Posts made by hubrys

Looks like your buddy Greenwald had to issue a retraction/clarification for his fake news.

@raphjd said in Georgia cops respond to ‘swatting’ call at home of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene:

Nowhere to the degree that it exits on your side.

That's just your confirmation bias showing.

@raphjd said in USSA watch: CO court rigs ballot to benefit Regime; Vivek protests:

The question is, did they look for evidence or just take the word of the side they support?

I see, so in your political hack world, it's innocent-until-proven-guilty for Trump, but guilty-until-proven-innocent....and-then-still-guilty-anyway-because-we-don't-like-her for Pelosi.

I'm trying to learn the rules of your madness.

@raphjd said in Georgia cops respond to ‘swatting’ call at home of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene:

Unactioned death threats are not the same as actioned swatting.
Also, your side has been actively engaged in acts of violence for a long time.

Oh, no doubt there are crazies on the liberal, Democrat side. However, I find it funny how you're so much of a political hack that you can't even acknowledge that it exists on your side as well, whether it be violently attacking the capital, plotting to kidnap the Governor of Michigan, or having their assassination attempt of Obama foiled by the ATF in Denver.

@raphjd said in Georgia cops respond to ‘swatting’ call at home of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene:

It always shocks me that liberals love violence to get their way.

The irony...

LINK: Colorado supreme court justices face death threats after Trump ruling

@raphjd said in USSA watch: CO court rigs ballot to benefit Regime; Vivek protests:

Do you mean the staged video by Pelosi's daughter?

If you had read the article:

Neither Pelosi nor the House sergeant at arms could have stopped an ordered deployment of National Guard troops because Congress doesn’t control the National Guard, legal experts say. Guard troops are generally controlled by governors, though they can be federalized, said William C. Banks, a law professor at Syracuse University.

@raphjd said in USSA watch: CO court rigs ballot to benefit Regime; Vivek protests:

Trump tried to get the National Guard in, but Pelosi refused.

LINK: Trump did not sign an order to deploy 20,000 troops on Jan. 6

Why do you keep repeating false, easily-debunked lies?

I love how anti-Trump forces use official processes within a legally established judicial system based on a federal constitutional amendment that has been the recognized law of the land for more than 100 years, to try to stop the reelection of the a president who verifiably intended to remain in power beyond the constitutional end of his presidency and who caused our country to have the first violent and disorderly transfer of power in our nation's history from George Washington to today....

...and it's the anti-Trump forces that are anti-democratic. The anti-Trump forces are using the tools established by the democratic process. Trump tried to break those democratic processes to remain in power.

At best, it's a pitch black pot calling a vaguely grey kettle black.

@raphjd said in USSA watch: CO court rigs ballot to benefit Regime; Vivek protests:

Which party started this shit show?!

The "Birther" Movement!

Have you forgotten the lawsuits in North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Hawaii, Connecticut, New Jersey, Texas, Washington, California, Indiana, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Mississippi, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Kansas, and New York challenging either Obama's qualifications to be president or his eligibility to be on the ballot.

Don't you remember that? Your buddy boy Trump was big into claiming Obama was born in Kenya. Did you forget about Trump being the loudest Birther?

Maybe to jog your memory:

LINK: 67 Times Donald Trump Tweeted About the 'Birther' Movement

LINK: Republicans Pull Trigger on Plan to Remove Joe Biden From Ballots

@blablarg18 said in US Supreme Court upholds ban on LGBTQ+ ‘conversion therapy’ in Washington state:

I do hope you can cheer up, not be so wild-eyed & yet boring to others at same time.

Wow, you so perfectly described yourself. Projection; it's not just for high school film reels!

@blablarg18 said in True Journalism: Julian Assange:

PS. President Trump did nothing publicly to help Assange. A failing.

It was Trump's DOJ that requested Assange's arrest in London and indicted him. Trump went farther than merely not helping Assange; he actively prosecuted him.

Conservatives: "The State must not tell a conversion therapy doctor what he can and can't say to his patients!"

Also Conservatives: "The State must tell abortion services doctors what she can and can't say to her patients!"

@blablarg18 said in Conservative Hypocrisy:

Their entire point was only to mock & blaspheme religion.

LINK: Iowa lawmaker calls for Gov. Kim Reynolds to remove Satanic Temple's display from Capitol

Lucien Greaves, spokesman and co-founder of the Satanic Temple, said it is always important for the group to seek equal representation in public forums that are open for religious displays.

"People assume that we're there to insult Christians and we're not," Greaves said. "And I would hope that even people who disagree with the symbolism behind our values, whether they know what those values (are) or not, would at least appreciate that it's certainly a greater evil to allow the government to pick and choose between forms of religious expression."

