>>3411922 (last bread)

>So what defines "functioning" is the question.

Looking at this statement, wouldn't it would be in the best interest of POTUS's team to leave a corrupt judicial system in place until D-Day?

If a DECLAS reveals non-fixable corruption in the current justice system, and that revelation warrants military tribunals, then you would want that corrupt justice system to have been filled with people who were not your appointees, or, at the very least, mostly those who got the highest confirmation votes from a corrupt congress. (Is this why Q keeps asking that question?)

In this regard, Sessions opting out of some dealings via recusal while keeping RR in charge makes sense. Why condemn a system run by your own people?