Comey admits he sent the agents to interview Flynn at the beginning of the administration because "he could've gotten away with it," due to the disorganization of an incoming admin in this video.
Belgians in front of European Union HQ now.
Not seeing he was "tuned up," by a cop. Got sauce?
Chief Justice Rehnquist wore a robe with four golden stripes on the sleeves. The robe is now in the Smithsonian.
"…the Court soon settled on basic black.
Until last week. That was when Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist appeared on the bench in a black robe adorned with four gold stripes on each sleeve. The courtroom audience was too polite to point or exclaim, but an explanation was clearly in order and, within hours, the Court's public information office provided one: the Chief Justice had designed a robe after one worn by the Lord Chancellor in a local production of Gilbert and Sullivan's "Iolanthe," and he intended to keep on wearing it.
The Model
The Chief Justice's sartorial model was an aging fop whose principal juridical duty seemed to be marrying off pretty young orphan girls with whom he had the comic misfortune of continually falling in love."
https://www.nytimes.com/1995/01/22/weekinreview/ideas-trends-the-chief-justice-has-new-clothes.html
"The Associated Press reports that Chief Justice William Rehnquist has given the Smithsonian Institution the robe–the one with the ridiculous yellow stripes on the sleeves–that he wore while presiding over President Clinton’s impeachment trial in the Senate. Rehnquist valued the donation at $30,000, according to his 1999 financial disclosure form. How does he know the value? He had it appraised by Sotheby’s!
Hmmm. Did Rehnquist actually take a tax deduction for the $30,000 donation? The AP reported that “the chief justice did not respond when asked” that question. And a Supreme Court spokesperson no-commented when queried by kausfiles. But why would Rehnquist go to the trouble of having Sotheby’s appraise the robe if he didn’t deduct it? (And if he didn’t, you’d think he would just say he didn’t, rather than refuse to comment.)
If he did deduct, it’s probably perfectly legal. But isn’t it a bit outrageous? What it would mean is that Rehnquist actually made a tidy profit from performing his public, constitutional duty of presiding over the impeachment of a president–a job for which he was already paid $175,400 a year by the American people. How much profit? Assuming he’s in the 31 percent bracket–even $175,400 doesn’t put you in the top 40 percent bracket these days–the deduction would be worth about $9,000 to him."
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2000/06/rehnquist-s-scandalous-shmatte.html
Bringing in the cavalary
JFK is witness to Brussels.
From what I can see, these people are marching against a globalist agenda. They are not like pussy hat wearers or anti ice prostesters. They don't want foreign entities dictating to them. I can support such an ideology. And as far as the masks go. It would see if you don't come with a gas mask to the march, you are not prepared for the march.
This is flagrantly open illegal behavior. Where are the authorities?
Everything is fine.
Just a little martial law that's all.
The courts you say?