|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Obamagate /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1589324456 Message started by pg on 05/12/20 at 16:00:56 |
|
Title: Obamagate Post by pg on 05/12/20 at 16:00:56 For those on the left how does it feel to know Trump is going to be completely vindicated and Barry is complicit in many if not all these illegal activities... Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by srinath on 05/12/20 at 16:21:55 Apparently telling a reporter to ask about china virus to Chinese president when she interviews him is racist cos the reporter was Chinese. So I guess Trump should have said - Let me ask Chinese president next time I meet him on the 12th of never and let you know I guess. This china virus crap is excellent cover for the press to continue covering up Hopey's crimes. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by Nickjwill on 05/13/20 at 03:59:58 Fake news |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by srinath on 05/13/20 at 06:25:50 Yea nothing like a wide eyed chinese reporter asking a gotcha question about what china screwed up. It should have been followed by a black guy asking Trump about Ebola failures, to which Trump says - I don't know that ask Obama - to which again scream racist racist. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by pg on 05/13/20 at 18:59:16 More than a dozen Obama officials including fired FBI Director James Comey, former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power, and former Vice President Joe Biden participated in the unmasking..... Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by WebsterMark on 05/14/20 at 05:06:29 All, say again ALL major national political figures have done illegal acts, knowingly or otherwise. It’s almost a prerequisite. How else are you going to navigate the cesspool? Of course Obama and his administration ordered agencies to spy on Trump. He ordered the IRS to attack his enemies, why wouldn’t he use the FBI? But this was a big and complicated undertaking. Maybe they should have studied the 3-D chess board closer and considered what would happen if Mueller totally F’d up, which is what happened. You know in chess (and war) if you gamble on a big move and lose, you’re in trouble. The Dems are going to be like The Godfather. They’re gonna go to their media friends and remind them of all the favors they’ve done for them and ask them to sell their journalistic souls one more time and cover this up. You seriously think a “reporter” is going to press Uncle Joe after he gives an incomprehensible answer to why he wanted Flynn unmasked? You think a reporter is going to ask Obama WTF was he doing? |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by srinath on 05/14/20 at 06:17:58 Check this out. Richard Burr is being investigated by FBI for selling stock after corona virus briefing - but the biggest one in that pile was Diane Feinstein - is she being papered over by the FBI now ??? I believe 2 dems and 2 libs are in that list, but Feinstein was over 10 mill if I recall. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by pg on 05/14/20 at 07:38:03 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1260938381254701060 If I were a Senator or Congressman, the first person I would call to testify about the biggest political crime and scandal in the history of the USA, by FAR, is former President Obama. He knew EVERYTHING. Do it @LindseyGrahamSC , just do it. No more Mr. Nice Guy. No more talk! 9:21 AM · May 14, 2020 Best regards, |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/14/20 at 08:58:11 Someone already said he Wouldnt call Obama..I THINK it was Lindsay,, not certain. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by srinath on 05/14/20 at 11:43:45 Well lets focus on Biden first. Hopey isn't gong anywhere. Biden definitely knew about it - better nail him before he claims dementia - or nail him and watch him claim dementia. Might as well get that out into public record. BTW that Nancy Antionette video was absolutely freaking killer. Trump's meme creation and trolling on social media will put most teenagers to shame. That's one reason why he's so freaking effective as a president. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by eau de sauvage on 05/14/20 at 13:48:15 The unmasking of a US citizen who was taped undermining US govt policy with a Russian official, is an utterly normal and routine occurrence. It so happens that after it was known it was Flynn, Trump was advised not to hire him. No one knew who the person was at the time of the request other than it was a US citizen. 