Jump to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Surly Horns

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.
Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Featured Replies

25 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Interdasting.  Since the protest was against the law, they now have someone to prosecute.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title18-section1507&num=0&edition=prelim

First rule of breaking the law is STFU.

Quote

Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty

Nope.

They didn't interfere with, obstruct, or impede the administration of justice and literally no one believes this will influence Kavanaugh to be more favorable to the protestor's side.

  • Replies 12.9k
  • Views 815.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • Brisketexan
    Brisketexan

    Some people and posts above see this for the incredibly dangerous thing it is.  See the whole forest, not just the tree.  Roe is built on the bedrock of the 14th amendment and the inherent right to pr

  • Ghost of LL
    Ghost of LL

    The whole episode is pretty bad for the Court.  The leak is embarrassing.  But the decision is catastrophic. You've got a 5-4 decision to get rid of a something that has been settled as a constit

  • in one of the many instances in which i debunked your oversimplified, unsupported bullshit and you simply never responded, i addressed your absolutist contention that religious are more charitable tha

Posted Images

3 minutes ago, Pods said:

Nope.

They didn't interfere with, obstruct, or impede the administration of justice and literally no one believes this will influence Kavanaugh to be more favorable to the protestor's side.

Then why are they there?  Just to call him a dick?  They chant "we will not go back" over and over.  Is that not an attempt at influence?

Or "resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence"?

This looks like the catchall for this.

Look.  Doxxing is wrong.  And going to the personal residences of people in government (or anyone else) is wrong.  I don't care who does it, right or left.

1 minute ago, Ag with kids said:

Then why are they there?  Just to call him a dick?  They chant "we will not go back" over and over.  Is that not an attempt at influence?

Or "resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence"?

This looks like the catchall for this.

Look.  Doxxing is wrong.  And going to the personal residences of people in government (or anyone else) is wrong.  I don't care who does it, right or left.

Or"? Catchall for this?

Do you not know the definition of the word "or"? 

Or means they would have to have done at least one of those things, but they didn't do any of them. 

The post I responded to had nothing to do with whether it was wrong. It's quoted right there at the top of the screen if you'd like to re-read it. You said the neighbors could be prosecuted, because this is against the law.

 

42 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Breaking the law isn't important?

Going to be hard to prove they are doing anything other than exercising freedom of assembly. Clearly they have no intent to interfere with his ability to administer justice. As far as whether they are trying to influence him in any way, that clause seems in direct conflict with the first amendment so good luck prosecuting it successfully

21 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Then why are they there?  Just to call him a dick?  They chant "we will not go back" over and over.  Is that not an attempt at influence?

Or "resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence"?

This looks like the catchall for this.

Look.  Doxxing is wrong.  And going to the personal residences of people in government (or anyone else) is wrong.  I don't care who does it, right or left.

They are exercising their first amendment rights. Fuck that piece of shit

1 hour ago, Ag with kids said:

Breaking the law isn't important?

Like Republicans care about Laws.  FOH with that nonsense. 

1 hour ago, Pods said:

Or"? Catchall for this?

Do you not know the definition of the word "or"? 

Or means they would have to have done at least one of those things, but they didn't do any of them. 

The post I responded to had nothing to do with whether it was wrong. It's quoted right there at the top of the screen if you'd like to re-read it. You said the neighbors could be prosecuted, because this is against the law.

 

Or "resorts to any other demonstration"...

They don't have to do any of those things.  That's the catchall.

1 hour ago, Sawbonz said:

Going to be hard to prove they are doing anything other than exercising freedom of assembly. Clearly they have no intent to interfere with his ability to administer justice. As far as whether they are trying to influence him in any way, that clause seems in direct conflict with the first amendment so good luck prosecuting it successfully

Read the statute.

"resorts to any other demonstration"

I'm glad y'all are back to supporting freedom of speech though.  Elon will be happy with y'alls conversion.

If they broke the law, arrest them all

At the same time, if you use your position of power to take peoples rights away, you shouldn’t assume you or your family are safe. Humanity and it’s 300,000 years of existence prove otherwise 

1 hour ago, Ag with kids said:

Then why are they there?  Just to call him a dick?  They chant "we will not go back" over and over.  Is that not an attempt at influence?

Or "resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence"?

This looks like the catchall for this.

