User

I don't think you are willing to really look at what the answer to that might be.

What is this, backwards bonzo world to you now?

It is pretty transparent when your first thought is to turn this into a cheap shot at the poster who brought it up instead of condemning what happened.

He was about to be impeached and would have been convicted in the Senate. He was pressured to resign so it wouldn't come to that. Your first post here and continued insistence of not backing off it prove otherwise.

The person doing the hand waving here was you... again, nothing honest about this: "With no law capable of constraining the executive, the last barrier to dictatorship has fallen, along with all of John Roberts hopes for legacy. Instead, should the country survive to remember, this court will live in infamy."

It was obvious he was mocking that as your usual schtick on this forum, not that you did it specifically in this thread yet. The gist being that is likely what you would end up doing here though...

No one tried to use lawfare like this to get Obama after he left office...

Personally oversaw? OK.. Trump will not personally oversee the people he is ordering to be executed either. Don't worry, he will come up with a reason to kill them too, remember, he will declare them to be enemies of the state. They will be legitimate targets. Also... Obama killed more than that one American citizen...

I quite specifically said drone strikes of American citizens. It must be that you did not read what I wrote. Well... when Trump uses his newfound immunity to order the military to assassinate anyone he wants to it will not be him pushing the button either!

The voting population is only about 250 Million. Only about 165 Million Voted. Even less in the party primaries to nominate these two... But, your point still stands.

Bush and Trump were killing Americans? I don't think so... This is the garbage you are pushing here. If anyone has come close to the whole OMG TRUMP WILL ORDER AMERICANS TO BE ASSASSINATED is Obama.

The lie by you was this: AKA, backs the new Iron Curtain brought to the world by Putin. That is not what he said and the full context of saying Putin was smart was followed up by him saying Putin never would have done it while he was President, not that he somehow supported his doing it like you are lying about. You are beyond dishonest on this forum. It is just gross how much you will lie and distort things on here. Why? You are not fooling anyone on here, you are only hurting yourself and any care you have for your own integrity.

So... you want to charge Obama with murdering American citizens abroad with drones now?

Except when it comes to "predicting" Presidential debates, it seems... LOL

Seems you have not read it then... Either way, the discussion was not really about your thoughts on the Bible. You can think whatever ignorant things you like. The point being made was that, at least in America, you have Religious Freedom and can read The Bible in school.

"If" You are singing a different song now adding in a huge qualifier there that you did not before. Then you follow it up with another ignorant comment about long live king Biden. You have no interest in any kind of honest intelligent discussion here.

Stupid and wasting peoples time is your "predicting" there will be a few more debates when all available evidence is to the contrary.

Look up the definition of probably. If you wanted to use the word predict, you should have led with that to begin with. I am just an impartial observer here of what you write.

You said probably... I understand what you write. If you meant that you were just randomly throwing numbers out with no reasoning what-so-ever, you should have said so.

There are traditionally only 2-3 debates total going back 50 years now. And Trump / Biden only agreed to 2 and already had 1. There is only 1 scheduled debate remaining. So... where do you get there will be a few more?

Playing dumb is the last refuge of your dishonest game, now it seems. Let me clear this up for the audience: You ignorantly claimed: "With no law capable of constraining the executive, the last barrier to dictatorship has fallen, along with all of John Roberts hopes for legacy. Instead, should the country survive to remember, this court will live in infamy." You have nothing to back that stupid assertion up. It was not only stupid, it was so self-evidently absurd. That you are still here playing dumb only shows the depths of dishonesty you are willing to go to.

That is a lot of words to avoid saying you have not read the ruling and have no clue what you are talking about.

Where does it say that in the ruling?

Not making up anything. You made a stupid assertion, now you are too dishonest to admit you have nothing to back it up.

It is not your attitude, it is your ignorance and bigotry that is the problem here.