>>4721208 (LB)
What the fuck are you talking about? I thought the post was awesome. "Stop paying taxes" is the ultimate response to some nitwit saying "we don't have to pay taxes." Try it, it'll be fun they said, what could go wrong they said.
Until that level of tyranny is removed from our lives, we'll never be free.
Chill anon.
Must not work much. Or don't have any reporting requirement.
The fuck? "Rod" is RR. So… RR wanted Trump to fire… RR? Really?
Sigh, RR was McCabe's enemy. RR had to get rid of McCabe before the investigation into the swamp could move forward because McCabe was swamp. ALL of the "evidence" that RR is a "black hat" originates with McCabe. If you haven't figured this out by now you can't be helped.
Most of us are fluent in Snopes speak, however, so STFU.
It seems the RGB defenders are out in force tonight. Must be something big about to happen with her.
He was running a sting, anon. Think.
Sigh, you do realize that the full statement was both conditions, i.e.RR dirty ←>RM dirty, which NECESSARILY implies if one is clean, the other is as well.
Seriously, study logic. It will benefit your life in more ways than you can imagine. Also learn how disinformation works and why it works. I'll give you a starter hint: you're susceptible for reasons I'll leave up to you to figure out.
Paine is worse. I think Bongino knows, sort of, but isn't allowed to say it out loud. Paine, OTH, is just a fucking idiot.
Remember, Bongino has inside information on Bill.
The word "believe" is the first indication that you aren't using logic to come to your conclusions. You don't have any evidence, and you just said so. You believe. You don't know, you just believe.
If they are dirty, all of the cases they touch get tossed. Instantly. It's that simple. Even if that means they exonerate Trump, which they've essentially already done. But you're too fucking stupid to think through this simple matter of logic and fact. You should be ashamed of being this dumb.
The SC needs people that understand the Constitution, period. If you don't understand why that matters, your opinion doesn't matter.
To idiots, I'm sure it appears that way. Cya.
Indeed, so they can escape that way? Gotcha…
The SC is required to uphold the Constitution, nothing more. That is the ONLY thing that matters. People like you are the reason we have the shit-show we have now.
No idea, frankly. Just thought it was a good response to the concernfag's shillery! :)
The fuck? Read the Constitution. The SC has no other role than to uphold it. There is no concern about what the people want, or Christianity, or another moronfag concern; uphold the Constitution. One job. Not sure what you're getting at, but you're being pretty stupid about it.
Well, the hard-core Christians think she'll deliver RvW overturn, and the shills think she'll deliver Trump doom if he appoints her.
Pretty sure that means he's going to do something completely different because that's what he always does. I have an idea, but I'll wait it out because too many are incapable of figuring out why…
Harry Reid. Pancreatic cancer, I think, back in November. He's fucked.
Hers was metastatic colon cancer, so not the same. Also, hers was caught VERY early. Reid is stage 4 from what I understand (could be wrong), which is when most is caught.
That's the deal with pancreatic: there's no symptoms until it's too late. The only way you survive is if they catch it accidentally. They did with Buzzi because she was already being screened for her colon cancer relapses (my guess, at least).
To be a fly on the wall in those discussions, though neither is on my list. They're lawyers, not judges, IMO.
Willing to be wrong, I like 'em both, and they are really good at the law. My pick is good at the law, too. We'll see.
True dat. He nees someone around 50 or so… someone around the same time frame as Kav.
That's what I just said. The first was colon, the second was in the pancreas, but is typically defined as a metastatic variety of the first. Not always, from what I understand. A medfag in here earlier was saying it's ALWAYS considered whatever your first cancer is, but I'm not sure that's necessarily true.
I do know a colleague of mine had colon cancer, and after fixing that, they found more in his lungs, but they said that was colon cancer, too. Don't know for sure.
I don't disagree with anything you wrote.
And yes, I think RvW should be overturned too, but not because of any position I have on the morality of it. I just don't think the SC had a standing to write law as they did. You're correct, some states will still allow it. It's just not the SC's job to tell them how to run their states.
Everything I said is true. What exactly is your point?
Which is fucking weird.
In my colleague's case, he was lucky as fuck. The stuff in his colon was huge (removed 8-10"). When it got to his lung, it was huge. But it was slow growing colon cancer, so they were able to treat it easily.
OTH, another friend was diagnosed with liver cancer in March, they treated it but it came back around turkey week and he died on Christmas day.
It's an insidious disease.