1864 vs 1870 vs 1917

Do tell…..


ban
[ban]
verb


officially or legally prohibit:
"he was banned from driving for a year" · "a proposal to ban all trade in ivory"

Do you see an exception in the definition? The AZ law has an exception, so it's not a ban. Just heavily restricted.

Must be nice to be a paid liar.

.
 
ban
[ban]
verb


officially or legally prohibit:
"he was banned from driving for a year" · "a proposal to ban all trade in ivory"

Do you see an exception in the definition? The AZ law has an exception, so it's not a ban. Just heavily restricted.

Must be nice to be a paid liar.

.
:laughing0301:
Nice try Skippy

I thought you were serious
 
OK, so, we've got the Arizona supreme court making a recent ruling enforcing an anti-abortion law on their books since 1864 and the left are all up in arms over an 1864 law being used.

But

They seem perfectly fine with prosecuting Trump using a civil war era law from 1870:


and prosecuting Trump using yet another law dating back to 1917:


Can anyone say hypocrisy?
And George Washington took a crap in 1789.

But only one of these things violates the 4th, 5th, and 14th amendments.
 
Regardless of what you commies say, words have meaning. Now run along and peddle your propaganda elsewhere. Everyone on this board knows what kind of a liar you are.

.
Peddle your nonsense elsewhere

I am not buying it Skippy
 
1712886198300.webp
 
OK, so, we've got the Arizona supreme court making a recent ruling enforcing an anti-abortion law on their books since 1864 and the left are all up in arms over an 1864 law being used.

But

They seem perfectly fine with prosecuting Trump using a civil war era law from 1870:


and prosecuting Trump using yet another law dating back to 1917:


Can anyone say hypocrisy?
1712891680524.webp


There was no Arizona in 1864.
 
So no, right?
Actually, I'm reasonably certain that Washington crapped whenever he needed to.
Unless, of course, you have documentation that proves otherwise.
 
15th post
Back
Top Bottom