Trump Says He’ll Impose Felony Sentence…

[extragreen]

Link to where he said: "I want to terminate our Constitution."

That's the accusation.

Of course, you're just a dumbass bleater and a liar.

You're a really stupid lying trumptard. There is zero difference in the outcome between "I want to terminate our Constitution" and "the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,”

Now go ahead and reaffirm You're a really stupid lying trumptard.

 

[30CAT]

You're a really stupid lying trumptard. There is zero difference in the outcome between "I want to terminate our Constitution" and "the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,”

Now go ahead and reaffirm You're a really stupid lying trumptard.

As I already pointed out to your dumbass, there is definitely a difference, bleating liar.

 

[extragreen]

As I already pointed out to your dumbass, there is definitely a difference, bleating liar.

You're a really stupid lying trumptard. There is zero difference in the outcome between "I want to terminate our Constitution" and "the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,”

Now go ahead and reaffirm You're a really stupid lying trumptard.

Thanks for the reaffirmation. You really stupid lying trumptard.

 

[KyMUfan]

I think that that would rightfully still be illegal as it is harassment if they were doing it to harass you. Just like burning a cross is legal to do, it's just not legal to do when you're doing it to harass someone.

Does this count as harassment and intimidation? Seems like the intent is the same...

People's homes, work and school should all count towards harassment and intimidation...

 

[30CAT]

You're a really stupid lying trumptard. There is zero difference in the outcome between "I want to terminate our Constitution" and "the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,”

You're also leaving out part of what he said, just so it can fit your narrative. Typical, leftist/bleater tactic. If you're going to quote someone, don't mix and match words.

Just as you do with other sources you use, you cherry pick words and leave others out, because they destroy your point.

As I said. You not only can't debate, you don’t want to debate. You're a liar and you misinform.

 

[extragreen]

You're also leaving out part of what he said, just so it can fit your narrative. Typical, leftist/bleater tactic. If you're going to quote someone, don't mix and match words.

Just as you do with other sources you use, you cherry pick words and leave others out, because they destroy your point.

As I said. You not only can't debate, you don’t want to debate. You're a liar and you misinform.

You're a really stupid lying trumptard. There is zero difference in the outcome between "I want to terminate our Constitution" and "the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,”

 

[30CAT]

You're a really stupid lying trumptard. There is zero difference in the outcome between "I want to terminate our Constitution" and "the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,”

Repeating your ignorance, isn't debating.

What's your reasoning behind leaving out part of what he said?

Start with his entire quote and explaining your position.

Pointing a weapon at a police officer allows them to shoot you dead. That doesn't mean the officer wants to kill you.

See? That's a position and a good one too.

Repeating partial quotes and nonsense isn't a leg to stand on.

 

[extragreen]

Repeating your ignorance, isn't debating.

What's your reasoning behind leaving out part of what he said?

Start with his entire quote and explaining your position.

Pointing a weapon at a police officer allows them to shoot you dead. That doesn't mean the officer wants to kill you.

See? That's a position and a good one too.

Repeating partial quotes and nonsense isn't a leg to stand on.

You're a really stupid lying trumptard. There is zero difference in the outcome between "I want to terminate our Constitution" and "the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,”

 

[30CAT]

You're a really stupid lying trumptard. There is zero difference in the outcome between "I want to terminate our Constitution" and "the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,”

This is easy. You expose your own ignorance. I'm done here.

 

[HerdandHokies]

Does this count as harassment and intimidation? Seems like the intent is the same...

People's homes, work and school should all count towards harassment and intimidation...

Considering it’s in a big public space and not aimed at any specific individual I think no, that wouldn’t be harassment.

I think burning the flag is a really stupid protest tactic but it’s legal to be really stupid.

 

[WVUSerg]

On anyone who burns the flag. Eff that nonsense.

I say if they want to buy their own flag and burn it then go right ahead.

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

So what if

Did you really compare burning a cross to burning the flag? Jesus.

Burning a cross carries A LOT of connotation for violence. It ain't even the same ballgame.

 

[HerdandHokies]

Did you really compare burning a cross to burning the flag? Jesus.

Burning a cross carries A LOT of connotation for violence. It ain't even the same ballgame.

I think they’re comparable but it’s important to note the differences. I know I’m about to get a lot of “OF COURSE THE ATHIEST BURNS CROSSES” for the point I’m about to try to make but that’s fine.

