>>3473974

Or this gem.

<The corruption that will come out is so serious that deals must be cut for people to walk away otherwise 70% of elected politicians would be in jail (you are seeing it already begin).

Disclosure is something that's been on my mind, and then this. Like, yeah let's get rid of some of the bad guys, but keep the majority out of jail for the convenience of big brother still being a well oiled machines. It's okay if they are /ourbadguys/, RED WAVE. Lmao.

Just saying, doesn't really sound that great. If 70% are corrupt, and we keep them in, it doesn't really look that great either way you look at it. Just seems like a power grab, regardless of how well our country is doing right now. That's a lot of control for one party.

>>3474048

Resignations and then what? Jail, or a slap on the wrist?

>>3474080

I guess we'll never know, because that would fall under the category of disclosure kek. But I would agree if that were the case anon, as long as they didn't harm children or kill others out of blackmail. That's inexcusable no matter what's on the line, and should be given time for.

>>3474072

I don't see the problem either, regardless of optics. People already don't trust the government for this exact reason. Red wave is cool and all, but some people don't identify with any party and don't really care for either one.

>>3474269