The United States as defined by the Constitution is Over

The hand picked Supreme Court Justices just ended 248 years of the rule of law.

I have nothing more to say.

Wait a minute.

Highly regarded Swill posters have been saying for months that court verdicts, judgements and rulings are sacrosanct and unless you believe them and accept them you are anti-democracy and darn right anti-American.

I guess I assumed RQA was smart enough to know the difference between a jury trial and a ruling…..

Eh, never mind.

kingstonlake wrote:I guess I assumed RQA was smart enough to know the difference between a jury trial and a ruling…..

Eh, never mind.

So jury verdicts are sacrosanct (although I would check with the family of Carlos DeLuna about that) but court rulings are not.

Thanks for the clarification. And I guess that means it's okay to be dismissive of the James case against Trump in NY.

Looks like RQA has the early trolling shift

Welcome to the united states of dictatorship!

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Zurn wrote:Wait a minute.

Highly regarded Swill posters have been saying for months that court verdicts, judgements and rulings are sacrosanct and unless you believe them and accept them you are anti-democracy and darn right anti-American.

Do you have even a lick of common sense to ya?

What’s the matter, you don’t appreciate ironing?

Guys just a tip, stop following along on the inane argument that the silly twat wants you to have. It’s pointless, not related at all to the topic, and what he wants you to do.  If you really must engage, I suggest you stick to outright mocking. But you could just not engage also.

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Guys just a tip, stop following along on the inane argument that the silly twat wants you to have. It’s pointless, not related at all to the topic, and what he wants you to do.  If you really must engage, I suggest you stick to outright mocking. But you could just not engage also.

Who are the twats? Zurn? Tm? Trapp?

TIA

Why am I a twat now? I can’t keep up with you people and your spin.

In the interest of fairness and accountability I think it would be wise to suspend the presidential election until all of the convicted felons cases are resolved.

So let it be written. So let it be done.

TravelinMan wrote:

sεяεηιτλ wrote:

Who are the twats?  Zurn? Tm? Trapp?

TIA

Why am I a twat now?  I can’t keep up with you people and your spin.

I’m not talking about you. Did you get your coffee today

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

TravelinMan wrote:

Why am I a twat now?  I can’t keep up with you people and your spin.

I’m not talking about you. Did you get your coffee today

I did. Delicious Kona imported medium roast.

Hey boys I’ve mentioned this podcast before but you should give this one a listen re the decision yesterday. Once you do I’m sure you’ll want more episodes then before you know it you’ll be radicalized into wanting to destroy the legitimacy of the Supreme Court just like your good buddy Travis

Find it on whichever app you like for podcasts, I’m just providing a general link that doesn’t tie back to a user profile. You can find it by searching for five to four on your radio dial or in Apple Podcasts or Spotify or whatever 

https://shows.acast.com/fivefourpod/episodes/trump-v-united-states

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Hey boys I’ve mentioned this podcast before but you should give this one a listen re the decision yesterday. Once you do I’m sure you’ll want more episodes then before you know it you’ll be radicalized into wanting to destroy the legitimacy of the Supreme Court just like your good buddy Travis

Find it on whichever app you like for podcasts, I’m just providing a general link that doesn’t tie back to a user profile. You can find it by searching for five to four on your radio dial or in Apple Podcasts or Spotify or whatever 

https://shows.acast.com/fivefourpod/episodes/trump-v-united-states

I listened to all 50 plus fucking minutes of this smart but totally off the fucking wall discussion. Honestly it sounds like a couple of fucking smart high school kids who are high and have just fucking learned that they can say fucking out loud.

Their points are fine and interesting, the presentation is fucking horrible and "Rachel Ward is our producer" who need to sit on their heads and get them to be at least a tad professional and fucking drop all the use of "fucking" in their conversation.

(Clearly, I am using the F word to emphasize how much they use it, and the giggling also needs to go.)

