Fuck off, Missouri. You don’t get to interfere with another state’s internal judicial procedures and it’s outrageous of you to try.
The Missouri AG ought to be ejected for this ridiculously basic gross incompetence.
If we did that to every AG that demonstrated that kind of behavior, there wouldn’t be any AGs across the entire south.
Don’t threaten me with a good time!
I’m right there with you. My AG is fucking felonious impeached but still in office Ken Paxton.
You’ve convinced me. This should be done.
Hard agree.
Reconstruction 2: Electric Boogaloo
I ain’t asking for carpetbaggers, just, you know, not criminals.
Well shit, Ken Paxton ain’t gonna like that!
The list of things Ken Paxton likes is power and money, so yea.
Don’t forget Utah and Idahore.
Missouri is a garbage state and it should not be allowed to talk while adults are in the room.
Can confirm.
Source: lifelong Missourian
If you said that out loud, would you have said, “lifelong Mizzuran”?
Ah, I see you have met my countrymen. I’m in St. Louis, so I escaped the accent that is prevalent in the center of the state.
Er, I mean, yes. Here in Mizurrah, we talk like that. now i have to go warsh my car before I go drive on highway farty-far.
This is were the SC gets to pretend to be fair and balanced, rather than partisan extremists because they also ruled against Trump. When a more serious challenge comes in, watch them make an outrageous ruling in Trumps favour.
Again.
Texas AG is mad you ignored their subpoena to Washington.
Still, what do you suppose the punishment will be this time. 1 slap on the wrist, or two?
The decision by the justices came in response to Missouri’s lawsuit claiming that the case against Trump infringed on the right of voters under the U.S. Constitution to hear from the Republican presidential nominee as he seeks to regain the White House
What the fuck did I just read? The voters’ rights, whatever the fuck they are, have zero bearing on Trump’s rights as an individual. He would have broader rights to talk shit, within legal limits, if he wasn’t a convicted felon. Now that he’s a felon, his rights are curtailed. That’s how it fucking works, idiots.
This is akin to me claiming that I have the right to hear someone lay out a specific, actionable plan to shoot trump in the face, at a predetermined date and time, described in exquisite, premeditated detail, during a fucking CNN interview or whatever, and that person can do so without violation of the law. Because that is, after all, my right. As determined by me.
Lock him up. If you can’t do the time don’t do the crime. His cultists can hear from him again once he gets out, or if he texts from a cell phone smuggled up his arse.
Sounds like the SC doesn’t think Trump’s going to win either.
Ok, so when is the sentencing? *taps watch *
September 18th, as stated in the article.
What article?
Am I misreading the article? This seems like good news that means that sentencing can proceed, but the comments are all negative.
My negative comment, at least, was about how ridiculous it was that the court even had to rule on this issue in the first place, not that they (somewhat miraculously) got it right.
Ah I understand now, thanks for the explanation
Womp womp
Where’s Flying Squid with Riker?
Voice of America - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for Voice of America:
MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
In what ridiculous fantasy world is VOA LEAST BIASED??!?? They’re state-owned media! They do good factual reporting, but they’re US biased to the core! That’s they’re whole damn job!
The long-range interests of the United States are served by communicating directly with the peoples of the world by radio.
THATS THE FIRST. SENTENCE. OF THEIR CHARTER.
Look their work is good and they are important, but just what the hell does MBFC think “bias” means??
It’s crucial to note that our bias scale is calibrated to the political >spectrum of the United States, which may not align with the >political landscapes of other nations.
From their methodology page.
They aren’t rating for any and all bias. They are rating for political bias within the context of the US political landscape.
Which makes it even more absurd considering some of their other ratings. They rate The Washington Post as leftist. The Washington Post. The newspaper for respectable Republicans owned by the platonic ideal of a capitalist. The newspaper every movie and television show in the nation uses to show what the Republicans think about something while they use the New York Times to show what the Democrats think about something. When they say they’re telling you the US political landscape they’re just lying. It’s a garbage bot using a garbage source.
That’s not even to speak of all the other terrible problems with this source that have been documented by others elsewhere which I encourage you to read.
deleted by creator
Yeah, if I wanted a paper as a capitalist/conservative symbol, I’d use the WSJ.
Anyway, MBFC is garbage and this bot is actively harmful.
You should make a better bot :)
A bot for what? Just posting a comment every time saying “consider the source” or something? Because there is no truly unbiased evaluation of sources.
But TV and movies disagree with you so you’re wrong
The Conservative newspaper in DC is The Washington Times
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Times
And in NYC, the Conservative paper is the New York Post
(Once you click the other link to Wikipedia, you can go look it up yourself without having to actually look at with paper.)
So:
In NYC, Times <=> Post
In DC, Post <=> Times
Do they have the authority?
