i tied it to 'Q' because, as i said, it isn't going to happen in my opinion - it's not a question of whether the insurrection act is applicable, there's simply no indication Trump will leverage it
so to clarify my position: is it possible? perhaps
will it happen? i'd bet no and, again, i see it as yet another 'Q' pipe-dream just as the all the others that never panned out
I believe you miss the point. You call it a Q pipe dream when in fact it is what all lawful Americans want. Really you're saying Americans are ridiculous for believing in rule of law.
You can't condemn Q here without condemning all good Americans. Well, you can, but it's dishonest to do so.
As I said, say what you mean.
The real problem is, any other answer brings legitimacy to Q and all Americans who still believe in rule of law. For better or worse, on this point, they are tethered.
literally the dumbest thing i read all day...
You can't condemn Q here without condemning all good Americans.
so you're either with us, or with the terrorists, is that it?
to say that to call 'Q' what it is; , is to knock most Americans, is disingenuous mouth babble
most Americans 'wanting' something doesn't make the 'Q' LARP legitimate, nor does your nonsensical attempt to tie 'Q' to the rule of law as though the law somehow adds creditability to completely discredited concept
so you're either with us, or with the terrorists, is that it?
Please stop with the dishonest strawmen. I stopped reading there as there can be no communication based on a hoisted lie. That most definately is not true.
For your lie to have any credibility means the population at large do not want Trump to use his lawful authority. Very clearly the majority of Americans do want him to do so.
Which means, Q and The People say you're full of shit, with one voice. Stop with the strawman bullshit. Which also means, on this point, you can't attack Q without attacking all good Americans. Period. Same position. One is a subset of the other.
Additionally, I simply asked you to say what you mean. Made clear disagreement is fine. Repeatedly.
At this point, you've made my point clear.
For the record, i'm the one up voting you because I believe is discussion even if we disagree. Which also invalidates the, with or against stupidity and lie.
(post is archived)