Look.  Doxxing is wrong.  And going to the personal residences of people in government (or anyone else) is wrong.  I don't care who does it, right or left.

I'm not sure how morally wrong it is, as long as they aren't threatening or blocking ingress or egress or something else at least a little bit dangerous.

I assume that you are aware that just because it's written in a law doesn't mean that the law doesn't violate the First Amendment.  That one fairly screams violation of the First Amendment.  The intent part might, just barely, get it by.

5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I'm not sure how morally wrong it is, as long as they aren't threatening or blocking ingress or egress or something else at least a little bit dangerous.

I assume that you are aware that just because it's written in a law doesn't mean that the law doesn't violate the First Amendment.  That one fairly screams violation of the First Amendment.  The intent part might, just barely, get it by.

Yes.  But, right now it is the law, right?

But, do we really want this to be the standard?

What if the final opinion came out and they DON'T overturn RvW.

Would you support anti-abortion advocates going to the houses of the Justices that upheld it?

You know as well as I do that what they're doing right now is threatening. And it would be threatening if anti-abortion people showed up at the justices that upheld RvW.

  • Popular Post

Oh my god- it’s a protest. Go clutch your panties in a country that doesn’t have the first amendment. 

I assume you also support the arrest of every politician that supported the insurrection? You know, law and order?

9 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

I assume you also support the arrest of every politician that supported the insurrection? You know, law and order?

Anyone that actually broke the law, yes I do.

But...then, you must also be on my side, right?  If these protesters broke the law (which according to the statute they did) you want them arrested too, right?

You know, law and order...

18 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Yes.  But, right now it is the law, right?

But, do we really want this to be the standard?

What if the final opinion came out and they DON'T overturn RvW.

Would you support anti-abortion advocates going to the houses of the Justices that upheld it?

You know as well as I do that what they're doing right now is threatening. And it would be threatening if anti-abortion people showed up at the justices that upheld RvW.

Threatening like following nurse home from work? Threatening like shooting an abortion doctor in church? GTFO with your indignation about a protest and citations to obstruction of justice laws. Leave the lawyering to the lawyers 

12 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Threatening like following nurse home from work? Threatening like shooting an abortion doctor in church? GTFO with your indignation about a protest and citations to obstruction of justice laws. Leave the lawyering to the lawyers 

Yes.  Those are all fucking wrong.

Why do want the law to only work one direction?  I don't.  I want ALL people that do illegal things to suffer consequences.

one could argue that he is in fact the one breaking the law

Just now, Celery Man said:

one could argue that he is in fact the one breaking the law

"He"?

 

Who are you talking about?

51 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Read the statute.

"resorts to any other demonstration"

I'm glad y'all are back to supporting freedom of speech though.  Elon will be happy with y'alls conversion.

Quote

Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

 

So your contention is that all protests near any federal courthouse, including the Supreme Court, are illegal? This statute doesn't distinguish houses from courthouses. 

Setting aside that this would be blatantly unconstitutional, there is no Oxford comma in front of the clause you are citing, despite the Oxford comma being used throughout the remainder of the text. The clause you are citing is dependent on the "with such intent" clause in front and isn't intended to be a stand-alone clause forbidding all protests near all federal courthouses. That would be a ludicrous take. 

Quote

or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration

There was no intent to interfere with, obstruct, impede, or influence any judge. You don't have to like it, but it was legal. 

1 hour ago, Ag with kids said:

Read the statute.

"resorts to any other demonstration"

I'm glad y'all are back to supporting freedom of speech though.  Elon will be happy with y'alls conversion.

Y’all? Fuck you you don’t know me

1 hour ago, Ag with kids said:

Or "resorts to any other demonstration"...

They don't have to do any of those things.  That's the catchall.

Don’t hold your breath waiting on prosecution 

38 minutes ago, Ag with kids said:

Yes.  Those are all fucking wrong.

Why do want the law to only work one direction?  I don't.  I want ALL people that do illegal things to suffer consequences.

Yeah you’re all over that January 6 thread calling for prosecutions right?

