Things that made you laugh today (Political Version)

[Methais]

https://i.imgur.com/svKgbSJ.png

[Methais]

Gov. Rauner drinks chocolate milk to demonstrate his commitment to diversity (https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chicagoinc/ct-met-rauner-chocolate-milk-0223-chicago-inc-20180222-story.html?fbclid=IwAR32QuclFKW4ZwZ0YfU_OwBtpEfLaB EkHAtDa5SvbCGcuYUg1lO-kKkWlyU)

https://media1.tenor.com/images/843166c9d3dc66da2ad9ecf63a4e80cb/tenor.gif?itemid=12221156

[Wrathbringer]

It was actually confirmed that Trump has an encrypted Government issued iPhone. Pk proving yet again he is little more than a drone.

GSA has had iPhones in their inventory since 2012. Perhaps research before you post dumb shit, huh pk?

Never going to happen. He's a retarded partisan hack who regurgitates anything that fits time4fun's narrative in the hopes of getting to crash on her couch and maybe sleep with her as long as she doesn't masturbate too loudly after they're finished.

[Methais]

Never going to happen. He's a retarded partisan hack who regurgitates anything that fits time4fun's narrative in the hopes of getting to crash on her couch and maybe sleep with her as long as she doesn't masturbate too loudly after they're finished.

Fun fact: pk has never denied crashing on time4fun's couch

Or getting railed by her massive collection of giant dildos. Even the cactus ones.

[Methais]

https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/403/189/66f.523578

[Parkbandit]

https://i.imgur.com/svKgbSJ.png

http://www.smosh.com/wp-content/uploads/ftpuploads/bloguploads/laughing-gifs-foolish-human.gif

[Methais]

https://scontent.fbtr1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/44771222_2250689101815659_1482265923350953984_n.pn g?_nc_cat=1&_nc_eui2=AeH1vTwZWsQ9RMvCZ7AOypEG0pZsgMgmRpvQSNrIL BS6eGOQXJSwPZmD9209eqh0MTj3oifqyrQSQ8kxpxBJDS6rYma 3x3W6zg6COri3jPjzsA&_nc_ht=scontent.fbtr1-1.fna&oh=2d142cfce848cfc41e4d4a814000830c&oe=5C50E385

[drauz]

https://i.imgur.com/eJB75vv.jpg

[Methais]

https://scontent.fbtr1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/44825725_2251608611723708_8951069581280018432_n.jp g?_nc_cat=104&_nc_eui2=AeEgoFEEZmn-j_9tsdcdgCLXquQu8Xf8bjybZfsmYgPaPN3WRvTCHS7ZPILGDP 0EFIi0gb1JZmK9zukdnGYi4wFnJumrKublz4ltQZ7n8StuBA&_nc_ht=scontent.fbtr1-1.fna&oh=81785b072145130b886b2131f3dbc2a0&oe=5C4DF589

[drauz]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNvEWxbLSEA

[Taernath]

https://i.imgur.com/omKudCo.jpg

[Androidpk]

Trump thinks he can do away with the 14th amendment via an executive order.

[Wrathbringer]

Trump thinks he can do away with the 14th amendment via an executive order.

You think you're not retarded.

[Methais]

https://scontent.fbtr1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/44988326_10156478961172535_2225845223236304896_n.j pg?_nc_cat=101&_nc_eui2=AeGKRWMj2J6u-3daCRY_Mm5J0Rv_F5XL5MmpsQy9ErXjlSAIE_I6YMuLpRD5orD 17MLteUG5e65Djkbgd5HIvH2XSxcrQ7QTpcfZ8_BlNcCu8Q&_nc_ht=scontent.fbtr1-1.fna&oh=e905065b081615aeccf37f13e2f5be41&oe=5C4C7781

[Methais]

Here's Hillary saying black people all look alike and her leftist crowd of racists being ok with it. :lol:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTxUDqH2YCE

[Parkbandit]

Trump thinks he can do away with the 14th amendment via an executive order.

What do you believe the 14th Amendment is all about?

As usual, Trump is like 10 steps ahead of your party.

[BigWorm]

What do you believe the 14th Amendment is all about?

As usual, Trump is like 10 steps ahead of your party.

Is this the part where you focus in on "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to pretend like children born in America to people without the correct papers shouldn't be citizens? You are clearly not familiar with the copious legal precedent surrounding this. Making it pretty clear you have zero respect for the Constitution though.

[Tgo01]

Is this the part where you focus in on "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to pretend like children born in America to people without the correct papers shouldn't be citizens?

"People without the correct papers." You mean illegal aliens?

"Officer I have you know I wasn't speeding, I simply lack the correct papers to obey the speed limit.

[Parkbandit]

Is this the part where you focus in on "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to pretend like children born in America to people without the correct papers shouldn't be citizens? You are clearly not familiar with the copious legal precedent surrounding this. Making it pretty clear you have zero respect for the Constitution though.

I can't possibly expect you to have an adult conversation regarding the history of this country because:

1) You've shown zero ability to have an adult conversation in past.
2) You've shown zero ability to have an intelligent conversation in the past.
3) You've shown zero ability to understand history or the Constitution in the past.

Otherwise, you would be the perfect person to have a conversation with. Really.

PS - I LOVE the sudden "ZOMG WE NEED TO RESPECT THE CONSTITUTION!" that is suddenly the liberal left's mantra.. after decades of shitting on it. It's like the DNC put that into the computer and the bots are suddenly spitting it out.. not realizing what fucking hypocritical douchebags they look like.

[BigWorm]

"People without the correct papers." You mean illegal aliens?

"Officer I have you know I wasn't speeding, I simply lack the correct papers to obey the speed limit.

I worded it specifically like that because it could be any arbitrary document. What about a child born to someone here on a tourist visa? What if the government starts requiring citizenspawn permission slips even from white american birthright citizens like yourself?

[BigWorm]

I can't possibly expect you to have an adult conversation regarding the history of this country because:

1) You've shown zero ability to have an adult conversation in past.
2) You've shown zero ability to have an intelligent conversation in the past.
3) You've shown zero ability to understand history or the Constitution in the past.

Otherwise, you would be the perfect person to have a conversation with. Really.

PS - I LOVE the sudden "ZOMG WE NEED TO RESPECT THE CONSTITUTION!" that is suddenly the liberal left's mantra.. after decades of shitting on it. It's like the DNC put that into the computer and the bots are suddenly spitting it out.. not realizing what fucking hypocritical douchebags they look like.

Mocking people for respecting the constitution to own the libs.

[Tgo01]

What about a child born to someone here on a tourist visa?

Yes, which is exactly what some people do so their children can become legal citizens. I'm not sure what point you are making here?


What if the government starts requiring citizenspawn permission slips even from white american birthright citizens like yourself?

"What if the government turns tyrannical and starts slaughtering all of its citizens?"

Again what point are you trying to make here?

[~Rocktar~]

Convention of States. Problem solved.

He can, with executive order, likely end chain migration and most of the allowances that keep all the extended (really extended) family members of an anchor baby in the country. Simple solution, just repeal the amendment to take effect on Jan 1 the year after adoption. The problem with that is, there is a LOT of law in the 14th Amendment that has nothing to to with citizenship and is a major foundation of our laws. So I would propose something like:

"The 28th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.

Section 1. The 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America shall be amended as follows. Citizenship shall be granted to all biologically human children born of at least one genetic parent who is a natural born or naturalized citizen at the time of birth excluding genetic donors in the case of artificial inducement or transference of genetic material used to cause pregnancy.

Section 2. Minor children, both biological and adopted for a period not less than 4 years previous, meeting the above stipulation of a parent who becomes naturalized on or before the 18th year of the minor child shall then be considered also naturalized citizens.

Section 3. Any person of any age who has knowingly and/or willing entered the United States, it's territories, embassies and/or all other lands or properties in violation of immigration laws at the time of commission of the crime of illegal entry shall be forever denied citizenship under section 1 or 2 of this amendment except on an individual basis by act of Congress requiring a 2/3rds majority of both Houses.

Section 4. This amendment shall become effective on the first day of January of the year after ratification and apply to all human children who's final birth labor and/or delivery was initiated before the stroke of midnight on January 1. Due to the sometimes ambiguous nature of labor in childbirth, labor shall be defined as the initiation of the birth process as observed and certified by a licensed medical doctor, nurse or any other local, state or federal official present at the event in which a non-interrupted labor or surgical intervention results in delivery of the child or children. Five adults not related not related to the parent(s) or each other who submit affidavit under penalty of felony agreeing on the time of the initiation of labor shall also be considered valid certification.

Section 5. This amendment supersedes and renders null and void all Federal, State and Territory laws, rules, judgments, precedents and policies which might be found in conflict with this amendment regarding the status or eligibility for citizenship only."

[BigWorm]

Yes, which is exactly what some people do so their children can become legal citizens. I'm not sure what point you are making here?



"What if the government turns tyrannical and starts slaughtering all of its citizens?"

Again what point are you trying to make here?

What point are you trying to make? At least Rocktar has details about his blood and soil citizenship requirements, though I expected him to propose something more like Starship Troopers.

[Parkbandit]

Mocking people for suddenly respecting the constitution.

Yes.

[Tgo01]

What point are you trying to make?

I see you have moved on from strawmanning everything to "No you!" type arguments.

[BigWorm]

Even Rocktar realizes the president can't end birthright citizenship with an executive order.

[Tgo01]

Even Rocktar realizes the president can't end birthright citizenship with an executive order.

Yeah no shit he can't. If Trump follows through with this plan the goal is to obviously get the courts involved in whether or not we should continue handing out citizenship for simply being born here.

[BigWorm]

Yeah no shit he can't. If Trump follows through with this plan the goal is to obviously get the courts involved in whether or not we should continue handing out citizenship for simply being born here.

The courts can't change the constitution either.

[Tgo01]

The courts can't change the constitution either.

The courts can certainly rule on whether or not the constitution as written extends citizenship to people just because they are born here.

[BigWorm]

The courts can certainly rule on whether or not the constitution as written extends citizenship to people just because they are born here.

I haven't seen any serious legal opinions that think this has a chance in hell of having any affect on how citizenship is adjudicated. It's purely a PR stunt.

By the way, what did you do to deserve citizenship other than be born?

[Tgo01]

I haven't seen any serious legal opinions that think this has a chance in hell of having any affect on how citizenship is adjudicated. It's purely a PR stunt.

Those the same opinions that said Trump didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning?


By the way, what did you do to deserve citizenship other than be born?

My parents were US citizens.

[BigWorm]

My parents were US citizens.

How is this something you did?

[Tgo01]

How is this something you did?

Are you still "practicing" how to sound smart for your cool communities? Because you're sounding kind of dumb lately.

[Fortybox]

Even Rocktar realizes the president can't end birthright citizenship with an executive order.

Yes he can if the executive order is to restore the original intent of the 14th amendment. Stop being so stupid.

[Gelston]

https://scontent.fmem1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/45039355_2152692388109555_7046106656127582208_n.jp g?_nc_cat=109&_nc_ht=scontent.fmem1-1.fna&oh=af4080bbc5c85ca9f405c27019ac3e43&oe=5C872D24

[BigWorm]

Yes he can if the executive order is to restore the original intent of the 14th amendment. Stop being so stupid.

