Donald Trump - GUILTY!
- Thread starter Pexbo
- Start date
That word played a role in it? Could have sworn I listened to a good portion of it.Boofing? Did you miss the Kavanaugh confirmation
It’s a game like quarters
Same here, I had to Google it!
Never a bad time to offer this gem up. Totally forgot ‘boofing’ was in there…
Last edited:
I leant it at the hearing for one of the Supreme Court Justices appointment.
Yep.
That happened quite some time ago. Do wonder what his eventual legal punishment was.
Because this utterly deficient justice system does not do treat people equally before the law, this is what you get.
The fat cnut and his dwarf of a bald lackey should have been taken straight to prison as soon as the indictments came.
Probably means an indictment in the next couple weeks. 
That second sentence is quite the doozy.
I just can't read it all, it's melting my brain.
This can't be real. How does he even get his family to support him? Let alone millions of actual adults.
Such a way with words!
Makes me think she received a letter in the mail
Thought it was some random maga twat, then I was pleasantly surprised it's a us rep maga twat
Really? Are you allowed to just say this sort of shit in America? Surely it's contempt of court or conspiracy to pervert the course of justice or libel or something isn't it?
Well, we have the 1st Amendment, so yes.
But freedom of speech doesn't give you the right to incite violence for example. Conspiracy to murder is a crime right even though you haven't done anything?
There is also a responsibility of speech isn't there?
Per Schenk v. United States, “The clear and present danger test features two independent conditions: first, the speech must impose a threat that a substantive evil might follow, and second, the threat is a real, imminent threat.”
Her tweet does neither. She’s a raging idiot for posting it, but she has the right to do that.
That's a pretty dumb ruling. Explains a lot about American politics then.
You say that, but would you say it if it were a person calling Trump a dictator wannabe fascist who is a bitch for the far right?
Also, regarding the issue of libel, then you get into NYT v. Sullivan, which set the bar very high for a libel suit involving a public official… “a public official must show that what was said against them was made with actual malice – "that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard for the truth."’
I find that sort of language weird in general tbf but a public figure saying it is rather unbecoming. Calling someone a fascist isn't quite the same as calling them corrupt in my view. One is an opinion, the other an aspersion. You should have to have evidence if you want to defame someone.
See above regarding defamation / libel / slander of a public official.
I understand your discomfort though. To me, from the perspective of America’s idea of freedom of speech, it is absurd that ongoing cases involving footballers cannot be openly discussed on this forum.
Can you imagine what US cable news would be like if they could not discuss ongoing court cases of politicians and celebrities?
Can you imagine what US cable news would be like if they could not discuss ongoing court cases of politicians and celebrities?
The American idea of freedom of speech is deeply flawed, a lot of people have no idea what their actual rights are
In basic terms your speech is protected from Government interference, that's it
The CAF for example is a private owned forum, so is Twitter, Facebook et al, you have no rights in regard to what the forum allows you to post.
BTW, The UK has different laws regarding libel/defamation, essentially they are the opposite of US laws, in that the defendant has to prove their case rather than the accuser prove theirs, that's why a lot of these high profile cases are held in UK courts as they're easier to win
I'm disappointed it didn't include a verse like this:
With Giuliani
And Kushner, too.
Don Junior's bag of white
The pillow guy, a gargoyle and Sidney Powell
Here at Donald Trump's trial!
Fixed it for you
I’m not sure what you mean by that. It’s a broader sense of freedom of speech, not necessarily flawed.
Which is what we’ve been discussing above.
Correct.
Also correct, hence me saying I understand his unease… as I’m required to moderate a forum that operates based on a different set of rules than I’m used to.
I meant the peoples idea of what the first amendment protects is very different to what it actually does protect, in general it doesn't give you as many rights as the general population thinks it does
re: the rest that's fair enough