Trump Derangement Syndrome - Orange man bad. Read the OP! (ᴛʜɪs ᴛʜʀᴇᴀᴅ ɪs ʟɪᴋᴇ ᴋɪᴡɪ ғᴀʀᴍs ʀᴇᴠɪᴇᴡs ɴᴏᴡ) 🗿🗿🗿🗿

So what's with this "Joey Salads drank piss" thing I keep reading from these people who obviously despise Joey Salads? Is this true, or is it just bullshit?
I don't remember how it came about, but there's a legit video of Joey drinking his own piss. Can't remember if it was a prank or something he does to get his rocks off. It really doesn't matter. It's just a weapon they use against on Joey for daring having conservative opinions. If he was running for a political position with a D next to his name, they'd defend him drinking his piss to the moon and back.

For people who spend every waking moment sharing their kink with the world, they sure love "kink shaming". But its only Kink Shaming when the other side does it to them.
Screenshot from 2020-05-12 21.05.40.png Screenshot from 2020-05-12 21.04.24.png Screenshot from 2020-05-12 21.04.13.png Screenshot from 2020-05-12 21.03.54.png Screenshot from 2020-05-12 21.03.31.png
 
So what's with this "Joey Salads drank piss" thing I keep reading from these people who obviously despise Joey Salads? Is this true, or is it just bullshit?
He apparently did a youtube/whatever video where he drank his own piss on a dare for cash.


Changing gears, Quora is a gold mine for pretentious TDS cringe.
1589339417190.png

1589339445721.png

1589339468428.png

1589339494105.png

1589339530380.png

brave_HA1TJ04Zvp.png

brave_ovpVu56abL.png

brave_5RR9SnlwbI.png

brave_QIdq42IO5E.png

brave_TPstOtg1Cn.png

brave_IhAW3rsTR2.png

brave_b481iPRF1E.png

brave_xnqtphH3Hd.png

brave_0EnOHbrxk7.png

brave_B6xhtLfW4H.png

brave_uG0tO5UbIG.png

brave_siImiFjFm5.png

brave_jo267NExtx.png

Also, holy crap this just popped up for me. Source / Archive
1589340042095.png

 
He apparently did a youtube/whatever video where he drank his own piss on a dare for cash.

All he has to do is claim he donated it to charity, and he has the high road.

"Yeah, I did some wild and crazy things to help feed homeless orphans when I was a kid. ... So. What have you done to make the world a better place, WokeDipshitReporter538? Tweeted something pithy?"
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
Link, Wapo via SFgate:
"On May 12, 2020, Sullivan announced that he would place a hold on the DOJ's attempt to drop charges against Flynn, and began an investigation with outside aid. Critics called this unconstitutional, while others said the rule is a part of civil procedure allowing judges to accept aid for a case."
A U.S. judge on Tuesday put on hold the Justice Department's move to drop charges against Michael Flynn, saying he expects independent groups and legal experts to argue against the bid to exonerate President Donald Trump's former national security adviser of lying to the FBI.

U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan of the District of Columbia said he expects individuals and organizations will seek to intervene in the politically charged case.

Sullivan's order came after the government took the highly irregular step last Thursday of reversing its stance on Flynn's charges and embracing Flynn's move to dismiss his own guilty pleas.

Flynn was convicted in course of special counsel Robert Mueller III's investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election. Flynn had initially repeated that he was guilty of lying, that no one had coerced him to admit his guilt and that he had no intention of taking back that plea. Flynn also said he took responsibility for wrongdoing that also culminated in his firing by Trump for misleading Vice President Mike Pence, White House aides and the public.

After Mueller's investigation into 2016 campaign interference closed last year, Flynn changed defense teams, began attacking prosecutors, and gained Trump's support despite initially cooperating against the White House by claiming he was entrapped in a partisan FBI and Justice Department conspiracy.

In January, Attorney General William Barr tapped Jeff Jensen, the U.S. attorney in St. Louis, to review how the case had been handled. Jensen said publicly last week that he recommended it be dropped, asserting that newly analyzed FBI reports and communications showed the bureau had no valid basis to question Flynn, and so any lies he told were not relevant to a criminal probe.

The Justice Department's attempts to dismiss the case last week prompted fresh accusations from law enforcement officials and Democrats that the criminal justice system was caving to political pressure from the Trump administration.

Sullivan said he will "at the appropriate time," set a schedule for outside parties to argue against the Justice Department's claims.

Sullivan's invitation could set the stage for an adversarial proceedings in which one or more attorneys argue against the Justice Department. It would also permit, if the judge chooses, to require sides to produce evidence and revisit the case for and against Flynn.

In an evidentiary hearing, Sullivan could call witnesses, such as Flynn, his investigators or even prosecutors, to obtain more facts about how the case was handled and why Flynn and agents took the steps they did.

