tvc184

He and some of the other Democrats might be perturbed about missing some possible committee chairman positions. With the ongoing fight over the next speaker, we might end up with a Phelan clone.

🤣🤣🤣 Maybe we want Paxton and his cronies. What has Phelan brought to SE Texas?

The Texas Penal Code, as an example, lists three reasons for punishments. It is to be used as a deterrent, rehabilitation and to punish so as to protection of the public. In a case like this, rehabilitation is out of the question. So is a deterrent. He won’t have to worry about getting in more trouble by re-offending. That leaves purely punishment to prevent reoccurrence. Life without parole satisfies that objective. Having him put to death would certainly be satisfying to many people. I only wish that they had more punishment than merely being in prison without parole. Perhaps hard labor, restricted exercise time out of his cell, etc. If you want to get out of that 8’x8’ box? Hard labor or you can stare at walls all day

The judge dismissed the Manslaughter charge at the request of the prosecution. The other option was to declare a mistrial. The judge has sent the jury back to deliberations for the lesser included offense of Criminal Negligent Homicide. According to the way I read the judge’s comments, the jury could not move on to the lesser charge unless they have acquitted Penny of the more serious charge. If the judge declared a mistrial, the prosecution would have to start the whole thing over and I’m guessing that they could see the handwriting on the wall. They were definitely not going to get the Manslaughter charge which is basically murder, but in sudden passion in this case. For that reason, the prosecution asked for the dismissal of the Manslaughter. From my understanding of double Jeopardy, that charge can never be brought up again. If it was a mistrial, then the prosecution could go after Manslaughter a second time. With this dismissal, that charge is now forever off of the table. If the jury cannot reach a unanimous decision in the lesser charge, the judge will declare mistrial and the prosecution has to decide whether to do it all over again but only for the lesser charge.

I can understand that. I am not against the death penalty but I am also not against life without parole.

Such a comedy of errors… 🤣🤣🤣

I didn’t believe anything and have never commented on the video or the book. I have neither seen nor read either and had no desire to do so. So wherev did “you actually believe” (referring to me) come from? Also, you conveniently ignored the entire point of my comments. You claim that D’Souza “admitted” that it was “one big fat lie” yet it was your referenced article that shows your comment to be complete nonsense. The only big fat lie was your TDS driven diatribe. I’m sure you’ll come up with some other nonsensical response that completely ignores your own lies. it always amuses me that people post an article to prove a point but then it becomes apparent that they never read the article. 🤣🤣🤣

Probably. But I made no comment about Hunter getting away with felonies. I am sure that you missed that. I even brought up both Republican and Democrat presidents who made seemingly questionable pardons. I didn’t choose sides….. like you just did with the classic whataboutism. My only comments were toward the repeated and adamant claims that it would “never” happen. Even funnier are virtually every Democrat whether a politician or a socialist news media talking head not defending the pardon but saying that he didn’t lie. A crawfish has nothing on these hypocrites. Answer your question, Trump probably would, but he did not make a national campaign out of not doing it. Also, I made no comment whatsoever criticizing Hunter getting off. I only commented on the lies that were perpetrated and even today defended. Also note, Biden didn’t just pardon Hunter for the crimes he was charged with. He pardoned him back to January 2014 for unknown crimes that have yet to new discovered. Heck, why not go back to birth? 🤣 The Democrats love to set stupid precedents. Imagine if when Trump leaves office, he pardons every member of his extended family for any crimes that they may or may not have committed. 😎

Terrible video. Glad they blurred it out. 😢

Certainly. The DOJ and state prosecutors targeted Trump. We know good and well that the Biden DOJ didn’t target his son. Of course KJP said exactly that, that Hunter was targeted. 🤣🤣🤣

