For months, we have been discussing the concerted effort of Democrats to bar challengers to President Joe Biden from primary ballots and block third-party candidates like Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Cornel West from appearing on the November ballots. As both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris insisted that “Democracy is on the ballot,” their allies sought to deny the ability of voters to cast their ballots for other candidates. Now, a state judge has issued a stinging denial of the effort of Democratic officials to block West from the Michigan ballots.
Democratic Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson helped lead the effort to prevent citizens from being able to vote for West in Michigan.
Judge James Robert Redford issued the ruling days after West was kicked off the ballot due to technical issues.
West issued a statement: “Victory in Michigan! We brought thousands of voices to the table, and the court listened, rejecting the Democrats’ technical challenges. This is a win for democracy and for every person fighting for truth, justice, and love. Onward!” He is running with Black Lives Matter co-founder Melina Abdullah.
Democrats are still pushing to strip them from the ballots in other states to prevent voters from having a choice in the election.
Another such effort failed in Maine recently.
The press and pundits have been largely silent about this effort despite the glaring contradiction with the campaign rhetoric of the DNC on saving democracy from imminent destruction.
The media does not appear at all alarmed or critical of the effort to limit democratic choice. The Washington Post stated clinically “Democrats are taking third-party threats seriously this time.” Taking it seriously appears to mean using legal means to keep them from the ballots.
It is true that the main political parties have challenged qualification signatures and paperwork in the past. However, the reports indicate a systemic effort geared toward reducing the choices for voters. What is striking is that this is coming from democratic groups and the DNC, which are raising money on the “save democracy” narrative.
The contradiction is spellbinding. On the same sites promising to oppose the third party candidates, the DNC and other groups push the narrative that only the Democrats are working to protect the right to vote.
The Post reports that Democrats have studied the Hillary Clinton campaign and vowed not to allow third party candidates to drain away millions of voters as they did in 2016.
This well-funded campaign to block other candidates is continuing. It was cited by Kennedy as one of the reasons that he pulled out of the race and endorsed former president Donald Trump.
West is now a threat with independents looking for an alternative to Trump and Harris. West has long been a charismatic figure in academia. Decades ago, I was his editor on what may have been his first law review publication as a young, rising divinity professor at Princeton.
One does not have to support Trump, West, or the other third-party opponents to find this effort repulsive. While some of us have challenged that hyperbolic claim that this “may be our last election,” the one thing that may not be on the ballot is choice, if the self-appointed defenders of Democracy have anything to say about it.
When I want to take a break from being thoughtful and wholesome, it’s nice to know there’s a cesspool of rightwing extremists here to provide some retarded entertainment.
Still smelling Trump’s diaper, booger boy?
Wholesome… cesspool, only a ped* dem would consider itself wholesome asd a cesspool.
Wholsesome as in ped*phile? Oh the joy you must have…
“Right-wing extremists.”
You mean the American Founders and the Framers who created America and produced the Constitution and Bill of Rights?
Those right-wing extremists?
The inverse being the parasitical and enslavement-craving communists of Karl Marx’s vivid, incoherent, and fantastical imagination.
Ms. McCarthy on the November election results (amusing to me 🙂
Dear Democrats: Things Are Not Looking Good
https://jennasside.rocks/p/dear-democrats-things-are-not-looking
“I hope you’ve got your organic, ethically-sourced stress balls and fair trade lavender calming spray handy, because I think you’re going to need them. The anti-vax black sheep of Camelot has thrown his support behind the felonious, mean-tweeting Cheeto, and despite xlxaxuxgxhxaxbxlxex heroic MSM attempts to convince the masses otherwise, the unlikely duo appears to be unbeatable. Even if you cheat harder than you did in the last election—and let’s be real, you set the bar pretty high for yourselves there—it’s looking like you might have to make good on that threat to move to Canada come November.”
“Zuckerberg tells Rogan FBI warning prompted Biden laptop story censorship”
– David Molloy, BBC, 26 August 2022
_________________________________________
Zuck told us all about the FBI’s election interference in 2022.
Why is Zuck reprising his mea culpa today?
Zuckerberg is attempting to shift the onus from Kamala Harris to Joe “The Irrelevant” Biden.
Kamala Harris was the “last person in the room” expounding on expurgation.
Excellent article by Mattias Desmet today.
In other words, while the term ‘demo-cratic’ suggests that the Democratic Party represents the interests of the people, the very opposite is likely: the Democratic Party represents industries that have the most detrimental impact on the people. The decline of the Democratic Party follows a general mechanism: the institutionalization of a virtue usually deteriorates into the vice that is precisely opposed to the original virtue. According to that psychological mechanism—which I won’t elaborate on here—the police become a threat to the safety of the people (see, for example, the police response during COVID protests and what happens in ‘police states’), the church a threat to morality (perversion and child abuse thrived within institutionalized religion), medicine detrimental to health (a huge percentage of diseases are ‘iatrogenic’) and the university becomes the main producer of misinformation (see replication crisis).
But the most important problem of the Democratic Party is this: they rely more and more excessively on propaganda to keep in power. The only thing that still holds the Democratic Party together is the immense Big Tech propaganda machine, in which the media are also deeply involved. I will elaborate on that thoroughly in my next article. The discourse of the Democratic Party has become an empty shell where the sea whispers a melancholy dirge for the great Democrats of the past.
https://open.substack.com/pub/mattiasdesmet/p/trump-kennedy-and-the-true-nature?
PAYOFFS TOO
“Independent left-wing presidential candidate Dr. Cornel West told said Friday that Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign offered him a job in her potential administration, and to pay his campaign debts, if he dropped out of the 2024 race.”
– Joel B. Pollak
I’m sure Harris’s campaign is quite familiar with the “jobs” she offered to get a leg up, so to speak.
The planks in her platform are not clear.
What is Kamala’s favorite position?
I know, let’s ask Willy!
“What is Kamala’s favorite position? ”
There are 100 positions in the Kama Sutra, the Kamala Sutra may have added even more. I doubt that she had time to show them all to Willy. She probably saved her favorites tor the Oakland gang bangers anyway, and baby, they convinced she belong to th’ streets, so they ain’t snitchin’ on her.
Kamala Harris is, “Trying to Hide Her Positions from the Electorate.”
– Senator Tom Cotton
“Job Offers,” the mother’s milk of politics.
I presume you are talking about JFK Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard being offered jobs on Trump’s transition team.
Cabinet positions. Glad you approve.
Don’t know. Ask Willy.
Nice Shot, Olly!
Olly: : “I’m sure Harris’s campaign is quite familiar with the “jobs” she offered to get a leg up, so to speak.”
Both legs I think it is said.
Trump keeps crapping his Depends.
You should stay out of Trump’s pants.
He crapped them again.
You should know.
You would know
Anyone who wants to see the modern Democratic Party in action should look back to the 2020 Governor’s race in Michigan. There were eight Republican candidates seeking to challenge the failed-Gretchen Whitmer. The leading candidate was James Craig, a former Police Commissioner in Detroit, and an African-American, who probably would have won the general election. Another strong candidate was Perry Johnson, a former GM executive. But Democratic operatives challenged the nominating petitions of five of the candidates, and the state Elections Bureau disqualified all of those candidates on the grounds that many of the signatures had “obviously” been forged. But it appears that this decision was based only a facial review of the petitions, not a comparison of petiton signatures to confirmed signatures. An appeal to the Board of Canvassers split 2-2, along partisan lines in refusing to overturn the disqualification. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2022-election/5-gop-candidates-blocked-michigan-governors-primary-false-signatures-rcna30673
edwardmahl,
The Democrats idea of free and fair is the same as the Nazis, or the former Soviet Union.
Edward- :The leading candidate was James Craig, a former Police Commissioner in Detroit”
I wondered what happened with him. I thought he was great. Upstate is right, the Democrats are acting like Soviets now. Given their open behavior and despicable lack of scruples can there be very much doubt that they stole the last presidential election and will try to steal this one?
OT
Milhouse says:
August 27, 2024 at 9:06 AM
“You’re lying, and you keep lying. At the time of that exchange between Washington and Jay, there is no evidence that either of them had read Vattel, or cared what he had to say.”
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
You can lead a student to knowledge but you can’t make him assimilate and comprehend.
You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink.
__________________________________________________________________
“The circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the law of nations.”
Of course, Vattel was pervasive throughout Europe and the Colonies since 1762, and Vattel was not “foreign” but international (i.e. the Law of Nations). Blackstone was obsolete and irrelevant in his discussion of not citizens but subjects and ligeance to a liege lord in a dictatorship of monarchs. In his letter of 1775, Franklin thanked Dumas for copies of Vattel writing, “I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the law of nations.”
______________________________________________
“OF THE FIVE, THE ONE THE AMERICAN FOUNDERS MOST FREQUENTLY CONSULTED WAS VATTEL.”
“The Ideas that formed the Constitution, Part 20: Vattel and the Law of Nations”
The Law of Nations
Legal terms of art also appear in what constitutional lawyers call the “Define and Punish Clause” (Article I, Section 8, Clause 10). This provision gives Congress power to “define and punish Offenses … against the Law of Nations.”
The Founders’ Sources of International Law
During the 17th and 18th centuries, five great scholars forged international law into its modern shape. In 1783, the Confederation Congress empaneled a committee consisting of James Madison of Virginia, Thomas Mifflin of Pennsylvania, and Hugh Williamson of North Carolina—all of whom were to serve at the 1787 Constitutional Convention. This committee recommended that Congress purchase the works of all five international law scholars.
Emer de Vattel
Of the five, the one the American Founders most frequently consulted was Vattel. Like Grotius, Vattel was both a scholar and diplomat. His principal work, “Le Droit des Gens” (“The Law of Nations”), was published in French in 1758 and translated into English two years later. You can learn more about Vattel’s life at the Online Library of Liberty.
There were four reasons why Vattel was so congenial to the American Founders: First, he was the most recent of the five great authorities. Second, his book was comprehensive and readable. Third, he was a strong advocate for individual liberty. And fourth, he discussed issues that, while not always part of the “law of nations,” were very important to the Founders: the nature of confederations, the superiority of constitutions to legislatures, the need for one and only one person to supervise the executive branch, and so forth.
Vattel was referenced at the Constitutional Convention, primarily in a speech by Luther Martin of Maryland. He also showed up during the ratification debates. For example, at the Pennsylvania ratifying convention, James Wilson argued about Vattel with an Antifederalist delegate. In the South Carolina legislature, Charles Cotesworth Pinckney also debated Vattel with an Antifederalist. In New York, Gov. George Clinton relied on Vattel in a speech to his state’s ratifying convention.
– Rob Natelson, Independence Institute . org
You keep lying. He was only moderately known and not very influential, while Blackstone was hugely influential.
Keep in mind several points:
1. In interpreting the constitution, what matters is not what the framers of a clause had in mind; that is completely irrelevant, just as it’s irrelevant what the draftsman who drew up a statute was thinking. Even what the ratifiers had in mind isn’t really relevant, since again it’s the text that controls, not the ratifier’s private thoughts. The only thing that matters is the public meaning at the time the clause was ratified. The constitution means what an ordinary citizen of the time would have thought it meant.
2. Vattel was not very well known in America at the time. A few copies existed in French, and there was an English translation as well, but his influence was nowhere near that of Blackstone, whose book was almost as common in America as the Bible.
3. The only English translation at the time did NOT use the term “natural-born”. So anyone reading that term in the constitution would NOT have been reminded of Vattel’s definition. The first translation to use that term was published in 1797.
4. Blackstone, on the other hand, DID use that term, so that’s what would come to the mind of anyone who had read him.
5. Even those few who’d read Vattel in the original French wouldn’t have his definition come to mind when they saw that phrase, because of course it doesn’t appear in the French either! It’s not a phrase that even exists in French; it’s a term of art used by the English common law, on which all of our law is based.
6. Washington borrowed a copy of Vattel after he was already president, and never returned it, which is likely to mean he never got around to reading it, and also that he had not read it before. So at the time of the Philadelphia convention he had probably not read it.
