2
NotJudging 2 points ago +2 / -0

Information had been dropping for 5 years. We know the crimes and conspiracies. We need action by those on power. But they aren't going to police themselves.

4
NotJudging 4 points ago +5 / -1

Libertarian party seemed to be infected by leftists that just wanted to be a different form of snowflake than their commie Californian neighbors. They didn't want to be labeled "Nazi" when they slightly disagreed, so they pretended to be above it all but didn't really adhere to any libertarian philosophy.

1
NotJudging 1 point ago +1 / -0

Exactly. We aren't going to be shocked because we already know. The blatant illegal corruption is already known and out there. There is no reason to wait unless we just don't have the power to do anything about it.

22
NotJudging 22 points ago +22 / -0

In the Podesta email leaks they talk about Rand. It's very insightful. They're basically asking each other if he's "for real." And are somewhat shocked someone on that stage isn't playing "the game," but is there trying to do the right thing. It's eye opening because apparently it's that rare of quality in dc.

2
NotJudging 2 points ago +2 / -0

Ah so her little tweets are just for show

4
NotJudging 4 points ago +4 / -0

Which way did she vote on it?

92
NotJudging 92 points ago +92 / -0

I'm not one to "blame the victim," but wtf did she expect? The dude is a walking insane asylum. Even if he didn't beat her (cause I'll never just take the msm word for it), it like saying, "omygawd running into and destroying beehives was a really bad experience and who knew right? I'm retarded" stupid chick is stupid.

5
NotJudging 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yeah, but that was deep state vs deep state.

1
NotJudging 1 point ago +1 / -0

I really don't think there was a plan. The fact that Trumps biggest/only "guns" were attacking outside the system led me to believe that a while back. Trump is surrounded by traitors. Anyone that steps up on our side immediately gets attacked by the state.

12
NotJudging 12 points ago +12 / -0

Interesting. My problem with this is there might not be a "later." And we've seen too many things/evidence disappear when the doj gets involved.

1
NotJudging 1 point ago +1 / -0

You bring up good points, but the age limit is too keep help insure there are no "lifers."

I think senators should go back to being selected by the states (governor's was it?)

2
NotJudging 2 points ago +2 / -0

I really think we need other limits too. No one under 60. No one that's held public office for the last 15 years. We need people that rose up in private sector and are of the age to "give back."

Edit: speaking as someone in their 40s. So I'm not just pushing for people like me.

1
NotJudging 1 point ago +1 / -0

My reply to when that phrase is used (or something similar, like that's it's outdated) when it comes up in conversation has always been: "there's a process for that. That's what the amendments are for."

They never know how to respond to that.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›