Topic: Federal protection only for democrat friendly officials.
Bart's photo
Thu 06/16/22 05:26 PM
Has anybody heard of a radical liberal group called “janes revenge”? This group is , ever since the leak of the Supreme Court decision over roe vs. Wade , this group is responsible for over 50 attacks against pro-life clinics and pregnancy centers. ( places that help pregnant women) but where is the White House or the attorney general condoning these attacks, not a peep, same as the dems. dragging their feet to pass the bill that will give more protection to our Supreme Court justices after the assignation attempt against judge Kavanaugh. They are to busy trying to enact laws against parents expressing their views about what they teach our youngins . Now they are going to go after the border gaurds on horseback that we’re accused of horrific acts worse than slavery according to the usual suspects. Investigations proved the guard's innocent of those accusations but to save face Biden’s d.o.j. is going with some lame charge against these guards. November is getting closer , just a few months for the democrats to push some of their socialist ideas through before they become a lame duck like the president will become.

motowndowntown's photo
Thu 06/16/22 09:45 PM
So tell the clinics and judges to lock their doors and buy AR15s.

Bastet127's photo
Fri 06/17/22 03:30 AM
Supreme Court justices already receive protection, the bill, which was signed into law yesterday, is to extend protection to their family. The hold up was because dems wanted to include protection for employees and other high court judges, which the GOP said nay to.

Bart's photo
Fri 06/17/22 05:27 AM
I’m glad he finally got around to it after two or three weeks of pelosi stalling it in the house. 27 dems voted against this bill because the assignation attempt was against a conservative judge. And we still haven’t heard a peep from any democrat condemning violence against conservatives.in fact we hear some democrat leaders calling for their followers to confront and harass anyone that disagrees with their agenda

Bastet127's photo
Fri 06/17/22 08:35 AM

I’m glad he finally got around to it after two or three weeks of pelosi stalling it in the house. 27 dems voted against this bill because the assignation attempt was against a conservative judge. And we still haven’t heard a peep from any democrat condemning violence against conservatives.in fact we hear some democrat leaders calling for their followers to confront and harass anyone that disagrees with their agenda


No one voted against protecting them, they wanted the protection expanded to other at-risk groups. Unless you have proof, stop putting words in others mouths. You post your opinion as if it’s truth and that’s just wrong.

As far as harassment goes, Pastor Mark Burns, a republican running for senate in SC, campaigned on the arrest and execution of people that support LGBTQ+ rights. He lost the recent primary, thank goodness. And trump is the king of inciting his followers, they tried to overthrow the government. When you get caught up in the whole republicans v democrats thing it can often lead you to look like a hypocrite. And yes, it goes both ways.

Bart's photo
Fri 06/17/22 09:54 AM


I’m glad he finally got around to it after two or three weeks of pelosi stalling it in the house. 27 dems voted against this bill because the assignation attempt was against a conservative judge. And we still haven’t heard a peep from any democrat condemning violence against conservatives.in fact we hear some democrat leaders calling for their followers to confront and harass anyone that disagrees with their agenda


No one voted against protecting them, they wanted the protection expanded to other at-risk groups. Unless you have proof, stop putting words in others mouths. You post your opinion as if it’s truth and that’s just wrong.

As far as harassment goes, Pastor Mark Burns, a republican running for senate in SC, campaigned on the arrest and execution of people that support LGBTQ+ rights. He lost the recent primary, thank goodness. And trump is the king of inciting his followers, they tried to overthrow the government. When you get caught up in the whole republicans v democrats thing it can often lead you to look like a hypocrite. And yes, it goes both ways.

Twenty seven house democrats voted against a bill that would expand protection for scotus and family’s . Just because you don’t here about it on the news outlets you listen to( sounds like a broken record) doesn’t mean it not true. If the assignation attempt would have been against a liberal justice, that’s all we would hear on the news about white supremacy killing our democracy, which is what we hear anyways. Hypocrisy does go both ways but the loudest voice of hypocrisy is by far the democrats because with them its a natural part of the way they conduct their lives.