Jesus Christ, at least Rocktar understands how the Constitution works. An executive order can't change the Constitution, full stop.

And the original intent of the 14th amendment has been clear from the beginning and confirmed multiple times in the courts.

[time4fun]

Jesus Christ, at least Rocktar understands how the Constitution works. An executive order can't change the Constitution, full stop.

And the original intent of the 14th amendment has been clear from the beginning and confirmed multiple times in the courts.

Uh yeah. There's a reason why the birthright citizenship clause is in the 14th Amendment. Because in Dredd Scott, the Court ruled that people of color were NOT US citizens and could never be.

That language was 100% intentional- to ensure citizenship for millions of people who were born in this country.

But this is exactly what Trump is counting on. There's not going to be an Executive Order. And the Courts aren't going to touch birthright citizenship because it's not even a question of interpretation- it's explicitly written into our Constitution.

He's doing it because he knows morons like Fortybox are going to get all riled up and excited and will want to go out and vote to help end birthright citizenship- which no one can do without a Constitutional amendment.

[Fortybox]

Jesus Christ, at least Rocktar understands how the Constitution works. An executive order can't change the Constitution, full stop.

And the original intent of the 14th amendment has been clear from the beginning and confirmed multiple times in the courts.

It’s not a change to the constitution if the executive order holds up the original intent. You’re the one advocating to expand the 14th beyond the meaning - which isn’t surprising because the left wants to ascribe new meanings outside of the original intentions of why the amendment(s) were put in the first place.

[Fortybox]

Uh yeah. There's a reason why the birthright citizenship clause is in the 14th Amendment. Because in Dredd Scott, the Court ruled that people of color were NOT US citizens and could never be.

That language was 100% intentional- to ensure citizenship for millions of people who were born in this country.

But this is exactly what Trump is counting on. There's not going to be an Executive Order. And the Courts aren't going to touch birthright citizenship because it's not even a question of interpretation- it's explicitly written into our Constitution.

He's doing it because he knows morons like Fortybox are going to get all riled up and excited and will want to go out and vote to help end birthright citizenship- which no one can do without a Constitutional amendment.

Intent is important and you just want to manipulate the amendment to account for additional details not even thought of when the amendment was drafted. Illegal aliens pooping out babies who then get citizenship wasn’t the intent.

I don’t expect the SC to side with Trump on this but he is absolutely right.

[Gelston]

He is saying the Amendment covers only those who are legally here, such as the former slaves and all African Americans born here from them. That is what the actual amendment was created for. Not to allow for anchor babies. He is doing this purely to get it into the courts, which it will, and that will define what the law states.

[Fortybox]

He is saying the Amendment covers only those who are legally here, such as the former slaves and all African Americans born here from them. That is what the actual amendment was created for. Not to allow for anchor babies. He is doing this purely to get it into the courts, which it will, and that will define what the law states.

Bingo - we have a winner!

The left doesn’t view it that way though. The constitution is something to be manipulated and changed to meet the political need at the time.

[Tgo01]

But this is exactly what Trump is counting on. There's not going to be an Executive Order. And the Courts aren't going to touch birthright citizenship because it's not even a question of interpretation- it's explicitly written into our Constitution.

Gun ownership isn't a question of interpretation either yet the courts touch that one all the time.

Also the 14th amendment is open for interpretation. The important part of the 14th amendment is:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

What does "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" mean? Could it mean if the parents are citizens or residents?

Are you telling me that if someday the US were invaded and occupied, and the invading army brings their family or gets a foreigner pregnant and has a child on US soil, then the US wins the war and kicks out all of the invaders, the children of these invaders are US citizens and can stay and can eventually sponsor their previously invading parents to come live in the US to be American citizens? You really think this is what they had in mind when they wrote the 14th amendment? Or could it be that since they weren't subject to the jurisdiction of the US that their children aren't automatically US citizens?

[Gelston]

Gun ownership isn't a question of interpretation either yet the courts touch that one all the time.

Also the 14th amendment is open for interpretation. The important part of the 14th amendment is:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

What does "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" mean? Could it mean if the parents are citizens or residents?

Are you telling me that if someday the US were invaded and occupied, and the invading army brings their family or gets a foreigner pregnant and has a child on US soil, then the US wins the war and kicks out all of the invaders, the children of these invaders are US citizens and can stay and can eventually sponsor their previously invading parents to come live in the US to be American citizens? You really think this is what they had in mind when they wrote the 14th amendment? Or could it be that since they weren't subject to the jurisdiction of the US that their children aren't automatically US citizens?

Technically, if the US was invaded, the taken over territory wouldn't be US soil anymore. If it were occupied, our Constitution would be whatever the occupiers say it is.

[Tgo01]

Technically, if the US was invaded, the taken over territory wouldn't be US soil anymore.

Okay fine just invaded and not occupied. Like they were really bad invaders.

[Fortybox]

Technically, if the US was invaded, the taken over territory wouldn't be US soil anymore. If it were occupied, our Constitution would be whatever the occupiers say it is.

Wrong. By that argument we wouldn’t have had a revolution.

Our constitution lays out the God given rights we have. No worldly authority can take that away.

[Gelston]

Wrong. By that argument we wouldn’t have had a revolution.

Our constitution lays out the God given rights we have. No worldly authority can take that away.

rofl, worldly authorities sure as fuck can.

[Methais]

Uh yeah. There's a reason why the birthright citizenship clause is in the 14th Amendment. Because in Dredd Scott, the Court ruled that people of color were NOT US citizens and could never be.

That language was 100% intentional- to ensure citizenship for millions of people who were born in this country.

But this is exactly what Trump is counting on. There's not going to be an Executive Order. And the Courts aren't going to touch birthright citizenship because it's not even a question of interpretation- it's explicitly written into our Constitution.

He's doing it because he knows morons like Fortybox are going to get all riled up and excited and will want to go out and vote to help end birthright citizenship- which no one can do without a Constitutional amendment.

https://i.imgflip.com/1s5q5w.jpg

[time4fun]

He is saying the Amendment covers only those who are legally here, such as the former slaves and all African Americans born here from them. That is what the actual amendment was created for. Not to allow for anchor babies. He is doing this purely to get it into the courts, which it will, and that will define what the law states.

He's incorrect. The amendment language doesn't give any such qualifications.


All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside

A child born in the US is *always* here legally unless they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US (in which case we're talking about either foreign invaders or diplomats). You are maligning US citizens right now, and it's gross.

[Gelston]

He's incorrect. The amendment language doesn't give any such qualifications.



A child born in the US is *always* here legally unless they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US (in which case we're talking about either foreign invaders or diplomats). You are maligning US citizens right now, and it's gross.

You're willfully leaving out the and subject to the jurisdiction thereof part. It doesn't say or, it says and. Both be required. That is what is being challenged. It will be decided by the courts. Not you, not me, not Trump, not Congress.

[Tgo01]

He's incorrect. The amendment language doesn't give any such qualifications.



A child born in the US is *always* here legally unless they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US (in which case we're talking about either foreign invaders or diplomats). You are maligning US citizens right now, and it's gross.

Go back and read my invasion scenario, you really think they intended for this amendment to work in such a way?

And please don't respond with something dumb like "LOL! The US isn't going to be invaded!"

[time4fun]

You're willfully leaving out the and subject to the jurisdiction thereof part. It doesn't say or, it says and. Both be required. That is what is being challenged. It will be decided by the courts. Not you, not me, not Trump, not Congress.

Um Gelston are you actually under the impression that undocumented immigrants have immunity to US laws?

Allow me to clarify for you- all immigrants- documented or not- are subject to US jurisdiction unless they have diplomatic immunity. In fact, all immigrants- even undocumented ones- have the same rights US citizens have under the Constitution (with a few obvious exceptions like the right to vote or run for office)

[Tgo01]

Allow me to clarify for you- all immigrants- documented or not- are subject to US jurisdiction unless they have diplomatic immunity. In fact, all immigrants- even undocumented ones- have the same rights US citizens have under the Constitution (with a few obvious exceptions like the right to vote or run for office)

Illegal aliens are JUST like US citizens!

Except when they aren't.

This from the person who teaches "logic."

[Gelston]

Um Gelston are you actually under the impression that undocumented immigrants have immunity to US laws?

Allow me to clarify for you- all immigrants- documented or not- are subject to US jurisdiction unless they have diplomatic immunity. In fact, all immigrants- even undocumented ones- have the same rights US citizens have under the Constitution (with a few obvious exceptions like the right to vote or run for office)

You seem to be confused with what the word jurisdiction means. A basic law class will tell you it has a few different meanings, one of which covers citizenship and how legal authority effects that. Trump is arguing that case. Of course they are still criminally liable when committing crimes in the US, don't be stupid. Don't worry, the courts will take care of all this.

[Androidpk]

Illegal aliens are JUST like US citizens!

Except when they aren't.

This from the person who teaches "logic."

This isn't logic, it's documented law. Illegal immigrants have the same constitutional protections that US citizens have.

[Tgo01]

Illegal immigrants have the same constitutional protections that US citizens have.

Except for the ones they don't have, right?

[time4fun]

You seem to be confused with what the word jurisdiction means. A basic law class will tell you it has a few different meanings, one of which covers citizenship and how legal authority effects that. Trump is arguing that case. Of course they are still criminally liable when committing crimes in the US, don't be stupid. Don't worry, the courts will take care of all this.

I promise you Gelston, I'm not the one who is confused about this.

This is settled case law and has been for a very long time. I encourage you to read more objective pieces on the subject as it's clear to me that you're getting your information from inaccurate sources with agendas.

[Gelston]

I promise you Gelston, I'm not the one who is confused about this.

This is settled case law and has been for a very long time. I encourage you to read more objective pieces on the subject as it's clear to me that you're getting your information from inaccurate sources with agendas.

My information is directly from the law. I haven't placed an opinion anywhere. I have stated WHAT Trump is saying. WHAT is going to happen, and WHO is going to determine it. Nothing else. I haven't even said whether I agree with it or not. Of course, your toxic attitude has you in constant attack mode.

[Tgo01]

I promise you Gelston, I'm not the one who is confused about this.

This is settled case law and has been for a very long time. I encourage you to read more objective pieces on the subject as it's clear to me that you're getting your information from inaccurate sources with agendas.

Nothing is "settled case law." That's just a dumb talking points leftists such as yourself trot out when you want to talk about shit like abortion.

The second amendment is very clear on gun rights yet that is constantly in and out of the courts, whereas the 14th amendment is ambiguous as shit.

[Methais]

Nothing is "settled case law." That's just a dumb talking points leftists such as yourself trot out when you want to talk about shit like abortion.

The second amendment is very clear on gun rights yet that is constantly in and out of the courts, whereas the 14th amendment is ambiguous as shit.

“This is settled case law.” -time4fun

“Omg we can’t confirm Kavanaugh or else he’s going to overturn Roe v Wade!!!” -also time4fun

[Wrathbringer]

He's incorrect. The amendment language doesn't give any such qualifications.