So, I guess @blablarg18 was wrong about their motives and intentions.

@blablarg18 said in Conservative Hypocrisy:

I literally quote YOU and say "In which case". You can't even read, can you? Much less argue.

The words "In which case" do not appear in the post I'm quoting. Can't you read? Here it is again for you:

Stop being fucking stupid and trying to deflect to a different post.

@blablarg18 said in Conservative Hypocrisy:

But anyway YOU have said display was not real religious faith - only blasphemy. aka hate speech

I don't say that at all. It's a HOLIDAY display, and my assumption is that their point was to troll Christian legal hypocrisy.

But I go back to my question, should blasphemous displays be taken down?

@blablarg18 said in Conservative Hypocrisy:

And, as lib, YOU think hate speech (so-called) should be censored or at least removed to non-government platform. Check - mate.

Tilting at windmills, Mr. Quixote?

LINK: Straw Man

Do you think blasphemy should be illegal?

@blablarg18 said in Conservative Hypocrisy:

In this case, platform owner is State of Iowa, whose Constitution reads:
Constitution of the State of Iowa, codified.
Preamble. WE THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF IOWA, grateful to the Supreme Being for the blessings
hitherto enjoyed, and feeling our dependence on Him for a continuation of those blessings, do ordain and
establish a free and independent government....

Again, the preamble to the Iowa Constitution has no legal effect. Nothing within it grants the State of Iowa with the power to discriminate between religions or no religion. It doesn't empower the State of Iowa to punish, criminally or otherwise, anyone espousing loyalty to Satan.

The part of the Iowa Constitution that does have legal effect, as I have already pointed out to you, is Section 3 of Iowa's Constitution, which reads:

The general assembly shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; nor shall any person be compelled to attend any place of worship, pay tithes, taxes, or other rates for building or repairing places of worship, or the maintenance of any minister, or ministry.

Iowa Const. art. I, § 3

@blablarg18 said in Conservative Hypocrisy:

Now, you can argue any tension of that vs. USA First Amendment.

We don't even need to turn to the Federal Constitution. As quoted above, the Iowa Constitution also contains equivalent Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses.

@blablarg18 said in Conservative Hypocrisy:

BUT, before it can get to USA Courts there must be injury - a question to decide.

You're talking about the injury-in-fact requirement for Standing, part of a case's justiciability. Unfortunately for you, your ignorance is again showing, since it has been well established by the SCOTUS that intangible or psychic injury is sufficient injury-in-fact to bring an Establishment Clause suit.

It seems to me that you think that because the State of Iowa's preamble invokes a "Supreme Being," that the State of Iowa should be allowed, carte blanche, to erect Christian monuments and displays. Thankfully, you are incorrect once again.

@blablarg18 said in Conservative Hypocrisy:

"the TST does not believe or worship Satan" - in which case, they have no business making a "religious" "holiday" display in Iowa State Capitol.
DUMBASS.

Their entire point was only to mock & blaspheme religion.

NOT, as you yourself have now been maneuvered (by me) into admitting, to express or celebrate religion.
Go back to what I said earlier:

How would yall libs feel to see a display celebrates Hitler, in taxpayer funded-protected space at Iowa Capitol?
Oh wait - as with satan you'd feel thrill to see your secret hero & master. Let's try something else.
Ummm.... How would yall libs feel to see display that blasphemed & mocked Mohammed in Iowa Capitol? ... USA authorities would CRASH DOWN on such displays - and you'd cheer

Stop pretending you care about Free Speech.
No one believes you @hubrys
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAhahahahahahaa - you clown
This is you:

And this is proper answer to you:

Go back and read what you said, dumbass.

@blablarg18 said in Conservative Hypocrisy:

"You're assuming their motives" - Nope. I repeat your assumption, your concession, back to you.

You literally just fucking assumed their motives when you said:

@blablarg18 said in Conservative Hypocrisy:

Their entire point was only to mock & blaspheme religion.

You're so dumb. Why don't you go back to telling us how preambles have legal effect. I'm still waiting for your evidence there.

@blablarg18 said in Conservative Hypocrisy:

they sought to mock & blaspheme & tear down.

Should displays that blaspheme be taken down?

@blablarg18 said in Conservative Hypocrisy:

"Their point, as I surmise it" - So you're hallucinating again?
You think you know?
Either you know..... in which case you need to come clean
Or you don't.

I'm not a member of the TST, so I don't have any inside knowledge on what their ultimate motives are. Neither are you.

You're assuming their motives just as much as I am. Unless you're secretly a member of the TST and was at all their meetings. I bet you were.