I’ve spent the weekend (and honestly the end of last week) under a rock with the manuscript for NML (the earc for volume 1 is out, btw. Post about this later.) so I’m not writing about Tulsi’s revelations on Friday.
For a recap here. And if you’re X-less, here.
I read them again this morning, and one thing jumps out at me: the use of the word “Treason”. As Charlie Martin has explained on X this has a very specific meaning in US constitutional terms: It means cooperating (Aiding and abetting) an enemy at open (shooting) war with the US.
Is Tulsi using the word loosely? Did none of her advisors point out the meaning? Or is she using it advisedly? What war were we involved in? Well…. Afghanistan. Eyes the ignominious retreat….
This stuff seems more solid than it’s been, though I’ll point out to Cynical Publius that at least for me the “Big Mike” thing was never a serious conspiracy. I don’t know if it was for anyone, but certainly not most people. (Unlike the French who are deadly serious about Mrs. Macron.) I think it was just our way of pushing back on Michelle Obama’s stunning beauty and style when in fact she was a “fairly decent looking” woman about my age. I’d like to think with her resources I’d look better. I’m probably wrong, but hey, I’d probably look about the same. Anyway selling her as the most stunning and well dressed woman ever was a serious attempt at gaslighting.
(Her sense of style reminds me of P. J. O’Rourke’s description of the sense of style of Russian oligarch wives: cover yourself in Elmer’s glue, then roll through the boutiques on Rodeo Drive.)
The “Big Mike” thing was our way of rattling the cage bars right back.
But the rest…. yeah.
Now, I’ve read Mike Walsh screaming that none of this matters unless there are indictments. I’m not sure he’s right.
Unless Tulsi really means that “treason” and has the receipts on that (in which case we’re in “hanged by the neck” territory, guys and … scary times ahead) it might be better, instead of arrests that while they aren’t will give the appearance of revenge, to expose Obama very thoroughly and make it so he can’t hold up his head in public anywhere.
For him, and those with him, that is literally a punishment worse than death.
But this post is to say: I’m taking the 48 hour BUSINESS DAY rule. Because none of this, right now, makes any sense in my head. I’ll wait till the contents under pressure settle.
However, I figured you guys needed some time to discuss it, and a place, and I’ll let you do that.
The one thing I’m already sure of is that all the people who idolized Obama need to go on their knees to Nixon’s grave and apologize.
Anyway, I’m going back to the day job (fiction, guys, fiction) and give you a chance to arggle bargle on this thread.
According To Hoyt 
Apparently in Mongolia, people deal with eczema by washing with nettle tea or nettle soap.
I’ve heard about washing with burdock tea for eczema, but nettle soap is new to me.
I mean, yes, it’s definitely all nutritious and full of vitamins, so I guess it would be okay.
They also believe in the beauty uses of fat from fat-tailed sheep’s fat tails. I mean, I guess? Maybe because the lanolin gets worn off the sheep fleeces, out on the steppe?
LikeLiked by 2 people
A [snipping elaborate detailed ‘no blood relation sort of cousin’] from Germany took out most of our stinging nettles when I was a kid one summer, because every time he walked up or down the road he’d stop at the first one and cut a big handful of it and smack himself over the back to help with blood pressure and cure skin issues.
As a kid, and now, I’m sitting here going “isn’t the cure worse than the disease?”
LikeLiked by 2 people
The term Treason has been misused too much.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I tend to agree, altough the definition in the Constitution is a bit slippery: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”
Depending on how any of those terms are defined, it could be applied to almost any act against the best interests of the nation, including attempting to circumvent the results of an election as Tulsi claims to have evidence for Obama and crew doing in 2016-17; a declared war is not specified.
I suspect that the Founders intended it to mean a declared shooting war, but unlike the debates regarding the 2nd Amendment I’ve never seen its meaning discussed in documents from the time.
LikeLike
Two of the instigators of the Whiskey Rebellion were convicted of treason (in 1794, so post-Constitution) – not a declared shooting war, nor against a foreign power.
LikeLike
They fell under the “levying war against the United States” clause.
LikeLiked by 1 person
…. you realize that the Whiskey Rebellion included armed battles between the involved forces, right?
If we had proof of repeated attempted public killing of federal employees by Obama, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Armed battles involving sufficient forces to have Washington actually climb back into uniform, IIRC. I’m pretty sure that’s the one and only example of the President actually serving as the in uniform military CinC.
LikeLiked by 1 person
May it stay that way!
LikeLike
They were convicted for instigation and coordination of the violence – not for the commission of violence personally.
John Mitchell was convicted of being in the meeting that resolved to attack the Neville house (he being the local tax collector). Prosecution accused him of also being “present” when the house was burned – but could not produce the two witnesses.
Phillip Vigol was convicted for being a part of (not leading) the militia that committed the arson – and was the only one arrested where they could produce two witnesses.
By the way… The violence commenced when Neville (the aforementioned tax collector) fired the first shot – killing one Oliver Miller.
LikeLike
https://philadelphiaencyclopedia.org/essays/whiskey-rebellion-trials/
Spend years attacking folks, finally pick a fight where they shoot back, scream and play victim.
Shiny.
LikeLike
–
Sounds familiar. How’d that work out for them. (Not a question.)
I’d accuse the usual suspects of taking notes from history, but we all know the reason why we see them repeating the same mistakes is because they don’t know history.
LikeLike
Conveniently omits who fired the first shot in that gun battle.
Irrelevant, in any case. The two men were convicted of treason for their actions to hamper, if not overthrow, the Federal government legitimately formed under the Constitution.
With that as the basis for charging and convicting a person of treason – the actions of Obama and minions certainly qualify!
LikeLike
Oh, no! Someone may have fired a shot at a mob coming to burn down the building they were in, after years of mob violence including against the specific person involved!
Because they weren’t getting what they wanted via normal political means!
Dude, if we had Obama on half the stuff that was solidly documented there, he could be arrested already.
LikeLike
Agreed. That the Founders saw fit to make it the one crime in the Constitution and create very specific proof requirements should inform how seriously we take it and strive not to dilute it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Holy crud, that “Mongolian Store” is like paradise for wool socks! Dang, those look like really good socks!
