Jump to content

Jan 6: They All Lied And Here's The Proof!


Reagan

Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...
On 7/12/2022 at 3:51 PM, Unwoke said:

Who the undercover FBI that was in the crowd. That’s appalling, I can’t believe someone would say something like that. I am sure a Democrat would never be that offensive. By the way that’s Trumps head that the liberal nut job is holding.
 

 

 

 

She was wrong, as well. It doesn't make the violent mob right

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Big girl said:

How do these events resemble the insurrection 

A insurrection is believable as the Russian Hoax. Lol

“Fact checkers” aren’t actually concerned with the truth, they were put in place to control narratives and push their own biased version of reality. Some of them realize this, and they still don’t care.

Fact checkers were never a thing until the left lost control of the narrative and the truth started coming out.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Big girl said:

How do these events resemble the insurrection 

Jan 6th was a wake up call, it’s a sign of things to come when govt gets too big as well as not trusted.

those events listed are not an exact resemblance but it shows that thru out history people will only take so much before they stand up and against big govt and an untrustworthy one at that.

read up and educate yourself on said events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Unwoke said:

A insurrection is believable as the Russian Hoax. Lol

“Fact checkers” aren’t actually concerned with the truth, they were put in place to control narratives and push their own biased version of reality. Some of them realize this, and they still don’t care.

Fact checkers were never a thing until the left lost control of the narrative and the truth started coming out.

 

 

 

 

I watched it on TV live while it was happening.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Unwoke said:

I watched the Russian Hoax on Tv for years….DAILY….only for it to be proven it was TOTAL BS! And that our own DOJ and FBI tried to remove a sitting President with the Russian Hoax.  Wake Up Buttercup!

I watched as people stormed the Capitol, live.  It was an insurrection 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, 5GallonBucket said:

Jan 6th was a wake up call, it’s a sign of things to come when govt gets too big as well as not trusted.

those events listed are not an exact resemblance but it shows that thru out history people will only take so much before they stand up and against big govt and an untrustworthy one at that.

read up and educate yourself on said events.

Wow, I have no words. Smh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Big girl said:

Wow, I have no words. Smh

 

3 minutes ago, Big girl said:

I watched as people stormed the Capitol, live.  It was an insurrection 

The Democrat Nut Jobs stormed the Capitol when Kavanaugh was being vetted by Congress for the Supreme Court. Nearly 300 protesters were arrested. Was that a Insurrection also?

This is the hidden content, please

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Big girl said:

I watched as people stormed the Capitol, live.  It was an insurrection 

I bet you watched blm riot and loot on TV. You were probably screaming, “Bust that window on Wal Mart. Grab that big screen Sony TV. You deserve it because Wal Mart and Sony are responsible for the death of our beloved George Floyd!”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Unwoke said:

 

The Democrat Nut Jobs stormed the Capitol when Kavanaugh was being vetted by Congress for the Supreme Court. Nearly 300 protesters were arrested. Was that a Insurrection also?

This is the hidden content, please

Using her own words, yes it was.  She will give them a pass since they were low info Dimocrat voters, such as herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,937
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined



  • Posts

    • There is a difference, but I wouldn't at all put it past Trump to do so if he had the infrastructure in place to get away with it like the Dems currently do.  With the amount of effort he's invested in ruining those republicans who've opposed him, it wouldn't surprise me one bit.
    • I think it will be an interesting case and could potentially come up for appeal on a different constitutional point.  The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that the government doesn’t have to take possession of property in order to take it under the meaning of the Fifth Amendment.  If they take away the enjoyment or use of the property, it is no different than physically seizing it to build a highway for example. In a lawsuit as opposed to a criminal trial, a person/plaintiff doesn’t have to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt but rather by a preponderance of evidence or “more likely” to have happened. Maybe it could be described as more likely yes than no or 51%-49%.  ”IF” it can be shown at a trial by a preponderance of evidence that Texas more likely yes than no caused the flooding with its engineering of the project, the people suing might have a case. But…. Does that alone win the case under the Fifth Amendment taking clause? I am not so sure. In US v Causby the Supreme Court ruled that the US government took a man’s property by flying airplanes over it. It was a public airport lawfully leased by the US in WWII and used to fly heavy bombers from it. Causby had an egg farm and the extremely loud noise of some airplanes under full power and sometimes at night with a landing lights being so close, it bothered and scared the family and damaged his egg farm production. Some chickens died and some quit laying eggs due to the extreme disturbances and lights at night. The Supreme Court ruled in Causby’s favor saying that the US had taken away the enjoyment and use of his land even though they didn’t physically seize it. The use of the land was hampered and that was enough for the taking clause under the Fifth Amendment. So in the IH-10 case, did Texas take away the use or enjoyment of the property?  A point of Causby was that the military bombers at a public airport was certainly for “public use”. The planes were public/taxpayers’ and the airport and lease were taxpayers’ property so the “public” definitely used it   My question in this lawsuit against Texas, even in they can prove the damage, was the damage (like in Causby) for “public use”? If not would it then not be a Fifth Amendment case but rather a state law case?  If Texas law denies such a lawsuit under state sovereignty and the families can’t prove a Fifth Amendment case of “public use”, could they prove the damages but still lose the case under state law? I haven’t read that anywhere and just thinking out loud. I could be way off base. But I think it could be interesting…..
    • Both sides...that is, everyone tries to get their people elected. Trump has not weaponized the government to bankrupt and imprison his political opponents. Night and day difference for me.
    • Surely you're aware of the great lengths Trump has gone to disrupt the elections and destroy the careers of republican politicians who haven't supported some of his most outlandish claims, or dared to question him or disagree with him about January 6.  You and I actually agree on this issue, although it must only go one way for you, because Trump's actions against republicans who didn't fall into lockstep with him is one of my biggest concerns about reelecting him.  The fact that he took action to affect literally hundreds of republican primaries from national elections down to municipal levels across the country, is concerning. It would've been one thing had he done it in an effort to help republicans win. Instead his purpose was to push out his perceived detractors and install MAGA politicians at every level of government in as many places as possible, and has resulted in a fractured republican party.
    • Lmao. No doubt. With a name like that, he would've gotten made fun of even if he was home-schooled.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...