Can *You* Be Bought?

YOu're info on TBI is sadly just RWNJ propaganda. In fact it is the polar opposite of factual.
What part is wrong, do ya figger, Mr Untelligent?

Can you point to a single thing that I said that wasn't 100% correct?

I would love to see you try, Creppy Crawly.
 
Sorry, I already bought this one...

Brooklyn-Bridge-East-River-New-York-City.jpg


Great price too!
that's mine.

I have the paperwork.
 
They do so jointly.
Democrats are akao adept at getting dark money and money laundered funds.

I don't know if that's true, but it's beside the point. NO ONE should be allowed to spend obscene amounts of money on elections. The Supreme Court calls it protected free speech. Do you think Musk deserves more "free speech" than you do because he's wealthy?
 
I don't know if that's true, but it's beside the point. NO ONE should be allowed to spend obscene amounts of money on elections. The Supreme Court calls it protected free speech. Do you think Musk deserves more "free speech" than you do because he's wealthy?
Show me your post where you complained about the Soros money.
 
I don't know if that's true, but it's beside the point. NO ONE should be allowed to spend obscene amounts of money on elections. The Supreme Court calls it protected free speech. Do you think Musk deserves more "free speech" than you do because he's wealthy?
It's going on all the time. You’re just singling Musk out because he gave money to Republicans.
 
It's going on all the time. You’re just singling Musk out because he gave money to Republicans.

Reading comprehension isn't your forte, is it? Try again.

 
Reading comprehension isn't your forte, is it? Try again.

Obscene amounts of money have been spent by Democrats in the past.
 
Supreme Court declared bribery is free speech. They should have been disbanded.
They had to do that as both Sam Alito and Clarence Thomas were taken blatant and obvious bribes beyond anything the SC had treated as acceptable prior and thus they had to create a law that basically says 'nothing is a bribe unless you can prove it changed what the person would have done had they not taken the bribe'.


You have to now get in a person's mind and prove their intent changed, an impossibility within law or you have to catch them saying "ok i changed my vote... due to that money". As long as they never say that part out loud, a guilty verdict is near impossible.
 
They had to do that as both Sam Alito and Clarence Thomas were taken blatant and obvious bribes beyond anything the SC had treated as acceptable prior and thus they had to create a law that basically says 'nothing is a bribe unless you can prove it changed what the person would have done had they not taken the bribe'.


You have to now get in a person's mind and prove their intent changed, an impossibility within law or you have to catch them saying "ok i changed my vote... due to that money". As long as they never say that part out loud, a guilty verdict is near impossible.
that's right.

buttress the system with your alleged "insights".
 
Back
Top