'Unmasking' is such a routine request which is then handled by the NSA, that the Trump administration has requested the 'unmasking' of over 100 US citizens in their first three years. In fact the number is closer to 500 than 100. In fact the Trump administration has requested the 'unmasking' of more than 1000, US citizens. Nah, I'm only kidding it was really over ten thousand. In fact the number of US citizens that the Trump administration has requested unmasking is more precisely 37,000. Anyone who thinks asking for the unmasking of a US citizen who was caught up undermining US foreign policy with a hostile nation, is somehow unusual, is a chump. This all came out on 2017 and is only being revived because as they say, this is just red meat to the whacky lunatic fringe. This is all Trump and the GOP know how to do, come up with endless bullsh!t and distraction from the absolute chaos caused by their inept handling of the pandemic. And the reason they need these idiotic distractions is because other than the lunatic fringe as seen on these very forums, their base cares more about their jobs and health and health cover than they do about some obscure bullshit. The more the GOP do this the worse it gets for them. 2020 is not 2016 but Trump hasn't worked that out yet. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/14/20 at 13:54:51 In fact the number is closer to 500 than 100. In fact the Trump administration has requested the 'unmasking' of more than 1000, US citizens. Nah, I'm only kidding it was really over ten thousand. Ive seen your Facts How about you back that up? |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by MnSpring on 05/14/20 at 14:02:33 44564241565052370 wrote:
Reminds me, (Seeing as you just posted when I was on) I have copied the post, just in case you did not see it. Do you care to respond ? http://suzukisavage.com/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1589048087 (Reply #2) eau de sauvage wrote on May 9th, 2020, 9:47pm: ... Expect Eegore to ask you if ... Please explain. Are you telling Eegore what to do ? Or is Eegore telling you what he is going to do ? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by eau de sauvage on 05/14/20 at 15:00:21 @JoG How about you back that up? Here's a quote from FoxNews..."The Office of the Director of National Intelligence reported that in 2019, the Trump administration had 10,012 unmasking requests fulfilled; Chump. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by verslagen1 on 05/14/20 at 15:08:08 Quote:
|
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/14/20 at 15:17:33 And where does Samantha powers become a valid requestor? And WHY was Flynn unmasked? Once it was determined it was Flynn, who had legitimate reasons for conversations with his counterpart, under investigation? It's Bullshit, honest people know it. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by eau de sauvage on 05/14/20 at 15:36:17 I could give you plenty of links to all this but then you'd just question the accuracy. So why don't you just go straight to the source where all the links get the information they publish. https://www.dni.gov/files/CLPT/documents/2019_ASTR_for_CY2018.pdf There's the actual govt document. In that pdf you can find all the information you need to know unless you like being a chump. In it they answer all your questions like 'why was Flynn unmasked'. The answer to that is that Flynn was not unmasked, an unnamed US citizen was unmasked. No one knows who these unknown US citizens are because they are 'masked'. They only find out it's Flynn afterwards, and Obama advised Trump not to hire him, then Flynn lied to Pence. Seriously to think Flynn should be allowed to lie to the VP and the FBI then you'd have to wonder why there'd be any laws at all. The information is only released on a "need to know" basis. For example if a US citizen was collaterally intercepted during listening into the Russian ambassador discussing circumventing US govt policy, that would most definitely be a need to know. Here's two excerpts from the above report... http://https://i.postimg.cc/FfDb1xK9/Screen-Shot-2020-05-15-at-8-24-44-am.jpg (https://postimg.cc/FfDb1xK9) http://https://i.postimg.cc/v4y5zKgY/need-to-know-basis.jpg (https://postimg.cc/v4y5zKgY) It would have been easier to just give you the link to the NYT article but then you question it because it's not one of your conspiracy theory websites. So above is the actual govt pdf. Seriously 17,000 granted requests last year by the Trump administration. It's not news, it's a perfectly normal occurrence, and it shows how thoroughly manipulated you are. Not that but you'll take all the bs on board without question. You don't bother with any news that offers you an alternative world view. And what's worse you don't even care, you are the gold standard for Trump's unquestioning base. Chump. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by eau de sauvage on 05/14/20 at 15:47:10 Flynn is not a bad guy, he's just a greedy mercenary fcuk who's only interest is getting paid, whether from Russia, or from Erdogan who Flynn was also working for. And he'll lie to anyone for money. Pretty fcuking sad for a US General. Even more pathetic is that because Russia knew he was lying to the VP, that makes Flynn open to being blackmailed by Russia. This is the main concern that the security arms of govt have with mercenaries like Flynn. If he was not unmasked then he'd get deeper and deeper into serious blackmail territory and he's the security advisor to the US. The reason Trump gave for sacking him was precisely because he lied to the VP. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by eau de sauvage on 05/16/20 at 19:54:40 'It eats him alive inside': Trump's latest attack shows endless obsession with Obama Ben Rhodes, a former Obama national security aide, tweeted this week: “Trump’s fact-free fixation on Obama dating back to birtherism is so absurd and stupid that it would be comic if it wasn’t so tragic.” Tara Setmayer, a former Republican communications director on Capitol Hill, said: “Donald Trump always needs a foil. This riles up his base because they cling to anything that diverges responsibility for anything from Donald Trump over to someone else. And in this case Barack Obama is the boogeyman of the month.” https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/16/trump-obama-obsession-coronavirus-president |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by Eegore on 05/17/20 at 05:08:39 We all know nobody is going to read the actual documentation used in court because it will contain information we don't want to hear. Cut apart sections of that report, take it out of context, cite losing cases as precedent and hope nobody notices, then get back to us with information we want to hear. But by no means expect us to read the actual documentation we are discussing. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by srinath on 05/17/20 at 09:36:25 After 3 yrs of investigating crap, the democraps have found evidence - of their own corruption. LOL. Its like when a cop writes you a ticket, you get to ask and check his radar calibrations etc etc. That's how it works - accuse someone of a crime, and you need to make sure that charge is completely clean in all aspects of how it was arrived at. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by MnSpring on 05/17/20 at 10:29:46 6C6D76717E6B771F0 wrote:
The very VAST, MAJOR MAJORITY of drivers do not know that. Just like when a Gov says: Stay at Home. Close your Business. Do not put a motor on your boat when you put it in the water. Do not go to a PUBLIC Park. Do not go to a PUBLIC Beach of a Ocean. (On and On and ON) Then allows, ‘SOME’ people to do those very things, and not others. And says people who do not, ‘OBEY’, the illegal orders are NOT, Patriots. And says; ‘We are all in this together’, while he/she get the Same amount of money, (from YOUR Tax dollars), and you are wondering where your next nickel is coming from because he/she, ‘Ordered’ your business/livelihood, ‘Shut Down’. Yes, many drivers just pay the ticket, because they know they were speeding. A very significant number of people, are penalized by someone compensating from a small, ‘thingy’ ! And they DON”T KNOW, that, ‘ticket’, just can’t be made up. Another slip down that slope. The C-19, (Yes Virginia it is a real virus, and people would have done the correct thing, without destroying this Nations Economy) Is a Huge slip down the slope. And a study in: "Just how far, can FEAR lead Shepol" |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by Eegore on 05/17/20 at 13:23:10 What part of the Stay at Home orders are illegal? As in the specifics of actual law(s) not this "Unconstitutional" nonsense by selecting out of context quotes from cases while leaving out the parts we don't like. Anyone can just say the words "illegal'" but none of that works in court. What part of public safety ordinance, law, statute needs changed? Everyone I've seen that says they can't be told they can not run their business have not been successful in keeping them open. What case law can they use to take that to court? |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by MnSpring on 05/17/20 at 14:53:58 5E7E7C74697E1B0 wrote:
Here is a idea; You prove, that a arbitrary 'order' as to which business, person, event, can or cannot be/happen. Is a Constitutional order. NOT JUST A 'WHIM'. You prove, that it is Constitutional, that a Gov of a state can, 'order' things, which are one way for some, and another way for others. You prove that it is Constitutional that, 'Buddies', can do what ever they want. While people who are not, 'Buddies', have to obey, 'orders' ! You prove it is Constitutional that a Governor can, sig, the AG on a person. "... received a phone call Friday from Attorney General Keith Ellison who allegedly told him that if he opens his doors, the state will fine him $25,000 per location, per occurrence, with no maximum amount of fines per day ..." https://knsiradio.com/news/local-news/shadys-bar-and-restaurant-wont-open-monday What part of the Stay at Home orders are illegal? You prove, they ARE ! |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by Eegore on 05/17/20 at 15:23:49 "You prove, they ARE !" You mean by citing, again, all of the information publically available that have years of documentation and legal application? No problem: https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/aboutlawsregulationsquarantineisolation.html https://www.statnews.com/2020/03/17/mass-quarantine-lockdown-explainer/ https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/264 The state of emergency can affect your rights because states have used emergency declarations to close or restrict the hours of private businesses, close schools and public buildings, and enforce curfews for citizens. Precedence from a case that won: Compagnie Francaise de Navigation a Vapeur v. Louisiana Board of Health The Supreme Court, by a vote of 7-2, approved that order as constitutional. The Constitution gives states the power to police citizens for the health, safety and welfare of those within its borders. Each State's statutes categorized in detail: https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/state-quarantine-and-isolation-statutes.aspx Of course all of these are claimed illegal, but nobody will reference how. You can't just look at written, and applied, and upheld law and say "Nope - illegal" and expect to get anywhere. You can't say "arbitrary" and magically make it so when written law says those orders can exist. Saying the words "It's illegal" means nothing. Where's the substance to that argument? How do people who use real law and not forum complaining use your claim that this is illegal? |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/17/20 at 15:51:17 Yeah, Quarantine,, for WHAT?? Show me how horrible it is. They ABSOLUTELY chose to Not consider the asymptomatic when calling it CV,, And Ive sen deaths so completely NOT CV , attributed to CV, We are being lied to and Herded like stupid sheep.. You believe what you want. Demand proof of what is in plain sight,, Go ahead.. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by Eegore on 05/17/20 at 15:52:41 I'm asking what portions of current written law are not legal? The orders given are, when actually read, citing law. Written, enacted, used in the past, law. What part of that is illegal? "You believe what you want" I believe what I see. I literally see the medical wings, I go into them, I went to China, I saw the dump-trucks of bats. I see the metadata of cellphone activity and where the infection rates are. I just came back from DC. I see the metrics, and I can replicate the numbers. I've already told you I am not even aware of models with the crazy numbers you claim, unless I'm on some website where they won't disclose their methods. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by MnSpring on 05/17/20 at 16:34:48 5575777F6275100 wrote:
First, the words, May, Shall, Probably, Could, are prevalent. Just like writing the word, 'Substantial', in a contract, with no description of what that word means. Then the absurd rulings of some of the Govs, who have applied their, 'wanna be', Dictatorship is very apparent. Which does not follow the guidelines of preventing the wantonly infecting, or preventing widespread infecting of others. Of which their has been no cases. (Well unless you look at Calf, were one who has AIDS can Knowingly and Wantonly Infect others. And instead of being a Felony, with a Minimum of a year in Jail. It is reduced to a misdemeanor) Are those, 'rules' pertinent ? Sure, in a serious event. Which C-19, started that way, because no one knew. Then it became a big time money maker, for a very few. And now, it's a bad Flu, to be added to the list of others. With the exposing of the State Health services, CDC, WHO, And companies that 'only' say one drug can work, (because they have the patent on it). The jig is up. And the Lawsuits will abound. Saying that old statutes are relevant to a, 'buddy/buddy, pick and choose' mentality, would be akin to saying the 2nd, means only muzzle loading flintlocks. (Oh Wait, their ARE some that say it is) The point. We did not know, we did things, which at the time, we, thought were correct. Now, we all know better. So the motors can be put back on the boats. And when a AG, THREATENS, the Lawyers will be stepping in big time. LOL, 'Robot Overlords" LOL |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by Eegore on 05/17/20 at 16:44:56 "First, the words, May, Shall, Probably, Could, are prevalent. Just like writing the word, 'Substantial', in a contract, with no description of what that word means." They are also upheld in court. How are they illegal? "Which does not follow the guidelines of preventing the wantonly infecting, or preventing widespread infecting of others. Of which their has been no cases." How are they not following "the guidelines"? What specific guidelines are you referring to? What lines, on what documents? What portions of what law are they violating? How is it illegal? I for one find it hard to believe there are "no cases" as in zero cases where SARS-COV-2 was spread from one human to another. All those nursing homes never happened? "With the exposing of the State Health services, CDC, WHO, And companies that 'only' say one drug can work, (because they have the patent on it). The jig is up." Can you reference this? I'm not aware of the CDC/WHO saying conclusively that only one drug can work. I am however aware of them saying the opposite. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by MnSpring on 05/17/20 at 18:33:32 6646444C5146230 wrote:
