RFK 2024

[Cassandros]

Look kiddo, honoring Due Process and taking trump to court over perceived crimes is fine, and if/when found guilty --> punish accordingly. But, that's not what's happening, is it?

And that's the process taking place, and the crimes are not perceived. The crimes were committed. Denying it is indicative of the remarkable stupidity you want to find everywhere else but in what you're proclaiming. Trump's in the trial and pre-trial phases, even went through closing arguments in one. That is what is happening. So let's get on to the political sports team playing that you want to be above but somehow participate in.

So, you don't understand how Due Process works, nor what "innocent until proven guilty" means.

Not at all surprised.

By punishing trump before he is properly convicted all you are doing is empowering the next guy to the same.

How is he being punished yet? By denying him his phantom former presidential immunity? It doesn't exist. Biden is the next guy already. Where is it that he's punishing Trump prematurely? Take all the time you need to invent it to argue. After all, if Biden really wanted to punish Trump, he could just kill him right? Dispatch Seal Team Six and end it right now. That's what Trump is arguing he could do and can do again if you want your doom and gloom to come to fruition. Biden's an unaccountable king according to you in quoting I haven't gotten to yet. If Biden is king already, what's stopping him from your endgame doom and gloom? But make no mistake, I'm more interested in what he's done now to have you so committed that either Trump or Biden, we end up with a dictator.

Taking him off ballots for insurrection, even though he has NOT been convicted of that crime.

This is really basic shit man.

And biden has already proven he's an unaccountable king when he enforced the myriad of mandates across the nation and when he used Federal power to force States from protecting their borders. But, sadly, you drink copious amounts of blue kool-aid, so I fully expect this to go right over your head.

Please let it be that you're referring to Governor Wheels McAsshole wanting to kill people for crossing the border. I'd love for you to go from prematurely punishing Trump to extrajudicial killing of brown people. That'd be remarkably stupidly inconsistent of you. Mandates I'll grant that Biden had to do something you clearly don't like, but it's telling that you're more pissed about being told to wear a mask than you are of downplaying and mishandling a virus that ended up killing millions of people worldwide. That you're more pissed about being told to get a shot and locking down than the ineptitude of a response that led to the widespread deadly infection in this country. But I get the sense you don't care about worldwide deaths, and that's little comfort to the many who did die here in this country.

So I know you want to pretend you're above the red and blue M&Ms sports teams line that you want to roll out every time, but you really do only get animated about the blues. Not the reds. Maybe it's time to just be honest and admit you're not above the political gamesmanship that you proclaim. Or you can let it continue to allow you to make remarkably stupid commentary like this. The ball's in your court on that.

1) A wall built of shipping crates in AZ, razor wire and buoys in TX, none of which will kill anyone --> unless they ignore the obvious danger and try to do something remarkably stupid. If there is a sign saying "angry bull, do not enter" and I hop the fence and get killed, the only person to blame is me.

There was no reason to force these states to take these barriers down, or to stop detaining illegals caught crossing, except to show the world that you are both out of touch with reality and to flex your kingly might.

2) The mandates were created under the guise that masks can stop airborne viruses (they cant), the vaccine will prevent infection AND spread (they don't), that 6' social distancing was far enough to prevent spread (its not), and lockdowns to prevent spread (which had minimal impact on the spread and came at a remarkable cost. Preventing people from going outside compromised immune systems (sunlight, exercise, and fresh air are all important to stay healthy), caused a huge rise in depression, addiction, and suicide (especially in young people), damaged the economy immensely (impacting poor and minority communities the hardest), and continues to show a massive negative impact on children and their educational progression).

Mandates that usurp freedom with absolutely no scientific basis is just abuse of power.

3) When the red M&Ms shit on freedom, I react against them the same as I do when the blues do it. While the blue keep assaulting the 1st and 2nd amendments, the red attack the 4th and 5th. They are both working to destroy the Constitution in real time. Sadly the cultist single party voters of America prefer to point fingers at how bad their opponents are, instead of cleaning house from within and removing the career politicians that care more about their corporate/special interest funders than their constituents and Country.

So, congrats on proving once again --> single party voters are the dumbest fucking people on the planet.

[Animal]

And yet, it was refuted, not by me, by facts. You cannot argue that a crime is erased if it is not charged. That's the only way your argument would hold water. It doesn't, and therefore it's refuted time and time again. Subpoenas are still ignored that even you say should have been honored, therefore the crime is still committed despite no charges. So given that, why do you have such a hard time addressing the facts? So many posts and you have yet to even attempt it. I mean, I know why. Because you can't argue the facts. But feel free to keep making that clear to everyone reading.

actually, you poor dumb dolt, a crime is erased once it is charged with lesser charges. All of these people they have tried related to Jan 6th are all free and clear of charges for insurrection that day because they have already been charged and they can't be charged again for the same crime. So, yes, if you think the crime of insurrection was committed, then it was erased when they were charged with disorderly conduct or unlawful entry or assault on law enforcement officers, trespassing, disrupting Congress, theft or other property crimes, making threats, and seditious conspiracy. MYTH BUSTED!

[dot]

Keep showing you can't argue the facts.

So, you don't understand how Due Process works, nor what "innocent until proven guilty" means.

Not at all surprised.

Taking him off ballots for insurrection, even though he has NOT been convicted of that crime.

This is really basic shit man.

Yeah, except he got a trial for that too. He lost. They found he engaged in insurrection which is literally disqualifying in the Constitution. Twice. Like it or not, that's due process. Even him appealing it is due process, he's not being denied his appeal outright. He's not facing any sentencing right now that has not been adjudicated. Back to the basics, man. Sounds like you need to brush up.

1) A wall built of shipping crates in AZ, razor wire and buoys in TX, none of which will kill anyone --> unless they ignore the obvious danger and try to do something remarkably stupid. If there is a sign saying "angry bull, do not enter" and I hop the fence and get killed, the only person to blame is me.

There was no reason to force these states to take these barriers down, or to stop detaining illegals caught crossing, except to show the world that you are both out of touch with reality and to flex your kingly might.

No reason, exception human rights violations and international law. More to the point, Texas lost. More of that pesky due process, and they still lost. Not much of a tyrant if he's following the lawful process. Try again, red. If you're interested in actual presumptive kingly unaccountability behavior, might I suggest the red who flouted the Constitution and enriched himself off of the office of the presidency, your tax dollars, and foreign cash.

2) The mandates were created under the guise that masks can stop airborne viruses (they cant), the vaccine will prevent infection AND spread (they don't), that 6' social distancing was far enough to prevent spread (its not), and lockdowns to prevent spread (which had minimal impact on the spread and came at a remarkable cost. Preventing people from going outside compromised immune systems (sunlight, exercise, and fresh air are all important to stay healthy), caused a huge rise in depression, addiction, and suicide (especially in young people), damaged the economy immensely (impacting poor and minority communities the hardest), and continues to show a massive negative impact on children and their educational progression).

