ZRod

I fully support the intent, but I don't really see it holding up in court. Who gets to define what is and isn't acceptable? And how is that applied equally? Is there a review or appeals panel of some kind? How would any of this be allowable given the courts current interpretation of 2A?

Just find the northwest passage.

Just use another coast!

The intent is nice, but the likelihood of abuse or even the appearance of abuse by government officials never should have let this pass the laugh test.

Well this aged like milk.

The words are coming from the perps and their inner circle though...

I don't know who's actually responsible for the "production" of this committee, but they are either a damn good lawyer or an extremely detailed person. The way every interview and piece of evidence has been setup and tied to the case as a whole is simply brilliant. This is exactly how the government should work!

That's a little more appropriate for the Native Americans. I think slavery is the correct term in all cases of slaves being brought to the US. When did the right become so woke and PC?

I can't see s#!t

Oh! And more s#!tty meaningless grocery store trophies!

It's going to wind up in a court ruling for sure. No way team Trump let's him just spill his guts.

There's no way the B1G will drop there beloved moniker.

But does Attorney client privilege come in to play here?

Cipollone, right? And the secret service detail, but based on reports that have been coming out they are extremely loyal to Trump. So there's the possibility they would lie under oath for him. I'm also not that comfortable with secret service testifying. I think they should be like the wallpaper so that all POTUS can speak freely in their presence and now worry about them having an agenda.

Isn't Assange a pedo?