Fake Trump (Baldwin) goes to jail before Real Trump; Never thought Id type this

[Skylar]

you are making claims about his testimony

Show me making claims about the content of grand jury testimony. Quote me.

Or admit you made the claim up.

I'll give you two chances.

 

[Skylar]

so you still have nothing other than a claim without evidence,,

you are free to believe anything you want,,

Laughing....you're stuck spamming. This after you were caught lying.

You're stuck. We have the Secretary of State of Georgia affirming Trump threatened him. And you insisting that Trump only 'asked'.

But tell us again about how you have 'expressed no opinion'. If your claims had merit, you wouldn't have had to lie.

 

[progressive hunter]

Laughing....you're stuck spamming. This after you were caught lying.

You're stuck. We have the Secretary of State of Georgia affirming Trump threatened him. And you insisting that Trump only 'asked'.

But tell us again about how you have 'expressed no opinion'. If your claims had merit, you wouldn't have had to lie.

so you still have nothing other than a claim without evidence,,

you are free to believe anything you want,,

 

[Skylar]

so you still have nothing other than a claim without evidence,,

you are free to believe anything you want,,

Laughing.....your surrender is accepted with the grace it deserved.

 

[Skylar]

A press tour on right wing media by the prosecutors is odd.

 

[progressive hunter]

Laughing.....your surrender is accepted with the grace it deserved.

yes I surrender to the fact the SoS made a claim without evidence and you believe it,,

 

[Rigby5]

The constitution wasn't written until 1787. Nothing you've cited about 1770 supports any claim you've made about it about a document that didn't yet exist.




Nope. The 14th makes no more mention of the Bill of Rights applying to citizens than the constitution did. You've imagined it all. If you believe otherwise, show us. You won't....because you can't show us your imaginatary constitution. It exists solely in your head.

The actual 14th amendment applied the Bill of Rights to the States. Not people. Rights are freedom from government action. An individual isn't 'the government'.

You simply have no idea what you're talking about. Again.

Wrong.
The 1770 Boston massacre showed that the good guy protesters had the right to attack the police.
Everyone agreed at the time.

Applying the Bill of Rights to the states means upholding individual rights from state abuse.
The Bill of Right is restrictions.

 

[Skylar]

yes I surrender to the fact the SoS made a claim without evidence and you believe it,,

Evidence....according to you. Again, you are not any standard of evidence. Or facts. Or reality. Or any of the other things you insist you define. You're offering us your personal opinion....which is legally meaningless.

Which leaves us with the Secretary of State of Georgia affirming Trump threatened him. And you insisting Trump only 'asked'.

Our sources are not equal. As demonstrated elegantly by the fact that the Fulton County Grand Jury called on the Secretary of State of Georgia to testify. But no one ever asked you.

 

[Skylar]

Wrong.
The 1770 Boston massacre showed that the good guy protesters had the right to attack the police.
Everyone agreed at the time.

More ignorant nonsense.

The US government has never found that people have a right to attack the police as a form of expression or that such attacks are 'protected'. Nor did the US government even exist in the time period you've cited.

Quite the contrary, both State and Federal governments have laws that explicitly prohibit attacking police, sedition, or interference with government functions.

You are hopelessly out of your depth.

Applying the Bill of Rights to the states means upholding individual rights from state abuse.
The Bill of Right is restrictions.

Where you blunder into imaginary delusion is when you insist that the Bill of Rights limits individuals. It does not even mention limits to individual actions. It expressly limits the acts of the federal governments against people. It makes zero mention of people's actions against people.

Nor does the 14th amendment.

You imagined it all. Which is why you don't quote the 14th amendment or the Bill of Rights, you quote yourself.

 

[Rigby5]

dont you have to pull the hammer back first??

I own and have access to several and no they dont just go off easy,, if you drop them or bang them against something that could cause it,,

I was specifically saying "you don't have to pull the trigger", but yes, with a fixed firing pin, if you simply tap the hammer foward on a live primer, it can fire.
Try it by tapping with a piece of 2x4.

 

[progressive hunter]

I was specifically saying "you don't have to pull the trigger", but yes, with a fixed firing pin, if you simply tap the hammer foward on a live primer, it can fire.
Try it by tapping with a piece of 2x4.

thats not rue,, it takes more than just a tap,, if youre using a 2x4 you are striking it with a blunt object not tapping it

 

[struth]

Show me making claims about the content of grand jury testimony. Quote me.

Or admit you made the claim up.

I'll give you two chances.

what testimony if his have you been referring to?

 

[basquebromance]

 

[Rigby5]

More ignorant nonsense.

The US government has never found that people have a right to attack the police as a form of expression or that such attacks are 'protected'. Nor did the US government even exist in the time period you've cited.

Quite the contrary, both State and Federal governments have laws that explicitly prohibit attacking police, sedition, or interference with government functions.

You are hopelessly out of your depth.



Where you blunder into imaginary delusion is when you insist that the Bill of Rights limits individuals. It does not even mention limits to individual actions. It expressly limits the acts of the federal governments against people. It makes zero mention of people's actions against people.

Nor does the 14th amendment.

You imagined it all. Which is why you don't quote the 14th amendment, you quote yourself.

Wrong.
The US is a democratic republic, so government IS the people, and they did exist in 1770, as well as agreeing with attacking police.

I NEVER said Bill of Rights limits individuals.
I said the opposite, that after the 14th, the Bill of Rights protects individuals from state abuse.

 

[Skylar]

what testimony if his have you been referring to?

That is not me claiming to have the transcripts of the grand jury testimony.

Strike one and Strike Two.

You have one more chance to quote me making claims about the content of grand jury testimony or access to any transcript.

Show me.

 

[progressive hunter]

Wrong.
The US is a democratic republic, so government IS the people, and they did exist in 1770, as well as agreeing with attacking police.

I NEVER said Bill of Rights limits individuals.
I said the opposite, that after the 14th, the Bill of Rights protects individuals from state abuse.

wrong,, the USA is a constitutional republic, if we didnt have a constitution we would be a democratic republic,,

 

[struth]

That is not me claiming to have the transcripts of the grand jury testimony.

Strike one and Strike Two.

You have one more chance to quote me making claims about the content of grand jury testimony or access to any transcript.

Show me.

so you admit he never testified he was threaten. Thanks

 

[Rigby5]

thats not rue,, it takes more than just a tap,, if you're using a 2x4 you are striking it with a blunt object not tapping it

Depends on the primer.
Military ammo has hard primers.
But I have had ones go off easily.

The point is you do not have to pull the hammer back far enough for half cock or full cock.
So then no trigger pull is necessary.

 

[struth]

Depends on the primer.
Military ammo has hard primers.
But I have had ones go off easily.

The point is you do not have to pull the hammer back far enough for half cock or full cock.
So then no trigger pull is necessary.

maybe not, but baldwin pulled the trigger.

 

[progressive hunter]

Depends on the primer.
Military ammo has hard primers.
But I have had ones go off easily.

The point is you do not have to pull the hammer back far enough for half cock or full cock.
So then no trigger pull is necessary.

ammo has nothing to do with it,,

the point is it doesnt go off by itself,, as you said though if you hit it hard with a 2x4 it could go off,,

but that has nothing to do with the baldwin case,,