The great thing about a Biden presidency is we'll see a lot more of President Obama

There is enough validated evidence released now to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Obama is guilty of conspiring to commit TREASON. It is eminently possible to interpret his orchestrating the use of the Steele dossier to launch Operation Crossfire Hurricane to spy on Trump's 2016 election campaign as being treasonous in accordance with the definition of TREASON in the Constitution.

Of course it is very unlikely that he will be ever charged, the American Ruling Class will protect him. Still he he is guilty of conspiring to commit treason, - NO OTHER US PRESIDENT has ever done that.


Dachshund

read the constitution for the definition of treason...........
 
He was "gay" enough to kill Osama Bin Laden. I bet you wish you were that "gay".


He didn't kill anyone now did he , a Navy seal did the killing O bung hole probably has trouble killing a beer ? and you need to look up the legend of bath house Barry.

And you need to watch O dark thirty to see how the information to know were to kill him came from .
It wasn't because of any of O bung holes polices or work. He just gave the Ok to do it.
 
He didn't kill anyone now did he , a Navy seal did the killing O bung hole probably has trouble killing a beer ? and you need to look up the legend of bath house Barry.

And you need to watch O dark thirty to see how the information to know were to kill him came from .
It wasn't because of any of O bung holes polices or work. He just gave the Ok to do it.

And Biden disagreed with that.
 
He didn't kill anyone now did he , a Navy seal did the killing O bung hole probably has trouble killing a beer ? and you need to look up the legend of bath house Barry.

And you need to watch O dark thirty to see how the information to know were to kill him came from .
It wasn't because of any of O bung holes polices or work. He just gave the Ok to do it.

so all of those drone strikes he ordered with all the lives that they took........obama didn't do anything but order?????
 
He didn't kill anyone now did he , a Navy seal did the killing O bung hole probably has trouble killing a beer ? and you need to look up the legend of bath house Barry.

And you need to watch O dark thirty to see how the information to know were to kill him came from .
It wasn't because of any of O bung holes polices or work. He just gave the Ok to do it.

So, by that logic, Trump didn't kill terrorist Al Baghdadi. Right?

And Bush Jr had six years to find and kill Bin Laden and he even denied Bin Laden was alive or still a threat.
President Obama came in, gave the killing of OBL top priority (as he said in the video) and Bin Laden was dead in two years.
The truth sucks, don't it:

 
read the constitution for the definition of treason...........

It does not work that way. To rightys merely claiming a crime means you have to defend yourself from it. Forget that law and the stupidity. You have to take it seriously. ...or maybe you don't. These guys are nuts.
 
There is enough validated evidence released now to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Obama is guilty of conspiring to commit TREASON. It is eminently possible to interpret his orchestrating the use of the Steele dossier to launch Operation Crossfire Hurricane to spy on Trump's 2016 election campaign as being treasonous in accordance with the definition of TREASON in the Constitution.

Of course it is very unlikely that he will be ever charged, the American Ruling Class will protect him. Still he he is guilty of conspiring to commit treason, - NO OTHER US PRESIDENT has ever done that.


Dachshund

Are you a lawyer? Ok, let's see the evidence that President Obama is guilty of conspiring to commit TREASON. And an OAN article written by some minion reporter doesn't qualify as evidence.


funny_redneck_crazy_face_animated_gif_by_bensib-d4is1um.gif
 
It does not work that way. To rightys merely claiming a crime means you have to defend yourself from it. Forget that law and the stupidity. You have to take it seriously. ...or maybe you don't. These guys are nuts.

you all are nuts by picking and choosing which laws and which parts of the constitution you think should apply or no longer apply
 
Why is that great? Obama was a loser in terms of what he did in office. Mediocrity might best describe his accomplishments. I'll submit and give you he was one hell of an orator when reading a script and certainly he was excellent at getting elected. As a manager and leader however, he was crap at best. I'd have voted for him as class president in high school... but that position is and was meaningless as is Obama in terms of his accomplishments.

Dumbasses listen to the MSM who think Obama was great, and fake the narrative. He was GODAWFUL on foreign policy and very corrupt domestically.

But media claims his only scandal was a tan suit. This is how easy it is to fool sheeple like the OP.
 
no, you haven't read the constitution. you get it spoon fed to you by liberal idiots trying to tell you that the 2nd Amendment only gives a right to the militia

I just Googled the Constitution, so...it seems what you're mad about is that we don't accept your interpretation of the Constitution, as strained as it may be, and because of that, you do not accept them as legitimate either.

But I'm not sure who deemed you the arbiter of legitimacy because you've done nothing to earn that distinction...you just gave it to yourself.
 
I just Googled the Constitution, so...it seems what you're mad about is that we don't accept your interpretation of the Constitution, as strained as it may be, and because of that, you do not accept them as legitimate either.

But I'm not sure who deemed you the arbiter of legitimacy because you've done nothing to earn that distinction...you just gave it to yourself.

does it say 'right of the militia' or 'right of the people'?????

you lose..........it's not anyone elses fault but yours that you deliberately misunderstand plain words...........and we the people wrote the constitution. nowhere does it say that we gave the new government any power to define their limits of power
 
does it say 'right of the militia' or 'right of the people'?????

If you're referring to the 2A, it says the militia is to be regulated. It's literally the first part of the amendment:

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.


you lose..........it's not anyone elses fault but yours that you deliberately misunderstand plain words...........and we the people wrote the constitution. nowhere does it say that we gave the new government any power to define their limits of power

"A well regulated Militia..."
 
If you're referring to the 2A, it says the militia is to be regulated. It's literally the first part of the amendment:

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.

"A well regulated Militia..."

and i'll ask again, because nobody has yet to provide the founders citation, what documentation from the founders do you have that shows they wanted the militia to be regulated by the government????

because i've provided numerous citations that specifically states that the militia were the people, independent of the government to ensure the security of a free state over that of an oppressive central government.

do you need to see all of those again?
 
and i'll ask again, because nobody has yet to provide the founders citation, what documentation from the founders do you have that shows they wanted the militia to be regulated by the government????

Well...it is in the founding document, and who else would regulate it? The King of England? The Dutch East India Company? Jesus?


because i've provided numerous citations that specifically states that the militia were the people, independent of the government to ensure the security of a free state over that of an oppressive central government.

Well, if that's what you think, then you need to go back and learn what "regulated" means. The Constitution didn't set out that any trashy redneck could arm himself with a gun and call himself a militia.

Well-regulated means what?
 
Well...it is in the founding document, and who else would regulate it? The King of England? The Dutch East India Company? Jesus?
regulated meant many things, and to the founders it meant well working or trained. It is the absolute height of stupidity to believe that the founders would only accept a right of government regulated troops to keep and bear arms after they just won independence from their government that tried to regulate their arms.

Well, if that's what you think, then you need to go back and learn what "regulated" means. The Constitution didn't set out that any trashy redneck could arm himself with a gun and call himself a militia.

Well-regulated means what?

every single piece of documentation from the ratification years all have a single common thread, that standing armies were a bane to liberty, so we the people have the right to keep and bear arms......including all our trashy rednecks, communist
 
America's favorite President is doing the talk show circuit, writing a book, doing interviews. Isn't it great to see him and Michelle back in the spotlight. The sanity is contagious.

Be careful what you ask for.

Obama lost more power and seats since anyone since Eisenhower. Just sayin’
 
Back
Top