***Official Political Discussion Thread***

It's almost like everyone around him are nothing but grifters.

Yup He can only control grifters and corrupt people :lol.

Seth Abramson has been saying this for years. Glad there is finally more mainstream proof of it.

He needs a Pulitzer for his work. Or something even higher. He’s been right at every turn. But people are playing stupid :lol. His new book dropped yesterday. Going to grab the audio version.

Rudy G needs to get up out the paint.

 
seeing this, I´m surprised you never hit a mf with ¨NONSENSE!¨ on here.



super relevant (from TFA):



nah homie.
Mutombo GIFs | Tenor





whoa whoa whoa there buddy.

I will have you know my beautiful bronze self feels much safer here atm...talkin´ bout some neck and neck.

al menos no tenemos un presidente que tiene un culto a la muerte y un cabeza llena de pendejadas.

:lol I stand corrected.

help me out here... you don’t have a president who has a cult of the brain dead and full of *****es?

I Only know a little Spanish from cooking.
 
:lol: I stand corrected.

help me out here... you don’t have a president who has a cult of the brain dead and full of *****es?

I Only know a little Spanish from cooking.

loosely, ¨death cult¨ and ¨brain full of stupids,¨ pendejadas being things crafted BY the implied pendejo.
 
seeing this, I´m surprised you never hit a mf with ¨NONSENSE!¨ on here.



super relevant (from TFA):



nah homie.
Mutombo GIFs | Tenor





whoa whoa whoa there buddy.

I will have you know my beautiful bronze self feels much safer here atm...talkin´ bout some neck and neck.

al menos no tenemos un presidente que tiene un culto a la muerte y un cabeza llena de pendejadas.
WHAT IS THE MEANING OF ALL OF THIS?!
 
Never trust a junkie, for anything, not even for telling you the time of day. If he is a junkie that suddenly finds jesus? He’s even more dangerous, then perfect fodder for the right wing. dwalk31 dwalk31 , what did you think of that article?

Sounds like the group needs to file its annual report and pay taxes to me, based on that article.
 
Sounds like the group needs to file its annual report and pay taxes to me, based on that article.
What do you think the odds are that they will? Also from the article attached, the Banks lookalike was hardly known until the man in Orange showed up.
 
just amazing that they are already over this story from just this week


After looking into this more, I think DOJ's argument is very likely to prevail. If anything could derail it, I think it would be the question of whether the president himself qualifies as an "employee" of the federal government, not whether Trump's comments were within the "scope of his office and employment."

The sovereign immunity doctrine states that the government is immune from lawsuits unless that immunity has been specifically waived. Defamation has not gotten a waiver so it falls under that immunity.
In other words, if Barr succeeds in making the argument that Trump's remarks were within the scope of his official duties, the case is 100% guaranteed to be dismissed because the defendant would then be the US government instead of Trump personally.

The Westfall Act is what gives DOJ the power to move such cases from state to federal court and to substitute itself as the defendant.
The Attorney General issues a certification that the activity was within the scope of his federal duties and that's it.

The argument here that Trump calling one of his sexual assault accusers a liar falls under that scope sounds absurd but I think it'll succeed based off of the precedent I read.
The case is Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) v. Cass Ballenger, decided in the D.C. Circuit Court in 2006.
Ballenger was a congressman who was sued by CAIR because of comments he made about the separation between him and his wife. Amongst other things, he blamed the separation on his wife not liking living across the street of CAIR's building. Additionally, he accused CAIR of fundraising for terrorism. Hence why CAIR sued for defamation.

Despite all that, the D.C. Circuit Court held that those comments were within the scope of Ballenger's federal duties. They concluded that Ballenger's comment were at least in part motivated by a desire to preserve his re-election campaign odds and minimizing the political damage of a marriage scandal. Therefore the comments were within that scope, as absurd as it sounds.

You could make the very same argument for Trump's comments, and I'm guessing that's exactly how the case will proceed, ultimately resulting in a dismissal. I'm not sure why Barr waited about a year to take action but at the end of the day, the WH asked Barr to intervene shortly before a key deadline in the case and he quickly followed through.
 
Last edited:
its so weird. white boomer house wives go from reposting russian "BLM want to see our contry burned to the ground and murder our police" memes to "I had a great time with Carol and the girls last night" and " 5 gardening tips to spruce up your yard" in 5 minutes. ^^^ that lady looks like one of them
 
Back
Top Bottom