Disgusting Asset Forfiture

[Dill]

(07-18-2017, 01:24 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote:
If you're going to make two completely pointless and useless garbage posts in the same thread within 5 minutes of each other with nobody's reply in the middle of them, you could at least have the common decency to combine them into one bigger useless garbage post.

Even hamsters have the decency to put all their poop into one corner of their cage so it's not just spread all over the place, creating a sea of shit that nobody wants to be around.

Well, at least one person did see a point.

We have this AG, who supports these illegal and unethical seizures, because of who was voted president.

When you choose the POTUS, you also choose his choices for cabinet.

XXLT was expressing anger through a mode of writing called "militant satire," which is a mode of social critique.

 According to everyone's favorite source: "This "militant" irony or sarcasm often professes to approve of (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to attack." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satire

So when XXLT claims Hillary's choice for AG "would have been worse," he is using irony, making a point by saying the opposite of what means. This fits because, incredibly, so many trumpsters still believe Hillary would have been worse.

I could add something to this as well, namely that all those things XXLT ironically professes to approve are de facto approved, even if those who approve won't put that approval into words.

Both you and XXLT agree that forfeitures are bad, Leonard. XXLT was just linking them to the current regime.