ADVERTISEMENT

Judge allowing Jury to pick between 3 "crimes"

You first.
i know. yet none of them are arrested. Guess we are too busy recording license plates in parking lots of Latin masses and prosecuting 70 year olds praying in front of planned parenthood. You know the real problem. All part of Biden's 2 State Solution (MN & MI).
 
i know. yet none of them are arrested. Guess we are too busy recording license plates in parking lots of Latin masses and prosecuting 70 year olds praying in front of planned parenthood. You know the real problem. All part of Biden's 2 State Solution (MN & MI).
Lol. You’re worse than Riveting when it comes to changing the topic and deflecting.

You replied to my post with a completely different issue. Answer or go away.

So tired of this.
There was NO CHANCE they were taking over the government, nor was that their intent.
So it wasn’t a “real threat”, whatever that means, or an insurrection. What would you call it? What was the intent if the rioters? What was the outcome they were hoping for? What outcome were you hoping for?
 
So I read the article that I think you reference and the “experts” you listed. All it is, is a bunch of “nobody is above the law” “jury of his peers” and “the system works” and they are just quotes. Not a single person provides justification for the actions taken and why they do not constitute violations of the defendants 5th, 6th, and 14th amendment, nor explains the 5 elements required for a crime (this is basic) nor the lack of jurisdiction by a local level DA to prosecute a federal election crime?

I get that you like the buzz phrases but the references I provide go into detail about the specific constitutional and administrative errors.

Maybe I just like factual references and citations, and you lean towards more of emotion and lawn sign phrases.

But like I said prior, looks like you didn’t have any citations so we are good.
The left does tend to lean more toward emotions. That's just a fact.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT