Posted on 07/01/2024 3:17:43 PM PDT by PJ-Comix
The liberal meltdowns over the SCOTUS immunity decision in the Trump appeal are starting to come in. Yes, some are quite wild as you can see in this example. However, it is NOTHING compared to the Supernova explosion I am expecting from a certain someone with whom most of us are familiar. So far today, this person appears to be in lockdown but I assure you, when it happens I fully expect the ANGER to be of Supernova magnitude. The reason I am not revealing the person's identity yet is because I want the DUmmie FUnnies to scoop this person's Supernova meltdown in reaction to the SCOTUS immunity decision.
Maybe tomorrow afternoon. I see the guy is posting about other stuff but maybe he is trying not to think about the immunity decision. Hopefully tomorrow he does.
Yep. Maybe it’s someone who promised to leave the country if Trump won?
Michael Moore has been awfully quiet for the last two years. So quiet, with all this .. stuff going on in every direction.
Maybe he’s feeling poorly.
Oooooh, I didn’t think of him! I’d forgotten all about that idiot. Have we heard from Mittens?
Neither did I, and I could only stand to watch about 50 seconds of it because he has nothing interesting to say. Just babbling.
Thank you for your input. As a result I shall wander off into the wilderness wearing nothing but an old sackcloth and living off eating raw turnips in order to reach absolution for my grave sin. Oh, and I must not forget to bring a whip with which to beat myself.
Hey, it didn't work out as I expected but I am sure we will see more emotional meltdowns from Conway in the future. Better to just wait until they happen rather than try to anticipate them.
At first (here, days later) i thought you were talking about the Chevron decision.
Basically it neuters every federal agency
No more ‘law by agency fiat’
Now we need to reject any decision that is the democrats tactic of ‘repeal to a third position’
There is a current law- A. They want a new law B. So they write a bill B that is so bad it gets overturned by the courts as ‘unconstitutional’. So instead of just going back to A, they say if B is unconstitutional then the opposite of B -or NEW position C- must be constitutional.
They don’t repeal to go back to A, they go to a new position C.
That is how they got ‘gay marriage’.
They knew the people would never vote for it, so they crafted a bill that AGAINST it, but wrote it in a way that was to be declared unconstitutional (on purpose) so they could say then that the opposite- or to be FOR it- was ‘constitutional’.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.