Linking a decision that she was part of (which was actually a decision that gave Pritzker the leeway to allow church worship services but not battle of the bands or picnics at the church property) just because the author of that decision who was not ACB made a passing comment about a concerning case, is consensus cracking.
If a SINGLE FUCKING POST contained a SINGLE FUCKING DECISION ACTUALLY AUTHORED BY ACB I would consider it relevant. So far, nothing.
I agree the decision was concerning. Barrett didn’t fucking write it, though.
Telling me to shut the fuck up in all caps while providing nothing but a repetitive demand for an unreasonable level of justification of my healthy skepticism that ACB is not potentially another Roberts in disguise, while every RINO in the senate reverses their opposition to a pre-election appointment...
All while telling me that rulings she concurred with don’t count because they aren’t in her own words...
is proof to me that you are a totally disingenuous shill. LOL
No, I want SUBSTANTIVE ARGUMENT.
Linking a decision that she was part of (which was actually a decision that gave Pritzker the leeway to allow church worship services but not battle of the bands or picnics at the church property) just because the author of that decision who was not ACB made a passing comment about a concerning case, is consensus cracking.
If a SINGLE FUCKING POST contained a SINGLE FUCKING DECISION ACTUALLY AUTHORED BY ACB I would consider it relevant. So far, nothing.
I agree the decision was concerning. Barrett didn’t fucking write it, though.
And by the way. I’ve never heard anyone use a term like “consensus cracking” who wasn’t on the left.
Consensus cracking is a tactic used by cia disinfo teams etc, media matters/David brick types to infiltrate and divide.
You telling me that you’ve only heard leftists use it is a proof to me that you are a totally disingenuous shill.
Post a link to a Barrett decision that she wrote that is of concern. Or....SHUT THE FUCK UP.
Right back at ya.
Telling me to shut the fuck up in all caps while providing nothing but a repetitive demand for an unreasonable level of justification of my healthy skepticism that ACB is not potentially another Roberts in disguise, while every RINO in the senate reverses their opposition to a pre-election appointment...
All while telling me that rulings she concurred with don’t count because they aren’t in her own words...
is proof to me that you are a totally disingenuous shill. LOL