354
Comments (67)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
6
deleted 6 points ago +8 / -2
7
DrinkLikeAGilmore 7 points ago +7 / -0

And yet you think the mounds of evidence of fraud in the elections would do the same but as you can see, it hasn't. People are walking around with a foot width worth of wool over their eyes as well as shoved in their ears.

1
Porkbut 1 point ago +2 / -1

Right, and where would he even disseminate it that wouldnt be deleted immediately, or get him some nice CP distribution charges, if not both? If hes seen it, whos to say it hasnt already been dropped on the internet and immediately scrubbed? People think the internet is a magic button sometimes, it has limitations and pitfalls just like anything else in life

3
MadamDee420 3 points ago +3 / -0

That could actually be used against the good cause. I forget where I read it or heard it but if something is put out there before a hearing or court or whatever it cannot be used as evidence and it’s useless. I think the same shit just happens to Johnny Depp in his case.

5
Asstreeks 5 points ago +5 / -0

It could be useless in a trial. But if the public saw a Supreme Court justice on video doing those things, there wouldn’t be a trial. There would be events that happen before it got to trial.