JUST IN: With disclosures for a potential vindictive prosecution motion due to the defense on Monday, feds (Pirro) drop criminal case against Army vet who said he burned flag in park to protest Trump pledge to prosecute flagburners. No explanation. Doc: www.documentcloud.org/documents/27...
CareyMTD031326
www.documentcloud.org
March 13, 2026 at 9:11 PM
JUST IN: With disclosures for a potential vindictive prosecution motion due to the defense on Monday, feds (Pirro) drop criminal case against Army vet who said he burned flag in park to protest Trump pledge to prosecute flagburners. No explanation. Doc: www.documentcloud.org/documents/27...
Also people who are so concerned about disrespect for the nation should be way more concerned about electoral disinfo movements and first past the post supporters than the comparatively tiny number of flagburners.
September 6, 2026 at 12:11 PM
Also people who are so concerned about disrespect for the nation should be way more concerned about electoral disinfo movements and first past the post supporters than the comparatively tiny number of flagburners.
If you're wondering how "look forward, not back" got us to the place of refusing to prosecute Republicans for their crimes and cheering the arrest of flagburners for the crime of pointedly violating an executive order, well, check the bio
August 26, 2025 at 12:33 AM
If you're wondering how "look forward, not back" got us to the place of refusing to prosecute Republicans for their crimes and cheering the arrest of flagburners for the crime of pointedly violating an executive order, well, check the bio
SIMPSONS DID IT
August 25, 2025 at 4:09 PM
SIMPSONS DID IT
When you got nothin’ go after flagburners bc they’re all over the place
September 6, 2026 at 7:07 AM
When you got nothin’ go after flagburners bc they’re all over the place
And it never will...
Actually, thinking back through the Simpsons parody, it's pretty eerie how accurate it was and remains.
"There's a lot of flagburners who have got too much freedom. I wanna make it legal for policemen to beat 'em!"
Actually, thinking back through the Simpsons parody, it's pretty eerie how accurate it was and remains.
"There's a lot of flagburners who have got too much freedom. I wanna make it legal for policemen to beat 'em!"
March 14, 2024 at 11:17 PM
And it never will...
Actually, thinking back through the Simpsons parody, it's pretty eerie how accurate it was and remains.
"There's a lot of flagburners who have got too much freedom. I wanna make it legal for policemen to beat 'em!"
Actually, thinking back through the Simpsons parody, it's pretty eerie how accurate it was and remains.
"There's a lot of flagburners who have got too much freedom. I wanna make it legal for policemen to beat 'em!"
"There's a lotta flagburners who have got too much freedom. I wanna make it legal for policemen, to beat em cause there's limits to our liberties. Least I hope and pray that there are. Cause those liberal freaks go too far."
Simpsons missed on this one, they didn't think a loser would just say it
Simpsons missed on this one, they didn't think a loser would just say it
Trump signs an executive order: "If you burn a flag, you get one year in jail."
August 25, 2025 at 11:32 PM
"There's a lotta flagburners who have got too much freedom. I wanna make it legal for policemen, to beat em cause there's limits to our liberties. Least I hope and pray that there are. Cause those liberal freaks go too far."
Simpsons missed on this one, they didn't think a loser would just say it
Simpsons missed on this one, they didn't think a loser would just say it
Part of the problem a lot of the Discourse(tm) faces is that we have a damned hard time extricating questions about the political strategy of party elected officials defending flagburners, or those people being associated w a party's image, from the question of whether flagburning is protected.
August 26, 2025 at 12:17 AM
Part of the problem a lot of the Discourse(tm) faces is that we have a damned hard time extricating questions about the political strategy of party elected officials defending flagburners, or those people being associated w a party's image, from the question of whether flagburning is protected.
Trump just signed an executive order to "vigorously prosecute flag-burners" while literally trying to burn down the Constitution itself. Apparently respecting fabric matters more than respecting the actual document that makes flag-burning protected speech. WTFGOP?!
Trump’s obsession with flag-burning is performative patriotism
President Trump signed an executive order directing the Justice Department to vigorously prosecute flagburners — all while he tries to shred the Constitution.
www.msnbc.com
August 29, 2025 at 8:01 AM
Trump just signed an executive order to "vigorously prosecute flag-burners" while literally trying to burn down the Constitution itself. Apparently respecting fabric matters more than respecting the actual document that makes flag-burning protected speech. WTFGOP?!
@citizensforethics.org @rwpusa.bsky.social @tribelaw.bsky.social @jonflan.bsky.social @timothysnyder.bsky.social
@democrats.senate.gov @housedemocrats.bsky.social
FFS. 🙄🤨
Stop #TrumpsFascism!
Trump's EO to #DOJ, Prosecute #FlagBurners
youtu.be/n0SnVKEsepA?...
#LandOfTheFree❓️
#ResistFascism
@democrats.senate.gov @housedemocrats.bsky.social
FFS. 🙄🤨
Stop #TrumpsFascism!
Trump's EO to #DOJ, Prosecute #FlagBurners
youtu.be/n0SnVKEsepA?...
#LandOfTheFree❓️
#ResistFascism
August 26, 2025 at 1:24 PM
I agree with this post and already said something similar if duller myself.
But your first post says he “cheer[ed] the arrest of flagburners” and that’s untrue and, in my opinion, unfair.
But your first post says he “cheer[ed] the arrest of flagburners” and that’s untrue and, in my opinion, unfair.
August 26, 2025 at 12:57 AM
I agree with this post and already said something similar if duller myself.
But your first post says he “cheer[ed] the arrest of flagburners” and that’s untrue and, in my opinion, unfair.
But your first post says he “cheer[ed] the arrest of flagburners” and that’s untrue and, in my opinion, unfair.
Yes.
I think that if you start arguing the "Freeze Peach" side, you cede the valuable territory of "It's MY Property".
Anti-flagburners can't address that line of argument and I think it needs to be used more.
It tickles the "gummint can't tell me wut to do on mah own land" part of their brains.
I think that if you start arguing the "Freeze Peach" side, you cede the valuable territory of "It's MY Property".
Anti-flagburners can't address that line of argument and I think it needs to be used more.
It tickles the "gummint can't tell me wut to do on mah own land" part of their brains.
August 26, 2025 at 4:01 AM
Yes.
I think that if you start arguing the "Freeze Peach" side, you cede the valuable territory of "It's MY Property".
Anti-flagburners can't address that line of argument and I think it needs to be used more.
It tickles the "gummint can't tell me wut to do on mah own land" part of their brains.
I think that if you start arguing the "Freeze Peach" side, you cede the valuable territory of "It's MY Property".
Anti-flagburners can't address that line of argument and I think it needs to be used more.
It tickles the "gummint can't tell me wut to do on mah own land" part of their brains.