If the Justice Dept and our institutions weren’t corrupted and hijacked by the Democrats

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The free press is allowed to interfere in elections?

Don't feed the sealions.

 

[Marener]

The free press is allowed to interfere in elections?

It’s not interference. It’s constitutionally protected speech.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It’s not interference. It’s constitutionally protected speech.

It’s constitutionally protected speech.

That interfered with an election by hiding negative information from voters.

 

[Marener]

It’s constitutionally protected speech.

That interfered with an election by hiding negative information from voters.

Are you talking about Facebook again? They’re not the topic.

They did not and could not “hide” negative information from voters.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It’s constitutionally protected speech.

That interfered with an election by hiding negative information from voters.

And you sat there and did nothing?

Wow... why do you interfere with elections?

 

[struth]

Um, yeah, actually.

If he really was stoned out of his mind and smoking crack every 20 minutes, like the prosecution claims, there's no way that they should have sold him a gun... no matter what his race was.

Instead, they helped him finish filling it out. Anything to make that sale.

Thanks for highlighting your back ground checks are pointless. I mean what’s the point of them if you are simply going to blame the gun industry when someone fails

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Are you talking about Facebook again? They’re not the topic.

They did not and could not “hide” negative information from voters.

Facebook, Twitter, all the main stream media.

They did not and could not “hide” negative information from voters.

They did. They also published negative info and positive info intended
to influence an election.

 

[struth]

The government has the power to subpoena that laptop and search it. The shop owner and the other MAGGOTS do not.

The shop owner didn’t need to subpoena it, Hunter let’s it with him

 

[struth]

But peole do have a right to privacy. Especially under California law, under which Hunter is suing Giuliani and the store owner.

They weren’t in California, so not subject to it.

California is where the United state is prosecuting hunter for his tax fraud money laundering scam

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The shop owner didn’t need to subpoena it, Hunter let’s it with him

And now he is going to be very poor because of his actions.

 

[struth]

And now he is going to be very poor because of his actions.

Why? What did he do that was wrong? He turned over evidence to law enforcement.

 

[Marener]

Facebook, Twitter, all the main stream media.

They did not and could not “hide” negative information from voters.

They did. They also published negative info and positive info intended
to influence an election.

Facebook and Twitter could do nothing to stop the story from being reported on by many other sources in the media.

They could not hide anything.

Publishing negative and positive info is also known as freedom of the press, which is constitutionally protected.

 

[JoeB131]

Thanks for highlighting your back ground checks are pointless. I mean what’s the point of them if you are simply going to blame the gun industry when someone fails

You are confused.

If the gun industry wasn't so gung ho on selling guns to every crazy person who walks in the door, we wouldn't have an issue.

Instead, we have a weak background check system.

Let's take Hunter. If someone had called Hunter's wife, or his Dad, before selling him the gun, that would have put an end to this nonsense right there.

 

[struth]

You are confused.

If the gun industry wasn't so gung ho on selling guns to every crazy person who walks in the door, we wouldn't have an issue.

Instead, we have a weak background check system.

Let's take Hunter. If someone had called Hunter's wife, or his Dad, before selling him the gun, that would have put an end to this nonsense right there.

Doesn’t seem weak…caught hunter

 

[Roudy]

Back when the story broke, the information was unverified and highly suspicious.

Any sane person would be cautious before believing it. That’s all they said.

Yeah, they were part of a conspiracy to hide the truth from the American people during an election. All they did was treason.

 

[Marener]

Yeah, they were part of a conspiracy to hide the truth from the American people during an election. All they did was treason.

Speaking your opinion is not treason. It’s not “hiding the truth”.

You’d have to be absolutely insane to call it such.

 

[Roudy]

It’s not interference. It’s constitutionally protected speech.

There was no “hiding” anything. It’s just some citizens giving their opinion on a news story.

Funny, Roger Stone of The Inquirer was accused of the same “hiding” and sentenced to 3 years in prison.

 

[Marener]

Funny, Roger Stone of The Inquirer was accused of the same “hiding” and sentenced to 3 years in prison.

If you’re talking about this piece of shit:

He never worked for the Inquirer.

He was sentenced to 40 months for lying to Congress and witness intimidation. It bears no similarities to what the former intelligence officials did.

Or are you referring to a different Roger Stone?

 

[AntonToo]

The free press is allowed to interfere in elections?

....of course they are.

We have entire partisan networks dedicated to "interfering in elections". Do you live out on the fucking moon?

 

[Roudy]

If you’re talking about this piece of shit:
View attachment 960451

He never worked for the Inquirer.

He was sentenced to 40 months for lying to Congress and witness intimidation. It bears no similarities to what the former intelligence officials did.

Or are you referring to a different Roger Stone?

Doesn’t matter, he was charged with five counts of making false statements, and just like the 51 intelligence officials, he was “working for the govt.”. You Leftards always wants to have it both ways.