By TheHunter Go To PostDA is going to end up being a Russian funded company or some shit.
Like I said, this shit is big.
By DY_nasty Go To Post
Story seems to be evolving. An earlier version seemed to imply the SRO shot and killed the suspect. The most recent version as of this post says the SRO fired a round but not sure if that round struck the suspect, which means the fatal shot could have been self-inflicted.
The shooter and the officer both fired a round, but authorities don't know if the officer's bullet killed the suspect, (Sheriff Tim) Cameron said. The officer was not hurt.
"When the shooting took place, our school resource officer, who was stationed inside the school, was alerted to the event and the shots being fired. He pursued the shooter and engaged the shooter, during which that engagement he fired a round at the shooter," Cameron said.
Cameron said the shooter fired a round simultaneously.
"In the days to come, through a detailed investigation, we will be able to determine if our SRO's round struck the shooter," Cameron said.
fired a single round simultaneously? RO just knew where to be in that big ass school too? Identified and chased the right kid on the spot through a crowded hallway leading to some weird ass standoff?
i dont believe any of that shit lol. if that's how it really went down, sure, but right now that sounds like police ducktales prepackaged for FBI and ATF like "nothing to see here, feds"
i dont believe any of that shit lol. if that's how it really went down, sure, but right now that sounds like police ducktales prepackaged for FBI and ATF like "nothing to see here, feds"
Meanwhile we have a domestic terrorist bombing people randomly in Texas. You know Trump woulda been on the terrorism bandwagon a long time ago if we knew this was a brown person.
President Trump must face a defamation suit filed by former “Apprentice” contestant Summer Zervos — as a Manhattan Supreme Court judge denied him immunity through his job as the nation’s commander-in-chief.
“In Clinton v Jones the United States Supreme Court held that a sitting president is not immune from being sued in federal court for unofficial acts,” Justice Jennifer Schecter wrote in a ruling released Tuesday, citing the sexual harassment suit that led to the 1998 impeachment of then-President Bill Clinton for lying under oath about his affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.
“It left open the question of whether concerns of federalism and comity compel a different conclusion for suits brought in state court. Because they do not, defendant’s motion to dismiss this case or hold it in abeyance is denied,” Justice Schecter ruled.
The decision means that Zervos, who in 2016 accused then-candidate Trump of groping and pressing his privates against her in 2007, can pursue her defamation case against the president for suggesting she made up the allegations for “ten minutes of fame.”
It's pretty obvious America as a whole isn't sending enough thoughts and prayers to stop school shootings. All you morally corrupt corrupt bastards...
By Randolph Freelander Go To Postsexual harassment Trump stuff
This is great.
In Clinton v Jones the United States Supreme Court held that a sitting president is not immune from being sued in federal court for unofficial acts,” Justice Jennifer Schecter wrote in a ruling released Tuesday, citing the sexual harassment suit that led to the 1998 impeachment of then-President Bill Clinton for lying under oath about his affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.
By Randolph Freelander Go To PostThe entire middle East says hi
..
By KingGondo Go To Postyas kween
By kween are you referring to liberal darling Gillibrand who just endorsed Cuomo?
By Fenderputty Go To PostBy kween are you referring to liberal darling Gillibrand who just endorsed Cuomo?
Pretty sure he is referring to the person at the start of the tweet lad
By n8 dogg Go To PostPretty sure he is referring to the person at the start of the tweet lad
I know. Lol
By Randolph Freelander Go To PostSounds like a candidate for Pod save my soul.
Why he do dem boys like dat?
Bannon oversaw the entire CA ordeal. Lmao.
Either he squealed to Mueller, in which case Mueller already knows everything we’re now figuring out, or he lied to Mueller.
Either he squealed to Mueller, in which case Mueller already knows everything we’re now figuring out, or he lied to Mueller.
By Method Go To PostGod I hope he lied. Fucking assholes think they were so far ahead of the game…Were they not, though? I mean, they got Trump elected.
I'd like to see Democrats catch up to the game and get a Bernie elected. Until that happens, it's entirely possible, probable, and plausible that the next MAGA president will be even more of a lunatic than Trump and still get elected.
By Smoke Dogg Go To PostWere they not, though? I mean, they got Trump elected.
I'd like to see Democrats catch up to the game and get a Bernie elected. Until that happens, it's entirely possible, probable, and plausible that the next MAGA president will be even more of a lunatic than Trump and still get elected.
I used to think it was hubris, but after hearing about Manafort sending docs over email for gates to convert to pdf, I’m now more like 50/50 hubris and stupid.
Regarding the possible / probable portion of your post, it’s really the only reason I really give a shit about this Russia stuff. There’s a reason “constitutional crisis” is being tossed around.
Does Trump fire Mueller? Do the republicans do anything if he does? The House intel committee has proven to be a sham for a check. What about the senate? Does all of this hinge on some Mueller plan where’s he’s anticipated this and we rely on state AGs?
Clearly we’re capable of electing populist racist trash. Even the CA whistleblower pointed out that portions of the US like authoritarian rulers.
Then again ... Trump may be innocent and is just acting guilty because he’s a loon, and none of this matters in the end, and I’ll face 25 years of DY trolling me.
i mean, i don't get why people automatically assume that dems aren't profiting off of trump and this fukkery too
By DY_nasty Go To Posti mean, i don't get why people automatically assume that dems aren't profiting off of trump and this fukkery too
Who benefits if he fires Mueller and and the GOP doesn’t do a thing?
I mean you could argue that Dems will gain electorally, but there isn’t some future guarantee that they always would. In this instance our government will have failed us and we will have relied on mass voter backlash that no suppression tactic could sqash.
It’s cracks in the institution, man. Like finding bugs on a program and having no power to fix them.
I suppose you could argue no system is impervious to corruption, but damnit ours is supposed to be on of the better ones.
By Fenderputty Go To PostWho benefits if he fires Mueller and and the GOP doesn’t do a thing?why is the focus on mueller? lol
I mean you could argue that Dems will gain electorally, but there isn’t some future guarantee that they always would. In this instance our government will have failed us and we will have relied on mass voter backlash that no suppression tactic could sqash.
It’s cracks in the institution, man. Like finding bugs on a program and having no power to fix them.
I suppose you could argue no system is impervious to corruption, but damnit ours is supposed to be on of the better ones.
and i'm not even talking seats or votes either, i'm talking private interests, convenient scapegoating, etc. for all this 'we must oppose pompeo and haspel' talk, why do people just kinda gloss over how they got or kept those positions to begin with?
and the government been failing people for decades anyways.
I mean those two examples of governmental corruption don’t quite rise to constitutional crisis. I think at a base level some corruption is expected, but I think most assume our system would stop shit if it rose to “stooge in whitehouse” levels.
Mueller matters because I assume Trump’s a stooge. That’s why I said I could be wrong and you’re welcome to troll me for a quarter century. Lol
Mueller matters because I assume Trump’s a stooge. That’s why I said I could be wrong and you’re welcome to troll me for a quarter century. Lol
By Fenderputty Go To PostBy kween are you referring to liberal darling Gillibrand who just endorsed Cuomo?Anybody paying attention knows that Gillibrand is an opportunist above all else. She was a blue dog democrat when she first came into the house.
By Fenderputty Go To PostI mean those two examples of governmental corruption don’t quite rise to constitutional crisis. I think at a base level some corruption is expected, but I think most assume our system would stop shit if it rose to “stooge in whitehouse” levels.constitutional crisis? we have at least two of those per president
Mueller matters because I assume Trump’s a stooge. That’s why I said I could be wrong and you’re welcome to troll me for a quarter century. Lol
By DY_nasty Go To Postconstitutional crisis? we have at least two of those per presidentI'm still pissed with the Patriot Act.
By Kibner Go To PostI'm still pissed with the Patriot Act.im pissed at how we ran with it and just accepted it like a fact of life
By DY_nasty Go To Postim pissed at how we ran with it and just accepted it like a fact of lifeIt will literally never go away because of that, too. Infuriating.
I mean like literal checks and balances of the three branches of government, man. Foundational shit. Though I do agree I needed to be more specific since the Patriot act is an ace example. I suppose you could even argue it’s foundational ....
Maybe people aren’t as receptive because that shit was expected while nobody really expected the POTUS to be compromised by piss tapes.
Maybe people aren’t as receptive because that shit was expected while nobody really expected the POTUS to be compromised by piss tapes.
