Yes, show me a court where the affidavits were considered but dismissed.Sorry, ignore that, you said all courts are corrupt.
Yes, show me a court where the affidavits were considered but dismissed.Sorry, ignore that, you said all courts are corrupt.
Yes, first they came for the insurgents, but I thought the insurgents were dangerous lunatics and I did nothing.Stolen from Dan Bongino
The past 24 hours:
- Twitter permanently suspends President Trump
- Twitter suspends "POTUS" government twitter account
- Amazon employees call for company to stop hosting Parler through AWS
- Google removes Parler from Google Play, Apple considers following suit
- YouTube Bans Steve Bannon
- CEO of Mozilla says we need more than deplatforming
Me
Big tech is out of control. If you think the thought police will stop at censoring the right wing people who disagree with their world view, you are a fcking idiot.
Yes, show me a court where the affidavits were considered but dismissed.
That's a perfect example of the corrupt system at work. A judge reading afffidavits and forming a judgement based on that, without giving any of the witnesses their day in court. That case was dodged by that judge after a preliminary hearing without allowing it to go to trial.Here's one found in two minutes. Scroll down for the actual court judgement.
https://www.clickondetroit.com/news...lt-certification-of-detroit-election-results/
Find me a case where the judge actually listened to the evidence in court before forming a judgement.
No point, it is a corrupt system. Roll on the 20th.
ParlerHere is some pretty damming evidence for you to pooh pooh.
If it turns out to be kosher, you may all owe me an apology.
This guy is an Italian and her gets his months mixed up right at the end.
https://video.parler.com/Y3/iW/Y3iWk7KPgwNj.mp4
Some of the more intelligent are a little more discerning about what is truth and what is lie, you demonstrably don't fall into that category
Yes, show me a court where the affidavits were considered but dismissed.
A judge reading afffidavits and forming a judgement based on that, without giving any of the witnesses their day in court.
YouTube Bans Steve Bannon
Yes my understanding was affidavits were thrown out as they lacked substantive proof.So, if I could show you where the affidavits were considered but dismissed as poor or non existent evidence that would be a start? I've asked you this before.