Biden Dismisses Uighur Genocide As Being a "Different Norm"

originally posted by: Irishhaf

I have some hope with family, have an aunt the matriarch of the clan at this point and she is done with the democrats told her recently careful someone might call you conservative, her reply was good those worthless *bleep* need to be taken to task.

This is a late 80s life long democrat bleeds blue type that is looking at this administration and is sickened by it.

I remember seeing a lot of articles and posts from reasonable Democrats who were sick of the party treating U.S. President Trump like he was some kind of traitor, 24/7, 365 days a year.

They vowed to not vote Democrat in 2020. As a result, Democrats lost 13 U.S. House seats.

Another indicator that Joe Biden did NOT WIN in 2020, let alone get more votes than Obama did!

a reply to: DBCowboy
While I try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, I won't sit quietly if my neighbor is a human who endorses selective murder for their own interpretation of a NWO agenda.

At that point, they're just husks. Human meat bags without souls.

Edit: Or NPC for the PC inclined.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
This is what the anti-Trump and/or Biden voters wanted.

We warned them all on this site.

*shrugs*

I guess Biden voters want genocide. Can't say I'm surprised.

But they promised us Rainbows! 🌈

a reply to: Nivhk

Flag this all you want, if this upsets you, you're either blind or feeling rightful shame for supporting these types of behaviors.

I have to ask.

Are you addressing me here?

If not you might want to clarify who you are referring to in future posts.

a reply to: Wide-Eyes
No, no.

Not anyone specifically at this time. I just know some people like to play the "Alert" game for certain comments of mine. Don't know who, but I've been in the dog house with mods from time to time.

Just trying to head it off in advance.

Sorry to you and anyone else that feels that was directed at them.

Edit: If I need to change it, I will, if it really causes problems for the thread.

Edit2: My bad, I forgot I had tagged you for a response when that paragraph was just a general post for the thread. I'll try to keep track of that in the future.

originally posted by: Nivhk
a reply to: carewemust
An attempt was made to recall them.

Remember that congresswoman who literally got socially sacrificed and murdered?

She had introduced a bill to impeach and look into the devils twins actions.

Wait, what?

a reply to: NightVision

a reply to: slatesteam
www.congress.gov...

Edit: In hindsight, this makes sense that the impeachment sham trial of Trump was pushed so hard.

To cover this up.

originally posted by: Nivhk
a reply to: Wide-Eyes
No, no.

Not anyone specifically at this time. I just know some people like to play the "Alert" game for certain comments of mine. Don't know who, but I've been in the dog house with mods from time to time.

Just trying to head it off in advance.

Sorry to you and anyone else that feels that was directed at them.

Edit: If I need to change it, I will, if it really causes problems for the thread.

Nope, don't worry. I made an educated guess that it wasn't directed at me but I just wanted you to know how it could be construed.

I have no idea who has been reporting you but there are some serial reporters on this site.

Ask Snarl, he's good at spotting them.

“I point out to him[Xi] no American president can be sustained as a president, if he doesn’t reflect the values of the United States,”

-Biden

Lmao okay man.

a reply to: Nivhk

So what exactly does it mean when it says resolved?

Resolved  That Joseph Robinette Biden, President of the United States, is impeached for abuse of power by enabling bribery and other high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following article of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:

Does this mean it has been resolved or that's how it should be resolved?

And when it says it was agreed to in House?

Oh the grifters, as if
they really care about
Muslims all of a sudden,
with out
hidden agendas.

Biden's "comments" are piling up fast.

The disaster of a lifetime is happening.

☠️🦃☠️

originally posted by: LoneCloudHopper2
a reply to: vonclod

Absolutely agree. Imagine conducing the Olympics there with millions of minorities meanwhile being tortured and killed in concentration camps, some maybe not far away.

I missed your reply,

Exactly, I think of Disney, and Mulan. It backfired on Disney.

a reply to: dug88
I'll be honest, I don't know much about lawyer or government speak, but I think its defining what the hopes of the bill will conclude to.

If that makes sense.

I don't think it's been addressed yet but its active on the Gov page and only at introduced, I think.

I mean, you'd think something like this would be getting some more coverage since its sitting on the governments own website.

Maybe they didn't scrub Greene enough from the internet?

I'll be honest, I'm the last person that should be explaining this.

Edit: I have little knowledge in this, just was passing on what I saw, to Slate.

Edit2: Maybe a thread of it's own, maybe it's a nothing burger. But from what I saw at the link, its active, not denied, passed, rejected or scrapped.

originally posted by: ToneDeaf
Oh the grifters, as if
they really care about
Muslims all of a sudden,
with out
hidden agendas.

Systematic rape and torture is not okay, nimrod.

The only hate I've seen here towards Muslims is contempt for terrorists. Real terrorists.
Not these pretend ones that the MSM tells you are public enemy #1.

a reply to: Nivhk

Ok...yeah makes sense. Those were my thoughts as well...like it's being considered by the house now.

I dunno, there's a weird mix of past and present tense that makes it hard to parse.

a reply to: dug88
That's what I was getting from what I read.

From what I saw, if you look at the list of actions, it was introduced to the house, I think, then forwarded to the house of jurisdiction.

So it looks like its moving through the proper channels, instead of just being forced to the floor, like a certain event that just happened.

Honestly, with the fact it's on the .Gov website, I'm surprised it hasn't been noticed by others. So I thought maybe it had come and gone, but maybe it's something that hasn't had a light shined on it yet?

Edit:
01/21/2021 Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
01/21/2021 Introduced in House

(From the link All Actions on the bills page)

Edit2: I think this is the real reason Greene was dragged across coals, then whatever cross the Democrats tried to hang her on. But I'm not intimately experienced with the correct procedures and terms surrounding this.

a reply to: dug88

“Resolved” is the way you state a position in formal debate. You start “Resolved that...” and then you state your position.

a reply to: KansasGirl
Thank you for articulating that better then I ever could.

Edit: Might be too late to be seen, but if dug88 or someone feels like making a thread on this bill, go for it. I don't feel experienced enough to make a thread about it.