President Donald Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
It seems most MOD's are liberal. HMM!
I find that people who you use cursing as a big part of their vernacular tend to be trashy people. I imagine they didn't have the best upbringing.
Yet you admire Andrew Tate, who seems a bit of a potty mouth. And rapey. And sex trafficky. And facing 24 charges from the United Kingdomy. And crying like a little girl in jaily.
I take it Andrew didn't have the best upbringing and is a trashy person?
He was apprehended for using fake money to buy stuff, that's en flagrante as much as you can get.
He was committing a crime when police arrived and took him, that part is uncontroversial and it is the first time I hear debating otherwise.
He was sitting in his car when the police arrived.
It was confirmed that the 20$ bill he used was counterfeit after the fact.
At the time, there was only a call to the police.
Police can't murder you for sitting in your car because you were accused of something. Please stop
He was sitting in his car when the police arrived.
It was confirmed that the 20$ bill he used was counterfeit after the fact.
At the time, there was only a call to the police.
Police can't murder you for sitting in your car because you were accused of something. Please stop
You claimed he didn't commit a crime. He did, en flagrante.
That doesn't justify morally anything that happened after, but if he had not used the fake note , he would not have died at the hands of police there.
So moondig was right and you were wrong denying what is objectively true: if Floyd hadn't been a criminal, he wouldn't have died at police hands like it happened.
Coordie if you book a trip to Naples and get killed by the Camorra in a Naples neighborhood, it is objectively true you wouldn't have died there if you hadn't come to Naples.
That doesn't justify the Camorra killing you.
You claimed he didn't commit a crime. He did, en flagrante.
That doesn't justify morally anything that happened after, but if he had not used the fake note , he would not have died at the hands of police there.
So moondig was right and you were wrong denying what is objectively true: if Floyd hadn't been a criminal, he wouldn't have died at police hands like it happened.
So in summary, nothing justified Floyd's execution and the cop deserves to rot in jail.
You claimed he didn't commit a crime. He did, en flagrante.
That doesn't justify morally anything that happened after, but if he had not used the fake note , he would not have died at the hands of police there.
So moondig was right and you were wrong denying what is objectively true: if Floyd hadn't been a criminal, he wouldn't have died at police hands like it happened.
You are working this backwards
At the time there was no proof a crime was committed
He would still be dead even if the note wasn't counterfit
It was confirmed counterfit AFTER the fact, which is the whole point of due process
Coordie if you book a trip to Naples and get killed by the Camorra in a Naples neighborhood, it is objectively true you wouldn't have died there if you hadn't come to Naples.
That doesn't justify the Camorra killing you.
Yes, and it's also true that if you get struck by lighting, you would not have been struck by lightning had you not been standing in the exact spot you were. Lots of things are both true and completely irrelevant.
Unless you are suggesting that interactions with police are expected to end in death for black suspects, so he should have known this was a likely outcome when he was committing petty crimes. Is that what you are suggesting?
You claimed he didn't commit a crime. He did, en flagrante.
That doesn't justify morally anything that happened after, but if he had not used the fake note , he would not have died at the hands of police there.
So moondig was right and you were wrong denying what is objectively true: if Floyd hadn't been a criminal, he wouldn't have died at police hands like it happened.
So normal to dies at police hands for such a huge crime .
Don’t jay Walk, its a crime , u might get shot by a police officer ….
Yet you admire Andrew Tate, who seems a bit of a potty mouth. And rapey. And sex trafficky. And facing 24 charges from the United Kingdomy. And crying like a little girl in jaily.I take it Andrew didn't have the best upbringing and is a trashy person?
Lmao.
Eagerly awaiting "there was feces being expelled from my ******* and running down my leg, but I did not **** myself."
I would have loved to have been in the room.
Chair Powell did not discuss his expectations for monetary policy, except to stress that the path of policy will depend entirely on incoming economic information and what that means for the outlook.
Finally, Chair Powell said that he and his colleagues on the FOMC will set monetary policy, as required by law, to support maximum employment and stable prices and will make those decisions based solely on careful, objective, and non-political analysis.
Whether George Floyd was passing a counterfeit $20 is entirely beside the point when evaluating the behavior of the officers. Assume that he was. It doesn't matter. Under U.S. law, the only relevant question is whether the police officers used reasonable force under the circumstances. Police officers aren't allowed to use more force if they are really, really certain that the person they arrested is factually guilty of a crime.
You can think the law should be different. You can think that police officers should be allowed to do more or less whatever they want. But that isn't the law in Minnesota or any of the other fifty states.
Such a df argument. You know if he would've just taken a shower that morning instead of the night before he would still be alive.
The point is, EVEN IF TRUE, SO FING WHAT?
There is no benign reason to be discussing that crap. You want to put some of the blame on him while simultaneously denying that's what you're doing.
The height of dishonesty. It doesn't fool anyone but braindead conservatives, but that's who it needs to fool.
The same reason you get mong in here saying Kamala is for they/them, so true. Drooling idiots eat this crap up.
Dumb**** hypocrite right wingers getting their panties in a bunch about cUrSe wOrds while supporting Donald "pussy grabber" ****ing Trump will never cease to be a source of lols to me. Being the nut low human being is fine for president, but god forbid you stub your toe and utter an expletive, that's just beyond the pale.
So every time you cuss on here it's because you stubbed your toe?
Coordie if you book a trip to Naples and get killed by the Camorra in a Naples neighborhood, it is objectively true you wouldn't have died there if you hadn't come to Naples.
That doesn't justify the Camorra killing you.
This entry into the list of stupid analogies is noted.
Is your issue with swearing or with the reason for swearing? If it's the latter, what reasons do you consider acceptable and what reasons do you consider unacceptable?
When he's not on camera trying to pander to idiots like you? I imagine so.
Do you know what due process means? It means Floyd didn't commit a crime, he was accused of committing a crime. Police don't make that determination on the spot.
Maybe if the Police didn't murder him he'd be alive today, albeit in jail. But like I said, you don't actually give a **** about citizen life
I'm all about self accountability. If I do something wrong or dumb I'd expect to pay the consequences. I live my life by the Rodney King rule. Was he physically abused by the cops more than he should have been? It appears so. Did he put himself into that situation? Definitely. The lesson is to not put yourself into situations where you might get beat up. Liberals have a way of ignoring everything that lead up to the moment in question. It's amazing how fewer people wouldn't be dead at the hands of cops if they just didn't live a life of crime and just obeyed the officers orders.
He was apprehended for using fake money to buy stuff, that's en flagrante as much as you can get.
So?
He was committing a crime when police arrived and took him, that part is uncontroversial and it is the first time I hear debating otherwise.
Not necessarily and even if he was, again, so? He was restrained, on the ground and not a danger to anyone. Chauvin had zero business or justification putting his knee on Floyd's neck. He fully deserves to be in prison. That's it.
I obviously am not personal friends with him, but by reputation, yes.
Is your issue with swearing or with the reason for swearing? If it's the latter, what reasons do you consider acceptable and what reasons do you consider unacceptable?
The way you cuss and name call in here tells me you have issues off the court. If people can't say a sentence without dropping the F bomb they are probably trashy people. If somebody drops an F bomb once in a while that is reasonable.
The way you cuss and name call in here tells me you have issues off the court. If people can't say a sentence without dropping the F bomb they are probably trashy people. If somebody drops an F bomb once in a while that is reasonable.
Counterpoint: people who don't swear are puritanical idiot ****heads whose priorities are completely ****ed.
