Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
If that doesn't tell Republicans how wrong they are about Trump, and how they are fighting the indefensible, then knock yourself out Trump cultists. Because you will pay a heavy price in the end for siding with stupid.
Hmm perhaps you need to do a weeeeee bit of research on this "judge" before assuming hes right about pretty much anything:
Andrew Napolitano Has Been Wrong About Basically Everything
6 Times When Fox’s Judge Napolitano Got Things Very, Very Wrong
You aren't debating the substance of the thread. See how easy it was to bury you and the rest? If he's wrong, then show us hot shot.
Dershowitz says he's wrong. Let's compare credentials: Dershowitz a law professor at Harvard. Nap: A municipal court judge.
Dershowitz: Napolitano Is Wrong About Obstruction Of Justice, "Not Even A Close Case"
You think its right? Prove it right.
After a dozen posts and saying nothing, we certainly hope not.You keep responding now don't you?All these funny face cowards are worth teats.All you Trump cultists can do is attack the messenger. And yet, you're too chicken shit to challenge him on the substance. Get out of here loser.
Ok then. Napolitano is right. Trump is going to lose in 2020, unicorns will magically appear with Skittles spraying out of their butts, we'll buy the world a Coke as we sit around the bonfire singing "Kumbaya" and "This Land is Your Land", and everyone will live happily ever after.
There: You happy now, or would you like your blankie and a pacifier?
What the fuck ever. Nobody takes you serious anyway, that's why you should go into comedy.
Sorry. There are also other more interesting threads then this one going on right now.
I'll be back though, keep up with the entertainment.
His credibility and the truth are synonymous. Otherwise he wouldn't be on the show. Unless Fox is tired of hearing the truth that is.Where nappy really screwed himself is he was all in for Trump...Then he turned on a dime and became the biggest never-Trumper in world history...utterly destroying his own credibility.
If he doesn't stop this nonsense we wont be able to get a job an captain kangaroo.
After a dozen posts and saying nothing, we certainly hope not.You keep responding now don't you?All these funny face cowards are worth teats.Ok then. Napolitano is right. Trump is going to lose in 2020, unicorns will magically appear with Skittles spraying out of their butts, we'll buy the world a Coke as we sit around the bonfire singing "Kumbaya" and "This Land is Your Land", and everyone will live happily ever after.
There: You happy now, or would you like your blankie and a pacifier?
What the fuck ever. Nobody takes you serious anyway, that's why you should go into comedy.
Sorry. There are also other more interesting threads then this one going on right now.
I'll be back though, keep up with the entertainment.
Nope! Money was not authorized by Congress for military action. And the judge was talking about separating families, not money. You're twisting the argument to be incoherent and confusing.There are legal ways to move money around separating families at the border was done under previous administrations nary a word about impeachment enjoy the factual rebuttal.Let's start with money not authorized by Congress and separating families. Both are unconstitutional. Any rebuttals to those facts?Lets review a couple of his points firing an AG or FBI Director something any President has the legal and constitutional authority to do deploying troops or ordering military action without congressional approval again something that has been done by previous Presidents both Republican and Democrat and yet in all these instances no one ever suggested impeaching a sitting President over them. The following sums up those who suddenly support impeachment over things they never did before.
View attachment 292533
After a dozen posts and saying nothing, we certainly hope not.You keep responding now don't you?All these funny face cowards are worth teats.Ok then. Napolitano is right. Trump is going to lose in 2020, unicorns will magically appear with Skittles spraying out of their butts, we'll buy the world a Coke as we sit around the bonfire singing "Kumbaya" and "This Land is Your Land", and everyone will live happily ever after.
There: You happy now, or would you like your blankie and a pacifier?
What the fuck ever. Nobody takes you serious anyway, that's why you should go into comedy.
Sorry. There are also other more interesting threads then this one going on right now.
I'll be back though, keep up with the entertainment.
If that doesn't tell Republicans how wrong they are about Trump, and how they are fighting the indefensible, then knock yourself out Trump cultists. Because you will pay a heavy price in the end for siding with stupid.
