Comments by "" (@indonesiaamerica7050) on "Bloomberg Television" channel.

The Senate vets judicial appointees. What's so hard to understand? The majority gets to vote as it wishes. Yes or no?
2
Bernie has great ideas...but Congress...still full of racists! OMG. Hillary has "street cred." LOL. Yeah, she's a well known crook!
1
Jeff Daniels is such a pathetic moron. Make Americana white again. What a loser. All they understand is race-baiting.
1
He's playing a role. He's a cult zombie just following the Hollywood / leftist zeitgeist. He has no original thoughts and didn't even mention anything factual about the targets of his critiques.
1
Are you another cult zombie? How about actual criticism of the policies Trump is promoting? Real criticism - not baby talk.
1
They're victims of US Federal hegemony over US (and all Western) academies, which also means that the GD communist morons that have taken over the unions have too much influence over how history is presented to the idiots.
1
Bloomberg apparently only employs neo-Marxists and their false choice economic dogmas. Tariffs on a Communist regime are not "blanket tariffs" nor "protectionism". Using "tit for tat" economic policies is not an "ism". It's only "seduction theory" that led us to trade with Communists as "equal" partners or even "developing economies" that will turn "democratic" if we first make the regime powerful enough to destroy us. Great work. Idiots.
1
@sw6118 You should find a good college prep school and spend at least 4 years figuring out why you make such absurd and damaging comments on a compulsive basis. Everything you regurgitate on "politics" is based on circular logic. That's alluding to a theory and then restating a different element of the theory in circular fashion without testing the validity of the theory nor supplying any expected evidence to support any of your claims.
1
@sw6118 Nobody needs to respond to your delusional declarations. I actually gave the best possible response to your comment. All of the problems alluded to in your original post pertain only to you and your flawed mind.
1
@Ysmir_The_Ancient LOL. Logic much? See, you have no video of any kind of Insurrection. It was a Blair Witch Insurrection. A Wag the Dog insurrection. Your stupid Marxist party has destroyed your mind. Did you ever find the Witch in that "documentary"?
1
@CraigScottFrost The ONLY thing that could have occurred on the Joint Session of Congress would be that they were pressured to vote for taking a "pause" to allow States to investigate the allegations and lack of forensic support for "certified" claims. It doesn't matter how much drama you lunatics want to inject. Lobbying Congress is explicitly protected by the First freaking Amendment. The first Amendment on the Bill of Rights. Learn to read. When your stupid cult leaders use language like "overturn" what they mean is changing their consensus decrees. If you listen to Ted Cruz's presentation from his Senate seat at the Joint Session you will understand the "demand" from the "street" petitioners. They wanted forensic audits. If forensic election audits is so foul to your sense of "democracy" maybe you're the one with the problem. The last politician that was allowed to present forensic evidence in a Federal court to seek redress for grievances in a Presidential election was Al Gore. Al Gore was allowed to not only perform selected forensic audits but was also allowed to "heal" the ballots according to his specious theory.
1
@badpuppy3 "If the Supreme Court rules the Constitution qualifications don’t matter, then I want Barack Obama for a third term!" You're joking. Right?
1
@ReachXEnt "why bother to let the states decide if you think SCOTUS will just let him on the ballot anyway?" You don't understand ANYTHING about the 14th Amendment. "Originalists can't have it both ways." It was the slavers, your party, that insisted on absolute States' right to keep their slaves. The Supreme Court of the United States was already the only Supreme Court over the nation. The 14th Amendment reworded the Bill of Rights to make that clear and this was supposed to ensure that rulings like Dred Scott (v. Sandford) could not occur again. Unfortunately, your party can't stop twisting and lying about, well, everything. It has never been a rule of law party. "He should have to abide by the Constitution he swore to uphold & defend and he's shown by his own actions that he's not willing to." You don't understand how any "rule of law" republic works. You can't even properly describe any cases or controversies for a court to rule on. Basically, your ignorant feelings are not actionable in court. At all. It should be that your school teachers corrected your ignorant form of rant while you attended. That no longer happens either. They cultivate "activists" and disgruntled ignoramuses to use as as petty little street terrorists to frighten the judges and dissenting electing officials in order for your cult to achieve single party rule under Lenin's "Vanguard Party" and "Democratic Centralism" doctrines.
1
@pakpala1 Red is the color of revolution. He's not a revolutionary Marxist. Your party is full of Marxist worms that wants to climb up the ladder in the CCP Vanguard Communist Party paradigm. Some are OK being vassals and others are even more deluded than that. They're like you but with actual political power in DC.
1