Priceless

[P@triot]

No, she wasn't. Being escorted out of the room is not the same as being arrested, and is for damn sure miles away from actually being charged with a crime.

Yeah.....uh....why exactly would she be "escorted out" if what she was doing was legal and within her rights? Law enforcement may not "escort you out" if you're not breaking a law.

 

[P@triot]

Again, she was NOT arrested, NOT charged for any crime -- end of ******* story.

Uh-oh....looks like someone needs a timeout again.

Here she is being arrested....

 

[mamooth]

You asked a question. I answered it. Why can't you deal with that?

Please attempt to work the sand out of your mangina, and then try to locate your balls. Do you condemn the murder threats against me from Pete and DOTR?

Let's take count. The number of Trump-thugs condemning the murder threats is ... still zero. That is, every Trump-thug on this thread sees no problem with such things.

In contrast, you've got a video of a woman somewhere acting badly, who everyone agrees is a dumbass. It's not a contest. Your cherrypicking fallacy is meaningless. There are always going to be dumb people on both sides, and finding a single one means nothing. What is meaningful is that, right here, without exception, every Trump-thug on this thread sees no problem with murder threats.

Conclusion? The Trump-thugs here are both violent and gutless. They'd have made fine Nazi-symps, being that none of them would have had the guts to be an actual Nazi.

If any Trump-thug disagrees, they can demonstrate it by condemning Pete and DOTR for their calls to murder. But they won't. First, that would require courage and integrity. Second, they all support those threats.

So why are all of the Trump-thugs such complete shitstains? They all fail utterly both as good Americans and as good human beings. They'd best hope the atheists are right, or they burn in hell for eternity.

 

[ding]

You asked a question. I answered it. Why can't you deal with that?

Please attempt to work the sand out of your mangina, and then try to locate your balls. Do you condemn the murder threats against me from Pete and DOTR?

Let's take count. The number of Trump-thugs condemning the murder threats is ... still zero. That is, every Trump-thug on this thread sees no problem with such things.

In contrast, you've got a video of a woman somewhere acting badly, who everyone agrees is a dumbass. It's not a contest. Your cherrypicking fallacy is meaningless. There are always going to be dumb people on both sides, and finding a single one means nothing. What is meaningful is that, right here, without exception, every Trump-thug on this thread sees no problem with murder threats.

Conclusion? The Trump-thugs here are both violent and gutless. They'd have made fine Nazi-symps, being that none of them would have had the guts to be an actual Nazi.

If any Trump-thug disagrees, they can demonstrate it by condemning Pete and DOTR for their calls to murder. But they won't. First, that would require courage and integrity. Second, they all support those threats.

So why are all of the Trump-thugs such complete shitstains? They all fail utterly both as good Americans and as good human beings. They'd best hope the atheists are right, or they burn in hell for eternity.

I think if you behave in public as you do on this ANONYMOUS forum, it won't be murder that gets you, it will be manslaughter. I doubt they would convict anyone of murder for killing you. Of course, I doubt you would behave in public as you do on this ANONYMOUS forum, I believe that you are too big of a ***** for that.

 

[ptbw forever]

One of the Trump-fans here just threatened to have me murdered, by posting an image of what was supposedly in store for me, a one-way helicopter ride. I linked to my reply, in case the original gets deleted.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/posts/16107050/

Tell us, Trump-fans. Anyone on this board threatened to murder you? No? It would appear all the actual threats are coming only from one side.

Oh, I await your unqualified condemnation of the actions of that Trump-fan. Let's see if your actions match your fine words. Are you willing to condemn violent threats or not?

View attachment 103034

That isn't really fair.

I am 1000% against Hillary and the Democrats, but I am on the authoritarian left.

Can I get a special reprieve or something?

 

[mamooth]

I think if you behave in public as you do on this ANONYMOUS forum, it won't be murder that gets you, it will be manslaughter. I doubt they would convict anyone of murder for killing you. Of course, I doubt you would behave in public as you do on this ANONYMOUS forum, I believe that you are too big of a ***** for that.

Obviously, I'm much more polite in public. That's because goosestepping wusses aren't crying at me and lying about me and threatening to kill me.

And do you really want me to not be anonymous in a forum where people are threatening to kill me, and half of the board approves of it?

And no, your pout-stalking won't convince me to go easier on you. If anything, it tells me my punches are hitting a sore spot, so I should keep on doing what I'm doing.

And yes, we can see you're clearly in the "I approve of murder threats against any liberals" camp, just like all the other Trump-thugs.

 

[ding]

I think if you behave in public as you do on this ANONYMOUS forum, it won't be murder that gets you, it will be manslaughter. I doubt they would convict anyone of murder for killing you. Of course, I doubt you would behave in public as you do on this ANONYMOUS forum, I believe that you are too big of a ***** for that.

Obviously, I'm much more polite in public. That's because goosestepping wusses aren't crying at me and lying about me and threatening to kill me.

And do you really want me to not be anonymous in a forum where people are threatening to kill me, and half of the board approves of it?

And no, your pout-stalking won't convince me to go easier on you. If anything, it tells me my punches are hitting a sore spot, so I should keep on doing what I'm doing.

And yes, we can see you're clearly in the "I approve of murder threats against any liberals" camp, just like all the other Trump-thugs.

Apples don't fall far from the tree. You are delusional. You dismiss your defeats and ignore your incongruities. You practice critical theory and you have an external locus of control. You have never accomplished shit in your life and you never will.

 

[SYTFE]

She broke ZERO laws, was NOT arrested, and was NOT charged for any crime. Lie some more -- I'll only punish you like the other gimp.

Land and structures owned by the federal government are considered "public" in the sense that they are owned by the taxpayers of the United States. Not all public areas are considered public forums for free speech purposes, however, and the government can disallow speech on certain government property altogether.

Finally, there are "nonforums" - areas that are not open to unfettered communication by members of the public. Examples of nonforums include government offices and other areas where uninhibited speech could disrupt the functioning of the government.

Members of the public are generally free to express themselves in traditional and designated public forums, but the government can subject their speech to what are known as "time, place and manner" restrictions that regulate the when, where and how of a speaker's message. These restrictions must be applied evenly, and must ignore the content of each particular expression.

FindLaw | Legal News & Information: Free Speech, Protesting and Your Rights

This was a nonforum area and event.

And?

I demonstrated that she was under arrest by definition and cited law AND proved she broke the law. It is now on you to disprove with proofs I am incorrect, not simply stating your opinion and insults.

No, you didn't "demonstrate" anything. You want her to have been arrested. Learn the difference between your fantasies and REALITY.

Again -- she broke NO laws, was NOT arrested, and was NOT charged with any crime.

What does that mean? It means she damn well CAN do exactly what she did in that room -- until being escorted out. But it was well within her legal rights as citizen protected by the constitution. Deal with it, or pack your bags.

So...no proof.

She was not escorted, she was physically removed. It was in the video and that would mean lawsuit, unless she was under arrest.

Looks like you need to leave the country.

She was escorted, and went voluntarily. There was no resisting. And the burden of proof is on you -- dipshit. You're the one claiming that she "can't" do what she did and siding with your pansy ass girlfriend who claims what she did was "illegal."

You've got nothing. Jack shit. She wasn't arrested, broke no laws, will have nothing on her record, and was 100% within her rights protected by the US constitution that you and your conservative friends hate. Choke on that, moron.

 

[SYTFE]

No, you didn't "demonstrate" anything. You want her to have been arrested. Learn the difference between your fantasies and REALITY.

Again -- she broke NO laws, was NOT arrested, and was NOT charged with any crime. What does that mean? It means she damn well CAN do exactly what she did in that room -- until being escorted out. But it was well within her legal rights as citizen protected by the constitution. Deal with it, or pack your bags.

So...no proof.

She was not escorted, she was physically removed. It was in the video and that would mean lawsuit, unless she was under arrest.

Looks like you need to leave the country.

Wow...that nitwit came back for another huge helping of crow?!? LMAO! I love how she denies that the woman broke any laws when I posted the laws and then denies that she was arrested when I posted the video of her being arrested.

You "posted" a list of potential violations -- moron. Not ONE of those were committed by her, you ******* imbecile. How do we know this?

BECAUSE SHE WASN'T ARRESTED AND WASN'T CHARGED WITH ANY CRIME.

You are literally one of the all-time dumbest ******* conservatives I've encountered on this forum, and that's saying a lot.

 

[SYTFE]

Again -- she broke NO laws, was NOT arrested, and was NOT charged with any crime.

Yeah....uh....she actually broke multiple laws:

• Disturbing the Peace

• Disorderly Conduct

• 6-11-34.1 - Preventing or disrupting General Assembly sessions or other meetings of members; unlawful activities within the state capitol or certain Capitol Square buildings

It's ok sweetie... believe me, I understand more than anyone how you progressives are completely clueless of the U.S. Constitution, the laws, etc.

No, she didn't. Stop lying, or stick around for more abuse -- only gonna get worse from this point on, you ******* degenerate.

 

[BluesLegend]

Land and structures owned by the federal government are considered "public" in the sense that they are owned by the taxpayers of the United States. Not all public areas are considered public forums for free speech purposes, however, and the government can disallow speech on certain government property altogether.

Finally, there are "nonforums" - areas that are not open to unfettered communication by members of the public. Examples of nonforums include government offices and other areas where uninhibited speech could disrupt the functioning of the government.

Members of the public are generally free to express themselves in traditional and designated public forums, but the government can subject their speech to what are known as "time, place and manner" restrictions that regulate the when, where and how of a speaker's message. These restrictions must be applied evenly, and must ignore the content of each particular expression.

FindLaw | Legal News & Information: Free Speech, Protesting and Your Rights

This was a nonforum area and event.

And?

I demonstrated that she was under arrest by definition and cited law AND proved she broke the law. It is now on you to disprove with proofs I am incorrect, not simply stating your opinion and insults.

No, you didn't "demonstrate" anything. You want her to have been arrested. Learn the difference between your fantasies and REALITY.

