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.
As we keep reminding you Liberty U does not receive federal funding
Only if we adhere to your not particularly honest definition of federal funding.
Actually, we can go with the government's definition of federal funding, since that's the guideline Liberty University is using in order to legally avoid government interference.
Who made that definition?
That would be either Congress or the US Department of Education, depending on the law or regulation in question. There's more than one.
So the Trump administration, correct?
Question. And I'm dead serious here...You’re changing the subject because you’re losing.So the fbi never inspected the system is what you are saying.That's fine. The fbi never inspected the DNCs.So you didn't read the multiple links where CBS ran the story, did you?
Whether or not they spied on her isn't what's slowing down her case. That is known.
Maybe you should read more, dick less.
CBS said they never inspected her computer. Her technician did but she refused to produce any results of that investigation or let anyone talk to the idiot she hired.
No. The thing that’s slowing down her case is her complete lack of evidence. She’s wasting everyone’s time.
Seems to be policy.
The FBI inspected the forensic copy. Crowdstrike made binaries of x-agent available publicly. They produced a copy of their forensic report. All of which were consistent with the conclusion. What did Attkisson produce other than a shitty book and a bunch of half baked opinion editorials?
Good. We agree.
It’s hilarious the level of proof you demand for Trump’s impeachment but then say it’s a fact that Attkisson was hacked without a shred of evidence.
And you pretend to be objective?
Pathetic.
You’re changing the subject because you’re losing.So the fbi never inspected the system is what you are saying.That's fine. The fbi never inspected the DNCs.So you didn't read the multiple links where CBS ran the story, did you?
Whether or not they spied on her isn't what's slowing down her case. That is known.
Maybe you should read more, dick less.
CBS said they never inspected her computer. Her technician did but she refused to produce any results of that investigation or let anyone talk to the idiot she hired.
No. The thing that’s slowing down her case is her complete lack of evidence. She’s wasting everyone’s time.
Seems to be policy.
The FBI inspected the forensic copy. Crowdstrike made binaries of x-agent available publicly. They produced a copy of their forensic report. All of which were consistent with the conclusion. What did Attkisson produce other than a shitty book and a bunch of half baked opinion editorials?
Good. We agree.
It’s hilarious the level of proof you demand for Trump’s impeachment but then say it’s a fact that Attkisson was hacked without a shred of evidence.
And you pretend to be objective?
Pathetic.
Only if we adhere to your not particularly honest definition of federal funding.
Actually, we can go with the government's definition of federal funding, since that's the guideline Liberty University is using in order to legally avoid government interference.
Who made that definition?
That would be either Congress or the US Department of Education, depending on the law or regulation in question. There's more than one.
So the Trump administration, correct?
No, shitforbrains. There have been various laws for quite a while outlining what constitutes "federal funding" for the purposes of a university or college being subject to federal government regulation/interference. They predate the Trump administration by quite a bit, even if your pathetic memory doesn't.
Actually, we can go with the government's definition of federal funding, since that's the guideline Liberty University is using in order to legally avoid government interference.
Who made that definition?
That would be either Congress or the US Department of Education, depending on the law or regulation in question. There's more than one.
So the Trump administration, correct?
No, shitforbrains. There have been various laws for quite a while outlining what constitutes "federal funding" for the purposes of a university or college being subject to federal government regulation/interference. They predate the Trump administration by quite a bit, even if your pathetic memory doesn't.
Listen here asshole. Did you read what the thread is about? Obviously not you lazy fuck.
This entire thread is about an executive order, not legislation.
Question. And I'm dead serious here...You’re changing the subject because you’re losing.So the fbi never inspected the system is what you are saying.That's fine. The fbi never inspected the DNCs.CBS said they never inspected her computer. Her technician did but she refused to produce any results of that investigation or let anyone talk to the idiot she hired.
No. The thing that’s slowing down her case is her complete lack of evidence. She’s wasting everyone’s time.
Seems to be policy.
The FBI inspected the forensic copy. Crowdstrike made binaries of x-agent available publicly. They produced a copy of their forensic report. All of which were consistent with the conclusion. What did Attkisson produce other than a shitty book and a bunch of half baked opinion editorials?
Good. We agree.
It’s hilarious the level of proof you demand for Trump’s impeachment but then say it’s a fact that Attkisson was hacked without a shred of evidence.