Rock's photo
Fri 06/17/22 07:58 PM
Both Federal, and state law, protect the common loon.

Dems can feel safe in that knowledge.

Mr Good Guy's photo
Sat 06/18/22 07:34 AM

Both Federal, and state law, protect the common loon.

Dems can feel safe in that knowledge.
The Dems run around afraid if they don't have their "safe space" nearby and cry/get offended if you don't call them by their made up pronouns. Nothing will make them feel safe.

Bart's photo
Sat 06/18/22 01:02 PM


Both Federal, and state law, protect the common loon.

Dems can feel safe in that knowledge.
The Dems run around afraid if they don't have their "safe space" nearby and cry/get offended if you don't call them by their made up pronouns. Nothing will make them feel safe.

Next thing you know the schools will demand their students to be politically correct when talking about or to their school mates that may not be sure about their gender. We are talking about children that are confused about why their friend Bobby” all of the sudden wants to be “ Betty”… oh wait they are doing this , in Fairfax Va…They will label and punish a 9 year old for calling a gender confused kid “ he” if that kid wants to be a girl that day. This is Crazy. But it’s the liberal democrats way…. Instead of her or him or them or they when one’s not sure , how about referring to them as “ one of those” . That should cover you in all of those awkward situations.

Jesse's photo
Sat 06/18/22 04:16 PM
This is just the start, things are going to get really bad. And the "people" pulling the strings aren't public figures like biden....... At some point the general public is going to be forced to take matters into their own hands, we will miss the days that we were complaining about gas prices and genders........ The stuff on the news is just a distraction from the real story. The shots are the most important thing that needs to be stopped, and they're the reason that people are so ignorant/violent. I can give you a real life example of how bad they are. When you're out in public, look at the color of people's eyes. They are getting darker, some of them are literally pure black. Here's another example, ask alexa how the zombie apocalypse will happen.

Bob Just Bob's photo
Sat 06/18/22 04:47 PM
Abortion isn't any of the government's business any more than covid vaccines or drugs are.

Mr Good Guy's photo
Sat 06/18/22 07:25 PM



Both Federal, and state law, protect the common loon.

Dems can feel safe in that knowledge.
The Dems run around afraid if they don't have their "safe space" nearby and cry/get offended if you don't call them by their made up pronouns. Nothing will make them feel safe.

Next thing you know the schools will demand their students to be politically correct when talking about or to their school mates that may not be sure about their gender. We are talking about children that are confused about why their friend Bobby” all of the sudden wants to be “ Betty”… oh wait they are doing this , in Fairfax Va…They will label and punish a 9 year old for calling a gender confused kid “ he” if that kid wants to be a girl that day. This is Crazy. But it’s the liberal democrats way…. Instead of her or him or them or they when one’s not sure , how about referring to them as “ one of those” . That should cover you in all of those awkward situations.
"One of those", lol, I like it. Or maybe "it".

Bob Just Bob's photo
Sat 06/18/22 07:54 PM


I’m glad he finally got around to it after two or three weeks of pelosi stalling it in the house. 27 dems voted against this bill because the assignation attempt was against a conservative judge. And we still haven’t heard a peep from any democrat condemning violence against conservatives.in fact we hear some democrat leaders calling for their followers to confront and harass anyone that disagrees with their agenda


No one voted against protecting them, they wanted the protection expanded to other at-risk groups. Unless you have proof, stop putting words in others mouths. You post your opinion as if it’s truth and that’s just wrong.

As far as harassment goes, Pastor Mark Burns, a republican running for senate in SC, campaigned on the arrest and execution of people that support LGBTQ+ rights. He lost the recent primary, thank goodness. And trump is the king of inciting his followers, they tried to overthrow the government. When you get caught up in the whole republicans v democrats thing it can often lead you to look like a hypocrite. And yes, it goes both ways.


