Anonymous ID: 637024 June 26, 2018, 12:36 p.m. No.1912438   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2484

>>1912197

 

This is a very old case. Hmmm. Not a law type.

US v Reynolds.

extension of presidential power.

Was the affirmation proper?

Justice cannot be served when beneath

secrecy.

How could be sure of justice otherwise?

Anonymous ID: 637024 June 26, 2018, 12:42 p.m. No.1912502   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>1912222

 

That's a hard decision.

Can exposed secretes hurt us to no return?

That they be protected by law against the ppl?

If such a secret exist, who holds the power

to deny access besides the President and

those that know by result of operations.

Or should the people know all.

Taxpayer information.

How can ppl control the government,

if they can't see it's operations?

How fight war without secrecy.

Hard decisions affecting justice.

Anonymous ID: 637024 June 26, 2018, 12:56 p.m. No.1912652   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2668

"He is, after, the Greatest Shitposter Master Troll that uses twaat to perfection to achieve his goals & communicates directly to us, and then Q posts here to show the correlations in their comms."

anon, 6/26/18