It didn't tell me anything I didn't already know from other sources, BTW, but if you want a source and you can sit through the use of the F-word in every sentence and giggling abut whatever the information was there.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Hey boys I’ve mentioned this podcast before but you should give this one a listen re the decision yesterday. Once you do I’m sure you’ll want more episodes then before you know it you’ll be radicalized into wanting to destroy the legitimacy of the Supreme Court just like your good buddy Travis

Find it on whichever app you like for podcasts, I’m just providing a general link that doesn’t tie back to a user profile. You can find it by searching for five to four on your radio dial or in Apple Podcasts or Spotify or whatever 

https://shows.acast.com/fivefourpod/episodes/trump-v-united-states

I listened to all 50 plus fucking minutes of this smart but totally off the fucking wall discussion.  Honestly it sounds like a couple of fucking smart high school kids who are high and have just fucking learned that they can say fucking out loud.

Their points are fine and interesting, the presentation is fucking horrible and "Rachel Ward is our producer" who need to sit on their heads and get them to be at least a tad professional and fucking drop all the use of "fucking" in their conversation.

(Clearly, I am using the F word to emphasize how much they use it, and the giggling also needs to go.)

It didn't tell me anything I didn't already know from other sources, BTW, but if you want a source and you can sit through the use of the F-word in every sentence and giggling abut whatever the information was there.

Yeah it’s not really for you. They also make fun of Biden’s age almost immediately, I’m sure you loved that.

I don’t think your sources are going to tell you about Supreme Court cases that you aren’t aware of from decades ago and how they impact today. It isn’t a news podcast trappy.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Trapper Gus wrote:

I listened to all 50 plus fucking minutes of this smart but totally off the fucking wall discussion.  Honestly it sounds like a couple of fucking smart high school kids who are high and have just fucking learned that they can say fucking out loud.

Their points are fine and interesting, the presentation is fucking horrible and "Rachel Ward is our producer" who need to sit on their heads and get them to be at least a tad professional and fucking drop all the use of "fucking" in their conversation.

(Clearly, I am using the F word to emphasize how much they use it, and the giggling also needs to go.)

It didn't tell me anything I didn't already know from other sources, BTW, but if you want a source and you can sit through the use of the F-word in every sentence and giggling abut whatever the information was there.

Yeah it’s not really for you. They also make fun of Biden’s age almost immediately, I’m sure you loved that.

I don’t think your sources are going to tell you about Supreme Court cases that you aren’t aware of from decades ago and how they impact today. It isn’t a news podcast trappy.

I use many sources and some of them are pretty smart & have been analyzing court rulings for decades, including tracing back through older rulings to explain their points travie...

Their presentation styles fit more into my sensitivities, and I read them, because that is my preferred style of information gathering.

Here are a few of them...

https://hartmannreport.com/

https://www.democracydocket.com/

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/

https://www.lawdork.com/

edit - they are correct regarding Biden being an institutionalist, however everyone knew that when they voted in 2020. The rest of their Biden comments are just playing to their audience's sensitivities.

I’m not questioning your elite sources trapper, I would never.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I’m not questioning your elite sources trapper, I would never.

Thanks, I guess.  

Your comment in the other thread suggests otherwise, but we would just be playing the game of me misunderstanding your post in that thread.

I came back to hear what your podcast had to say, and was disappointed in its editorial quality, though they did a good job with the facts, listening to it was difficult, as I have already explained.

Did they cover the case that overturned Chervon?  I didn't see that on there.

Trapper Gus wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I’m not questioning your elite sources trapper, I would never.

Thanks, I guess.  

Your comment in the other thread suggests otherwise, but we would just be playing the game of me misunderstanding your post in that thread.

I came back to hear what your podcast had to say, and was disappointed in its editorial quality, though they did a good job with the facts, listening to it was difficult, as I have already explained.

Did they cover the case that overturned Chervon?  I didn't see that on there.

I was being facetious trapper I don’t care about what your sources are. If you already were pretty aware of the finer points, then it was kinda too late to bother listening, you’re not going to learn anything new because there’s nothing else to learn really.

Not yet, like I said it isn’t a news podcast. It’s a weekly one about a different case each week, the Trump one they just took out of order. I probably wouldn’t bother listening to cases, like say Dobbs, that you’re already familiar with. just looking through the list and picking one, something like Gedulig v Aeillo would probably be more interesting assuming that you aren’t super familiar with it. (Haven’t listened to that yet just randomly picked one) There are a whole bunch of cases, many of which are probably unfamiliar