>>18312739 pb
imma go out on a limb here and say that lurch's wife has the same ethnicity as Huma Abedin - i.e., muslim brotherhood ethnicity
now that Huma's out of the loop, (((they))) needed to get one of theirs back in the loop via lurch
as soon as she's ready for prime time, to be appointed to the Senate by shapiro, lurch better watch his back
>>18312972 pb
this "protect democracy" narrative needs to be taken down.
the only relevant question is whether any laws were broken by the tweets in question. nothing more.
same goes for the us gov't, including the police and armed forces - the only relevant question is whether any laws are being broken by a citizen - not whether they may be considered some vague "threat to democracy". that's a vague basis that is used to justify tyranny.
maybe the easiest way to do that is by turning the phrase against them. like what happened with "fake news".
for example:
the fbi needs to be prosecuted for election interference to protect democracy
yoel roth needs to be thrown in jail to protect democracy
joe biden needs to be impeached to protect democracy
mayorkas needs to be impeached to protect democracy
etc., etc.
just use that phrase to justify whatever you are doing. turn it into a nonce-word.
why not, they do it!
understood, but to offer some vague idea that "we must protect democracy" to justify state action, any action, against a citizen is tantamount to giving the state a free pass to act. it's a nose of wax that can be twisted to whatever they'd like.
the only power for the state (federal) to act against any citizen must be an enumerated power under the Constitution.
i don't see any grant of power to the state to "protect democracy" in the Constitution. that's the point.
so it needs to be called out as nonsense. the state has no power, no jurisdiction, to "protect democracy"!
and that same logic applies if they were to say we must "protect the republic" to justify censorship, etc.