I seem to recall bible verses speaking pretty specifically against faith as a spectacle, a weapon to divide or to exacerbate prejudice. But then, these cunts don't read.... Aetius....maybe, but that's not exactly how the Patriot Act was written, now was it? They can say a bunch of whacky shit on social media, but like...the entire security apparatus can now be keyed on fringe elements that have ever more fleeting and tenuous claims to immunity, Constitutional protections and better judgement. This results in Florida Man's bottle rocket-esque tenure in politics, but it also can have some wild repercussions on massive political machinery. Literally, you can get on the no-fly list for far less than this bullshit. I agree, a lot of this is getting ahead of impending court cases that are so numerous they can't hope to win/escape them all. That being said....the laws for this sort of shit are pretty stark. You could literally sue a donor for giving to an organization claiming to be a terrorist, and there are some rules around asset seizure, etc that could come into play here. If they claim to be domestic terrorists, they will reap some pretty scary shit. Like, the whistleblower shit here is pretty neat and clean: "Hi, FBI, I work for MyPillow and my CEO just gave millions of dollars to an organization claiming to be a domestic terrorist organization." "We know, ma'am, you're the fifth caller today. We're investigating it already." Some of these departments cannot refuse to investigate this sort of shit, by law. The establishment GOP will be glad to see them go, and will likely help flush them away. The Biden administration and the Democrats was just handed an enormous gift in the form of a major American political operation claiming to be domestic terrorists, basically taunting the powers that be to investigate them. We'd all suffer if they forego the opportunity.
Okay, lets get a grip here. Do you really think they're self-identifying as terrorists or is it a more reasonable assumption that it's some idiotic tongue-in-cheek nonsense the way Hilary tried to own the whole "nasty woman" thing in 2016?
It's all idiotic nonsense. However, some of that has consequences. I've seen two things emerge from CPAC: MGT's blowie/prayer stunt and that. I dunno where the average conservative voter is these days, but I have to assume without any additional context, they don't resonate strongly with either of those things. I would imagine the average American in general is leaning away from supporting Jan 6. traitors, Trump, etc. after the hearings. This feels like goading Merrick Garland, and some of the other investigative bodies. The sad part is, the data bears that the most likely and persistent terrorist threat is radical, right-wing, nationalists, depending on how you classify terrorist (ie, were the Charleston or Vegas mass shootings politically motivated or not). It's like when 90's rappers constantly got arrested or investigated: yes, bitch, you told us, but you also fit 100% of the criteria we're looking for, and made it stupidly easy. The key thing here is not a lot of due process in the Patriot Act, and these are just the kind of people who would talk themselves into prison. If you wanted to turn your persecution fetish into something real, what would you do differently?
I return to noted political theorist Pete Davidson who once said "It was just a joke, a serious joke. You know, like when you're joking, but you mean it?"
I have no idea; I don't have a persecution fetish. But if I did, probably go out and protest like everyone else who does?
You're going to take political commentary from the guy who voluntarily stopped fucking Kim Kardashian?
I wonder how the Biden admin honestly felt about Pelosi’s Taiwan trip? I don’t even remember what the impetus to do that was. Not that China can actually do anything about it or even take over Taiwan for that matter, but it must have pissed Blinken off.
Evidently, it was in relation to the classified documents he stole on the way out and took back to Florida. The national archives wasn’t to thrilled with it.
That seems like the quickest way in the door, but I can't imagine Garland would sign off on that warrant if they weren't ready to drop a whole other ton of bricks. If not, that would be a huge tactical error by the DOJ.
Well, Garland's track record this presidency doesn't look too good, so it wouldn't be the first time someone in this administration completely shit the bed...
Does anybody here think that the FBI would act on a no knock search warrant on a former president of the United States without something absolutely concrete? Also, the FBI is being run by a Trump appointee.
I get that we're all a bit inured to it at this point, but we should really take a step back and recognize how disturbing it is that so many elected and prominent Republicans are openly claiming that a former President should not be subject to the law, and that the Department of Justice and/or the FBI should be completely dissolved in order to ensure that the law cannot be enforced on said former President. Just open opposition to fundamental precepts of the country.