The midget judge is a liberal hack. He's full of shit.
His credibility and the truth are synonymous. Otherwise he wouldn't be on the show. Unless Fox is tired of hearing the truth that is.Where nappy really screwed himself is he was all in for Trump...Then he turned on a dime and became the biggest never-Trumper in world history...utterly destroying his own credibility.
If he doesn't stop this nonsense we wont be able to get a job an captain kangaroo.
A cultist attacking me. Lol! That's all you're going to do. You have no means for logical, intelligent debate, because you are too far gone, like the rest of Trump's Sheep herd.After a dozen posts and saying nothing, we certainly hope not.You keep responding now don't you?All these funny face cowards are worth teats.
What the fuck ever. Nobody takes you serious anyway, that's why you should go into comedy.
Sorry. There are also other more interesting threads then this one going on right now.
I'll be back though, keep up with the entertainment.
You, stupid sir, would have gone down with the Titanic as the band played.
On 2nd thought, you would have been a member of the band.
If that were the case, you would have mounted a challenge. You didn't. That makes you a loser.His credibility and the truth are synonymous. Otherwise he wouldn't be on the show. Unless Fox is tired of hearing the truth that is.Where nappy really screwed himself is he was all in for Trump...Then he turned on a dime and became the biggest never-Trumper in world history...utterly destroying his own credibility.
If he doesn't stop this nonsense we wont be able to get a job an captain kangaroo.
His credibility is zero. See politifact. And fuck off.
Most of those people were not being prosecuted for crimes. They were refugees who weren't turning themselves in as criminals, but as refugees. That's not illegal. You are addressing a different issue.Nope! Money was not authorized by Congress for military action. And the judge was talking about separating families, not money. You're twisting the argument to be incoherent and confusing.There are legal ways to move money around separating families at the border was done under previous administrations nary a word about impeachment enjoy the factual rebuttal.Let's start with money not authorized by Congress and separating families. Both are unconstitutional. Any rebuttals to those facts?Lets review a couple of his points firing an AG or FBI Director something any President has the legal and constitutional authority to do deploying troops or ordering military action without congressional approval again something that has been done by previous Presidents both Republican and Democrat and yet in all these instances no one ever suggested impeaching a sitting President over them. The following sums up those who suddenly support impeachment over things they never did before.
View attachment 292533
So what law requires children to be kept with people who are being prosecuted criminally?
.
Most of those people were not being prosecuted for crimes. They were refugees who weren't turning themselves in as criminals, but as refugees. That's not illegal. You are addressing a different issue.Nope! Money was not authorized by Congress for military action. And the judge was talking about separating families, not money. You're twisting the argument to be incoherent and confusing.There are legal ways to move money around separating families at the border was done under previous administrations nary a word about impeachment enjoy the factual rebuttal.Let's start with money not authorized by Congress and separating families. Both are unconstitutional. Any rebuttals to those facts?Lets review a couple of his points firing an AG or FBI Director something any President has the legal and constitutional authority to do deploying troops or ordering military action without congressional approval again something that has been done by previous Presidents both Republican and Democrat and yet in all these instances no one ever suggested impeaching a sitting President over them. The following sums up those who suddenly support impeachment over things they never did before.
View attachment 292533
So what law requires children to be kept with people who are being prosecuted criminally?
.
You just made up a different argument that has nothing to do with what he said. You're a chicken shit coward.Let's start with money not authorized by Congress and separating families. Both are unconstitutional. Any rebuttals to those facts?Lets review a couple of his points firing an AG or FBI Director something any President has the legal and constitutional authority to do deploying troops or ordering military action without congressional approval again something that has been done by previous Presidents both Republican and Democrat and yet in all these instances no one ever suggested impeaching a sitting President over them. The following sums up those who suddenly support impeachment over things they never did before.
View attachment 292533
Let's start with money not authorized by Congress and separating families.
He's right, those families should be kept intact and immediately deported.
Wouldn't want to make you cry.