And they even have thigh-high yak wool socks, if you really really get cold a lot!
LikeLiked by 2 people
WordPress is being weird again, you were responding to Crossover’s.
Link to blog because it is cool.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I don’t know what to think about what’s going on, so I’m biding my time. I feel like it’s time to dig in my heels, refuse to be driven, and just wait and see.
Probably that’s why I’m looking at Mongolian things.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The advantage of being the side that reads history is we have a whole mental storehouse of In Case of Dangerously Stupid, Break Glass ideas.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I would say its was treason adjacent … If we had been in a “formal” shooting war (we have been in an informal shooting war with Iran for 30 years) it would certainly have been aiding and abetting our enemy … not working in corrdination with, no but certainly aiding our enemies cause …
So using the word treason may be over the top … when people look hard at it they will maybe say “its not treason” but now that I’ve looked at it hard it was certaining horrid behavior and may be criminal … but if she hadn’t said “treason” many folks wouldn’t have looked any deeper …
If they can call Trump Hilter and a dictator (obviously over the top) then whats good for the goose is also good for the gander.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Shooting war North Korea, North Korea is maybe closely allied to Russia and the PRC.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting. Like Trump misquoting statistics by just enough to get the press to pounce on it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
:points up: An option.
And if it happened this time or not, it is possible and they have to actually think.
They’re not use to that. ^.^
LikeLiked by 2 people
“… [treason] has a very specific meaning in US constitutional terms: It means cooperating (Aiding and abetting) an enemy at open (shooting) war with the US.”
No, it doesn’t. Why would someone say that? The Constitution is written in plain English; there is no need to invent text that does not exist.
The Constitution defines treason as follows (Article 3, Section 3): “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”
So (a) it says “war” but does not limit it to “shooting war”. And (b) it also lists separately “adhering to their enemies”. For example, spying for Iran probably does not reach “levying war” but it most definitely is “adhering to their enemies, giving them aid…”
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Reader offers the full text of Article 3 Section 3 to observe that the Founders set and incredibly high bar for prosecuting treason.
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.”
Requiring 2 witnesses’ testimony to an act of treason for a conviction makes it unlikely in a politically charged environment. Not to mention the Supreme Court would have to establish the the meaning of ‘levying War against them, or in adhering to their enemies…’ where there is no declared state of war. The Founders had seen the abuse of a treason charge by Britain and other governments in Europe and wanted to make sure it didn’t happen here.
LikeLike
Those are certainly helpful safeguards, though I wonder whether a crooked politician like Leticia James would have in getting “two WItnesses to the same overt Act” in Manhattan.
LikeLike
Expose Obama and crew. Have him testify in front of a Senate committee or a full committee of Congress. Let him take the 5th 100 times. Ridicule, public shaming is better.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Consider, that if we haul the prior folks into a name-n-shame, that becomes the defacto what gets done to our side.
Do we want the price of losing an election to be conviction and prosecution/persecution? If so, the elections stop happening in any meaningful way.
Yes, we need to punish the wicked. We also need to not empower them to just turn around and screw unto others.
Forty-ish percent of the electorate think -you- are the bad guy in this discussion. What does that do to the future of the political process if you toss a prior pres in prison, or simply impeach?
-Why- did the founders make it so dang hard to do this? What were they -actually- guarding against?
If we go this route, we have to do the whole thing. Essentially, gut/geld the opposition, such that it is eliminated from the process. Then new factions form up, as our system depends upon a two major faction system.
Now, what does the former faction fanbase do in response? Submit? Shrug? Or explode? Assuming a spectrum of response, what percent of the former opposition has to go violent to wreck the system? To merely prevent it from functioning? What mechanism is needed to prevent that from occurring? Is that method anything recognizable as our Constitutional Republic?
Are you now seeing why Trump has -not- gone primate-poop on his tormentors, as most rational folks might say was totally justified?
LikeLike
While you have valid points, I have to disagree on one aspect.
You mentioned impeachment of a former President. IMO since the impeachment process involves “removing a governmental official from office”, it is not applicable to talk about impeaching a Former President.
And yes, I’m aware that certain assholes tried to impeach Trump AFTER HE LEFT OFFICE.
Those assholes were idiots when they attempted impeach Trump but let’s not do the same concerning Obama.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I respectfully disagree and here’s why: They’re going to do it ANYWAY.
The Left knows no rules but the ones they implement. (See “Hawaiian judges” implementing nationwide blocks on completely legal laws and EOs.) We don’t have to empower them to turn around and screw unto others, 2020 proved damn good and well they’re going to do it regardless.
We’re wearing boxing gloves and fighting by Marquess of Queensbury rules. They’re wearing brass knuckles and biting, eye-gouging, and ball-stomping. Does that mean we need to sink to their level? No, I don’t want to do that. But I do think it means that “they might do it to us” no longer applies if we want to start using power while we have it, because they will regardless. Not doing it gives us no credit in their eyes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This, tbh. If they ever get hold of Congress and/or the White House again, the Democratic Party WILL go into full-commie purge mode. They’re power-hungry, vicious, angry, and are rapidly losing what little sense of restraint they once had. What our side does must be carefully calculated to take that into account — either by turning the voting populace thoroughly against them (preferably by being massively better than them), such that whatever party eventually supplants Republicans as the governing majority, it no longer bears any resemblance to the Democratic Party as we have known it, or, even better, dismantling the gigantic federal apparatus that makes the government such a threat in the first place (it’d be the work of decades, but one can hope…).
LikeLiked by 2 people
Indeed, they see it as weakness, and exploit it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If we wreck the Constitution and Tepublic for them, then they will definitely use it.
Basic Marxist method it to induce the victim to overreact and self deligitimize.
Thst does not equal “so overthrow it all now, ourselves, so we can crush them!”
If we do not play by the rules, and win by the rules, they have won by our hand.
No.
No we don’t scrap the Republic first. Nor the Constitution. Nor Liberty.
No. Not them. Not you. Not anyone.
