I imagine it’s uploaded to Rumble, by now. Hope so, anyhow.
That was a tweet, is from twitter, so … so far @jerk, er, Jack, is giving it a pass. For now.
That’s good. But it needs to reach the largest audience possibe.
A Supreme Court nominee has an incontrovertible, 25-year public record of advocating for leniency toward sex predators of kids.
Media response, so far?
1. Ignore
2. Bogus “fact checks”
3. Claim “racism!” and “sexism!” (she’s a “woman” again)
4. Attack wife of Justice Thomas— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) March 25, 2022
Reporters claim they’re “too busy covering Ukraine” (but not too busy to cover Ginni Thomas’ personal politics) to cover this bombshell: https://t.co/FMJmKsaB9s— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) March 25, 2022
Let's get this straight:
Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson can't define "woman," because she's "not a biologist."
But she ignored a Columbia Medical School psychiatrist's definition of "pedophile," to protect child pornographers.
Tell both of your senators to VOTE NO:
202-224-3121 https://t.co/BxO5JMsZmC— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) March 24, 2022
🚨2012 Sentencing Commission transcript revealed Judge Jackson stated she “mistakenly assumed” child pornography offenders are not pedophiles.
Her theory, which she brought up multiple times, was that there are “less serious offenders” who are “non-sexually motivated”. pic.twitter.com/RI6tysuzHF— 🇺🇸 Mike Davis 🇺🇸 (@mrddmia) March 24, 2022