720
posted ago by light151 +721 / -1

Not sure if everything he's saying is true but if they challenge it then they'll have to go through the court process.

Not sure if everything he's saying is true but if they challenge it then they'll have to go through the court process.
Comments (46)
sorted by:
23
deleted 23 points ago +23 / -0
16
hereticpatriot 16 points ago +17 / -1

He’s baiting Roberts to sue for defamation.

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
-14
MyPresidentOrange -14 points ago +5 / -19

A sitting member of SCOTUS has never sued anyone before. So no. That’s not going to work. Please stfu

6
VoterIDMatters 6 points ago +6 / -0

ok

i really trust your take, internet guy

aside from the obvious logical fallacy (“never happened before, therefore cannot happen”), you simply don’t know shit

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
4
VoterIDMatters 4 points ago +4 / -0

they definitely have

7
RC22 7 points ago +7 / -0

Or, as he likes to say, he is being a Truth-Giver :) Sure would be great if it was true !1

5
bubble_bursts 5 points ago +6 / -1

More importantly, he is setting the state for whats to come.

5
Aedenwolf187 5 points ago +5 / -0

Lin is baiting someone dumb enough to challenge him. He wouldn't allow someone to beat him at his own game.

4
Cloudrdr 4 points ago +5 / -1

Lin is throwing buckets of chum in the water, making extraordinary claims and the response to all of it?

. . .

. . .

. . .

. .

.

So, what this means is that his allegations are probably true, else they would be suing him into oblivion.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
3
VoterIDMatters 3 points ago +3 / -0

No, not all of them. The specific dates of the recorded phone call between breyer and roberts is not from fourchan

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
VoterIDMatters 2 points ago +2 / -0

you read the phone call claim on 4chan? when? what were the specifics?

what i have noticed with the other claims is that while the 4chan posts lacked specific details (adoption, for instance), wood is making very specific allegations, timelines, associations etc.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
VoterIDMatters 2 points ago +2 / -0

the podesta theory is based on podesta’s emails

i’m talking about the call between justice breyer and justice roberts about stopping trump’s reelection, a recorded phone call on a specific date with sorcifuc words used

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
petiteputnam 0 points ago +1 / -1

That makes no sense because they're not suing therefore he's telling the truth?! That's not how proof works. Why would anyone (Roberts, kemp, etc) sue lin wood? Literally zero to gain it's the ramblings of a mad man essentially the more he talks the more damage he's doing to himself and the more he's helping them. Each claim gets more fanatical and harder to believe

1
Vivere_Pericoloso 1 point ago +1 / -0

At this point, I trust Lin Wood more than Justice Roberts.. He maybe a justice but he already lost all credibilities..

1
petiteputnam 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's fine trust whomever you want. Personally, I trust neither of them.

1
eagle123 1 point ago +1 / -0

Their corruption and degeneracy is hard to believe.

-1
VoterIDMatters -1 points ago +1 / -2

no one says it was proof of anything, donkey

3
JohnTitor2020 3 points ago +3 / -0

its all true

2
ArizonaDesertRat2021 2 points ago +2 / -0

Crazy like a fox 🦊

1
Turnerscreek 1 point ago +1 / -0

He’s punk guy Roberts.

1
readyIgnite 1 point ago +1 / -0

This is my read as well. His expertise is defamation. He's dancing in the minefield of his creation inviting instigated parties to come play.

It's messy.

Could be useful. Could be a nut. I'm not in a position to tell.

I read for amusement and will see how it turns out.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
JohnHancock1776 1 point ago +1 / -0

He forcing their hands.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
OneBigMaga 0 points ago +3 / -3

No, he's just suckering stupid people into giving him money.

3
Guffman 3 points ago +3 / -0

I didn't see the part where he was begging for money, maybe only the stupid people saw that part.

-1
priestessnico -1 points ago +4 / -5

Whatever rationalization the hopium addicts need to justify this quack.

1
whiskey_shitz 1 point ago +2 / -1

Roberts should sue him for defamation huh?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
whiskey_shitz 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's not how defamation works.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
-1
MyPresidentOrange -1 points ago +2 / -3

Ask yourself this: has a sitting justice EVER sued anyone for anything? The answer is no.

4
whiskey_shitz 4 points ago +6 / -2

Has anyone ever publically accused a sitting justice of buying children illegally?

0
MyPresidentOrange 0 points ago +2 / -2

I want you to know that Lin Woods will never prove that statement and Justice Robert’s will never sue Lin Woods for defamation.

2
whiskey_shitz 2 points ago +2 / -0

Ok thanks

0
MyPresidentOrange 0 points ago +1 / -1

Welcome

-2
MyPresidentOrange -2 points ago +3 / -5

This is stupid... who is going to sue Lin Wood for defamation? Jeffrey Epstein? Lol

-3
whiskey_shitz -3 points ago +1 / -4

Roberts