Removed by mod

Removed by mod

You can keep repeating that but it won’t make fall into your definition you provided

None of that falls under your quote

https://youtu.be/Leor8ual9tw

One another means violent force and fraud.

Meat packers can’t sweep up floor waste and sell it as grade A meat. Why?

… Because that’s fraud. I support the government protecting individuals from fraud.

Imagine a for profit police department

Police are here to protect you from others, that’s what I said the government is here for.

Actually it’s the left that yells acab abolish the police, abolish ice

Organize to prevent outside attack means the military should protect us from foreign enemies. So no I’m not objectively wrong, actually by your own quote you provided with a source, I’m objectively right

The director literally said he welcomes them

Again, never made that argument

I know what I said, you clearly don’t understand what I’m saying. Guards aren’t the banks only security measure

That’s your opinion

They haven’t gotten that far yet. They can’t audit every department in one day.

https://youtu.be/Leor8ual9tw

That’s a strawman, I never argued that

If the bank kept it’s money in the open with only guards protecting it yeah, but that’s not the case

Getting rid of those people isn’t evidence that they are insecure. So yes it is an opinion piece

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/immediate-assessment-of-aviation-safety

I don’t care what rawstory thinks

Yes lol nothing you said that would possibly change someone’s mind

Ok my way they wouldn’t pay for it by the threat of violence. I like my way better

The customer would pay for it. Why do I need to know individual names of them? If I had them would that change anything?

Who would that be?

I didn’t know their names

There was no list drawn up of unimportant federal employees when this started.

Because you have to go through the expenses. You don’t know what’s waste if you don’t look at the receipts, like lgbt comic books