Mandates that usurp freedom with absolutely no scientific basis is just abuse of power.

Yeah, you're really pissed that you had to do the mildest of measures to keep a deadly virus from spreading. Once again, not at the red who let it run rampant by downplaying it and mishandling the response, but at the blue who had to clean up his mess. I've been watching your Covid back and forth, I know you won't be talked down by facts, reasoning, logic, or humanity. So have your complaint, but it still doesn't make Biden a tyrant.

3) When the red M&Ms shit on freedom, I react against them the same as I do when the blues do it. While the blue keep assaulting the 1st and 2nd amendments, the red attack the 4th and 5th. They are both working to destroy the Constitution in real time. Sadly the cultist single party voters of America prefer to point fingers at how bad their opponents are, instead of cleaning house from within and removing the career politicians that care more about their corporate/special interest funders than their constituents and Country.

So, congrats on proving once again --> single party voters are the dumbest fucking people on the planet.

Except you don't, do you? You pop up to complain about blues. And then there's this phantom claim that you'll do the same for the reds but it just never seems to materialize does it? So this holier than thou I don't play politics team sports is just a façade. Just be honest with yourself and everyone else. And while you're at it, let's hear how Biden will be an unaccountable king. Maybe pull something a little more believable than he made you wear a mask.

actually, you poor dumb dolt, a crime is erased once it is charged with lesser charges.

Except no. It isn't. It still happened, all you're talking about is the punishment for it. It does not change what actually happened. So just like what happened in Portland does not alter the facts of January 6, the charges filed and the commission of the crime remain two different things. The former does not change the latter. Thanks for bringing your denial of reality to this thread as well.

[Animal]

actually, you poor dumb dolt, a crime is erased once it is charged with lesser charges.

Except no. It isn't. It still happened, all you're talking about is the punishment for it. It does not change what actually happened. So just like what happened in Portland does not alter the facts of January 6, the charges filed and the commission of the crime remain two different things. The former does not change the latter. Thanks for bringing your denial of reality to this thread as well.

So tell me, dupey dot, why in the fuck would a prosecutor go to the trouble to charge a person with a lesser crime (illegal entry), IF they actually committed a bigger crime (like insurrection), KNOWING that once they file that charge and hold that trial, they have given them a free pass on the insurrection charge forever. And, why would they do that same thing for hundreds of other people?

Can you really be this fucking stupid? Do they not have access to this "definition" that you have?

[dot]

So tell me, dupey dot, why in the fuck would a prosecutor go to the trouble to charge a person with a lesser crime (illegal entry), IF they actually committed a bigger crime (like insurrection), KNOWING that once they file that charge and hold that trial, they have given them a free pass on the insurrection charge forever. And, why would they do that same thing for hundreds of other people?

Can you really be this fucking stupid? Do they not have access to this "definition" that you have?

You forget, I'm going off of your definition too. I've proven both. And you keep falling back on charges filed which does not change the commission of the crime. So instead of your deflection and distraction, how about proving it wrong? Offer your counterpoint. Tick tock.

[Animal]

So tell me, dupey dot, why in the fuck would a prosecutor go to the trouble to charge a person with a lesser crime (illegal entry), IF they actually committed a bigger crime (like insurrection), KNOWING that once they file that charge and hold that trial, they have given them a free pass on the insurrection charge forever. And, why would they do that same thing for hundreds of other people?

Can you really be this fucking stupid? Do they not have access to this "definition" that you have?

You forget, I'm going off of your definition too. I've proven both. And you keep falling back on charges filed which does not change the commission of the crime. So instead of your deflection and distraction, how about proving it wrong? Offer your counterpoint. Tick tock.

and, once again, the downs duped dummy can't answer a simple question.

but we got to hear about charges not proving crimes again. so there's that. poor thing, he is like the one person still arguing that the earth is flat.

[Cassandros]

So, you don't understand how Due Process works, nor what "innocent until proven guilty" means.

Not at all surprised.

Taking him off ballots for insurrection, even though he has NOT been convicted of that crime.

This is really basic shit man.

Yeah, except he got a trial for that too. He lost. They found he engaged in insurrection which is literally disqualifying in the Constitution. Twice. Like it or not, that's due process. Even him appealing it is due process, he's not being denied his appeal outright. He's not facing any sentencing right now that has not been adjudicated. Back to the basics, man. Sounds like you need to brush up.

Once an insurrection is deemed to have occurred, the question becomes whether a specific person
engaged in it. Section 3 does not establish a procedure for determining who is subject to the proscription
on holding office, instead providing only a process by which the disability may be removed (i.e., by two-
thirds vote in both houses). Congress has also not set forth a procedure for determining who is subject to
the disability imposed by Section 3. Although definitions of insurrection and rebellion for purposes of the
Fourteenth Amendment would not necessarily be confined by statute, it would appear that a criminal
conviction for insurrection or the “levying of war” prong of treason would provide sufficient proof, and
each of them contains a bar on holding office.https://crsreports.congress.gov/product ... B/LSB10569

A ruling != a criminal case.

Post where he has been convicted of insurrection charges. And when that happens, my he be affected by the full force of the law.

1) A wall built of shipping crates in AZ, razor wire and buoys in TX, none of which will kill anyone --> unless they ignore the obvious danger and try to do something remarkably stupid. If there is a sign saying "angry bull, do not enter" and I hop the fence and get killed, the only person to blame is me.

There was no reason to force these states to take these barriers down, or to stop detaining illegals caught crossing, except to show the world that you are both out of touch with reality and to flex your kingly might.

No reason, exception human rights violations and international law. More to the point, Texas lost. More of that pesky due process, and they still lost. Not much of a tyrant if he's following the lawful process. Try again, red. If you're interested in actual presumptive kingly unaccountability behavior, might I suggest the red who flouted the Constitution and enriched himself off of the office of the presidency, your tax dollars, and foreign cash.

Weak. You are not abusing human rights by using prevention measure to prevent crime. No one is forcing people to risk their lives and break the law.

Border states lost because the blue M&Ms want to give more Rights and privileges to illegals than Americans. The current king got his way.

2) The mandates were created under the guise that masks can stop airborne viruses (they cant), the vaccine will prevent infection AND spread (they don't), that 6' social distancing was far enough to prevent spread (its not), and lockdowns to prevent spread (which had minimal impact on the spread and came at a remarkable cost. Preventing people from going outside compromised immune systems (sunlight, exercise, and fresh air are all important to stay healthy), caused a huge rise in depression, addiction, and suicide (especially in young people), damaged the economy immensely (impacting poor and minority communities the hardest), and continues to show a massive negative impact on children and their educational progression).

Mandates that usurp freedom with absolutely no scientific basis is just abuse of power.

Yeah, you're really pissed that you had to do the mildest of measures to keep a deadly virus from spreading. Once again, not at the red who let it run rampant by downplaying it and mishandling the response, but at the blue who had to clean up his mess. I've been watching your Covid back and forth, I know you won't be talked down by facts, reasoning, logic, or humanity. So have your complaint, but it still doesn't make Biden a tyrant.

Mildest of measures?

You could not be more fake or disingenuous. And you have no facts to support your position; just memory loss and revisionism.

Taking peoples freedom and livelihood by force is absolutely the move of tyrants.

3) When the red M&Ms shit on freedom, I react against them the same as I do when the blues do it. While the blue keep assaulting the 1st and 2nd amendments, the red attack the 4th and 5th. They are both working to destroy the Constitution in real time. Sadly the cultist single party voters of America prefer to point fingers at how bad their opponents are, instead of cleaning house from within and removing the career politicians that care more about their corporate/special interest funders than their constituents and Country.

So, congrats on proving once again --> single party voters are the dumbest fucking people on the planet.

Except you don't, do you? You pop up to complain about blues. And then there's this phantom claim that you'll do the same for the reds but it just never seems to materialize does it? So this holier than thou I don't play politics team sports is just a façade. Just be honest with yourself and everyone else. And while you're at it, let's hear how Biden will be an unaccountable king. Maybe pull something a little more believable than he made you wear a mask.

There has been no accountability for his forcing Americans to take a shot or lose their livelihoods, nor any accountability for using Federal agencies and admin officials from contacting online businesses and having them curtail free speech.

These are not minor offenses.

[dot]

A ruling != a criminal case.

Post where he has been convicted of insurrection charges. And when that happens, my he be affected by the full force of the law.

Post where the amendment says he has to convicted of insurrection. Going by the strict text of the Constitution is what you guys live for, right? He got his due process and he lost. Brush up.

Weak. You are not abusing human rights by using prevention measure to prevent crime. No one is forcing people to risk their lives and break the law.

Border states lost because the blue M&Ms want to give more Rights and privileges to illegals than Americans. The current king got his way.

Aren't they? Your reds have demonized being brown and seeking asylum. To this moment, they are refusing to allow better process handling for that purpose. Furthermore, the reds at the same time are pushing for more lethal "preventative measures" and lament that they'd be prosecuted for murder for killing them like they want to. Ironically, you don't care about anyone not from here just like your reds you claim you don't side with or play for. Regardless, they lost. Due process. A king doesn't follow process. He just does. So, still waiting for how the blue is a king.

Mildest of measures?

You could not be more fake or disingenuous. And you have no facts to support your position; just memory loss and revisionism.

Taking peoples freedom and livelihood by force is absolutely the move of tyrants.

Oh yay, another accusation that's actually a confession. I mean, I know when I want to argue about taking people's freedom, my go-to example is wearing a mask or getting a shot. Not, you know, reproductive healthcare and bodily autonomy. So once again, tell us how much the mask hurt you. Tell us how having to stand 6 feet away impacted your sense of well-being.

There has been no accountability for his forcing Americans to take a shot or lose their livelihoods, nor any accountability for using Federal agencies and admin officials from contacting online businesses and having them curtail free speech.

These are not minor offenses.

Again, mild inconvenience to fix what the red let happen. Losing livelihoods? I'm gonna be interested in hearing what you mean by that, given how you don't really care about anyone but numero uno. And curtailing free speech, heh, yeah, that was a big problem with the last red.

Oh, that's not who you meant? Oops, well I'm sure you'll be as animated about that as your imagined slight now.

[Cassandros]

A ruling != a criminal case.

Post where he has been convicted of insurrection charges. And when that happens, my he be affected by the full force of the law.

Post where the amendment says he has to convicted of insurrection. Going by the strict text of the Constitution is what you guys live for, right? He got his due process and he lost. Brush up.

I did.

Its the quote that you omitted from your reply.

Weak. You are not abusing human rights by using prevention measure to prevent crime. No one is forcing people to risk their lives and break the law.

Border states lost because the blue M&Ms want to give more Rights and privileges to illegals than Americans. The current king got his way.

Aren't they? Your reds have demonized being brown and seeking asylum. To this moment, they are refusing to allow better process handling for that purpose. Furthermore, the reds at the same time are pushing for more lethal "preventative measures" and lament that they'd be prosecuted for murder for killing them like they want to. Ironically, you don't care about anyone not from here just like your reds you claim you don't side with or play for. Regardless, they lost. Due process. A king doesn't follow process. He just does. So, still waiting for how the blue is a king.

Just claiming asylum without being vetting to be sure that its a real claim is a problem. The blue solution is to just let everyone in. Which is about the dumbest option available.

And, again, if your reading comprehension is too weak to see that I have, again, already answered your question --> there is no hope for you.

Mildest of measures?

You could not be more fake or disingenuous. And you have no facts to support your position; just memory loss and revisionism.

Taking peoples freedom and livelihood by force is absolutely the move of tyrants.

Oh yay, another accusation that's actually a confession. I mean, I know when I want to argue about taking people's freedom, my go-to example is wearing a mask or getting a shot. Not, you know, reproductive healthcare and bodily autonomy. So once again, tell us how much the mask hurt you. Tell us how having to stand 6 feet away impacted your sense of well-being.

Your appeal to ignorance is, well, ignorant.

If you are pro-bodily autonomy, you would be against mandates that violate that principle.

The funny thing is, your compliance was because biden demanded it; but I bet if trump had been the one to force these measures on you, you would magically be on my side of the fence.

There has been no accountability for his forcing Americans to take a shot or lose their livelihoods, nor any accountability for using Federal agencies and admin officials from contacting online businesses and having them curtail free speech.

These are not minor offenses.

Again, mild inconvenience to fix what the red let happen. Losing livelihoods? I'm gonna be interested in hearing what you mean by that, given how you don't really care about anyone but numero uno. And curtailing free speech, heh, yeah, that was a big problem with the last red.

Oh, that's not who you meant? Oops, well I'm sure you'll be as animated about that as your imagined slight now.

Red let happen?

Remember when the orange M&M wanted to stop flights from China, the source of the pandemic, and you blue idiots called him racist for it?

***

But, I'll bite on that last line though: in what way did the orange M&M harm free speech?

Was it when government conspired with big business to kick him off social media? Wait...

[Animal]

So tell me, dupey dot, why in the fuck would a prosecutor go to the trouble to charge a person with a lesser crime (illegal entry), IF they actually committed a bigger crime (like insurrection), KNOWING that once they file that charge and hold that trial, they have given them a free pass on the insurrection charge forever. And, why would they do that same thing for hundreds of other people?

