21 Dec 2023 2:09 pm
Substantive reasons and justifications. Bear in mind, the accusation that there was an insurrection, has not been subjected to legal due process - so as of now, there wasn't one that can be demonstrated. Also bear in mind Trump's involvement has not been established through any legal due process either. So as of now, it can't be established Trump had any involvement in something which can't be established to have actually happened. Insurrection is a crime, so until legal due process establishes the crime actually happened - and that Trump actually played a part - Trump wasn't there, because there wasn't a 'there' for him to be there atR.Suave » 21 Dec 2023, 2:23 pm » wrote: ↑ nyet, tovarish.
Reasons were provided...
Consistent with reasoning offered from other benches.
..unless you're saying you do have some substance - if you do, put it up front.. If 'none is required' is your substance, then you have no substance, nothing in this ruling is actually true, and it's frankly an embarrassment to the US. Legal processes are not there for paperwork - they are there to ascertain what actually happened. What actually happened is **** important when it comes to making decisions and judgements based on what actually happened
No, I'm not raking through history to 'provide links'. If you can't directly dispute a point, then question your own links.