Trump condemned for ‘disgusting’ and ‘depraved’ statement after deaths of Rob Reiner and wife Michele

I guess if your numerous, repetitive ‘he is going to jail’ postings turned out to be nonsense, we can ignore the fake concern for drug smugglers.

He's in good company

.

Was Osama Bin Laden convicted in a court of law?

.

.

Was Osama Bin Laden convicted in a court of law?

He may have been tried in absentia. Whatever, what happened to two wrongs do not make one right?

Only watched five seconds of the video... Remember, peeps, liberals are en route to kill millions of human beings and this dude displays the effective pattern of thought required for it to happen.

Liberals always think that words are enough, words are shells with empty content.

Narcoterrorists is another absurdity from liberals. As it grows more frequent, liberals sound as they do not understand the consequences of the words they use.

Was Osama Bin Laden convicted in a court of law?

Coming back to this because it is a revealing insight of a liberal mind, a pattern of thoughts simple-minded people can not produce on their own, they lack the imagination for it. It probably has to do with deep biological differences in brains as human brains exhibit differences in ways they work. Liberal brains are wired in ways that allow them to produce this kind of patterns.

Remember, peeps, the greatest speculation of all: liberals are en route to kill hundreds of millions people. It can be determined right now, it will not happen by incident or coincidence.

Let's observe how things are collapsing fast, revealing and exposing liberals.

Liberals have this powerful cerebral power that allows them to consider that redefining and reframing is enough for things to fall in order. This leads them to conflate non similar things at will.

Of course, and what makes the proposition about the mass killings to come compelling, there are many forces behind it, not one. Only pinpoints right now a few of them.

One is the sentence; notice how this simple observation is absent from liberal disputes (for one obvious reason: it ends the dispute when accepted, liberals do not discuss or debate, they quarrel or dispute. Discussions do not happen on the ground as set by liberals in this context)

Transportation of drugs does not command the death penalty, it is an infringement not met by the death penalty. It is not possible to want to discuss or debate on another claim. It is over even before start for people who want to discuss or debate. Notice how this argument is absent from liberals' disputes, they prefer to keep going on stuff whether the person is not guilty etc. But even if these dudes had been tried, they would have not collected the death penalty. It shows how everything is about submission for liberals, they select their context to stage a struggle over power.

This part is eminently different: the drugs trader would not have collected the death penalty if they had been tried. Bin Laden would have.

Another major thing; the conflation between hypothetical outcomes and actual outcomes. A very common trend among liberals who often shield their atrocities behind this (others would do the same etc) Bin Laden killed people, these batches of drugs do not have, they might have (not a given though) Looked at from a different angle, liberals want to punish scheming the same way as doing. The death penalty has no degrees to it, one person is killed or not. So when punishing two different acts with the death penalty, a potential outcome is that two different things are forced to be perceived the same. Scheming is the same as doing. It is an incredibly power force as it selects being smart and less smart people. Smart people will collect deaths penalties for actually doing things, while less smart people will collect it from merely scheming things. A lot to say as this also negates the change in mind, the change in mind no longer exist. It is going to be productive beyond expectation.

Another powerful force: the total inability to consider other human beings as human beings. It runs deep among liberals. Now read again the previous point but this time with the very common and insane liberal mantra: guns do not kill people, people do. Not much commenting on this because it is self obvious.

Another powerful force: rewriting situations. Again, this was mentioned previously. In the past, liberals used to cover their actions under shades of grey. The killing of Bin Laden called questioning, it did not slip as easily as the quotation suggests. From memory, Bin Laden was reported as protected by guards, a fire fight ensued etc Liberals could at the time claim they had the intent of arresting Bin Laden but had to kill him. It does not apply to the bombed dudes. There is no intent to arrest them. The plain intent is to kill them. There is no room for liberals to wiggle. .

A lot to say about the last point: see how liberals work in duo. The very claim of crime of war is bogus, there is no war between narco traders and liberals, there can not be war between them so there can not be war crimes. The acts are also not plain murders but assassinations.

Observe also by the way how liberals are trying to reframe by pushing the terrorist narrative. Drugs traders are terrorists (a disastrous move) Even with that, terrorists do not collect death penalties that way.

And there is more to it. See how less than one line of the production of a liberal mind can lead to write such a large comment to exhibit the multiple failures in this one line. Another powerful force. Liberals have reached such a level in denial that it would take ages to restore a proper context to act and think properly.

Peeps, hundreds of millions people killed incoming. Liberals will claim they have nothing to do, when they are the engineers and executives.