A child born in the US is *always* here legally unless they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the US (in which case we're talking about either foreign invaders or diplomats). You are maligning US citizens right now, and it's gross.

You're retarded.

[time4fun]

My information is directly from the law. I haven't placed an opinion anywhere. I have stated WHAT Trump is saying. WHAT is going to happen, and WHO is going to determine it. Nothing else. I haven't even said whether I agree with it or not. Of course, your toxic attitude has you in constant attack mode.

If your information were directly from "the law"- we wouldn't be having this conversation. The jurisdiction clause, by the way, was primarily put there to deal with the issue of Native American reservations (and preemptively foreign invaders)- though it also applies to people with diplomatic immunity. There was never any intention of precluding people who were born to undocumented immigrants.

Because, in theory, this is supposed to be a country where you don't lose rights based on who your parents are. And SCOTUS agrees:

Elk v Wilkins

Nothing is better settled at the common law than the doctrine that the children even of aliens born in a country while the parents are resident there under the protection of the government and owing a temporary allegiance thereto are subjects by birth.


Also allow me to also re-narrate this conversation for you:

1) I pointed out that birthright citizenship is literally written into the Constitution

2) YOU then jumped in and made an inaccurate statement to disagree

3) I then corrected you

4) You then held fast to your clearly incorrect interpretation and accused me of failing to understand the situation

5) I pointed out that you were the one who misunderstood

6) You went into victim mode and called me toxic

Find a mirror. Look into it really hard.

[Gelston]

If your information were directly from "the law"- we wouldn't be having this conversation. The jurisdiction clause, by the way, was primarily put there to deal with the issue of Native American reservations (and preemptively foreign invaders)- though it also applies to people with diplomatic immunity. There was never any intention of precluding people who were born to undocumented immigrants.

Because, in theory, this is supposed to be a country where you don't lose rights based on who your parents are. And SCOTUS agrees:

Elk v Wilkins



Also allow me to also re-narrate this conversation for you:

1) I pointed out that birthright citizenship is literally written into the Constitution

2) YOU then jumped in and made an inaccurate statement to disagree

3) I then corrected you

4) You then held fast to your clearly incorrect interpretation and accused me of failing to understand the situation

5) I pointed out that you were the one who misunderstood

6) You went into victim mode and called me toxic

Find a mirror. Look into it really hard.

Again, I only ever pointed out the argument being made. You corrected nothing because you aren't a court. Again, you are not the decider on this issue. I'm not either. You can't correct shit about it.

[Tgo01]

If your information were directly from "the law"- we wouldn't be having this conversation. The jurisdiction clause, by the way, was primarily put there to deal with the issue of Native American reservations (and preemptively foreign invaders)- though it also applies to people with diplomatic immunity.

So many exceptions carved out for this "ALL persons" argument, yet supposedly it doesn't preclude people residing in the country illegally. Weird.


Nothing is better settled at the common law than the doctrine that the children even of aliens born in a country while the parents are resident there under the protection of the government and owing a temporary allegiance thereto are subjects by birth.

Hilarious you bring this case up, the case whereupon the supreme court decided that an American Indian born on a reservation wasn't under the jurisdiction of the US and thus was not a US citizen. The supreme court has never overturned this decision by the way.

Not to mention the quote you cited is clearly referring to LEGAL RESIDENTS of the US, which American Indians are and were at that time, it is obviously not referring to illegal aliens.

You really should stop owning yourself so hard.

[BigWorm]

It's a PR stunt to get blood and soil racists who don't understand the law worked up before the election. From this thread, I can tell it is working pretty well on most of the usual suspects here, though Rocktar is level-headed enough to recognize this doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of actually affecting how citizenship status is adjudicated. A court challenge is probably the only realistic remedy here which will be a huge waste of money and time, but I guess it will be good to have a crystal clear ruling on this exact question eventually.

Do any of you have a serious legal analysis you can link to that supports your interpretation of the 14th amendment?

[Fortybox]

My information is directly from the law. I haven't placed an opinion anywhere. I have stated WHAT Trump is saying. WHAT is going to happen, and WHO is going to determine it. Nothing else. I haven't even said whether I agree with it or not. Of course, your toxic attitude has you in constant attack mode.

You do realize you are dealing with a textbook narcissist right? I’m serious here.

[Neveragain]

Ouch!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUr55mWmOyw

[Fortybox]

Great quote by Harry Reid in 1993:


"If making it easy to be an illegal alien isn't enough, how about offering a reward for being an illegal alien? No sane country would do that, right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission to give birth to a child, we reward that child with US citizenship and guarantee a full access to all public and social services this society provides - and that's a lot of services. Is it any wonder that 2/3 of the babies born at taxpayer expense at county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?"

But of course it's different now.

https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/802660698392317956/4NMOzXJ4_400x400.jpg

[Tgo01]

Ouch!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUr55mWmOyw

What a pathetic little lying sack of shit she is. But racist Democrats such as time4fun and cwolff will rush to vote for her again.

[Parkbandit]

What a pathetic little lying sack of shit she is. But racist Democrats such as time4fun and cwolff will rush to vote for her again.

Pretty sure, if you are under ethics review.. you have been notified of it.

PLEASE LET THIS WOMAN RUN FOR PRESIDENT IN 2020!!!!

[Methais]

https://i.imgur.com/q4fPBgP.jpg

https://imgur.com/gallery/q4fPBgP

[~Rocktar~]

Imagine that, New York government is corrupt and trying to kill people while stealing from the poor to middle class.

[Neveragain]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf-iGNnygGc

Doing his part to rid the world of Nazis.

[Methais]

https://scontent.fbtr1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/45421930_2257538771130692_889150799702130688_n.jpg ?_nc_cat=111&_nc_ht=scontent.fbtr1-1.fna&oh=e4f89da5ad3a79309e7f365df77bfb41&oe=5C79367A

[Methais]

https://scontent.fbtr1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/45433811_307276156773874_7721179750172983296_n.jpg ?_nc_cat=104&_nc_ht=scontent.fbtr1-1.fna&oh=eec04655105c66653785712c1bb052c1&oe=5C3DD871

[Neveragain]

France's Macron pushes for 'true European army'


"We have to protect ourselves with respect to China, Russia and even the United States of America," he told French radio station Europe 1.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46108633

http://i.imgur.com/WLRV4HT.gif

[Astray]

https://i.imgur.com/Dx7iCXz.png

[drauz]

https://i.imgur.com/V03OFKK.jpg

[Methais]

Random tards on my fb already celebrating "Trump's finally gonna be impeached!!!!!"

[Gelston]

Random tards on my fb already celebrating "Trump's finally gonna be impeached!!!!!"

That'll be funny seeing as they'd never get a conviction in the Senate.

[Parkbandit]

That'll be funny seeing as they'd never get a conviction in the Senate.

These are the same Backlash/time4fun type retards that believe the Republicans kept the Senate due to gerrymandering....

[Androidpk]

Epic meltdown by Trump today in his presser. Sad that Acosta had his credentials pulled because of the orange fucboi's tantrum.

[Tgo01]

Epic meltdown by Trump today in his presser. Sad that Acosta had his credentials pulled because of the orange fucboi's tantrum.

Is this true? Acosta had his press credentials pulled? Finalfuckingly.

[Taernath]

That exchange was hilarious. Trump didn't know what to do when he refused to relinquish the microphone and kept asking hard questions.

[Neveragain]

Epic meltdown by Trump today in his presser. Sad that Acosta had his credentials pulled because of the orange fucboi's tantrum.

https://media.giphy.com/media/z6HfcxhWSYF1u/giphy.gif

Guy had his questions answered multiple times. He constantly talks over both the president and the other reporters, he's a giant drama queen that needed to be called out. People that act like Acosta need to be shut down.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqYOZosQH6A

comments to the video:

"That reporter was horribly disrespectful"

"I hate this. I am no fan of Obama but while he is president, he still deserves the respect that liberals refused to give George Bush."

"Some journalists are scumbags, just as some non journalists are. Respect and empathy is disintegrating, not only in Gods chosen countruy the US of A, but all over the World. Shut up and LISTEN, befor you interupt. Jerk!"

[Androidpk]

That exchange was hilarious. Trump didn't know what to do when he refused to relinquish the microphone and kept asking hard questions.

For a second I thought he was about to jump down and body slam Acosta.

[Taernath]

Here's the video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1WkFpbHIpI

People are gonna pull whatever meaning they want out of it. I just love seeing how Trump reacts when he's not insulated behind Sara Sanders or a cheering MAGA crowd.

[SHAFT]

Here's the video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1WkFpbHIpI

People are gonna pull whatever meaning they want out of it. I just love seeing how Trump reacts when he's not insulated behind Sara Sanders or a cheering MAGA crowd.

That press conference was a trainwreck and he fired the AG less than 24 hours after the midterms.

Before anyone says Sessions resigned, his letter stated “At your request”.

Trump, for the first time in his life, is about to be held accountable. I’d be scared if I were a criminal and someone was about to hold me accountable.

[Fortybox]

That press conference was a trainwreck and he fired the AG less than 24 hours after the midterms.

Before anyone says Sessions resigned, his letter stated “At your request”.

Trump, for the first time in his life, is about to be held accountable. I’d be scared if I were a criminal and someone was about to hold me accountable.

He resigned. He wasn’t fired.

That’s what a letter of resignation is for.

Maybe you should be more concerned with Acosta assaulting the assistant trying to pass the mic around today. You know, #metoo stuff and all.

[Androidpk]

That press conference was a trainwreck and he fired the AG less than 24 hours after the midterms.

Before anyone says Sessions resigned, his letter stated “At your request”.

Trump, for the first time in his life, is about to be held accountable. I’d be scared if I were a criminal and someone was about to hold me accountable.

Oh he was most certainly fired.

[Androidpk]

And no, Acosta didn't assault anyone. As the video shows (of which multiple angles exist) the women clearly put her hands on him more than once.

[BriarFox]

That press conference was a trainwreck and he fired the AG less than 24 hours after the midterms.

Before anyone says Sessions resigned, his letter stated “At your request”.

Trump, for the first time in his life, is about to be held accountable. I’d be scared if I were a criminal and someone was about to hold me accountable.

He really likes the bully pulpit. Notice how he abuses the reporter from behind his podium after the reporter's microphone is taken away. Those reporters are being polite and brave, while he's a civic disgrace.

[Astray]

L O L (https://politics.theonion.com/inconsolable-jeff-sessions-tries-to-commit-suicide-by-s-1826462420)

[Tgo01]

Here's the video:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1WkFpbHIpI

People are gonna pull whatever meaning they want out of it. I just love seeing how Trump reacts when he's not insulated behind Sara Sanders or a cheering MAGA crowd.

"Tough" questions? Acosta doesn't ask tough questions, he makes dumb statements in the form of a question. Just like here. "They are hundreds of miles away, that's not an invasion." That's not a question. Then when Trump says no more questions he throws a tantrum and pulls the microphone away from the person trying to take it from him. Then dipshit other reporter no name defends Acosta's childish actions. Why do people like Acosta? He's more useless than dog shit on the bottom of my heel.

[Tgo01]

And no, Acosta didn't assault anyone. As the video shows (of which multiple angles exist) the women clearly put her hands on him more than once.

Here's a shocker, then man who has taken advantage of several women on these forums is saying the woman had it coming. I'm sure poor Acosta was fearing for his life.

[Tgo01]

He really likes the bully pulpit. Notice how he abuses the reporter from behind his podium after the reporter's microphone is taken away. Those reporters are being polite and brave, while he's a civic disgrace.

"Polite" and "brave"? Brave? BRAVE? What the fuck are you even going on about?

Abuses his reporter from behind his podium? Like the podium is some sort of magical shield or something? Grow the fuck up.

[SHAFT]

"Polite" and "brave"? Brave? BRAVE? What the fuck are you even going on about?

Abuses his reporter from behind his podium? Like the podium is some sort of magical shield or something? Grow the fuck up.

You could see the fear seeping from trump today. He’s frightened, which is why he requested sessions to resign minutes after that awful press conference.

Trump is a criminal. Only criminals act like this. How do I know? Look at Nixon.

Fuck you fortybox and fuck you tgo. Eat shit. Fuck civility.

[Tgo01]

Fuck you fortybox and fuck you tgo. Eat shit. Fuck civility.

I'm sure the cowardly piece of shit Briarfox will be along any minute now to tell you to act more civil.

Oh, right, Briarfox already proved what a worthless, partisan, hypocritical hack he is, much like yourself there, SHAFT.

Glad to see so many Democrats defending an absolute worthless human being such as Acosta for placing his hands on a woman like that. You all put on a great act pretending to give a single shit about women but when it comes to old, rich, white men who happen to be Democrats abusing women you all suddenly look the other way. I couldn't be this much of an absolute sack of shit of a human being even if I tried. Kudos for being good at something, SHAFT.

[Androidpk]

I'm sure the cowardly piece of shit Briarfox will be along any minute now to tell you to act more civil.

Oh, right, Briarfox already proved what a worthless, partisan, hypocritical hack he is, much like yourself there, SHAFT.

Glad to see so many Democrats defending an absolute worthless human being such as Acosta for placing his hands on a woman like that. You all put on a great act pretending to give a single shit about women but when it comes to old, rich, white men who happen to be Democrats abusing women you all suddenly look the other way. I couldn't be this much of an absolute sack of shit of a human being even if I tried. Kudos for being good at something, SHAFT.

Acosta never once touched her.. :lol:

Kudos to being an unwavering Trump sycophant, that's some serious commitment. I've always thought you were a zealot but these past 2 years you've really let your crazy fly.

[RichardCranium]

That press conference was a trainwreck and he fired the AG less than 24 hours after the midterms.

Good. Bring on the weed.

[BriarFox]

Acosta for placing his hands on a woman like that.

Wow, you've drunk the Kool Aid. The evidence is right there in the video that he never once touches her. You've just swallowed the bald-faced lies from Sanders Huckabee and Fox News wholesale. There's a partisan hack in the room, but it's not me.

[Tgo01]

Acosta never once touched her.. :lol:

Here's a video that slows it down and everything to clearly show he did indeed put his hands on her.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVFPpM6p3D4

But let's face it, you're so worthless and so pro-violence against women that you won't ever admit you're wrong, yet again.

[Tgo01]

Wow, you've drunk the Kool Aid. The evidence is right there in the video that he never once touches her.

Look at the video I just linked. Why are Democrats such as yourself worthless pieces of shit who don't care about facts? Just answer me one simple question, Briarfox. Oh and why aren't you telling SHAFT to be more civil? Is it because you don't really care about civility and it's just another lame tactic to "win" an argument when you're looking even more like a retard than you usually do?

[SHAFT]

Wow, you've drunk the Kool Aid. The evidence is right there in the video that he never once touches her. You've just swallowed the bald-faced lies from Sanders Huckabee and Fox News wholesale. There's a partisan hack in the room, but it's not me.

He’s trolling. That’s all he does. He’s a lunatic.

[BriarFox]

Here's a video that slows it down and everything to clearly show he did indeed put his hands on her.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVFPpM6p3D4

But let's face it, you're so worthless and so pro-violence against women that you won't ever admit you're wrong, yet again.

Are you serious? Your slow-mo video shows their arms crossing as she tries to take the mic from him. If you think this is assault, it's just a sign of how egregiously distorted your views are. Moreover, claiming that this is assault utterly disrespects the true victims of assault. Words matter. Use them better.

[SHAFT]

Good. Bring on the weed.

Amen to that!

[Taernath]

Glad to see so many Democrats defending an absolute worthless human being such as Acosta for placing his hands on a woman like that. You all put on a great act pretending to give a single shit about women but when it comes to old, rich, white men who happen to be Democrats abusing women you all suddenly look the other way.

Hahahahaha oh my god

There's more reach here than that Swetnick allegation.

[BriarFox]

Look at the video I just linked. Why are Democrats such as yourself worthless pieces of shit who don't care about facts? Just answer me one simple question, Briarfox. Oh and why aren't you telling SHAFT to be more civil? Is it because you don't really care about civility and it's just another lame tactic to "win" an argument when you're looking even more like a retard than you usually do?

You keep looking for gotcha moments, but they don't exist. There are both straw man and false analogy fallacies here. Shaft's response to you has nothing to do with my stipulation that I wasn't going to debate you while you were slinging insults.

[Tgo01]

Are you serious? Your slow-mo video shows their arms crossing as she tries to take the mic from him. If you think this is assault, it's just a sign of how egregiously distorted your views are. Moreover, claiming that this is assault utterly disrespects the true victims of assault. Words matter. Use them better.

Hilarious. You go from "He never once touched her!" to "Well okay he DID touch her...but you're crazy if you consider that assault!"

Fuck you. You're more worthless than Acosta is. If you want to have a discussion as to whether or not this constitutes assault we can (hint: it is), but first admit what a worthless shit bag of a person you are that you first claimed he never touched. But we all know you're not going to, right?

[Tgo01]

Shaft's response to you has nothing to do with my stipulation that I wasn't going to debate you while you were slinging insults.

See what a worthless human being you are? "Oh be more civil! WAHHHHHH! Be more civil!!!"

"Your side isn't being civil."

"So?"

Even if I worked at being this much of a horrible human being I couldn't do it, but somehow it comes naturally to you and SHAFT. Good job.

[Tgo01]

Hahahahaha oh my god

There's more reach here than that Swetnick allegation.

I know, truth sucks sometimes huh?

It's funny how so many Democrats on the forums are choosing Jim fucking Acosta as their hill to die on. The man who compared himself to journalists during the Nazi occupation.

[Androidpk]

Speaking of weed, tgo could use some right about now. Or a snickers bar at the very least.

[BriarFox]

Hilarious. You go from "He never once touched her!" to "Well okay he DID touch her...but you're crazy if you consider that assault!"

Fuck you. You're more worthless than Acosta is. If you want to have a discussion as to whether or not this constitutes assault we can (hint: it is), but first admit what a worthless shit bag of a person you are that you first claimed he never touched. But we all know you're not going to, right?

You get really angry when I point out all the flaws in your reasoning, don't you? Again, straw man fallacy. You can't even keep my words straight when they're right in front of you.

[Fortybox]

He really likes the bully pulpit. Notice how he abuses the reporter from behind his podium after the reporter's microphone is taken away. Those reporters are being polite and brave, while he's a civic disgrace.

Right - he is the bully. Acosta clearly was not disrespectful at all...

You are WAY out of touch with reality. What happened to you?

https://media.giphy.com/media/d2Zky2iLtrlAZGmc/giphy.gif

[Fortybox]

You could see the fear seeping from trump today. He’s frightened, which is why he requested sessions to resign minutes after that awful press conference.

Trump is a criminal. Only criminals act like this. How do I know? Look at Nixon.

Fuck you fortybox and fuck you tgo. Eat shit. Fuck civility.

:lol:, I thought I was on ignore?

Acosta's attitude...you're attitude is why the "blue wave" didn't come to full fruition. Calm the crazy down.

Seriously, I think Democrats really had a chance for a much bigger sweep but you all just ruin it with the stupid.

[Tgo01]

You get really angry when I point out all the flaws in your reasoning, don't you? Again, straw man fallacy. You can't even keep my words straight when they're right in front of you.

Admit you're a worthless scumbag of a human being and that Acosta actually laid his hands on the woman. Why can't you just admit this? Is it because you just got finished saying I "swallowed the bald-faced lies from Sanders Huckabee and Fox News wholesale" when it turns out you're the one who swallowed the outrageous lies from the leftist media? I bet you didn't even watch the video first before making such a wrong accusation did you? You just relied on what the "news" TOLD you to think.

How utterly useless you are.

This all reminds me of Bigworm watching a video of someone being punched and hit on the head with a flagpole and declaring "I don't see any crimes being committed."

You all with Trump Derangement Syndrome are convinced your eyes and ears are lying to you.

[Fortybox]

Here's a video that slows it down and everything to clearly show he did indeed put his hands on her.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVFPpM6p3D4

But let's face it, you're so worthless and so pro-violence against women that you won't ever admit you're wrong, yet again.

That's assault.

[BriarFox]

Admit you're a worthless scumbag of a human being and that Acosta actually laid his hands on the woman. Why can't you just admit this? Is it because you just got finished saying I "swallowed the bald-faced lies from Sanders Huckabee and Fox News wholesale" when it turns out you're the one who swallowed the outrageous lies from the leftist media? I bet you didn't even watch the video first before making such a wrong accusation did you? You just relied on what the "news" TOLD you to think.

How utterly useless you are.

This all reminds me of Bigworm watching a video of someone being punched and hit on the head with a flagpole and declaring "I don't see any crimes being committed."

You all with Trump Derangement Syndrome are convinced your eyes and ears are lying to you.

Ad hominem. Failure to observe visible evidence. Mistaken premise. Tu quoque. Assumption. Unsupported conclusion. Ad hominem. False analogy. Projection.

You're glowing.

[Fortybox]

Are you serious? Your slow-mo video shows their arms crossing as she tries to take the mic from him. If you think this is assault, it's just a sign of how egregiously distorted your views are. Moreover, claiming that this is assault utterly disrespects the true victims of assault. Words matter. Use them better.

HAHAHAHA.

Wait let me get this straight. You will believe Ford with absolutely ZERO corroborative evidence but when Tgo1 shows a video of Acosta pushing this poor defenseless woman aside...that's ok?

You are a moron. Like seriously.

[Tgo01]

That's assault.

The Democrats here won't even admit Acosta made contact with her. It's truly a sight to behold.

[Tgo01]

Ad hominem. Failure to observe visible evidence. Mistaken premise. Tu quoque. Assumption. Unsupported conclusion. Ad hominem. False analogy. Projection.

You're glowing.

So when you going to admit you were wrong and that Acosta did in fact touch her? I'm not asking you to admit it was assault (but it was), I'm asking you to admit that Acosta made contact. Don't believe your own eyes anymore? Gee, I wonder why that could be.

Oh by the way, what you're doing now is actually a perfect example of an ad hominem; not commenting on my arguments at all and instead attacking my character. Glad to see you are capable of making ad hominems, too bad you're shit at actually recognizing them.