Once again your TDS either blinds you to the facts or you intentionally did what you falsely accused D’Souza of doing. Were you simply swept up in the emotion or did you intentionally tell one big fat lie? The article that you cited at no point says that D’Sousa lied or admitted to lies. Did you read the article or just the headlines, got severe TDS and your brain neurons went into overdrive, sparking this way and that? You can choose not to believe him if you wish but your statement is completely false. According to the article that you posted, D’Souza said that they based the film on what was believe to be correct information. It relied on a third party’s video backed up by cell GPS data. In fact, according to your article, the data was correct. The false information was that at least one of the people videoed (and blurred) did in fact harvest ballots but it was revealed to be for own family which is completely lawful. As D’Souza stated, they have recently learned that the information was false. Basically, he only admits that he was duped. You can choose to believe him or not. We all have the ability of free thought. Feel free, however to point out where in the article that Desouza “admitted that” it was a “big fat lie”. Point out where D’Souza admitted to lying. In fact D’Souza made this comment quoted from your article, “the underlying premise of the film holds true.” Basically he doubled down and said that the premise of the book was correct. So D’Souza didn’t admit to lying at all but said that the premise of video and the geodata/GPS was correct. He claimed that the information given to him about the reason that the harvesting was in at least some cases, false. So your claim that D’Souza “admitted” to one big fat life, is one big fat lie. Again, were you overcome by excitement on seeing the headlines or did you actually read it and ignore the parts that you didn’t like or simply made a false statement?

I watched a youtube video of so many Democrats saying about Trump….. no one is above the law!! As we now see, unless it’s a Democrat’s family. The World certainly will not stop because Hunter Biden got pardoned. There are plenty of criminals out there that haven’t even been charged, much less convicted. It seems overly hypocritical to ever complain about Trump from the other side of the aisle when the people complaining have done worse. People in glass houses should not throw stones and the Democrats sure throw a lot of them. Gerald Ford pardoned Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton pardoned his brother and so on. Who cares? I don’t recall any of them ever making a campaign promise or a political commentary that they absolutely would not do it. I will gladly point out that both sides do the same thing. Most of the time I think whataboutism should not be brought into an argument. If you did something wrong, then own up to it. Don’t try to dismiss bad conduct because the other guy did it also. This time however, it seems apropos when the left side of the aisle who lives by pointing at Trump for seemingly bad conduct while completely ignoring their conduct. Most of those other pardons have come at end of a president’s term, where he is walking out the door and has no loss politically. It is interesting then as to why now? Is it yet another Democrat attempt at DEI gotcha? Is Biden suddenly going to resign and make Harris the first female president… for about 10 days? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 The entire Biden presidency has been a DEI farce. I suspect no different for these last couple of weeks. Remember that if Biden had not run for Office again, even though he promised he wouldn’t, there is absolutely no way that Harris would have been the nominee. Just like in 2020, where she got approximately 2% of the polls in her favor, and it had to be the first to drop out, she would have been destroyed by the candidates within her own party. This has likely been a set up from the get-go and all of this was planned. Harris got beat worse than any Democrat presidential candidate in decades and by Trump, who had the Democrats put up an actual good candidate, might have beaten. DEI has crumbled the Dems attempt at an empire and I suspect that they will double down and pull one last comedy skit.

I AM NOT GOING TO PARDON MY SON! Just as long as I have a chance to use it as a campaign stunt. 🤣🤣🤣 Anybody that didn’t see this coming…….

I have no issue with that however…. Rick Perry, although seemingly not really popular even with Republicans, was almost impossible to beat. The Texas conservatives just needed that tough, real conservative with an already popular voting base. Someone that has been elected to both Texas state office and federal office. Boom! In 2010 in steps Kay Bailey Hutchison, a popular sitting US Senator and former Texas Treasurer. So she has been elected, statewide in both a state political position and nationally as a senator. A Rasmussen poll in 2009 showed Hutchison with a 40% to 38% lead over Perry. She had high profile endorsements as did Perry. Hutchison was endorsed by the likes of G H W Bush, Nolan Ryan, Roger Staubach, etc. If people are actually going to listen to endorsements, those are some fairly well thought of people in Texas. Primary day was between Perry, Hutchison and Debra Medina. Hutchison was beaten by Perry 51% to 30% and he got enough votes to avoid a runoff. Obviously, that has no bearing on today. It does show that just because a person is very popular and already elected to national office from Texas such as Kay Bailey Hutchison, it does not ensure a good showing in the polls against an incumbent. It will be interesting for sure.

