Tripnsweep

I had an ex girlfriend who graduated from Wittenberg who used that line when she described Kent State to me and why she didn't go there.

Over under on the crowd? 800?

You might as well be reading the Weekly World News in that case.

https://www.courthousenews.com/narrow-focus-on-rape-definition-wont-get-trump-a-new-trial/

Google is your friend.

That's your news source?

Apparently you're incapable of using Google. That's too bad you have to rely on people to tell you what to think.

I saw Colton Hawk transferred to ASU.

He was found guilty. Whether you agree with it or not doesn't matter. It happened. He is now and will always be a convicted criminal. The end.

How are those lies? He was found guilty. Do you live in some alternate reality where Trump has never done anything wrong?

The government didn't take an ownership stake in any of those companies though.

Fell out of a window.

I'm pretty sure being a convicted felon is a forever thing. It's already been decided in court, survived several appeals, etc. He will die a convicted felon and rapist. Which from the look of things might be sooner rather than later.

So if you're in favor of going after criminals, why do you support the actions of a rapist and 34x felon?

Oh look little jimmy has an opinion that nobody cares about.

So nobody can give a solid reason. Pretty much what I expected.

You're too stupid to continue with.

Yes I did. I don't know why you're trying to nitpick about how it was written or quoted when the more important issue is the blatant unconstitutionality of this latest edict by a wannabe dictator.

I don't know who his advisors are.

Boom.

You should either learn how to read or just stop asking stupid questions.

It says right there that they did not expand on how this doesn't apply to the first amendment. It also doesn't say anything about how your burning the flag has to cause a riot, just that the act of burning a flag is now going to be prosecuted because it could incite one. Your reading comprehension sucks.

You didn't read the article. There is nothing that says that. In fact, here is a direct quote. WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump on Monday signed an executive order charging the Department of Justice with investigating cases of flag desecration and burning, saying that anybody who burns a U.S. flag would be charged with inciting a riot. Trump said burning an American flag “incites riots at levels we’ve never seen before.” Anybody charged for destroying a flag would be charged with inciting a riot and receive one year in jail with no opportunity for early release, Trump claimed. Trump’s advisers said the executive order “wouldn’t fall afoul of the First Amendment,” which protects the freedom of speech, but did not expand on what that meant.

https://www.12news.com/article/news/nation-world/trump-signs-executive-order-to-prosecute-flag-burning/507-4fd1a614-a217-406e-8f28-e200c91f265b?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook_12News&fbclid=IwQ0xDSwMZjLlleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHpeVMdVe7vnB55VrGEL3Bgtzfolz2qzbrFBtPnnRUMKvrdIx-PKDFaNgctT5_aem_wypJ6onhuLCBE5Dc03bRbw Well so much for free speech. According to his own words, burning the flag is now an arrestable offense because you will be charged with inciting a riot now. Hilarious coming from a guy who had his supporters storm the capitol building to prevent the transfer of power who beat police with the flag itself.