Took me awhile to find it but this 2005 post on Craigslist sums my view up nicely:


“Pro-life republicans, while they claim to oppose abortion, create the very environment in which demand for the practice thrives. Pro-choice democrats seek to create an environment in which no one needs an abortion in the first place, while ensuring the practice is safe, sanitary, and performed by a licensed medical practitioner as we, as a society, are still in a transitional period. By eliminating the demand for abortion, practitioners will lose the ability to practice. The supply will cease to exist and the clinic will close. Which seems much more civil than blowing it up or shooting some doctors. “


https://www.craigslist.org/about/best/min/86638741.html

 

Guess this happened yesterday. Pro-choice group shows up to protest a pro-life group that first meets regularly at a church before going down to protest at an abortion clinic.

First tweet captures comments by a pro-life guy wearing a NYFD jacket and America First cap.

 

Thread below provides some context:

 

12 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Guess this happened yesterday. Pro-choice group shows up to protest a pro-life group that first meets regularly at a church before going down to protest at an abortion clinic.

First tweet captures comments by a pro-life guy wearing a NYFD jacket and America First cap.

 

Thread below provides some context:

 

What a bunch of cunts.  How many of these assholes were decrying vaccine and mask mandates, bleating, “my body, my choice.”  





Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

This can’t be accurate, Johnny Sack said GOP is party of less regulation on private business.
4 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

Breaking the law isn't important?

Sexy Cbs GIF by Paramount+

  • Popular Post

Here is what so many people don't get.  Being pro-choice does not mean you are pro-abortion.  It just means that the choice rests with the woman, her doctor, and anyone else she chooses to include in the process.  Pro-choice is pro-woman.  Trying to force your beliefs on others is as anti-American as you can get.  If you support this bullshit that is happening now, you are a misogynist and anti-American.  You can absolutely go fuck yourself.  

Edited by PenelopeWitherspoon

Here is what so many people don't get.  Being pro-choice does not mean you are pro-abortion.  It just means that the choice rests with the woman, her doctor, and anyone else she chooses to include in the process.  Pro-choice is pro-woman.  Trying to force your beliefs on others is as anti-American as you can get.  If you support this bullshit that is happening now, you are a misogynist and anti-American.  You can absolutely go fuck yourself.  

Nuanced thought is in dire straits. People can’t comprehend that one can be pro-choice and anti-abortion. When I bring this up in discussion I’m met with silence.

“Abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.”  - Bill Clinton, 1992

I don’t know about y’all but I’m beginning to think that living in Free Market Gilead is going to suck.

8 hours ago, Woland said:


Nuanced thought is in dire straits. People can’t comprehend that one can be pro-choice and anti-abortion. When I bring this up in discussion I’m met with silence.

This is absolutely correct.  This has been happening for ages.  You see it in a number of different ways.  All part of the dumbing down of the populace.  

Look, we all know a number of Americans weren't exactly the sharpest tools in shed, but it has gotten demonstrably worse since the internet and social media.

16 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

You need therapy.  You’re absolutely batshit crazy.  

You're the one who requires therapy, you neo-fascist-religious-nutbar.   Shouldn't you be in a public bathroom in the standard wide stance Republican way?

  • Popular Post
9 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Here is what so many people don't get.  Being pro-choice does not mean you are pro-abortion.  It just means that the choice rests with the woman, her doctor, and anyone else she chooses to include in the process.  Pro-choice is pro-woman.  Trying to force your beliefs on others is as anti-American as you can get.  If you support this bullshit that is happening now, you are a misogynist and anti-American.  You can absolutely go fuck yourself.  

We don’t discuss abortion in my classes, even though I always let my students know this is a college classroom and most topics are on the table as they relate to various parts of Communication.  When we discuss Persuasive Speaking techniques, we talk about how giving examples of things that are not mutually exclusive can be a good persuasive technique.  Students often ask for examples and my go-to examples are 1.) you can be pro-BLM and pro-police, 2.) you can be pro-2nd amendment and still be pro-gun reform.  Then my 3rd example is “you can be pro-choice but still be against abortion.”  Students get baffled and ask how and I say “being pro-choice doesn’t mean you’re pro-abortion rather it can mean you are pro-choice for a woman to decide what to do with her body.”  I then tell them of some friends I have to are pro-choice but anti-abortion noting my friends have said they themselves would never get an abortion but they are 100% for a woman deciding what to do with her own body and not the government. 

 

  • Popular Post
14 hours ago, Pods said:

Nope.

They didn't interfere with, obstruct, or impede the administration of justice and literally no one believes this will influence Kavanaugh to be more favorable to the protestor's side.

