sid shofner

@ChuckGrassley ONLY the USA IS STUPID ENOUGH TO FEED OUR ADVERSARIES AND NOT OUR OWN AMERICAN FARMERS.🤬🤬🤬🤬🎯🎯🎯

Why would USA help bail out Argentina while they take American soybean producers’ biggest market??? We shld use leverage at every turn to help hurting farm economy Family farmers shld be top of mind in negotiations by representatives of USA

@CourageHabit @PirateWires Now YOU KNOW WHAT HARRIS/WALZ MEANS 🤬🤬🤬

@PirateWires Here is what Walz means for those who need examples.

Walz Doubles Down on Punishment for Hate Speech, MSM Continues to Ignore It Minnesota Governor Tim Walz reiterated his belief that “hate speech” isn’t protected under the First Amendment at last night’s vice presidential debate. The remarks came after Trump VP pick JD Vance argued censorship is “a much bigger threat to democracy than anything we’ve seen in the last four years,” drawing a contrast to January 6, which Democrats regularly point to as evidence of Donald Trump’s danger to democracy. “[We do] have a threat to democracy […] It’s big technology companies silencing their fellow citizens, and it’s Kamala Harris saying that rather than debate and persuade her fellow Americans, she'd like to censor people who engage in misinformation.” Vance said. “You guys attack us for not believing in democracy,” he continued, referring to January 6. “But the most sacred right to the United States democracy is the First Amendment. You yourself have said, ‘There’s no First Amendment right to misinformation’—” “Or threatening. Or hate speech. You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater… That’s the Supreme Court test.” Walz interjected. Vance was alluding to comments Walz made in a 2023 MSNBC interview, when he remarked that “there’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech.” Video of the interview resurfaced in August shortly after Harris announced Walz as her VP pick. While figures like Glen Greenwald and RFK Jr. were quick to express concern about the clip, others downplayed it by claiming the clip was being taken out of context. The mainstream media seems to have entirely ignored the issue. Likewise, establishment media has yet to report on Walz’s comments about hate speech from last night. NPR’s “fact check” of the debate, for example, dedicates around 2,600 words to fact checking Vance and 200 to Walz. NBC’s “5 key takeaways” of the debate don’t mention the exchange or Walz’s views on free speech. The AP mentions Vance’s comments about censorship, but not Walz’s response; instead framing Vance’s comments as “downplaying January 6.” Contrary to Walz’s statements, there is no “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment. This is supported by well-established Supreme court precedent. R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul struck down an ordinance prohibiting the display of symbols that “arouse anger, alarm, or resentment in others on the basis of race, color, creed, religion or gender.” 2011’s Snyder v. Phelps ruled that even anti-gay protests by Westboro Baptist Church members staged at armed service members' funerals were protected under the First Amendment. In 2017, the court — which included the liberal Ruth Bader Ginsberg — unanimously struck down the disparagement clause of the Lanham Act in Simon v. Tam, with Justice Alito writing: “Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express ‘the thought that we hate’.” The court has treated misinformation similarly. “The First Amendment creates ‘breathing space’ protecting the false statements and hyperbole that are ‘inevitable in free debate’,” according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. “The Court has suggested the government may not regulate false ideas, and even false factual statements receive some constitutional protection.” Last night’s vice presidential debate was the first to be held during this election cycle, and likely the last. — Riley Nork (@rylzdigital) ────────── References for this post are available on our website.

@PirateWires MSM WON'T REPORT OR QUESTION HIM. THEY ARE THE EPITOME OF A RAG NEWS

@WernerS350841 @cb_doge 👍👍👍👍

JD Vance called out the moderators for lying to the audience, and CBS immediately muted him. Legacy media is clearly controlled by the Democrats.

@Arkagami_ @cb_doge Corrupt Moderaters wouldn't let JD answer,Scared of the FACTS

@cb_doge Crazy I heard something about an app facilitating immigration, I didn't know it went this far as to grant legal status. Wtf can they vote with this???? Why didn't they expand on this??

@oida_grantler @cb_doge English Please

@cb_doge Als Trumps Vize JD Vance sagt, dass großer Zuzug an Migranten Städte überfordert, wird er mit einem „Faktencheck“ von den CBS-Moderatorinnen unterbrochen. Und das Mikro kalt abgedreht.

@KevinlyFather @cb_doge LMFAO What Does TEMPORARY STATUS MEAN. TEMPORARY STUPID. NOW SEND THEM HOME

@cb_doge No. She's correct. The Haitians have legal temporary protected status. Trump gave it to them too. Look at the date.

@MichaelK1499909 @cb_doge But they are Led by DEI SCUM

THIS is BLATANT Censorship by CBS ! I'm so glad they did this ! Americans can see with their own eyes, the BIAS of #LYINGNEWS that CBS is ! CBS broke the Rules of the Debate & the FEC should fine them for breaking the Rules & for Violating Vance's Freedom of Speech rights !

@wuhgees @cb_doge No not Legal,only in Obiden,/CAMELTOES Mind. Also MIORKY SKUNK

@cb_doge I am still very confused about this. He called them illegals, yet defeated his own argument by explaining their legalization process... so they are legal? The process has been there for a long long time...