If that was an insurrection then why wasn't the Capitol burned to the ground? Why weren't any members of Congress publicly executed for violating our Constitution? You may want to ask Muammar Gaddafi what an insurrection actually is

Mortman's photo
Sun 06/19/22 09:48 AM

If that was an insurrection then why wasn't the Capitol burned to the ground? Why weren't any members of Congress publicly executed for violating our Constitution? You may want to ask Muammar Gaddafi what an insurrection actually is


Insurrection is just attempted violent overthrow of the government. In fact, if the insurrectionists were completely successful, there wouldn't have been any charges because they'd just install their own guys in place of the government.

Bart's photo
Sun 06/19/22 10:38 AM


If that was an insurrection then why wasn't the Capitol burned to the ground? Why weren't any members of Congress publicly executed for violating our Constitution? You may want to ask Muammar Gaddafi what an insurrection actually is


Insurrection is just attempted violent overthrow of the government. In fact, if the insurrectionists were completely successful, there wouldn't have been any charges because they'd just install their own guys in place of the government.

Hmmm, although nobody wants to live in a country that is so bad that it causes a insurrection, I wonder if this country would be in much better shape if it was a actual insurrection and successful on Jan. 6. I can’t imagine it being worse than what Joe Biden has brought us… just a thought.

Bob Just Bob's photo
Sun 06/19/22 08:06 PM


If that was an insurrection then why wasn't the Capitol burned to the ground? Why weren't any members of Congress publicly executed for violating our Constitution? You may want to ask Muammar Gaddafi what an insurrection actually is


Insurrection is just attempted violent overthrow of the government. In fact, if the insurrectionists were completely successful, there wouldn't have been any charges because they'd just install their own guys in place of the government.

Who the **** says we'll replace it? It's also our right to abolish government. Think that will be done peacefully? The State isnan inherently immoral institution that relies on force and coercion against otherwise peaceful people. Our right to liberty is violated daily. Insurrection and violent revolution are LONG overdue, but one shitty government isn't going to be replaced by another shitty government

Bob Just Bob's photo
Sun 06/19/22 08:06 PM


If that was an insurrection then why wasn't the Capitol burned to the ground? Why weren't any members of Congress publicly executed for violating our Constitution? You may want to ask Muammar Gaddafi what an insurrection actually is


Insurrection is just attempted violent overthrow of the government. In fact, if the insurrectionists were completely successful, there wouldn't have been any charges because they'd just install their own guys in place of the government.

Who the **** says we'll replace it? It's also our right to abolish government. Think that will be done peacefully? The State isnan inherently immoral institution that relies on force and coercion against otherwise peaceful people. Our right to liberty is violated daily. Insurrection and violent revolution are LONG overdue, but one shitty government isn't going to be replaced by another shitty government

Smartazzjohn's photo
Fri 06/24/22 10:16 AM
Laws passed by congress DON'T mean squat if it's not enforced and people breaking laws aren't punished.

The 18 U.S. Code 1507 reads: "Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both."

18 U.S. Code 1507 was written to protect not only judges but also court officers, jurors and witnesses from being intimidated.
How many protesters have been fined or arrested for protesting at the homes of Supreme Court justices??
If ANY administration, the DOJ or those in charge of enforcement pick and choose which laws to enforce there will be laws that DON'T mean squat.

Bob Just Bob's photo
Sat 06/25/22 07:31 PM

Laws passed by congress DON'T mean squat if it's not enforced and people breaking laws aren't punished.

The 18 U.S. Code 1507 reads: "Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both."

18 U.S. Code 1507 was written to protect not only judges but also court officers, jurors and witnesses from being intimidated.
How many protesters have been fined or arrested for protesting at the homes of Supreme Court justices??
If ANY administration, the DOJ or those in charge of enforcement pick and choose which laws to enforce there will be laws that DON'T mean squat.

Hahaha. 18 USC §2384 also says Sedition is a federal crime but our Declaration of Independence says it's our RIGHT when government is destructive to the natural rights of man. I could give a **** less about 18 USC or any other United States Code.