Sullivan has not hesitated to personally question Flynn in court before, as he did during an abortive 2018 sentencing hearing, when he rejected a defense motion supported by the government for probation.
---
I love that second one. "Is Trump unhinged? Yes, let me quote the Washington Post."
"Is ice cream the best? Yes, let me quote Dr. Baskin Robbinson..."
 
Ostatnio edytowane:

Holy shit, why can’t he hire a single person who understands technology?? How hard is it to have a chat in a separate app with the news station? It would still be fucked to be asking for no more questions, but they‘d avoid the public embarrassment at least.
 
Link, Wapo via SFgate:
"On May 12, 2020, Sullivan announced that he would place a hold on the DOJ's attempt to drop charges against Flynn, and began an investigation with outside aid. Critics called this unconstitutional, while others said the rule is a part of civil procedure allowing judges to accept aid for a case."

Judicial activism is the bane of our democracy.
 
Using Youtube's search function is almost always a punishment. That they've designed it to give you results that they know you do not want is hilarious for a company that was born on search engine prowess.
For a while, it used to be you could not find Dame Pesos' "TYT 2016 Election Meltdown" by searching on YouTube.
If you searched the exact name of the video it gave you this reupload as a result, but not the original one. Even though the original video is still available on YouTube to this day and it never had any strikes or age restrictions on it to cause it to be banned from the search function. Really makes you think. 🤔

Edit: You still can't find it by searching "TYT 2016 Election Meltdown" or "Young Turks 2016 Meltdown" lol. It just doesn't show Dame Pesos' video despite all the results they show having 5.5m less views than his video. :story:
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
Link, Wapo via SFgate:
https://archive.li/0pEcL"On May 12, 2020, Sullivan announced that he would place a hold on the DOJ's attempt to drop charges against Flynn, and began an investigation with outside aid. Critics called this unconstitutional, while others said the rule is a part of civil procedure allowing judges to accept aid for a case."
Why the fuck is he doing this? This is one of those rare instances where the government gets their hands on exculpatory evidence and does the right thing by dropping their case. The DOJ should get a pat on the back and be told "That's a good thing you did. Now do it for people who aren't insanely well connected to a presidential administration."
 
if I'm not mistaken the bill also rescinds any states existant Voter ID laws.




Edit: it also gives a large amount of money per family too. It is pretty insane the amount of spending that will be going on in this bill.
I'm having a hell of a time trying to find the actual bill information.

Edit 2:
1815 pages of bullshit....
 

Załączniki

Ostatnio edytowane:
Judicial activism is the bane of our democracy.
This'll go straight to the Supreme Court... and will be struck down BY the Supreme Court. As far as I know, a judge holds no authority to keep charges pressed against someone, and the supreme court has upheld charges being dropped for cases quite like Flynn's where law enforcement engaged in entrapment.
 
Link, Wapo via SFgate:
"On May 12, 2020, Sullivan announced that he would place a hold on the DOJ's attempt to drop charges against Flynn, and began an investigation with outside aid. Critics called this unconstitutional, while others said the rule is a part of civil procedure allowing judges to accept aid for a case."

---

I love that second one. "Is Trump unhinged? Yes, let me quote the Washington Post."
"Is ice cream the best? Yes, let me quote Dr. Baskin Robbinson..."
Judicial activism is the bane of our democracy.
Why the fuck is he doing this? This is one of those rare instances where the government gets their hands on exculpatory evidence and does the right thing by dropping their case. The DOJ should get a pat on the back and be told "That's a good thing you did. Now do it for people who aren't insanely well connected to a presidential administration."
I've raised this a number of times elsewhere. My basic argument is: Given the extraordinary facts of the case and the length of the case I firmly believe Flynn's case should be dropped on 6th amendment grounds. (That is, timely justice.)

In particular, this judge has actively worked against Flynn on these same matters...
1589343337979.png
Source / Archive
 
I've raised this a number of times elsewhere. My basic argument is: Given the extraordinary facts of the case and the length of the case I firmly believe Flynn's case should be dropped on 6th amendment grounds. (That is, timely justice.)

In particular, this judge has actively worked against Flynn on these same matters...
Wyświetl załącznik 1289763
Source / Archive

"You can't escape, we rigged a perfectly good kangaroo court show trial for you. ORANGE MAN BAD. NOT MY PRESUDENT."
 
Why the fuck is he doing this? This is one of those rare instances where the government gets their hands on exculpatory evidence and does the right thing by dropping their case. The DOJ should get a pat on the back and be told "That's a good thing you did. Now do it for people who aren't insanely well connected to a presidential administration."
Check the DC voting percentages and you will understand.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole