FennPol @FennPol

@JHHall90 @itsdeaann You know, you should PROVE that 2020 was rigged. Like Trump did. Oh, wait... Like Trump's lawyer did. Oh, wait... Like 60+ judges said it was. Oh, wait...

@CarlaLaceRs6 @BobbyChurchil @DemocraticWins MAGA has a first name, it's C-U-L-T.

@A24 Why the fuck are you copyright claiming and taking down peoples' stuff? They were here first, you guys are tourists making a quick buck on open source internet folklore. The movie was great, but this is sleezy af.

@MattAHay @zBrutallyHonest @FoxNews The DOJ was allowed to operate of its own volition during Biden's term.

@The_Novi_Chalk @Burghbrawler703 @RT_com WE need unredacted access so that anyone can be held accountable by the people. For a 'law loving' party, politicians in the GOP seem awful lenient with Trump disobeying an explicit federal law.

@The_Novi_Chalk @Burghbrawler703 @RT_com But A) Not all of the ones he was supposed to BY FEDERAL LAW and B) Had tons of redactions that were also illegal according to the law. He released more, but not nearly enough. I'd give him credit if he actually released them all.

@MattAHay @zBrutallyHonest @FoxNews I have no doubt they had dirty laundry as well in there, but the big difference is that Biden didn't control that DOJ directly AND it would have taken an act of congress to force its release due to it being under investigation at the time.

@letter2mike_ @CNN And not just tax audit immunity for him: For his ENTIRE FAMILY.

@letter2mike_ @CNN Basically he was set to settle with the IRS (remember, HIS government) for $1.8bn and immunity from tax audits. That's an obscenely corrupt win if he were to get it.

@letter2mike_ @CNN This IRS thing is him suing the government (himself), winning, and then basicallly getting a tier of justice for himself where he doesn't have to answer to the IRS. That's corrupt as fuck.

@sydneyduodenum @AFpost A legally binding opinion as granted to them by the Constitution. Granted that hasn't stopped him before because he has nothing but contempt for the Constitution, but the SCOTUS is the HIGHEST OPINION that decides if an action is lawful or constitutional.

@sydneyduodenum @AFpost Article III Section 2, they have power over 'all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution'. So, while any branch can interpret the Constitution, only the Judicial has power specifically making their final interpretation valid in terms of case law and precedent.

@sydneyduodenum @AFpost If he were just able to defy it because he disagreed, that's how you get a literal dictator. To be clear, I'm saying someone ignoring the legal precedent set by the PEOPLE WHO DECIDE WHAT IS CONSTITUTIONAL would break the three branches keeping an eye on each other.

@sydneyduodenum @AFpost I don't see what you mean. Judicial Review by SCOTUS says what is constitutional or not. That's not up for debate. If they say it's not constitutional, it is therefore against the constitution. That's one of their strongest powers. Where does it say otherwise, I'm curious.

@sydneyduodenum @AFpost You don't actually know how the SCOTUS works, do you? SCOTUS' decision isn't an OPINION. It's a legally binding interpretation set by the majority of the court. They decide what's constitutional, not the President.

@109stitches @factpostnews They did with the JCPOA.

France, 7 July 2026 The National Assembly has passed the law granting police officers a "license to kill." Shameful and dangerous.

@WhiteHouse You mean the global prices that increased during the pandemic which he had no control over? Unlike you, who put up bullshit universal tarrifs and started a war of choice that closed a major shipping route?

@ReedHawk2 @abierkhatib You might actually be correct as I *do* sometimes confuse social democracy and democratic socialism and that's my fault, I admit.