Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

No one is above the law. Inciting violence against ICE is going to land her in jail. 

  • Like 1

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
7 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

No one is above the law. Inciting violence against ICE is going to land her in jail. 

No wonder Mexico wants to take over Southern Cal. The stench of treason and weakness is all over that shithole. 

  • Like 1
Posted
On 6/24/2025 at 1:12 PM, Deluge said:

No wonder Mexico wants to take over Southern Cal. The stench of treason and weakness is all over that shithole. 

This needs to be bumped and talked about. I mean, Californians are actually voting these shitbags into office. Is it really the majority, or are these  f*ckers cheating? 

Posted
On 6/24/2025 at 12:03 PM, gatomontes99 said:

No one is above the law. Inciting violence against ICE is going to land her in jail. 

Too bad your TWEET is NOT evidence that any law was broken.

Also SHAMEFUL that the DoJ is LEAKING the existence of an FBI investigation to TAR a politician in violation of what WAS DoJ policy against using the power of government to LIBEL ANYONE BEFORE an INDICTMENT.

Of course, there are NO BOUNDARIES in the Trump admin based on JUSTICE nor ILLEGALLY USING THE DoJ for POLITICS.

 

 

  • Haha 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Too bad your TWEET is NOT evidence that any law was broken.

Also SHAMEFUL that the DoJ is LEAKING the existence of an FBI investigation to TAR a politician in violation of what WAS DoJ policy against using the power of government to LIBEL ANYONE BEFORE an INDICTMENT.

Of course, there are NO BOUNDARIES in the Trump admin based on JUSTICE nor ILLEGALLY USING THE DoJ for POLITICS.

 

 

Of course, you are more upset that she is under investigation than for her comments....

  • Like 1

 

 

Posted
28 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Too bad your TWEET is NOT evidence that any law was broken.

Also SHAMEFUL that the DoJ is LEAKING the existence of an FBI investigation to TAR a politician in violation of what WAS DoJ policy against using the power of government to LIBEL ANYONE BEFORE an INDICTMENT.

Of course, there are NO BOUNDARIES in the Trump admin based on JUSTICE nor ILLEGALLY USING THE DoJ for POLITICS.

 

 

That stoopid b*tch was calling on her gangbanger comrades to rise up against ICE. THAT is the kind of filth Californians have been voting into office. 

I'm just wondering if you f*ckers have been rigging elections, because you have to be pretty f*cking woketarded to vote someone like that into any position. 

Posted
1 hour ago, robosmith said:

Too bad your TWEET is NOT evidence that any law was broken.

Also SHAMEFUL that the DoJ is LEAKING the existence of an FBI investigation to TAR a politician in violation of what WAS DoJ policy against using the power of government to LIBEL ANYONE BEFORE an INDICTMENT.

Of course, there are NO BOUNDARIES in the Trump admin based on JUSTICE nor ILLEGALLY USING THE DoJ for POLITICS.

 

 

Well, it is pretty obviously against the law, but here is an article about the law that also references 18 US Code 115 if you'd like to verify it:

Quote

What Does the Law Prohibit?

18 U.S. Code 115 outlines several prohibited behaviors. These actions include:

    Threatening to assault, kidnap, or murder a U.S. official, judge, federal law enforcement officer, or their immediate family members.
    Actually committing assault, kidnapping, or murder of the same or
    Conspiring with others to do so.
https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/threatening-public-officials

Then there is the SCOTUS decision that covers this topic as well. The ruling talks about the limits of free speech:

Quote

Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.[1] The Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

In this case, she literally said things that were "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action" and it "is likely to incite or produce such action".

Per the SCOTUS ruling and the law, she's pretty damn guilty. 

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...