I guess on one hand you have to hand it to marxists. They never give up

Grim Reaper said:
Intothenight screaming DON’T TRY TO DENY YOUR OWN POSTS! again is the clearest sign yet that his brain has officially entered safe‑mode. He’s not debating, he’s running the same corrupted line like a Roomba slamming into the same wall forever.

When a man repeats one sentence this many times, it’s not conviction, it’s catastrophic system failure. He has no evidence, no receipts, no argument. Just the same shriek on loop because the rest of his mental software crashed hours ago.

At this point he’s not even glitching. He’s bricked.
Click to expand...
He has been saying that shit on here for a couple of years now and has yet to show us where ANYBODY has denied making any post.
He is one fucked up very low IQ person.
 
QP! said:
Why don't people put this bot on ignore.

His entire reason for being here is to get people to reply to his posts with anything so he can then reply with a spam barrage.

He does not care and likely does not read what you say as he is on autopilot spam bot mode.

Of all the posters here who should get banned for what most forums call empty posting, he is top of the list
Click to expand...
He is good for a laugh some times.
 
QP! said:
Why don't people put this bot on ignore.

His entire reason for being here is to get people to reply to his posts with anything so he can then reply with a spam barrage.

He does not care and likely does not read what you say as he is on autopilot spam bot mode.

Of all the posters here who should get banned for what most forums call empty posting, he is top of the list
Click to expand...
Ignoring him doesn’t fix anything, he’ll just keep spamming the same fake fallacies and pretending it means he won. Calling out the spam and the idiocy isn’t optional. It’s necessary.
 
Grim Reaper said:
Ignoring him doesn’t fix anything, he’ll just keep spamming the same fake fallacies and pretending it means he won. Calling out the spam and the idiocy isn’t optional. It’s necessary.
Click to expand...
If everyone put him on ignore his spamming would be meaningless. No one would see it.

The entire reason a spammed or hard core conspiracy theorists enters forums is to get people to reply so they can repost the same talking points. They could care less what you reply with as they are on autopilot.
 
Grim Reaper said:

🧊 1. What actually happened (sourced facts)​

The Virginia Supreme Court struck down the Democratic redistricting amendment​

  • The court ruled 4–3 that Democrats violated procedural requirements by placing the amendment on the ballot after early voting had already begun.

After the ruling, some Democrats privately discussed lowering the judicial retirement age​

  • Multiple sources (MSN, Reason, NYT reporting referenced in Reason) confirm that Democratic lawmakers discussed lowering the mandatory retirement age from 73/75 to 54.
  • This would force all current justices to retire and allow the Democratic-controlled legislature to appoint replacements.

This idea originated from a progressive newsletter (The Downballot)​

  • The Downballot published a column proposing the tactic.
  • Lawmakers then discussed it privately.

It is legal under the Virginia Constitution​

  • The General Assembly has explicit authority to set judicial retirement ages.

It is NOT a finalized plan​

  • Reports describe it as a “radical,” “drastic,” “extreme,” or “floating” idea — not a bill, not a vote, not a public proposal.
  • Some Democrats warned it would be politically damaging and might fail the “legitimacy test.”

🧊 2. Bias check on the forum framing​

The forum post claims:
  • Democrats “were thwarted because of their illegal ballot initiative.”
    • Fact: The court ruled it was procedurally invalid, not “illegal” in the criminal sense.
  • Democrats “plan on changing the retirement age to 54.”
    • Fact: They discussed it; no evidence of a formal plan or legislative action.
  • Democrats are “marxists” who “march in lockstep.”
    • Bias: This is ideological labeling, not supported by any factual source.
  • “JPP marxists won’t oppose it.”
    • Bias: Predictive claim about individuals’ behavior, not evidence-based.
The post mixes one true element (the idea was discussed) with exaggerations (claiming it is a coordinated plan) and ideological framing (“marxists,” “lockstep,” “illegal”).

🧊 3. What is actually true vs. exaggerated​


ClaimStatusEvidence
Democrats discussed lowering retirement age to 54TrueMSN+1
It is legal for the legislature to change retirement ageTruefactually.co
Democrats have a formal plan to do thisNot supportedNo bill, no public proposal
Democrats are “replacing all judges to get their way”ExaggeratedDiscussion ≠ action
The ballot initiative was “illegal”MisleadingIt violated procedure, not criminal law
Democrats are “marxists”Opinion / ideological framingNo factual basis
Click to expand...
another AI response from the queen of AI, lol. Nobody read your shit moron
 
Tobytone said:
another AI response from the queen of AI, lol. Nobody read your shit moron
Click to expand...
Thanks for the laughs, Tobytone. You couldn’t refute a single-sourced point, so you hid behind your broken catchphrase again. Every time you yell “another AI response,” all you’re really saying is I have no counterargument and this hurt my feelings.