Not happening. Over whatever is necesary, not happening.
LikeLike
I’m in “yes-and” agreement. We need to be very careful about doing this RIGHT — the more so because the Democrats seem to have reached the point where they’re willing to burn down everything to get their way. They’re going to try it no matter what we do…but we sure as hell don’t have to help them with it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Like they wouldn’t use it if we didn’t.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree with you that we don’t scrap everything and burn it down just to get to them–the Left is the one that would rather be king of the ashes than live peacefully in a civilized capitalist society. But we use EVERYTHING within those rules to defeat them. Typical Republican failure theatre is not an option. We fight to WIN, not to not lose.
We may not like it, but this is an existential fight and we need to act appropriately. Because right now only one side sees it that way.
LikeLike
This.
LikeLike
You both have points, but the math that matters is that going after Obama directly makes him a political martyr. The Dems attacked Trump that way, and it backfired bigly. Trump doing the same thing would lend credence to the “dictator” refrain and give the Democrats something to rally around, both of which they desperately need right now.
Maybe Trump has a way to make it work, but for now, the best outcome seems to be trashing Obama’s reputation, neutralizing his allies, and making Trump look like the bigger man for not actually arresting him.
LikeLiked by 2 people
We want to trash Obama so that he is anathema to the Democrat party (he is already anathema to most rational folks). Why you ask? Because right now there are three psudopods to the Democrat amoeba. The Clinton part that has nearly reached irrelevance as all its adherents would give Methuselah a run for his money in a wrinkles contest, The Bernie Bros/Squad/Mamdani arm who mostly aren’t bright enough to keep their Marxist inner monologues inner and the Obama branch which give SPECTRE and And HYDRA a fair fight in the evil organization world they even have Soros as a Blofeld stand in. Of the three The Obama psuedopod has been the most effective of late (going on nearly 20 years) so it needs to be taken down a few notches.
Now there is a part of me that would love to see Obama perp walked. But as noted we don’t want to make him a martyr. Don’t give him any attention, nail all the underlings skins to the wall as best you can (Pour encourager les autres in the Intelligence community). Certainly leave his name in the documents and dump as much of this stuff into public as unredacted as feasible (ala the Pentagon Papers) so future historians can see what happened.
That alone will ruin Obama’s day because as a narcissist he longs for the adulation he thinks he deserves. In prison he would become a cause celebre, particularly in his own mind. He’d be the greatest martyr (perhaps greater in his own estimation) since Pontius Pilate freed Barabas instead of Jesus. Without that validation it tells him we think he was a puppet just like his VP became, so unimportant that we shan’t bother to even deal with him. That will gall him all to heck and gone. And he’ll have the misery of “Big Mike” hammering him for being such a gutless useless worm and failure. Sadly we can’t do to him like was done to Harry Mudd and give him 500 Android Big Mikes. Perhaps Elon could work on that? Anyways even if we could do that it would probably be a violation of the Eighth Amendment.
LikeLike
Agree. Biden was a failure and not worth the time. Make Obama a failure. Reverse everything he ever did. President Trump is already making inroads there. Make a public spectator of the underlings. Make it so spectacular that the next time they try this, and they will, the deep state underlings will raise the flag so fast that those that won’t learn from history will be taken down so fast they won’t know what hit them.
This has to include hitting the states with hardcore election reforms they must conform to (**purged roles, in person voting with id, except for deployed, diplomatic core, those who have a *certified valid reason to not be home, etc.).
(*) Vacation is NOT an excuse. Should know when an election is coming due, and not be gone! Courts and legislatures should NOT be in session.
(**) Any ballots that require a certain percentage of voters to turn out to pass something (Oregon), better have their voting rolls clean so that dead voters don’t turn a yes vote into a no, because the dead on the rolls didn’t show up to vote.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Deportation?
LikeLike
Nope. Do nothing, Absolutely nothing except make it clear that he was an even bigger failure than his VP. Do not feed his ego, do not give the Democrat party any reason to celebrate him, do not let him pass go or send him to prison. He wants his face on Mt. Rushmore, make him instead Ozymandias.
As for deportation he is a natural born American by the rules extant when he was born. We have rescinded naturalization for lying (e.g. several who were Nazi guards or participants in WWII war crimes by the German military). I don’t think we have ever removed citizenship from an American. If he wishes to renounce citizenship, fine even good, the door that way make sure it doesn’t hit him on his skinny little backside.
Take all the documents from this coup attempt and have them all bound up into several volumes, have them displayed at the Obama presidential library. Maybe have a special display section on them. Remember the Presidential Libraries are part of the Library of Congress. Nothing we can do to him will hurt him more than that.
The Democrat party right now is hanging on the edge between the two remaining parts (the Clinton pseudopod being essentially a dried up stick with Carville and the Clintons raging uselessly). Someone later in the comments equated the Democrat part to Lord Voldemort from the Harry Potter universe. These pseudopods are like the Horcruxes that hold the soul of the party. If we can destroy them perhaps a new party will form to make a viable opposition party. The Clinton Horcrux is dying of old age. This is our chance to rid ourselves of the more devious of the two remaining Horcruxes. With a bit of luck the remaining Bernie Bro/open socialist Horcrux will self immolate (Deus Volent). They’ve manage to hoist themselves on their own petard and we’ve got them on the run now is NOT the time to let up
LikeLike
Turn Obama into a failed puppet of the Clintons. Hillary spread the stain. Take out Bill’s legacy in the history books too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Probably not worth the effort. That pseudopod of the Democrat monster is busily getting ready to shuffle off their mortal coil and get their just rewards and for most of them I suspect that will NOT be “Well done oh good and Faithful servant”
LikeLike
Which I will note is exactly what Trump did to Hillary in 2017 – despite leading chants of “Lock her up!” during the campaign the previous year.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Agreed. How does Alinsky put it, something like “isolate and freeze the target?” Make him live by the rules for radicals that he loves so damn much. Make him and Big Mike laughingstocks. Cut them off from as much funding as possible. You’ll never be able to stop the Messiah worship from parts of the left but you can isolate it as much as possible.
LikeLike
^^^ EXACTLY! ^^^
LikeLike
THIS. All of this.
LikeLike
“There is no good or evil. There is only power.”
Voldemort was a Democrat!
LikeLiked by 1 person
We have already established that our opponents attempted this.
Moreover, they attempted this when there was no crime.
And have announced the intent to do so again.
Thus, the appeal to maintain a status quo that no longer exists, fails.
Hang the bastard.
And yes, overriding laws to provide pallets of cash to the Iranian government is very clearly “giving aid and comfort” to our enemies.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Do we want the price of losing an election to be conviction and prosecution/persecution?”
Um, that price has already been charged and paid. It needs to be made FAR too expensive to demand it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is a fight that we have to understand is existential. It MUST be pursued until, to paraphrase the words of the great William “Bull” Halsey, Marxism is only spoken in Hell.
LikeLike
So I think Gabbard got to major, so it would be sorta incompetent of her to be unfamiliar with some of the nitpicky legalities that officers should consider, and which are of little relevance to Jimmy McOrdinary, who lives in Saint Louis and is strictly mentally occupied by his family, his church, and his HVAC bro to logistics manager career path.
The special legalities of the American officer or enlisted man are basically the constitution, the UCMJ, case law on rules of war, what your in service or former service fellows are likely to press charges on following a civil war, and the question of precisely if we are at war with whom.
For example, we are at war with North Korea, so it would be possible to give treasonous aid and comfort to North Korea.
“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”
Now, obviously, Gabbard ought to have staff check with legal advice when it comes to implications of documents, and charges. This necessarily opens her to an information warfare attack by dishonest staffers, or disloyal legal advisors.
Anyway, multiple sets of documents. Might satisfy criteria for two independent witnesses.
Was it an overt act? I dunno, maybe, but not being an intel type myself, I kinda have a hard time understanding how well one could persuade a jury of such.
Did our enemies benefit? Yes, in purely my own reckoning, maybe not in the way that other people would seek to prove it. I’m not sure anyone took advantage of the opportunity, unless we count the ChiComs with the 2020 shenanigans.
Act of war against the United States? My brothers in Christ, I think communism is a practice of warfare against the American people, but I have serious questions when it comes to being able to persuade a jury of elemetns of a crime in specific examples.
The basic issue of this situation is that it has some parallels to some other claims that certain people have made about certain other persons.
Thus it maybe inherits some of the ambiguities that other situations also inherited.
Now, privately planned dishonesty is perhaps a bit different than directly making a claim in public that one believes to be true.
So there are several things that this release and statement might be. Two of them are a) political grandstanding b) attempting to get a precedent of immunity from the courts that might be more broadly applied.
Anyway, we have an internal stability issue that is an artifact of communists, and in particular of having OBama be a communist who won’t freaking let go of influence.
A question is whether Gabbard has sufficiently left her left mental background enough that she does not think that the Trump administration is literally facist. I mean, the standards of evidence one would plan to use would be different if one assumed that one was voluntarily participating in a fascist regime, than if one expected to participate in a mildly conservative American government.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Communism is a practice of war against the whole human race.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It is also the official ideology of the Canadian Union of Public Employees.
Not kidding, they went there.
LikeLike
For some reason, that doesn’t surprise me at all.
LikeLiked by 1 person
https://x.com/SarahAHoyt/status/1947489412075687945
LikeLike
100%
Need to save this to the meme folder.
LikeLiked by 1 person
When Tulsi Gabbard accepted her commission as a officer, she raised her right hand and repeated the Officer’s Oath. She repeated the SAME oath, in the aspects relevant to this matter, when accepting her civilian position as Director of National Intelligence.
The EXACT same wording is used in BOTH oaths: “protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
Key words here – the CONSTITUTION, not political convenience of the moment. DOMESTIC – those seeking to subvert that Constitution and the government legitimately formed under its provisions.
There are many things that I disagree with her on – but I have the highest respect for her, as a woman who understands and honors her duty as an officer AND American.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Lawyers have to make distinctions that the rest of us don’t. To a chemist ‘to contain’ and ‘to dispense’ are necessary distinctions about containers for measuring liquids. To me a liter is a liter. To me libel and slander are both someone promulgating something provably false to defame me. I don’t care if it’s speaking or writing. Treason is a more widely understood word than sedition, and Tulsi ain’t writing up the indictment.
For me it’s a bonus that Trump’s cabinet is full of non-lawyers even if I don’t go so far as to agree with Richard III.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Big Mike is a fashion plate like Rosie O’Donnell is a swimsuit model or Amy Schumer is a comedian. Mrs. Obama being some sort of aspiring model is the ultimate expression of “piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining.” As is, for that matter, any expression of Barack Hussein Obama as “the Lightbringer” or the next Messiah of All That is Good and Right.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you Anonymoose, I was going for “…Michelle Obama’s stunning beauty and style…” as six words that should never be used in the same sentence. And has anyone ever seen a picture of Mike when she was preggers with either of her children?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cynical Publius had another post where he laid out his predictions:
Which seems pretty sensible. Going after Obama directly doesn’t gain much over destroying his reputation and influence, and it plays into the “Trump is jailing his enemies!” narrative the Dems are going to launch over this. Whereas the public doesn’t care enough about the other big fish for that narrative to be effective.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Note that it is well-established in law that accepting a pardon is an admission of guilt.
This is why you occasionally see someone turn down a pardon. They intend to prove themselves not guilty. Thus they wont accept due to the “admission” aspect.
LikeLike
Is it? Because all I know is that internet ‘lawyers’ readily claim that to be the case, right up to the point that they feel the need to defend the honor of someone who has accepted a pardon.
By that logic, Hunter Biden can be considered guilty of every non-violent federal offense from 2014 until 2024.
So while it’s fairly well-established that accepting a pardon can make you seem more guilty in the court of public opinion, that’s a very different thing from it being so in a court of law.
Some quick research suggests that the most often-cited opinion on the matter is easily read to refer to public opinion (that is, the public is likely to presume guilt from accepting a pardon,) rather than the law, although the only prominent case referring to the matter never went beyond the 10th Circuit (where that court was clear that accepting a pardon is not an admission of guilt.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes. To the law (rightly, IMHO), guilt is only established by conviction in a court of law, or a freely entered plea in same. (Also, to the law, a pardon after that does not erase the guilt.)
For instance, Hunter, as a convicted felon, cannot vote or own a firearm. Fauci and company, on the other hand, can do both.
LikeLike
Those who maintain that there were really witches in Salem do not belong in the discussion.
(They were pardoned, don’t you know?)
LikeLike
If the law supposes that, then in the words of one of Dickens’ characters, “The law is a ass.”
I mean, what else is someone to do who has been wrongfully convicted, or faced with malicious prosecution or extended “process as punishment” legal harassments over a crime they didn’t commit? “I’ll just suck it up rather than accept a pardon”?
Yeah. I don’t think so.
LikeLike
Take the pardon. THEN prove innocent, full vindication, and absolution. Then you can sue the harassers. Win, Win.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I like the thought of that jug-eared empty suit squirming, I hope they keep him in suspense for years.
And agreed that the “Big Mike” thing was a way to hit back at M’Shelle being thrust upon us over and over as the epitome of beauty and style. Yes, she could have been handsome, and elegant, if she had only tried, and had better advice from professionals in picking out clothing that flattered her body type and suited the occasion (whatever the occasion was!), instead of covering herself with glue and rolling through the trendy boutiques. I honestly wonder if whoever was advising her, and Mrs. Biden on their wardrobes was deliberately encouraging them to look awful.
Yes, she is an OK-looking woman, considering; but OMG, what a schlumpy-looking heifer she looked, on some of those visits to other heads of state, in comparison to some of the other high-status women. I can say many ugly and accurate things about Nancy Pelosi (and have!) but the one thing that I always gave her credit for was for looking polished, professional and in outfits that suited her and the occasion.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’m still recalling the video snippet of the dance bit on Ellen Degeneres’s (it’s so tempting to modify the surname with an “at”…) show. Big M had something going on at the crotch level, and I was/am inclined to believe that M is a pointer, not a setter.
(Yet another possible/plausible explanation for the emphasis on trans rights, no?)
LikeLike
If she is actually “he”, he does a better female impersonation than 95% of the “trans” and drag queens, and much better than that Budweiser idol, Dylan Mulvaney.
But as for him/her being the mostest bee-yoo-tiful and stylish First Lady in simply evah, I look at Jackie Kennedy and Melania Trump (and even Nancy Reagan and Lady Bird Johnson!), and wonder if those making such ridiculous claims had cataract surgery that went horribly wrong.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Party requires you to ignore the evidence of your own eyes, Comrade.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I suspect it was a pad, inexpertly applied. If very large which menopausal women sometimes need, it can look like that.
Now, no excuse given all the money and dressers, etc, but….
LikeLike
NeoNeocon and others pointed out that when Mrs. Obama wore classical, tailored outfits and dresses with looser, more flaring designs, she carried the looks off very well. Alas, that is not what was stylish, nor the feature that she or her stylists preferred to call attention to.
LikeLiked by 2 people
…Omar the Tentmaker did a good business…
LikeLike
Which is a shame because -as First Lady – *she* can set fashion trends, particularly with the sycophancy of the news media toward the left.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is hard to disguise a size 12 foot.
LikeLike
Not filing charges may be worse. If he is indicted he has the power of discovery and may even be exonerated. If he is not charged he will be tried in the court of public opinion which, I suspect, would be far worse for his “legacy.”
Don’t get me wrong. Watching him rot in a re-opened Alcatraz wouldn’t hurt my feelings one bit. Nevertheless, I’d settle for him selling blowjobs on the street for the price of a bottle of Thunderbird.
LikeLiked by 1 person
One should not offer Obama his ‘Birmingham Jail’ moment, and even if he could fade into the sunset, there is the Che Guevara example to recall. Some Won’t Let Him Go.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yup. His reputation has already dropped off massively since the Lightbringer years. Played smart, Russiagate could make him irrelevant.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I could have sworn at some point I’d read it as “high treason” but that appears to be a legitimate “Madela effect” (as opposed to several things claimed to be Mandela effects that I still believe my memory is correct).
Perhaps it’s that “treason against the United States” is, for an American citizen, the ultimate category of “high” treason (treason against a superior), vs “low treason” (betrayal of inferiors)? Or vs, say, a theoretical “treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia” (if such a thing existed, but Constitutionally, it looks like it would be permissible)?
LikeLike
“Treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia” is a thing. Most (if not all) of the States do have such laws.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think the term “High Treason” is a British/Monarchy thing.
LikeLike
Under Crown law, high treason happened only during wartime and carried the death penalty (like “high justice”), while treason was during peace time and the penalties could be fines or imprisonment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s what John Brown was hanged for.
(Despite not being a citizen of Virginia.)
LikeLike
Brace yourself for a million alleged MAGA accounts on social media spouting Chinese/Russian talking points in 5 . . . 4 . . . 3 . . .
LikeLiked by 2 people
Oh, honey. They never stopped.
LikeLike
We don’t get to use treason unless we can invoke Iran. IMO. Because as has been pointed out elsewhere, they have been shooting at us since 1979.
LikeLike
OTOH, RICO? Sedition? We might be up against statutes of limitations. IANAL.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have no idea what the RICO statue of limitations would be, but it seems like the Discovery Rule would come into play– we didn’t know wrong had been done. Rumors, yeah, but you can’t take rumors to court.
https://www.schachtelaw.com/2022/04/24/exceptions-to-the-statute-of-limitations-the-discovery-rule/
LikeLiked by 1 person
I understand that the time issue is defined in RICO.
I basically read a RICO explainer that some lawyer did years ago, don’t know if correct.
1. It is not all crimes, there is a specific list of crimes that the wider conspiracy has to have been involved in carrying out. 2. It has to be within ten years.
December 2015 or 2016, that has huge issues with establishign stuff in a timely way, and with a foreknowledge of actual killings.
