Posted on 09/16/2025 11:22:34 AM PDT by Miami Rebel
LOo no they are not. It’s self -evident if they were someone else would have done it before him.
Only one or two of you actually read what she said. Lazy, stupid, and ignorant people.
Yeahhhh...nah.
What law is that?
Then why not just reference the wording in those federal statues against death threats and incitement to violence? Things for which there is a legal definition. Maybe she just aint kno words or statootes too good. T'aint no evidins that she nose the diffrinse.
Wrong.
You’re not thinking carefully, this explains your logically incoherent reply to me.
Again—exposing the radical trans cult targeting children was easy and millions of people did it. We didn’t need “Matt Walsh.”
The “gender neutrality theory” as you call it exposed itself.
For a person claiming to be a patriot, supporting Trump is the very least he can do.
No, Matt Walsh made a massive intellectual error in calling for the removal of Pam Bondi.
.
Sorry for the source, but if you find another account of Walsh’s words that contradicts this one, please feel free to post it.
o his 5th rate show are getting more and more pathetic
Contrary to the mythology the Free Speech absolutists tell themselves, there has never been a free speech right to terroristic threats and advocation of political violence. The US has a long history of dealing with domestic terrorists groups who engage in this behavior like the KKK, the Anarchists and the Weathermen.
The targets of this speech have a equally valid right to not be subject to these threats. The legal principal “you can’t scream fire in a crowded theater” still apply no matter how desperately the daily media squealers hate the current administration
Nope
That a myth. There is no free speech right to incitement to violence and terroristic theat. The is no such thing as consequence free speech. Never has been.
Especially when one has no idea what that particular job entails. Arm-chair Generals suck.
The UK happens to be an ally. There are probably always reasons to meet and things to discuss.
Bondi may be doing an “incredible job” when not in front of a microphone. But when put in front of the public, either when speaking or when putting on a media event (the Epstein binders fiasco, for example), she has been disastrous. Somebody needs to yank her off the podium as she’s doing nothing but hurting the admin.
Sure because everyone creates movies like these. Because whining about the radical trans on a forum is the same.
Fact is you are so emotionally tied up with Pam Bondi YOU can’t think coherently.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42ivIRd9N8E
I believe Ted would have gone after Hillary . That would have been a fight to see.
Britain is now doing this, and it seems like the British citizen is the one arrested, while the immigrant is given a pass.
Since administrations come & go, what went around will be turned around.
So, I say no.
As for denying service, that is something that they applied to people who refused to participate in homosexual weddings, so it might be tempting to turn the tables on those who refuse to allow service. Instead, let's use lawfare against these people who refuse, just like they did us. We do not need to open a different can of worms, Let's use that can of worms the Democrats opened. Perhaps we should allow banks to de-bank these businesses as well.
I’m down with Matt Walsh most of the time. But like a lot of people on the right, he can be a bomb thrower. A bomb throwers have to eat their words sometimes.
On 1 hand he calls for crack downs for the psycho left, then on the other hand, he whines about the “rights” being violated, or whatever. You can’t have it both ways people.
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.