[~Rocktar~]

The issue I see is that when the President is in the room and doing a press conference, when he tells you that you are done, you are done. If you think Obama or Clinton would have put up with all the crap Acosta has done, you are sorely mistaken. Acosta is a punk ass bitch and has been pushing the petulant child act for far too long, it is about time Trump flat shut him down. Maybe he can cool off and grow up a bit then the Whitehouse can consider letting him back. He is almost as bad as Piers Morgan in the metrosexual whiny bitch department.

[Fortybox]

The issue I see is that when the President is in the room and doing a press conference, when he tells you that you are done, you are done. If you think Obama or Clinton would have put up with all the crap Acosta has done, you are sorely mistaken. Acosta is a punk ass bitch and has been pushing the petulant child act for far too long, it is about time Trump flat shut him down. Maybe he can cool off and grow up a bit then the Whitehouse can consider letting him back. He is almost as bad a Piers Morgan in the metrosexual whiny bitch department.

If a conservative reporter ever acted that way to Obama...CNN would have sharted its pants.

[~Rocktar~]

If a conservative reporter ever acted that way to Obama...CNN would have sharted its pants.

The reporter would have immediately felt so much guilt and remorse that they would have committed suicide by shooting themselves in the back of the head twice.

[Tgo01]

The issue I see is that when the President is in the room and doing a press conference, when he tells you that you are done, you are done. If you think Obama or Clinton would have put up with all the crap Acosta has done, you are sorely mistaken. Acosta is a punk ass bitch and has been pushing the petulant child act for far too long, it is about time Trump flat shut him down. Maybe he can cool off and grow up a bit then the Whitehouse can consider letting him back. He is almost as bad a Piers Morgan in the metrosexual whiny bitch department.

Acosta is worthless. Just check out his useless Twitter feed, it's full of dumb tweets like "I asked the president this completely insane and dumb question from 2 miles away and he totally ignored me! RESIST!"

Or he's making statements in the form of a question then acting shocked when people tell him to sit down and shut up.

Remember the time Acosta thought the words on the Statue of Liberty were somehow US immigration policy? He was a nobody in the era of Obama, he had like a hundred followers on Twitter, but he started "asking tough questions" of the Trump administration and suddenly he has hundreds of thousands of followers and now all of the publicity has gone to his head.

His Twitter profile used to have a picture of himself as the Twitter profile pic (which is fine and makes sense), but the header on his profile was not one but TWO different pictures of himself. 3 fucking pics of himself as his profile on Twitter. The dude is a prime example of a narcissist.

[Jeril]

Here's a video that slows it down and everything to clearly show he did indeed put his hands on her.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVFPpM6p3D4

But let's face it, you're so worthless and so pro-violence against women that you won't ever admit you're wrong, yet again.

I've watched this a few times. You can see him pointing and her reaching across his arm to grab the mike away at which point he brings his hand down briefly to stop her. She initiates contact with him first and he only touches her for less than a second, and with only one hand. Why you keep saying he put his hands on her is very inaccurate. How this constitutes assault in anyone's mind to me is crazy.

[Neveragain]

The mounting evidence that Democrats are being radicalized.

In this video CNN defines white males as not being people:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dx6nM_S--xw

Now let's refresh on what has been said by members of PC and the GS community.

"Great news, white people are dying off" ~ cwolffs' comment when linking an article about white baby boomers passing away.

Another Democrat expressing their vengeful glee that poor white people were wiped out by a natural disaster.

Multitudes of community Democrats dismissing mob rule, rioting, assault and attempted mass assassination by people that label themselves anarcho communists.

Wishful thinking that the world would be a better place by the removal of people of faith.

Constant negative labeling of anyone with dissenting thoughts.

[Fortybox]

I've watched this a few times. You can see him pointing and her reaching across his arm to grab the mike away at which point he brings his hand down briefly to stop her. She initiates contact with him first and he only touches her for less than a second, and with only one hand. Why you keep saying he put his hands on her is very inaccurate. How this constitutes assault in anyone's mind to me is crazy.

Wrong.

[Tgo01]

I've watched this a few times. You can see him pointing and her reaching across his arm to grab the mike away at which point he brings his hand down briefly to stop her.

Yes, how is that not him making contact?


She initiates contact with him first and he only touches her for less than a second, and with only one hand. Why you keep saying he put his hands on her is very inaccurate. How this constitutes assault in anyone's mind to me is crazy.

She is trying to get the mic away from him, that's not really contact. It doesn't matter how long he touched her. I'm not familiar with DC's laws (where I'm assuming this happened) but in many places simple assault is merely unwanted touching, which this clearly is. I'm sure DC defines simple assault as such as well.

[Gelston]

I think it is a huge stretch to call it assault. She should have just said his pas was being revoked for being disruptive, which he assuredly was.

[Jeril]

Yes, how is that not him making contact?



She is trying to get the mic away from him, that's not really contact. It doesn't matter how long he touched her. I'm not familiar with DC's laws (where I'm assuming this happened) but in many places simple assault is merely unwanted touching, which this clearly is. I'm sure DC defines simple assault as such as well.

How is that not really contact when she clearly touches him first? Her reasoning for doing so doesn't really matter.

[Fortybox]

I think it is a huge stretch to call it assault. She should have just said his pas was being revoked for being disruptive, which he assuredly was.

Um clearly if she thought it was assault...it was assault.

Someone call Gloria Allred

[Tgo01]

I think it is a huge stretch to call it assault. She should have just said his pas was being revoked for being disruptive, which he assuredly was.

I don't know if she called it assault elsewhere but on Twitter she didn't call it assault, she simply said it was unacceptable for him to place his hands on her, which he did and she is right it is unacceptable.

[drauz]

I've watched this a few times. You can see him pointing and her reaching across his arm to grab the mike away at which point he brings his hand down briefly to stop her. She initiates contact with him first and he only touches her for less than a second, and with only one hand. Why you keep saying he put his hands on her is very inaccurate. How this constitutes assault in anyone's mind to me is crazy.

I mean the only way this is assault if it's like a police officer, you pat them on the shoulder and that's assaulting an officer. To any other person it's not assault.

[Gelston]

I don't know if she called it assault elsewhere but on Twitter she didn't call it assault, she simply said it was unacceptable for him to place his hands on her, which he did and she is right it is unacceptable.

Either way, I think the "placed hands on" thing is reaching. He was disruptive. Take his pass for that.

[Neveragain]

I mean the only way this is assault if it's like a police officer, you pat them on the shoulder and that's assaulting an officer. To any other person it's not assault.

Not that I think this is assault but it does raise a question.

I'm assuming this lady is a member of the presidents team, if that is the case does she deserve the same legal protection as say Sarah Huckabee or any other member of the presidents team?

[C.Difficile]

Not getting into the politics of this, but it would make a great Torts exam question. Assault, (or battery when physical contact occurs) can extend to objects like if someone smacked a coffee cup out of your hand or pulled a chair out from under you. She probably committed battery first by attempting to grab the mike and his contact appeared to be purely in self-defense, just enough to stop the initial battery. The closer question I suppose is whether his conduct reached the level where physical force was justified, but as he was not being physically disruptive (prior to the mic being grabbed), I would wager not.

Not really her fault and she was in a bad position. She's an intern, panicked, and just started grabbing. If she yelled "Sir PLEASE HAND ME THE MICROPHONE" it would have been much more effective.

[Tgo01]

She probably committed battery first by attempting to grab the mike

I highly doubt it's assault to attempt to grab property that belongs to you and I'm almost positive that microphone belongs to the White House and not Jim Acosta or CNN.


and his contact appeared to be purely in self-defense, just enough to stop the initial battery.

It could be considered assault if you push someone out of the way if they are blocking you from leaving a room, I highly doubt it's considered self defense to push someone away who is trying to remove property out of your hands that belongs to them.

[Gelston]

Not really her fault and she was in a bad position. She's an intern, panicked, and just started grabbing. If she yelled "Sir PLEASE HAND ME THE MICROPHONE" it would have been much more effective.

No, I think usually motherfuckers just hand over the microphone. Acosta was being a dipshit.

[C.Difficile]

I highly doubt it's assault to attempt to grab property that belongs to you and I'm almost positive that microphone belongs to the White House and not Jim Acosta or CNN.



It could be considered assault if you push someone out of the way if they are blocking you from leaving a room, I highly doubt it's considered self defense to push someone away who is trying to remove property out of your hands that belongs to them.


nah sorry man. Common law, at least when it comes to the assault offenses, tends to look worst upon those who escalate when it's not necessary. Ownership of the property is not relevant at least when the property was initially passed with consent. I can't break into a dry cleaner to take back my own coat that I took to them for cleaning, for example.

Your door example is different because it's an unlawful detention type offense, and it's probably self defense to push your way out of it.

[Neveragain]

Not getting into the politics of this, but it would make a great Torts exam question. Assault, (or battery when physical contact occurs) can extend to objects like if someone smacked a coffee cup out of your hand or pulled a chair out from under you. She probably committed battery first by attempting to grab the mike and his contact appeared to be purely in self-defense, just enough to stop the initial battery. The closer question I suppose is whether his conduct reached the level where physical force was justified, but as he was not being physically disruptive (prior to the mic being grabbed), I would wager not.

Not really her fault and she was in a bad position. She's an intern, panicked, and just started grabbing. If she yelled "Sir PLEASE HAND ME THE MICROPHONE" it would have been much more effective.

Actually most of us were taught this lesson in kindergarten, it went like this.

When the head of the classroom tells little jimmy that it's someone else's turn, little jimmy needs to sit down, be quiet and keep his hands to himself. If little jimmy can't do this he gets sent to time out.

If we are needing to test this on Torts exams, we have much bigger problems to be concerned about.

[Tgo01]

nah sorry man. Common law, at least when it comes to the assault offenses, tends to look worst upon those who escalate when it's not necessary. Ownership of the property is not relevant at least when the property was initially passed with consent. I can't break into a dry cleaner to take back my own coat that I took to them for cleaning, for example.

Well yes, breaking and entering is quite different than retrieving your own property from someone's hands, especially if the reason the cleaners isn't giving it back is because of an unpaid bill. This is a totally different situation where someone said "Here, you can use this microphone to ask a question but we'll want it back when we say we want it back." Now it would totally be assault if Acosta was threatened in any way or someone grabbed him or even if just a reasonable person would have felt threatened in his position, but a small 100 pound woman attempting to grab the microphone out of his hands? That's a hard sell for assault, and even it if were that does not give Acosta the right to push her arm away like that, unless again he felt threatened in some way.


Your door example is different because it's an unlawful detention type offense, and it's probably self defense to push your way out of it.

Depends on the circumstances. Do you have a cell phone on you? Call the police. Is the person being threatening towards you? Clearly self defense to push them out of the way. Are they simply just standing in the doorway preventing you from leaving but otherwise not threatening you? Could be a totally different ballgame that a prosecutor and jury might end up deciding.

[Wrathbringer]

No, I think usually motherfuckers just hand over the microphone. Acosta was being a dipshit.

Yeah, he should have been removed for being a disruptive tard. That girl should have kneed him in his tiny balls and taken the mic.