7. There are no records of *any* discussion of the term, at any of the conventions or by anyone involved. If it were an obscure term pulled from some French book, someone would have asked about it. Obviously it was a well-known term, and the only source from which it could have been well-known is the English common law, which is explained by Blackstone.
“They vowed not to let third part votes drain away millions of votes” These authoritarian thugs that rule this Country are indistinguishable from thugs like Maduro. Their sense of Democracy is a one-party State.
Cornell West took the payoff, just like Bernie did.
OT
BURN THE FLAG?
The freedom of speech includes thought, choice, discrimination, and opinion sufficient to permit the burning of the American flag.
The freedom of speech includes thought, choice, discrimination, and opinion insufficient to permit so-called “racism.”
Were the American Founders and Framers “racist?”
Was “racism” a pejorative in 1789 at the ratification of the Constitution?
The rights, freedoms, privileges, and immunities of the Constitution and Bill of Rights may not be implemented arbitrarily, partially, and with personal bias.
The rights, freedoms, privileges, and immunities of the Constitution and Bill of Rights must be implemented equitably and without bias, favor, affirmative, or negative action.
Indeed, Americans are allowed to speak freely, burn the flag, be racist, etc., per fundamental law, understanding that bodily injury, property damage, harassment, etc., are illegal.
A Carrousel rotating with jumping horses and other beasts is the purest picture of current events. The media sees nothing but others on the carrousel and reports that everything is just hunky dory, and all the up and down being reported is just more nonsense, Yaw know disinformation, (yaw as in movement left or right).
The left has been pushing the legal, lingual, moral and other values to limits never before seen in America. History has shown the pendulum swinging here and there, generally its closest to the middle of the swing, but when one side gets weighted, the swing gets longer unit the weight is discharged bringing the swing back to the middle. I think we have reached the limit of the swing of the democrat’s agenda of, controllable anarchy!
George W,
You seem to have a way with imagery. Ever consider becoming a poet?
Great observation concerning the pendulum. While I oppose the Democrats leftist, socialist, Marxis, communist, fascist swing, I have no desire for the kind of government Robert Heinlein depicts in his book, Starship Troopers. Of course his book was a warning just like Orwell’s 1984.
“Democracy is on the ballot.”
So the Democrats must forcibly ensconce the “Biggest Loser,” the candidate who received no money, received no votes, and definitively lost all relevant primary elections.
The Democrat Party is the party of fraud and deceit, just as Karl Marx designed it.
Democrats covet, bear false witness, and steal the power of the “dictatorship of the proletariat” as ruled by the so-called “intellectuals.”
Conservatives seek the power of freedom and the clear meaning of the literal words of the Constitution.
In the movie Saving Private Ryan there was a sniveling coward who stood by when he could have saved a fellow solder. The German soldier when he had finished killing the American soldier walked by the shivering American and didn’t even bother to kill him because he knew he was no danger. This is the picture that comes to mind when I think of Mark Zuckerberg. Zuckerberg caved to the government censorship and to secure his safety he gave $350,000,000 to the Democratic Party to get out the vote in 2020. Just like the sniveling coward in Saving Private Ryan Zuckerberg believed that no one would ever find out. Both will have the pleasure of carrying their cowardice to their graves.
Dodging and weaving as it dawns on him now that Trump is going to win.
He is a Quisling.
Thoughtless —- You completely disremember the encounter in the stairwell.
So Harris now says that she would sign the border protection bill. That bill, negotiated by senators such as James Lankford (R-Okla.) and Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), requires hundreds of millions of dollars of unspent funds to be used to continue building a wall on the border. Axios, a no friend of conservatives magazine has the story titled “Harris flip flops on border wall”. I hear that Kameleons thrive in the nooks and crannies of the border wall. Harris said many times that the wall was just a Trump vanity project. Don’t be surprised if she finally visits the border wall with shovel in hand. She has to sign the bill to find out what’s in it. Just like Biden she’s sharp as a tack.
