That's the game you play all the time. I guess you could call it Duffy the Pussy clown game.
I would expect more from someone who can kick M. Tyson's arse.
REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Trump immunity
- Thread starter StuAzole
- Start date
I would expect more from someone who can kick M. Tyson's arse.
No. You guys jump to conclusions that I’m not making.That's the game you play all the time. I guess you could call it Duffy the Pussy clown game.
I would expect more from someone who can kick M. Tyson's arse.
The classic one is variations of this….
TDS poster: ”Trump said xxxxx.”
Duffy after looking up what Trump actually said: “No, he didn’t actually say that. Here’s the full quote.”
TDS poster: “You love Trump. You’re a MAGA extremist Trump loving lover of Trump.”
In this post I said, “Presidents have legal immunity.” I also said, “Trump will lose in the appellate court.”
Both of those statements can be true. It’s not my fault that some of you can’t wrap your minds around it.
You said Presidents have immunity in response to the question “can Trump be prosecuted if he isn’t first impeached?”
Is that not what you meant ?
Did you mean presidents probably have immunity in cases where the actions concerned are within the scope of his role as president? And there’s nothing in the law to suggest he needs to first be impeached before being charged with crimes if the actions fall outside the legal scope of his role as president? If so, you should have said that.
It’s not my fault that you are so full of preconceptions that you can’t just read a statement for what it says.
It is your fault that you constantly communicate poorly. If everyone is always misunderstanding your point, maybe the problem is on your end.
Learning to write clearly is not easy. Sometimes people use poor writing to hide things.
overturning the results of a free and fair election are not part of the job description.
the president does not get to pick who becomes the next president.
Did she grab anybody by the ppeepis or fucked a porn star while her wife was pregnant with her child?
If she did, no big deal.
That’s what I was thinkong
It seems to happen very often with you duffy.
try clarity
clarity is good
I hear they added Talking Good to the curriculum at Zoolander's Center for Kids Who Can't Read Good.
Jeff Bell on Instagram: "Michael Moore"
1,522 likes, 710 comments - floridafishingmate on January 14, 2024: "Michael Moore".
www.instagram.com
He's not talking about me but I'm still pulling the lever for Mister T.
who coulda seen this coming
apple.news
Attorney Joe Tacopina withdraws from Trump's legal team — ABC News
Tacopina was representing the former president in two New York cases.
apple.news
Jim Wright (@stonekettle) on Threads
As a general rule of democracy: If one candidate says that he's going to need immunity from accountability because he can't do the job without literally committing actual crimes and he repeatedly announces that he fully intends to do so, you should vote for the other guy. In fact, you should...
www.threads.net