The Truth About Project 2025 | The Culture War with Tim Pool

[Dragonlady]

same rule has always applied,,

your just mad it got thrown back in your face,,

let not forget the crimes of bush and obama,,

obama had an american citizen killed without due process and bush,, well shit his list is linger than my arm,,

According your corrupt SC, Richard Nixon should have been exonerated because starting a secret war with Cambodia was "an official act", and so was the Saturday Night Massacre. Except the Supreme Court of Nixon's day said the opposite. That Nixon was subject to investigation and his "tapes" belonged to the people, not Nixon personally.

The ONLY reason Bush wasn't prosecuted is because Obama refused to prosecute him or members of his administration, which is of course, what embolded Trump. Bush and company at least tried to cover up corruption and their criminality. Trump was in your face about it.

 

[progressive hunter]

its only terrifying to progressives and their agenda,,

and its wonderful to watch them lose their collective minds,,

 

[Marener]

same rule has always applied,,

your just mad it got thrown back in your face,,

let not forget the crimes of bush and obama,,

obama had an american citizen killed without due process and bush,, well shit his list is linger than my arm,,

Nope. The rule never applied to any other presidents because no other presidents ever wanted, asked or needed to be made immune from criminal consequences for their actions

The conservative courts only changed the rule for Trump because despots aren’t accountable under the law.

 

[Marener]

I know everything you know, I simply understand it properly.

You are told what to believe. You don’t understand, you adopt dogma.

 

[progressive hunter]

Nope. The rule never applied to any other presidents because no other presidents ever wanted, asked or needed to be made immune from criminal consequences for their actions

The conservative courts only changed the rule for Trump because despots aren’t accountable under the law.

they changed nothing,,

 

[MagicMike]

that game of attacking the messenger when you cant refute the message is the lamest of surrenders,,

try again,,

If Project 2025 is so good and harmless then why is convicted felon Trump trying so hard to distance himself from it?

 

[progressive hunter]

If Project 2025 is so good and harmless then why is convicted felon Trump trying so hard to distance himself from it?

why are you asking me??

 

[Marener]

they changed nothing,,

They invented a doctrine of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution.

That never existed until the despot needed it to.

It’s obvious, you’re just incapable of admitting it.

 

[progressive hunter]

They invented a doctrine of presidential immunity from criminal prosecution.

That never existed until the despot needed it to.

It’s obvious, you’re just incapable of admitting it.

no they didnt,,

 

[Marener]

no they didnt,,

Then please show me where presidential immunity from criminal prosecution existed before they made their ruling.

It sure as hell isn’t in the constitution.

 

[progressive hunter]

Then please show me where presidential immunity from criminal prosecution existed before they made their ruling.

It sure as hell isn’t in the constitution.

I did,, previous POTUS were not prosecuted for their clear crimes,,

or are you telling me having an american killed without due process is legal??

and also the long list of the crimes bush committed??
re you saying bush never broke the law??

 

[Rawley]

You'll rarely if ever get intellectual honesty from a partisan ideologue.

QED

 

[Rawley]

Then please show me where presidential immunity from criminal prosecution existed before they made their ruling.

It sure as hell isn’t in the constitution.

Obama was not prosecuted for order the death of a US citizen abroad without any due process

 

[progressive hunter]

You'll rarely if ever get intellectual honesty from a partisan ideologue.

you prove that daily,,

 

[Marener]

I did,, previous POTUS were not prosecuted for their clear crimes,,

or are you telling me having an american killed without due process is legal??

and also the long list of the crimes bush committed??
re you saying bush never broke the law??

Obama never claimed he had criminal immunity and spent a lot of time making sure his actions were legal within the bounds of his duties as commander in chief executing a war abroad that was authorized by Congress which does include a military attack on an American citizen who was participating in the war on the side of the enemy.

No one prosecuted him for it because no one thought it was illegal. Not because they didn’t think they couldn’t.

Show me where anyone claimed that Obama or Bush couldn’t be prosecuted.

 

[progressive hunter]

Obama never claimed he had criminal immunity and spent a lot of time making sure his actions were legal within the bounds of his duties as commander in chief executing a war abroad that was authorized by Congress which does include a military attack on an American citizen who was participating in the war on the side of the enemy.

No one prosecuted him for it because no one thought it was illegal. Not because they didn’t think they couldn’t.

Show me where anyone claimed that Obama or Bush couldn’t be prosecuted.

I never said he claimed it,,,

but it happened and he wasnt impeached so he could be prosecuted,,

case closed,,


so how about we get back on topic??

 

[Rawley]

It is a hell of a screed. But there are policy proposals within, but it is like finding a needle in a haystack of nothing but platitudes. For example,

Some are obvious and long-standing goals like eliminating marriage penalties in federal welfare programs and the tax code and installing work requirements for food stamps. But we must go further. It’s time for policymakers to elevate family authority, formation, and cohesion as their top priority and even use government power, including through the tax code, to restore the American family

Democrats should seize on such quotes. Eliminating marriage penalties in federal welfare programs--just exactly what does that mean? Well, Sally is a single mother, she has two kids from a former boyfriend, she collects food stamps, Medicaid covered her pregnancy and the children until they are five. She works, waits tables at the local diner. And she lives with Richard. He is a stand-up dude. Busts his ass at the regional Amazon hub, unloading trucks and sorting, on the night shift. He would like to marry Sally. They are both born again Evangelical Christians. But what happens if they do get married.

Sally loses the food stamps. The kids lose Medicare

How about the Federal Gvt. garnish the baby daddy's wages to pay for the food stamps and the kid's medicare. Why are you jumping to take these away from the mother?

 

[Marener]

I never said he claimed it

Who did claim it?

 

[progressive hunter]

How about the FEderal Gvt. garnish the baby daddy's wages to pay for the food stamps and the kid's medicare. Why are you jumping to take these away form the mother?

if the dad doesnt pay for the child hes punished,,

but if the mother doesnt pay for the child the government takes from others and gives it to the mother,,

that doesnt sound like a good system to me,,

 

[progressive hunter]

Who did claim it?

youre talking in circles,,