nobody will every suck your micro dick troll boy
now go procreate amongst yourself. nobody else will!
Rachel Maddow called out for 'dangerous' rhetoric toward Supreme Court: 'Fueling the
- Thread starter ExpressLane
- Start date
nobody will every suck your micro dick troll boy
now go procreate amongst yourself. nobody else will!
ExpressLane
Verified User
How long did the federally funded kangaroo court "hearing" the dems put on go on?
I recall an article highlighting how few voters are aware that Biden had to drop out of prior elections when caught being a serial liar and plagiarizer. no candidate has ever benefitted more from softball coverage
Rachel Maddow called out for 'dangerous' rhetoric toward Supreme Court: 'Fueling the rage'
MSNBC host Rachel Maddow challenged the legitimacy of the Supreme Court Wednesday following its decision to take up former President Trump's immunity case. On "America's Newsroom" Thursday, Fox News contributor and constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley hit back at Maddow and other liberal voices for "fueling the rage" toward the justices.
JONATHAN TURLEY: This is why you have such anger. This is why people go to the homes of justices. This is what they hear in this echo chamber, that the court is a bunch of robotic, partisan hacks. You've had law school deans refer to them as hacks and what people hear about that, but they don't hear the truth that the Supreme Court has ruled against Donald Trump, against conservative causes regularly, including the conservatives on the court. You had one person yesterday say that, well, this just shows the court is part of the insurrection and the insurrection is ongoing. That type of rhetoric is what's fueling the rage in this country. The court accepted this for review. There are issues here. It's a long-standing debate. I think that Trump is at a disadvantage on the merits, but some of the justices may have serious questions of where to draw this line, that is to tell future presidents when they are not protected. So this rhetoric is dangerous and it's wrong.
The Supreme Court agreed Wednesday to review whether former President Donald Trump has immunity from prosecution in the Special Counsel's federal election interference case, an election-year dispute that will have blockbuster legal and political implications for the nation.
The justices have fast-tracked the appeal, and will hear oral arguments in late April, with a ruling on the merits expected by late June. Trump's criminal trial has been put on hold pending resolution of the matter.
Arguments will begin the week of April 22.
MSNBC host Rachel Maddow shared her strong feelings after learning about the news on "All in with Chris Hayes" Wednesday.
"This is B.S. You are doing this as a dilatory tactic to help your political friend, your partisan patron. And for you to say that this is something that the court needs to decide because it's something that's unclear in the law is just flagrant, flagrant bullpucky. And they know it and they don't care that we know it. And that's disturbing about the future legitimacy of the court," Maddow said.
=========================
I water my garden with liberal tears.
What Madow is doing is potentially dangerous to SC justices. In our system of government we must accept them as the final arbiters of the law. Sometimes they go your way and sometimes they don't. Get over it. I doubt Trump will get total immunity but ALL Presidents need some form of immunity to do their job. The SC needs to clarify how much immunity ALL Presidents have. Obama killed two American citizens without even a trial by drone attack should he be prosecuted? for murder?
Could the hypocrisy be any more visible?
First off, Turley, for real, pay Turley enough and he will say anything, love his testimony at the impeachment inquiry hearings when responding to Democrats questions he said there existed no evidence but that they should keep looking, beautiful
And coming from Fox, Fox, the only news source to lose a three quarter billion dollar lawsuit for lying, promoting the Big Lie which in itself was the cause of hate and division in America
figured a retard such as yourself would miss the symbolism of a mirror in your face
I thought I told you to suck my dick. On your knees, you nazi bitch!
I liked Mancow best when she trolled her audience with Trump's tax returns and found out he paid $34 million on a $150 million income.
https://time.com/4701747/donald-trump-rachel-maddow-taxes/
https://time.com/4701747/donald-trump-rachel-maddow-taxes/
ExpressLane
Verified User
JFC you are a retard
you act like a brown shirt ordering me on my knees. I think you are confused on who are the nazis retardo
in the 40's you would of clearly been on the side of the government against free people. might as well order me into a camp nazi scum
ExpressLane
Verified User
I liked Madcow best when Trump beat Hillary and she cried on TV.
Scott
Verified User
Anyone can accuse anyone of anything. Now, I certainly haven't been following all of this that closely. I'm not American, I'm Canadian Mexican, so I tend to focus more on international wars like the ones in Ukraine and Gaza, rather than how Trump's chances of becoming the next U.S. President are doing. But I've noticed that on pretty much any issue that a lot of people tend to make a lot of claims, yet provide little if any evidence to support their claims. So while you accuse the Supreme Court justices of engaging in a "maga stall tactic", I suspect that they might have already had enough on their plates when the case first came to them and thought it'd be good to see if the lower court could work it out before finally deciding that no, they'd have to take it on themselves. Like you, I haven't provided any evidence, but note that I haven't claimed that I know the truth here, as you are doing. If you have the evidence to support your claims, by all means present it. Otherwise, well, opinions are easy to come by, but not very persuasive on their own.
You said a lot of stuff except addressing the issue of this thread. Does Rachel Maddow have the right to state her opinion about SCOTUS or not?
The whiney trumtard bitches who support all the maga propaganda that has resulted in injury or death, have no problem when their fucknuts do it. But when Democrats give opinions? OH NOOOOO!!! It's terrrribull!
Maga shitheads are the whineyist, most hypocritical bitches I've ever seen.
<shrug> Bitch, you're not listening. I have things to do and this dick isn't gonna suck itself. I mean, you're already toothless so it's half your effort's already done, you nazi fuck. On your knees and get to work! I'm gettin' tired of asking! Make yourself useful for once in your sorry trumptard, life!
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
First of all, learn English.
Second of all: Your trash talk is embarrassing to anyone younger than someone in 7th grade.
It's okay to admit you're mentally challenged. Embrace your issues!
ExpressLane
Verified User
Triggered much?
I have a rule on the internet . Meet insults with similar insults. You are HUGE troll and that is why you were permabanned on the site where we met. If you want to debate I'll be happy to give you an insult free debate but if you want to troll like usual In the words of Val Kilmer "I'll be your huckleberry."You never answered if Biden's smegma gags you.
He addressed it. You must not be able to read.
Speaking of 7th. grade mentally challenged trash talk...
Lurch passed up the opportunity to visit Yellowstone because she was afraid of not having a wifi connection. This is the world we live in.
That happens when you're just a 7th. grade servant like LurchAddams...
The East coast has a lot to see with all their war heroes but beside Mount Rushmore our northern border has more cattle than people. They are desperate to meet an outsider like you and me. Lurch missed out on the opportunity to talk with real people because she was in a hurry to log onto JPP.