- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Trump: “The traitors that told the military to disobey my orders should be in jail”
Posted on 11/23/25 at 4:52 pm to NC_Tigah
Posted on 11/23/25 at 4:52 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Every single one
Why lie?
Again, the specific language at issue it this:
quote:
"You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution,"
Which of those examples has a clear, lawful message comparable to that one?
quote:
As a non-lawyer, I can cite 50 or 60 more cases EASILY.
Again, you can cite as many irrelevant cases as you want. It won't change things or support your argument.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 4:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:You are better than that.
irrelevant examples
You did not read any of them.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 4:54 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
You are better than that.
You did not read any of them.
I can read the holdings and know the words being analyzed are not anything like this:
quote:
"You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution,"
Because that is clear and unequivocal. No secondary interpretation needed like the reasoning in the cases you linked.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 4:55 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:I'm sure you "can." So do it.
I can read the holdings
Posted on 11/23/25 at 4:58 pm to NC_Tigah
You're doing the medical equivalent of asking me to give 7 physicals of cadavers who coded 3 hours prior, to ensure they're dead.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:04 pm to SlowFlowPro
I used Gemini to get the applicable language, so if it's wrong, that's your fault.
Elonis:
Not applicable or relevant
VA v. Black
Cross burning. Not applicable or relevant
Jefferies
Not applicable or relevant
Mafia cases: required a long-time study and expert testimony of agents to decode inapplicable language like this
Hanse
Fraudulent statement that was not in line with the law. Not applicable or relevant.
Weimert
Again, untruthful and fraudulent. Not applicable to a lawful statement
Abu Ali
Like the mob cases, relied on long-standing analysis and experts. Also the language was only unlawful, just interpreted as unlawful. There was no lawful and clear equivocation at issue.
Jackson
So literally NONE of these are comparable to this
Elonis:
quote:
There’s one way to love you but a thousand ways to kill you. I’m not going to rest until your body is a mess, soaked in blood and dying from all the little cuts.
Not applicable or relevant
VA v. Black
Cross burning. Not applicable or relevant
Jefferies
quote:
Take my child and I'll take your life... I guarantee you, if you don't stop, I'll kill you.
Not applicable or relevant
Mafia cases: required a long-time study and expert testimony of agents to decode inapplicable language like this
quote:
Gotti: Referring to a victim who needed to be silenced: "We're gonna have to isolate him" or "create a severed relationship."
Gigante ("The Chin"): He rarely spoke on the phone, but when he did, he used phrases like "Do the work" or simply rubbed his chin to order a hit.
Hanse
quote:
Hansen told victims that if they paid him for adoption, "Immigration cannot touch you."
Fraudulent statement that was not in line with the law. Not applicable or relevant.
Weimert
quote:
Weimert created the impression that: "The seller wants me to have a piece of the deal." (When, in fact, the seller didn't care).
Again, untruthful and fraudulent. Not applicable to a lawful statement
Abu Ali
quote:
"Getting married" = Participating in a martyrdom operation/bombing.
"Playing soccer" = Training for jihad.
"Buying books" = Obtaining weapons or funding.
Like the mob cases, relied on long-standing analysis and experts. Also the language was only unlawful, just interpreted as unlawful. There was no lawful and clear equivocation at issue.
Jackson
quote:
"You know what happens if you talk." (Or variations such as "I'd hate to see something happen to you."
So literally NONE of these are comparable to this
quote:
"You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution,"
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:05 pm to SlowFlowPro
PASTE #2
quote:
Who has been prosecuted for sedition involving only interpretation when the statement also included clear language that specifically addressed only unlawful and illegal behavior?
This post was edited on 11/23/25 at 5:06 pm
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:06 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:Stay away from medical analogies. They won't serve well.
You're doing the medical equivalent of asking me to give 7 physicals of cadavers who coded 3 hours prior, to ensure they're dead.
I'm simply telling you,
I can cite a litany of legal examples.
Rebut two or three of the 50 or so of your choice.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:07 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
I can cite a litany of legal examples.
And like I've told you twice, you can cite as many irrelevant examples as you want. They have no value to the discussion.
I'm waiting for the first relevant legal example.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:08 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
so if it's wrong, that's your fault.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:15 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:You have no clue as to WTF those examples even are. Yours is an extraordinarily lazy retort and noted in this instance.
And like I've told you twice, you can cite as many irrelevant examples as you want.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:16 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
You have no clue as to WTF those examples even are.
I literally went through them one by one
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:17 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The implication seems to be an angle you're pushing that they did not directly
The press release was pointless without the false implication.
For you to act like the implication isn’t obvious is right on point though.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:18 pm to djsdawg
quote:
The press release was pointless without the false implication.
Not pointless. See: the OP in this thread.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:22 pm to SlowFlowPro
4obtuseberg still putting in work.
Others are melting
Not slowfanipro
Others are melting
Not slowfanipro
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:25 pm to djsdawg
quote:
For you to act like the implication isn’t obvious
Its not, to anyone objective.
Your influencers are lying to you again.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:25 pm to Jbird
I'm watching the Saints game and posting between plays.
I don't know how you'd interpret anything I said as melting
I don't know how you'd interpret anything I said as melting
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:26 pm to SlowFlowPro
Yes it was and Slotkin dug a deeper hole with a Nuremberg reference, as did Crow with a pack of BS.
Law Barbie needs to charge them because they need to suffer consequences for what they have dome, if nothing else be forced to defend themselves in court.
Law Barbie needs to charge them because they need to suffer consequences for what they have dome, if nothing else be forced to defend themselves in court.
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:29 pm to antibarner
quote:
Law Barbie needs to charge them
The DOJ has had a bad enough week
Why do you want to make them reach total clown show status?
Why play into the "MAGA stupidity" trope and give them such an easy win?
quote:
because they need to suffer consequences for what they have dome,
They will emerge victorious and empowered and the admin will look like absolute irrational-emotional retards. Why do you think that's a good result?
I will never understand why so many MAGA types willingly support suicide politically-rhetorically like your post. Just self-sabotage constantly for emotional reacts
This post was edited on 11/23/25 at 5:30 pm
Posted on 11/23/25 at 5:43 pm to SlowFlowPro
Same as you claiming I melted 4boasberg.
Popular
Back to top



0