The default for any form of speech, including burning any symbol, should be legal. Flag, cross, Quran, menorah, effigy of Kamala Harris, whatever. So a bunch of stupid Klaners building a cross on their land and gathering around it while it burns should be legal. A bunch of people burning a Quran at a protest over (insert the reason your side doesn’t get along with Islam here) should be legal. Burning an American flag at a protest over American foreign policy should be legal. I think all those things are stupid and judge anyone who does them, which is my right, but they should be legal,

It crosses the threshold when it’s used to harass and intimidate individual people. Burning a cross outside a black family’s house to get them to move? Harassment. Burning an American flag outside, I don’t know, a veteran’s house to try and get them to move? Harassment.

To me, and I believe legally, that’s the difference.

 

[i am herdman]

Did you really compare burning a cross to burning the flag? Jesus.

Burning a cross carries A LOT of connotation for violence. It ain't even the same ballgame.

So does ragheads burning a flag.

No I am not for someone burning a cross in someone's yard.

There waa just a recent case where a man and woman burned a cross in their own yard because some of their neighbors were black. They got arrested and charged.

 

[extragreen]

This is easy. You expose your own ignorance. I'm done here.

You're a really stupid lying trumptard. There is zero difference in the outcome between "I want to terminate our Constitution" and "the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution,”

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

So a bunch of stupid Klaners building a cross on their land and gathering around it while it burns should be legal.

As long as their land isn't surrounded by a black neighborhood, I agree. Do that stuff out in the sticks where no one else can see it.

So does ragheads burning a flag.

If they are burning it in Terhan, I'm not feeling threatened.

If they are here burning it at an organized protest against our foreign policy, well good for you I guess, I know who the assholes are.

There waa just a recent case where a man and woman burned a cross in their own yard because some of their neighbors were black. They got arrested and charged.

Their yard isn't important here. They knew who was going to see it and what message they were sending.

 

[HerdandHokies]

I’m surprised they were able to charge the guy who burned the cross on his own property using the FHA, but he was dumb enough to straight up admit that he was doing it to get them to move.

 

[i am herdman]

As long as their land isn't surrounded by a black neighborhood, I agree. Do that stuff out in the sticks where no one else can see it.


If they are burning it in Terhan, I'm not feeling threatened.

If they are here burning it at an organized protest against our foreign policy, well good for you I guess, I know who the assholes are.


Their yard isn't important here. They knew who was going to see it and what message they were sending.

I believe someone has the right to burn a flag. I don't agree with everyone on everything.

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

I believe someone has the right to burn a flag. I don't agree with everyone on everything.

I also believe it is a right to burn the flag.

It's a strong statement. A strong nation isn't harmed by such actions.

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

I’m surprised they were able to charge the guy who burned the cross on his own property using the FHA, but he was dumb enough to straight up admit that he was doing it to get them to move.

When the neighbors are black, it's kinda obvious what you are up to.

 

[HerdandHokies]

When the neighbors are black, it's kinda obvious what you are up to.

Particularly when you fill your days with screaming racial epithets at them, but if they had kept their traps shut they probably could’ve made a pretty interesting first amendment case and claimed it wasn’t an effort to get their neighbors to move, it was just their expression of (insert bullshit here.)

It’s a very interesting first amendment edge case.

 

[Raoul Duke MU]

Particularly when you fill your days with screaming racial epithets at them, but if they had kept their traps shut they probably could’ve made a pretty interesting first amendment case and claimed it wasn’t an effort to get their neighbors to move, it was just their expression of (insert bullshit here.)

It’s a very interesting first amendment edge case.

I don't know many overt racists that can keep their mouths shut.

 

[19MU88]

As I already pointed out to your dumbass, there is definitely a difference, bleating liar.

Were you replying to this "ignored user" or baldy?

 

[30CAT]

I think they’re comparable but it’s important to note the differences. I know I’m about to get a lot of “OF COURSE THE ATHIEST BURNS CROSSES” for the point I’m about to try to make but that’s fine.

The default for any form of speech, including burning any symbol, should be legal. Flag, cross, Quran, menorah, effigy of Kamala Harris, whatever. So a bunch of stupid Klaners building a cross on their land and gathering around it while it burns should be legal. A bunch of people burning a Quran at a protest over (insert the reason your side doesn’t get along with Islam here) should be legal. Burning an American flag at a protest over American foreign policy should be legal. I think all those things are stupid and judge anyone who does them, which is my right, but they should be legal,

It crosses the threshold when it’s used to harass and intimidate individual people. Burning a cross outside a black family’s house to get them to move? Harassment. Burning an American flag outside, I don’t know, a veteran’s house to try and get them to move? Harassment.

To me, and I believe legally, that’s the difference.

Very good point. Nice post!

 

[30CAT]

Were you replying to Rhys "ignored user" or baldy?

extralyingdumbass