[Enuch]

Shouldn’t one of the security personnel acted in the according manner to diffuse the situation? Trump multiple times verbally closed off the discussion and that person should not have acted to take the microphone or needed to, one of the security personnel authorized to do the moving should have intervened and escorted dude out in my opinion at least.

Also if she wanted that mic she should have swept dude and then Kimuraed the ish out of his arm, if your going to go for the mic fucking go for it!

[Fortybox]

Shouldn’t one of the security personnel acted in the according manner to diffuse the situation? Trump multiple times verbally closed off the discussion and that person should not have acted to take the microphone or needed to, one of the security personnel authorized to do the moving should have intervened and escorted dude out in my opinion at least.

Also if she wanted that mic she should have swept dude and then Kimuraed the ish out of his arm, if your going to go for the mic fucking go for it!

Yeah and then the media would then say he is a dictator. The idiot wasn’t even asking questions - he just started opining.

The media is the enemy of the people and CNN is at the forefront.

[Methais]

He really likes the bully pulpit. Notice how he abuses the reporter from behind his podium after the reporter's microphone is taken away. Those reporters are being polite and brave, while he's a civic disgrace.

https://static.fjcdn.com/gifs/Broken_73c1b6_5375577.gif

[Methais]

You could see the fear seeping from trump today. He’s frightened, which is why he requested sessions to resign minutes after that awful press conference.

Trump is a criminal. Only criminals act like this. How do I know? Look at Nixon.

Fuck you fortybox and fuck you tgo. Eat shit. Fuck civility.

https://static.fjcdn.com/gifs/Broken_73c1b6_5375577.gif

[Methais]

Here's a video that slows it down and everything to clearly show he did indeed put his hands on her.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVFPpM6p3D4

But let's face it, you're so worthless and so pro-violence against women that you won't ever admit you're wrong, yet again.

I wonder how long before a version comes out with the Brazzers logo after she kneels down. :lol:

I don't think Acosta was trying to "put his hands" on her, but at the same time if this was someone from Fox News and it happened at an Obama press conference, the left would be going nuts playing the violence against women card, dude would be fired, tarred and feathered, and probably charged with sexual assault and you'd never hear the end of it.

https://i.imgur.com/C7UBjWu.gif

[Methais]

Are you serious? Your slow-mo video shows their arms crossing as she tries to take the mic from him. If you think this is assault, it's just a sign of how egregiously distorted your views are. Moreover, claiming that this is assault utterly disrespects the true victims of assault. Words matter. Use them better.

Remember how just a few weeks ago leftists were trying to make Kavanaugh out to be a violent person because he supposedly threw ice at someone at a bar back in the 80s?

You should really make up your minds as to what you consider violence and stop changing it based on whether you like the person in question or not.

[Astray]

Nobody in that video looks competent.

[Androidpk]

Should be noted the video linked by tgo was doctored by Infowars then shared by the WH.

[Wrathbringer]

Should be noted the video linked by tgo was doctored by Infowars then shared by the WH.

Should be noted that you cleaned out someone's account and tried to get someone here fired from their rl job.

[~Rocktar~]

Should be noted the video linked by tgo was doctored by Infowars then shared by the WH.

Yes, because zooming in qualifies as "doctored". Keep up the great work spreading fake news.

[Androidpk]

Yes, because zooming in qualifies as "doctored". Keep up the great work spreading fake news.

Speeding up Acosta's actions is what was doctored, you Alex Jones wannabe.

[RichardCranium]

Broward County is about to pull it off again with mail in and/or early votes.

https://enr.electionsfl.org/BRO/Summary/1985/

https://floridaelectionwatch.gov/FederalOffices

[Taernath]

Same thing is going on in AZ. The senate race is like a 15k difference.

[RichardCranium]

Same thing is going on in AZ. The senate race is like a 15k difference.

I blame voter suppression.

[Gelston]

I blame voter suppression.

I BLAME SENATE GERRYMANDERING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Stumplicker]

I blame voter suppression.

I blame Tammany Hall thugs making people vote and then shaving their beards and making them vote again.

[Gelston]

https://scontent.fmem1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/45609141_10218412070199836_6805808351222431744_n.j pg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ht=scontent.fmem1-2.fna&oh=4a0bcbc9d09fc936beb53c19571491a4&oe=5C42582C

[Tgo01]

Speeding up Acosta's actions is what was doctored, you Alex Jones wannabe.

You really watched the video I linked and determined it was SPED UP?

Proof positive you don't even watch video evidence you don't like, you get your "facts" directly from CNN's mouth. Damn you're pathetic.

[Gelston]

https://scontent.fmem1-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/45762716_2242012112677017_5355879653254889472_n.jp g?_nc_cat=111&_nc_ht=scontent.fmem1-2.fna&oh=ac7b96ad3dc81eb7c15ea3ab662ad087&oe=5C89FF33

[BriarFox]

You really watched the video I linked and determined it was SPED UP?

Proof positive you don't even watch video evidence you don't like, you get your "facts" directly from CNN's mouth. Damn you're pathetic.
Check your sources: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/11/08/white-house-shares-doctored-video-support-punishment-journalist-jim-acosta/

[Gelston]

Check your sources: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/11/08/white-house-shares-doctored-video-support-punishment-journalist-jim-acosta/are

you posted a bad link. Also, I don't see a difference.

[Neveragain]

you posted a bad link. Also, I don't see a difference.

I looked as well, I can't tell the difference.

[Tgo01]

Check your sources: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/11/08/white-house-shares-doctored-video-support-punishment-journalist-jim-acosta/are

Another toolbag openly admitting he didn't even watch the video I linked and instead gets has his thoughts fed to him directly from Acosta's gaping asshole.

I would love for you or Androidpk to actually watch the video I linked and reply stating with 100% sincerity that the video I linked is sped up and that it's the same video you two are referring from Paul Watson.

Here's that video again since I'm sure you two are too lazy to go back and find it:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVFPpM6p3D4

[Tgo01]

Also, I don't see a difference.

Washington Post even has these "experts" (which are just people on Twitter claiming to be experts) stating a bunch of bullshit about how even though a side by side comparison looks the same it's really different because one frame was withheld for 2 frames and then 2 other frames were dropped to make it look like a faster chopping motion on Acosta's part. It all just sounds like a bunch of bullshit and honestly it sounds like a huge distraction anyways because even from the actual video from CSPAN you can clearly see Acosta pushes her arm away, but the "experts" explain that away by claiming the intern engaged in an "aggressive reach" (I shit you not) and that the intern touched his hand first when she grabbed the microphone. Oh and also it's okay what Acosta did because he said "Pardon me ma'am" afterwards.

[BriarFox]

Link fixed.

[BriarFox]

Also, I watched the original video multiple times and your interpretation is ludicrous. Stop swallowing the WH’s nonsense hook, line, and sinker.

[Tgo01]

Also, I watched the original video multiple times and your interpretation is ludicrous. Stop swallowing the WH’s nonsense hook, line, and sinker.

When are you going to watch the video I linked and tell me it's sped up and that it's the same video Paul Watson linked?

[Parkbandit]

He really likes the bully pulpit. Notice how he abuses the reporter from behind his podium after the reporter's microphone is taken away. Those reporters are being polite and brave, while he's a civic disgrace.

Another shining example of you being blinded by your political viewpoint.

Can you just come clean and admit you are anything but unbiased and you don't give a shit about evidence before throwing anyone under the bus that isn't in lock step with you?

That would be a good start on your journey to some sort of recovery.

If you think I'm wrong.. let's just take Trump out of the picture for a moment. Your absolute hatred for the President is obvious... but try.

Do you think that if someone from Fox News acted in that manner to President Obama.. you would be defending him?

[Parkbandit]

Right - he is the bully. Acosta clearly was not disrespectful at all...

You are WAY out of touch with reality. What happened to you?



He's always been that way. He dips his toes into the political threads to remind us how much of a partisan hack he is. And when he gets called out on being a hypocritical bitch, he tucks tail and goes away for a few months.

Rinse / repeat.

[Parkbandit]

That's assault.

That's only assault if the reporter was from Fox and that was President Obama.

Don't play the pussy leftist's game... that wasn't assault at all.

[Tgo01]

Do you think that if someone from Fox News acted in that manner to President Obama.. you would be defending him?

Obama told a heckler "You're in my house" and that he won't put up with hecklers when they are invited to his house before having the heckler removed.

The only difference between Obama's heckler and Acosta is Acosta pretends to be a journalist. That's legit the only difference. Both the heckler and Acosta stood up and started hurling accusations and demands at the president, refused to sit down and be quiet when asked, and both were barred from the White House. Actually if anything Acosta was treated better because to my knowledge he wasn't removed from the White House at the time of his being brutally manhandled by an "aggressive reach" whereas Obama's heckler was escorted from the White House.

[Parkbandit]

I think it is a huge stretch to call it assault. She should have just said his pas was being revoked for being disruptive, which he assuredly was.

Exactly.

Let's not suddenly all turn into soy drinking, soy farting leftists who suddenly come up with new rules when they feel slighted.

Facts:

It wasn't assault.
President Trump shouldn't have called on Acosta to begin with.
President Trump actually acted better in that situation than I would have expected him to act. Instead of a 12-13 year old, he was at least 15 or 16.
Acosta acted like a 4 year old and hasn't been a journalist for most of his career.
Acosta deserved to get his credentials yanked.
CNN is the real culprit here. They want Acosta to act like a petulant child.. they finally get more viewers than the Pet Channel.
President IS right to call this caravan an invasion. Look up the word and get educated.

[Parkbandit]

Yeah, he should have been removed for being a disruptive tard. That girl should have kneed him in his tiny balls and taken the mic.

THAT would have been assault.. and also, unless she's a sharpshooter.. nearly impossible to hit him there.

[Parkbandit]

Speeding up Acosta's actions is what was doctored, you Alex Jones wannabe.

Add "doctored" to the huge list of words you can't understand.

Stick to 4 letter words. Ones without x, y or z in them... since they are for the advanced class.

[Parkbandit]

Broward County is about to pull it off again with mail in and/or early votes.

https://enr.electionsfl.org/BRO/Summary/1985/

https://floridaelectionwatch.gov/FederalOffices

How is it that every election recount.. it only seems to help the Democrat?

[BriarFox]

He's always been that way. He dips his toes into the political threads to remind us how much of a partisan hack he is. And when he gets called out on being a hypocritical bitch, he tucks tail and goes away for a few months.

Rinse / repeat.

More like a hazmat suit. I exit before it dissolves from the toxicity.

As for your video, Tgo01, I watched it last night. It doesn’t show what you think it does. So, I assume you’re swallowing the WH’s line, thus the link debunking it.

[Parkbandit]

Oh he was most certainly fired.

No.

You can say "yea, Trump was going to fire him.. so he turned in his resignation", but legally, he resigned.

[Parkbandit]

More like a hazmat suit. I exit before it dissolves from the toxicity.

You literally might have more self awareness issues than even time4fun.

At least she acknowledges she's biased. So far, only you and Androidpk have made that type of bullshit claim.

Grats. I didn't think anyone could be less self aware than time4fun. If we had a belt for that type of achievement, you would definitely be in the title match.