Can you really be this fucking stupid? Do they not have access to this "definition" that you have?

You forget, I'm going off of your definition too. I've proven both. And you keep falling back on charges filed which does not change the commission of the crime. So instead of your deflection and distraction, how about proving it wrong? Offer your counterpoint. Tick tock.

so the prosecutors went off of your definition, or my definition, or whatever definition they felt they should use to make a legal decision. and they made one when they decided which charge to file and you still fucking think they got it wrong. they not only got it wrong one time. they got it wrong hundreds and hundreds of times every single time they charged a person.

[CHEEZY17]

Here is the number again for Dodgin' Dot to call and tell the authorities he understands insurrection better than they do.

1-202-514-2000
https://www.usa.gov/agencies/u-s-department-of-justice

[dot]

I did.

Its the quote that you omitted from your reply.

Remember where I said you have to brush up? Yeah, you didn't quote the amendment. Try again.

Just claiming asylum without being vetting to be sure that its a real claim is a problem. The blue solution is to just let everyone in. Which is about the dumbest option available.

And, again, if your reading comprehension is too weak to see that I have, again, already answered your question --> there is no hope for you.

Is it? Or is it to process the claims? See, this is indicative of a red M&M that you are desperate to avoid being identified as. You will deliberately misrepresent what the blue wants and ignore the active sabotage by the red team you support but pretend you don't.

No. You didn't. You came here with doom and gloom and your Covid rage over wearing a mask but you can't actually articulate how the current blue is going to be or is a tyrant. Remember? A king or tyrant has no need for due process. Try again.

Your appeal to ignorance is, well, ignorant.

If you are pro-bodily autonomy, you would be against mandates that violate that principle.

The funny thing is, your compliance was because biden demanded it; but I bet if trump had been the one to force these measures on you, you would magically be on my side of the fence.

You do know who gave the order to fast track the vaccines, right? Maybe if you weren't so blinded by your holier than thou pretentious façade, maybe you'd stop and think that in times of emergency, you gotta put aside your discomfort over being mildly inconvenienced to do something for your family, neighbor, fellow man. See, I think like that, I didn't think I'd be too much at risk if it was just me but I have elderly and young family that I wasn't willing to take a chance on. Oh, but that's right, you dgaf about other people. It's all about you. That's why wearing a mask or getting a shot is such a violation to you, but women being arrested for miscarriages isn't even a blip on your radar by comparison. Carrying a nonviable fetus that could kill her by order of state officials, not her doctor and damn sure not her own choice, that gets a shrug. So yeah, I am pro bodily autonomy. Why aren't you when it actually matters more than a piece of cloth on your face?

Red let happen?

Remember when the orange M&M wanted to stop flights from China, the source of the pandemic, and you blue idiots called him racist for it?

I remember him stopping some but not all entry from China, in what is considered more of a political reaction than a public health one. I then remember him downplaying the virus while it started to spread and kill people here. "And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done" as just one example. And you know what else I remember? People like you who rage to this day about having to wear a mask also refusing to do the human decency thing and lockdown to keep it from spreading. So yeah, the red let it happen. The reds like you enabled it to happen. That's okay to you, but heaven forbid you had to wear a mask under a blue.

But, I'll bite on that last line though: in what way did the orange M&M harm free speech?

Was it when government conspired with big business to kick him off social media? Wait...

No, it was when the thin skinned red demanded social media delete what other people said about him that hurt his fee-fees. You know what did get him kicked off social media though? Using their platforms to incite an insurrection against the United States government because he lost his election. But I guess that was a conspiracy, huh? Maybe you should talk with your favorite Covid guy:

so the prosecutors

Yeah, charges filed does not change the commission of the crime. Where's that counterpoint?

[Animal]

so the prosecutors

Yeah, charges filed does not change the commission of the crime. Where's that counterpoint?

pretty much on every page of several threads now. where is your post about charges filed does not equal crime committed?

[dot]

pretty much on every page of several threads now. where is your post about charges filed does not equal crime committed?

That's you changing the argument. Charges filed is not the same as committing the crime. Show me how January 6 doesn't fit the definition of insurrection, either one provided. I showed how it does. Now you offer your counterpoint.

[Cassandros]

I did.

Its the quote that you omitted from your reply.

Remember where I said you have to brush up? Yeah, you didn't quote the amendment. Try again.

"Section 3 does not establish a procedure for determining who is subject to the proscription
on holding office, instead providing only a process by which the disability may be removed (i.e., by two-
thirds vote in both houses). Congress has also not set forth a procedure for determining who is subject to
the disability imposed by Section 3."

"for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment would not necessarily be confined by statute, it would appear that a criminal
conviction for insurrection or the “levying of war” prong of treason would provide sufficient proof,"

Prove the current "ruling" is enough to bar him from running.

Just claiming asylum without being vetting to be sure that its a real claim is a problem. The blue solution is to just let everyone in. Which is about the dumbest option available.

And, again, if your reading comprehension is too weak to see that I have, again, already answered your question --> there is no hope for you.

Is it? Or is it to process the claims? See, this is indicative of a red M&M that you are desperate to avoid being identified as. You will deliberately misrepresent what the blue wants and ignore the active sabotage by the red team you support but pretend you don't.

No. You didn't. You came here with doom and gloom and your Covid rage over wearing a mask but you can't actually articulate how the current blue is going to be or is a tyrant. Remember? A king or tyrant has no need for due process. Try again.

OK. Well, what I see from the blue camp is a concerted effort to do nothing about the border until the election year.

So, help me out...

What do you blue m&ms want, what's your teams solution now that you have exacerbated the issue for the last three years?

Your appeal to ignorance is, well, ignorant.

If you are pro-bodily autonomy, you would be against mandates that violate that principle.

The funny thing is, your compliance was because biden demanded it; but I bet if trump had been the one to force these measures on you, you would magically be on my side of the fence.

You do know who gave the order to fast track the vaccines, right? Maybe if you weren't so blinded by your holier than thou pretentious façade, maybe you'd stop and think that in times of emergency, you gotta put aside your discomfort over being mildly inconvenienced to do something for your family, neighbor, fellow man. See, I think like that, I didn't think I'd be too much at risk if it was just me but I have elderly and young family that I wasn't willing to take a chance on. Oh, but that's right, you dgaf about other people. It's all about you. That's why wearing a mask or getting a shot is such a violation to you, but women being arrested for miscarriages isn't even a blip on your radar by comparison. Carrying a nonviable fetus that could kill her by order of state officials, not her doctor and damn sure not her own choice, that gets a shrug. So yeah, I am pro bodily autonomy. Why aren't you when it actually matters more than a piece of cloth on your face?

