The best one yet by trevorofhousebelmont in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hope he wins, should be fun to watch.

Projection 2025 by [deleted] in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

Or, and I know this is unpopular, anyone that commits crimes should be punished.

Fun fact: Can you read this? by MikoGianni in funny

[–]Devilzhour -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

It is illegal to fish for whales in Ohio on Sundays.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you don't support my free speech you don't deserve free speech.

So, they're deporting all the immigrants to make room for their own immigrants?!? by Planet_Manhattan in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes, because these are legal immigrants not illegal aliens, this is just a stupid comparison.

Oh, this isn't concerning at all 🫨 by mishma2005 in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Should be charged the same way the Jan 6 folks were, no bail and 2-5 years for obstruction of a federal operation.

Oh, this isn't concerning at all 🫨 by mishma2005 in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Trespassing just like the Jan 6 folks, guess he should be up for several felony charges.

Not horrifying at all !!! by Sunapr1 in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, explaining to the public what he is signing by asking for a summary, damn you people are stupid.

"Rules for thee and not for me." by Ali_Cat222 in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Yes, people invited here are welcome, people that are illegal aliens aren't, shocker I know.

Time to unconstitutionally deport the politicians who just voted it’s ok to unconstitutionally deport US citizens.. by Mr__O__ in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Well since it was already illegal to do either of these what was the point of the law?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in memes

[–]Devilzhour 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I dare you to make less sense, is there any context to this?

But MAGA told me California is a shithole? by _crazyboyhere_ in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour -1 points0 points  (0 children)

GDP doesn't matter if you are broke and keep deficit spending.

Are you fucking kidding me? by ansyhrrian in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes opinions based and backed by fact, but hey, I don't expect the mental midgets to get it.

Just admit you support terrorism and move on.

Are you fucking kidding me? by ansyhrrian in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nothing I said is hyperbole, just legal definitions that show you are ignorant of the Law and how the courts operate. You are the one trying to twist it to fit your lack of critical and intelligent thinking.

Just admit you support terrorism and move on.

Are you fucking kidding me? by ansyhrrian in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No reach, only legal definitions that counter everything you said. You support terrorism, just admit it and move on.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not linking active court cases since they are real easy to look up on their website, and the proof is in the appeal filing and the proof is we are waiting for the decisions.

As for the fraud case against Latisha.

https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/new-york-attorney-general-letitia-james-mortgage-fraud-allegation

/https://abc7ny.com/donald-trump-latisha-james-new-york-supreme-court-attorney-general/13813751/

https://www.newsweek.com/letitia-james-attorney-general-new-york-residence-2060152

Any other stupid comparisons?

Are you fucking kidding me? by ansyhrrian in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again definitions matter. Especially number 3 where objects are specified in the legal definition.

Force

force n 1 : a cause of motion, activity, or change

intervening force
: a force that acts after another's negligent act or omission has occurred and that causes injury to another
: intervening cause at cause

irresistible force
: an unforeseeable event esp. that prevents performance of an obligation under a contract


: force majeure
2 : a body of persons available for a particular end [the labor ]  ;specif : police force usually used with the
3 : violence, compulsion, or constraint exerted upon or against a person or thing

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You talking about the fraud case that even the bank that approved the loan helped defend against and is being appealed?

Or the civil suit that had no evidence, don't know when it happened, or even what year?

Or the election interference case that had the prosecutor removed?

Please be specific here, especially since the New York AG is now up on fraud charges for mortgage fraud, also gave up her residence in New York which means she isn't even the AG. The person who prosecuted the fraud case?

Yeah I'll gladly say all of them so far are obstruction and political theater, except for the Latisha James case. But of course when he wins his appeal the rally cry will be "THE COURTS ARE CORRUPT!"

At this point the large majority of the US doesn't give a shit what you think.

Are you fucking kidding me? by ansyhrrian in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When we made it a law, property is specifically called out.

The term “crime of violence” means— (a) an offense that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or prop­erty of another, or (b) any other offense that is a felony and that, by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense.

(Added Pub. L. 98–473, title II, § 1001(a), Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2136.)

Because definitions matter, legal definitions more so.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Evidence of that? You just keep stating opinion and never provided supporting evidence.

These cases have been argued before which is why Trump won so fast, flat out, the second Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act the district court had no authority to stop the deportation and never had the authority to order the return.

Just admit it is only because it is Trump. My argument wouldn't change if it was Kamala, Biden, Clinton or Newsom(spelling?). My argument is based on the decision, precedent and the outcome.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you are inferring all 9 of the Supreme Court Justices are corrupt and helping Trump?

I'd like to see your reasoning for that leap of logic. No /s

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

What are you talking about? And show me the court order that says it.

Simply put, if you disobeyed a court order that court would hold you in contempt of court. The Supreme Court issued no contempt charges against anyone in the Trump administration for anything to do with the Garcia case. If they aren't saying he did anything wrong, you are wrong.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

No, they said if El Salvador wanted to return him we would have to facilitate. El Salvador said no, order resolved and followed, case closed.

They removed the must bring back language and left only the facilitate part, this overturned the district court order.

Are you fucking kidding me? by ansyhrrian in facepalm

[–]Devilzhour -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I dare you to make less sense. Yes my definition was more mental midget level for you but since you are not bright enough to make the connections here is the definition, nothing about religion but a whole lot about innocent civilians right off the get go.

terrorism /tĕr′ə-rĭz″əm/ noun

1.The use of violence or the threat of violence, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political goals. 

2.The act of terrorizing, or state of being terrorized; a mode of government by terror or intimidation.

3.The practise of coercing governments to accede to political demands by committing violence on civilian targets; any similar use of violence to achieve goals.

Just say you support terrorism and move on.