@continentaldivide.bsky.social
OK, hang on...The defendant was convicted and sentenced and now he's going in the slam. That is the rule of law in action. What Rubio means is that the if the law can send a person like him to prison, the rule must be wrong--and he'll be working to change it. That is the rule of law broken down.
September 18, 2025 at 12:57 AM
OK, hang on...The defendant was convicted and sentenced and now he's going in the slam. That is the rule of law in action. What Rubio means is that the if the law can send a person like him to prison, the rule must be wrong--and he'll be working to change it. That is the rule of law broken down.
That's not going to be allowed in US schools. DEI historical agricultural economics.
September 17, 2025 at 10:25 PM
That's not going to be allowed in US schools. DEI historical agricultural economics.
If they win one of these and jail an innocent person who fits their hate profile and has authority, like Cook or James, they'll do it for everybody. On the other hand, if honest authorities succeed in jailing one of the administration officials who are criming their asses off, they'll back off.
September 17, 2025 at 10:23 PM
If they win one of these and jail an innocent person who fits their hate profile and has authority, like Cook or James, they'll do it for everybody. On the other hand, if honest authorities succeed in jailing one of the administration officials who are criming their asses off, they'll back off.
wait...James AND Cook? Who's next, Beyonce?
September 17, 2025 at 10:21 PM
wait...James AND Cook? Who's next, Beyonce?
Several GOP representatives have been injured and one has died from boos.
September 17, 2025 at 6:18 PM
Several GOP representatives have been injured and one has died from boos.
It's because the photons of that particular projection left a toxic black slime on the stones.
September 17, 2025 at 6:17 PM
It's because the photons of that particular projection left a toxic black slime on the stones.
We need a mutually agreed authority that arbitrates what truth is and which statements are truthful and which are not. Then we can ostracize the people who habitually fail that arbitration, creating a storng public incentive to be truthful.
Mullin's kids are experiencing the exat opposite proess.
Mullin's kids are experiencing the exat opposite proess.
September 17, 2025 at 6:13 PM
We need a mutually agreed authority that arbitrates what truth is and which statements are truthful and which are not. Then we can ostracize the people who habitually fail that arbitration, creating a storng public incentive to be truthful.
Mullin's kids are experiencing the exat opposite proess.
Mullin's kids are experiencing the exat opposite proess.
Loomer is like a Musk chatbot programmed to foam at the mouth.
September 17, 2025 at 6:08 PM
Loomer is like a Musk chatbot programmed to foam at the mouth.
Sophists like CK know to use that transitive property in a syllogism with the premise slipped in early so it's had to return to and dispute.
All birds can fly. Or, more disguised:
Birds can fly.
Penguins can't fly. Penguins are birds.
Penguins aren't birds. Penguins can fly.
All birds can fly. Or, more disguised:
Birds can fly.
Penguins can't fly. Penguins are birds.
Penguins aren't birds. Penguins can fly.
September 17, 2025 at 6:06 PM
Sophists like CK know to use that transitive property in a syllogism with the premise slipped in early so it's had to return to and dispute.
All birds can fly. Or, more disguised:
Birds can fly.
Penguins can't fly. Penguins are birds.
Penguins aren't birds. Penguins can fly.
All birds can fly. Or, more disguised:
Birds can fly.
Penguins can't fly. Penguins are birds.
Penguins aren't birds. Penguins can fly.
I know he was going for the rhetorical question--black-belt arguing there, dude--but in fact it IS pure happenstance. We know this because the VP's schedule is not published in advance, to make it harder for people to accost him with words or, perhaps, drop a couch on him from an upper floor.
September 17, 2025 at 6:00 PM
I know he was going for the rhetorical question--black-belt arguing there, dude--but in fact it IS pure happenstance. We know this because the VP's schedule is not published in advance, to make it harder for people to accost him with words or, perhaps, drop a couch on him from an upper floor.
That may be an amazing lawyer in the photo but it looks to me like somebody who is holding her breath until the judge decides in her favor.
September 17, 2025 at 5:54 PM
That may be an amazing lawyer in the photo but it looks to me like somebody who is holding her breath until the judge decides in her favor.
DOGBERRY One word more, honest neighbors. I pray
you watch about Signior Leonato’s door, for the
wedding being there tomorrow, there is a great coil
tonight. Adieu, be vigitant, I beseech you.
you watch about Signior Leonato’s door, for the
wedding being there tomorrow, there is a great coil
tonight. Adieu, be vigitant, I beseech you.
September 17, 2025 at 5:47 PM
DOGBERRY One word more, honest neighbors. I pray
you watch about Signior Leonato’s door, for the
wedding being there tomorrow, there is a great coil
tonight. Adieu, be vigitant, I beseech you.
you watch about Signior Leonato’s door, for the
wedding being there tomorrow, there is a great coil
tonight. Adieu, be vigitant, I beseech you.
Yes, it's true, but a lot of rifles that aren't 'assault rifles' fire the same ammunition with the same effect on fragile humans.
Though banning the recognizable and already hated black rifle is a good political choice. If you're going to ban something.
Though banning the recognizable and already hated black rifle is a good political choice. If you're going to ban something.
September 17, 2025 at 5:44 PM
Yes, it's true, but a lot of rifles that aren't 'assault rifles' fire the same ammunition with the same effect on fragile humans.
Though banning the recognizable and already hated black rifle is a good political choice. If you're going to ban something.
Though banning the recognizable and already hated black rifle is a good political choice. If you're going to ban something.
Does that mean all those people worked all those years for wages? Because I smell a lawsuit.
September 17, 2025 at 5:39 PM
Does that mean all those people worked all those years for wages? Because I smell a lawsuit.
As I have always thought, our president has a window in his ear.
September 17, 2025 at 5:38 PM
As I have always thought, our president has a window in his ear.
"I was, however, instructed to wear my glasses on my head like a dork."
September 17, 2025 at 5:37 PM
"I was, however, instructed to wear my glasses on my head like a dork."
Starting 5 is not impressive. I'll take the big guy.
September 17, 2025 at 5:35 PM
Starting 5 is not impressive. I'll take the big guy.
not only that but three of them are taller than our Donny.
September 17, 2025 at 5:33 PM
not only that but three of them are taller than our Donny.
I basefully hate Trump in a ranged way and can prove it in open court.
September 17, 2025 at 3:58 AM
I basefully hate Trump in a ranged way and can prove it in open court.
Sure not going to choose the restaurant where he is. Would rather choose the restaurant where botulism is. And if it turns out he is there? I’m going to be pissed, because my dinner is ruined and I will feel like a wimp if I miss the chance to call him a fascist douche. Is that a RICO? Have at it.
September 17, 2025 at 3:54 AM
Sure not going to choose the restaurant where he is. Would rather choose the restaurant where botulism is. And if it turns out he is there? I’m going to be pissed, because my dinner is ruined and I will feel like a wimp if I miss the chance to call him a fascist douche. Is that a RICO? Have at it.
September 17, 2025 at 3:46 AM
He will be back.
September 16, 2025 at 8:45 PM
He will be back.
Same for Minnesota assassin. You don’t get tweetage but you also don’t wreck your case.
September 16, 2025 at 8:44 PM
Same for Minnesota assassin. You don’t get tweetage but you also don’t wreck your case.
That guy ain't hon.
September 16, 2025 at 5:21 PM
That guy ain't hon.