Fast tracking vaccines, in and of itself, is a reasonable response based on the early unknowns. But by the time those shots became available we knew a lot more. Of which, we knew the elderly were the most vulnerable and, generally, the only young people who had negative outcomes had comorbidities (usually more than one); and we knew it was not airborne.

So, in the face of "what we knew", to force young healthy people to take a shot is completely unreasonable. Just like forcing people to wear masks when they don't stop the spread of airborne viruses. That is about as anti-bodily autonomy as you can get you fucking hypocrite.

Lastly, you assuming my stance on abortion just shows the level of ignorance coming from a horribly uninformed, virtue signally fool.

Red let happen?

Remember when the orange M&M wanted to stop flights from China, the source of the pandemic, and you blue idiots called him racist for it?

I remember him stopping some but not all entry from China, in what is considered more of a political reaction than a public health one. I then remember him downplaying the virus while it started to spread and kill people here. "And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done" as just one example. And you know what else I remember? People like you who rage to this day about having to wear a mask also refusing to do the human decency thing and lockdown to keep it from spreading. So yeah, the red let it happen. The reds like you enabled it to happen. That's okay to you, but heaven forbid you had to wear a mask under a blue.

/facepalm

First, the attempt was made to restrict travel from China; your team got butt-hurt and called him racist for it.

Second, we have four years of data that shows lockdowns caused WAY more harm than good. How anyone can defend those is beyond me.

Third, I was OK with masks until the day it was revealed that it was an airborne virus. Information that was withheld from the public for months and even when it was released authoritative asshole "leaders" still stoked the fear and continued the demands.

Fourth, when you give an inch, Power takes a mile. To not stand up for ones Rights is a great way to not have any.

Lastly, the fact that you can't admit your faults, or understand why any of this is actually very important, makes you a useful idiot for your cult. You continue to prove single party voters are the dumbest people on the planet.

But, I'll bite on that last line though: in what way did the orange M&M harm free speech?

Was it when government conspired with big business to kick him off social media? Wait...

No, it was when the thin skinned red demanded social media delete what other people said about him that hurt his fee-fees. You know what did get him kicked off social media though? Using their platforms to incite an insurrection against the United States government because he lost his election. But I guess that was a conspiracy, huh? Maybe you should talk with your favorite Covid guy:

On the second part, the blue m&ms had been trying to silence his mean tweets for four years; the perception of J6 just gave them enough political points to do it.

On the first, citation required. Silencing dissent and open forum discussion is generally the tactic of the left.

[dot]

"Section 3 does not establish a procedure for determining who is subject to the proscription
on holding office, instead providing only a process by which the disability may be removed (i.e., by two-
thirds vote in both houses). Congress has also not set forth a procedure for determining who is subject to
the disability imposed by Section 3."

"for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment would not necessarily be confined by statute, it would appear that a criminal
conviction for insurrection or the “levying of war” prong of treason would provide sufficient proof,"

Prove the current "ruling" is enough to bar him from running.

Interesting. You're still not posting the text of the amendment, the section. You're posting analysis, but not the actual amendment. I wonder why that would be.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Oh. That's why.

OK. Well, what I see from the blue camp is a concerted effort to do nothing about the border until the election year.

So, help me out...

What do you blue m&ms want, what's your teams solution now that you have exacerbated the issue for the last three years?

Are you familiar with the proposed border funding that is being sat on by the reds? Are you familiar how it was not fixed under the previous red? It's always amazing to see where memories begin when playing the team sports political game that people swear they aren't playing.

Fast tracking vaccines, in and of itself, is a reasonable response based on the early unknowns. But by the time those shots became available we knew a lot more. Of which, we knew the elderly were the most vulnerable and, generally, the only young people who had negative outcomes had comorbidities (usually more than one); and we knew it was not airborne.

Two things, first the "but the elderly and unhealthy excuse" reads very much like you not gaf about other people besides yourself again. The mild inconvenience of a shot and a mask and distancing is worth it to most people with a conscience wanting to protect more vulnerable people. But I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt if you want to clarify that. Second, we knew the virus wasn't airbone? That's how it's transmitted. At least last I read and last y'all were arguing in the other thread. I know I masked up early in the pandemic and kept at it long after many others stopped, though I admittedly was not wealthy enough for the high value high protection masks.

So, in the face of "what we knew", to force young healthy people to take a shot is completely unreasonable. Just like forcing people to wear masks when they don't stop the spread of airborne viruses. That is about as anti-bodily autonomy as you can get you fucking hypocrite.

No, because you overexaggerate the weight of your mild inconvenience to the vast overreach of a religious bigot political party and its financial backers to dictate what a woman can and cannot do with their own body.

Lastly, you assuming my stance on abortion just shows the level of ignorance coming from a horribly uninformed, virtue signally fool.

I believe you're trying to say virtue signaling, which is very unfortunate to trip over when trying to insult someone's intelligence. And I will assume your stance on abortion because you're here comparing having to wear a mask as the epitome of violating bodily autonomy in a time where women are being charged criminally for having a miscarriage or being told by non-medical state government officials to carry a nonviable fetus at the risk of the woman's health. By all means, show me the same level of animation railing about things like that, then maybe I can buy your self-righteous indignation over a piece of cloth on your face.

/facepalm

First, the attempt was made to restrict travel from China; your team got butt-hurt and called him racist for it.

Yeah just breeze over what actually happened. Or rather lack of what happened. The red made a point of downplaying it from the beginning and his "ban" on travel from China had holes in it, big enough for the virus to come through. But don't worry, as he said:

"And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done"

How'd that end up working out?

Second, we have four years of data that shows lockdowns caused WAY more harm than good. How anyone can defend those is beyond me.

The goal was to stop people from getting infected and dying, and people did not obey them. Who knew a country full of selfish red blue and purple Karens would think about themselves before others?

Third, I was OK with masks until the day it was revealed that it was an airborne virus. Information that was withheld from the public for months and even when it was released authoritative asshole "leaders" still stoked the fear and continued the demands.

Won't get an argument from me about information being held back. If we could trust our selfish population and our selfish leaders to have behaved in a responsible way on this virus from inception, many people may not have had to die.

Fourth, when you give an inch, Power takes a mile. To not stand up for ones Rights is a great way to not have any.

Brittany Watts and Kate Cox would agree with you. Power took their rights and the rights of so many more women away. I await your animation over that.

Lastly, the fact that you can't admit your faults, or understand why any of this is actually very important, makes you a useful idiot for your cult. You continue to prove single party voters are the dumbest people on the planet.

