4 points

This sounds like undigested talking points being regurgitated in a warm mental vomit stew, with lots of little chunks of everything in there.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

Now this don’t make a damn lick of sense. If we need guns to protect ourselves from gubmint tyranny, and y’all plan to put that feller back in the gubment, then what the hell does he need a gun for?

permalink
report
reply
11 points

Dude probably has no idea how to properly handle a gun, AND he has a permanent secret service detail.

This has zero impact on his life, other than politically.

permalink
report
reply
-9 points

Not permanent. He will lose his security at some point. Obama changed the direction of how long people keep secret service details.

Personally, I think they should keep them for life. Yes it is a tax payer expense but for their service, I think it is a good expense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

Oh my God here we go lol

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

So which one is it? Do you now think they shouldn’t be lifetime or do you agree with Obama? I think I was very clear on the topic. Which part did you find confusing?

Here is what I said

Personally, I think they should keep them for life. Yes it is a tax payer expense but for their service, I think it is a good expense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

Trump was never of any service to the country. He has only ever been a problem, and has only ever served himself.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Are you saying that you reckon an ex-president, who commits any crime (before, during or after serving) should still be protected by the SS?

Including convictions for murder? Extortion? Rape? Child rape?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

The protection comes because of the risk of the title. So yes, until they die.

If the SS has to protect Trump in prison so be it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Here’s what the same gun group said about Hunter Biden using a 2A argument in his case. The judge denied the argument.

that’s right, that Hunter Biden, who, despite his father’s long standing and well known disdain for the second amendment, is now turning to the exercise of his rights to shield him from prosecution. “Rules for thee but not for me” eh Hunter?

permalink
report
reply

Conservative

!conservative@lemm.ee

Create post

A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff

  1. Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee’s rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.

  2. We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.

  3. Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.

A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don’t reply to it.

Community stats

  • 1.2K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.2K

    Posts

  • 14K

    Comments