Grondoth posted:

Why do we keep doing this

Grondoth posted:

Why do we keep doing this

Grondoth posted:

Why do we keep doing this

fits my needs posted:

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/888870534699765762

Taintrunner posted:

slave labour 2020 or you're racist

Taintrunner posted:

slave labour 2020 or you're racist

Scent of Worf posted:

the "WOW you're just criticizing her cause she's a woman" accusations from 2016 liberals will become "WOW you're just criticizing her cause she's black and a woman" in 2020.

quote:

From drug-selling rings in Salinas’ Chinatown to corruption scandals with more than $10,000 at stake, the Assembly bill introduced Monday would allow prosecutors to seize assets before initiating criminal proceedings — a power only available at the federal-level — if there is a “substantial probability” they will file a criminal complaint.

“It would let us get (assets) before they are gone, before the defendants have a chance to react and hide it,” said Berkley Brannon, chief assistant district attorney for Monterey County, who supports the bill.

The bill comes a month after U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder sharply limited a civil asset forfeiture program that had come under bipartisan scrutiny. A number of ideologically opposed groups, including American Civil Liberties Union, The Institute for Justice and Americans for Tax Reform, have all criticized forfeiture programs, particularly when no criminal charges are filed.

The bill is being sponsored by Attorney General Kamala Harris, who has focused on battling transnational criminal organizations. Harris said those groups have made California the biggest point of entry for methamphetamine trafficking into the United States, adding that this bill could equip local and state law enforcement with tools to “dismantle these dangerous organizations.”

MaxxBot posted:

She supports asset forfeiture too, it seems pretty much any politician with a law enforcement background has the taint.

http://www.montereyherald.com/article/NF/20150223/NEWS/150229908

punk rebel ecks posted:

Secret of Nimh is overrated. Come at me!

Raskolnikov38 posted:

i'm fairly certain more stuff is going to come out of her time as AG. california's prison system is a literal hell on eath

Raskolnikov38 posted:

i'm fairly certain more stuff is going to come out of her time as AG. california's prison system is a literal hell on eath

Oh Snapple! posted:

dumb leftists gonna perpetuate a lot of right-wing smears again

Probably Magic posted:

"I'd vote for Nina Turner, though."

"You only want to vote for her because she doesn't have any power."

quote:

...

Meyerson went on to ask “And how will Our Revolution relate to progressives within government who didn’t back Bernie, like Sherrod Brown and Tammy Baldwin, if they go on to seek reelection?” Her response is an indication of what is clearly self-destructive about both Nina Turner and ‘Our Revolution’. She said about those two successful and respected progressives “If they want Our Revolution’s endorsement they will seek it like everybody else and so they gotta start with the local affiliates, and if the local affiliates say that this is the person that we want to back, then there it is. There it is.”

So ‘Our Revolution’ isn’t about supporting progressives or helping people learn how the system works so they can move forward progressive change. Rather it is about catering to groups of local activists, often self-indulgent, to the point of taking action that actually hurts the causes they believe in. To bring about change one has to understand the system; understanding how Congress works. Like it or not when it comes to Congress there are only two parties, Democrat and Republican. If you don’t work to support one of them you are helping the other. We saw that in the last Presidential election and we saw it in 2000 when we ended up with George W. Bush.

...

quote:

One must wonder what turned Nina Turner from a rational Democrat who won her legislative seat running as a Democrat in Ohio to the irrational person she appears to be today.

SKULL.GIF posted:

enjoy this article from a literal cross-eye

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nina-turner-our-revolution-president-from-democrat_us_595a4413e4b0c85b96c66373

Scent of Worf posted:

liberals.... what are they even good for?

Scent of Worf posted:

https://twitter.com/nataliesurely/status/888476323840012288

https://twitter.com/marcushjohnson/status/888825677608353793

https://twitter.com/DanRiffle/status/888827788349853696

https://twitter.com/DanRiffle/status/888828262968938496

liberals.... what are they even good for?

MaxxBot posted:

I used to mock this book title but maybe he was right?

Squizzle posted:

my pitch for beauty and the beast 2 involves aristocrats dueing the french revolution creating a rose bush from cuttings of the magic rose and using it to imbue an army of beast soldiers to oppress the revolution and belle and the former beast take up arms to fight alongside the poor and oppressed

belle is a crack shot w a rifle and at the end of the movie the lead villain stumbles into the rose bush and is turned into a sentient guillotine thats uses to execute the rest of the elites

docbeard posted:

Isn't this just Les Miserables?

gradenko_2000 posted:

sorry Joementum

https://twitter.com/YALiberty/status/888790838200893441

punk rebel ecks posted:

https://twitter.com/liberalism_txt/status/888586100381409281

etalian posted:

Trevor Noah is basically the late night comedy equivalent to a bad dem

Pener Kropoopkin posted:

Defending capitalism.

MizPiz posted:

That implies they're doing a good job.

Pener Kropoopkin posted:

It doesn't matter if you're doing something well so long as you're still winning.

Al! posted:

Probably Magic posted:

"I'd vote for Nina Turner, though."

"You only want to vote for her because she doesn't have any power."

Yinlock posted:

winning by default is still winning, i guess