Steward Rhodes charged with seditious conspiracy

Status
Not open for further replies.
fake-laughing.gif
rudy.gif
 
Last edited:
This will be a slam dunk for the court , fits like a glove.
"If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; July 24, 1956, ch. 678, § 1, 70 Stat. 623; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(N), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)"
 
This will be next
"Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)" And this is the legal definition of inserection as far as the constitution is concerned ' " an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government." This will also be a slam dunk for the courts.
 
This will be next
"Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)" And this is the legal definition of inserection as far as the constitution is concerned ' " an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government." This will also be a slam dunk for the courts.
Good. About time.
Kyle Rittenhouse already took care of some for us.
 
And his defense will be "Trump made me do it." ?

You don't overthrow a government with bats and flagpoles.

And why doesn't your media ever mention the FBI agents there like Epps ?
The media doesn’t mention your crazy fringe theories because they’re not detached from reality like you guys are.
 
I'm just one observant American wishing for some honest journalism which is never in the MSM anymore. Including, by and large , Fox News and whoever else you fantasize that I get my information from.
You arent observing, you’re being told things that just aren’t true and leaving all logic and common sense at the door.

It’s comfortable for you, not having the burden of ever having to be wrong.
 
I've only been wrong once, politically, voting for Barack Hussein Obama in 2008.
You think it’s really likely you’ve only been wrong once?

Or is it that you’ve just decided to bend reality to protect your ego?
 
Good. About time.
Kyle Rittenhouse already took care of some for us.
Too bad he wasn't at the Capitol helping the police - he could have gunned down all those violent protesters when the police were reluctant to open fire, right?
 
Too bad he wasn't at the Capitol helping the police - he could have gunned down all those violent protesters when the police were reluctant to open fire, right?
What violent protesters?

I saw the police leading them in. I saw a black cop shoot an unarmed white woman in cold blood.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top