Steward Rhodes charged with seditious conspiracy

Status
Not open for further replies.
We’ve been hearing for a long time they there was no insurrection because no one has been charged with it.

Well, here’s the founder of the Oath Keepers who was just arrested and charged with (among other things) seditious conspiracy.


I guess it’s time to retire that talking point.
Wow, one guy charged with “sedition”, good luck on a conviction.

Meanwhile Democrats openly practice sedition against this country everyday.
 
Sure was but they are like you and your brains, none!
MAGA
nope. here.

 
Out of context bullshit. Lies are all you have.

Dude, strap your dick on and go fight it out in court for tRump with all your evidence!!!!!
MAGA
nope. here.


The Washington Examiner, no wonder you are so fucked up!
DARK MAGA
 
yep, those drop boxes and video evidence not provided. And exactly, those machines that exited the country faster than a jet plane.

By "drop boxes," you mean where these red dots are? :lmao:

screenshot_20220622-155351_samsung-internet-jpg.660971
 
No evidentiary hearings. Fact.

LOL

Because there was no evidence. Like in this Nevada case...


They filed a case claiming dead people voted, others voted in Nevada and another state, and many weren't registered to vote.

The judge threw it out because they had no evidence to demonstrate any of that upon the first motion to dismiss by the defendant...

"Contestants' claims fail on the merits ... or under any other standard," the judge said in his 35-page ruling.

... so then the plaintiff filed an appeal... ALL 6 Justices ruled unanimously against them and upheld the lower court's ruling.

“To prevail on this appeal, appellants must demonstrate error of law, findings of fact not supported by substantial evidence or an abuse of discretion in the admission or rejection of evidence by the district court,” the six justices said. “We are not convinced they have done so.

That's 7 judges in 2 courts ALL reaching the same conclusion... the plaintiff's evidence failed to demonstrate fraud.
 
LOL

Because there was no evidence. Lime in this Nevada case...


They filed a case claiming dead people voted, others voted in Nevada and another state, and many weren't registered to vote.

The judge threw it out because they had no evidence to demonstrate any of that upon the first motion to dismiss by the defendant...

"Contestants' claims fail on the merits ... or under any other standard," the judge said in his 35-page ruling.

... so then the plaintiff filed an appeal... ALL 6 Justices ruled unanimously against them and upheld the lower court's ruling.

“To prevail on this appeal, appellants must demonstrate error of law, findings of fact not supported by substantial evidence or an abuse of discretion in the admission or rejection of evidence by the district court,” the six justices said. “We are not convinced they have done so.

That's 7 judges in 2 courts ALL reaching the same conclusion... the plaintiff's evidence failed to demonstrate fraud.
Because a corrupt Obama appointed judge said so? :auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg: :auiqs.jpg:Blow that out of your ass.
 
There were 7 judges involved in that case. Prove they were Obama appointed judges or you're lying again...
I do not give a shit how many were involved. Their decision was wrong and most likely coerced with assorted threats of financial ruin and cancellation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top