RNC on ballot-security operations, but will allow the DNC to offer further evidence after the election.




cold hard court documented ass breathers

For the record:

*On November 5, after abbreviated discovery, the district court denied the DNC’s request, ruling that the DNC had not provided sufficient evidence of coordination between the Trump campaign and the RNC on ballot-security operations, but will allow the DNC to offer further evidence after the election.

Do you have the further evidence OR is the request still denied?

[evince]

but will allow the DNC to offer further evidence after the election


why would you think they didnt?

[evince]

In 1982, after caging in predominantly African-American and Latino neighborhoods, the Republican National Committee and New Jersey Republican State Committee entered into a consent decree


want to comment on the first line assmouth


It is proof the republican party cheats minority Americans out of their rights to vote

[Phantasmal]

I don’t need a Civil class, I am usually very civil.

[evince]

I am as uncivil as hell to liars


its a public service