Again -- she broke NO laws, was NOT arrested, and was NOT charged with any crime.

What does that mean? It means she damn well CAN do exactly what she did in that room -- until being escorted out. But it was well within her legal rights as citizen protected by the constitution. Deal with it, or pack your bags.

So...no proof.

She was not escorted, she was physically removed. It was in the video and that would mean lawsuit, unless she was under arrest.

Looks like you need to leave the country.

She was escorted, and went voluntarily. There was no resisting. And the burden of proof is on you -- dipshit. You're the one claiming that she "can't" do what she did and siding with your pansy ass girlfriend who claims what she did was "illegal."

You've got nothing. Jack shit. She wasn't arrested, broke no laws, will have nothing on her record, and was 100% within her rights protected by the US constitution that you and your conservative friends hate. Choke on that, moron.

Well you seem angry and upset, maybe you need a time out in your safe space. I'll do you a favor, buy yourself a Rush 24/7 subscription in a few months you will be right as rain. No need to thank me, its Christmas I'm feeling generous.

 

[SYTFE]

Here's "Proud to be white forever again," being his usual passive aggressive little self.

 

[Bush92]

Again....priceless. I love how this certified nut job Tara Dublin states that she can make an obscene gesture in public because (and I quote) it is her "1st Amendment, freedom of speech rights" but she doesn't recognize the individuals "1st Amendment, freedom of speech rights" to have Donald Trump and Mike Pence signs in his yard.

She also ends the rant by crying that (and again I quote) "a man will always have the upper hand". Uh...sweetie...you broke the law. You made an obscene gesture in public. You instigated the situation by being confrontational.

Bat-shit. Crazy. Progressives.

Schenck v. United States 1918
Free speech has its limits.

 

[Bush92]

Here's "Proud to be white forever again," being his usual passive aggressive little self.

I'm proud of my European heritage.

 

[Bush92]

I dunno. I think Hillary would like to be locked up with all those girls. Also...all the black inmates would treat her nice...right? After all, she was fighting for them...surely they would respect that? Or they would just beat her typical white liberal ass that thinks they are "down with black people because I vote Democrat...they love me."

 

[P@triot]

Do you condemn the murder threats against me from Pete and DOTR?

If there is ever an actual threat - I completely condemn it. I'm not sure how a sarcastic picture of a helicopter on a message board constitutes a "threat" but I completley condemn any and all actual threats.

 

[P@triot]

Please attempt to work the sand out of your mangina, and then try to locate your balls.

All you need to do is allow a progressive to get upset (which normally takes around 90 seconds) and they will inevitably reveal their true feelings.

The people who claim to love, support, and embrace transgenders want to make crass comments towards men about their "balls" and their alleged "manginas". Mmmm...doesn't sound very "tolerant" and "inclusive" to me. Sounds like someone is viciously attacking gender identity.

 

[P@triot]

In contrast, you've got a video of a woman somewhere acting badly, who everyone agrees is a dumbass.

I do have to salute mamooth on this one. She is only the second progressive I've encountered on this board who simply admits what idiots those ladies in the videos are (instead of attempting to defend them like SYTFE does).

Well done M....your honesty is respected.

 

[saveliberty]

She was escorted, and went voluntarily. There was no resisting. And the burden of proof is on you -- dipshit. You're the one claiming that she "can't" do what she did and siding with your pansy ass girlfriend who claims what she did was "illegal."

You've got nothing. Jack shit. She wasn't arrested, broke no laws, will have nothing on her record, and was 100% within her rights protected by the US constitution that you and your conservative friends hate. Choke on that, moron.

I gave you the definition of arrested and she fits it to a tee. People voluntarily leaving do not have to ask others to bring their coat. They go and pick it up themselves BEFORE leaving. That was on the video. You were also given Constitutional limits which apply in this case. I asked you to prove she was not arrested. No proof given to date.

 

[saveliberty]

No, you didn't "demonstrate" anything. You want her to have been arrested. Learn the difference between your fantasies and REALITY.

Again -- she broke NO laws, was NOT arrested, and was NOT charged with any crime. What does that mean? It means she damn well CAN do exactly what she did in that room -- until being escorted out. But it was well within her legal rights as citizen protected by the constitution. Deal with it, or pack your bags.

So...no proof.

She was not escorted, she was physically removed. It was in the video and that would mean lawsuit, unless she was under arrest.

Looks like you need to leave the country.

Wow...that nitwit came back for another huge helping of crow?!? LMAO! I love how she denies that the woman broke any laws when I posted the laws and then denies that she was arrested when I posted the video of her being arrested.

You "posted" a list of potential violations -- moron. Not ONE of those were committed by her, you ******* imbecile. How do we know this?

BECAUSE SHE WASN'T ARRESTED AND WASN'T CHARGED WITH ANY CRIME.

You are literally one of the all-time dumbest ******* conservatives I've encountered on this forum, and that's saying a lot.

So all you have to do is provide proof she was not arrested...

I saw a tape where she was arrested. The burden falls on you.