I know you were calling on the meme and this isn't against you, but I have to say it's anything BUT bold. It's a coward's strategy.

"More wrong and harder" is the weak way out of having a critical light shone on one's choices. To most of us it's no big deal, but to these guys -- who know far better than we do the truth of what they are doing -- it's ego death and frightening as hell.

Is it easier to stand up and take responsibility for all the evil you have done, or to pull a bit of metal on the gun you're holding a fraction of an inch, in order to kill an unarmed person trying desperately to go on living when you confront them with your own will and means to murder them, knowing that afterward your fellow ICE sociopaths will high-five you like it's something to be proud of?

For those of us with working consciences, that question only gets answered one way.

For the rest, that's a personal profile of every single serving member of ICE. They already know they're not "defending" jack shit and that immigrants are no danger at all. If they were, ICE would not be shooting at them, because ICE goons regularly run from conflict, as Tom Homan is demonstrating right now, and as they all prove when people whip out cameras and start shouting loud enough.

These sociopaths RUN from accountability. They signed up for the opportunity to get paid to play The Most Dangerous Game all day every day, they're glad to do it, and the ones who have any shred of conscience/humanity left in themselves are being eaten alive by it, as they should be.

And Tom Homan is upset that people who do have working consciences are calling bullshit on the whole thing. He's so scared of real accountability that he has equated words with physical danger, lol.

That's not bold. That's weakness. A fucking snowflake in a skin suit who could never personally bear even a fraction of the suffering he readily metes out to others.

Now that's what I call a bold strategy.

"Let's see how that plays out for 'em, Cotton!"

I'm pretty sure by "they" he meant Democrats.

I mean we have to acknolwedge that Rubio and Homan did not act back then the way they do now. A Christian Nationalist (Nat-C) movement electing a fascist president has a way of bringing the latent bigot out of people that may have been decent at suppressing it in the past.

People across this nation have been experiencing that on a personal level with their family/friends for the last decade.

So is it just required to blame democrats for everything republicans do on your instance? You all never seem to miss an opportunity to criticize and blame Dems. Never mention republicans though. Fishy, that.

No, it's just a crime by the letter of the law. The problem is that nobody will enforce it.

It was so disgusting seeing the """"left leaning"""" news networks sit there giving softball interviews to trump, because otherwise they'd seem biased! You can't just sit there talking about the crimes the presidential candidate is committing, that's too partisan...???????

They gotta go too

Republicans and Democrats, coworkers. I wonder what the watercooler talk is like.

how many children do you bleed out into your bath every night?

Reach across the aisle©

Yup.

At this point I won't even feel satisfied with life behind bars.

If you betray a nation (330 million+ people) you get tried and executed. Period. This nation has done it before for FAR less egregious forms of treason than what we've seen over the last 10 years.

I'm aware

It's maddening. At least around my part of the country, the 250th anniversary Independence Day celebrations were fairly muted. It's like people know it in their bones. But you're right, "America" is over, and most of us have realized it yet.

I get your tangent. Its like. You think your going to valhalla dude. Pretti and goode will go to valhalla. You not so much.

If we're honest, that was always painfully obvious.

You know what, let's just go to the source:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

One whole sentence.

Which is why there's an entire field of U.S. law called constitutional law, and why the Supreme Court's primary role is to decide constitutional questions.

That also means we can infer the Constitution doesn't specify every type of weapon people should be allowed to own. For example, it obviously doesn't say that citizens should be able to possess intercontinental ballistic missiles.

What it does mention is "a well-regulated militia." I think that's the more important part of the Second Amendment, even though most people focus almost exclusively on "the right to keep and bear arms."

A free state can, technically, maintain its own military. That context is often overlooked in modern discussions of the amendment.

You can get one now and you should, everyone should, that much is clear now to everyone.

Sure would be nice if all the "we need guns to protect our freedoms from tyranny" people hadn't joined ICE to enforce tyranny at the first opportunity.

Some of us are quite well armed. There's a saying: if you go far enough left, you get your guns back. There's lots of gun clubs, all across the country, that are left wing. See Pink Pistols and the John Brown Gun Club.

Nah. That never happened.

They simply advocated for stricter background checks and a ban on the type of firearms expressly designed to kill as many people (children) as quickly as possible.

Then let the ash blot out the sun.

Everything is bigger in Texas.

I don't see the problem here.