

Why do we need laws against standing next to golf courses with guns? It’s already illegal to shoot the president.
Why do we need laws against standing next to golf courses with guns? It’s already illegal to shoot the president.
This is hard to verify on Google. What did he do?
Yield and volume are also very important factors.
ButHerEmails.jpg with a side of StopStopHesAlreadyDead.gif
Like people think he will be shot again or something?
Ohio, still managing to stay relevant in a bad way
Seventh months later…
Biden should get on the floor and force a debate. Bring a nerf gun and just start shooting people who disagree or email in an end of debate.
Only if he says I DECLARE AN OFFICIAL ACT first. Otherwise, it’s a sparkling personal act.
Where’s my husband? - desperate housewives of silicon valley
How can Thomas say both anything a president says to the DOJ is an immune official act AND ALSO SAY that Jack Smith is not legitimate?
It seems Biden has carte Blanche to sic the FBI/CIA/DOJ/ST6 on Trump. His very life may depend on wielding this power. Thanks everyone.
I’ve yet to hear a good criticism of Biden that isn’t also true of Trump. Yet the media rarely writes a headline like “Trump should drop out/resign/kill himself”
Because he obviously won’t. He will pursue your freedoms, wealth and sanity until his dying breath.
Yes but in a very specific way.
In particular, Jesus showing off his wounds was the big evidence it was him and he had come back from the dead. He isn’t just being weird in front of religious people. He is selling himself as the new messiah.
So if it makes sense to charge people in India 1/4 the people in the US why can’t we pretend we are in India? People travel to other continents for healthcare.
I don’t believe in the anti christ. But if I did.
If you were writing the article you probably wouldn’t get to pick your headline. Headline writing is not an art, it’s a boring science of putting it in the most regular and concise of terms.
He resigned amid allegations of abuse. Those are the cold hard facts. If it turns out that the Christian Monitor how misquoted him or coerced him etc then this outlet might also be liable for claiming something not quite 100% defensible in a court of law.
It’s just a sparkling apology if it isn’t administered under oath as part of a court pleading.
“Baseless? So they could be true and there is just no evidence at all?”