Look in a mirror. Anyone that presents as such a holier than thou is usually the first one with flaws. We've exposed several here, among those your silence on things your reds do that are so egregious that it's genuinely laughable when you complain about what you do. I've never said I'm perfect or that the blue M&Ms you rail against are. But I will always recognize who is the lesser of two evils, in a political system gamed to make us always choose that way. And going back to the beginning, yes, the blue is still the least concerning especially when factoring in RFK as a contender. So in the end, I'm still waiting. What is it about the current blue that showcases a tyrant to be? Sorry, but a mask and vaccine directive in times of emergency fixing of a red's doing don't cut it. A criminal conman having to face accountability for his many crimes is not going to cut it.

On the second part, the blue m&ms had been trying to silence his mean tweets for four years; the perception of J6 just gave them enough political points to do it.

The blue M&Ms didn't kick him off of anything. A private entity did. And they did that for him repeatedly violating their terms of service over the course of many years. Even the private entity by the way recognized what January 6 was.

On the first, citation required. Silencing dissent and open forum discussion is generally the tactic of the left.

Brush up at your leisure. I await you amending your generalization.

[CHEEZY17]

Dodgin' Dot conveniently ignores all of the private meetings that were held between big tech and the Biden administration "discussing" what to allow on their platforms.

[dot]

Dodgin' Dot conveniently ignores all of the private meetings that were held between big tech and the Biden administration "discussing" what to allow on their platforms.

The Biden administration didn't exist while the Trump administration was in power. Hack conveniently ignores such timeline discrepancies such as when his fake whistleblowers ended up complaining about Trump's government when trying to blame it on Joe Biden.

[Reservoir Dog]

Dodgin' Dot conveniently ignores all of the private meetings that were held between big tech and the Biden administration "discussing" what to allow on their platforms.

Cheezy has his finger on the pulse of "private meetings" held by big tech.

[CHEEZY17]

Dodgin' Dot conveniently ignores all of the private meetings that were held between big tech and the Biden administration "discussing" what to allow on their platforms.

Cheezy has his finger on the pulse of "private meetings" held by big tech.

Well yes. Its public knowledge, Ricky. The Biden administration held numerous private meetings with "big tech" in efforts to influence what the sites would allow on various topics. Hence:

The Biden-Big Tech Collusion Case
A judge rules that illegal White House pressure led to social-media censorship, especially on Covid-19.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/missouri-v ... h-9a98f268

Biden to appeal Big Tech collusion ruling banning admin officials meeting with social media firms: Report
The ruling found Biden likely violated the First Amendment with social media censorship meetings
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden- ... edia-firms

Judge restricts Biden officials from colluding with Big Tech in bombshell ruling after COVID censorship
The cases could mean that interactions between tech companies and government officials may be limited in the near future.
https://www.valleynewslive.com/2023/07/ ... ensorship/

Judge limits Biden administration in working with social media companies
https://apnews.com/article/social-media ... 53fd333727

Biden administration blocked from working with social media firms about ‘protected speech’
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/bid ... ted-speech

[dot]

You gotta fight for your right to lie and misinform. Never ceases to amaze me what is at the core of what the hacks want. Meanwhile, the discussion is about thin skinned wannabe tyrants demanding private entities delete speech that hurt their fee-fees. Once again, it's clear which side is worse.

[CHEEZY17]

You gotta fight for your right to lie and misinform. Never ceases to amaze me what is at the core of what the hacks want. Meanwhile, the discussion is about thin skinned wannabe tyrants demanding private entities delete speech that hurt their fee-fees. Once again, it's clear which side is worse.

Just say youre good with censorship, Dodgin' Dot.

[dot]

Just say youre good with censorship, Dodgin' Dot.

Trump came first. So after you.

[Cassandros]

"Section 3 does not establish a procedure for determining who is subject to the proscription
on holding office, instead providing only a process by which the disability may be removed (i.e., by two-
thirds vote in both houses). Congress has also not set forth a procedure for determining who is subject to
the disability imposed by Section 3."

"for purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment would not necessarily be confined by statute, it would appear that a criminal
conviction for insurrection or the “levying of war” prong of treason would provide sufficient proof,"

Prove the current "ruling" is enough to bar him from running.

Interesting. You're still not posting the text of the amendment, the section. You're posting analysis, but not the actual amendment. I wonder why that would be.

If you read what I had posted (twice now), you would know the amendment does not spell out the necessary burden of proof.

Activist judges making "rulings" is not going to be enough. Those ruling are about as relevant as your opinion --> worthless.

An actual criminal conviction however...

OK. Well, what I see from the blue camp is a concerted effort to do nothing about the border until the election year.

So, help me out...

What do you blue m&ms want, what's your teams solution now that you have exacerbated the issue for the last three years?

Are you familiar with the proposed border funding that is being sat on by the reds? Are you familiar how it was not fixed under the previous red? It's always amazing to see where memories begin when playing the team sports political game that people swear they aren't playing.

It wasn't fixed under the orange M&M because you blues worked night and day, and fought tooth and nail to not allow any solution to work. Worse, your team (and your media) actively distorted the actions. When trump has a detention center its called a concentration camp, when biden does it they are just 'holding facilities'.

Ironically, your team is now quietly implementing more of his ideas. For example:

The US and Mexico announced a new “border enforcement” policy on Thursday, January 5, 2023, which blocks Cubans, Haitians, and Nicaraguans from accessing asylum by immediately expelling them to Mexico under the Trump-era Title 42 rule.

Fast tracking vaccines, in and of itself, is a reasonable response based on the early unknowns. But by the time those shots became available we knew a lot more. Of which, we knew the elderly were the most vulnerable and, generally, the only young people who had negative outcomes had comorbidities (usually more than one); and we knew it was not airborne.

Two things, first the "but the elderly and unhealthy excuse" reads very much like you not gaf about other people besides yourself again. The mild inconvenience of a shot and a mask and distancing is worth it to most people with a conscience wanting to protect more vulnerable people. But I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt if you want to clarify that. Second, we knew the virus wasn't airbone? That's how it's transmitted. At least last I read and last y'all were arguing in the other thread. I know I masked up early in the pandemic and kept at it long after many others stopped, though I admittedly was not wealthy enough for the high value high protection masks.

When covid first emerged the thought (narrative) was it traveled by droplets. I.e. carried on saliva and transmitted when someone sneezed. Droplet transmission can be mitigated by mask. Most masks do nothing against airborne viruses because the virus is way to small to catch. Its the equivalent of a chain-linked fence trying to keep out a mosquito.

Why should I wear a mask or take a shot when neither prevent spread or infection? I'm not protecting anyone when these measure DO NOT WORK.

The mantra of sacrificing my liberty, and my health (taking an under tested and very new technology that, up until that point had an abysmal track record on all animal trials) is just about the dumbest thing anyone could possibly suggest. You are the selfish one to make such a demand. If you think the mask helps, wear one. If you feel "protected"from a shot, you do you. But under no circumstance shall you violate my Rights and my bodily autonomy because your pussy ass is scared of what is essentially a bad flu bug.

