1
Belleoffreedom 1 point ago +1 / -0

Bullshit. They're looking for an excuse to be nasty.

2
Belleoffreedom 2 points ago +2 / -0

No. Giving a physically healthy child puberty blockers is malpractice.

3
Belleoffreedom 3 points ago +3 / -0

Somebody called Eric Swalwell a POS, and it made the news, but was reported as a "death threat." Calling someone a POS is an insult, but it is not a death threat.

These people are a bunch of sanctimonious liars.

1
Belleoffreedom 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, I am sure there are people with TDS that would love to believe that. Of course it comes from an anonymous source via the WaPo, so I have my doubts, because the WaPo has gotten not one thing right about Trump, yet. This sounds like a John Podesta special effort. This is what he (and she) wished they could find.

2
Belleoffreedom 2 points ago +2 / -0

That was the worst threat against Swalwell? That was a rude opinion. But the news media is calling a rude phone call a "death threat."

These unethical morons are stumbling all over themselves in order to gin up support for their narrative, again.

This is going to backfire.

3
Belleoffreedom 3 points ago +3 / -0

Unfounded assertions that the FBI doesn't deserve criticism for its lawless actions and arbitrary and capricious enforcement of the law degrade the credibility of the current institution.

3
Belleoffreedom 3 points ago +3 / -0

They came armed, with what their leaders (mis)characterize as "weapons of war," but it wasn't a raid.

2
Belleoffreedom 2 points ago +2 / -0

Agreed. I consider the affidavit as part of the search warrant.

In any case, if they play that game with us, or do the idiotic redaction stunt, we'll all know that there is no probable cause, won't we?

2
Belleoffreedom 2 points ago +2 / -0

Ah, but taxation was a hot button issue, and the Tea Party made a big splash at the time.

2
Belleoffreedom 2 points ago +2 / -0

Tiny population, very long, very harsh winters. They have to get along.

1
Belleoffreedom 1 point ago +1 / -0

He could have simply and routinely let slip a little bit of false info to a person acting just a little sus. If nothing happens, fine. If something happens, he knows who the leaker is. It's called a "canary trap," and he used it during his administration. I am sure the need to plug leaks continues.

1
Belleoffreedom 1 point ago +1 / -0

I know that's what he said, but both Judicial Watch and Trump's attorneys had previously filed such motions, and the judge had ordered a response. The or DOJ was not the movant.

5
Belleoffreedom 5 points ago +5 / -0

They pursue low-hanging fruit, because it's easy. Wealthy people fight, and they often win.

view more: Next ›