Michelle Obama-at convention

[SSFB]

3 minutes ago, DriftBusta said:

You’re wired to believe Trump is ginning up racism.  I can’t help you with that, if that’s what you believe.  You hate Trump.  We get it.  You’re free to have that opinion, and I’m not going to wear a mask and hit you over the head with a bicycle lock, or bring 15 of my buddies to your house over it.  I hate Biden and what he represents.

Wired to believe. By who and what?

I don't hate Trump, told you that many times. 

[DriftBusta]

8 minutes ago, SSFB said:

Wired to believe. By who and what?

I don't hate Trump, told you that many times. 

By your experience, associations, perhaps your education.  I’d love to know how you’re defining Trump ginning up racism.

Sure you do.  We have a different prism that we view the world, let’s leave it at that.  I’m very comfortable with my prism and the history that formed it.

Edited August 18, 2020 by DriftBusta

[SSFB]

2 minutes ago, DriftBusta said:

By your experience, associations, perhaps your education.  I’d love to know how you’re defining Trump ginning up racism.

Sure you do.  We have a different prism that we view the world, let’s leave it at that.  I’m very comfortable with my prism and the history that formed it.

You can't even remember the things you post or that other people post, don't try to give insight on other people's lives. 

[Rod]

Trump isn’t a racist 

[XC.Morrison]

2 hours ago, DriftBusta said:

You go with the narrative.  I’ll go with reality.  Why is it no one ever dares to talk about black criminality?  Systemic racism is a buzzword made up from bullshit, and the the lefties are trying to use it as a cudgel to divide the country. I’m simply not on board.

Narrative?  This isn't a bedtime story.  If you go with reality, which I sincerely hope you do then we are on the same page.  You're a Brett M. Kavanaugh fan right?  His recent majority opinion in Flowers v Mississippi found that the state had conducted its jury selection with unlawful racial bias.  How fucked up is the justice system that even the K man has to call B.S.?

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-9572_k536.pdf

Brett Kavanaugh:  In his sixth trial, which is the one at issue here, Flowers was convicted. The State struck five of the six black prospective jurors. On appeal, Flowers argued that the State again violated Batson in exercising peremptory strikes against black prospective jurors. In a divided 5-to-4 decision, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. We granted certiorari on the Batson question and now reverse. See 586 U. S. ___ (2018). Four critical facts, taken together, require reversal. First, in the six trials combined, the State employed its peremptory challenges to strike 41 of the 42 black prospective jurors that it could have struck—a statistic that the State acknowledged at oral argument in this Court. Tr. of Oral Arg. 32. Second, in the most recent trial, the sixth trial, the State exercised peremptory strikes against five of the six black prospective jurors. Third, at the sixth trial, in an apparent effort to find pretextual reasons to strike black prospective jurors, the State engaged in dramatically disparate questioning of black and white prospective jurors. Fourth, the State then struck at least one black prospective juror, Carolyn Wright, who was similarly situated to white prospective jurors who were not struck by the State. We need not and do not decide that any one of those four facts alone would require reversal. All that we need to decide, and all that we do decide, is that all of the relevant facts and circumstances taken together establish that the trial court committed clear error in concluding that the State’s peremptory strike of black prospective juror Carolyn Wright was not “motivated in substantial part by discriminatory intent.” Foster v. Chatman, 578 U. S. ___, ___ (2016) (slip op., at 23) (internal quotation marks omitted). In reaching that conclusion, we break no new legal ground. We simply enforce and reinforce Batson by applying it to the extraordinary facts of this case. We reverse the judgment of the Supreme Court of Mississippi, and we remand the case for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Edited August 18, 2020 by XC.Morrison

[Snake]

Moosechelle: We didn't lock kids in cages.

[awful knawful]

2 hours ago, Polaris 550 said:

HA!HA!HA! Don't think you're sending me a rental bill!! LMMFAO!!! 

 

What is is AWFYY DRAGGY, is it my money, my broads or my chainsaws!! 

 

It's the chainsaws, isn't it?????????    

Big Mike says you don't tip well

[DriftBusta]

2 hours ago, SSFB said:

You can't even remember the things you post or that other people post, don't try to give insight on other people's lives. 

Yeah ok, we're done here.  You're just too woke for me.   

2 hours ago, ACE said:

Trump isn’t a racist 

Joel apparently disagrees...

2 hours ago, XC.Morrison said:

Narrative?  This isn't a bedtime story.  If you go with reality, which I sincerely hope you do then we are on the same page.  You're a Brett M. Kavanaugh fan right?  His recent majority opinion in Flowers v Mississippi found that the state had conducted its jury selection with unlawful racial bias.  How fucked up is the justice system that even the K man has to call B.S.?

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-9572_k536.pdf

Brett Kavanaugh:  In his sixth trial, which is the one at issue here, Flowers was convicted. The State struck five of the six black prospective jurors. On appeal, Flowers argued that the State again violated Batson in exercising peremptory strikes against black prospective jurors. In a divided 5-to-4 decision, the Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. We granted certiorari on the Batson question and now reverse. See 586 U. S. ___ (2018). Four critical facts, taken together, require reversal. First, in the six trials combined, the State employed its peremptory challenges to strike 41 of the 42 black prospective jurors that it could have struck—a statistic that the State acknowledged at oral argument in this Court. Tr. of Oral Arg. 32. Second, in the most recent trial, the sixth trial, the State exercised peremptory strikes against five of the six black prospective jurors. Third, at the sixth trial, in an apparent effort to find pretextual reasons to strike black prospective jurors, the State engaged in dramatically disparate questioning of black and white prospective jurors. Fourth, the State then struck at least one black prospective juror, Carolyn Wright, who was similarly situated to white prospective jurors who were not struck by the State. We need not and do not decide that any one of those four facts alone would require reversal. All that we need to decide, and all that we do decide, is that all of the relevant facts and circumstances taken together establish that the trial court committed clear error in concluding that the State’s peremptory strike of black prospective juror Carolyn Wright was not “motivated in substantial part by discriminatory intent.” Foster v. Chatman, 578 U. S. ___, ___ (2016) (slip op., at 23) (internal quotation marks omitted). In reaching that conclusion, we break no new legal ground. We simply enforce and reinforce Batson by applying it to the extraordinary facts of this case. We reverse the judgment of the Supreme Court of Mississippi, and we remand the case for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

  So this is rationale for rioting, looting, killing for the past 2 plus months?  Of course not, and it sounds like the wrong has been righted thanks to a clear thinking legal scholar, and besides, this is not anything that was codified into any law so,  and again, you make no mention of the 800 lb. gorilla in the room, which is black criminality, and some could argue lately, black on white racism.

1 hour ago, Snake said:

Moosechelle: We didn't lock kids in cages.

Right?  Have you ever heard such a line of prerecorded propagandist bullshit?  Are that many people fucking hypnotized or something?  If this forum is any indication I guess I have my answer.......

 

and for good measure, a preemptive fuck you frenchy, and fuck you smales.  

[Edmo]

8 hours ago, XC.Morrison said:

Systemic racism is pervasive.  Just one example is prosecutors using their peremptory strikes to remove black jurors at greater rates than white jurors.  Legally they’re not allowed to discriminate on the basis of race or sex but if challenged, they need only make up one race neutral qualifier.  Studies have proven that this happens and it happens because greater percentage white or all white juries are more likely to convict black defendants.  We are all entitled by the Constitution to a jury of our peers but black defendants more frequently face a jury of the prosecutor’s peers.  

That also happens with men/women. I got picked for a rape trial and that prosecutor wanted all women on that panel. He had a problem with every single man that went up there.   

Edited August 18, 2020 by Edmo

[hayward]

10 hours ago, f7ben said:

I’d put one up just to piss off my fucking retard QANON Trump loving neighbor. 

No, you wouldn't.

[XC.Morrison]

37 minutes ago, Edmo said:

That also happens with men/women. I got picked for a rape trial and that prosecutor wanted all women on that panel. He had a problem with every single man that went up there.   

Absolutely happens with women, generally they are not favored by prosecutors.  They look at the way you’re dressed, if you brought a book to read they look at what the subject matter is, they look at your age, your profession - many DA’s really disfavor social workers, teachers, doctors, and lawyers.  They really don’t want anyone they see as smart since they fear they’ll look at the details of the case too analytically. They look at your place of residence, suburban, rural, urban.  Young black women are usually the most disfavored.

Again, they aren’t trying to establish fair and balanced juries as you found out...they want the most biased jury they can get.  

[XC.Morrison]

58 minutes ago, DriftBusta said:

Yeah ok, we're done here.  You're just too woke for me.   

Joel apparently disagrees...

  So this is rationale for rioting, looting, killing for the past 2 plus months?  Of course not, and it sounds like the wrong has been righted thanks to a clear thinking legal scholar, and besides, this is not anything that was codified into any law so,  and again, you make no mention of the 800 lb. gorilla in the room, which is black criminality, and some could argue lately, black on white racism.

Right?  Have you ever heard such a line of prerecorded propagandist bullshit?  Are that many people fucking hypnotized or something?  If this forum is any indication I guess I have my answer.......

 

and for good measure, a preemptive fuck you frenchy, and fuck you smales.  

Kavanaugh’s opinion continues on for several pages from where my earlier post leaves off.  I really recommend you read it all as it goes into a full history of how this discrimination has been found to continue even in the wake of the 14th amendment and the 1875 Civil Rights Act.

Here’s an excerpt from further on:

In 1875, to help enforce the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress passed and President Ulysses S. Grant signed the Civil Rights Act of 1875. Ch. 114, 18 Stat. 335. Among other things, that law made it a criminal offense for state officials to exclude individuals from jury service on account of their race. 18 U. S. C. §243. The Act pro- vides: “No citizen possessing all other qualifications which are or may be prescribed by law shall be disqualified for service as grand or petit juror in any court of the United States, or of any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”

So, as you can see, you are misinformed when you stated that this hasn’t been codified into law.  You’ve got some learning to do if you want to be well informed. 

[Skidooski]

Are they grooming her for 2024? Media is just drooling all over her speech 

[f7ben]

1 hour ago, Skidooski said:

Are they grooming her for 2024? Media is just drooling all over her speech 

I’d prefer her to Trump I guess.....both are trash but at least she’s somewhat articulate and like able 

[Skidooski]

3 minutes ago, f7ben said:

I’d prefer her to Trump I guess.....both are trash but at least she’s somewhat articulate and like able 

Slim chance we’ll see a decent candidate in our lifetime. This shit show just keeps escalating 

[XC.Morrison]

6 minutes ago, Skidooski said:

Slim chance we’ll see a decent candidate in our lifetime. This shit show just keeps escalating 

I hope Amanda Seyfried runs.  She’s hot.  

[Skidooski]

3 minutes ago, XC.Morrison said:

I hope Amanda Seyfried runs.  She’s hot.  

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5792395/Amanda-Seyfried-gives-rare-glimpse-marriage-motherhood.html

[XC.Morrison]

40 minutes ago, Skidooski said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5792395/Amanda-Seyfried-gives-rare-glimpse-marriage-motherhood.html

Fuck, it pains me to think that if I’d just held out and if I’d known that she’d just marry the first dude that came around in the wake of Trump’s election I could be married to her right now.  I’d lick her from head to toe everyday  

[DriftBusta]

3 hours ago, XC.Morrison said:

Kavanaugh’s opinion continues on for several pages from where my earlier post leaves off.  I really recommend you read it all as it goes into a full history of how this discrimination has been found to continue even in the wake of the 14th amendment and the 1875 Civil Rights Act.

Here’s an excerpt from further on:

In 1875, to help enforce the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress passed and President Ulysses S. Grant signed the Civil Rights Act of 1875. Ch. 114, 18 Stat. 335. Among other things, that law made it a criminal offense for state officials to exclude individuals from jury service on account of their race. 18 U. S. C. §243. The Act pro- vides: “No citizen possessing all other qualifications which are or may be prescribed by law shall be disqualified for service as grand or petit juror in any court of the United States, or of any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”

So, as you can see, you are misinformed when you stated that this hasn’t been codified into law.  You’ve got some learning to do if you want to be well informed. 

I recommend you stop ignoring the real problems facing the black commuties today and quit being distracted.

[frenchy]

9 hours ago, ManOnManOral said:

 

 Bill Burr is so awesome 

[BOHICA]

7 hours ago, Snake said:

Moosechelle: We didn't lock kids in cages.

Did she really say that???

[Guest]

Watching some of the DNC on Tv, and some of the commentators is making me sick.

I hope the fuck Woofie is right, and Trump kicks ass.

Imagine, Bill Clinton talking about the integrity of the Oval Office!!!!  

This is like the THEATRE OF THE ABSURD!!!!! 

[Mikeadoo]

17 hours ago, XCR1250 said:

Surprised Biden didn't choose her.

Didn't like Michael's smell apparently.....

[Guest]

8 hours ago, awful knawful said:

Big Mike says you don't tip well

Big Mike said you had nice lips. 

 

 

[Snake]

7 hours ago, BOHICA said:

Did she really say that???

Sad, ain't it...