Keep going, your panic is the best endorsement of my accuracy.
 
Teflon Don said:
www.the-downballot.com

How Virginia Democrats can overturn the redistricting ruling: Retire the Supreme Court

The state Constitution gives lawmakers complete latitude to set the judicial retirement age. They should use it.
www.the-downballot.com www.the-downballot.com

So after being thwarted by the courts because of their illegal ballot initiative in Virginia, the democrats have a new plan to get their redistricting ways.

They plan on changing the current retirement age of their judges to 54 so they can replace all of them with those that will give them their way.

Now technically, this is legal, but the optics aren't good. But, when do these marxists care about optics?

I must say it is funny to watch. I doubt any JPP marxist will come out in opposition to this move because they all march in lock step even though they claim to be "independent" thinkers.

About the only response I will get from them is complaints about being called marxists.
Click to expand...
You know what's even funnier? The moron that appealed the decision to SCOTUS screwed the first attempt up by literally misspelling the word Virginia, lol. The second time he tried? Screwed up the name of the court he was sending it to. You know who the moron is? Jay Jones the guy that fantasized about killing a republican and his kids while his wife watched. Brilliant libtards in Virgna, his spelling not mine, lol.

Of course, you already need to be a dumbass thinking that SCOTUS would take the case, they have nothing to do with Virgnia law at all.
 

🧊 FACT CHECK (with sources + corrections)​

1. Did Democrats get “thwarted by an illegal ballot initiative”?​

Misleading. The Virginia Supreme Court ruled the amendment procedurally invalid, not “illegal” in the criminal sense. It was struck down because it was placed on the ballot after early voting had already begun, violating procedural rules — not because Democrats committed a crime.

2. Did Democrats “plan” to change the judicial retirement age to 54?​

Not supported. What actually happened:
  • A progressive newsletter (The Downballot) proposed lowering the retirement age to 54.
  • Some Democratic lawmakers privately discussed the idea afterward.
  • No bill exists.
  • No public proposal exists.
  • No legislative action has been taken.
Calling it a “plan” is an exaggeration. It was a floated idea, not a coordinated strategy.

3. Is it legal to change the retirement age?​

True. The Virginia Constitution gives the General Assembly the authority to set judicial retirement ages.

4. “Democrats want to replace all judges to get their way.”​

Exaggerated. Lowering the retirement age would force current justices to retire, but:
  • There is no evidence Democrats intend to do this.
  • There is no legislation.
  • There is no coordinated plan.
  • It was described as “radical,” “drastic,” and politically risky even by Democrats.

5. “JPP marxists march in lockstep.”​

Opinion, not fact. This is ideological labeling, not evidence‑based.

6. The Jay Jones claim​

The user’s post mixes:
  • A real person (Jay Jones)
  • A real filing error (misspelling “Virginia”)
  • And an unverified, inflammatory claim about him “fantasizing about killing a Republican and his kids.”
That last part is not supported by credible reporting. It appears to be a forum rumor or political smear, not a sourced fact.

7. “SCOTUS has nothing to do with Virginia law.”​

True. SCOTUS generally does not take cases involving purely state constitutional questions unless a federal issue is involved.

🧊 Summary Table​

ClaimStatusNotes
Democrats discussed lowering retirement ageTruePrivate discussion, no bill
Democrats have a “plan” to do itNot supportedNo legislative action
Ballot initiative was “illegal”MisleadingProcedural violation, not criminal
Democrats want to replace all judgesExaggeratedDiscussion ≠ plan
Jay Jones “fantasized about killing a Republican”Not supportedNo credible sourcing
SCOTUS irrelevant to VA constitutional issuesTrueState-level matter
 
Last edited:
Grim Reaper said:
Thanks for the laughs, Tobytone. You couldn’t refute a single-sourced point, so you hid behind your broken catchphrase again. Every time you yell “another AI response,” all you’re really saying is I have no counterargument and this hurt my feelings.

Keep going, your panic is the best endorsement of my accuracy.
Click to expand...
Another AI response
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top