Anonymous ID: 7256a3 Sept. 18, 2018, 2:06 p.m. No.3076708   🗄️.is 🔗kun

The Q link to the HRC tweet is maybe the best example of projection in the history of the world. The Hag is looking like she was ridden hard & put away wet, yes sir. But not hard & wet enough for me. Put the spurs to her, Chuck!

Anonymous ID: 7256a3 Sept. 18, 2018, 2:17 p.m. No.3076867   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6880 >>6917

@lawfag

I had assumed maybe the executive branch presented a motion to Justice Roberts concerning the FISA court, since he supervises it? Isn't it true that some kinds of motions can be brought to 1 specific justice, such as a Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, in a case that has not yet been formally appealed to SCOTUS? Likewise, don't appeals of a FISA decision go to SCOTUS? Since FISA is secret, would the appeal of a FISA decision also be maintained secret and therefore we wouldn't see the case reported in the usual law journals?

I was thinking through what kind of legal process could involve just 1-2 SCOTUS justices and that is what came to mind.

If we have evidence that a FISA warrant was fraudulently obtained due to corruption of the parties who presented the evidence and/or of the judges who granted the FISA order, would that be grounds for appeal to SCOTUS, or grounds to submit a motion for TRO? Maybe the TRO is to STOP an ongoing surveillence that was fraudulently obtained. Maybe Sessions presented the motion and had to submit an affidavit explaining why it was him presenting it and why he was no longer recused, with evidence of RR's malfeasance.

Anonymous ID: 7256a3 Sept. 18, 2018, 2:49 p.m. No.3077369   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>3077131

You're welcome. I recommend LOOKING in Memes30 and studying the weird-text and obscured-color memes and seeing what you think works. People have to be able to read it, at least to some extent, and algorithms hopefully to NOT read it.

Also there are some no-text or minimal-text memes in there.