And you pretend to be objective?
Pathetic.
You ever get tired of being a half-witted, mouthbreathing, Neanderthal throwback?
Awe... The half-witted, mouthbreathing, Neanderthal throwback needs a hug...Actually, we can go with the government's definition of federal funding, since that's the guideline Liberty University is using in order to legally avoid government interference.
Who made that definition?
That would be either Congress or the US Department of Education, depending on the law or regulation in question. There's more than one.
So the Trump administration, correct?
No, shitforbrains. There have been various laws for quite a while outlining what constitutes "federal funding" for the purposes of a university or college being subject to federal government regulation/interference. They predate the Trump administration by quite a bit, even if your pathetic memory doesn't.
Listen here asshole. Did you read what the thread is about? Obviously not you lazy fuck.
This entire thread is about an executive order, not legislation.
Only if you're a leftist drone who doesn't comprehend what individual freedoms are, or why they matter.
Liberty University restricts the individual freedoms of their students. That’s a fact.
Liberty University is a private institution, and therefore irrelevant to this topic, no matter HOW much you despise them and want to twist the discussion into an attack on them.
"Liberty University is a private institution, and therefore irrelevant to this topic, no matter HOW much you despise them and want to twist the discussion into an attack on them. "
the fact that you can't stay on topic is evidence of just how ignorant ALL conservatives really are!
The topic:
"no federal funding for any college that does NOT allow free speech"
This is NOT about "liberty university"
any college (or university) that does NOT ALLOW "free speech" can lose their funding.
ANY college: liberty or not.
If liberty doesn't receive any FEDERAL FUNDING then they can DENY free speech all you want them to.
Dumbfuck, you are incapable of understanding your own words as you type them. How does this not humiliate you?
One more time for the hard-of-thinking: Liberty University is a PRIVATE INSTITUTION. That means they don't GET federal funding, you half-witted, mouthbreathing, Neanderthal throwback. They quite deliberately choose to not get federal funding for the specific purpose of being free of federal government interference.
So I will say it again: any post from you gabbling and ranting about them is irrelevant to the topic.
That means they don't GET federal funding, you half-witted, mouthbreathing, Neanderthal throwback
Ah come on Cecilie, dont be shy
Tell us what you really think
Liberty University restricts the individual freedoms of their students. That’s a fact.
Liberty University is a private institution, and therefore irrelevant to this topic, no matter HOW much you despise them and want to twist the discussion into an attack on them.
"Liberty University is a private institution, and therefore irrelevant to this topic, no matter HOW much you despise them and want to twist the discussion into an attack on them. "
the fact that you can't stay on topic is evidence of just how ignorant ALL conservatives really are!
The topic:
"no federal funding for any college that does NOT allow free speech"
This is NOT about "liberty university"
any college (or university) that does NOT ALLOW "free speech" can lose their funding.
ANY college: liberty or not.
If liberty doesn't receive any FEDERAL FUNDING then they can DENY free speech all you want them to.
Dumbfuck, you are incapable of understanding your own words as you type them. How does this not humiliate you?
One more time for the hard-of-thinking: Liberty University is a PRIVATE INSTITUTION. That means they don't GET federal funding, you half-witted, mouthbreathing, Neanderthal throwback. They quite deliberately choose to not get federal funding for the specific purpose of being free of federal government interference.
So I will say it again: any post from you gabbling and ranting about them is irrelevant to the topic.
That means they don't GET federal funding, you half-witted, mouthbreathing, Neanderthal throwback
Ah come on Cecilie, dont be shy
Tell us what you really think
What can I say? It's so hard to break out of my shell of niceness and let it all out.
You are doing great, girl!
I have a problem with the double standard of conservatives decrying “censorship” except when it’s done by conservative Christian universities (which was claimed to not exist because conservative chrisitians are so comfortable and confident in their beliefs).Who made that definition?
That would be either Congress or the US Department of Education, depending on the law or regulation in question. There's more than one.
So the Trump administration, correct?
No, shitforbrains. There have been various laws for quite a while outlining what constitutes "federal funding" for the purposes of a university or college being subject to federal government regulation/interference. They predate the Trump administration by quite a bit, even if your pathetic memory doesn't.
Listen here asshole. Did you read what the thread is about? Obviously not you lazy fuck.
This entire thread is about an executive order, not legislation.
And what exactly is your problem with it again?
And we suddenly all figured out where to pee, too.I have a problem with the double standard of conservatives decrying “censorship” except when it’s done by conservative Christian universities (which was claimed to not exist because conservative chrisitians are so comfortable and confident in their beliefs).That would be either Congress or the US Department of Education, depending on the law or regulation in question. There's more than one.
So the Trump administration, correct?
No, shitforbrains. There have been various laws for quite a while outlining what constitutes "federal funding" for the purposes of a university or college being subject to federal government regulation/interference. They predate the Trump administration by quite a bit, even if your pathetic memory doesn't.
Listen here asshole. Did you read what the thread is about? Obviously not you lazy fuck.
This entire thread is about an executive order, not legislation.
And what exactly is your problem with it again?
I don’t support censorship but I feel that universities should have some ability to say no to people whose only intention is to distrust and troll the school and provide zero academic benefit (like Milo). Since it’s a slippery slope, I don’t know if it’s feasible to do so and to some extent the problem seems to have solved itself.
So, you support the use of street violence, against your political enemies.
THank you for your honesty. So many of your lib buddies here, lie about that.
So, are you going to be honest enough to admit that with people like you, and mobs like Antifa, that Trump's move is completely called for?
Or is that too much even for an honest left like you?
do YOU support street violence against your political enemies?
rush limbaugh (having already advocated "beating them with clubs") said "leave only SOME liberals left alive!" (apparently as a warning to future generations)
ann coulter: "we should shoot a few (liberals) to let the rest know it can happen to them"
and when every con on this board says "I HAVE GUNS and soon there is gonna be a CIVIL WAR" can I assume they are threatening violence? street or otherwise?
Only if you're a completely humorless dunce who wouldn't recognize sarcasm and hyperbole if they had neon signs and sparklers on them.
Yeah right. So let a liberal say the same about right wingers and lets see how much humor and hyperbole you see.
Not being a snowflake feel free to call me anything you like. BTW, just because you don't "think" you're a racist in no way means you aren't. You are and seem to be the only one who refuses to acknowlege it.
Yawn! I know I am not a racist and I know that in a forum full of "conservative" white racists they will call me one just for pointing out continuing white racism.
And we suddenly all figured out where to pee, too.I have a problem with the double standard of conservatives decrying “censorship” except when it’s done by conservative Christian universities (which was claimed to not exist because conservative chrisitians are so comfortable and confident in their beliefs).So the Trump administration, correct?
No, shitforbrains. There have been various laws for quite a while outlining what constitutes "federal funding" for the purposes of a university or college being subject to federal government regulation/interference. They predate the Trump administration by quite a bit, even if your pathetic memory doesn't.
Listen here asshole. Did you read what the thread is about? Obviously not you lazy fuck.
This entire thread is about an executive order, not legislation.
And what exactly is your problem with it again?
I don’t support censorship but I feel that universities should have some ability to say no to people whose only intention is to distrust and troll the school and provide zero academic benefit (like Milo). Since it’s a slippery slope, I don’t know if it’s feasible to do so and to some extent the problem seems to have solved itself.
Only problem...what the fuck does that mean?if they're not going to allow both sides equal time,
do YOU support street violence against your political enemies?
rush limbaugh (having already advocated "beating them with clubs") said "leave only SOME liberals left alive!" (apparently as a warning to future generations)
ann coulter: "we should shoot a few (liberals) to let the rest know it can happen to them"
and when every con on this board says "I HAVE GUNS and soon there is gonna be a CIVIL WAR" can I assume they are threatening violence? street or otherwise?
Only if you're a completely humorless dunce who wouldn't recognize sarcasm and hyperbole if they had neon signs and sparklers on them.
Yeah right. So let a liberal say the same about right wingers and lets see how much humor and hyperbole you see.
Not being a snowflake feel free to call me anything you like. BTW, just because you don't "think" you're a racist in no way means you aren't. You are and seem to be the only one who refuses to acknowlege it.
Yawn! I know I am not a racist and I know that in a forum full of "conservative" white racists they will call me one just for pointing out continuing white racism.
I hope you realize that these conservatives are deranged?
any one who goes around spitting on blacks all day long and then claims he is NOT a racist is deranged.
