I'd be very disappointed to see that if I were one of their twelve viewers

Ex-President's tax returns: not moot

True. But...

Since when do our enemies care if we actually did the thing we're accused of?

Well kek'd. I love how the mid-wit NPC pretends to be a serious intellectual and plays the "muh statistics" reverse card, as if simple observation weren't entirely sufficient. Then she's immediately reduced from "your claim doesn't meet my rigorous intellectual standards" to "your claim is completely outside my ideological purview, no matter how much evidence has been presented to me."

To be fair, if the powers that be were to crack down on us, it would be over some (excuse the expression) trumped-up doxxing accusations

Maybe we ought to try to get blackmail tapes of SC justices fucking underage girls. Seems to be a winning formula.

"This is what you voted for. The blood is on your hands. If you have a shred of decency left, you'll take your own life and leave the world to people who aren't active murderers."

(or something similar)

LOL now with the telepathy.

I'm not urban. I just didn't interpret the post as a personal attack.

"Agree with my opinion or you're ignorant."

That's how you know a conversation has ceased to be productive.

What the OP is getting at is that, broadly speaking, rural means conservative while urban means leftist. None of this implies that city dwellers are better informed, but merely that it doesn't cost them anything to be wrong about domestic terrorist legislation because they aren't the ones in the crosshairs.

I agree that it's an overgeneralization, but you can't pretend that they're ALL paying attention.

I see your point, but bear in mind that not every right-leaning person has the time or inclination to follow politics as closely as we do here. Hearing "domestic terrorist" sans euphemisms like "white nationalist" might reasonably invoke the people that spent the last 4 years rioting, looting, and assaulting people for their political beliefs.

You know the percentage of Republicans who DON'T believe the election was stolen? That's them.

What's the point of covering up their profile name? They're posting on a public (or private, as is rhetorically convenient) forum and should be afforded no more anonymity than they afford themselves.

Besides, at this point it should be clear that our only two choices are to take the high road to oblivion or the low road to a fighting chance of survival. Do you think this person would hesitate for a moment to post your information knowing that you would get fired, ostracized or worse?

Instead of throwing around lazy insults, you could try explaining your reasoning.

You faggot.

Edit: it's a joke not a dick, don't take it so hard

If only there were some legal process to verify such claims, maybe some process that was repeatedly denied by the narrowest of legal technicalities and judicial interpretations.

Well, as I'm aware no process exists, so we have no choice but to believe everything was completely above-board despite our lying eyes and ears.

We should all take a moment to turn inward and learn from November 3rd's anti-Trump referendum in which Trump gained 5 million votes over 2016.

That's funny, I just found 10 million Trump ballots each in AZ, MI, WI, and PA but they fell into a furnace after I counted them. But I swear they existed, so you're obligated to count them.

I believe the question is rhetorical

Something about an old internet adage concerning under-bridge dwellers and providing sustenance

I.e. don't give this faggot the satisfaction. Deport and move on

With 8 days left until the supposed transition? This is not the strategy of people confident in their position.

Kek @ horizontal stripes. He's the guy who doesn't have the confidence to ask someone to dance but still wants to project confidence.

I too have a CIT4DT, just not in the same way

This is kinda cringe tbh. It's a really generic insult. Insults like "Creepy Joe" or "Arkancide" are effective because they're personal and verifiable

Spoiler: he didn't want to pull out, and now people will remember him after he dies

Some anon pointed out that women think they're oppressed becaused they compare themselves only to high-status men, because they don't perceive low-status men as even human

This is a larger implication behind this. Leftists' moral framework is that any further expansion of government power or spending is, by default, good. The concepts of ulterior motive and unintended consequences don't seem to exist in their calculation, unless the bill intently furthers right-wing causes.

This is why Democrats destroy the cities and states they control. They turbo-legislate away their budgets, with nothing but vague optimism that any given bill will achieve its intended effect without creating additional problems, and create an ever-expanding market for politicians willing to grant legislative windfalls to their big donors.

It amazes me that leftists who complain about corrupt politicians selling favors to corporate donors never figure out that the product that corporations and lobbyists are buying is the politician's ability to regulate the economy. This is a libertarian argument, and they use it to justify authoritarianism.