You know, I never thought we'd reach the stage in our republic where debaters for the presidency need to be checked down for juicing, but here we are... and yes this is definitely on the idiocracy bingo card.
> adderall
Just call it its street name - speed. meth. You know the stuff that the leftists accused trumps WH of popping like candy...
edit: for our august brigaders from other subs
https://www.addictionresource.net/street-names/adderall/
Yes, it is absolutely speed,meth, crank, whatever you want to call it when it's illegally provided.
As much as I’d like to see it, would it change any indecisive voters minds? I would imagine that Biden’s “accomplishments” is at the top of their reasons to not vote for or vote against him, vs him getting juiced right before a SotU or a debate.
They’ll absolutely say no to a drug test, and their reason will be that there’s no need to do one so why would they?
As a police officer I hear this often: “I won’t consent to you looking for illegal thing, because I don’t have illegal thing and so there’s no point” this 100% means you have said illegal thing.
P.S. : on the off chance anyone wants to get salty about my example, I totally acknowledge that if you’re not under arrest you totally have the 4th amendment right to deny a search, that does not mean we can’t tell the difference between someone holding and someone just exercising their rights.
I had a local cop at a "checkpoint" on my interstate exit ask me to open my trunk after checking my license/insurance.
I said no, there was nothing in my trunk, but unless you have a good reason to look I'm not opening it and he shouldn't be asking. The thing that bugs me is that if the stop isn't constitutional (debatable) and he found evidence in a trunk it could be found to be an unlawful search in court and the evidence could get ruled as inadmissible. What if that evidence was the only thing they had on a rapist/murderer?!? Now they go free because some local cop didn't understand that people have a right to travel from point A to B without showing their papers?!?
police are not a single monolithic element and we don’t all hold the same position on every last thing. I don’t agree with DUI checkpoints in the slightest. If courts decide they’re an acceptable breech of 4th amendment, that’s on them. DUI checkpoints are also not what I was talking about. I did not mean police should be able to search you because we all know you’re doing something illegal, I meant we can pretty much tell when someone is lying about there being no need for a search, while still acknowledging it’s your right to deny it.
Edit: I see by the downvotes I’m either being misunderstood or ….we want police to be able to search you for no reason?
How about just having trustworthy members of the Trump team physically present during Biden's "performance" to assure us it isn't an deepfake Biden actually giving answers?
You know, I never thought we'd reach the stage in our republic where debaters for the presidency need to be checked down for juicing, but here we are... and yes this is definitely on the idiocracy bingo card.
Im just curious on what they give Biden before a speech lol
Probably a stimulant. Doesn’t take much. 5-10mg adderall will have a person awake and laser focused
For a normal person sure, but would it have the same effect on someone with possible dementia?
> adderall Just call it its street name - speed. meth. You know the stuff that the leftists accused trumps WH of popping like candy... edit: for our august brigaders from other subs https://www.addictionresource.net/street-names/adderall/ Yes, it is absolutely speed,meth, crank, whatever you want to call it when it's illegally provided.
Adderal is an amphetamine which is the chemical cousin to methamphetamine but not the same
Meth and adderall are not the same, lol. Adderall is amphetamines, meth is *meth*amphetamines. Those are not the same substance.
So, you say that's not acceptable? Would that be not acceptable? Everyone on probation has to accept that as terms of probation?
Thought this was hilarious trolling when he first floated it in 2020. I got a lot of things wrong in that election cycle.
It would need to be done midway through the debate. If someone is tested before, he could just take it after the testing but before the debate begins.
Unless the whole world is meat gazing during the debate no one would trust the results anyway
Doesn’t sound like something that should be a problem to me.
It doesn't matter. They'd find a way to use clean blood/urine.
CNN will do the test. Lol. They find Trump is on cocain and left some in the white house, CNN confirms Biden is clean.
Drug test him after the debate not before! It's rigged anyway! CNN debate fair my ass.
His handlers won’t allow it
Drug test? How about a human test? They're working on replacing him with a robot right now!
In order to get on stage please select all pictures containing bikes
Honestly I'd take one of those Boston Dynamics robot dogs with the flamethrowers over what he have now.
It would save a few Secret Service agents from being bitten by Commander.
I’d settle for a dna test to make sure it’s actually Joe and not someone in a biden mask.
Everyone is speculating the use of stimulants, but I like to believe Biden is just blasting straight trenbolone acetate.
As much as I’d like to see it, would it change any indecisive voters minds? I would imagine that Biden’s “accomplishments” is at the top of their reasons to not vote for or vote against him, vs him getting juiced right before a SotU or a debate.
I see what he did there. 😂😂
They’ll absolutely say no to a drug test, and their reason will be that there’s no need to do one so why would they? As a police officer I hear this often: “I won’t consent to you looking for illegal thing, because I don’t have illegal thing and so there’s no point” this 100% means you have said illegal thing. P.S. : on the off chance anyone wants to get salty about my example, I totally acknowledge that if you’re not under arrest you totally have the 4th amendment right to deny a search, that does not mean we can’t tell the difference between someone holding and someone just exercising their rights.
I had a local cop at a "checkpoint" on my interstate exit ask me to open my trunk after checking my license/insurance. I said no, there was nothing in my trunk, but unless you have a good reason to look I'm not opening it and he shouldn't be asking. The thing that bugs me is that if the stop isn't constitutional (debatable) and he found evidence in a trunk it could be found to be an unlawful search in court and the evidence could get ruled as inadmissible. What if that evidence was the only thing they had on a rapist/murderer?!? Now they go free because some local cop didn't understand that people have a right to travel from point A to B without showing their papers?!?
police are not a single monolithic element and we don’t all hold the same position on every last thing. I don’t agree with DUI checkpoints in the slightest. If courts decide they’re an acceptable breech of 4th amendment, that’s on them. DUI checkpoints are also not what I was talking about. I did not mean police should be able to search you because we all know you’re doing something illegal, I meant we can pretty much tell when someone is lying about there being no need for a search, while still acknowledging it’s your right to deny it. Edit: I see by the downvotes I’m either being misunderstood or ….we want police to be able to search you for no reason?
How about just having trustworthy members of the Trump team physically present during Biden's "performance" to assure us it isn't an deepfake Biden actually giving answers?