Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Stewart Rhodes the leader of the Oath Keepers took the stand made wild claims about the 2020 election being unconstutional. Rhodes is really delusional worst thing he could have done was take the stand too bad federal courts don't allow cameras.
He claims his weapons stash was to fight off antifa if they attacked the Whitehouse.
Stewart Rhodes the leader of the Oath Keepers took the stand made wild claims about the 2020 election being unconstutional. Rhodes is really delusional worst thing he could have done was take the stand too bad federal courts don't allow cameras.
He claims his weapons stash was to fight off antifa if they attacked the Whitehouse.
Except I think he's on tape saying he was ready to hang Nancy from a lamp post. And he's ready to take up arms in Trump's defense.
I'm not sure how he's thinking his testimony is helping him.
Did she have rifles packed and ready to use against the government in order to stop the peaceful transfer of power? Are you sure you want to compare this nutcase to Abrams?
Not really because if he loses his election he ends up in prison she can just go home and plan her next run for office. He is telling a jury made up of mostly people who work for the federal government in some way that he had the right to riot. I doubt they will think much of his election conspiracy theories.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuebald
Rhodes is looking at 20 years on the Seditious Conspiracy count alone, and that is just one of the things he was indicted for. I wonder if he will attempt to get a plea deal before his sentencing?
I doubt thing they need to plea deal with them unless he is willing to testify that he coordinated with Roger Stone, and Trump.
...
Our courts including the SCOTUS said there was zero, zip, nadda evidence of wide spread voter fraud that would have changed the outcome of our election. ...
Nothing of the sort happened. I don't know why the Left continues to push this blatant lie.
The courts didn't say anything about the evidence of fraud, because, in defiance of the Constitution, they refused to look at the evidence.
The rioters should be pardoned (and compensated).
Quote:
Originally Posted by kell490
Not really because if he loses his election he ends up in Prison she can just go home and plan her next run for office. He is telling a jury made up of mostly people who work for the federal government in some way. I doubt they will think much [snipped erroneous part].
I fixed your statement, and agree with the corrected statement.
They work for the Federal Government, who pays them not to think.
I used to be one of them, but never rose in the ranks, because I can see the corruption.
Nothing of the sort happened. I don't know why the Left continues to push this blatant lie.
The courts didn't say anything about the evidence of fraud, because, in defiance of the Constitution, they refused to look at the evidence.
So 60 judges all refused to look at actual evidence of fraud in defiance of the constitution? This is what you actually believe?
So 60 judges all refused to look at actual evidence of fraud in defiance of the constitution? This is what you actually believe?
I don't know the number, but it isn't what I believe, it is what it is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
