5
phillipcurl 5 points ago +5 / -0

Not trespassing the people (Americans) own that building

3
phillipcurl 3 points ago +3 / -0

That article has a fact check in it stating they could not verify any of the statements. So I’d highly doubt it. Then again the referenced snopes so idk

1
phillipcurl 1 point ago +1 / -0

Free real estate - Epstein, Seth Rich and Harrison Deal didn’t kill themselves. Thank you.

1
phillipcurl 1 point ago +1 / -0

No timeline to invoke it. 90 day total period for briefings of various people. The second briefing is for another group I can’t exactly remember who. It could already be in action - we don’t know the extent of which it will be invoked

1
phillipcurl 1 point ago +1 / -0

If I missed anything let me know. Was thinking earlier about Pompeo's comment, and I looked up the date to see if there were any coincidences. A ton of stuff went down during the few days following the ninth, involving basically everyone mentioned in the infamous EO. I'm sure I missed some stuff so post it here if you can think of anything.

I'm almost certain they got the report mentioned in section 1(a) on the 9th. Which makes today, the 14th, the day that section 1(b) is supposed to take place.

1
phillipcurl 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yesterday’s episode was the first I’ve seen to have obvious political themes, and thankfully it was anti-communist. Bill Burr and Gina Carano are pretty based as well.

12
phillipcurl 12 points ago +12 / -0

IANAL but I believe they will if it hasn’t been presented before, such as in this case where it is direct to SCOTUS.

44
phillipcurl 44 points ago +45 / -1

Basically defendants argument is that there is no precedent for invalidating a governors certification and at the same time they are saying that in doing so would undermine our trust in the constitution. Too bad the democrats did that already. I believe it will be rules in our favor

12
phillipcurl 12 points ago +12 / -0

*Prosecuted, but I like the way you think

22
phillipcurl 22 points ago +22 / -0

I'm not exactly super keen on legal stuff, but I believe it is because she is acting as a lawyer; not as a prosecutor. I don't think lawyers can indict people. Maybe someone more fluent in legalese has a better answer.

4
phillipcurl 4 points ago +4 / -0

Thanks fren. I’m not new to this community but I’m a bit of a lurker so I don’t know who to get in touch with. Just hoping this gets attention

2
phillipcurl 2 points ago +2 / -0

I was thinking about that earlier. Actually I'm certain of it. I think they have all the evidence they need for Dominion and foreign interference (see EO on election interference, and the seeming mountain of data and evidence they had on Dominion on like the 4th) but there was so much other fraud Trump and Rudy are like kids in a candy store.

2
phillipcurl 2 points ago +2 / -0

Not correct. They are expected to, but every now and again you get what’s known as a ‘faithless elector’. Never has decided an election but it has happened a handful of times

2
phillipcurl 2 points ago +2 / -0

What keeps happening with these streams? Too much traffic on one post?

6
phillipcurl 6 points ago +6 / -0

Mirror on Rumble I just made. For the Non-FB people and just in case it gets taken down. Enjoy. 45 minutes.

2
phillipcurl 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah but considering it is illegal probably not a great idea.

view more: Next ›