2020, there were a few qualifying murders, and we are only five or six years out.
I have some sort of forecast that is silly for me to try to understand well enough for specific words.
1. I have had a doomer fixation on a similar hypothesis for years. Not only am IANAL, but there are other reasons to think my judgement on this stuff is suspect. 2. Hunter is being allowed or encouraged to run his mouth. There is an inference that Gabbard is also acting according to an information warfare strategy, and that the smart thing for me to do is not play.
LikeLike
Nope!
For civil charges, the Supreme found 4 years.
Mostly, though, RICO is heckin’ hard to make stick, by design. There are so very, very many other crimes that would fit better, depending on details. ^.^
Most do involve conspiracy and fraud, though.
LikeLike
Discovery might be our friend. It has to be from when you found out. If I remember correctly? OK sedition. Fraud. And lots of perjuries and violations of NDAs.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A friend has pointed out a pathway for this to be outright Treason. I’m just not sure we can prove it.
LikeLike
:happy grin: Yes, I love the idea of discovery.
LikeLike
Though experiment: what word would you use for an attempt to paralyze the executive branch of the United States and render our Constitutionally constituted government unable to carry out policy? What word would you use for the people who would do such a thing?
LikeLike
“politics”
Might even hear it said to be
“really good politics”
-That- is what you are up against. A whole bunch of folks see this as just doing a particularly good job of playing by the rules. “Gamer!” etc.
And you can absolutely count on the Left doing back anything that gets done to them, with a vengeance.
If the system ever is largely perceived as “Heads we win. Tails we go to prison” there wont be a next election in any meaningful sense. It will -immediately- morph to “Heads we win. Tails -you- go to prison. Aw heck, why flip? Face the wall, loser.”
In order to successfully prosecute major political figures, you have to convince a majority of -their- supporters that their favorite is truly a heel. Otherwise, the wheels come off. (They have guns too, remember? 2A and all that…)
LikeLike
Since The Reality for us is *already* “Heads we win, Tails we go to prison”, you are inadvertently arguing for us to line them up against the wall and shoot them.
I’d like to try them in an open court first, and air all their dirty laundry.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Which is the reason for the 2/3 requirement for both impeachment and to override a veto. You have to convince a healthy chunk of the opposition for either one.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The ever-nebulous “high crimes and misdemeanors”?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Trump’s standard policy, and the reason that we voted for him.
“Paralyze the Fed Gov” has been a much beloved plan for ages, and “policy” is not lawful duties.
So, the Dems have been calling that “treason” for ages. Anything that gets in their way is “treason.”
The thing here is, sounds like there are laws broken which can be investigated, charged, and tried.
LikeLiked by 1 person
yes. But it’s not the legal term.
LikeLike
I think “insurrection” works well for that case. ;)
LikeLike
Treason? IDK
What does “attempting to illegally over turn the election results” come under? Doesn’t matter that they failed.
What does “Bugging the opposition’s campaign” come under? It cost Nixon the remainder of his second term. Ford a second term (for pardoning Nixon). Which they also did under the Russia, Russia, Hoax.
Guaranteed Obama does not see bars. OTOH people in his cabinet? People in intelligence agencies? At worst being outed, tarnished, and fired. Former cabinet already fired. But if we can get certain “I have proof!” legislatures censured, booted, fined, that would be good.
Does all this tarnish everything that Obama legacy did? 100% Can it be more tarnished after Biden’s 4 year? IDK Does this make it easier to reverse what is left of that legacy? Probably not. Good distraction to help things get done.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Considering the way treason prosecutions were used by the a British, they were right to be very specific about it. That said, they should all hang for if they haven’t committed treason, they certainly committed TREASON.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“…just our way of pushing back on Michelle Obama’s stunning beauty and style when in fact she was a “fairly decent looking” woman…”
Add a couple more forehead lines and she’s a full-sized Klingon battle maiden. Her mighty hands bear the callouses of much batleth practice.
Quapla!
LikeLike
Maiden???
She needs to learn how to tuck first.
LikeLike
As to the rest of it, I strongly think all of this schlitz is “LOOK, A SQUIRREL!!!”
#Trump is on the #EpsteinDidn’tUnaliveHimself client list? Sure he is. Uh huh. And only now, after they tried to impeach, jail, and finally SHOOT the guy, twice, only now we’re hearing about it? Oh look, a squirrel.
RussiaGate was bogus? Yes, we know. Oh look, a squirrel riding a yak.
Tulsi said the “T” word? “TRRREEEEEEEEEEEASON!!!!” Uh huh. Never heard that one before. Oh look, a squirrel riding a yak, wearing a sombrero. (No, the squirrel has the sombrero. The yak has a rather fetching pink fedora. Probably stolen from an aging Silicon Valley neckbeard.)
I don’t care. I want to hear some more billions in tax cuts from DOGE. Because I am in Canada I must live vicariously through the victories of you Americans. Play for me the beautiful music of chainsaws ripping through dead Washington wood.
LikeLiked by 3 people
A lot of the masses on the left have been steadfast in their belief that Trump is an Epstein client, and had sex with at least one of Epstein’s underaged girls. Their biggest item of proof is the picture of the two of them smiling while standing side by side at some social event. They are, with few exceptions, completely unaware of Trump banning him from Maralago, and making sure the police report got filed over that incident.
They also haven’t thought it through far enough to think about why the Biden administration wouldn’t have used that against Trump.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Off Topic.
Sarah’s No Man’s Land: Volume 1 will be available for purchase as of Sept 10th.
Of course, you can preorder it now if you like. [Very Big Grin]
LikeLiked by 2 people
And per Amazon, Volume 2 is scheduled for release on 23 Sept.
LikeLiked by 2 people
What! I missed Volume 2!!!!! Terrible! [Crazy Grin]
LikeLike
Amusingly, I saw a Goth/Wiccan/MAGA car this weekend, at the laundromat.
I mean, yes, please convert to Christianity, but I’m glad to see someone with such strong, unstereotypical opinions.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Sounds a bit like the pickup I followed to the library. It had large stars-n-bars and Trump 2016 flags on the back. The driver was a black gentleman.
