Jump to content
Hugo Stiglitz

Rand Paul was always a Piece of Shit

Recommended Posts

Sweet fucking Christ. That NRA Russia money must be getting warm in their pockets.  This is going to be what they harp on until the election. With a dash of Hunter Biden thrown in. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the GOP caucus have lead pipe plumbing and flaking lead paint on the walls. It's an insane criminal organization.

I heard raving about this on the radio today. They're the party of spittle slinging fury now. Sekulow and Gym Jordan and Lindsay Graham and all the rest. Pure rage and false outrage.

Most of them are smart enough to know what they are doing, but they have no shame to restrain themselves. 

And it may be enough to keep them in power. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we start a GoFundMe account for his neighbor to cover his bail/lawyer/court fees to convince him to kick RP's ass again? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the risk of some neg bombing here,  does anybody have a link that presents the specific language that Paul is objecting to? I spent a few minutes searching for the actual language but didnt have much luck.

Quote

Paul said he’s concerned that the way the House bill is written, it might “conflate lesser crimes with lynching.” He said on Wednesday evening that he wanted to amend the legislation so that minor injuries could not be considered lynching and “ensure crimes resulting in substantial risk of death and extreme physical pain be prosecuted as a lynching.“

While I suspect this objection is probably his regular bullshit political grandstanding, I will withhold judgement until I better understand his specific objection. I am leary ANY time Congress passes legislation in a reactionary fashion to the outrage of the day, because the vote will likely be passed for political appearances rather than on the merit of the legislation itself. The Patriot act comes to mind after 9/11. Everybody wanted to root out terrorism and as an end result we now have more government surveillance of American citizens with fewer checks on how that power can be abused. 

The classic definition of lynching (implying murder by mob action without legal approval) I don't think anybody would have a problem with, but I am curious what he is referring to as minor injuries. Could open a pandora's box if the crimes that can be prosecuted as lynching are not tightly defined. Again, I think Paul is a fucking choad, but that doesn't mean Congress isn't capable of passing poorly thought out legislation with an election fast approaching. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there are only bruises on the neck then you shouldn't be convicted of lynching. If you tie someone to a pickup to be dragged but the rope breaks then you don't get convicted of lynching. I think that is what he is arguing but I don't really understand. If someone is trying to kill you but fails and you don't get real hurt then they shouldn't be convicted of lynching.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Blotto said:

At the risk of some neg bombing here,  does anybody have a link that presents the specific language that Paul is objecting to? I spent a few minutes searching for the actual language but didnt have much luck.

While I suspect this objection is probably his regular bullshit political grandstanding, I will withhold judgement until I better understand his specific objection. I am leary ANY time Congress passes legislation in a reactionary fashion to the outrage of the day, because the vote will likely be passed for political appearances rather than on the merit of the legislation itself. The Patriot act comes to mind after 9/11. Everybody wanted to root out terrorism and as an end result we now have more government surveillance of American citizens with fewer checks on how that power can be abused. 

The classic definition of lynching (implying murder by mob action without legal approval) I don't think anybody would have a problem with, but I am curious what he is referring to as minor injuries. Could open a pandora's box if the crimes that can be prosecuted as lynching are not tightly defined. Again, I think Paul is a fucking choad, but that doesn't mean Congress isn't capable of passing poorly thought out legislation with an election fast approaching. 

here's the entire operative part of the bill

Quote
§ 250. Lynching

“Whoever conspires with another person to violate section 245, 247, or 249 of this title or section 901 of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3631) shall be punished in the same manner as a completed violation of such section, except that if the maximum term of imprisonment for such completed violation is less than 10 years, the person may be imprisoned for not more than 10 years.”.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, elfenix said:

shall be punished in the same manner 

Wait.  So we can lynch them back?  Thats some biblical eye for an eye shit right there.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if Rand is trying to exclude from the definition of lynching “minor injuries” such as a neighbor licking your ass and breaking some ribs for you being an asshole then I am ok with this.  In fact, in his particular case, Im ok with not making it a crime at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Horn Dog said:

Well, if Rand is trying to exclude from the definition of lynching “minor injuries” such as a neighbor licking your ass and breaking some ribs for you being an asshole then I am ok with this.  In fact, in his particular case, Im ok with not making it a crime at all

That’s quite a lick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every time I get depressed about how shitty our two Senators are, I remember it could always be worse and we could be in Kentucky’s shoes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why, just yesterday the doc said I had cancer and needed to start thinking about cancer treatment. 

I told him he's fake news and to take his libtard hoaxes and shove it! SAD!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BigHorn'13 said:

Why, just yesterday the doc said I had cancer and needed to start thinking about cancer treatment. 

I told him I wanted a second opinion and he said, "Okay, you're ugly too!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...