Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 02/22/2021 3:24:48 PM PST by MarvinStinson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 next last
To: MarvinStinson

I am so glad he did not get on the SCOTUS and hope he never does.


56 posted on 02/22/2021 4:02:22 PM PST by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

“Welcome to The White House! How can I help you?”

....Me and my group are here to Burn It All Down, Man!

“I see. Do you have an appointment? We are about to close.

....Yes, Our ‘appointment’ is with Uncle Sam, at 1pm.

Oh. In that case, the Walking Tour begins right through these doors. No gum chewing allowed.
Enjoy your scheduled trip to The White House. Too-Da-Loo!”


57 posted on 02/22/2021 4:02:32 PM PST by lee martell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

He is: Leftarded.


58 posted on 02/22/2021 4:02:39 PM PST by vpintheak (Live free, or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

We should be thanking Mitch McConnell for keeping this guy off the Supreme Court. He’s no “moderate.” He’s a typical leftie judge who would have fit right in with the SCOTUS libs.


61 posted on 02/22/2021 4:04:53 PM PST by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

a LISP program is more intelligent than this
wacko who apparently belongs with the child eating,
rape-protecting, election stealing conspiring
monsters in POTUS (excluding the Honorable Justice Thomas).


62 posted on 02/22/2021 4:05:27 PM PST by Diogenesis (Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

WTF? USG definition of terrorism.
The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).

This is head of a US circuit court of appeals that deals in terrorism cases that does not understand this definition and deliberates the laws? And they want him to be making judgements on who gets prosecuted under those laws? It is a good thing that this entitled wisenheimer was not placed on SCOTUS.
Inconceivable. Shocked, shocked, I say. /sarc


65 posted on 02/22/2021 4:11:48 PM PST by Liaison (TANSTAAFL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

We waited for justice from Sessions, Barr and Durham for four long painful years, holding back. We were betrayed.

Now the the new AG and the enemies of freedom will label us all domestic terrorists and destroy us if they can. Working quickly and decisively with the full House,Senate,President and judges on their side. Fast, efficient work against us.

This is like after the Oklahoma City bombing, where the Janet Reno types inhibited all of us into total meek silence to avoid being called bomber-apologists or something.


67 posted on 02/22/2021 4:18:14 PM PST by frank ballenger (End vote fraud, harvesting,non-citizen voting & leftist media news censorship or we are finished.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson
So the cleaning crew does not count?


69 posted on 02/22/2021 4:28:54 PM PST by Michael.SF. (I believe you Tony B.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson
The point that everyone is missing here is that Garland made that idiotic statement based on what he said is his definition of domestic terrorism which is really the definition of the RATS in order to support their insurrection weapon against conservatives and President Trump.
My own definition, which is about the same as the statutory definition, is the use of violence or threats of violence in attempt to disrupt the democratic processes. So an attack on a courthouse, while in operation, trying to prevent judges from actually deciding cases, that plainly is domestic terrorism.
So forget the working hours stuff. What Garland is really saying is that he's agreed to perpetuate the insurrection garbage in return for becoming Attorney General of the United States. That should be the basis for the Republicans to pound him and, by extension, the entire RAT party, in further questioning.
73 posted on 02/22/2021 4:37:34 PM PST by Dahoser (I finally figured out what to call him: Fakephonyfraudident Biden. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

I wonder how he’d feel about a group of militia members occupying an empty wildlife refuge out in the middle of nowhere in Oregon in the middle of January.


74 posted on 02/22/2021 4:38:03 PM PST by Antihero101607
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

All democrats are the enemy, folks.


77 posted on 02/22/2021 4:43:49 PM PST by joma89 (Buy weapons and ammo, folks, and have the will to use them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson
If he's using this...(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion...he's out on a limb.
There was no "policy" at issue.

My own definition, which is about the same as the statutory definition, is the use of violence or threats of violence in attempt to disrupt the democratic processes.

It doesn't matter what he thinks the laws says.

And this was the man in line for SCOTUS!?

78 posted on 02/22/2021 4:55:59 PM PST by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

The comedy writes itself with this bunch.


79 posted on 02/22/2021 4:56:05 PM PST by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

He discriminates against poor janitors on the night shift.


80 posted on 02/22/2021 4:56:33 PM PST by rfp1234 (Caveat Emperor: Comitii asinorum atque rhinocerorum delendi sunt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson
Dang!
This moron was proposed as a SCOTUS member!

Chilling to think of him as AG and what that is going to mean for the rule of law...

Good to know that we have those ferocious GOP senators protecting our freedom & liberties against the likes of Garland...
Oh, wait..

81 posted on 02/22/2021 4:56:53 PM PST by SuperLuminal (Where is Joe McCarthy now that we desperately need him sober?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

So 9/11 wasn’t terrorism and neither was the Boston Marathon bombing. Riiiiight.

What a POS.


82 posted on 02/22/2021 5:09:37 PM PST by jdsteel ("A Republic, Madam, if you can keep it." Sorry Ben, looks like we blew it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

Many years ago had to undergo this same crap in the military. Thankfully, most of us managed to under the damage and increase in negative thoughts about things after being separated from the idiots (with no useful purpose in life) that lectured us. Oh well, during that time, we actually experienced the feeling of feeling superior to the useless fools standing in front of us.


83 posted on 02/22/2021 5:10:20 PM PST by Da Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

What BS...would I can set fire to a government building if the federal government is close and not be charged? Or is it only for BLM/Antics morons?


84 posted on 02/22/2021 5:24:44 PM PST by Deplorable American1776 (Rest In Peace, Rush H. Limbaugh III. You are missed already...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

Yep. He’s an idiot.


85 posted on 02/22/2021 5:42:23 PM PST by clintonh8r (Truth is hate speech to those who hate the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: MarvinStinson

So if the federal building in Oklahoma City had been blown up at 4:00 am, it would not be a terrorist attack?


86 posted on 02/22/2021 5:44:32 PM PST by gunnut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson