The Protests in Michigan Have Signaled the Nonsense Is Coming

[Dashinka 24,741]

1 minute ago, sl1pstream said:

Not every favor has to be monetary.

Whatever.  The first amendment allows for organized protests.

[sl1pstream 551]

6 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Whatever.  The first amendment allows for organized protests.

That's cool. Trump's tweets are still illegal and unconstitutional.

https://www.thehour.com/news/article/Trump-s-LIBERATE-MICHIGAN-tweets-incite-15209368.php

 

Edited April 18, 2020 by sl1pstream

[Dashinka 24,741]

15 minutes ago, sl1pstream said:

That's cool. Trump's tweets are still illegal and unconstitutional.

https://www.thehour.com/news/article/Trump-s-LIBERATE-MICHIGAN-tweets-incite-15209368.php

 

And this is relevant why?  Trump is an idiot, Trump is a dictator, Trump committed treason, anything else?  

[Ban Hammer 13,491]

20 minutes ago, sl1pstream said:

That's cool. Trump's tweets are still illegal and unconstitutional.

https://www.thehour.com/news/article/Trump-s-LIBERATE-MICHIGAN-tweets-incite-15209368.php

 

what is illegal and unconstitutional about his tweets?  got any specifics?

[sl1pstream 551]

5 minutes ago, Ban Hammer said:

what is illegal and unconstitutional about his tweets?  got any specifics?

Quote

That’s why we can’t write these tweets off as just hyperbole or political banter. And that’s why these tweets aren’t protected free speech. Although generally advocating for the use of force or violation of law is protected (as hard to conceive as that may be when the statements are made by someone in a position of public trust, like the president of the United States), the Supreme Court has previously articulated that where such advocacy is “inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action,” it loses its First Amendment protection. The president’s tweets — unabashedly using the current crisis to encourage a backlash against lawful and expert-recommended public health measures, falsely claiming a Second Amendment “siege” and calling for insurrection against elected leaders — have no place in our public discourse and enjoy no protection under our Constitution.

 

Edited April 18, 2020 by sl1pstream

[Ban Hammer 13,491]

so just regurgitated talking points. 

[sl1pstream 551]

Just now, Ban Hammer said:

so just regurgitated talking points. 

Ah yes. Talking points. Because that's all the Constitution is when it doesn't agree with your point of view. But uh muh second amendment.

[Ban Hammer 13,491]

7 minutes ago, sl1pstream said:

Ah yes. Talking points. Because that's all the Constitution is when it doesn't agree with your point of view. But uh muh second amendment.

i asked for specifics, not copy pasta.

what specifically in the constitution was violated?

what specific law was violated?

[Dashinka 24,741]

I am still waiting for the answer to the question regarding the identity of another state that restricts movement between residences.

Edited April 18, 2020 by Dashinka

[Boiler 45,956]

Colorado, well my County enacted something, now I wonder how practical it is or enforceable.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

3 hours ago, sl1pstream said:

That's cool. Trump's tweets are still illegal and unconstitutional.

https://www.thehour.com/news/article/Trump-s-LIBERATE-MICHIGAN-tweets-incite-15209368.php

 

I say LIBERATE FLORIDA!

Hell, LIBERATE AMERICA!!

 

Is that unconstitutional?

[Dashinka 24,741]

10 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Colorado, well my County enacted something, now I wonder how practical it is or enforceable.

So in your county, if you have a second residence such as a cabin, or cottage you cannot go there?

[Boiler 45,956]

3 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

So in your county, if you have a second residence such as a cabin, or cottage you cannot go there?

That is what they said, the stay at home means your primary home, now I have friends with several houses in the County and one of them asked a Commssioner if it was OK they moved to another one, the one near me which is much more remote and he said that was OK. Within half an hours drive.

[TBoneTX 45,962]

3 hours ago, sl1pstream said:

Talking points. Because that's all the Constitution is

One such point is "petition the government for redress of grievances."

[yuna628 9,700]

2 hours ago, Dashinka said:

I am still waiting for the answer to the question regarding the identity of another state that restricts movement between residences.

I think DE has this. And well.. if you knew anything about the nonsense that goes on over on the eastern shore beaches, you'd understand why. Not sure if MD has this in place, but they may. 

 

Had to head out to urgent care yesterday before the governor's new ''always wear a mask'' order, and it was super busy everywhere. But no one in this town really listens. What was disturbing though was all the out of state drivers. DE made it so that no one from MD/PA/NJ could come in unless it was an essential reason (can't even go shopping), but MD didn't do that, so we've got idiots coming from other states trying to buy up all the alcohol and food.