@Grouchyoldman3 @cb_doge When did they Mute Wallyboy??

@cb_doge They didn't immediately mute him, and they also muted Walz after repeatedly telling them they went over time.

@walden @cb_doge Your Pathetic 🤡🤡

LOL. Vance was upset that the moderators fact checked him. Because he lies. Never a good look.

@PresBlunderman @cb_doge @NGorhamA4S4 Yes she's a 💩🤡

@cb_doge @NGorhamA4S4 The smug look on the one in pink, at the end, is infuriating

@ElvisUSA @cb_doge Well Why hasn't Congress Stopped It. Oh Wait NO F__KING ⚾

@cb_doge A treacherous premise to give illegals "legal" status is still illegal. JD Vance is absolutely correct - the CBP One app has NOT been with us since the 1990s (what Walz was trying to spin). The inception of CBP One app was in 2022.

@ARTISTstacy @VasBroughtToX @cb_doge Read My Earlier Comments 🤡🤡🤡💩

no, it isn’t. it would’ve been, maybe, if Vance had been correct, but he wasn’t! Look it up yourself. Jus ridiculous claim about the CBP One App. was not accurate. He suggested that the app allows “illegal migrants” to easily apply for asylum or parole and be granted legal status, implying that the process is swift and automatic. In reality, the CBP One app, launched in 2020, simply allows migrants to schedule appointments with U.S. immigration officials to present their cases at ports of entry. It does not guarantee that their requests will be granted, as Vance implied. Migrants using the app must still undergo screening and meet stringent legal requirements for asylum or parole, such as proving a credible fear of persecution. Vance’s oversimplification of the app’s function misrepresented its role in the immigration process. The app facilitates orderly processing, but U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials retain full discretion to approve or deny entry based on the merits of each case. Therefore, the app does not bypass immigration laws as claimed .

@avgusergirl @EvilPlantLady @cb_doge If True why are they given Money and Hotel rooms at TAX PAYER EXPENSE. YOUR EITHER POORLY EDUCATED OR JUST A BIDUM DEMORAT 🤡🤡

@EvilPlantLady @cb_doge By US standards, they were given legal status as they were sponsored by Employers in the US needing employees. Legal.

@ChowMane10 @EvilPlantLady @cb_doge Starting with Cameltoe and OBIDEN/OBAMA 🤡🤡🤡💩💩💩

@EvilPlantLady @cb_doge Any senator or legislator that agreed or turned a blind eye to that app and this whole invasion should be fired,tried, convicted and sentenced for treason

@ARTISTstacy @Dr_Sidra_khan11 @cb_doge Keep Dreaming Goldy Locks 🤡🤡🤡

He was muted, princess, because he wasn’t telling the truth, and his time was up. Look it up yourself. Do a little research instead of giving a free pass to Republicans just because they want to lie about things. His claim about the CBP One was not accurate!!! He suggested that the app allows “illegal migrants” to easily apply for asylum or parole and be granted legal status, implying that the process is swift and automatic. In reality, the CBP One app, launched in 2020, simply allows migrants to schedule appointments with U.S. immigration officials to present their cases at ports of entry. It does not guarantee that their requests will be granted, as Vance implied. Migrants using the app must still undergo screening and meet stringent legal requirements for asylum or parole, such as proving a credible fear of persecution. Vance’s oversimplification of the app’s function misrepresented its role in the immigration process. The app facilitates orderly processing, but U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials retain full discretion to approve or deny entry based on the merits of each case. Therefore, the app does not bypass immigration laws as claimed .

@iam_smx @cb_doge Sue the Bastards for Breech

@cb_doge They fact checked him and fact checking was not in the campaign agreement of both parties.

@JaneenNoto @randyodish @cb_doge @CBSNews She's a 💩 repeater. Not a Journalist. The old News Journalist would have Flayed These Bitches for Disparaging Their Profession.

@randyodish @cb_doge @CBSNews Absolutely! Well put! @ CBSNews - Margret’s little attempt to - falsely mislead the viewers is blatant and disgusting. And then she get all condescending on him too. Wow. Shows your character Margaret. Not good.

@ARTISTstacy @randyodish @cb_doge @CBSNews Your Pathetic but You Look like it TOO 🤡🤡

Vance was lying, so the took the correct tone with him. His claim about the CBP One app was not accurate, you see. Resesrvhbit. Look it up! Hecwss lying! He suggested that the app allows “illegal migrants” to easily apply for asylum or parole and be granted legal status, implying that the process is swift and automatic. In reality, the CBP One app, launched in 2020, simply allows migrants to schedule appointments with U.S. immigration officials to present their cases at ports of entry. It does not guarantee that their requests will be granted, as Vance implied. Migrants using the app must still undergo screening and meet stringent legal requirements for asylum or parole, such as proving a credible fear of persecution. Vance’s oversimplification of the app’s function misrepresented its role in the immigration process. The app facilitates orderly processing, but U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials retain full discretion to approve or deny entry based on the merits of each case. Therefore, the app does not bypass immigration laws as claimed .