3
king07828 3 points ago +3 / -0

Awesome, hard to handle something other than a sternly worded letter from a republican

3
king07828 3 points ago +3 / -0

Such bigots, they don't have my preferred pronoun "his majesty"

68
king07828 68 points ago +68 / -0

The same odds that Biden won 2020 without cheating?

9
king07828 9 points ago +9 / -0

The jab mandate opinions from SCOTUS now seem to allow Biden to force you to get jabbed if you want your payment from Uncle Sam

5
king07828 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yes, however, it may also sets precedent for allowing the executive branch to withhold your tax refund (or any other payment/benefit the government owes you) until you're fully jabbed

9
king07828 9 points ago +9 / -0

The case "we won" against OSHA effectively held that the executive branch can't force injections, but ONLY because Congress didn't give them that power, which backhandedly acknowledges that Congress has the power to let the executive branch force inject anyone with anything at anytime in any place

The case "we lost" for health care workers allows the executive branch to withhold payments if you don't do what they want. E.g., you don't force your employees to get jabbed, then you don't get medicare payments. This gives the executive branch arbitrary power to compel anyone to do anything by withholding benefits

1
king07828 1 point ago +1 / -0

The case "we won" against OSHA effectively held that the executive branch can't force injections, but ONLY because Congress didn't give them that power, which backhandedly acknowledges that Congress has the power to let the executive branch force inject anyone with anything at anytime in any place

The case "we lost" for health care workers allows the executive branch to withhold payments if you don't do what they want. E.g., you don't force your employees to get jabbed, then you don't get medicare payments. This gives the executive branch arbitrary power to compel anyone to do anything by withholding benefits

4
king07828 4 points ago +5 / -1

Alternatively, sit with you child during your child's Internet time (e.g., instead of watching TV or doing something else) and ask them questions about what they're doing, why they're doing it, and what the ramifications are

1
king07828 1 point ago +1 / -0

Wow, that's a really specific denial, one that seems to artfully dodge whether he was a "paid informant", was "blackmailed" by government officials or agents, or whether he in fact "incited violence"

2
king07828 2 points ago +2 / -0

Perhaps she should be impeached for providing testimony she either knew or should have known was false, thereby recklessly endangering the country and the Constitution with an opinion based on falsehoods

12
king07828 12 points ago +13 / -1

Seems like Iran is good for two things 1) putting out hits on conservatives and 2) laundering US tax dollars back to corrupt US politicians

2
king07828 2 points ago +2 / -0

Tell him he forgot patriots.win? Or just write it yourself?

2
king07828 2 points ago +2 / -0

Pfizer can argue manpower allocation priorities, e.g., it is more important to review for use than it is to scrub for personally identifying information (PII), thus, lots of people allocated for initial review for emergency use and just a few people allocated to scrub for PII.

HOWEVER, proposing a 50 to 75 year timeline for release of this information looks disgusting and should be deserving of sanctions and being held in contempt of court. E.g., for even proposing such an unreasonable timeline, the attorney that handed it to the judge and the official at the FDA who gave final approval should get a 1 to 5 night stay at a Federal prison

1
king07828 1 point ago +1 / -0

Exactly, racists wearing masks keeps prolonging this?

view more: Next ›