Being on team SCOTUS means not having to tell the truth under oath.

[Admin.]

Morton's has been flooded with phone calls and fake reservations after it said Brett Kavanaugh had a 'right' to 'eat dinner' without protestors gathering outside

"I'll guess your weight for a beer?"

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

^^^Click this yahoo link for informative video, unless you're a paranoid trump douche nozzle.

 

[Dove]

Okay so where did "team SCOTUS" commit perjury?

 

[Seamajor]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

This is gonna change your life Dovey. You’ll get used to it.

 

[Seamajor]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The fat fucker should be deported

 

[Seamajor]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Seamajor]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Im extremely proud to be one of these people

 

[Seamajor]

Okay so where did "team SCOTUS" commit perjury?

Like every time he opens his mouth. Duh

 

[Dove]

I'm completely confused.

So who is "team SCOTUS" and what lie was told under oath?

This article has nothing to do with Jan 6th or Trump so how is this connection being made?

This is always what happens. Admin will say some shit that makes NO sense whatsoever and when he is asked what he is talking about he never clarifies.

This story is about protesters harrassing diners at a restaurant because Kavanaugh was present. So where in thos story is there is a "team SCOTUS"? And where did anyone lie under oath here?

 

[LotusBud]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The fat fucker should be deported

Just don't send him here.

 

[Admin.]

I'm completely confused.

So who is "team SCOTUS" and what lie was told under oath?

This article has nothing to do with Jan 6th or Trump so how is this connection being made?

This is always what happens. Admin will say some shit that makes NO sense whatsoever and when he is asked what he is talking about he never clarifies.

This story is about protesters harrassing diners at a restaurant because Kavanaugh was present. So where in thos story is there is a "team SCOTUS"? And where did anyone lie under oath here?

Go back to the op and follow the instructions.

 

[Dove]

I'm completely confused.

So who is "team SCOTUS" and what lie was told under oath?

This article has nothing to do with Jan 6th or Trump so how is this connection being made?

This is always what happens. Admin will say some shit that makes NO sense whatsoever and when he is asked what he is talking about he never clarifies.

This story is about protesters harrassing diners at a restaurant because Kavanaugh was present. So where in thos story is there is a "team SCOTUS"? And where did anyone lie under oath here?

Go back to the op and follow the instructions.

Was there some directive to eat shrooms first that I missed?

 

[Admin.]

I'm completely confused.

So who is "team SCOTUS" and what lie was told under oath?

This article has nothing to do with Jan 6th or Trump so how is this connection being made?

This is always what happens. Admin will say some shit that makes NO sense whatsoever and when he is asked what he is talking about he never clarifies.

This story is about protesters harrassing diners at a restaurant because Kavanaugh was present. So where in thos story is there is a "team SCOTUS"? And where did anyone lie under oath here?

Go back to the op and follow the instructions.

Was there some directive to eat shrooms first that I missed?

Just film of every single Republican SCOTUS Nominee lying to the Senate Committees about Roe V. Wade being "Settled Law" and "Established Precedent" The video is inside that yahoo link, i know it's difficult but you have to "click" that link to open it up to be able to view it's content.

 

[Seamajor]

I'm completely confused.

So who is "team SCOTUS" and what lie was told under oath?

This article has nothing to do with Jan 6th or Trump so how is this connection being made?

This is always what happens. Admin will say some shit that makes NO sense whatsoever and when he is asked what he is talking about he never clarifies.

This story is about protesters harrassing diners at a restaurant because Kavanaugh was present. So where in thos story is there is a "team SCOTUS"? And where did anyone lie under oath here?

Go back to the op and follow the instructions.

Was there some directive to eat shrooms first that I missed?

Best to understand these facts STRAIGHT

 

[Dove]

Havent you guys been told before that Roe was not ever a law?

So you guys are mad that a case challanged Roe and the SCOTUS had to do its job?

So here we are again where you guys view bodies of government as tools to serve your politcal stances that the people shouldnt have a say in?

 

[Seamajor]

Of course not, for the last 50 years. As I mentioned, one needs to understand these facts straight.

 

[Reggie_Essent]

Havent you guys been told before that Roe was not ever a law?

