Sounds like the judge had “pre-judged” the case. How does she KNOW that Parler content was anything like she described?
https://freerepublic.com/focus/news/3927573/posts?page=40#40
“Even though there is no evidence, the seriousness of the charge is what matters.”
This works great for democrats just as much as ignoring evidence and/or prejudging the case!
She's 82 years old. She probably has trouble finding the bathroom, much less understanding "social media".
Lawyer types in their 70s and 80s are too important to have to deal with computers and the Internet.
Having never had to learn, they have people for that.