Trump campaign would have picked the rally location.
What about the neighbors who remember them living there?
In a stunning development, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has revoked the controversial plea deal for alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and two accomplices announced on Wednesday, and said he was taking oversight of the military tribunal at Guantanamo
My point has this position has been around for like the past 4 presidents. Every convening authority has had the same authority since Congress passed the Military Commissions law.
So this is not evidence of devolution
So she replaced this guy who was there under Trump. This has been around for awhile. It's not new under Biden.
the ex branch (DOJ) of govt should have known but didn't.
Why would the DOJ know. It was a DOD case
And the DOD is still the executive branch.
I think that might be hard to do
2.07 trillion
USD Market capitalization
That's my point, the case is not dropped.
The Supreme Court did not completely throw out this case, but the language of this post makes this seem big.
The big news happened a month ago. That was a win.
Today's news means next week we will see a lot more about this case.
But the news of today isn't that The Supreme Court ruled on immunity. We knew that. We knew that a month ago.
The big news is not that Trump is getting a couple of grand in court costs.
The big news is this case has been on pause since December, but now it going to back in a big way in the heat of the presidential race.
They are going to start arguing over which part of the indictment involves official acts so the Jan 6 indictment is going to be part of the news cycle again.
She seems be the descendant of a slave and a slaveholder.
But either way that slavery did not happen in the US.
This is not the big story of what just happened.
Today's ruling is that the J6 case is back on. The case has been "remanded back to district court.". So after a several month delay this case is moving forward in Judge Chutkan's court.
A problem I have with remakes is the loss of context. The original is called The Manchurian Candidate because he was in Manchuria. There's another Denzel remake called The Taking of pelm 123 that makes no sense post 9/11
From the book
Major Bennett Marco, Sergeant Raymond Shaw, and the rest of their infantry platoon are captured by an elite Soviet commando unit during the Korean War in 1952. They are taken to Manchuria, and brainwashed into believing Shaw saved their lives in combat
In the remake they are from the Gulf War.
The original was inspired by real events Us POWs were confessing to war crimes including germ, warfare in Chinese custody.
When you look into it "brainwashing" there's a whole rabbit hole there
The concept of brainwashing was first pushed by a Anti-Communist journalist in the US about 1959. He used the words brainwash based on his translation of Chinese words. However what he described was not how the words were actually used in China which has a positive connotation of self improvement or becoming modern. In fact, a good portion of it was about bringing new Western scientific ideas to China and replacing superstition. His version was skewed it into a new negative connotation of mind control. So much so, that the Chinese saw this as an American concept.
Another issue was this journalist, Edward Hunter, was actually a CIA agent. He wrote this book in 1951.
https://www.abebooks.com/signed/Brain-Washing-Red-China-Calculated-Destruction-Mens/31517864221/bd
A few years after this book came out Psychologist realized that what Hunter was proclaiming was fake and that level of control especially what we see in Manchurian Candidate was not an actual phenomenon, but the concept took off.
But Hunter testified to Congress in 1958 and
rhe novel came out the next year and the movie 3 yeas after that.
Wouldn't it be like the same character from the first movie?
But that did not happen today
Where are you getting any of that from?
How do you get to treason?
Election Fraud is its own crime.
????
FBiI is legally able to do it. Using a contractor wouldn't change that. All communications with them would still be foiable.
He did not The "accounts" people were talking about were communication apps.
Like you have an account to use this site.
Somehow people twisted it into bank accounts.
Lots of Communication apps are encrypted.
I have a pixel when I chat with someone with another pixel it's encrypted.
What'sApp Signal Telegram
Apple I think is all encrypted.
What's the theory of the case with Yearick?