You have a right to speak. Kapernicki, since the nfl supported him, had the right to do what he did.
That does not mean that what he did was right.
IN the middle of a ritual, where standing is done to show respect and loyalty to the nation and to your fellow citizens, he choose to do the exact opposite.
THat obviously communicates the opposite of respect and loyalty, ie disrespect and enmity.
He is an anti-American piece of shit, and in a sane world, he would be marginalized by American society.
Read my post which you have responded to, and put yourself into the shoes of those who have been downtrodden. I have no problem coming to grips with how I would feel, if my ancestors, myself and my sons, were treated badly by people in power simply because of their skin color, ethnicity or sexual orientation. Of course I have empathy, something racists, misogynists, and all bigots lack.
I am in the shoes of someone who has been downtrodden, and if Kapernick feels disrespect and enmity to America and Americans, than the celebration of him by the Left is morally wrong.
His excuses and rationalizations for his disloyalty expressed DURING the National Anthem, are not good enough, not even close.
As I noted, you lack empathy. It's clear in your post.
I've been attacked too many times, by people like you, to empathize with you.
Oddly though, it has been scientifically demonstrated that it is liberals who have the least ability to empathize with people who are different than them. You probably already know that.
Know i didn't, I don't read RW Blogs as you seem to do. But my graduate work, and the 40 hours POST annual training for 32 years never made any such a stupid claim as you just did.
do YOU support street violence against your political enemies?
rush limbaugh (having already advocated "beating them with clubs") said "leave only SOME liberals left alive!" (apparently as a warning to future generations)
ann coulter: "we should shoot a few (liberals) to let the rest know it can happen to them"
and when every con on this board says "I HAVE GUNS and soon there is gonna be a CIVIL WAR" can I assume they are threatening violence? street or otherwise?
Only if you're a completely humorless dunce who wouldn't recognize sarcasm and hyperbole if they had neon signs and sparklers on them.
Yeah right. So let a liberal say the same about right wingers and lets see how much humor and hyperbole you see.
Not being a snowflake feel free to call me anything you like. BTW, just because you don't "think" you're a racist in no way means you aren't. You are and seem to be the only one who refuses to acknowlege it.
Yawn! I know I am not a racist and I know that in a forum full of "conservative" white racists they will call me one just for pointing out continuing white racism.
Of course you are a racist.
Interesting conflict between state law and personal beliefs.
Meanwhile, at lib schools when conservatives try to speak.
Sometimes it takes riots. It took riots to get blacks equal rights. It took riots to get us out of Vietnam. The founders understood that.
So, you support the use of street violence, against your political enemies.
Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?
THank you for your honesty. So many of your lib buddies here, lie about that.
So, are you going to be honest enough to admit that with people like you, and mobs like Antifa, that Trump's move is completely called for?
Or is that too much even for an honest left like you?
My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Our Founders were honest and clear in what they were doing and why, ie fighting against tyranny.
You liberals are filthy liars fighting to impose tyranny.
That's kind of acrobatic, since our Founders were the quintessential Liberals. Oops.
Interesting conflict between state law and personal beliefs.
Meanwhile, at lib schools when conservatives try to speak.
Sometimes it takes riots. It took riots to get blacks equal rights. It took riots to get us out of Vietnam. The founders understood that.
So, you support the use of street violence, against your political enemies.
Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?
THank you for your honesty. So many of your lib buddies here, lie about that.
So, are you going to be honest enough to admit that with people like you, and mobs like Antifa, that Trump's move is completely called for?
Or is that too much even for an honest left like you?
My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Our Founders were honest and clear in what they were doing and why, ie fighting against tyranny.
You liberals are filthy liars fighting to impose tyranny.
Which is why so often the riots happen to STOP conservative speech. Because you lefties fear the Truth getting out.
Which is why this rule will not NEED to be used against conservative schools.
We are not the bad guys, you are.
"We are not the bad guys, you are"
isn't that what aryan nazi germans said to the jews?
I'm certain you believe YOU are the good guys and liberals are the bad guys...
but from my perspective...
I am the GOOD GUY who wants rights and freedoms for EVERYONE and YOU are the piece of shit who supports a tyranical dirtbag .
so don't forget...
MILLIONS and MILLIONS of us believe YOU are "human scum"
