CodeWriter23

If not stopped, these commies will have us all wearing a fart monitor and taxing us per fart.

Ok, that's badass. =)

Actually it was a matter of law prior to the law being rewritten in 2022.

> You are of the group of people caught up in divisive partisan politics.

Yes that explains me attempting a civil, fact based conversation with receipts with you. [thumbs up]

Good day to you sir.

No. I'm saying until 2022, the legal and legitimate role of The Senate has always been to decide if questions or anomalies exist and re-query any or all of the several states.

I would point out, encouraging someone to perform a perfectly legal act itself is a perfectly legal act. You might not like it, but it's not illegal.

You raised the issue of J6 and implied Trump's culpability for the actions of others. If you have proof he committed a criminal act, bring it. I am simply saying you did not present any in your prior statement.

A lot of illegal things happened that day. The rule of law applies. A lot of people are still in jail related to their activities on J6, patriots and otherwise.

Since I can predict what your next point will be: The intended scope of the J6 pardons was to be those wrongly prosecuted under the Biden DoJ's on-the-fly rewrite of 18 USC 1512 (which SCOTUS agreed was an improper interpretation) or those denied habeas corpus. Some mistakes were made and there's a handful of people that received pardons when they should still be in jail. That is not ok.

> Now that our cover fronting for [intel agency|cybercrime org] has been revealed.

Returning votes to a state to check in with the state and see _IF_ they want to substitute a different slate of electors was a perfectly legal action at the time. They created a new act in 2022 to make that illegal called "Electoral Count Reform and Presidential Transition Improvement Act of 2022".

Are you implying some kind of collective punishment that Trump is somehow responsible for what everyone of a certain political alignment says?

Please, cite examples.

I believe you misspelled 'Digg culture', sir.

Welp, gonna piss everyone off. Child access to the internet is a parent problem, not an ISP problem. And if someone doesn't have documents to prove their identity, it's the result of either not attaining or not affirming their legal status within their locality.