Brunson ruled against?
(media.greatawakening.win)
Comments (17)
sorted by:
The case never sought to overturn the election. It was a case, to which many politicians broke the law and broke their oath of office.
SCOTUS apparently recognizes we no longer have a Constitution (it's been suspended?) and we are living under some other form of government.
Thank you for that lightbulb moment!
Other people need to figure this out too. Are you being facetious here?
No, I'm not being facetious at all, I'm just not as quick on the uptake as you and I hadn't considered that the legal environment the SC operates in might be altered due to devolution. You're usually quite a lot ahead of me fren!
That's all good. Carry on. Know that not everyone is aware of devolution though. You do win my Fine Fickle Finger Friend award though. Cherish it as I have. 😊😊😊
Always!
Now you've given me and other frens something to ponder! I hadn't really thought of this scenerio involving devolution.... Nice food for thought! UPDOOT
Thanks, but it's u/Tewdryg 's thinking, I just reacted.
OH poop you're right kek. Heat of the moment lightbulb excitement
proxy government of china perhaps?
It was NOT about overturning an election, it was about holding a Congress accountable for not pausing for 10 days and investigating. Congress failed to uphold their oath.
The Military is the only way!
They're too busy wearing pup masks and figuring out what gender they are today.
I am getting sick of seeing this everywhere. Don't expect them to do anything. Their munitions and funds are being depleted in a proxy war in Ukriane.
They strip our units to send weapons abroad, then our units wait for replenishment from the Military Industrial Complex. It is a win-win for the laundering of taxpayer money to those who . . . funnel some of it back to the pols who voted for it. Ukraine and the Mil Ind Complex. Circle Back IOW.
Well, shit.
Does Q say anything about the SC moving to run with the dark side?
What use is the oath now?