Trump Bans Bump Stocks [UPDATE: struck down by SCOTUS]

[phill4paul]

Oh look another so called libertarian that promotes censorship when it comes to the policies of certain forum member politician that posts here. Birds of a feather.

It's us, it's not you.

 

[acptulsa]

Oh look another so called libertarian...

Oh, look, the usual non-insults have begun.

 

[nikcers]

Oh, look, the usual non-insults have begun.

I don't think they have realized that libertarian isn't an insult in these circles.

 

[kahless]

Oh, look, the usual non-insults have begun.

Not an insult, rather statement of fact based on your continued 2.5 year campaign of violating NAP against me. You undermined my past efforts to do grass roots work for Rand in 2015 offline by using this forum and advocating others offline to come here to do the same. The behavior was so out of hand no one was willing to post in an openly hostile environment with people so willing to tarnish reputations with lies.

This all happened regardless that I told both you and the ring leader that started this that Rand was still my first choice and that I was publicly promoting Rand using this forum for grass roots with my handle. So not only did you damage my reputation with your lies in forum for some laughs you did so at the expense of Rand Paul outside these forums.

I am not the only one your little club drove out the forum there are many other long time posters that no longer use the forums or post here because you and your deviant cabal are completely incapable of having a civil discussion. I have let the past go when I post here yet you and others insist in keeping up the lies and attacks.

Obviously this all means you cannot possibly be libertarian or Rand supporters when your efforts have proven to be detrimental to the forum and offline recruitment of supporters.

How many people did you drive away with Rand with these tactics, did you keep count?

 

[r3volution 3.0]

I would be calling bullshit if it was a president Paul too. That's the difference between Paul' supporters and populists. The media said that we were Rands harshest critics, and it was the truth.

Some of Rand's harshest critics at RPF became Trump's greatest cheerleaders.

summer 2012 - summer 2015: "Rand's 99% libertarian record isn't good enough, he endorsed Romney after Ron dropped out, purity or bust!"

late 2015-present: "Trump's 99% unlibertarian record doesn't matter, he pisses off TV characters I dislike, MAGA!"

Tom Woods, Justin Raimondo, Lew Rockwell, and a number of others jumped off the same cliff.

Sad!

 

[dannno]

Some of Rand's harshest critics at RPF became Trump's greatest cheerleaders.

summer 2012 - summer 2015: "Rand's 99% libertarian record isn't good enough, he endorsed Romney after Ron dropped out, purity or bust!"

late 2015-present: "Trump's 99% unlibertarian record doesn't matter, he pisses off TV characters I dislike, MAGA!"

Tom Woods, Justin Raimondo, Lew Rockwell, and a number of others jumped off the same cliff.

Sad!

Some of Rand's biggest supporters also support Trump, especially since they work together to get Rand's stuff passed.

 

[kahless]

Some of Rand's biggest supporters also support Trump, especially since they work together to get Rand's stuff passed.

If they came here those same supporters would be crucified for working together to get Rand's stuff passed by the usual suspects.

 

[acptulsa]

...NAP...

...doesn't apply to self-defense. Nice try at playing the victim card like a good little liberal, though.

 

[kahless]

...doesn't apply to self-defense. Nice try at playing the victim card like a good little liberal, though.

How is it self-defense when the conversation that started your bullshit 3 years ago was not even between you and I. I also never attacked you, it was the other way around. I had to ask the mods to remove your signature but it was too late before it was all over google. The same time I was working grass roots outside the forum.

So one could say sure I am the victim, this forum is the victim and so is Rand. Further how far did your efforts here go to drive supporters from the forum? So perhaps one could say the entire country is the victim for you torpedoing the grassroots to help Rand get elected.

 

[phill4paul]

Some of Rand's harshest critics at RPF became Trump's greatest cheerleaders.

summer 2012 - summer 2015: "Rand's 99% libertarian record isn't good enough, he endorsed Romney after Ron dropped out, purity or bust!"

late 2015-present: "Trump's 99% unlibertarian record doesn't matter, he pisses off TV characters I dislike, MAGA!"

Tom Woods, Justin Raimondo, Lew Rockwell, and a number of others jumped off the same cliff.

Sad!

Wonder how ole Justin Raimondo is doing over at anti-war.com. I quit paying attention to him after he threw his support to Trump in the face of everything Trump said he would do during the election and then went on to do it.

