OFFICIAL LRC President Donald Trump SECOND TERM Thread

Noyankee wrote:

BillionairesForHire wrote:

Please name one of these thousands of innocents thrown in prison by democrats. Keep in mind that convicted in court is by definition NOT innocent. Trump admin are up to dozens either jailed or deported without crimes stated or a hearing required by due process.

The answer to perceived corruption is not more and greater corruption. That is called an excuse.

Plenty of them were rotting in cells from Jan 6, looooong before any speedy trial, so you can start there and research the names yourself. Would do you good. And don’t forget Roger Stones names while you are taking notes. Kamala has a long personal list. call her. those are just the famous ones at the tip of the tongue.

Ashli Babbit never made it to that cell, in case you cared or were wondering what democrats are capable of. dropped her in cold blood cause supposedly a democrat yelled stop.

trump2028! wrote:

Link:www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/most-am...

America first - not Israel first (giving Israel a blank check and free reign to do whatever they want), not Ukraine first, not migrants first

"As for younger Republicans, whether or not they have empathy for Palestinian civilians, many under-50 GOP voters no doubt see America's open-checkbook support for Israel as inconsistent with the "America First" philosophy that's supposed to underpin Trumpian Republicanism. In a move last month that surely aggravated them, fresh after amusingly humiliating Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky en route to ending the money-pit that is the proxy war against Russia, the Trump administration turned around and used emergency authorities to ship off another $4 billion in military aid to Israel.
As today's under-50 crowd proceeds to dominates the Republican electorate, those moves could start to become a political liability for GOP officials who've been conditioned to expect Red-Team praise for sending US wealth, weapons and soldiers to the Middle East to advance Israel's agenda. If rank-and-file Republicans increasingly embrace George Washington's advice to avoid "passionate attachments" that make the United States "a slave to its fondness," a seismic shift in the 77-year US-Israel relationship could be in the offing."

TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:

Shoko Asahara wrote:

Fetus. Not a baby.

There's a greater than 0 chance that denying a woman an abortion will do more damage than the abortion. For example, both the mother and baby die during the pregnancy. Therefore we shouldn't restrict abortions.

Unless you can PROVE (P < 0.00000000001) that denying children gender affirming care NEVER does more damage than providing gender affirming care, there's a greater than 0 chance that denying a child gender affirming care will do more damage than providing gender affirming care. Therefore we shouldn't restrict gender affirming care.

Oh, the "you don't pay taxes" line. Love it. Completely idiotic and wrong, just like every other time you've used it. Did they teach you that while you were getting your masters online?

Fetus is the Latin word for unborn child. The prolife people consider it to be a baby. Pregnancy is a choice. It's very easy not to get pregnant.

The fact that suicide rates INCREASE post op strongly suggests that sawing the genitals off the mentally ill person doesn't fix the problem.

I have no way of knowing for sure but I'm fairly confident you're not paying much if any taxes at all.

Shoko Asahara wrote:

TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:

Fetus is the Latin word for unborn child. The prolife people consider it to be a baby. Pregnancy is a choice. It's very easy not to get pregnant.

The fact that suicide rates INCREASE post op strongly suggests that sawing the genitals off the mentally ill person doesn't fix the problem.

I have no way of knowing for sure but I'm fairly confident you're not paying much if any taxes at all.

Right. So fetus is the correct term. One doesn’t abort a 3 month old. It’s also very easy to get the COVID vaccine. Thus, you’ve proved nothing, except that you supported people that failed the world’s easiest IQ test.

There’s the lovely Adolt bigotry again. Gender dysmorphia is a mental illness. Transsexuality is not. There’s a difference. But you need to show that NOBODY that was denied gender affirming care has ever committed suicide to prove that there’s not a greater than 0 chance. Don’t blame me. That’s the bar you set. Did you fail the world’s easiest IQ test?

There’s a lot you don’t know. You can be as fairly confident as you want. You’re still wrong.

TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:

Shoko Asahara wrote:

Right. So fetus is the correct term. One doesn’t abort a 3 month old. It’s also very easy to get the COVID vaccine. Thus, you’ve proved nothing, except that you supported people that failed the world’s easiest IQ test.