TiT,
Harris was against Trump’s border wall until she was for it, when it became an important issue for Americans in this election. Says a lot about her character or lack there of.
The bipartisan Border Protection bill was a compromised worked out by both parties, and it contains provisions that each disagrees with but agreed to in the spirit of compromise to get the deal done. So, you are just plain wrong in attacking VP Harris’s character–the wall matter was part of the compromise Democrats agreed to in order to better secure the border. This is the bill th at Trump got Republicans to reject in order to create a fake issue to use against the Democrat ticket. Sheesh! Harris can’t even be in favor of a compromise without getting attacked. One thing most Americans are not in favor of is the establishment of concentration camps and mass deportations. Trump can’t say where the billions are going to come from to pay for this or who is going to be doing the work migrants are doing now, like agricultural work, construction work, landscaping, nanny and housekeeping work and restaurant and hotel work.
Gigenius
How did Trump get 6 Democrats to vote against it?
Spastic.
She will believe anything Rachel Maddow tells her. It’s Trumps fault!!!
Trump says he’s going to round up millions of migrants, put them in camps and then deport them. He refuses to say where the money will come from to pay for it. Our agriculture industry has depended on migrant labor for decades.
Gigenius
How did Trump get 6 Democrats to vote against it?
Spastic.
Gigenius
The US Labor force is 170 million. At 3% Unemployment, thats 5 million out of work. So, why exactly did we need 10 million new workers? So unemployment could rise to 4%. Nice job, Harris.
Gigenius revises history again.
6 Republicans worked on the bill. 5 of them voted for it. Not a single other Republican supported that bill.
Thats not bi-partisan you imbecile.
You know what bipartisan legislation is, noncompoop? It’s a bill that PASSES CLOTURE in the Senate and is signed into law.
Anything else is something you can wipe your ass with.
What is that in this ad?
Looks like the @realDonaldTrump BORDER WALL to me! https://t.co/QeNVJNjOcD pic.twitter.com/QFugDm7bjc
— Mike Howell (@MHowellTweets) August 23, 2024
ABC just CALLED OUT Kamala Harris for using video of President Trump’s border wall in her new ads
If even *ABC* is calling her out for her hypocrisy, you know it’s REALLY bad 🤣 pic.twitter.com/R9DakoOKw5
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) August 26, 2024
Kamala Harris on the border wall over the years:
2017: “Asking taxpayers to pay for a border wall is a terrible idea.”
2018: “Funding Trump’s unrealistic border wall would be a gross misuse of taxpayer money.”
2019: “Trump’s border wall is stupid.”
2020: “As I said, Trump’s… pic.twitter.com/RxWrRZ1MRh
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) August 27, 2024
Four More Years of Biden/Harris!
Are you better of now than four years ago?
* money laundering wall just as are the fake elections…get a life
Don’t be surprised if she finally announces policies that sound eerily familiar to those of Trump. Of course she’ll never implement them, but that just might pick off the Independent voters gullible enough to believe her.
“Model Adrianne Curry Slams Mark Cuban Over Kamala Harris:
‘What Policies? The Only Ones She Stated were Trump’s’”
– Breitbart
James Caveford acquiesced to the communists?
Oh, my!
I note Mark Zuckerberg’s expressions of regret that he colluded with suppressing speech.
I suppose he never considered the possibility of screaming to high heaven about the attempts at censorship and then publishing the content of e-mails and communications that supported his point. I think another Billionaire basically did that.
Would it have taken that much bravery to stand up and say “this is wrong”. It’s not like he did not have some resources to fend off the firestorm that might come his way.
You know that there is physical bravery that makes you get out of a landing craft into the face of artillery and machine gun fire or jump out of a helicopter into a contested LZ. And then there is moral bravery that gets you to stand up and speak and unmask actions that you know are wrong. You might risk your reputation but they can be rebuilt with diligence and proving the rightness of your statement. Or you can just scurry away and hide in your little rat’s nest while others fight the good fight.
Yes, you might break out in a cold sweat and worry about your career when the pile of s—t falls on you when you speak up but there is an amazing feeling of accomplishment and satisfaction when you’re right and then acknowledged that your right. But don’t expect a thank you. People really don’t like being proved wrong or otherwise being exposed.
