Trump’s lawsuit against Bob Woodward is absurd — and dangerous

Uncensored2008 said:
Book burning and banning seems more in line with you Nazis.

Oh, wait, there’s more. We have now learned that the supposedly highly principled American Civil Liberties Union apparently is in favor of banning books that don’t conform to the accepted views of at least one of its lawyers, a transgender man named Chase Strangio. The ACLU and Mr. Strangio’s discontent involves a book by Abigail Shrier called “Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters.” In it, she makes the case that while adults should have the freedom to undergo medical transition, teenagers are a different matter.

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, she wrote: “Social contagions exist, and teen girls are particularly susceptible to them. The book takes a hard look at whether the sudden spike in transgender identification among teen girls is yet another social contagion to befall girls who, in another era, might have fallen prey to anorexia or bulimia.”

You’d think that liberals — at the ACLU, of all places — would defend an author’s right to make her case, whether it agreed with that case or not. But not Chase Strangio, who serves as the ACLU’s deputy director for transgender justice. “Abigail Shrier’s book is a dangerous polemic with a goal of making people not trans,” he tweeted. “I think of all the times & ways I was told my transness wasn’t real & the daily toll it takes. We have to fight these ideas which are leading to the criminalization of trans life again.”

Then, just to make sure we understand what Mr. Strangio means when he says “we have to fight these ideas,” he goes on to say: “Stopping the circulation of this book and these ideas is 100% a hill I will die on.”

“You read that right,” Ms. Shrier wrote in her op-ed. “Some in today’s ACLU favor book banning.”}

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaig...m-curb-speech-ban-books-make-an-enemies-list/

This isn't porn in elementary schools - but actual book banning from all avenues and outlets.
Click to expand...

One guy represents the whole ACLU. Okay, if we're going to play that game, can we pick Santos to represent the whole GOP? Crazy Eyes Boebert? Dennis "I just love kids!" Hastert?

You people are flailing.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Translation from the original Reichtardian: "Oh shit. I had no idea that you could get books at no cost through a Kindle Unlimited membership."
Click to expand...

Did I link to Kindle?

Nah, you just thought a red herring fallacy would be a great complement to the straw man fallacies you fascists are so famous for.

Standard Disclaimer: I suspected the leftists here would be too stupid to grasp the "hoot" reference.... No surprise....
 
Concart said:
No the judge hasn’t looked at the case. Probably one hasn’t been assigned. Like I said…read a book. Law for dummies would be a good place to start.
Click to expand...

Got it, so you think lawsuits are put on calendar without any sort of preliminary review.

Say sparky - the Nazis here made a bid deal out of how prior Trump suits were dismissed without a hearing - how in your alleged mind would that happen without a preliminary review?

LOL
 
Uncensored2008 said:
Got it, so you think lawsuits are put on calendar without any sort of preliminary review.

Say sparky - the Nazis here made a bid deal out of how prior Trump suits were dismissed without a hearing - how in your alleged mind would that happen without a preliminary review?

LOL
Click to expand...

It's not on the calendar. Jesus Christ can you at least nail down the basics? It is filed. That's it. The second it's filed it is public record. You don't know if the defendants have been served. Certainly the complaint has not been read by the court beyond the template requirements. You know absolutely NOTHING. It's sublime.

As for those suits you are talking about, they were much further into the process, someone had made a motion to dismiss the lawsuit and the judge approved. NO ONE HAS REVIEWED THIS CASE. Period, full stop.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
Did I link to Kindle?

Nah, you just thought a red herring fallacy would be a great complement to the straw man fallacies you fascists are so famous for.

Standard Disclaimer: I suspected the leftists here would be too stupid to grasp the "hoot" reference.... No surprise....
Click to expand...

Wow, you really like fallacies, don't you sock?
 
Concart said:
Wow, you really like fallacies, don't you sock?
Click to expand...

Without fallacy, you of the fascist left would never enter the same galaxy as logic.

And "sock?" ROFL

Just who's sock would I be?

Is there someone else on this board who mops the floor with you ignorant leftists the way I do?

I've sent at least three ignorant leftists into hiding, today alone - or at least that's their claim, after they were humiliated and left babbling in debates.

The left dominates this board 20 to 1, but is soft, incapable of supporting the fascist/Marxist position they espouse on behalf of the democrat Reich.

I'll have half of you leftists quivering in fear by the end of the week. The fact is the left are rhetorically crippled, dependent on mindless agreement and group think - without any ability to support the idiocy regurgitated from CNN and other hate sites.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
One guy represents the whole ACLU. Okay, if we're going to play that game, can we pick Santos to represent the whole GOP? Crazy Eyes Boebert? Dennis "I just love kids!" Hastert?

You people are flailing.
Click to expand...


LOL

That's the best you can do?

7accq8.jpg
 
Uncensored2008 said:
Without fallacy, you of the fascist left would never enter the same galaxy as logic.

And "sock?" ROFL

Just who's sock would I be?

Is there someone else on this board who mops the floor with you ignorant leftists the way I do?

I've sent at least three ignorant leftists into hiding, today alone - or at least that's their claim, after they were humiliated and left babbling in debates.

The left dominates this board 20 to 1, but is soft, incapable of supporting the fascist/Marxist position they espouse on behalf of the democrat Reich.

I'll have half of you leftists quivering in fear by the end of the week. The fact is the left are rhetorically crippled, dependent on mindless agreement and group think - without any ability to support the idiocy regurgitated from CNN and other hate sites.
Click to expand...

Yes, your incredible understanding of the legal process has simply blown me away!

:magagrin:
 
Phantasmal said:
Because, once the judge is assigned, the cases get reviewed as you have been told and obviously aren’t grasping.
Click to expand...


ROFLMAO

Yes, the case gets reviewed.

But you JUST claimed it didn't - as your fellow fascists have.

I get it, democrats must hold two contradictory positions simultaneously and sincerely believe both to be true drones of the Reich.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
Did I link to Kindle?

Nah, you just thought a red herring fallacy would be a great complement to the straw man fallacies you fascists are so famous for.

Standard Disclaimer: I suspected the leftists here would be too stupid to grasp the "hoot" reference.... No surprise....
Click to expand...

So once again you lose because you claimed that Woodward's Trump book was so lame they're giving it away free. They're not.

Is it painful, being the stupe in a room full of norms? Seems like it would hurt like hell. :rofl2:

PS -- The "hoot reference" is old hat around here, given my screen name. If you want to get popular you need some new material.
qSlgCNq.jpg
 
Uncensored2008 said:
ROFLMAO

Yes, the case gets reviewed.

But you JUST claimed it didn't - as your fellow fascists have.

I get it, democrats must hold two contradictory positions simultaneously and sincerely believe both to be true drones of the Reich.
Click to expand...
Whoosh, another subject goes over your head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top