Grand jury declines criminal charges against 6 Democrats who urged military to reject illegal orders, sources say

Grokmaster said:
"DC Grand jury" says it all; more Stalinist bullshit from the corrupt left of the injustice system.
Click to expand...
Notice that the insurrectionist provided no link.

This means one of two things;
  1. He made it up
  2. It's from a leftist hate site with a bad reputation
We know Mark Kelly was busted in rank. He was still actively in the Airforce so was treated to the UCMJ. Airman Kelly should have been courts marshalled. But this will do.

As far as grand jury? Who presented to them? Bondi had long stated she would not pursue charges. Again, the Insurrectionist didn't support his claims, so no telling what he is referring to.

This is a flaccid attempt to keep focus off of the Epstein files. The pedocrats are taking a beating in the latest dump.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2021749174065082827
View: https://x.com/BskiMike22802/status/2021749174065082827?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E2021749174065082827%7Ctwgr%5E7bf9b0dee4e96bcdf014852b8eac7df14185b70b%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fsamj%2F2026%2F02%2F12%2Fletter-to-hakeem-about-epstein-files-n2424940
 
QP! said:
But... but... i do not understand how Pirro is not correct and why the Grand Jury failed to indict. I am unable to make any sense of this. /RB

ahgatj.jpg
Click to expand...

pee pee, I never posted in this thread, you stupid moron.
Get a life :palm: .
 
RB 60 said:
pee pee, I never posted in this thread, you stupid moron.
Get a life :palm: .
Click to expand...
RB i told you before to not comment before you got help reading and compehending what is written.

I DO NOT say you posted in this thread, you poorly educated simpleton. My comments are on your posts in all the other threads on this topic, and your continued inability to comprehend this topic.
 
AProudLefty said:
You asked me what Kelly had to say. I said he agrees with me that the First Amendment won.
Click to expand...
This was not about the First Amendment. Telling them not to obey illegal orders is not against the law. It is a statement of fact. What law was broken? None. That is why the courts spend a few seconds tossing it in the trash where it belongs. It is like telling them not to kill people. Duh. That is all logical and proper. So was this. So Trump wasted a bunch of taxpayers' money on another show.
 
Nordberg said:
This was not about the First Amendment. Telling them not to obey illegal orders is not against the law.
Click to expand...
Even if it was - lawmakers have this special privlage called "The Speech and Debate Clause" which allows them great lattitude in what they're allowed to say. trump's case was DOA - but it wasn't about winning. It was about intimidation.,
Nordberg said:
It is a statement of fact. What law was broken? None. That is why the courts spend a few seconds tossing it in the trash where it belongs. It is like telling them not to kill people. Duh. That is all logical and proper. So was this. So Trump wasted a bunch of taxpayers' money on another show.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I know. trumptards are triggered by facts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top