Somebody tell Assange his 15 minutes were up about two years ago.
And Rohrabacher, well, it's 14:50 into his 15.
https://pjmedia.com/video/rohrabach...gave-him-dnc-emails-and-it-aint-the-russians/
If Assange was so cocksure about what he claims, he'd put it out there knowing Trump would have his back (if it really cleared Trump). Demanding the pardon before the goods is prime bait-and-switch from a huckster like ol' Julian.
This is true. We COULD be seeing a complete ending of a commonweath/country/island/etc however you want to classify it.
Trump is going to speak about Vegas...I am sure he will take a victory lap about all the people dying like he did with Puerto Rico. Then he will crap on the Senators from Nevada cause they didnt get ObamaCare repealed...
(and yes I know he voted for it but Trump doesnt)
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/...-mass-shooting.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur
He speaks of unity. You know, the same guy who divides us up whenever it suits him.
cnn hasn't mentioned PR or russia this morning.....
I notice the word terrorism didn't cross his lips. Figures.
legally, it's not as the law currently defines terrorism as foreign influenced.
legally, it's not as the law currently defines terrorism as foreign influenced.
Which is just plain stupid. Who cares where they are from, it should be their actions that define them as terrorists. I have never understood that argument from some groups. IMO anyone who is going to go kill a bunch of people in this kind of manner (or the Orlando shooting, or any of the others) is a terrorist.
legally, it's not as the law currently defines terrorism as foreign influenced.
Not really. If you limit yourself to the definition found in the USC for purposes of the Secretary of State's reports, sure.
But there are plenty of other definitions of terrorism in federal law that have no such restrictions.
18 U.S. Code § 2331 - Definitions
The term “international terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended:
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum
...
The term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) {same as above}
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/02/...-mass-shooting.html?smid=fb-nytimes&smtyp=cur
He speaks of unity. You know, the same guy who divides us up whenever it suits him.
Funny how he speaks of unity when most of the victims are white (wild speculation on my part) but fails to speak at all when they are anything else.
Oh he speaks; the cameras you watch just aren't rolling out of convenience for the narrative.
Funny how he speaks of unity when most of the victims are white (wild speculation on my part) but fails to speak at all when they are anything else.
Not really. If you limit yourself to the definition found in the USC for purposes of the Secretary of State's reports, sure.
But there are plenty of other definitions of terrorism in federal law that have no such restrictions.