 

[dannno]

Wonder how ole Justin Raimondo is doing over at anti-war.com. I quit paying attention to him after he threw his support to Trump in the face of everything Trump said he would do during the election and then went on to do it.

He has cancer.

https://www.antiwar.com/

And what Trump was saying during his campaign was that he was planning on defeating ISIS and then toning down our foreign policy, so it makes sense that Justin would have supported him over Hillary.

 

[phill4paul]

So one could say sure I am the victim, this forum is the victim and so is Rand. Further how far did your efforts here go to drive supporters from the forum? So perhaps one could say the entire country is the victim for you torpedoing the grassroots to help Rand get elected.

How far did it go towards driving Trump supporters, a candidate that our own forum regarded as not a liberty candidate, that continued to push for him away? Not near enough.

 

[acptulsa]

How is it self-defense...?

I added the question mark, since you didn't. Clearly you don't want to hear the answer, or you wouldn't have made a statement disguised as a question. But here it is anyway.

You spammed for one candidate on a forum dedicated to another candidate. And, no, prefacing your spam with a disclaimer that this (incessant criticism of "your first choice" notwithstanding) is your "second choice" you're spamming doesn't make the spam any less aggressive. That is an act of aggression, and self-defense is justified.

Your entire wall of text was built on one arch, and the NAP was the keystone of that arch. And since the NAP doesn't apply, your whole argument is dust and rubble at our feet. And there it is.

 

[kahless]

How far did it go towards driving Trump supporters, a candidate that our own forum regarded as not a liberty candidate, that continued to push for him away? Not near enough.

This was before there were any Trump supporters here. It was simply people discussing policy and out of 17 candidates running some like myself saying probably Trump would be second choice if no 3rd party option.

 

[enhanced_deficit]

This could be just start, Jarvanka may push for much more agressive gun control as Trump expresses more willingness to "take the heat" from GOP bases as he stated in last controversial meeting with Congress leaders. Jarvanak may prefer that only cops have guns when they go evict or arrest peoples who are late on their rents.

Md. lawmaker proposes ‘Jared Kushner Act’ to protect delinquent tenants

 

[phill4paul]

He has cancer.

https://www.antiwar.com/

And what Trump was saying during his campaign was that he was planning on defeating ISIS and then toning down our foreign policy, so it makes sense that Justin would have supported him over Hillary.

Well, I wouldn't wish it on anyone. But, I'm not going to give that site a click. And I know well what Trump said. And what he has done. And I still don't buy in to your false dichotomy between Trump and Hillary. He's a populist. So was Hillary.

 

[phill4paul]

This was before there were any supporters here. It was simply people discussing policy and out of 17 candidates running some like myself saying probably Trump would be second choice if no 3rd party option.

Well, at least you got the runner up trophy as a liberty supporter. Everyone should get a trophy.

 

[r3volution 3.0]

Well, I wouldn't wish it on anyone. But, I'm not going to give that site a click. And I know well what Trump said. And what he has done. And I still don't buy in to your false dichotomy between Trump and Hillary. He's a populist. So was Hillary.

And he was supporting Trump in the primary, before a single vote was cast (i.e. it was Trump over Rand, not Trump over Hillary).

Anyway, yea, cancer, which is unfortunate, but I'm done with him politically: same with Woods and Rockwell.

 

[kahless]

I added the question mark, since you didn't. Clearly you don't want to hear the answer, or you wouldn't have made a statement disguised as a question. But here it is anyway.

You spammed for one candidate on a forum dedicated to another candidate. That is an act of aggression, and self-defense is justified.

Your entire wall of text was built on one arch, and the NAP was the keystone of that arch. And since the NAP doesn't apply, your whole argument is dust and rubble at our feet. And there it is.

NAP applies since this was before I posted anything about Trump and I was still working offline to get support for Rand.

 

[acptulsa]

NAP applies since this was before I posted anything about Trump and I was still working offline to get support for Rand.

There is no 'before you posted anything about Trump.' Hell, you were already posting threads about Trump in August of 2015.

FNC opens 7pm hour with live press conference of Trump bashing Rand Paul for 3 minutes straight.

- Rand weak on the military at a time we really need a strong president.
- Rand responsible for not taking care of our vets.
- Rand hypocrite, comes to me, takes my money and now only bashing me since he is down in the polls.
- Perry and Graham attacked me and lost all their polling points, same will happen to Rand.