“I suppose he never considered the possibility of screaming to high heaven about the attempts at censorship and then publishing the content of e-mails and communications that supported his point.”
To repeat a comment made yesterday, the Zuckaterd siblings (Mark and his married sissy Sheila) care about nothing at all except making the Metaverse ubiquitous. Since in terms of the talent and intelligence required to accomplish that on merit, they are woefully lacking, they require government favoritism. So, they were not about to refuse any “requests” from the Biden administration to block content from U. S. dissidents. If Trump wins, look for them to come begging and scraping around the White House looking to brown-nose Trump into favors.
Will the Democratic Party block the newly-constituted RCA? Is the RCA a “threat to democracy” just like Cornel West? Or will the two join forces? To be truthful, I struggle to find a difference between the Democratic Party’s and RCA’s platform on issues….
see below:
https://socialistrevolution.org/class-fighters-gather-across-the-us-to-launch-the-revolutionary-communists-of-america/
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/communists-march-in-philadelphia-chanting-slogans/ss-AA1pncTR?ocid=winp2fptaskbarhover&cvid=984e513e3b454392d26158171ef530a6&ei=7#image=10
Lin,
Thank you for the linkys.
They do look very similar.
Lin,
I don’t know how your Spanish is, but here’s a video worth a look. An article in “Reason” explains further.
María Oropeza, a 30 year old Venezuelan, who denounced Maduro’s regime publicly and supported the opposition member in their recent stolen election. Her arrest was recorded by her via live recording on Instagram. watch the video.
This is what Democrats represent to me.
‘María Knew She Was Being Targeted’: The Arrest of a Venezuelan Activist Exposes Maduro’s Brutal Crackdown
María Oropeza’s arrest during a livestream highlights the dangers faced by opposition leaders in Venezuela and the regime’s relentless efforts to silence dissent.
https://reason.com/2024/08/26/maria-knew-she-was-being-targeted-the-arrest-of-a-venezuelan-activist-exposes-maduros-brutal-crackdown/
* yeah, the usa got the Dominion machines second hand from Maduro.
No, they didn’t.
The entire idea that Maduro has some connection to Dominion is a lie.
I would love to see a ballot with seven or 8 candidates. There is room for it in a free country. Let the Republicans and Democrats freely contend for the favor of all points of view, BLM Socialist, Right Wing the big Middle or any who are capable of organizing in favor of their point of view. Big Politics is as much a danger as big Military-Industrial, Pharma, or any other force. I would like to see an inclusive Native American party as well.
I do not have a problem with multiple candidates and parties. But the winner of an election MUST secure 51% of the votes.
if they can not – there should be a runnoff. Runoffs are the right way to do ranked choice voting.
Ultimately nearly all of us are going to have to pick someone to vote for who is NOT the perfect choice.
What we should NOT do is what many european systems do and have governments lead by people with 38% of the vote.
The UK just had a landslide labor election where labor did not get 40% of the vote.
That is an electoral failure – not success.
“ I do not have a problem with multiple candidates and parties. But the winner of an election MUST secure 51% of the votes.”
You do know that coalitions often form when multiple parties and candidates have similar views, right? If one candidate or party doesn’t get 51% of the vote a coalition is usually formed in order to achieve a majority.
“ What we should NOT do is what many european systems do and have governments lead by people with 38% of the vote.”
Not when those “people” with 38% of the vote form a coalition. Which is common in European governments and would be a good idea here. Coalitions means parties that wouldn’t otherwise have a chance to be a part of the majority can. That way their ideas and agendas have an opportunity to be applied.
Labour didn’t win by a vast majority, but the tories indeed lost by a landslide comprised of multiple parties. It was not an electoral failure. It was an electoral success. The British people made their choice very clear and sent a clear and loud message to the conservatives. That’s how it’s supposed to work.
“Coalitions means parties that wouldn’t otherwise have a chance to be a part of the majority can.”
Says the spastic who ealier said the Electoral College isn’t fair, and that the 51 should always choose for the 49.
Bwahahahaha
No doubt. George is too stupid to know when he is contradicting himself. Does it all the time.
He can’t even comprehend his own writing.
Lost in the vastness of Evil
Where you sought, there’s only void —
It Is I, the Nothingness that awaits.
“I” cannot exist in or as “Nothingness.”
Turls tries to confuse trying to win elections with being anti democratic. Sheer hackery.
“tries to confuse”
The word is “conflates”, genius.
Give the phone back to your mommy now, and go do your homework.
Oh look, the cracker picked up a thesaurus!! Good for him. …
But no, I meant confuse as Turley’s mission is to confuse. It speaks to his intent. To conflate is to switch out ideas. To confuse definitely entails some conflating, but the goal is to rattle a thought process such that it provides cover and plausible deniabilty. If Turley wrote out a mission statement for this blog, confusion would be one of his main goals.
Were you born as gullible as you became, cracker?
“rattle a thought process”
LOL, keep it up, genius.
Were you born a booger eating troll, or did that only start after your brain was laid waste by 20 years of day drinking cooking sherry?
Also, when did you stop cornholing your nephew?
Aww you’re cute when your idiocy gets exposed and you Chuck a nutty about it.
More brilliant prose from the booger eating Lawn Boy who brought us this:
“Turls tries to confuse trying…”
I hate it when people try to confuse trying.
Have another sip, drunktard, and go back to dreaming about naked orange felon god.
I see you still feel the need to resort to pathetic insults as a way of compensating for your extremely small hands.
Lack of self awareness looks good on you, booger boy, as you “insult” my hands and fantasize about being able to swallow my entire cock.
Bwahahahahaha
You are here all day every day.
Clearly an incel living in your mother’s basement constantly playing with your extremely tiny hands.
Cry me a little tiny handful, cockswain.
I see, you are trying to confuse my unusually large hands with my unusually large imagination about you and naked Trump
EB
No Lawn Boy, you can have your fantasies, that’s fine. It’s just a little creepy, that’s all.
Well, you are here all day every day, so its only natural that I would fantasize about you.
Party On
Bug
What’s brown, disgustingly stinky and smells like you?
Racial slurs will not be tolerated , Im calling Oprah.
I have no idea what word you meant as I can not read your mind.
But you clearly ARE confused.
Comment was to Anonymous fighting with…Anonymous?!
Cracker and Peckerwood, are racial slurs often used by African Americans for white people.
Everything that you can do to win an election is not moral, or legal or consistent with the values you claim to espouse.
Trying to remove other candidates from the ballot is “trying to win elections” it is also immoral, and anti-democratic.
But needing to meet the strict requirements to be on the ballot are important. Republicans made sure every single procedure and requirement MUST be met before qualifying or voting. That’s not immoral. That is ensure it the integrity of the election.
To republicans technicalities matter. Just like strict vote by mail or absentee ballot procedures. If you forget to put a number or address or check off a single item your vote is disqualified, right? So why would it be any different if democrats do the same thing? Republicans absolutely demand that all rules and procedures be followed to the letter in order to ensure the integrity of the vote. That’s not trying to remove a candidate.
Svelaz doesn’t like it that R’s don’t want mail in ballots accepted on the technicality that the signature is an obvious forgery.
In my post at 10:50 I used a reference concerning Mark Zuckerberg saying that he is sorry that he caved to the Biden/Harris censorship on Facebook. Here is another confirmation of the dictatorial actions that you can expect from a Harris/Walz Presidency. https://www.ft.com/content/202cb1d6-d5a2-44d4-82a6-ebab404bc28f?segmentId=b385c2ad-87ed-d8ff-aaec-0f8435cd42d9. Walz has stated outright that Socialism is just being neighborly and that whatever he deems to be misinformation should be censored by the central party politburo. Hyperbolic you might say? They did it concerning Covid and the Hunter laptop on Facebook and Twitter. Now they are trying to censor the voices of any third party candidate who would get in the way of their quest for total power. Why then should we expect anything different in the future considering their actions in the past?