Everyone recognizes the reason you 'left.'
As is true of every one of your ilk, you're a loser.
Now get lost, dunce.
You are the one who should get lost into Putin’s whore house.
You're a Liberal....you should know how to take orders: I said 'get lost.'
Don't forget the good news:
You're mentally qualified for handicapped parking.
I certainly don’t conserve old propaganda material that Russians troll.
I’m sorry (NOT!) to burst your pathetic
bubble.
What????
Back....begging for another chance?
I am magnanimous.....so, here you go:
1. We warned you what a low-life cur Ted Kennedy was...but you called him 'the Liberal Lion of the Senate.'
2. We told you Bill Clinton was a rapist...but you denied, denied, denied....until the Times and the rest admitted it.
3. We clued you into the facts about Hussein Obama, the most prodigious liar ever to infest the White House, that he wasn't up to the job, but you refused to look further than the color of his skin.
4. We explained that ‘global warming’ is nothing more than a scheme to impose global governance.
5. We told you that the Democrat Party hated Jews and the Jewish nation, yet you empowered them to guarantee Iran nuclear weapons.
6. Now…
.two year into the charade by your paladins, guess what? Yet another dry hole, another of your dreams ending in tears. No indictments, no charges, no impeachment. Exactly what we told you two years ago.
And....while you're here, against orders, you might want to explain how you can support this:
The Democrat Party is now running on full-blown anti-white racism, socialism, infanticide, opposition to free speech, substituting illegal alien voters for the American citizenry, and anti-Semitism…
If it is easier, you can simply state that you are a low-life lying scum and like to be with others like you.
Ok, i’ll try to help you focus. I hope you’re not a complete lost cause.
Explain with evidence that the Democratic Party is assisting any “
opposition to free speech“.
Prove that you are not a Putin “scum”, as you say.
By the way, I am not a Democrat.
"Explain with evidence that the Democratic Party is assisting any “
opposition to free speech“."
Easy peasy, lemon squeezy.....
Watch this, dope:
What could be more American than the first amendment????
“Trump And Universities In Fight Over Free Speech, Federal Research Funding
His
executive orderconditions research funding on "compliance with the First Amendment" and directs federal agencies to ensure that institutions receiving federal research or education grants "promote free inquiry."”
Trump And Universities In Fight Over Free Speech, Federal Research Funding
What could be less American than Democrats endorsing censorship of individual’s freedom of speech?
"In her 1993 article "Regulation of Hate Speech and Pornography After R.A.V," for the University of Chicago Law Review, [Democrat Elena] Kagan writes:
"I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation."
In a 1996 paper, "Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine," Kagan argued it may
be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government.
That paper asserted First Amendment doctrine is comprised of "motives and ... actions infested with them" and she goes so far as to claim that "First Amendment law is best understood and most readily explained as a kind of motive-hunting."
Kagan's name was also on a brief, United States V. Stevens, dug up by the Washington Examiner, stating: "Whether a given category of speech enjoys First Amendment protection depends upon a categorical
balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs."
If the government doesn't like what you say, Elena Kagan believes
it is the duty of courts to tell you to shut up. If some pantywaist is offended by what you say, Elena Kagan believes your words can be "disappeared".
WyBlog -- Elena Kagan's America: some speech can be "disappeared"
Elena Kagan Radical anti-gun nut?
Brandenburg v. Ohio - Wikipedia
“Earlier this week,
Obama-appointed Supreme Court Justice [Democrat] Elena Kagan wrote in her minority dissent to the Janus ruling that the Court had “weaponized the First Amendment.”
The
majority opinion dwelt on issues of compelled speech, noting that “because such compulsion so plainly violates the Constitution, most of our free speech cases have involved restrictions on what can be said, rather than laws compelling speech. But measures compelling speech are at least as threatening.”
Kagan, however, has other ideas and claimed in her dissent that
“The First Amendment was meant for better things,” she concluded.
Kagan’s fantastical notion of “black-robed rulers overriding citizens’ choices” by “weaponizing the First Amendment” is puzzling. Citizens in non-right-to-work states are completely free to join a union if they so wish, and in doing so, commit to paying union dues. The only change here is that unions can no longer extort dues from non-members in any state.
Citizens’ choices have not been overridden; indeed, citizen choice is expanded under this ruling. They can join a union or not join a union, those who do not join cannot be compelled to pay union dues, but they are also not barred from doing so if they wish.
Her point about “weaponizing the First Amendment” is equally confounding.
The Founders intendedthe First Amendment to be a weapon . . . against government tyranny and oppression. They were insistent that freedom of speech was required to check government and to maintain a free and independent citizenry.” Who's afraid of the 1st Amendment?
BTW, this Democrat star Kagan has been guilty of lying, and fraud as well as opposing free speech.
…the Democrat Party is now running on full-blown anti-white racism, socialism, infanticide, opposition to free speech, substituting illegal alien voters for the American citizenry, and anti-Semitism.
So, tool, how do you feel having proven that I am never wrong?