So you guys are mad that a case challanged Roe and the SCOTUS had to do its job?

So here we are again where you guys view bodies of government as tools to serve your politcal stances that the people shouldnt have a say in?

They're Lefties, Dove. You have to talk to them like they are slightly retarded children. Take Seamajor Slopey, for instance. If you post words with too many syllables he gets confused and posts Occupy Democrat cartoons.

 

[Dove]

Of course not, for the last 50 years. As I mentioned, one needs to understand these facts straight.

I've been watching people explain this for years. It was never a law. The SCOTUS does not legislate.

 

[LotusBud]

Of course not, for the last 50 years. As I mentioned, one needs to understand these facts straight.

I've been watching people explain this for years. It was never a law. The SCOTUS does not legislate.

Scotus does not legislate, but their decisions become law. When SCOTUS interprets the law, their decisions ultimately make law. And in case you didn't notice, it's highly fucking partisan, especially with the CON appointees. They do very little to protect the rights of the people. They're there to protect the interests of corporations, the wealthy, and the Party. Don't confuse the reality with the rhetoric. SMH.

 

[Reggie_Essent]

Of course not, for the last 50 years. As I mentioned, one needs to understand these facts straight.

I've been watching people explain this for years. It was never a law. The SCOTUS does not legislate.

Scotus does not legislate, but their decisions become law. When SCOTUS interprets the law, their decisions ultimately make law. And in case you didn't notice, it's highly fucking partisan, especially with the CON appointees. They do very little to protect the rights of the people. They're there to protect the interests of corporations, the wealthy, and the Party. Don't confuse the reality with the rhetoric. SMH.

Er, you did go to college, right? I don't see how you could so woefully "misinterpret" the role and the one job the Supreme Court has ... but then you are a Leftie and you people are notorious for your intellectual dishonesty and complete lack of standards.

 

[LotusBud]

Of course not, for the last 50 years. As I mentioned, one needs to understand these facts straight.

I've been watching people explain this for years. It was never a law. The SCOTUS does not legislate.

Scotus does not legislate, but their decisions become law. When SCOTUS interprets the law, their decisions ultimately make law. And in case you didn't notice, it's highly fucking partisan, especially with the CON appointees. They do very little to protect the rights of the people. They're there to protect the interests of corporations, the wealthy, and the Party. Don't confuse the reality with the rhetoric. SMH.

Er, you did go to college, right? I don't see how you could so woefully "misinterpret" the role and the one job the Supreme Court has ... but then I am a Rightie and I and my people people are notorious for our intellectual dishonesty and complete lack of standards.

FAYW

 

[Admin.]

Of course not, for the last 50 years. As I mentioned, one needs to understand these facts straight.

I've been watching people explain this for years. It was never a law. The SCOTUS does not legislate.

Scotus does not legislate, but their decisions become law. When SCOTUS interprets the law, their decisions ultimately make law. And in case you didn't notice, it's highly fucking partisan, especially with the CON appointees. They do very little to protect the rights of the people. They're there to protect the interests of corporations, the wealthy, and the Party. Don't confuse the reality with the rhetoric. SMH.

Er, you did go to college, right? I don't see how you could so woefully "misinterpret" the role and the one job the Supreme Court has ... but then I am a Rightie and I and my people people are notorious for our intellectual dishonesty and complete lack of standards.

FAYW

/thread Lotus

 

[Reggie_Essent]

Of course not, for the last 50 years. As I mentioned, one needs to understand these facts straight.

I've been watching people explain this for years. It was never a law. The SCOTUS does not legislate.

Scotus does not legislate, but their decisions become law. When SCOTUS interprets the law, their decisions ultimately make law. And in case you didn't notice, it's highly fucking partisan, especially with the CON appointees. They do very little to protect the rights of the people. They're there to protect the interests of corporations, the wealthy, and the Party. Don't confuse the reality with the rhetoric. SMH.

Er, you did go to college, right? I don't see how you could so woefully "misinterpret" the role and the one job the Supreme Court has ... but then I am a Rightie and I and my people people are notorious for our intellectual dishonesty and complete lack of standards.

FAYW

/thread Lotus

No. That would be "cheap dodge" and a dismount score of 0.3 for Lotus.

 

[Admin.]

Of course not, for the last 50 years. As I mentioned, one needs to understand these facts straight.

I've been watching people explain this for years. It was never a law. The SCOTUS does not legislate.

Scotus does not legislate, but their decisions become law. When SCOTUS interprets the law, their decisions ultimately make law. And in case you didn't notice, it's highly fucking partisan, especially with the CON appointees. They do very little to protect the rights of the people. They're there to protect the interests of corporations, the wealthy, and the Party. Don't confuse the reality with the rhetoric. SMH.

Er, you did go to college, right? I don't see how you could so woefully "misinterpret" the role and the one job the Supreme Court has ... but then I am a Rightie and I and my people people are notorious for our intellectual dishonesty and complete lack of standards.

FAYW

/thread Lotus

No. That would be "cheap dodge" and a dismount score of 0.3 for Lotus.

cheap dodge* Why Ragie Astounded, you sound positively dreary, turn that frown upside down, and choose happy!

 

[LotusBud]

Of course not, for the last 50 years. As I mentioned, one needs to understand these facts straight.

I've been watching people explain this for years. It was never a law. The SCOTUS does not legislate.

Scotus does not legislate, but their decisions become law. When SCOTUS interprets the law, their decisions ultimately make law. And in case you didn't notice, it's highly fucking partisan, especially with the CON appointees. They do very little to protect the rights of the people. They're there to protect the interests of corporations, the wealthy, and the Party. Don't confuse the reality with the rhetoric. SMH.

Er, you did go to college, right? I don't see how you could so woefully "misinterpret" the role and the one job the Supreme Court has ... but then I am a Rightie and I and my people people are notorious for our intellectual dishonesty and complete lack of standards.

FAYW

/thread Lotus

No. That would be "cheap dodge" and a dismount score of 0.3 for Lotus.

LMAO. Yeah, right. Dumbass Rightie.

 

[Dove]

Of course not, for the last 50 years. As I mentioned, one needs to understand these facts straight.

I've been watching people explain this for years. It was never a law. The SCOTUS does not legislate.

Scotus does not legislate, but their decisions become law. When SCOTUS interprets the law, their decisions ultimately make law. And in case you didn't notice, it's highly fucking partisan, especially with the CON appointees. They do very little to protect the rights of the people. They're there to protect the interests of corporations, the wealthy, and the Party. Don't confuse the reality with the rhetoric. SMH.

Er, you did go to college, right? I don't see how you could so woefully "misinterpret" the role and the one job the Supreme Court has ... but then I am a Rightie and I and my people people are notorious for our intellectual dishonesty and complete lack of standards.

FAYW

/thread Lotus

No. That would be "cheap dodge" and a dismount score of 0.3 for Lotus.

It's completely useless trying to argue with people who believe they are correct and "educated".

So I'm fine to let them create bullshit that was never true while ranting that the SCOTUS should be a left wing tool to legislate left wing values and force them on whole country. Of it's not used the way THEY want it its "partisan".

I'm sure none of them have even read Roe. They are gonna believe it was some federal law no matter how wrong they are. And no one can tell them shit.

Such an ironic post from Lotus. The lefties offer nothing BUT hyper partisan rhetoric and they think that's normal....like that's the standard. Its so backwards and twisted.

 

[Reggie_Essent]

Of course not, for the last 50 years. As I mentioned, one needs to understand these facts straight.

I've been watching people explain this for years. It was never a law. The SCOTUS does not legislate.

Scotus does not legislate, but their decisions become law. When SCOTUS interprets the law, their decisions ultimately make law. And in case you didn't notice, it's highly fucking partisan, especially with the CON appointees. They do very little to protect the rights of the people. They're there to protect the interests of corporations, the wealthy, and the Party. Don't confuse the reality with the rhetoric. SMH.

Er, you did go to college, right? I don't see how you could so woefully "misinterpret" the role and the one job the Supreme Court has ... but then I am a Rightie and I and my people people are notorious for our intellectual dishonesty and complete lack of standards.

FAYW

/thread Lotus

No. That would be "cheap dodge" and a dismount score of 0.3 for Lotus.

It's completely useless trying to argue with people who believe they are correct and "educated".

So I'm fine to let them create bullshit that was never true while ranting that the SCOTUS should be a left wing tool to legislate left wing values and force them on whole country. Of it's not used the way THEY want it its "partisan".

I'm sure none of them have even read Roe. They are gonna believe it was some federal law no matter how wrong they are. And no one can tell them shit.

Such an ironic post from Lotus. The lefties offer nothing BUT hyper partisan rhetoric and they think that's normal....like that's the standard. Its so backwards and twisted.

Well, yes, all that is true. What I find interesting is that not so long ago -- before the the draft of the Court decision was even leaked, our Proggie friends kept going on and on about "saving our Democracy" because, well, Trump. Yet now, all of a sudden, when the Court has returned the issue of Abortion to the States for the People to decide through actual direct democracy, suddenly our Proggie friends don't like Democracy so much.

It can be very confusing until you realize that Leftists are simply mentally ill, have no standards besides double-standards and are actually able to believe two contradictory things at the same time such as "our Democracy is in danger except when too much democracy gets in the way of our narrative."

 

[Seamajor]

Havent you guys been told before that Roe was not ever a law?

So you guys are mad that a case challanged Roe and the SCOTUS had to do its job?

So here we are again where you guys view bodies of government as tools to serve your politcal stances that the people shouldnt have a say in?

They're Lefties, Dove. You have to talk to them like they are slightly retarded children. Take Seamajor Slopey, for instance. If you post words with too many syllables he gets confused and posts Occupy Democrat cartoons.

Compared to your interest in raping women, I’m pure, you sick fucker. Just like Your hero, fatso

 

[Dove]

Of course not, for the last 50 years. As I mentioned, one needs to understand these facts straight.

I've been watching people explain this for years. It was never a law. The SCOTUS does not legislate.

Scotus does not legislate, but their decisions become law. When SCOTUS interprets the law, their decisions ultimately make law. And in case you didn't notice, it's highly fucking partisan, especially with the CON appointees. They do very little to protect the rights of the people. They're there to protect the interests of corporations, the wealthy, and the Party. Don't confuse the reality with the rhetoric. SMH.

Er, you did go to college, right? I don't see how you could so woefully "misinterpret" the role and the one job the Supreme Court has ... but then I am a Rightie and I and my people people are notorious for our intellectual dishonesty and complete lack of standards.

FAYW

/thread Lotus

No. That would be "cheap dodge" and a dismount score of 0.3 for Lotus.

It's completely useless trying to argue with people who believe they are correct and "educated".

So I'm fine to let them create bullshit that was never true while ranting that the SCOTUS should be a left wing tool to legislate left wing values and force them on whole country. Of it's not used the way THEY want it its "partisan".

I'm sure none of them have even read Roe. They are gonna believe it was some federal law no matter how wrong they are. And no one can tell them shit.

Such an ironic post from Lotus. The lefties offer nothing BUT hyper partisan rhetoric and they think that's normal....like that's the standard. Its so backwards and twisted.

Well, yes, all that is true. What I find interesting is that not so long ago -- before the the draft of the Court decision was even leaked, our Proggie friends kept going on and on about "saving our Democracy" because, well, Trump. Yet now, all of a sudden, when the Court has returned the issue of Abortion to the States for the People to decide through actual direct democracy, suddenly our Proggie friends don't like Democracy so much.

It can be very confusing until you realize that Leftists are simply mentally ill, have no standards besides double-standards and are actually able to believe two contradictory things at the same time such as "our Democracy is in danger except when too much democracy gets in the way of our narrative."

Whenever they say "democracy" they mean "OUR power".

They dont mean actual democracy. Anytime you hear a dem or prog say "democracy" just insert "our contol" and it make so much more sense. That is what they are saying.

Their control/power is in danger. BY democracy.

They rely on this tactic where issues are twisted and heavy emotional and loaded language is used. They dont try to persued with facts. They use shaming and smears.

 

[Seamajor]

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Fatso wouldn’t know the truth if it kicked him in his fat gut

 

[Admin.]