[Androidpk]

No.

You can say "yea, Trump was going to fire him.. so he turned in his resignation", but legally, he resigned.

You can't hand someone a resignation letter, tell them to resign, and call it anything but firing. And it's looking more and more like Whitaker's appointment is illegal.

[Tgo01]

As for your video, Tgo01, I watched it last night. It doesn’t show what you think it does. So, I assume you’re swallowing the WH’s line, thus the link debunking it.

I didn't ask you if the video I linked shows anything, I asked you to tell me with a straight face it's sped up and that it's the video Paul Watson linked to. Since you love fallacies so much what you are doing here is a strawman fallacy.

[Tgo01]

And it's looking more and more like Whitaker's appointment is illegal.

Of course it is because it's Trump.

So when are you going to tell me the video I linked is sped up and is the same video Paul Watson linked?

[Parkbandit]

You can't hand someone a resignation letter, tell them to resign, and call it anything but firing. And it's looking more and more like Whitaker's appointment is illegal.

The President asked for his resignation.

Sessions wrote a resignation letter and gave it to the President.

From a legal standpoint, Sessions quit his job. The President didn't fire him.

This isn't an opinion. This is the law.

Once again, you are wrong.

[Androidpk]

The President asked for his resignation.

Sessions wrote a resignation letter and gave it to the President.

From a legal standpoint, Sessions quit his job. The President didn't fire him.

This isn't an opinion. This is the law.

Once again, you are wrong.

You might want to learn how the law works instead of spending so much time stalking and harassing people on the internet.

[Tgo01]

You might want to learn how the law works instead of spending so much time stalking and harassing people on the internet.

So when are you going to tell me the video I linked is sped up and is the same video Paul Watson linked?

[Androidpk]

So when are you going to tell me the video I linked is sped up and is the same video Paul Watson linked?

When are you going to man up for once and admit you're fake news and you have no problem with the WH spreading fake news to slander a journalist just because they don't like his tough questions?

[Gelston]

When are you going to man up for once and admit you're fake news and you have no problem with the WH spreading fake news to slander a journalist just because they don't like his tough questions?

When are you going to man up and post the death threats you claimed to have receive?

[Tgo01]

When are you going to man up for once and admit you're fake news and you have no problem with the WH spreading fake news to slander a journalist just because they don't like his tough questions?

So in other words you're wrong...yet again. No wonder you made such a big deal about "predicting" the Democrats would take the House, take those easy victories while you can. Hey here's another way to up your correct/wrong ratio: go ahead and predict Trump will still be president tomorrow. OMG! Who saw that one coming?

[Methais]

That's only assault if the reporter was from Fox and that was President Obama.

Don't play the pussy leftist's game... that wasn't assault at all.

No, in that case it would be rape.

[Methais]

When are you going to man up for once and admit you're fake news and you have no problem with the WH spreading fake news to slander a journalist just because they don't like his tough questions?

Shut up loser and post some death threats you lying gaping unshaven fish smelling cunt.

[Tgo01]

Here is Acosta screaming questions at Trump during a White House Easter event while Trump was coloring with children.

https://twitter.com/nickmon1112/status/1060665809364811776

But yes, let's all act like Acosta is the gold standard of journalism and was unfairly treated. Honestly I think Trump and the White House showed amazing restraint by taking this long to kick his ass out. He's nothing but a "resister"/protester disguising himself as a legitimate journalist.

[Androidpk]

So in other words you're wrong...yet again. No wonder you made such a big deal about "predicting" the Democrats would take the House, take those easy victories while you can. Hey here's another way to up your correct/wrong ratio: go ahead and predict Trump will still be president tomorrow. OMG! Who saw that one coming?

I predict you'll still be a right wing extremist tomorrow with a penchant for angry outbursts. How's that for an easy prediction.

[Methais]

I predict you'll still be a right wing extremist tomorrow with a penchant for angry outbursts. How's that for an easy prediction.

I predict you will never produce a shred of evidence to back up any of the many obvious lies you keep pulling out of your time4wrecked flaccid asshole.

I also predict you will suck at everything forever.

[Parkbandit]

You might want to learn how the law works instead of spending so much time stalking and harassing people on the internet.

Irony.

Trust me.. I've hired and fired more people than you know or have mooched off.

The only person here saying President Trump fired him from a LEGAL perspective is you.

And once again, you are wrong.

[Neveragain]

Here is Acosta screaming questions at Trump during a White House Easter event while Trump was coloring with children.

https://twitter.com/nickmon1112/status/1060665809364811776

But yes, let's all act like Acosta is the gold standard of journalism and was unfairly treated. Honestly I think Trump and the White House showed amazing restraint by taking this long to kick his ass out. He's nothing but a "resister"/protester disguising himself as a legitimate journalist.

I like the one where he's screaming at Kim Jun even though Kim doesn't speak english.

[Tgo01]

I like the one where he's screaming at Kim Jun even though Kim doesn't speak english.

He's nothing but a joke.

"Sir, are you giving up your nukes?

What kind of dumbass question is that for a "journalist" to ask the leader of a country, even if he could understand his question?

A country giving up their nukes is going to take time, compromise, negotiations, and a whole hell of a lot of diplomacy, and Jim Acosta thinks he can drill down to the bedrock of the issue with one simple question.

[Androidpk]

Irony.

Trust me.. I've hired and fired more people than you know or have mooched off.

The only person here saying President Trump fired him from a LEGAL perspective is you.

And once again, you are wrong.

Really? Just me? Even Fox News legal analyst Judge Nap is saying the same. Why don't you go and actually learn something instead of stalking and harassing people. Here's something you can look up to help get you started, constructive discharge and how it applies in situations regarding resignations vs firings.

[Neveragain]

To be honest most these journalists suck these days, it's not a journalists job to debate.

[Tgo01]

https://www.dailywire.com/news/38153/breaking-voter-fraud-allegedly-found-deep-blue-ryan-saavedra


Stream of aggressive red stamping at Miami-Dade canvassing board as panel rejects provisional ballots from 108 people who showed up to vote a second time in the same election.

"But there's no such thing as voter fraud in the US!!!11111" -- Angry far leftists everywhere

[~Rocktar~]

And it's looking more and more like Whitaker's appointment is illegal.

So, how do you come up with this piece of fantasy. When you explain the so called logic of this, pretend I don't watch the media 24/7 and blindly accept whatever talking head is up there since I don't.

[Tgo01]

So Anderson Cooper was interviewing Jim Acosta on CNN (because you know that's how you treat a supposed journalist, as a guest on your show where you do an interview with them), and they played a clip of the incident in question while Jim Acosta is talking about what happens. At one point Acosta, the piece of shit liar, says "As you can see I never touched her" but the interesting part is CNN cut the clip of the actual incident in question where the intern tried to get the mic away and Acosta clearly pushed her arm away.

Come on, even far left political hacks such as Briarfox has to call foul on this blatant fake news. Right? ...right?

[Neveragain]

So Anderson Cooper was interviewing Jim Acosta on CNN (because you know that's how you treat a supposed journalist, as a guest on your show where you do an interview with them), and they played a clip of the incident in question while Jim Acosta is talking about what happens. At one point Acosta, the piece of shit liar, says "As you can see I never touched her" but the interesting part is CNN cut the clip of the actual incident in question where the intern tried to get the mic away and Acosta clearly pushed her arm away.

Come on, even far left political hacks such as Briarfox has to call foul on this blatant fake news. Right? ...right?

They won't call shit out. They are perfectly complacent with a network that calls black people negros and defines white males as not being people. Like I said, these people are being radicalized.

[Tgo01]

They won't call shit out. They are perfectly complacent with a network that calls black people negros and defines white males as not being people. Like I said, these people are being radicalized.

They are telling you to not believe what your eyes are seeing and instead believe what they are telling you. They are accusing their opponents of doing the exact shit they are doing.

Even Goebbels would be like "Dude, really?"

Again this all reminds me of Bigworm. I show him a video where people are clearly punching, shoving, and hitting someone on the head with a flagpole and he says "I don't see any crimes being committed in this video." Why? Because the media has drilled it into his head that the only violence committed in Charlottesville were from white supremacists and anyone who says otherwise is also a white supremacist.

[RichardCranium]

To be honest most these journalists suck these days, it's not a journalists job to debate.

This is why I can only laugh when people get upset about the calling out of mainstream media. The media gave up on reporting the news a long time ago. Now they just seem intent on creating news.

[Androidpk]

They are telling you to not believe what your eyes are seeing and instead believe what they are telling you. They are accusing their opponents of doing the exact shit they are doing.

Even Goebbels would be like "Dude, really?"

Again this all reminds me of Bigworm. I show him a video where people are clearly punching, shoving, and hitting someone on the head with a flagpole and he says "I don't see any crimes being committed in this video." Why? Because the media has drilled it into his head that the only violence committed in Charlottesville were from white supremacists and anyone who says otherwise is also a white supremacist.

Nice gaslighting.

At a Veterans of Foreign Wars Convention in Kansas City, Mo., on Tuesday, President Trump told veterans and guests that they shouldn't believe what they're reading about his administration or seeing on the news.

[RichardCranium]

Nice gaslighting.

At a Veterans of Foreign Wars Convention in Kansas City, Mo., on Tuesday, President Trump told veterans and guests that they shouldn't believe what they're reading about his administration or seeing on the news.

Catch 22. You really shouldn't believe the news. You also shouldn't believe anything Trump says.

[~Rocktar~]

And it's looking more and more like Whitaker's appointment is illegal.

So, how do you come up with this piece of fantasy. When you explain the so called logic of this, pretend I don't watch the media 24/7 and blindly accept whatever talking head is up there since I don't.

And?

[Tgo01]

Nice gaslighting.

I agree, that's exactly what the mainstream media that you consume is doing, gaslighting. Finally pk says something smart.

[Neveragain]

I agree, that's exactly what the mainstream media that you consume is doing, gaslighting. Finally pk says something smart.

9/11 + 24 hour news cycle + internet = western society suffering from mass psychosis.

[sellstuff1]

White House literally creates fake news to push a narrative.

Fucking deplorables.

https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/439dyp/the-white-house-is-circulating-a-doctored-infowars-video?utm_source=reddit.com

[drauz]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=29&v=4S2HRYYZoko

[RichardCranium]

White House literally creates fake news to push a narrative.

Fucking deplorables.

https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/439dyp/the-white-house-is-circulating-a-doctored-infowars-video?utm_source=reddit.com

I don't think you know the meaning of the words literally or creates, Inspire.

[Tgo01]

I don't think you know the meaning of the words literally or creates, Inspire.

Does this mean Inspire is also cwolff? That would explain so much.

[~Rocktar~]

White House literally creates fake news to push a narrative.

Fucking deplorables.

https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/439dyp/the-white-house-is-circulating-a-doctored-infowars-video?utm_source=reddit.com

When Buzzfeed debunks your retarded claims, you can be pretty sure that it's false and the accusation is pretty retarded.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/charliewarzel/acosta-video-trump-cnn-aide-sarah-sanders

[Gelston]

Does this mean Inspire is also cwolff? That would explain so much.

It isn't Alastir.

[Tgo01]

It isn't Alastir.

