General Discussion

Rebl2

(17,548 posts)

1. Never

Reply to sarisataka (Original post)

Thu Apr 25, 2024, 07:17 PM

Apr 2024

would wish that.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

4 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

raging moderate Arger68 txwhitedove GodlessX

45 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Why, on Democratic Underground, [View all] sarisataka Apr 2024 OP

Never Rebl2 Apr 2024 #1

I haven't seen that senseandsensibility Apr 2024 #2

That is certainly the best way MuseRider Apr 2024 #3

Look on page 1 of GD sarisataka Apr 2024 #6

Which OP's ? Let's get them taken down ! KS Toronado Apr 2024 #30

Venting (very inappropriately). But that is not allowed here hlthe2b Apr 2024 #4

Guess I missed those posts, but if that's happening, wnylib Apr 2024 #5

Look in GD... sarisataka Apr 2024 #7

Haven't they been alerted and removed yet? wnylib Apr 2024 #10

. sarisataka Apr 2024 #11

I alerted on the one I saw MustLoveBeagles Apr 2024 #27

Not allowed. Please report if and when you see any post suggesting physical harm to anyone. Fla Dem Apr 2024 #8

Alert on it. Kingofalldems Apr 2024 #9

Nobody is suggesting that. perfessor Apr 2024 #12

It would probably be helpful for the Justices to understand that they would make themselves.... kentuck Apr 2024 #26

I'd love to see the someone present this discussion to them in exactly those terms. LT Barclay Apr 2024 #31

Heck, even Joyce Vance pointed out soldierant Apr 2024 #36

I haven't seen people doing that. Elessar Zappa Apr 2024 #13

No, not seeing that at all. sheshe2 Apr 2024 #14

The most explicit one said sarisataka Apr 2024 #17

I think one hypothetical post about the scenario is enough, but that's just my opinion. LeftInTX Apr 2024 #15

The SCOTUS will come up with a pseudo legal argument why only Lucky Luciano Apr 2024 #20

That's a reasonable observation and question Hekate Apr 2024 #16

There is one responce to a post in GD revmclaren Apr 2024 #18

My question about the President assassinating a Supreme Court Justice was to show how silly Trump's argument is. surfered Apr 2024 #19

It's meant to provoke thought. Not to be taken seriously. mzmolly Apr 2024 #21

I get the sense they are more sdfernando Apr 2024 #22

That is one point of view... DemocraticPatriot Apr 2024 #33

Or...can a hypothetical thought exercise be used like Trump using a quote to get around violating the gag order? elocs Apr 2024 #41

It's a propaganda tsunami. kentuck Apr 2024 #23

go ahead and post some links Skittles Apr 2024 #24

Satirists. We are becoming satirists. dchill Apr 2024 #25

And trolls never sleep. nt Brenda Apr 2024 #42

People need to be careful about what they post. Even when trying to be funny. mucifer Apr 2024 #28

This message was self-deleted by its author DemocraticPatriot Apr 2024 #29

Steam release. chouchou Apr 2024 #32

I have not seen such things, but if so will surely alert. That is not OK. Just because PatrickforB Apr 2024 #34

I have not seen that once. Never mind multiple times. mahina Apr 2024 #35

If you can't link to examples mountain grammy Apr 2024 #37

A direct link could be considered a call out sarisataka Apr 2024 #38

I suggested raising the hypothetical in court... JT45242 Apr 2024 #39

I think "asking about" and discussing... Think. Again. Apr 2024 #40

Gee it just might be rhetorical hyperbole Voltaire2 Apr 2024 #43

My rule of thumb is simple sarisataka Apr 2024 #45

Scratch a liberal... WhiskeyGrinder Apr 2024 #44