Anonymous ID: bd6c98 June 27, 2018, 11:38 a.m. No.1927409   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7653

Some anons are being ridiculous about Gowdy

He is not judge material

Gowdy is prosecutor material

Will we need good prosecutors soon?

Well…..?

Anonymous ID: bd6c98 June 27, 2018, 11:40 a.m. No.1927430   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>1927407

 

He's right

They go to TAMPERING WITH THE USA's electoral process

Assisting traitors in their plan to overthrow the legitimate government in DC

They go very deep

And could even be considered an EU act of war

Against the USA.

Maybe he should stop talking now

Because he has already lost

Anonymous ID: bd6c98 June 27, 2018, 11:41 a.m. No.1927454   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>8110

>>1927428

 

Noetic World Order

 

They really did intend to run the world on magical principles and turn the political arena into one big magical ritual like the Nuremberg Rallies. Which, by the way, were very successful for the third Reich

Anonymous ID: bd6c98 June 27, 2018, 11:44 a.m. No.1927501   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7939

>>1927357

 

The image is too big

If you click on it on the board

Many things are too small to see

But if you open the image in a new tab

And then click it to expand

It is way bigger than needed

And difficult to scroll around in

Reduce it to 50% or maybe even 33%

Anonymous ID: bd6c98 June 27, 2018, 12:21 p.m. No.1928027   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>1927663

 

Some of Trump's actions already look like repairs to Obama's non-legitimacy. Like the reappointment of Huber to the same job. Like some EO's REPLACING regulations which is the equivalent of legitimizing the bits that were kept. And people really dod not spend a whole lot of time analyzing what was going on in that huge Omnibus bill. Innocuous little things could be there just to clarify bits of Obama era legislation that are important to keep.

Anonymous ID: bd6c98 June 27, 2018, 12:28 p.m. No.1928117   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>1928024

 

Supreme Court Justices probably have restrictions placed on them on what they can talk about in public. When they retire they should be less restricted.

For instance, since they often disagree with colleagues they probably have to refrain from publicly criticising them outside of dissenting rulings which are formal documents. But are they more free to critique judges afterwards?

 

Is Kennedy leaving the SC so that he can be free to blow the lid off RBG's incompetence and senility?