Masterag

quote:

---

At least guys like Mamdani won’t kiss Israel arse so that’s a breath of fresh air

---

yeah, they'll just come take everything you own.

quote:

---

Most of your claims are unsubstantiated. Have you seen divorce rates in our country? What’s wrong with not voting if neither party supports the American middle class?

---

no they aren't. they're all public knowledge that can be easily found on x, google, etc.

yes, the divorce rates (or at least what is assumed) is high. But what effect does that have on an individual? none. it's a logical fallacy to assume that a high divorce rate has some bearing on your prospects. if you choose a good woman and live by good values and don't give an option for divorce, then your likelihood of not getting divorced is substantially higher.

regarding voting, I hate the republican party as much as anybody. but the fact is that they are the only option if we want to remain a "free" country. if the dems win across the board, on day one with a supermajority they will stack the court and make PR and DC states. the republican party, or any future party based on constitutional freedoms will be overwhelmed. they will build back up the deep state money and influence machine bigger and stronger. at this point, the only way is through the republican party, unfortunately.

Look up Christopher Brunet, he authored a piece on the groypers and child pron.

There’s no fixing theft. Any government system which takes money from one and gives to another is theft and should be abolished. No entitlements, no Medicaid, no Medicare, nothing. If it exists at all it will be abused and we’ll be in the same situation in another 50 years due to incrementalism.

You have to cut the head off the snake and burn it in a barrel.

Anything else is unjust and un-American and should be unconstitutional.

quote:

---

Oh good God. A plant? Ridiculous. BUT, the left may be propping him up in a media spotlight thinking he can be the motivation to drive out lefty voters in 2028.

---

1. He’s not married
2. He tells young men not to get married.
3. He tells young men to go to college (so they can get indoctrinated in leftist ideology)
4. He tells young men not to vote for republicans, and to abstain from voting until they meet all Nicks demands
5. A substantial portion of groypers are involved in child porn, pederasty, and other things along those lines.
6. He’s literally on a bullhorn in front of the capitol on Jan 6 yelling at people to go in and storm the capitol while he stands back and yells.
7. He loves Stalin and celebrates his birthday.


I don’t know if he’s a plant by the DNC, but he’s definitely a plant from somebody. He’s not an honest actor, he’s a red commie through and through who has perfected the Saul Alinski playbook to a degree never before seen in American history.

Twizzlers and peeps are terrible.

Chick o stick and candy corn are among the best. If you don’t like candy corn, there is something wrong with YOU.

quote:

---

Whomever might benefit from his compromise. Regardless, Roberts' Obamacare finding, ruling, and rationale was as contorted as any in the history of the court. It came ~7yrs after the scum bucket's SOTUSCJ appt. Backstory: Roberts and his wife adopted two infants ~ 2000. The details of the adoption (country of origin of the children, agency used, etc.) have never been made public. There was suggestion of irregularities in the adoption process. Rumor is the children were born in Ireland but adopted via a Latin American process, If true, such irregularities would raise questions under both Irish and U.S. adoption law. Rumor is the aberrant adoption process gave political leverage/blackmail concerning Roberts. One would presume, as the kids are now in their mid-20's, such leverage would carry less weight. But that is the dark explanation for Roberts behavior as SCOTUSCJ.

---

Interesting. Thanks. Yeah, I agree about him not being a reliable vote for those in favor of constitutional originalism or preserving the republic. But to me, compromised in this context seems to imply someone is pulling strings. I didn’t know that about his family situation.

But what’s weird about him is that sometimes he makes the right decision and other times he doesn’t. I’ve heard it told that he doesn’t want the court to lose legitimacy and he makes decisions based on that. But then it must be asked, in whose mind is he worried about the court losing legitimacy. That can only be because of the left.

quote:

---

He reportedly asked his partner who worked in a daycare to send him nude photos of kids.

---

Just one look at that mf’er tells you all you need to know.

quote:

---

Y'all are so damn gullible lmao

---

Why don’t you tell that to the Charlie Hebdo staff and all those folks at the Bataclan?

quote:

---

And is already backtracking since the lawsuit was filed against her

---

She hasn’t backtracked on anything.

And the details of the lawsuit aren’t claiming she’s lying about the First Lady being a man. If you don’t know the details of a lawsuit, you don’t know anything about it. Allegations are very specifically laid out in a Petition, and anything outside of those allegations isn’t being alleged. In this case, they are not alleging Candace is wrong about her claims that Brigitte Macron is actually a man. But folks like yourself just think defamation lawsuit, therefore Candace must be liable.

no No Property tax, no care.