Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

Arizona Democrat thinks its ok to fight for the Taliban and kill our troops

24567

Comments

  • RaceBannon
    RaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 116,050 Founders Club
    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    And?

    Treason isn't a voting issue for democrats
    That's treason now?
    Now?

    What a dumbfuck
  • Pitchfork51
    Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 27,691

    Better get out and vote Bitchfork, this is your territory

    Nah brah I live in Las Vegas
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    And?

    Treason isn't a voting issue for democrats
    That's treason now?
    Now?

    What a dumbfuck
    Section 3.

    Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

    The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457
    Context:

    Later, Sinema and Hancock discussed their political views, with Hancock taking up the libertarian argument against intervention and raising as a hypothetical against Sinema's worldview if she would oppose him joining the Taliban army.
    "Now you would say, maybe we do owe something to the world, as long as it's nice and sweet and peaceful and what you want to do," Hancock said to Sinema on his show, "Declare Your Independence with Ernest Hancock."
    "Well it's not so much a candy cane kind of theory as you're making it stand out," Sinema responded. "But I do think that those of us who are privileged to have more do owe something to others."
    "By force?" Hancock asked. "By me, as an individual, if I want to go fight in the Taliban army, I go over there and I'm fighting for the Taliban. I'm saying that's a personal decision..."
    "Fine," Sinema interjected, "I don't care if you want to do that, go ahead."
    Hancock then listed off other hypotheticals, including joining Britain's Royal Air Force in World War II to fight the Germans bombing London, saying he has no problems with what individuals choose to do with their money, as long as its not by government force. Sinema responded by saying, "When you say we owe something to the world, my definition of owing something to the world does not involve war and destruction."
    Sinema then said she'd like to get back on topic to her opposition to the Iraq War.
    "I don't want to debate any kind of, I don't know, fiscal opportunities with you," Sinema said. "I'm interested in talking about the war. Specifically I'm interested in talking about opposition to the war that's happening tomorrow."
  • CirrhosisDawg
    CirrhosisDawg Member Posts: 6,390
    Trumpanzees are always going to trumpanzee. There is no other comment necessary.
  • GrundleStiltzkin
    GrundleStiltzkin Member Posts: 61,516 Standard Supporter
    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    And?

    Treason isn't a voting issue for democrats
    That's treason now?
    Now?

    What a dumbfuck
    Section 3.

    Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

    The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.
    Looks like you answered your own question.
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    2001400ex said:

    And?

    Treason isn't a voting issue for democrats
    That's treason now?
    Now?

    What a dumbfuck
    Section 3.

    Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

    The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.
    Looks like you answered your own question.
    I always knew you were smart.
  • sarktastic
    sarktastic Member Posts: 9,208
    Watch while this thread turns into 10 pages of Hondo defending Politicians who support the Taliban over USA
  • 2001400ex
    2001400ex Member Posts: 29,457

    Watch while this thread turns into 10 pages of Hondo defending Politicians who support the Taliban over USA

    Providing context is defending now. Got it.
  • RaceBannon
    RaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 116,050 Founders Club
    Treason has no context

    Ask John Brennan, CNN and the unhinged left who have all accused Trump of treason

    You're defending Tammy Taliban here hondo.