Interestingly, there’s a rumor in DC right now that Ginny Thomas leaked the opinion because of the concern that Kavanaugh was shaky and looking for a deal with Roberts to uphold the law while not overturning Roe. 

11 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

Why do want the law to only work one direction?  I don't. 

I don’t mean to be harsh or rude, but after 20 years of reading your posts on these boards I don’t believe you. I think you believe that, but after watching you tie yourself into knots to support your party time after time I don’t think that’s true. 

11 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

Yes.  Those are all fucking wrong.

Why do want the law to only work one direction?  I don't.  I want ALL people that do illegal things to suffer consequences.

You’re embarrassing yourself if you think the statute you cited will be the reason for a single arrest or indictment of protesters outside Kavanaugh’s. 

  • Popular Post

Just chiming in from Toronto, which is looking mighty appealing, that NOW Republicans and Trumpkins care about:

- Leaks of information 

- Breaking of norms and decorum

- Harassment of people and officials 

- Forcing their health views upon people who don’t want them 

In summary:

GO FUCK YOUR OWN FACES YOU SHIT BAG JESUS FREAKS

  • Popular Post

Anti-abortion activists have murdered abortion providers in churches, burned down abortion clinics, harassed and intimidated women for getting abortions, and bombed the fucking Olympics. Anyone complaining about pro-choice activists peacefully protesting in the street outside a justice’s home can get 100% fucked.

15 hours ago, Pods said:

Nope.

They didn't interfere with, obstruct, or impede the administration of justice and literally no one believes this will influence Kavanaugh to be more favorable to the protestor's side.

This is literally fucking retarded. And I'm pro-abortion. 

"we don't think what we are doing will work, therefore we are not breaking the law"

Edited by StruggleBus

2 minutes ago, StruggleBus said:

This is literally fucking retarded. And I'm pro-abortion. 

I wonder why certain people are so worried about the etiquette of protesters, but only when those protesters are protesting certain things. I really wonder why that is. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

10 minutes ago, StruggleBus said:

This is literally fucking retarded. And I'm pro-abortion. 

"we don't think what we are doing will work, therefore we are not breaking the law"

I Dont Believe You Will Ferrell GIF

13 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

Yes.  But, right now it is the law, right?

But, do we really want this to be the standard?

What if the final opinion came out and they DON'T overturn RvW.

Would you support anti-abortion advocates going to the houses of the Justices that upheld it?

You know as well as I do that what they're doing right now is threatening. And it would be threatening if anti-abortion people showed up at the justices that upheld RvW.

Cry more

Anti-abortion activists have murdered abortion providers in churches, burned down abortion clinics, harassed and intimidated women for getting abortions, and bombed the fucking Olympics. Anyone complaining about pro-choice activists peacefully protesting in the street outside a justice’s home can get 100% fucked.

But you see antifa once threw a smoothie at Andy Ngo… so….
12 hours ago, bolverk said:

Guess this happened yesterday. Pro-choice group shows up to protest a pro-life group that first meets regularly at a church before going down to protest at an abortion clinic.

First tweet captures comments by a pro-life guy wearing a NYFD jacket and America First cap.

 

Thread below provides some context:

 

If Dems have an ounce of sense they’ll take that video from the first tweet and combine it with a video of Kavanaugh threatening revenge during his nomination and run it a million times all over the country.

  • Popular Post
13 hours ago, Ag with kids said:

Yes.  Those are all fucking wrong.

Why do want the law to only work one direction?  I don't.  I want ALL people that do illegal things to suffer consequences.

so, if say, a sitting president in this country was...say, recorded on a phone call...with the secretary of state of a swing state...say, one in the south like georgia...in which that president had just lost that state's electoral votes...trying to pressure that secretary of state to "find" additional votes for that president so that he would win instead of letting the electoral outcome prevail...and he nakedly engaged in that pressure campaign for corrupt purposes of overturning the results of an election in this country...you'd want that person to suffer the consequences, right?

and you probably would not want that secretary of state's family to be relentlessly targeted, harassed, and threatened, correct?

just out of curiosity.

3 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

If Dems have an ounce of sense they’ll take that video from the first tweet and combine it with a video of Kavanaugh threatening revenge during his nomination and run it a million times all over the country.

They don't and they won't.  When we devolve into a fascist state, the Dems will be almost as culpable as the Reps, due to their weakness and stupidity. 

Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business & Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Advertise... Tailgate Donations

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.