Elon Musk Becomes Twitter’s Largest Shareholder…

[KLB]

That article was full of entitled idiots.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[bobzilla]

oh the twists and turns as this administration does all it can to keep from getting ****ed.

 

[BugI02]

It’s not time yet. Don’t drag your musket to the town square.

Still avoiding the question

 

[jamil]

Still avoiding the question

I answered the question behind the question. So leave your musket home. It's not time.

 

[J Galt]

Patches O'Houlihan: If you're going to become true dodgeballers, then you've got to learn the five d's of dodgeball: dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge!

 

[BugI02]

I answered the question behind the question

"It's not a lie if you believe it"

or something

 

[jamil]

"It's not a lie if you believe it"

or something

I don't think that your question involved lying. The question behind the question was to bait me about vigilantism. That's just nutty. I'm not getting involved in a discussion about that.

Like I've been saying, it's not time yet. That's an adequate answer. Don't drag your musket to the town square yet. But. Keep your powder dry.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

84% of all statistics are made up.

 

[wtburnette]

84% of all statistics are made up.

Even if true, who gives a ? We need to develop thicker skin as a nation and stop being offended by everything.

Oh and since it's Schiff, he's probaly lying out his a$$.

 

[BugI02]

I answered the question behind the question. So leave your musket home. It's not time.

That was the lie that you might believe

What conditions must exist in the normal legal channels before the people turn to vigilantism? Do those conditions exist now?

And that was the question you don't wish to answer, possibly because it is uncomfortable for your worldview to admit that those conditions already exist

Nice bob and weave, though

Edit: The legal dictionary defines vigilantism as “taking the law into one’s own hands and attempting to effect justice according to one’s understanding of right and wrong; private enforcement of legal norms in the absence of an established, reliable, and effective law enforcement body.”

 

[bwframe]

 

[bwframe]

 

[jamil]

That was the lie that you might believe

No. i don't think you were lying to me. I think you really do want to justify vigilantism. If you're honest with yourself, you know that.

And that was the question you don't wish to answer, possibly because it is uncomfortable for your worldview to admit that those conditions already exist

Nice bob and weave, though

Edit: The legal dictionary defines vigilantism as “taking the law into one’s own hands and attempting to effect justice according to one’s understanding of right and wrong; private enforcement of legal norms in the absence of an established, reliable, and effective law enforcement body.”

See? You are justifying it right there in your own highlighted text. I don't think those conditions exist to the extent necessary to justify what your question is really about. I think your instincts are about as wrong as they could be on this. THAT's what I'm uncomfortable with.

 

[Super Bee]

View attachment 241352

Dan will be fired up for tomorrows show.

 

[jamil]

84% of all statistics are made up.

From which hole did he pull those numbers? From his front hole or his back hole?

 

[jamil]

On the "other side" isn't Antifa (and other groups) engaging in a form of vigilantism to force their beliefs? Actually, I would argue that it is more than just vigilantism when they are setting fires to buildings.

No, I think that's called domestic terrorism. Or maybe revolutionary behavior.

 

[bwframe]

Dan will be fired up for tomorrows show.

He's on Hannity now. Unfiltered, saying bull on the air...


.

 

[J Galt]

On the "other side" isn't Antifa (and other groups) engaging in a form of vigilantism to force their beliefs? Actually, I would argue that it is more than just vigilantism when they are setting fires to buildings.

No, I think that's called domestic terrorism. Or maybe revolutionary behavior.

I literally wrote that "I would argue that it is more than just vigilantism." The more you type.......

I don't have a politically correct way to respond.

 

[BugI02]

No. i don't think you were lying to me. I think you really do want to justify vigilantism. If you're honest with yourself, you know that.

Deliberately obtuse. The lie that you apparently believe is that you in any way answered the original question (post #1155)