I forgot to add Drop the anti-gun Rhetoric and I will support you for President.
(4 votes)
Tulsi Fighting Fascism
I forgot to add Drop the anti-gun Rhetoric and I will support you for President.
Comments
(sounds retarded)
She endorsed Biden, nuf said!
(Old Spike)
Yes, but not all is said.
She is tackling the right kind of policy. This is good. She also refused to sign that abomination yesterday, Definitely an extra point.
(sounds retarded)
Yeah yeah, any politician can write a bill, but if it dead on arrival, so what? They get to say "see look I tried" but they know it would not pass. Her endorsing corrupt Joe is no different then Kamala agreeing to be his VP after saying he was a racist rapist. All for show! Same as Bernie endorsing and campaigning for sHillary, all talk! If Gabbard was true to what she says she is she would have given Joe the middle finger and endorsed Trump! She anti-war right? Anti-establishment, right? SO why would she endorse it? Says one thing but her actions say another!
(Old Spike)
She might be decieved about whats going on. She might be the mastermind of it all. Not all people are supporting Biden on Purpose.
I was just yelling at rednecks calling for civil war because they are idiots. So many people have their head up their ass about all kinds of shit.
Who knows, apparently the meeting between trump and allies was about making sure their case is air tight and giving legislation one last chance before invoking CONSTITUTIONAL powers.
She could have a chance at redmption if they reveal something that was not seen yet.
I heard some talk about him potentially using military court if the process is not respected. I'm not sure if he can. Do you know?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_tribunals_in_the_United_States Answer is typically No. But I can see two exceptions. 1. if those tried are former military. I believe that the transformation from civillian to military is a lifetime designation. 2. If they can contest that the courts are not "functioning"
(sounds retarded)
No way, Military courts have ZERO jurisdiction. They only have jurisdiction on active military personnel. When you sign up your butt is owned by the US government, thats why the US MiL courts have jurisdiction, because you signed up for it, otherwise you can fight jurisdiction. Thats actually one argument the Sovereign Citizens have, that we never signed into any contract with the US government or its courts to allow them to have jurisdiction over us. The government claims that it is implied when you step foot on their geographic boundary. Its neat stuff to look into, but not much can be done in real life. Dont you think its strange that the government can force you into an implied contract just becuase you step fought on "their" land? But hey, they have the power to kidnap, nuff said! LOL. Unless Trump pulls some crazy shit like the insurection act or something, nothing can be or will be done about the election fraud.
(Old Spike)
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed, and unanimously ruled that military tribunals used to try civilians in any jurisdiction where the civil courts were functioning were unconstitutional, with its decision in Ex parte Milligan (1866
I would say it could be argued that the courts are not "functioning." Because they are not.
(sounds retarded)
The power of the government derives from the illusion of power. There's like %99.999 of the population that still believes in that power. Back in 1861 that power was challenged and those that challenged it lost. Aint no way that would happen today. Like I said, the power to kidnap! Obey or die! Dude, I was party to the Standing Rock protest, spent 3 years fighting my charges, looked into and heard every argument you can think of. Arguments dont matter when they have the power to kidnap you. Hell, I even had the ninth largest lawfirm in the world representing me to fight civil asset forfetuire, and they got NOWHERE when the government just straight up dropped the case and gave me my truck back.
(sounds retarded)
Take a gander at this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)
(Old Spike)
How did your council play it?
Was the government "actually" an aggrieved party? If so do you tell the council, or do you keep their mind clear for the best defense?
(sounds retarded)
A cop claimed I tried to ram his vehicle into oncoming traffic and that I fought the cops when they tried to arrest me. The prosecutor forgot they gave me the cops fucking dashcam video and the cop thought he deleted it. They even tried to suppress it, during the fucking trial! Proved the cop lied, jury gave a not guilty on all counts, they had 8 cops ready to testify, they wanted to crucify me, after the video came out as well as multiple videos of the arrest, with 8 cops on top of me, the fifth cop ran out the backdoor of the court, literally! But even after all that they still fought to keep my truck under civil asset forfeiture law. SO I guess they claimed they were aggrieved under the civil asset forfeiture proceedings. Oh, and NO lawfirm would take my case to sue. Guess Im too white to get a lawsuit. So, yeah, the system is a little broken, LOL.
(Old Spike)
Let's go protest and burn the police station down lol.