Political funny picture thread, part 3

[jamil]

Even judging from a photo, I think I can confidently believe that whatever screeming and cackling is coming from the hole in their faces. That’s some really retarded **** going down there.

 

[KJQ6945]

 

[printcraft]

[video=youtube;6MmB7_e7ftY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MmB7_e7ftY&feature=youtu.be[/video]

 

[Route 45]

 

[actaeon277]

Right.
Cause I'm sure they're tired of all the killing, raping, and torturing that they've done SO MANY times before.

 

[actaeon277]

[video=youtube;6MmB7_e7ftY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MmB7_e7ftY&feature=youtu.be[/video]

Nah.
That's just all the teleprompters being fed the same information.

 

[Route 45]

 

[OakRiver]

That Tweet aged well

 

[Doug]

Or is it the difference multiple STD infections can make?

 

[sharkey]

Or is it the difference multiple STD infections can make?

So you are saying that Hillary had enough to be a vector?




Ewwwww

 

[Route 45]

 

[Route 45]

 

[Liberty Sanders]

To whom it may concern: I just read a story about some people who showed up at the Red Hen at its opening time of 1700hrs and it didn't open. The information was that its owner is keeping it closed until at least July 5 (as if that's going to save her).

If this flyer is legit no one is having dinner there June 30.

 

[Route 45]

 

[Route 45]

 

[Birds Away]

If, as has been reported, the travel ban only effects 8% of the worldwide population. How does that make it a "Muslim ban:. It would seem to be more accurate to call it a ban on immigration from countries whose infrastructure doesn't support international norms for information on potential immigrants. I welcome additional information that better explains this and/or refutes the summary I have posted. I truly would like to get a better grasp on this but, as usual, there is nowhere to turn to get the actual facts.

 

[indiucky]

 

[Jerchap2]

If, as has been reported, the travel ban only effects 8% of the worldwide population. How does that make it a "Muslim ban:. It would seem to be more accurate to call it a ban on immigration from countries whose infrastructure doesn't support international norms for information on potential immigrants. I welcome additional information that better explains this and/or refutes the summary I have posted. I truly would like to get a better grasp on this but, as usual, there is nowhere to turn to get the actual facts.

Your understanding of the situation agrees with mine. The executive order is lawful and constitutional. Those opposing it were using an argument that statements made by Donald Trump on the campaign trail showed his intent to ban Muslims. That does not enter into any decision on the executive order itself, which must only be judged on the merit of what it says. Applying this logic, all nine justices on the SCOTUS should have upheld it. It is a clear demonstration that the four liberal justices are activist judges, meaning that they intend to write law from the bench rather than do their job of determining constitutionality.

 

[Jerchap2]

 

[printcraft]