Comments by "SmallSpoonBrigade" (@SmallSpoonBrigade) on "LegalEagle" channel.

@tinamoul Perhaps, but why would he care? You're not his audience.
1
People make far too much of Project 2025, I didn't see anything in there that wasn't a logical next step or something to fundraise on. If people didn't see this coming with the Democrats running further and further to the right, then they sort of deserve what we get. This is the inevitable result of voting blue no matter who.
1
If they do return from the dead, they'll probably be at most 1/3 of their current size as it would require everybody that had been giving them money to sign up again and there are a lot of other gun rights organizations out there without the baggage of the NRA. Many of them are OK with reasonable measures like background checks and limitations on the number of rounds you can have in a magazine in order to preserve more important firearm related freedoms. It's also worth keeping in mind that the 2nd Amendment can be revoked or modified at any time through the amendment process. It wouldn't be the first amendment to be changed in that fashion and at some point people are going to get fed up with the mass shootings and they may just demand more restriction than what you can do without an amendment.
1
@John-Smith02 I agree, Harris would never have been the VP if Biden hadn't promised to choose a woman of color for VP.
1
I guess, I'm not really seeing anything in this, apart from the abortion stuff, that they haven't been openly saying for years. And I'm pretty sure that the abortion stuff is more or less just the logical next step following the overturn of Row v., Wade so even on that count, I'm not sure why people are shocked that the party is pushing this. Just remember, this stuff is only possible because the Democrats keep throwing winnable elections and fights and the GOP never does. So, the Democrats are just as responsible for this garbage as the GOP is.
1
@nickmcgookin247 On of the things that I'm curious about is what sort of actions were attempted to contact them on the bridge. Which given the the wold have been tough to do.
1
You're just now realizing that? Something like half of the people in the country live in "constitution-free zones" that the SCOTUS permits because they're too cowardly to tell the government they have to obey the constitutional rights of the people who live near airports and other borders. Not to mention the completely unconstitutional Bush v., Gore which handed the election to Bush in spite of him losing the vote in Florida by literal tens of thousands of votes and led to no GOP candidate for President winning with more than half of the popular vote. Not to mention the court stripping away more and more power from the voters while allowing more and more brazen bribery. At this point, I'm not even sure if it's still possible to be convicted of bribing a public official due to the extremely broad permission that the court has already granted.
1
It's worth nothing that the NRA deserves to be dissolved if for no other reason than the fact that it is advocating for policies which go against the majority of the membership. Most of the members don't want people to get their hands of firearms that aren't going to use them responsibly or that have a criminal record. The NRA as an organization is just absolutely repugnant and repulsive, they advocate for policies that ensure that criminals will be able to easily get their hands on firearms and that the ones available are far more powerful than what one would reasonably need outside of an actual combat zone. Lastly, for those that do support the purported goals of the NRA as indicated by the charter, there are tons of other nonprofits that are faithfully protecting hunting rights and access to firearms that are appropriate for self-defense and that fund classes to learn to responsibly handle and shoot firearms. The money should go to them, not an extremist organization that is fighting hard to ensure that mass murderers and terrorists will always be able to get their hands on powerful weaponry.
1
Seeing that fraud Obama in one of the ads for this video was rather ironic given that it's partially his fault that we're in this position. He should have gotten 1 nominee at a minimum and should have leaned on RBG to admit that she was too old to make it the potential 8 years to get through the Trump administration. Those 2 would have shifted the court from 6-3 to 4-5.
1
The really dumb thing is that getting into one of those schools has little, if any, impact on how much you make in most cases. There are some situations like with legal degrees where having the right name on the degree may have an impact, but for the most part, you're flushing money down the toilet that could be better used for other things.
1
This is what happens when both parties are captured by the same donors. The Democrats should have seen Bush v. Gore as a warning to take the kid gloves off and go after the Republicans aggressively, but they didn't. They kept compromising and going after GOP voters rather than finishing the party off. It wasn't that long ago that the GOP was so weak that they could have been done for good. Now, they've pretty much succeeded in overthrowing the government for all practical purposes. The regulatory agencies can't regulate, you can't get any reasonable legislation through congress and now the POTUS is immune to prosecution for official acts, whether or not those acts would normally be criminal.
1
The Democrats rig their primaries and then capitulate to the GOP at just about every opportunity, they're not exactly any bigger supporters of Democracy than the GOP is.
1
It's time for a constitutional amendment that limits the President to nominating people to federal courts that don't come from a list created by a bipartisan, or non-partisan, working group. The President could choose whatever individual they like from that list, but they have to use the list and the Senate has to give the nominee an up or down vote as long as the nominee doesn't withdraw. And while we're at it, puts some sort of term limit in place and requires that the court adhere to some sort of code of ethics.
1