So, in the face of "what we knew", to force young healthy people to take a shot is completely unreasonable. Just like forcing people to wear masks when they don't stop the spread of airborne viruses. That is about as anti-bodily autonomy as you can get you fucking hypocrite.

No, because you overexaggerate the weight of your mild inconvenience to the vast overreach of a religious bigot political party and its financial backers to dictate what a woman can and cannot do with their own body.

That's a heaping pile of bullshit, see above.

Lastly, you assuming my stance on abortion just shows the level of ignorance coming from a horribly uninformed, virtue signally fool.

I believe you're trying to say virtue signaling, which is very unfortunate to trip over when trying to insult someone's intelligence. And I will assume your stance on abortion because you're here comparing having to wear a mask as the epitome of violating bodily autonomy in a time where women are being charged criminally for having a miscarriage or being told by non-medical state government officials to carry a nonviable fetus at the risk of the woman's health. By all means, show me the same level of animation railing about things like that, then maybe I can buy your self-righteous indignation over a piece of cloth on your face.

Typo's happen, get over yourself kiddo.

And by assuming my stance on abortion (and really, anything), you once again show the world just how dumb single party voters are.

/facepalm

First, the attempt was made to restrict travel from China; your team got butt-hurt and called him racist for it.

Yeah just breeze over what actually happened. Or rather lack of what happened. The red made a point of downplaying it from the beginning and his "ban" on travel from China had holes in it, big enough for the virus to come through. But don't worry, as he said:

"And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done"

How'd that end up working out?

The orange m&m did plenty wrong on covid. Remember, he was the OG on encouraging states to lockdown.

So, what's your point again? Other than trying to have a shotgun debate where you just shit all over everything hoping something sticks.

Second, we have four years of data that shows lockdowns caused WAY more harm than good. How anyone can defend those is beyond me.

The goal was to stop people from getting infected and dying, and people did not obey them. Who knew a country full of selfish red blue and purple Karens would think about themselves before others?

Oh, is that why you could NOT go to church, or the hair salon, or a wedding; but you could stand should to shoulder and protest?

Third, I was OK with masks until the day it was revealed that it was an airborne virus. Information that was withheld from the public for months and even when it was released authoritative asshole "leaders" still stoked the fear and continued the demands.

Won't get an argument from me about information being held back. If we could trust our selfish population and our selfish leaders to have behaved in a responsible way on this virus from inception, many people may not have had to die.

No chance of that. You can't "stop" the cold or flu, and that's really all covid is.

The selfish "leaders" are 100% to blame in that they not only withheld information to allow people to make informed choices for themselves; they straight up took away most peoples ability to make any choice at all.

That is unforgivable. And really, red and blue (and all in between) should be unitedly pissed over that.

Fourth, when you give an inch, Power takes a mile. To not stand up for ones Rights is a great way to not have any.

Brittany Watts and Kate Cox would agree with you. Power took their rights and the rights of so many more women away. I await your animation over that.

I have no idea who either of those people are.

Is this some kind of Roe v Wade comparison?

If so, you proved my point. So, thanks.

Lastly, the fact that you can't admit your faults, or understand why any of this is actually very important, makes you a useful idiot for your cult. You continue to prove single party voters are the dumbest people on the planet.

Look in a mirror. Anyone that presents as such a holier than thou is usually the first one with flaws. We've exposed several here, among those your silence on things your reds do that are so egregious that it's genuinely laughable when you complain about what you do. I've never said I'm perfect or that the blue M&Ms you rail against are. But I will always recognize who is the lesser of two evils, in a political system gamed to make us always choose that way. And going back to the beginning, yes, the blue is still the least concerning especially when factoring in RFK as a contender. So in the end, I'm still waiting. What is it about the current blue that showcases a tyrant to be? Sorry, but a mask and vaccine directive in times of emergency fixing of a red's doing don't cut it. A criminal conman having to face accountability for his many crimes is not going to cut it.

What egregious things have the reds done that I have "remained silent" on?

Also, only a tyrant would impose a vaccine mandate.

On the second part, the blue m&ms had been trying to silence his mean tweets for four years; the perception of J6 just gave them enough political points to do it.

The blue M&Ms didn't kick him off of anything. A private entity did. And they did that for him repeatedly violating their terms of service over the course of many years. Even the private entity by the way recognized what January 6 was.

A private entity that was firmly blue, and was happy to help a blue government.

And honestly, anytime a private business works with the government to subvert the Constitution because "technically it wasnt the government that did it" is the highest level of bullshit.

Getting Twitter to censor people is no different than using the 3rd party doctrine to avoid getting a proper warrant.

No one should be cool with it if they value their liberty and the Constitution.

On the first, citation required. Silencing dissent and open forum discussion is generally the tactic of the left.

Brush up at your leisure. I await you amending your generalization.

Hard to take Rollingstone as a credible source; but its probably true.

The way the left/right precedent window works, it makes perfect sense for the trump admin to try and skirt free speech first, so that biden could take it to the next level.

The constituents of both sides should really clean house and not elect people who do these things. Instead, both sides just get mad at the other and after 2 election cycles of both sides being guilty of the same shit --> it just turns into a big whataboutism and nothing gets done, no one gets punished, and we the people lose once again.

(But, for the record, the blue m&ms are generally more likely to attempt to shut down free speech. College campuses routinely try to shut down invited speakers they don't like. Ironically calling the speaker a fascist while they themselves are actually acting like fascist ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ).

[dot]

If you read what I had posted (twice now), you would know the amendment does not spell out the necessary burden of proof.

Doesn't it?

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Shall not engage in or give aid or comfort. Welp, he did that. Next.

It wasn't fixed under the orange M&M because you blues worked night and day, and fought tooth and nail to not allow any solution to work. Worse, your team (and your media) actively distorted the actions. When trump has a detention center its called a concentration camp, when biden does it they are just 'holding facilities'.

Ironically, your team is now quietly implementing more of his ideas. For example:

The US and Mexico announced a new “border enforcement” policy on Thursday, January 5, 2023, which blocks Cubans, Haitians, and Nicaraguans from accessing asylum by immediately expelling them to Mexico under the Trump-era Title 42 rule.

Your single party voterness is showing. Tell me you're a red M&M without telling me you're a red M&M when you blame everything on a blue and deliberately overlook the outright refusal to fix the problem from a red. You literally spell it out in your own words everything each side will do to sabotage the other, but if you were really not playing the team sport politics you claim to abhor, you wouldn't be identifying one side and excluding the other. You'd be harpooning both sides.

Well, that was easy.

When covid first emerged the thought (narrative) was it traveled by droplets. I.e. carried on saliva and transmitted when someone sneezed. Droplet transmission can be mitigated by mask. Most masks do nothing against airborne viruses because the virus is way to small to catch. Its the equivalent of a chain-linked fence trying to keep out a mosquito.

Yeah, that's airborne.

Why should I wear a mask or take a shot when neither prevent spread or infection? I'm not protecting anyone when these measure DO NOT WORK.

Except a measure of protection is afforded to other people via those protections, and it's you that objects to all of it. Whether that's masking up, getting a shot, or standing apart from the next person, you absolutely rage about it because it's a mild inconvenience to you.

The mantra of sacrificing my liberty, and my health (taking an under tested and very new technology that, up until that point had an abysmal track record on all animal trials) is just about the dumbest thing anyone could possibly suggest. You are the selfish one to make such a demand. If you think the mask helps, wear one. If you feel "protected"from a shot, you do you. But under no circumstance shall you violate my Rights and my bodily autonomy because your pussy ass is scared of what is essentially a bad flu bug.

That killed millions. You're here proclaiming that you should be able to infect everyone you want because that's your f'n right. I can see I was wrong to give you the benefit of the doubt. Once again, the self-righteous indignation that you wear a piece of cloth, take a needle in the arm, or stand away from someone, those are severe violations in your red-addled brain. And yet in the sane world, you would be seen as the selfish asshole because you were told to do or not to do something minor to benefit your fellow man and you rage over that. You say all of this in the same world in which women are being told to kill themselves having a baby that won't live outside of them or suffer criminal charges.

That's a heaping pile of bullshit, see above.

Couldn't have described your thoughts better myself, thanks.

Typo's happen, get over yourself kiddo.

And when they happen to people trying to insult other people's intelligence, it's ironic and worth pointing out. Get over it and proofread better.

And by assuming my stance on abortion (and really, anything), you once again show the world just how dumb single party voters are.

Like you? I mean, once again, you aren't here raging over the rights of women being taken away. No, you're here because you were told to wear a mask, Karen.

The orange m&m did plenty wrong on covid. Remember, he was the OG on encouraging states to lockdown.

So, what's your point again? Other than trying to have a shotgun debate where you just shit all over everything hoping something sticks.

Red M&M. The point is you once again showed your single party voter mindset and ignored that he botched Covid from the word go, preferring to only blame a blue for what went down. People above team sport party politics that they claim to not play don't ignore what one side does to blame the other in all cases. But you can guess what single party voters would do, and thank you for perfectly exemplifying it.

Oh, is that why you could NOT go to church, or the hair salon, or a wedding; but you could stand should to shoulder and protest?

Wouldn't have caught me doing that with or without Covid, and I struggle to remember vast numbers of blues who would've. But I can tell you a bunch of reds hated the idea of not paying weekly lip service to their idol, and while I don't know the color M&Ms of the Maine wedding that got the press because of Covid, I can tell you it was rural and people died. But yeah, you're probably right, who cares about them whether they voted red or blue? It's about you, isn't it?

No chance of that. You can't "stop" the cold or flu, and that's really all covid is.

The selfish "leaders" are 100% to blame in that they not only withheld information to allow people to make informed choices for themselves; they straight up took away most peoples ability to make any choice at all.

That is unforgivable. And really, red and blue (and all in between) should be unitedly pissed over that.

We can agree that this country is full of selfish assholes, but we won't agree that Covid is just a cold or flu. I've had all 3, Covid is the worst of them and thankfully I only got it to my knowledge once. Moreover, I think given what went down in this country during Covid, you can see why the protective measures were taken. Too many people want to disobey for the sake of disobeying. If it was only yourself that it would impact, then I would say have at it. But Covid isn't about just yourself, and such reckless actions put other people in danger. I draw the line there, whether that's with tailgating or with a contagious virus. Blame everyone else but yourself if you have to.

I have no idea who either of those people are.

Thanks for proving my point. Anyone screaming about bodily autonomy over a mask, but doesn't even know those two names in the last couple of months proves that bodily autonomy to you is just a buzzword.

What egregious things have the reds done that I have "remained silent" on?

Thanks for proving my point again. Oh, the irony. See above.

Also, only a tyrant would impose a vaccine mandate.

According to who? You? Your opinion is hardly valid given your hyperbolic reaction over mild inconveniences. Nah, give me something real. Here, I got a real one for you. A tyrant is someone who will incite an insurrection, organize and execute a multistate coup to overthrow the government to install himself in power because he lost his election. An election he lost because the majority of the country voted against him. Give me something like that from the blue that will result in said blue being a tyrant.

A private entity that was firmly blue, and was happy to help a blue government.

The government wasn't blue when Trump got his ass bumped off a private entity's product by violating their terms of service egregiously. Nor was it blue when he executed his attempted coup. Keep playing your team sports though, I'm sure everyone totally believes it.

And honestly, anytime a private business works with the government to subvert the Constitution because "technically it wasnt the government that did it" is the highest level of bullshit.

Getting Twitter to censor people is no different than using the 3rd party doctrine to avoid getting a proper warrant.

No one should be cool with it if they value their liberty and the Constitution.

To a degree, I agree. But even you have to admit there are limits on what your rights are under the Constitution. Moreover, Twitter is not the government, if they deem you to have violated their terms of service, then the argument lies with them and not the government.

Hard to take Rollingstone as a credible source; but its probably true.

Rollingstone was just the publication, the disclosure was public and from Twitter personnel themselves.

The way the left/right precedent window works, it makes perfect sense for the trump admin to try and skirt free speech first, so that biden could take it to the next level.

Let me know when Biden pressures Twitter to take down posts that hurt his feelings. Combating deliberate misinformation is a far cry from throwing a tantrum over a personal insult.

The constituents of both sides should really clean house and not elect people who do these things. Instead, both sides just get mad at the other and after 2 election cycles of both sides being guilty of the same shit --> it just turns into a big whataboutism and nothing gets done, no one gets punished, and we the people lose once again.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Would it be better for the country to have more than the two options we always get stuck with? Yes. Should we actively vote for a nutball just because he's not one of those two options? No. After all, we saw the damage just four years of the last red did to this country. Some experiments aren't worth the chaos that will ensue.

(But, for the record, the blue m&ms are generally more likely to attempt to shut down free speech. College campuses routinely try to shut down invited speakers they don't like. Ironically calling the speaker a fascist while they themselves are actually acting like fascist ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ).

And yet, the controversial speakers routinely called fascist do end up sounding a lot like fascists. After all, they see how far the last one of theirs got in the highest office of the country. Grifters gonna grift. Either way, I'm sure you'll be cognizant of future generalizations where you proclaim blues are the ones who shut down free speech. Surely you won't ignore the facts that reds will gladly partake in censorship or stifling dissent.