Or the Prius I’d seen earlier that year, covered in bumper stickers. They were IIIper, Molon Labe, the Gadsden flag, and so on. Oops, so much for my assumptions.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The best, “Say, what?” I have ever seen took place during Frat Week at my southern university during the early ’70s. A small group of horsemen rode across campus. They wore Confederate uniform and the lead rider carried a large Satrs ans Bars flag.
The leas rider was black.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Um…[raises hand]. Okay, not wiccan but “Asatru leaning Agnostic”.
LikeLiked by 2 people
There’s a young lady on twitter, too… I enjoy her posts.
LikeLike
Handle?
LikeLike
Dang. mind went blank. Will try to find tomorrow.
LikeLike
Cue my “goths should be natural libertarians” rant: any subculture perceived as weird and/or scary* by the mainstream should as a matter of self-preservation want the government to have as little power to oppress them as possible.
And yet, here we are.
(* for about ten terrifying minutes after Columbine, the Eye of Sauron landed on the goth community — the killers wore black and listened to weird music, goths wear black and listen to weird music, QED — but thankfully it moved on.)
LikeLike
No, they’re counting on the government to oppress everybody else. Stupid, of course, but there it is anyway.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It’s more “Republicans are racist nazis who want to force Leave It To Beaver on everybody; Democrats just want people to be themselves. We must always elect Democrats forever and any failings are the fault of the Republicans. Or hoarders and wreckers, same thing really.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is a technical term for people who believe that. That term is “idot.” (Okay, okay, hyperbole aside, I’ll allow “severely misguided”, at least to an extent.)
After all, I am considered all kinds of “ist” and “phobe” because I advocate for every individual to have the same rights I claim for myself and that chief of those is to live one’s life unmolested unless one is actively, and non-consensually, harming another and depriving them of their rights.
LikeLike
There is a technical term for people who believe that. That term is “idot.” (Okay, okay, hyperbole aside, I’ll allow “severely misguided”, at least to an extent.)
After all, I am considered all kinds of “ist” and “phobe” because I advocate for every individual to have the same rights I claim for myself and that chief of those is to live one’s life unmolested unless one is actively, and non-consensually, harming another and depriving them of their rights.
LikeLike
Wow, I can say that again. WPDE.
LikeLiked by 1 person
WPDE
LikeLike
LikeLiked by 2 people
Without individual rights, how can there be any rights at all? Either everybody has rights, or nobody does. And if ‘some animals are more equal than others’, well, anybody with more brains than a cockroach knows where that goes.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Generally, the issue comes down to folks trying to game it so that their rights are absolute, and everyone else’s are negotiable.
Usually cloaked in “well, obviously–“
LikeLike
The Big Mike started with us pushing back against the gaslighting.
But it continues to this day, because it causes the Lefties to absolutely lose their minds. It’s very entertaining, and I don’t think it will ever get old so long as it keeps getting that reaction.
LikeLiked by 2 people
ARGLEBARGLE! There, now that’s done.
Personally, I don’t see Obama ever making the perp walk he deserves, much less any more…permanent…consequences. Loss of reputation is the best we can hope for, and it’s a fine hope in its own right. Going down in ignominy and infamy as a low-rent Benedict Arnold would be a fitting enough end for that evil snake. People like Brennan, Clapper, Comey, and whoever their footsoldiers were, though…if there’s as much evidence as it looks like there might be, I could see several of them ending up in prison — for a very long time, I hope.
Probably somebody else has already made this distinction (coming back to a half-finished comment and haven’t read what’s been posted in the interim), but since they weren’t aiding an enemy nation but were themselves an enemy within, the crime Obama and his minions committed is sedition, not treason.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As to the treason charge…
It’s well deserved.
And if we can’t make it stick, getting the Leftists to “ACTUALLY, he’s just charged with sedition”. is still a total win.
As for the news, it’s nothing we didn’t already know.
It’s just that we now have PROOF.
It’s one thing for us to be stringing red yarn around the room. It’s another for a major government official to slap a phat stack of documents on the table, and declare “This happened, and those responsible need to hang”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Depends on the goal. Yeah, putting Bobo and Hillary and all the rest in prison would be enormously satisfying. However, I’d trade that in a minute to destroy the Left’s power base. Sure they will just rebuild but, with some luck, we can restore enough of the Republic in the interim that they will have to go back to Start and tear it down all over again.
I could live with being part of that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Basically, yes, what is the goal?
And, there may be no goal police for conservatives, nobody who can determine for Person A what A’s goals, priorties and weights are allowed to be.
We can have many paths to where we find ourselves now. Tribalism, rejection of elements of left theory, being drawn to an opposing theory, sentiment, etc.
The options we see are partly how we think the world works, how we think human behavior works.
There are reasons to think that we are mid surprise, and that we do not have complete knowledge of our alternatives, nor of exact outcomes of choices.
One of the issues with the communists, is the models they convince themselves are reality, and a bunch of complicated arguments they allow themselves to beleive about doing evil things to accomplish good or necessary things. Their evil choices of tactic tend to piss off and alienate people.
In matters of war, and in matters of war crime, winning the fight does not require a strict and mindless mirroring of tactics. Opponent can inspire, yes, but pick the tactics and strategies deliberately, which serve your ends.
WWII Japanese were not beaten with pure kindness, but, say, competing in terms of comfort women might have been an utterly terrible idea.
A model of the opposition is that they are a minority, and have truly depended on fraudulent elections.
Voters somewhat correlate to shooters, even if shooting is much messier and riskier than voting. There is a minimum threshold of deranged shooters below which the left cannot meaningfully force the loss of civil order.
There’s an inference (about which there is maybe room for reasonable men to disagree) that they are below that threshold. If this is true, some choice of goals point directly at “then act on what you can prove convincingly, and maybe wait on other priorities”.
LikeLike
A history teacher once told us that the only reason why Aaron Burr didn’t get charged with treason was the witness requirement. If that teacher was correct, then the need to be involved in a shooting war doesn’t appear to be a requirement.
