Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

11.0 MAGAnitude Earthquake Week at Legal Insurrection

11.0 MAGAnitude Earthquake Week at Legal Insurrection

Orange Crush.

I don’t know if there has been as momentous a week in the 8-year history of Legal Insurrection.

Certainly, the election of Obama in 2008 and 20012, the retaking of the House in 2010 and the continuing wave in 2014 were yuge. As was the surprise (except to us) victory of Scott Brown in January 2010 and the Scott Walker Recall victory in 2012. Yet as the key headlines from this week show, this seems somehow yuger in its own way.

The Orange Crush:

“Unhinged” is the word of the week:

You have nothing to fear but fear itself:

Burn, Baby, Burn:

There’s still hope:

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Orange Crush? More like a Crimsom Tide

Since many websites were the recipient of huge cash donations one does wonder how much went to LI.
Franklyn Graham’s ministry garnered over $200,000.
America for sale to man with no character but lots of dollars and cohorts such as alt/right willing to promise violence to any who disagreed with their guy.
Did the folks at LI get the David French treatment?

    Ragspierre in reply to Lee Jan. | November 13, 2016 at 10:32 am

    There is no credible way to impute to LI any partisanship, much less “bought partisanship”.

    Just the other day, the various authors/contributors gave voice to a very diverse set of opinions vis T-rump.

    PLUS, the Prof. is, IMNHO, entirely above that kind of conduct.

    Lee Jan: “Since many websites were the recipient of huge cash donations one does wonder how much went to LI.”

    So transparent. Your side still doesn’t get it, you really do think we are stupid enough to not see you.

    On your coffee break, tell your boss Soros we said “hi” and that we are coming for him next.

    And try “there’s a growing perception” next time. Just to remind me of old times. Thanks.

      Ragspierre in reply to Fen. | November 13, 2016 at 11:36 am

      See how you genuflect to character assassination as your default mode?

      You just have the Obamic talent for lies and being a smear-merchant as your first instinct when someone commits heresy agaist the Great God Cheeto or his cult.

        Anonamom in reply to Ragspierre. | November 13, 2016 at 11:41 am

        Pot meet kettle.

          Ragspierre in reply to Anonamom. | November 13, 2016 at 11:48 am

          …meet soot.

          Do you approve the smearing of Lee Jean with a bullshit accusation of a Soros connection?

          Yes or no, please.

          “Do you approve the smearing of Lee Jean with a bullshit accusation of a Soros connection?”

          Good. Goose. Gander.

          I play by the rules my opponent sets.

          Ragspierre in reply to Anonamom. | November 13, 2016 at 12:01 pm

          No. You lie like a dog, smear and character assassinate as your FIRST instinct instead of rationally arguing.

          You are a typical T-rumpian cultist.

        “See how you genuflect to character assassination as your default mode?”

        Nope. Lee Jan is an obvious troll, using unsupported vague assertions to imply the Prof was bought off. If you could put your butthurt ego aside for a moment and actually examine the language and tricks of rhetoric he uses, you would see it.

        People who play the “how long have you been beating your wife” card deserve to have their character assassinated. As do concern trolls who dance on the graves of death fathers just to score some cheap points (and thanks for showing us all your true colors there, Rag).

          Ragspierre in reply to Fen. | November 13, 2016 at 11:53 am

          “Nope. Lee Jan is an obvious troll…”

          No. THAT’s an obvious LIE.

          Lee Jan has been posting here for some time, and is no troll.

          LeeJan asked some questions, more respectfully than you did the other day in attacking what Mary wrote, and demanding she defend her post.

          Your depiction of the questions as “when did you stop beating your wife” is also a lie.

          The questions were easily refuted, as I did.

        Wow, dude.

        You need a mirror in the worst way

          Ragspierre in reply to murkyv. | November 13, 2016 at 11:59 am

          Wow, dude, you can’t answer the question I posed to Anonomom, I guess.

          murkyv in reply to murkyv. | November 13, 2016 at 5:17 pm

          And you can’t seem to get through a single thread about this election without hijacking it with personal attacks.

          That was my one and only point.

          You asked the question of Anonomom, not me.

innocent bystander | November 13, 2016 at 11:27 am

Lee Jan is an obvious troll, but I’ll go through it anyway.

1. Lee Jan wrote: “Since many websites were the recipient of huge cash donations”

>> If that is so, it should be easy to provide evidence of MANY websites. Lee Jan seems to provide two examples:

“Franklyn Graham’s ministry garnered over $200,000.”
“Did the folks at LI get the David French treatment?”

>> But, Lee Jan does not provide evidence from any reliable source(s). Lee Jan’s assertion is not evidence

2. Lee Jan wrote: “one does wonder how much went to LI.” And, “Did the folks at LI get the David French treatment?”

>> a. The assertions above are no basis for an accusation against LI or William Jacobson. Lee Jan asserts that every time Graham or French get money, Jacobson gets some of that money too. Unproven and wildly unlikely.