Sure they are, in cases where their is a Judge like Judge Moyé. https://dfw.cbslocal.com/2020/05/05/coronavirus-in-texas-salon-a-la-mode-owner-shelley-luther-arrested/ How are they illegal? I truly hope you are never on the other side of a good Lawyer arguing the point. How are they not following "the guidelines"? Several publicized cases, even in the UL News, have been outlined. Do believe their are several thousand throughout the USA that are not publicized. That's OK, You don't believe any of your Freedom has been violated. So just sit back and accept what is being done. I on the other hand, will stand up for my Rights, and not allow a Socialist, to dictate. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by Eegore on 05/17/20 at 20:56:47 Sure they are, in cases where their is a Judge like Judge Moyé. And thousands of SC cases. Bad news, 99.99% of judges and juries are ok with the language. "I truly hope you are never on the other side of a good Lawyer arguing the point.? This means nothing. Zero reference, no case law, just claims of "illegal" with not one example, reference, precedence, or case. This is a direct aversion to the question. Some might have a term for that... Deflection maybe? "Several publicized cases, even in the UL News, have been outlined. Do believe their are several thousand throughout the USA that are not publicized." But you can't reference one? Convenient. "That's OK, You don't believe any of your Freedom has been violated. So just sit back and accept what is being done." Incorrect. I ask for specific reasons, but you provide zero useable content. "I on the other hand, will stand up for my Rights, and not allow a Socialist, to dictate." By complaining online and handing out business cards people throw in the trash? What laws are you changing? What directives are you challenging and how? What are you providing that other people can use? |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by MnSpring on 05/18/20 at 07:49:20 4A6A68607D6A0F0 wrote:
Have you not learned by now, I am not going to do your work for you ! One time I did give you a significant amount of work, for free, to let you carry on from their, because you alluded to YOU were well versed in following a paper trail. Then you could not, then you complained I did not, ‘GIVE’ you all the information, then you offered a paltry sum for me to finish the work for you. "Gov. Jared Polis signed the legislation late last week. Now, the question is whether enough additional states will join the pact to change the way we elect the President of the United States” "Under the National Interstate Vote Compact, states are pledging to pool their electoral votes towards the presidential candidate who wins the most individual votes nationwide, regardless of whether that person wins their state" Ya want me to look that up for you also? Or is that ‘fake’ news, that the State of Colorado will give ALL it's electoral votes to the candidate who wins the most individual votes nationwide, regardless of whether that person wins their state. If it passes in all States, just Calf and NY, will elect the Pres, so why bother to vote ? Are you involved in that ? Or did you just pass out cards that people threw away ? Just do what you do. I will stand up for Freedom. I will fight Tyranny. I will be against Oppression. When it comes to common, well known, "Several publicized cases”, of oppression. Or the well known cases of Governors, making, ‘rules’ out of thin air, and arbitrary applying them. And the widely laughed about, ‘rules’ which do not make any sense at all, as well as being totally out side even the most liberal, of Liberal, interruptions of the ‘laws’. (I will state a phrase said very often by a person who does not post here any more) “Don’t be so Lazy, and look them up for yourself. OK there ya go, You get the last word, have at it. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by WebsterMark on 05/18/20 at 08:10:11 “Stay at home, lockdown, quarantine, whatever you want to call them, are theoretically constitutional. States/Governors have certain rights that arguably Trump (no pun intended) that, the often times ignored 10th Amendment. Tough call, but in this day and age, Id say the Supreme Court would rule the Federal Government has the authority to enforce certain lockdown laws. Note: that doesn’t mean I agree, I’m just saying if a court battle ensued, the Feds would win. Now, there would be restrictions on their reach, but generally speaking, yes the Feds can order certain national regulations. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/18/20 at 08:51:07 So, you have a constitution,, and the constitution even lays out your rights, but, if the government decides you need to forego those rights, for a while, in your own and society's best interest, then the constitution is suspended, pending further notice,,from the government. Got it. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/18/20 at 10:11:03 How about Men have no place deciding what women do and If YOUR paycheck hasnt stopped, you need to stop pretending you know whats best for people. If they wanna Just GO somewhere,, well, LET THEM,, If youre scared,, stay home.. Standing on the side of authority, pretending theres some Really Good REason, when the obvious states otherwise,, not good E.. Lockdown was a FukkUP,, making it last longer is nothng but a political stunt. Destroy the economy Its the only way t hurt TRump. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by Eegore on 05/18/20 at 16:21:24 "Have you not learned by now, I am not going to do your work for you ! One time I did give you a significant amount of work, for free, to let you carry on from their, because you alluded to YOU were well versed in following a paper trail. Then you could not, then you complained I did not, ‘GIVE’ you all the information, then you offered a paltry sum for me to finish the work for you." Incorrect. You say you currently have proof but you will not provide it. This is different than saying you gave me all the information you had available. I am willing to pay for the information you are withholding, that I am unable to retrieve. "Or is that ‘fake’ news, that the State of Colorado will give ALL it's electoral votes to the candidate who wins the most individual votes nationwide, regardless of whether that person wins their state" This isn't the topic of legal or illegal quarantine. Deflection maybe? You say stay at home orders are illegal. How are they illegal? What laws are being violated? What actual laws make stay at home orders illegal? I referenced many that show it is. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by Eegore on 05/18/20 at 16:34:11 "So, you have a constitution,, and the constitution even lays out your rights, but, if the government decides you need to forego those rights, for a while, in your own and society's best interest, then the constitution is suspended, pending further notice,,from the government." Not really but its a good way to word it so it sounds worse. I've referenced hundreds of pages of documentation on Constitutional law, the difference being I didn't withhold any parts I don't like, and I cite precedence on winning cases. Yes, anyone's rights can be restricted for National or State emergencies. The "rights" part is that they can't base it off of your race, or similar disparities arbitrarily. It would be unconstitutional to say White US Citizens are to stay at home, but allow other races to go to work etc. "If they wanna Just GO somewhere,, well, LET THEM,, If youre scared,, stay home.." Disease prevention does not work that way. I'd provide information but historically you won't read it anyway, and if it doesn't match observed reality it's wrong. "Standing on the side of authority, pretending theres some Really Good REason, when the obvious states otherwise,, not good E.. " Again you admit you can't retrieve accurate data, but then when you want to prove your point that data is supposed to be accurate? |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by srinath on 05/18/20 at 17:08:59 He he he I didn't read most of this thread - But if some Chinese fool comes to fcuk my a$$ … rest assured before he gets anywhere near it, he's gonna find himself with a shotgun up his A$$ with bits of scrap metal into a shotgun shell and the aforementioned shotgun shoved so far up his A$$ he's gonna be tasting the rust before he gets anywhere near me. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/18/20 at 17:39:15 Yeah, Yeah, Ive read some of the Findinof the Black Robed traitors.. The Federal Reserve IS Constitutional Even tho its frikken NOT |
|
Title: Re: Obamagate Post by MnSpring on 05/19/20 at 08:58:55 Many States/Cities still have a, 'Law', on the books saying something to the likes of: 'Every business must have a hitching post in front of their establishment'. Does NOT, mean it is enforced, or even Valid ! 'You can't put a motor on your boat when it is on the water' Could have been valid, For about 5 seconds ! |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |