Wow, lotta straw man arguments. 'No public support
Post# of 127097
(Total Views: 138)
Posted On: 06/23/2023 9:38:05 AM
Wow, lotta straw man arguments. 'No public support for Biden and the Dems in '20? Only if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
otta straw man arguments. 'No public support for Biden and the Dems in '20? Only if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
traw man arguments. 'No public support for Biden and the Dems in '20? Only if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
an arguments. 'No public support for Biden and the Dems in '20? Only if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
uments. 'No public support for Biden and the Dems in '20? Only if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
. 'No public support for Biden and the Dems in '20? Only if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
public support for Biden and the Dems in '20? Only if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
support for Biden and the Dems in '20? Only if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
rt for Biden and the Dems in '20? Only if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Biden and the Dems in '20? Only if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
and the Dems in '20? Only if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
he Dems in '20? Only if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
s in '20? Only if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
20? Only if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
ly if you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
you believe a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
lieve a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
a 7M vote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
ote margin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
rgin is not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
s not support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
support. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
t. Congressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
gressional and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
onal and special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
nd special elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
cial elections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
lections then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
ns then and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
n and in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
in '22 belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
belie the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
the claim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
laim as well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
s well.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
/>
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
r />
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
h century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
ury jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
rist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
ho believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
ieved in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
ch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
nings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
ito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
d, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
y repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
al of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
s hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
ly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
oring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
nstitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
tion either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
ither, nor is inciting an insurrection.
nor is inciting an insurrection.
s inciting an insurrection.
ting an insurrection.
n insurrection.
rrection.
on.
r />
]https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/t_fit-760w,f_auto,q_auto:eco,dpr_2.0/newscms/2020_51/3437014/mtp_data_download_1_2020_12_20.png[/img
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-pre...s-n1251845
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
Citing a 16th century jurist who believed in witch burnings, as Alito did, to justify repeal of Roe V Wade is hardly honoring the constitution either, nor is inciting an insurrection.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-pre...s-n1251845
(0)
(0)