>> b. Innuendo is accusation, so I’m going to forego wondering about you, Lee Jan.

3. Lee Jan wrote: “America for sale to man with no character but lots of dollars and cohorts such as alt/right willing to promise violence to any who disagreed with their guy.”

>> a. This is irrelevant to your accusation against LI and Jacobson.

>> b. Lee Jan, let me fix that for you.

“America for sale to woman with no character but lots of dollars and cohorts such as radical left willing to promise violence to any who disagreed with their gal.”

    You are ill-read, bystander.

    The David French treatment refers to the attack on French and others…such as Erik Erikson…and their families by rabid T-rump cultists, which have happened.

    They’ve happened here, too, to the extent these pukes were able to mount them. I’ve been called a “traitor” here for not slavishly following the T-rumpian dogma.

      I like that you think its clever to make up school yard nicknames like T-Rump and Cheeto. Just like the kids at Dem Underground who called Bush “shrub” for 8 years. Reminds us just how seriously to take you. But maybe try doing it in ALL CAPS for even greater effect. Here:

      “RABID T-RUMP CULTISTS WHICH HAVE HAPPENED!!! THEY’VE HAPPENED HERE, TOO, TO THE EXTENT THAT THESE PUKES WERE ABLE TO MOUNT THEM!!! I’VE BEEN CALLED A “TRAITOR” HERE FOR NOT SLAVISHLY FOLLOWING THE T-RUMPIAN DOGMA!!!

        Ragspierre in reply to Fen. | November 13, 2016 at 11:58 am

        Yeh, you’re typically full of shit, Hysterics Boi.

        I’ve never once had you complain of my use of “Baracula”, ‘Ol Walleyes, McAnus, and all the other word-play I enjoy. Or that of others.

        That’s because you are a raging hater and hypocrite that LOOOOVES you some T-rump sucking.

        You can stuff your CAPS right where you know they belong.

        jhkrischel in reply to Fen. | November 13, 2016 at 1:46 pm

        Any rabid trumpkins or cultists at this point are basking in glory, and being magnanimous in victory.

        I’ll assert anyone who is still triggered by Rags pointing out fault, error, or crudity with Trump or supporters of Trump, isn’t really a Trump supporter – they’re just trolls.

        Rags, I remember the first time I started actually getting on the emotional side of Trump, watching violence against his supporters in San Jose, even though I was in the tank for Cruz. Watching people needlessly troll you may not make me agree 100% with everything you say, but it definitely gets me emotionally on your side.

        That all being said, insofar as the elegance of insult, the sharpness of wit, the clever turning of a phrase, Rags outclasses the common trolls pecking at him. Not trying to encourage anything, but just sayin’ 🙂

      Frank G in reply to Ragspierre. | November 13, 2016 at 2:07 pm

      The butthurt is strong with this one

Rag: “No. THAT’s an obvious LIE.”

No, it may be an invalid assumption, but to be a lie I would have to know he is not a troll and accuse him in bad faith. Again we see the “sharply trained mind” courtesy of the Sally Struthers School of Law. Try to be more precise.

“Lee Jan has been posting here for some time, and is no troll.”

…And try logic please. Regulars can be trolls. Hell, Althouse has a handful of Lefty trolls that have infested her site for some 10 years now.

“LeeJan asked some questions”

Lee Jan asked the equivalent of “how long have you been beating your wife”.

“more respectfully than you did the other day in attacking what Mary wrote, and demanding she defend her post.”

I didn’t demand. I noted that there were other more “disgusting” events re post-election harassment (ie beatings) in the news cycle, and asked why she chose one about illegal immigration. I asked her to defend and explain her choice to ignore them. See, my suspicion was that she supports amnesty for illegals and was floating a sad story to yank our heartstrings.

    Ragspierre in reply to Fen. | November 13, 2016 at 12:08 pm

    No, Fen, you can lie by stating something as fact you either know not to be true or without regard for its truthfulness.

    As you viciously do virtually ever day. You lie like Obama lies, without any seeming effort.

      Rag: “you can lie by stating something as fact you either know not to be true or without regard for its truthfulness.”

      No. You are confusing libel/slander with lie. Perhaps you should avoid talking about the law too. Your education appears to be as sound as your election analysis.

Rag: “THAT’S BECAUSE YOU ARE A RAGING HATER AND A HYPOCRITE THAT LOOOOVES YOU SOME T-RUMP SUCKING”

Nope. Walker was my first choice, and I went to work for Team Cruz after he fell out of the race. My vote for Trump was to keep Hillary out of the Executive Branch because she is above the law.

I wish you would behave like an adult and quit taking a dump in the Prof’s living room. You’ve made the comments here toxic. My guys lost, but I got over it. You are being a Sore Loserman.

And if you are going to continue to make everyone else here unwilling participants in your Anger Management Therapy, the least you could do is pay us. It’s bad enough that we have to deal with your constant ad hom, but it’s a bit much to make us do it for free.

