Posted on 12/01/2023 7:35:27 PM PST by 11th_VA
Courts are turning into code word for agendas another democrat domino chaos event.
Not one word about the substance of the appeal.
“I’m not questioning your post, I just want to be able to share that evidence.”
I understand and I have looked since and can’t find a thing about it. They were hiding it right away. But Cspan and CNN were streaming it live as it happened. And you can bet these videos they are NOT sharing has this event recorded.
I explained this back right after it happened. But we happened to be in a unique situation here which allowed us to watch it live on network closed feed meant only for internal use. We have old school big dish, and all the networks broadcast closed feeds to satellites meant for distribution to their affiliates across the country. It is live, unedited, and raw. So my wife and I were able to watch this all happen live on the CNN feed.
I’m still kicking myself hard for not recording it...
This question was answered long ago.
LOL!
Inevitable headline: "After the late Ruth Ginsburg's fashionable alterations to traditional jurist's robes, progressive members propose pushing the boundries of tradition even further."
Was that “shout” or “shot”?
Shot.
Was “Alexandra” Filming.... you know... her Daughter, The “documentary Maker”?
GAWD!
Sotomeyer or her office.
The leak.
This was reported a while ago
No, it was live feed from the proceedings on the house floor. Two reps had already challenged and had confirmed their sponsors from the Senate. The third, Paul Gosar was at the lectern making his speech when the proceedings were interrupted before he could finish. Then there was confusion among all the members and they were pointed out a door to leave the floor. Surprisingly, it was calm and relaxed as they gathered up and left the room. As if they were not sure exactly what was happening. There was no panic at all.
In 18 U.S. Code Chapter 102 - RIOTS, specifically 18 U.S. Code § 2102 - Definitions, is this:
(b) As used in this chapter, the term “to incite a riot”, or “to organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a riot”, includes, but is not limited to, urging or instigating other persons to riot, but shall not be deemed to mean the mere oral or written (1) advocacy of ideas or (2) expression of belief, not involving advocacy of any act or acts of violence or assertion of the rightness of, or the right to commit, any such act or acts.President Trump spoke of his belief that he won the election, and then asked the attendees to peacefully walk to the Capitol to show the lawmakers their support for President Trump. That meets the exception to the "to incite a riot" definition.
-PJ
I think the problem is these appeals are going to be coming from the DC courts and Roberts is the one who gets to decide what cases they take from the DC courts. So he can just deny them without consulting anyone else.
Yes, the DC court appeals are the real problem. It’s no secret Roberts dislikes Trump and the DC cases are total rigg jobs
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.