LikeLike
“…it might be better, instead of arrests that while they aren’t will give the appearance of revenge, to expose Obama very thoroughly and make it so he can’t hold up his head in public anywhere.” Sarah, this is the man who said “We didn’t have any scandals that embarrassed us” (emphasis mine). A nihilist cannot be embarrassed because nothing matters.
As far as treason, wouldn’t the fact that Congress has not had the cojones to declare war in 84 YEARS(!) be a defense?
LikeLike
Tulsi would have been well advised to go with “seditious conspiracy”, which is entirely defensible based on what is known.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Charlie says treasonous conspiracy is similarly chargeable.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I figured she wasn’t using the term merely for effect, the way most lefties do. Which means there are more shoes to drop.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Why not both?
LikeLiked by 1 person
(Creative writing today is a little wild.)
Another airplane crash today. I think the 7/21/2025 and 6/21/2025 crashes must be downstream of Trump firing the part of the FAA unit that was a USAID funded proxy for the IC to collect intelligence on foreign aircraft technologies through the ICAO.
Republican Mayoral candidate Stuv Molant is apparently insane, as he is campaigning for the mayoral office of Neo-Omaha-3, on a platform of suppressing the robot rebellions, expeditions against the Mongol and against the Saracen, and of hanging pirates as the common enemies of all mankind.
LikeLike
Suppressing the robot rebellion and hanging pirates are laudable and necessary goals. A punitive expedition against the Saracens, maybe…they’ve been quiescent of late, but perhaps cannot be trusted. But the Mongol? They haven’t been a threat to anyone in decades. The Parallax Time 2001.4-Alternate Administration is calling Stuv Molant, and it wants its foreign policy back.
LikeLiked by 1 person
this.
LikeLike
The Mongols can use the revenue from their music sales to buy more Harley Davidson motorcycles:
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yessss… (metal horns up)
LikeLiked by 2 people
The Mongols in this timeline *like* the United States. After GWB did a brief visit there they put his picture on their official government web site for more than a decade.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reportedly, Pete Buttigieg blew $80 billion on DEI grants instead of upgrading air traffic control. Don’t know if that has anything to do with the recent crashes, of course, but still.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I joked about the Brazil hot air balloon incident, and the Bengelidash crash of the PRC manufactured jet fighter trainer because you might think I was autistic the way that I was raving about the ‘we had an aviation incident in January, must be Trump’s fault’ political claims.
To some extent, aviation crashes can be normal. We prefer rare, but even if rare at modern traffic volumes you will get some. Soem crashes have avoidable contributing factors, but not all of those are a result of some politically convenient recent politician.
Hearsay is the FAA has a logn term issue, going back to Obama, with the humans that operate the aircraft control equipment. DIE informed problems with test changes and graduating enough trained persons.
Hardware/software side of the installations is important, and is not necessarily something that you could fix in a year by having the money.
I am not sure that modern air traffic towers, or modern airport radars would have prevented any of the crashes. Basically, the DC helicopter stuff could simply be manning. We would have to see how a replacement works to be able to evaluate whether a modern system would have automatically prevented whatever thingy.
DIE dollars and RF engineering dollars are not fungible, because you need the right management skills in various places to get RF engineering dollars spent effectively. If Biden and if Buttigieg were insane grifters, that might prohibit an effective modernization program.
It is very far from certain that the recently appropriated monies for aircraft control towers will prove to be an effective modernization program.
On the radar side, some of the FAA’s systems are fifty years old. IIRC. That is maybe a lot on congress deciding not to fund stuff, but maybe says some thing about red tape management questions.
The computers that integrate the radar tracks, and display it for the traffic controllers, are an IT problem, but one with some very domain specific aspects. For the last twenty years, the FAA has been very interested in funding research in human-machine interfaces for both aircraft traffic control, and for direct aircraft operation.
Anyway, I have a bunch of biases and outright ignorance in how I evaluate some of these engineering procurement questions. I like the idea of updating the FAA’s facilities and equipment they maintain, but also I have been trying to get into the work force that might profit by doign some of that work.
LikeLike
Well, the FAA would contract it out, so it’s RockLockMartBoeWhatever who needs the engineering talent. What the FAA needs is program management talent, which is similarly Venn-non-intersectional.
And since it’s government contracting, lowest bidder would likely win the contract, which means the winner would in turn contract it out to West Asia, if not the Middle Kingdom, and that would be a fine kettle of backdoors indeed.
It’s a fairly tricky problem these days with the radar tracking stuff mostly getting traded away for position and kinetics self-reporting via datalink, and conflict resolution between converging airplanes getting electronically negotiated between each other, leaving the controllers going “Hey, what are you guys doing?” today.
With everybody datalinking to everybody, and most cockpit panels down to small GA planes having a fair picture of everything else that’s in the area, the ATC folks will be in even more of a cat-herding situation. Add in all the fancy new curving approaches and tricky stuff that GPS nav can enable and… well, as noted it’s tricky.
LikeLike
The other thing 48 hours does is let a memetic infection spread to the point of great parody, to whit:
https://x.com/JasonFox29/status/1946366771373523177
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s hilarious.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think you’re selling Big Mike short. Any crossdresser worth her panties would die to pass that well that consistently for that long.
LikeLike
If Banshee is to be trusted, there are pictures of the younger female Michelle.
Young Michelle smiled and was lovely, before she met Barack.
Barack’s race war ideology would maybe make any person who practiced it long enough unlovely, unhappy, and occupied with trying to hurt others.
In a white never gainfully employed middle aged dude, that sort of race war ideology would tend to make ordinary middle class sorts prefer to not be associated with one.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Oddly, I have the same response if it comes from a college educated middle aged black woman. Go figure.
LikeLike
I don’t think she’s a crossdresser. LOL
LikeLike
Maybe not, although sometimes she the style of one…and an inexperienced one at that.
LikeLike
And neither do I, but the bit is too good to completely give up.
LikeLike
what about media that knowingly complied? Fines are great but a number should lose their broadcast license or be put on probation for a decade.
LikeLike