No, they weren't criminals. They came to the border as refugees. There is a big difference. And I did answer your question. The discussion is not about children being accompanied by criminals. That is a totally different discussion. No law mandates a separation of children from their parents, even if they are illegal. That is Trump's unconstitutional maneuver.Most of those people were not being prosecuted for crimes. They were refugees who weren't turning themselves in as criminals, but as refugees. That's not illegal. You are addressing a different issue.Nope! Money was not authorized by Congress for military action. And the judge was talking about separating families, not money. You're twisting the argument to be incoherent and confusing.There are legal ways to move money around separating families at the border was done under previous administrations nary a word about impeachment enjoy the factual rebuttal.Let's start with money not authorized by Congress and separating families. Both are unconstitutional. Any rebuttals to those facts?
So what law requires children to be kept with people who are being prosecuted criminally?
.
Actually they were, they pressed criminal charges against everyone who crossed illegally. Why are you dodging my first question?
.
Good!You just made up a different argument that has nothing to do with what he said. You're a chicken shit coward.Let's start with money not authorized by Congress and separating families. Both are unconstitutional. Any rebuttals to those facts?Lets review a couple of his points firing an AG or FBI Director something any President has the legal and constitutional authority to do deploying troops or ordering military action without congressional approval again something that has been done by previous Presidents both Republican and Democrat and yet in all these instances no one ever suggested impeaching a sitting President over them. The following sums up those who suddenly support impeachment over things they never did before.
View attachment 292533
Let's start with money not authorized by Congress and separating families.
He's right, those families should be kept intact and immediately deported.
Wouldn't want to make you cry.
He said we shouldn't separate illegal alien families.
I agreed.
Ya whiney twat.
And Trump thinks he's Rocky Balboa because a voice whispered in his head. You cultists better pray that that voice doesn't tell him he's really Meryl StreepNapolitano is a libertarian who believes in open borders, free trade and legalizing all drugs. You must think that's a good thing.An imbecile you couldn't debate. You produce no counter arguments to his, therefore you are the ultimate failure. Congratulations. You said nothing.Napolitano is a known imbecile. They just put him on air to appease the nincompoop demographic. Fox would be much better without him. He belongs on the View.
No I am calling you on your partisan idiocy and your are trying to hide it. Presidents can take money that has already been approved by Congress and move it around for other things it has been done for decades Seperating familes that have been caught trying to enter the country illegally did not start with Trump we saw that with the lefts phony outrage over the childern in cages photos which as we found were taken during the Obama adminstration no calls for impeachment then. You may continue this all you wish my point has been made and stands up you can keep.Nope! Money was not authorized by Congress for military action. And the judge was talking about separating families, not money. You're twisting the argument to be incoherent and confusing.There are legal ways to move money around separating families at the border was done under previous administrations nary a word about impeachment enjoy the factual rebuttal.Let's start with money not authorized by Congress and separating families. Both are unconstitutional. Any rebuttals to those facts?Lets review a couple of his points firing an AG or FBI Director something any President has the legal and constitutional authority to do deploying troops or ordering military action without congressional approval again something that has been done by previous Presidents both Republican and Democrat and yet in all these instances no one ever suggested impeaching a sitting President over them. The following sums up those who suddenly support impeachment over things they never did before.
View attachment 292533
Good!You just made up a different argument that has nothing to do with what he said. You're a chicken shit coward.Let's start with money not authorized by Congress and separating families. Both are unconstitutional. Any rebuttals to those facts?Lets review a couple of his points firing an AG or FBI Director something any President has the legal and constitutional authority to do deploying troops or ordering military action without congressional approval again something that has been done by previous Presidents both Republican and Democrat and yet in all these instances no one ever suggested impeaching a sitting President over them. The following sums up those who suddenly support impeachment over things they never did before.
View attachment 292533
Let's start with money not authorized by Congress and separating families.
He's right, those families should be kept intact and immediately deported.
Wouldn't want to make you cry.
He said we shouldn't separate illegal alien families.
I agreed.
Ya whiney twat.
You cultists better pray that that voice doesn't tell him he's really Meryl Streep