Yeah apparently not, he messaged me on LNet to tell me to quit being mean to him. So Alastir is Inspire then? Has this been known for a long time and I'm the last to know? :(

[SonoftheNorth]

So Alastir is Inspire then? Has this been known for a long time and I'm the last to know? :(

Yes

[Gelston]

Yeah apparently not, he messaged me on LNet to tell me to quit being mean to him. So Alastir is Inspire then? Has this been known for a long time and I'm the last to know? :(

Yes, Alastir is Inspire, Sellstuff1 is not. Sellstuff1 is also not cwolff.

[Tgo01]

Sellstuff1 is also not cwolff.

Debatable.

[Gelston]

Debatable.

It isn't, promise.

[Tgo01]

It isn't, promise.

If he's not cwolff the person he is cwolff the idea.

[Gelston]

If he's not cwolff the person he is cwolff the idea.

Well, I'll grant that.

[sellstuff1]

https://apnews.com/c575bd1cc3b1456cb3057ef670c7fe2a I'm lmaoing irl that you debunked my claim of fake news with fake news. Retards. Brain-washed retards. You're all just Putin's little finger-puppets trying to be nationalists.

[Gelston]

https://apnews.com/c575bd1cc3b1456cb3057ef670c7fe2a I'm lmaoing irl that you debunked my claim of fake news with fake news. Retards. Brain-washed retards. You're all just Putin's little finger-puppets trying to be nationalists.

This is why people like using the NPC locksmith instead of you.

[sellstuff1]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TSpgB0QS0g
Which one's fake? The one where an AP video editing instructor goes over it frame by frame or the one where a White House desperate to further denigrate CNN(like they've been doing for two fucking years) alters the content of the video professionally to fit their narrative?

[Gelston]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TSpgB0QS0g Which one's fake? The one where an AP video editing instructor goes over it frame by frame or the one where a White House desperate to further denigrate CNN(like they've been doing for two fucking years) alters the content of the video professionally to fit their narrative?

You should learn how to post a youtube clip.

[sellstuff1]

Can't click a fucking link? Fine.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TSpgB0QS0g

[Gelston]

Can't click a fucking link? Fine.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TSpgB0QS0g

MAybe people don't want to open up new tabs to view your partisan hack bullshit videos?

[sellstuff1]

MAybe people don't want to open up new tabs to view your partisan hack bullshit videos?

It's AP news. You read Fox News. Are you actually this dumb or does Putin pay you to be this dumb?

[Gelston]

It's AP news. You read Fox News. Are you actually this dumb or does Putin pay you to be this dumb?

No, your video was from the Independent. A liberal leaning British websource.

[sellstuff1]

No, your video was from the Independent. A liberal leaning British websource.

*And* from the Associated Press. Do you think that because a website has a liberal slant that they will intentionally try to misrepresent facts?

[Gelston]

*And* from the Associated Press. Do you think that because a website has a liberal slant that they will intentionally try to misrepresent facts?

No, it is directly from the Independent. The people who put it up is the Independent. They may have taken things from the AP, as all news sources do, but this isn't a collaborative effort between then. And no, I don't think that because something has a liberal slant it'll intentionally misrepresent facts. I think all of them do it. Especially one that is owned by a Saudi and two Russians.


It's AP news. You read Fox News. Are you actually this dumb or does Putin pay you to be this dumb?

I just find it is funny that you're posting videos from a websource that is owned by two Russian Oligarchs, a father and son (and a Saudi guy too). And one of the Russians is a former KGB agent... Yet I'm the one being paid by Putin huh?

[sellstuff1]

No, it is directly from the Independent. The people who put it up is the Independent. They may have taken things from the AP, as all news sources do, but this isn't a collaborative effort between then. And no, I don't think that because something has a liberal slant it'll intentionally misrepresent facts. I think all of them do it. Especially one that is owned by a Saudi and two Russians.

https://apnews.com/c575bd1cc3b1456cb3057ef670c7fe2a

Here's the AP news article from the video.

It was written by Dave Bauder, an AP employee.

Here's Dave Bauder's linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dave-bauder-13b96a5

It was also written by Calvin Woodward, notorious for doing shitty fact-checking during President Obama's state of the union address.

[sellstuff1]

I just find it is funny that you're posting videos from a websource that is owned by two Russian Oligarchs, a father and son (and a Saudi guy too). And one of the Russians is a former KGB agent... Yet I'm the one being paid by Putin huh?

Nice whataboutism, Comrade.

[Gelston]

https://apnews.com/c575bd1cc3b1456cb3057ef670c7fe2a

Here's the AP news article from the video.

It was written by Dave Bauder, an AP employee.

Here's Dave Bauder's linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dave-bauder-13b96a5

It was also written by Calvin Woodward, notorious for doing shitty fact-checking during President Obama's state of the union address.

You seem to have mistaken me for someone who gives a damn about any of this in the first place. I think it was stupid for the White House to retweeted the video. Again, they didn't "literally create it" they retweeted something someone else created. And that is all anyone has said about your post from the start.

I still think Acosta should have been booted for being disruptive. It wasn't an Acosta 1 on 1 interview with the President, it was a press conference.


Nice whataboutism, Comrade.

I mean, you literally said it in this thread mere minutes ago, but okay.

[Gelston]

https://scontent.fmem1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/45586547_2374697286093959_8580946651378614272_n.jp g?_nc_cat=109&_nc_eui2=AeFcFQ0XuhjeXZPZzn2dWpBi2Y2gbqkFnHpLLpwJr 87SG_-T4GC0PQMZ_HgqW8JyB1AIgvIDDEpRJ8heeW6475kAffsfFraPn 2b2k5-2Tpb6Bw&_nc_ht=scontent.fmem1-1.fna&oh=0ffc53b33a6e335250b22cb2cc344ed8&oe=5C736EB6

[sellstuff1]

I still think Acosta should have been booted for being disruptive. It wasn't an Acosta 1 on 1 interview with the President, it was a press conference.


It was the third press conference since the election that President Orange Clown Man has given after he stopped giving them because he is incapable of speaking in complete sentences and would damage his own approval rating after each fiasco.

Remember The Mooch? Fired after 10 days, because the job of being Trump's front-man is not only impossible to perform with dignity, but is also undeniable career suicide.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BgabMU3v3Q

How about Sean Spicer?

Says Adolf Hitler "didn't even sink to the level of using chemical weapons. ... He was not using the gas on his own people the same way that (Bashar al-)Assad is doing."
— Sean Spicer on Tuesday, April 11th, 2017 in comments to reporters

He's either a Holocaust denier or he huffs paint for fun. Those are the only two explanations.

I think that Acosta has more integrity than literally anyone associated with Trump. And I think that the WH's efforts to push the narrative of an Acosta attack on a journalist stinks of manipulation of recorded history by a totalitarian regime.

[Tgo01]

It was the third press conference since the election that President Orange Clown Man has given after he stopped giving them because he is incapable of speaking in complete sentences and would damage his own approval rating after each fiasco.

Remember The Mooch? Fired after 10 days, because the job of being Trump's front-man is not only impossible to perform with dignity, but is also undeniable career suicide.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BgabMU3v3Q

How about Sean Spicer?

Says Adolf Hitler "didn't even sink to the level of using chemical weapons. ... He was not using the gas on his own people the same way that (Bashar al-)Assad is doing."
— Sean Spicer on Tuesday, April 11th, 2017 in comments to reporters

He's either a Holocaust denier or he huffs paint for fun. Those are the only two explanations.

I think that Acosta has more integrity than literally anyone associated with Trump. And I think that the WH's efforts to push the narrative of an Acosta attack on a journalist stinks of manipulation of recorded history by a totalitarian regime.

How is this not cwolff? Did he clone himself or something?

[sellstuff1]

How is this not cwolff? Did he clone himself or something?

Hey it's everyone favorite NPC fascist! I'd call you a goose-stepper but from your youtube videos it sounds like you get winded standing up, much less marching.

[sellstuff1]

"Fascists are never content to merely lie; they must transform their lie into a new reality, and they must persuade people to believe in the unreality they’ve created. And if you get people to do that, you can convince them to do anything."

-Hannah Arendt

[Tgo01]

Hey it's everyone favorite NPC fascist! I'd call you a goose-stepper but from your youtube videos it sounds like you get winded standing up, much less marching.

I wonder if cwolff has logged onto the PC, was about to start posting, but then read some of sellstuff1's posts and was like "Well I see someone is taking over in my absence" and that's why he hasn't been posting lately?


"Fascists are never content to merely lie; they must transform their lie into a new reality, and they must persuade people to believe in the unreality they’ve created. And if you get people to do that, you can convince them to do anything."

-Hannah Arendt

Right down to the quoting of random people as if that in and of itself is an argument. It's uncanny.

[sellstuff1]

.

[sellstuff1]

I wonder if cwolff has logged onto the PC, was about to start posting, but then read some of sellstuff1's posts and was like "Well I see someone is taking over in my absence" and that's why he hasn't been posting lately?



Right down to the quoting of random people as if that in and of itself is an argument. It's uncanny.

Sorry, I can't understand what you're saying when you've got orange clown dick makeup smeared all over your pretty face.

[sellstuff1]

Right down to the quoting of random people as if that in and of itself is an argument. It's uncanny.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Arendt

Johanna "Hannah" Cohn Arendt was a German philosopher and political theorist. Her many books and articles on topics ranging from totalitarianism to epistemology have had a lasting influence on political theory. Arendt is widely considered one of the most important political philosophers of the twentieth century.

Yeah definitely a random person and not one of the most important political philosophers of the twentieth century. Oh wait your superiors haven't given you a directive from a think-tank to whataboutism a German philosopher, so you're basically speechless when confronted with evidence of your fascist ideals.

[Tgo01]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Arendt

Johanna "Hannah" Cohn Arendt was a German philosopher and political theorist. Her many books and articles on topics ranging from totalitarianism to epistemology have had a lasting influence on political theory. Arendt is widely considered one of the most important political philosophers of the twentieth century.

Yeah definitely a random person and not one of the most important political philosophers of the twentieth century. Oh wait your superiors haven't given you a directive from a think-tank to whataboutism a German philosopher, so you're basically speechless when confronted with evidence of your fascist ideals.

See what I mean? Quoting some random person is "evidence" of his claims. I wonder what would happen it cwolff did come back? Would two cwolffs being in the same place at the same time cause some sort of tear in the fabric of reality and we all cease to exist?

[sellstuff1]

See what I mean? Quoting some random person is "evidence" of his claims. I wonder what would happen it cwolff did come back? Would two cwolffs being in the same place at the same time cause some sort of tear in the fabric of reality and we all cease to exist?

I wonder what happen when a fascist is publicly executed? Do all the other snowflake fascists scream out in terror, because they're next?

[Tgo01]

I wonder what happen when a fascist is publicly executed? Do all the other snowflake fascists scream out in terror, because they're next?

Fantasizing about people dying he doesn't like. Yup, cwolff Part 2 here.

[sellstuff1]

Fantasizing about people dying he doesn't like. Yup, cwolff Part 2 here.

You think you qualify as a person, that's cute. Sorry, NPC. Maybe next year.