I didn't take the Q-drop as defining the subject of the 45 minute discussion, beyond that the subject was essentially treasonous. 2 witnesses to the call (this is relevant for a charge of treason).
Assuming Benedict Arnold had a 45 minute discussion with some British general does not mean the 45 minutes were spent on the definition of treason or the establishment of a judiciary system.
Who might VJ speak with, where the subject was subverting US? Likely not Scalia. Possibly Adam Schiff, possibly Andrew Schiff.
I didn’t take the Q-drop as defining the subject of the 45 minute discussion, beyond that the subject was essentially treasonous. 2 witnesses to the call (this is relevant for a charge of treason).
Assuming Benedict Arnold had a 45 minute discussion with some British general does not mean the 45 minutes were spent on the definition of treason or the establishment of a judiciary system.
Who might VJ speak with, where the subject was subverting US? Likely not Scalia. Possibly Adam Schiff, possibly Andrew Schiff.
________________
Yes. See my reply to hoosiermama. I was mistaken that they discussed Art 3 Sec 3 and agree Q said it was a witnessed act pertinent to Art 3 Sec 3.
However, do take a look at Andrew Schiff. If the aggregators have it right, he is very interesting and more so than Schiffty Eyes.
Very tired and another heavy day tomorrow. Apologies for errors to all.