Terminating the Constitution Thread

[kcmets]

I mean, can this guy get any more nutty?

[batmagadanleadoff]

I mean, can this guy get any more nutty?

I wouldn't call that "nutty". That's an extremely dangerous statement made by an extremely dangerous person. And what I just finished writing is a gross understatement of just how dangerous that comment is.

What the fuck is it ever gonna take to take this guy out already and terminate him?

[batmagadanleadoff]

I mean, can this guy get any more nutty?

I wouldn't call that "nutty". That's an extremely dangerous statement made by an extremely dangerous person. And what I just finished writing is a gross understatement of just how dangerous that comment is.

What the fuck is it ever gonna take to take this guy out already and terminate him?

He tried to force his way into the presidency through sheer violence -- a presidency he has no right to -- and would've had Mike Pence and others murdered if it would've enabled him to steal back the presidency. If he should win re-election in 2024, he's not ever going away voluntarily, notwithstanding term limits and, oh yeah, that thing we call The Constitution. Now let the delusioned pollyannas challenge what I just wrote in this here post.

[kcmets]

Didn't know you just finished writing something. Haven't read what that might be.

Stand alone post, based on the news today.

[MFS62]

The Lincoln Project (or someone else) should produce a very simple ad.
It would show him swearing on a Bible (at his inaugural) to uphold the Constitution, followed by him saying he wants to terminate it.
I wonder if breaking a sworn oath would be the last straw for some of his supporters to whom that is important, and who have overlooked his "sins" up to now.

Later

[Ceetar]

When have republicans ever let the constitution stand in their way of gaining power? These fascists, ALL OF THEM, simply will say whatever it takes to gain power, and think the ends justify the means. and they've got the system so rigged that no one even punishes them for it.

TFG's "shoot someone on 5th avenue" comment wasn't bluster. If he saw opportunity, he'd do it.

[kcmets]

There are delusional Pollyanna's here?

[kcmets]

Someone should tell the lemmings, no constitution - no right to bear arms.

They'll turn on him so fast lol...

[batmagadanleadoff]

Didn't know you just finished writing something. Haven't read what that might be.

Stand alone post, based on the news today.

I have no idea what this even remotely means. And if you weren't aware of my posting in the first place, why did you then write this second post of yours? To remind me that I wrote a post here? That you had no idea existed? But nevertheless acknowledged in your follow up post?

"Stand alone post"? What's that? A thread that nobody else can post in?

[kcmets]

I have no idea what this even remotely means.

Obviously.

I have no comment, have nothing to defend.

[batmagadanleadoff]

I have no idea what this even remotely means.

Obviously.

I have no comment, have nothing to defend.

Because you can't explain your own post. Who can? It's illogical.

[kcmets]

I don't need to explain myself to you.

Really, just stop. I know you can't help it. But just stop.

[kcmets]

I have no idea what this even remotely means.

Obviously.

I have no comment, have nothing to defend.

Because you can't explain your own post. Who can? It's illogical.

Quoted to edit-proof.

[Edgy MD]

Someone should tell the lemmings, no constitution - no right to bear arms.

They'll turn on him so fast lol...

Well, he suggested terminating articles of the Constitution. He wasn't clear on which articles or amendments he was referring to.

But I definitely think it's a statement that could clear the head of a few potential jurors who might otherwise be sympathetic to him.

[kcmets]

Most of the news I saw today cited no suggestioning by him nor a narrowing
down to articles. They pretty much called it TERMINATION of the constitution
all day. Hence, the thread title.

I still don't know why not knowing what...

And what I just finished writing is a gross understatement of just how dangerous that comment is.

... was referring to, and why it got the tables turned against me. Again.

I don't read everything posted here and to go looking for answers just to
defend myself to an anti-forum and caustic big-head doesn't interest me
'at the present time.'

[batmagadanleadoff]

I still have no idea. I used your opening post merely as a springboard to comment on the latest outrage from the former president. My post had little, if anything to do with you beyond what I just explained. But because you cant understand what you read half the time, coupled with your strange and creepy obsession with everything about me, you turned this thread into a dumbfuckfest, complete with your usual absurd and inarticulate posts that not even you know what the hell they mean.

That quote of mine that you later highlighted was nothing more than me commenting on something I had written earlier, in an attempt to underscore just how dangerous the former president's comments were. But because you cant read, you took that as an attack on you

Carry on.

[kcmets]

I like you too. I think I figured it out.

You wrote:

• "I wouldn't call that "nutty". That's an extremely dangerous statement made by an extremely dangerous person. And what I just finished writing is a gross understatement of just how dangerous that comment is."

I thought you meant you just finished writing something in another thread
that I was instantly supposed to know but I guess you meant you were just
referring to your previous sentence.

If it makes you feel good using such silly mix-ups as a spring board to tell everyone
how stupid you think I am and tout your big-head assumption that I'm obsessed
with you, have at it. I'm pretty confident that most regulars here think and know
that you're the forum ocd nutjob, not me.