'If white people were still here, this wouldn’t happen': the majority-Black town flooded with sewage
archive link: https://archive.is/HPceQ
direct link: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/11/centreville-illinois-flooding-sewage-overflow
Activist Catherine Flowers: the poor living amid sewage is 'the final monument of the Confederacy'
archive link: https://archive.is/rC81b
direct link: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/11/catherine-flowers-environmental-justice-sewage-alabama
America's dirty divide: how environmental racism leaves the vulnerable behind
archive link: https://archive.is/atAu0
direct link: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/series/americas-dirty-divide
America's dirty divide: about this series
archive link: https://archive.is/yVL52
direct link: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/11/americas-dirty-divide-about-this-series
Open Society Foundations (sponsor of this propaganda series)
archive link: https://archive.is/0ZjQs
direct link: https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/george-soros
Have you faced local sanitation issues in the US? We want to hear from you
archive link: https://archive.is/usoYU
direct link: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/feb/11/sanitation-sewage-community-tell-us
…dig this one up from the memory hole it fell into and shove it in their face.
https://i.maga.host/0FdeQW4.png
There are users here spreading a conspiracy theory that the shooting was faked and some are also claiming this video as proof https://streamable.com/mopbdi
If you really believe that, then I suggest you latch on to her martyrdom anyways, since that hurts the enemy the most whether your conspiracy theory is true or not. Her martyrdom is what the enemy DOES NOT WANT.
Also…
That video claims the gun is pointed down the hall when fired. Whoever believes that has a depth perception problem, as well as a severe lack of spatial awareness. Ashli was attempting to enter a side window panel on the right side of the double doors furthest away from the other side window panel where the cameraman was standing. She was against the far wall; not where the arrow points in the video. I suggest you look at the other videos for the one that shows her position clearly as well as the opening she was climbing through. Claiming that the shot was fired in a completely different direction than the target is blatantly false and doesn't match up with what is seen at all. In any case, if they were staging the incident, they could have simply used blanks and pointed the weapon directly at the target.
The video further claims that a ".45 will push you back and knock you down". That would only be possible if the round doesn't fully pass through the target, which in this case it likely did; through her neck. Full transfer of energy requires the round to stay within the target.
Next it makes claims about a "lack of blood". Not all wounds are the same. There is no evidence that the round directly severed any major vessels in the neck. She was wearing a large flag tied around her neck like a cape that covered her neck like a scarf. That makes it almost impossible to see the actual wound in the videos that I've seen. A bullet will not always create a massive wound cavity. Bleeding can take time to build up internally. Pressure on the wound can hold it back; even the pressure of her backpack propping her head up and compressing her neck when she was on the floor. Blood will always take the path of least resistance like any other fluid.
Real life shootings rarely look like a Hollywood movie. Filmmakers are out to make a scene visually stunning or shocking. That's not real life, nor is it real death.
BREAKING! So, I'm hearing that DNI Ratcliffe had intelligence analysts place a plate of cookies in the same room with Biden and Harris, then they warned them to not touch the cookies until the end of the intelligence briefing, but when the analysts all left the room for a break they came back to find that a cookie was missing. That's how they caught them in a sting operation. That is one of the reasons that Biden's team is no longer getting any briefings; at least until they own up as to who took the cookie. Stay tuned!
HoldTheLine #TeamTrump #PatrioticHashTagThree #KeepAmericaBeautiful #GiveAHootDontPolute #OnlyYouCanPreventForestFires
source (of inspiration): https://thedonald.win/p/11R4ufrRUP/breaking-so-im-hearing-that-dni-/c/
This has been live for an hour. General Flynn has already spoken to the crowd. Lots of people have posted the links, but still no sticky.
https://thedonald.win/p/11R4NtTF7X/live-rallies-for-trump-in-washin/
This may be a bitter pill for a lot of you to swallow, but nobody is going to follow you into a civil war if you fire the first shot on your own.
You only have so many chances to show your full support for President Trump. If you are within range of this event, this is your chance.
Get there. Be ready for a fight!!! (Antifa/BLM/etc. will be there).
Do it for President Trump. Do it for those who are too far away to make it in time now and/or who really do not have the money for airfare.
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Saturday, Dec. 12th @ 12:00pm
(READ THE INFORMATION ON THE LINK)
INTRODUCTION
Defendant States do not seriously address grave issues that Texas raises, choosing to hide behind other court venues and decisions in which Texas could not participate and to mischaracterize both the relief that Texas seeks and the justification for that relief. An injunction should issue because Defendant States have not—and cannot—defend their actions.
First, as a legal matter, neither Texas nor its citizens have an action in any other court for the relief that Texas seeks here. Moreover, no other court could provide relief as a practical matter. The suggestion that Texas—or anyone else—has an adequate remedy is specious.
Second, Texas does not ask this Court to reelect President Trump, and Texas does not seek to disenfranchise the majority of Defendant States’ voters. To both points, Texas asks this Court to recognize the obvious fact that Defendant States’ maladministration of the 2020 election makes it impossible to know which candidate garnered the majority of lawful votes. The Court’s role is to strike unconstitutional action and remand to the actors that the Constitution and Congress vest with authority for the next step. U.S. CONST. art. II, § 1, cl. 2; 3 U.S.C. § 2. Inaction would disenfranchise as many voters as taking action allegedly would. Moreover, acting decisively will not only put lower courts but also state and local officials on notice that future elections must conform to State election statutes, requiring legislative ratification of any change prior to the election. Far from condemning this and other courts to perpetual litigation, action here will stanch the flood of election-season litigation.
Third, Defendant States’ invocation of laches and standing evinces a cavalier unseriousness about the most cherished right in a democracy—the right to vote. Asserting that Texas does not raise serious issues is telling. Suggesting that Texas should have acted sooner misses the mark—the campaign to eviscerate state statutory ballot integrity provisions took months to plan and carry out yet Texas has had only weeks to detect wrongdoing, look for witnesses willing to speak, and marshal admissible evidence. Advantage to those who, for whateverreason, sought to destroy ballot integrity protections in the selection of our President.
On top of these threshold issues, Defendant States do precious little to defend the merits of their actions. This Court should issue the requested injunction.