1449
posted ago by Granny ago by Granny +1455 / -6

Obviously!!! He was arguing with the other Justices not to take the Texas case. Because there would be riots. Why?

He wasn't anticipating riots just because they hear the case. Riots would only be expected if Texas WON their case. I can't see it any other way, can you???

Comments (32)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
3
saltyviewer123 3 points ago +3 / -0

This new doesn't make any sense. We have already been dealing with riots for how many months now. I'm calling this info suspect to be potentially wrong.

1
fapoo 1 point ago +1 / -0

epoch times have already refuted it.