Actually it isn’t propaganda. Do they specifically harbor any gang or criminal? No. Is their policy to not notify ICE that an illegal alien gang member or other illegal alien is in their custody? Yes. This is quote from the official Los Angeles city website of a council member. The newly adopted ordinance permanently enshrines sanctuary policies into municipal law and prohibits the use of City resources, including property and personnel, from being utilized for immigration enforcement or to cooperate with federal immigration agents engaged in immigration enforcement. Critically, the Ordinance also prohibits the direct and indirect sharing of data with federal immigration authorities – an important gap to close in our city’s protections for immigrants. Also: Prohibiting the use of City resources for federal immigration enforcement shouldn’t depend only on executive actions that could be overturned by a future Mayor or Police Chief. This is common sense policy for LA.” So they made it where even a police chief could not make contact with ICE and it doesn’t make exemptions for criminals. To make sure that there was no loopholes, they added no “indirect sharing” of information and no “personal property” to be used. So a chief of police couldn’t simply say, “Okay, I won’t use city resources or do it directly. I can wait until I am off duty and use my personal cell phone”. So as a private citizen and not acting in any official capacity, he is not allowed to contact federal law enforcement and let them know that someone they may be looking for is currently in the city jail. That is intentionally protecting criminals for the sake of politics. Every time one of the illegal alien criminals is released and notice to ICE for deportation or filing of federal charges is denied, every murder, rape, burglary, assault, etc., committed by one of them is the result of protection given to violent criminals by the city of Los Angeles. Imagine a city offering protection to violent criminals because they don’t like election results or for votes. [Hidden Content]

That’s not recording….. right?

That’s what I am missing. Do conservatives consider Soros a bad person because he made billions of dollars or because of what he did with some of that money?

For anyone who wishes to spend as much as 15 minutes (but the first 7 minutes or so tells the tale) watching a youtube video, this explains the outcome by a lawyer. Kim Foxx unethical and probably illegal advised Smollett and his family. The prosecutor was in effect also playing defense attorney against her office and herself. That’s right folks. The prosecutor told the defendant how to proceed. She the recused herself and then violated Illinois law. By state law, it supposed to go to an outside prosecutor with no ties to the DA. Unlawfully Foxx created a position that did not exist and appointed her first assistant as special prosecutor. Again, this was a violation of state law. She then made a deal with a defense attorney where Smollett would forfeit his bond in lieu of prosecution. Again, this was a violation of law as she was not allowed to make a deal or dismiss the case after she had recused herself. Smollett’s attorney is in the video basically saying that forfeiting his $10,000 bail was a gift to the state although she doesn’t use those words. The state stepped in and said all of this was unlawful. Since it was unlawful and Foxx had no authority to dismiss the case, double Jeopardy did not apply and they could still try Smollett with the facts. As we all know, they then got a conviction by presenting the evidence to a jury. His lawyers appealed and it went to the Illinois Supreme Court. They ruled that even virtually though everything that Kim Foxx did was unlawful, they were stuck with the fact that he did take a plea deal in open court, even if unlawful, so the state cannot come back and try him again.

Musk didn’t even misspeak. He was commenting on a false meme.

There are no state laws that prevent people from being deported Carry on…..

Are you now wanting the Holy Bible to set our laws? I believe that most people believe that the correct translation should be….. Thou shall not murder In any case of your new conversion…. Genesis 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man. I don’t think unborn children have shed a man’s blood. I am also assuming by your response that self-defense is a sin. Good to know.

MSX

No, I am looking forward to every logical fallacy that the left can conjure up.

So you have deemed what peoples’ limitations are? I am pro life of innocent unborn children. I am pro death penalty for heinous murderers who have been convicted and appealed their verdict. There is no either/or to it.

I briefly heard Pam Bondi‘s name mentioned on the radio this afternoon and wasn’t sure what it was in reference to. Now I know. 👍🏼