Chomper Higgot

Support your claim they reported a false crime.

Feel free not to join any discussion you can’t deal with.

I like the bit where the extremists on the SCOTUS are now having their feet held to the fire by the guy who wants a favor from them. Do they stick with their long professed principles or do they buckle? The game afoot is justification to reform the SCOTUS.

We don’t know what he was declared because the details of the incident have never been released. The other guy won.

Tired of all this winning yet?

Don’t forget the bit where a President was rushed to the Walter Reid Memorial hospital in the middle of the night to be administered the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Test.

A bit of a challenge for the Originalists on the bench of the SCOTUS, do they stick to their long held black and white view of how the Constitution should be interpreted or do they bow to the wishes of those who they owe their seats to? Justice Gorsuch in particular is going to have a hard time squaring that particular circle.

Such terrible things like diversity, equity and inclusion have no place in Republican run States.

I was alluding more to the MET’s own record of dealing with sex offenders within its own ranks. Correcting yet more ill informed nonsense from you, Biden plays no part in the administration of justice.

There’s MAGA logic for you.

And in the latest update, the ticket has now been raised to $370,000,000. https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2024/01/05/donald-trump-fraud-trial-370-million/72122505007/

The MET refusing to investigate a member of the Royal Family is no surprise. I doubt Andrew will ever put the idea that the evidence against him are merely ‘allegations’, he’ll never again set foot in the U.S.

There is evidence, the U.S. courts just released the evidence in the form of formal court records. Or did you miss that bit?

No, they can simply point the police in the direction of the sworn testimony from the U.S. court records and U.S. DOJ Investigations. Known as ‘documentary evidence of crimes in the form of formal court records’.

‘Republic’ like any organization or indeed any individual have the right to report, in good faith, crime any crime or suspect crime they are aware of to the police. You, for example, have the right to report, in good faith, any crime you suspect ‘Republic’ to have committed.

Let’s put you to the test. Provide evidence to back up your claim that ‘Donors to the Democrats are making $trillions on immigration programs’. Give it your best shot, put up the evidence or be owned by your own baseless claims.

You could not have said it better: “the rambling writings and fanatical musing”

It’s not an ‘accusation’ that has been used to remove Trump from the ballot.

Supporting the bid for admirers of Hitler to win public office is definitely relevant ‘dirt’ on someone in public office making accusations of antisemitism. If nothing else it reveals the hypocrisy and absurdity of your claim. “ In 2023, the anti-semitism comes firmly from the left.” Antisemitism is widespread, especially in the US and is not the reserve of left or right.

What is enough of an accusation is a matter for debate, but their is no requirement in the Fourtheenth Amendment for a guilty verdict in a court of law. If you had ever read the Fourteenth Amendment you would have at least had the opportunity to be less ill informed on the matter. To better inform yourself, I recommend you look up the ruling of Justice Neil Gorsuch on the matter of the rights of the States to choose who gets on the ballot.

Putting the episode in the correct context of the publically expressed views of the two people engaged in the questioning is not whataboutism. It is however background knowledge missing from your customary ill informed posts on anything to do with the U.S.

Gray’s questioner was Republican Elise Stefanik who endorsed Carl Paladino after his gushing praise of Hitler. Bit of Republican accusation/confession going on.

Can you please provide a link to where the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states ‘a conviction in a court of laws’ law a necessary requirement for the Amendment clauses to be enacted?

Forgive me for being prudish over Epstein’s pedophilia.

Well they don’t if they are between consenting adults. But Epstein wasn’t dealing in consulting adults was he?!