There’s the lovely Adolt bigotry again. Gender dysmorphia is a mental illness. Transsexuality is not. There’s a difference. But you need to show that NOBODY that was denied gender affirming care has ever committed suicide to prove that there’s not a greater than 0 chance. Don’t blame me. That’s the bar you set. Did you fail the world’s easiest IQ test?

There’s a lot you don’t know. You can be as fairly confident as you want. You’re still wrong.

It's gender dysphoria not dysmorphia you imbecile.

If you think children who do not have gender dysphoria should be allowed to transition for purely cosmetic purposes you're even more depraved than I thought.

Shoko Asahara wrote:

TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:

It's gender dysphoria not dysmorphia you imbecile.

If you think children who do not have gender dysphoria should be allowed to transition for purely cosmetic purposes you're even more depraved than I thought.

Congratulations. You found a typo. Do you want a ribbon?

If you think children without gender dysphoria only transition for cosmetic purposes, you're an even bigger idiot than I thought.

Again, you need to show that:

1) There's zero chance that denying a woman an abortion will not do more damage than the abortion.
2) There's zero chance that denying a child gender affirming care will not do more damage than providing gender affirming care.

That's the bar you've set. Otherwise, you must support a woman's right to an abortion and a child's right to gender affirming care (or stop supporting the snowflakes that failed the world's easiest IQ test).

Did you figure out what the P value means in the study I linked? Or did you not learn about it when you took remedial math during your online masters?

Shoko Asahara wrote:

TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:

It's gender dysphoria not dysmorphia you imbecile.

If you think children who do not have gender dysphoria should be allowed to transition for purely cosmetic purposes you're even more depraved than I thought.

Congratulations. You found a typo. Do you want a ribbon?

If you think children without gender dysphoria only transition for cosmetic purposes, you're an even bigger idiot than I thought.

Again, you need to show that:

1) There's zero chance that denying a woman an abortion will not do more damage than the abortion.
2) There's zero chance that denying a child gender affirming care will not do more damage than providing gender affirming care.

That's the bar you've set. Otherwise, you must support a woman's right to an abortion and a child's right to gender affirming care (or stop supporting the snowflakes that failed the world's easiest IQ test).

Did you figure out what the P value means in the study I linked? Or did you not learn about it when you took remedial math during your online masters?

Noyankee wrote:

Shoko Asahara wrote:

Congratulations. You found a typo. Do you want a ribbon?

If you think children without gender dysphoria only transition for cosmetic purposes, you're an even bigger idiot than I thought.

Again, you need to show that:

1) There's zero chance that denying a woman an abortion will not do more damage than the abortion.
2) There's zero chance that denying a child gender affirming care will not do more damage than providing gender affirming care.

That's the bar you've set. Otherwise, you must support a woman's right to an abortion and a child's right to gender affirming care (or stop supporting the snowflakes that failed the world's easiest IQ test).

Did you figure out what the P value means in the study I linked? Or did you not learn about it when you took remedial math during your online masters?

Children should never transition period, for any reason, under any conditions. Is that clear enough for you? It’s pure lunacy and child abuse and Bondi will treat it as such. Dare her.

TheAdultInTheRoom wrote:

Shoko Asahara wrote:

Congratulations. You found a typo. Do you want a ribbon?

If you think children without gender dysphoria only transition for cosmetic purposes, you're an even bigger idiot than I thought.

Again, you need to show that:

1) There's zero chance that denying a woman an abortion will not do more damage than the abortion.
2) There's zero chance that denying a child gender affirming care will not do more damage than providing gender affirming care.

That's the bar you've set. Otherwise, you must support a woman's right to an abortion and a child's right to gender affirming care (or stop supporting the snowflakes that failed the world's easiest IQ test).

Did you figure out what the P value means in the study I linked? Or did you not learn about it when you took remedial math during your online masters?

That's not a typo that's you using the wrong word.

1.Theres a 99.9% chance the abortion will result in the death of the baby. And if the baby survives and is born alive animals like you will just stick the baby in the corner and let it die.

2. You clearly have no idea what gender affirming care even is. Your cult is all for it so you're just mindlessly supporting it.

I'm well aware that a .55 P value does demonstrate the correlation you think it does.

You remain an imbecile.