    Ragspierre in reply to Fen. | November 13, 2016 at 12:15 pm

    “Nope. Walker was my first choice, and I went to work for Team Cruz after he fell out of the race.”

    And your daddy argued before the Supreme Court.

    And by voting my conscience, I was DOOOOOOOOOOOING us all.

    You may have noted that lying liars can say anything on the internet.

    Oh, and, lying sack of filth, I was never going to vote…and on the record…within weeks of his announcement. You calling me a “sore loser” is simply another of your lies.

Rag: “you can lie by stating something as fact you either know not to be true or without regard for its truthfulness.”

No. You are confusing libel/slander with lie. Perhaps you should avoid talking about the law too. Your education appears to be as sound as your election analysis.

    Ragspierre in reply to Fen. | November 13, 2016 at 12:16 pm

    No, you are simply lying again. Duh.

    It’s just what you do.

      Nope.

      True – you have confused libel/slander with lying
      True – your election predictions all turn out to be wrong

      Else, prove me wrong.

        Ragspierre in reply to Fen. | November 13, 2016 at 12:43 pm

        I’d have to know WTF you were talking about vis my ‘election predictions”.

        I mean one I actually made, not one you pull out your ass.

        I can easily prove we’re not DOOOOOOOMED, Hysterics Boi. So I start on one up on you.

        According to your definition of lying, I’d have to prove intent, right, Hillary?

          Rag: “According to your definition of lying, I’d have to prove intent, right, Hillary?”

          No. Which is why your side gets away with their “Bush lied about WMDs in Iraq” lie. He may have been wrong (he wasn’t btw) but he was acting in good faith – Clinton’s Iraqi Liberation Act, historical evidence (Mustard Gas used against Iran), and the “consensus” of every Western intelligence agency in the world.

          And I say “your” side because all your tactics here are those of the Left – the constant ad hom, personalizing the political, distorting what the Republican candidate said, the bullying and then running to the blog admins when you get punched back, demonizing the dead (waves to Dad), hatred and anger over the most benign remarks simply because they challenge your narrative.

          And the fact that you spend most your comments here attacking your “fellow” conservatives.

          Stop pretending.

          And stop dragging your butt across the Prof’s living room floor. You said he was a friend. Was that another lie? If not, then prove it – stop concern trolling with your toxicity.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | November 13, 2016 at 1:44 pm

          And I say “your” side because all your tactics here are those of the Left – the constant ad hom, personalizing the political, distorting what the Republican candidate said, the bullying and then running to the blog admins when you get punched back, demonizing the dead (waves to Dad), hatred and anger over the most benign remarks simply because they challenge your narrative.
          ________________________________________________

          First, you moronic, lying little shit, I know more about WMD in Iraq than you do, and HAVE ALWAYS supported W in relying on his best assessment of the great threat there.

          Wanna know who you have me confused with? Yep, the Great God Cheeto, Code Pinko, and W hater. Donald J T-rump.

          What an idiot!

          On to your SECOND stupid lie: I don’t complain to the blog admins. This is the SECOND time you’ve told that lie. It is easily confirmed by asking them. Anyone here can drop them an email.

          THIRD moronic lie: T-rump cultists are NOT “conservatives”. They are rather the OPPOSITE.

          FORTH bald-faced lie: I’ve never claimed any particular relationship to the blog host. Again, this is the SECOND time you;ve tried this lie.

          Finally, you are confused. I’m dragging your ass across the floor.

          Rag: “I KNOW MORE ABOUT WMD IN IRAQ THAN YOU DO!!!!”

          Sure ya do, that’s why all ya got is argument by assertion.

          I didn’t bother to read the rest of your toxic rant, because you are just a chew toy to me now. I need to let off some steam, I find you and gnaw for bit, then place you back in the corner.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | November 14, 2016 at 8:32 pm

          Now, see, we all know you’re lying again.

          Assholes don’t have teeth.

Congratulations to everyone for letting Rags take over this thread.

    nordic_prince in reply to rabidfox. | November 13, 2016 at 7:06 pm

    Those two need to get a room, I think 😉

      Henry Hawkins in reply to nordic_prince. | November 13, 2016 at 9:08 pm

      One does get a whiff of that Moonlighting David and Maddie sexual tension vibe.

      Nordic: “Those two need to get a room, I think”

      Bully Rag attacks everyone in room, for months.
      Nordic hides and stares down at his shoelaces.

      One of the victims of Rag’s bully starts punching back.
      Nordic preens “those two should get a room”

        Ragspierre in reply to Fen. | November 14, 2016 at 9:10 pm

        Puuuuuurrrrr sad, victimize lil’ snowflake…!!!

        Now you’re trying to bully another poster into joining your filthy trolling.

        Putrid.

What’s all this noise about December 19? Could the Electoral College change their votes? Could they elect Hillary as the next president thus turning upside down the EC results?

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend