If You Were Joyously Anticipating The Demise Of The Democrat Party........

[Foxfyre]

This is a real problem when folks on the Right, nominally, you, don't believe that the principle of free speech is the protection of those who say things you don't like or don't agree with.

And I would bet a very expensive steak dinner that you cannot find a single quote of mine ANYWHERE at any time that even hints, much less shows that I have said that or supported any manner of suppression of constitutionally protected free speech.

One more time. Show me me any phrase, clause, wording in the President's directive that even suggests a violation of constitutionally protection of free speech that he or anybody else does not agree with. His entire first term and also in this one, he has been a strong protector of anybody's right to say things he or others don't agree with. I have never ever, in my entire life, wavered from that principle.

The directive is NOT any kind of initiative to curtail, suppress, impede constitutionally protected free speech. It is a directive to stop domestic terrorism and violence in our society.

I honestly don't know why you can't see that. Unless you just don't want to. The President does not believe, and I do not believe, that planning, plotting, funding, promoting, instigating, carrying out terrorism/violence against innocent citizens is protected speech.

Do you?

 

[Robert W]

And I would bet a very expensive steak dinner that you cannot find a single quote of mine ANYWHERE at any time that even hints, much less shows that I have said that or supported any manner of suppression constitutionally protected free speech.

One more time. Show me me any phrase, clause, wording in the President's directive that even suggests a violation of constitutionally protection of free speech that he or anybody else does not agree with. His entire first term and also in this one, he has been a strong protector of anybody's right to say things he or others don't agree with. I have never ever, in my entire life, have wavered from that principle.

The directive is NOT any kind of initiative to curtail, suppress, impede constitutionally protected free speech. It is a directive to stop domestic terrorism and violence in our society.

I honestly don't know why you can't see that. Unless you just don't want to. The President does not believe, and I do not believe, that planning, plotting, funding, promoting, instigating, carrying out terrorism/violence against innocent citizens is protected speech.

Do you?

She has gone from liking me very much to derailing my free speech calling me a liar.

 

[beagle9]

It seems that you believe that any American expressing one of these opinions should get a visit from the police, government agents:

5. ....the “indicia” (indicators) of future political violence listed in the report are:

• anti-Americanism,
• anti-capitalism,
• anti-Christianity,
• support for the overthrow of the United States Government,
• extremism on migration,
• extremism on race,
• extremism on gender
• hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family,
• hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on religion, and
• hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on morality."
• Trump Classifies “Anti-Capitalism” as a Political Pre-Crime

All reasonable when a republican administration is in charge, but it might be something to fear if a weaponizing Democrat party gets in control of government and such edicts that have been put forth in order to protect something.

What you might be fearful of is how the Democrats might gain control of government again, and upon how they would then use these well intentioned thing's in a very nefarious weaponized way correct ?

 

[Robert W]

NOT CRIMES: DIFFERING OPINIONS.

Sorry you can't make your case so you call me a liar. Here is a fact. A lot that Trump does angers me. Bragging for instance. Making claims deemed not true be I never call for him to be arrested.

 

[Foxfyre]

She has gone from liking me very much to derailing my free speech calling me a liar.

Again the line of argument is so out of character for PC I do suspect she is playing devil's advocate here. I certainly hope so. Otherwise it strongly appears she has gone over to the dark side.

 

[Edgetho]

I'm confused... So what is Ukraine in your mind, otherwise when the Democrats were coddling Zelensky as if he was their number one king in that region ??? Does a so called Russian loving party fuel an adversary of Russia to the tune of Billions of dollars in military aid and equipment ??? If Russia is their nemesis, then it sure didn't look as if that were true by the way the Democrats embraced Zelensky over Russia in that conflict over there.

dimocrap scum didn't have any choice but to embrace Zelenskyy and Ukraine.

Since it was Sponge Brains Shits Pants that gave Russia the Green Light with his stupider-than-dogshit comment of "Minor Incursion" lunacy

USA Today
https://www.usatoday.com › news › politics › 2022/01/20

Jan 20, 2022 — Ukraine's president pushed back Thursday on President Joe Biden's suggestion that a "minor incursion" by Russia into Ukraine might not merit a strong ...

dimocraps aren't just scum. They're seriously ******* stupid as well. ALL of them. Especially the voters, who are the worst scum in the Galaxy

 

[beagle9]

Again the line of argument is so out of character for PC I do suspect she is playing devil's advocate here. I certainly hope so. Otherwise it strongly appears she has gone over to the dark side.

Hope not..

 

[Foxfyre]

All reasonable when a republican administration is in charge, but it might be something to fear if a weaponizing Democrat party gets in control of government and such edicts that have been put forth in order to protect something.

What you might be fearful of is how the Democrats might gain control of government again, and upon how they would then use these well intentioned thing's in a very nefarious weaponized way correct ?

But there is nothing in the directive that suggests anything other than stopping the funding, planning, plotting, conspiracy, instigation, promotion, carrying out of terrorist activity/violence against American citizens.

I would certainly hope that even Democrats would return to the mindset that they would think that is a good thing.

I can't imagine Democrats being more viciously involved in lawfare than we saw already in the Biden administration though. There's nothing the Trump administration is doing that is likely to be corrupted by Democrats to be worse than what they already do. For sure we should not shy away from doing the right thing because they might corrupt that to use for their purposes.

 

[beagle9]

But there is nothing in the directive that suggests anything other than stopping the funding, planning, plotting, conspiracy, instigation, promotion, carrying out of terrorist activity/violence against American citizens.

I would certainly hope that even Democrats would return to the mindset that they would think that is a good thing.

I can't imagine Democrats being more viciously involved in lawfare than we saw already in the Biden administration though. There's nothing the Trump administration is doing that is likely to be corrupted by Democrats to be worse than what they already do. For sure we should not shy away from doing the right thing because they might corrupt that to use for their purposes.

Can't trust Democrats to run anything anymore. They will take anything and destroy it's meaning, intent, and good.

As long as they lurk in the shadows planning and contemplating how to take power again, and how to flip that power against us, we must be super aware of every bit of ammunition they can easily turn into a weapon that will be used against us.

You are right though when you say Trumps intent is good and will be used correctly to go after those who are using our constitution in a misinterpreted way to speak violence into existence under the protection of our 1st amendment rights. We can only do what is right during our hold on power, but after that if we drop the ball it becomes a crap shoot all over again.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And I would bet a very expensive steak dinner that you cannot find a single quote of mine ANYWHERE at any time that even hints, much less shows that I have said that or supported any manner of suppression of constitutionally protected free speech.

One more time. Show me me any phrase, clause, wording in the President's directive that even suggests a violation of constitutionally protection of free speech that he or anybody else does not agree with. His entire first term and also in this one, he has been a strong protector of anybody's right to say things he or others don't agree with. I have never ever, in my entire life, wavered from that principle.

The directive is NOT any kind of initiative to curtail, suppress, impede constitutionally protected free speech. It is a directive to stop domestic terrorism and violence in our society.

I honestly don't know why you can't see that. Unless you just don't want to. The President does not believe, and I do not believe, that planning, plotting, funding, promoting, instigating, carrying out terrorism/violence against innocent citizens is protected speech.

Do you?

You favor investigating Americas who have opposing views to yours.

Disappointing.



AI Overview

Constitutional rights in the United States are liberties and protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, primarily detailed in the Bill of Rights and later amendments. Key examples include freedom of speech and religion (First Amendment), the right to bear arms (Second Amendment), protection against unreasonable searches and seizures (Fourth Amendment), and the right to due process and a fair trial (Fifth and Sixth Amendments). These rights ensure individual freedoms and limit government power.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Sorry you can't make your case so you call me a liar. Here is a fact. A lot that Trump does angers me. Bragging for instance. Making claims deemed not true be I never call for him to be arrested.

AI Overview

Constitutional rights in the United States are liberties and protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, primarily detailed in the Bill of Rights and later amendments. Key examples include freedom of speech and religion (First Amendment), the right to bear arms (Second Amendment), protection against unreasonable searches and seizures (Fourth Amendment), and the right to due process and a fair trial (Fifth and Sixth Amendments). These rights ensure individual freedoms and limit government power.



You've lied about me three times.

 

[PoliticalChic]

All reasonable when a republican administration is in charge, but it might be something to fear if a weaponizing Democrat party gets in control of government and such edicts that have been put forth in order to protect something.

What you might be fearful of is how the Democrats might gain control of government again, and upon how they would then use these well intentioned thing's in a very nefarious weaponized way correct ?

Trump's directive institutes investigation of American citizens for their views.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Sorry you can't make your case so you call me a liar. Here is a fact. A lot that Trump does angers me. Bragging for instance. Making claims deemed not true be I never call for him to be arrested.

I proved the case in the OP with quotes about the directive.

Fourth lie about me.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Again the line of argument is so out of character for PC I do suspect she is playing devil's advocate here. I certainly hope so. Otherwise it strongly appears she has gone over to the dark side.

Devil's advocate for championing constitutional rights?

Be serious.

 

[Foxfyre]

You favor investigating Americas who have opposing views to yours.

Disappointing.



AI Overview

View attachment 1172944
Constitutional rights in the United States are liberties and protections guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, primarily detailed in the Bill of Rights and later amendments. Key examples include freedom of speech and religion (First Amendment), the right to bear arms (Second Amendment), protection against unreasonable searches and seizures (Fourth Amendment), and the right to due process and a fair trial (Fifth and Sixth Amendments). These rights ensure individual freedoms and limit government power.

Okay. Since you keep saying things like that which you cannot back up with any quote I have ever posted and cannot post any credible evidence to support your argument, I have to assume you're off your meds or something and have become delusional. Certainly out of character. Hope you get help for that soon. You are one I thought could never be persuaded to go to the destructive dark side and it's heart breaking, but oh well.

Meanwhile I'll wish you a lovely afternoon and move on.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

As a voter to whom free speech was the most important reason for my vote, this is scary.

Zero sympathy for you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

But there is nothing in the directive that suggests anything other than stopping the funding, planning, plotting, conspiracy, instigation, promotion, carrying out of terrorist activity/violence against American citizens.

I would certainly hope that even Democrats would return to the mindset that they would think that is a good thing.

I can't imagine Democrats being more viciously involved in lawfare than we saw already in the Biden administration though. There's nothing the Trump administration is doing that is likely to be corrupted by Democrats to be worse than what they already do. For sure we should not shy away from doing the right thing because they might corrupt that to use for their purposes.

As I said, you are fine with investigating American citizens for differing views.


AI Overview


Multiple authoritarian and hybrid regimes around the world investigate citizens for expressing opposing views, often using vague laws to suppress dissent and control information
. Reports from human rights organizations like CIVICUS and Freedom House consistently document this practice in numerous countries.

Authoritarian: favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom.


Get on board......that's what you favor.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Okay. Since you keep saying things like that which you cannot back up with any quote I have ever posted and cannot post any credible evidence to support your argument, I have to assume you're off your meds or something and have become delusional. Certainly out of character. Hope you get help for that soon. You are one I thought could never be persuaded to go to the destructive dark side and it's heart breaking, but oh well.

Meanwhile I'll wish you a lovely afternoon and move on.

You quoted the word "investigate," yourself.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Zero sympathy for you.

Why would I need sympathy?

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Why would I need sympathy?

So you have some validation for your goofy politics. You won't get it from me.