Necessary, to be sure, though. And I'm more than grateful that a monster is being brought to justice.

But this is not how America's supposed to be. I blame any and all trump voters for this shit show.

I mean... my understanding is that she actually talked the election commissioner in Coffee County into allowing her access into their voting machines to corrupt the software and change votes.

I mean... WHAT THE FUCK. She was so sure that the election was stolen that she had to cheat the system herself?

I'm thinking 20 years behind bars would be appropriate.

All these African American officials and clerks and officers have the NERVE to indict him! Don't they know their true place? This is not his vision of America.

And I'm as happy as I can be.

I understand the appeal among his sinning followers. "I would feel uneasy about my greed and racism but I've got a big boss man up there willing to die for those thoughts. We can achieve paradise despite our disgusting natures by exalting him. Accepting him is our salvation."

As a collection of people, entitled to First Amendment protections of speech and to the power of religious discrimination, according to the Citizens United and Hobby Lobby decisions.

So why is it that Harvard University was not allowed to admit into its halls people of its own choosing? Do I not as a person have freedom of association? Do I not have the First Amendment right to choose who I will and won't admit into my home? Did not the Citizens United and Hobby Lobby cases affirm/extend those people protections to corporations?

And why didn't Harvard's lawyers argue that angle in front of the Court?

OK, that's not really MY question. It's a trumpian's, who asked it of me:

"at this point you need to ask why the special counsel leaked the audio of the tape to cnn…. for what reason?

here’s the thing: the audio proves nothing. It is the sound of President Trump talking about presidential papers that are claimed by the DOJ to be “classified” or “secret.”
despite your most heartfelt wishes the audio will NEVER be used at trial – if there is even a trial – which is highly unlikely, because it cannot be admitted into evidence.
That’s why Jack Smith gave it to them. The audio is useless, except for the value in promoting the lawfare narrative
Why? Because the documents that are claimed to be heard in the audio are nowhere to be found. That’s right, the DOJ and FBI never found any “classified” or “super-secret” documents as described in the audio. As a result, the audio represents nothing, because without the documents the audio is inadmissible.
You cannot submit evidence in court of a person talking about documents without the documents the audio is supposedly talking about.
Can you see the issue now? As a result, the audio is nothing more than President Trump talking about something the prosecution cannot identify or prove. It’s inadmissible, hence no value, hence the leak"


I thanked him for the comedy.

You see, I'm asking because I don't think any competent judge would allow a trial to proceed unless the open question was one of commission, not whether or not he a technicality dismisses the charges.

For example, the question of whether or not he can declassify documents with his mind, or that they became his own personal records simply by taking them home, would be technical matters that should be resolved before a case is even brought to a jury. I just can't imagine that a jury would be asked to read, parse, and interpret statutes... to be asked to serve as legal experts.

So, I'm seeing two possible outcomes: the judge will dismiss the case, or the case will go to trial and the defense will be _________________?????

Go Philadelphia! Go Pennsylvania! This live video warms my heart....

[link:https://www.penndot.pa.gov/RegionalOffices/district-6/Pages/AlertDetails.aspx|

Wow, Aileen.

Give a one word clue that links "St. Patrick" and "garden" but avoids the word "oasis".