By Fenderputty Go To PostI mean like literal checks and balances of the three branches of government, man. Foundational shit. Though I do agree I needed to be more specific since the Patriot act is an ace example. I suppose you could even argue it’s foundational ….piss tapes or normalizing huge military action with zero consequence, oversight, or accountability lol.
Maybe people aren’t as receptive because that shit was expected while nobody really expected the POTUS to be compromised by piss tapes.
like okay facebook on a rampage - why the hell do people think they just now started pimping data out? and just to russia?
checks and balances = feigned ignorance and favors
By curlyfries Go To PostAnybody paying attention knows that Gillibrand is an opportunist above all else. She was a blue dog democrat when she first came into the house.
I was mostly just having some fun with Gondo.
By DY_nasty Go To Postpiss tapes or normalizing huge military action with zero consequence, oversight, or accountability lol.
like okay facebook on a rampage - why the hell do people think they just now started pimping data out? and just to russia?
checks and balances = feigned ignorance and favors
Your first point is a misrepresentation of what I said lol. Point is hes compromised. When have we ever had accountability? To some extent I think 9/11 played a psychological roll too, at least with its initial acceptance.
To be clear. I would operate under the assumption that Facebook always pimped data out. But if shit was done illegally and helps get things closer to solving the Russia stooge issue, great.
By Fenderputty Go To PostYour first point is a misrepresentation of what I said lol. Point is hes compromised. When have we ever had accountability? To some extent I think 9/11 played a psychological roll too, at least with its initial acceptance.its not a misrepresentation.... the stuff that's being emphasized as ground breaking or important just isn't in comparison to other stuff. i wouldn't have even bothered to reply if you hadn't started with the checks and balances, constitutional crisis stuff lol
To be clear. I would operate under the assumption that Facebook always pimped data out. But if shit was done illegally and helps get things closer to solving the Russia stooge issue, great.
who isn't 'compromised'? i mean come on - your boy schumer was taking donations from trump too. when is he going to get the call?
there's not even real, practical legal protections for that type of data either. or at the very least no real consequence for what's currently happening.
i swear its hilarious how people just decide to care about certain shit out the blue. other countries have made us do dumber shit, for less, and we were happy to do it.
By DY_nasty Go To Postits not a misrepresentation…. the stuff that's being emphasized as ground breaking or important just isn't in comparison to other stuff. i wouldn't have even bothered to reply if you hadn't started with the checks and balances, constitutional crisis stuff lol
who isn't 'compromised'? i mean come on - your boy schumer was taking donations from trump too. when is he going to get the call?
there's not even real, practical legal protections for that type of data either. or at the very least no real consequence for what's currently happening.
i swear its hilarious how people just decide to care about certain shit out the blue. other countries have made us do dumber shit, for less, and we were happy to do it.
That’s always why I’ve said it’s important though. Russia itself isn’t that scary. That’s also kinda the point to. Other more scary countries could pull this shit off and it may not be stupid watergate.
Breh like I said. People expect a certain level of corruption. Internal shit is an easier pill to swallow than this foreign shit.
I wish people cared more about automation, super bacteria and space related issues ... / shrug
im just saying its dumb leveraging all this on trump like he's the first to ever do it and that it all starts and stops with him
if people are serious, by all means go in - but don't forget to run schumer's pockets too instead of thinking its all about the votes. if people weren't profiting off of all this, it would've ended a long time ago.
if people are serious, by all means go in - but don't forget to run schumer's pockets too instead of thinking its all about the votes. if people weren't profiting off of all this, it would've ended a long time ago.
Ohh I agree monetarily we should be going after the internal stuff as much as the external. Honestly I think most people would handwave Trumps shit away if he wasn’t so .... Trumpish, though.
Mitt Romney 2.0 wouldn’t be getting this
Mitt Romney 2.0 wouldn’t be getting this
By HasphatsAnts Go To PostWhat did Elizabeth bruenig get herself into this time?
Some people in the DSA on twitter got mad about her views on abortion (personally opposed, wouldn't criminalize but has voiced anti-abortion talking points in the past) and started a petition demanding she be expelled from the DSA, which it turns out she's not a member of. So the typical farcical intra left online squabbling, which the DSA especially seems prone to.