The two women faced vicious harassment, including death threats, and fled their homes and went into hiding after people showed up unannounced at Freeman’s home. Moss’s son received death threats on his phone and fell behind in school. Freeman testified last year that she had nowhere to live. Moss testified to the committee investigating the January 6 attack in 2022, but has otherwise not spoken much publicly.

“I was terrorized,” Freeman said during a trial in Washington DC last year. “I’d rather stay in my car and be homeless rather than put that on someone else.”

The site’s founder, Jim Hoft, had refused to concede that the site said anything false about the women, even though the state quickly debunked accusations of wrongdoing and a longer investigation formally cleared them. Hoft and his twin brother, Joe, also a contributor, held a press conference in Milwaukee during the Republican national convention in July and repeated many of the false claims about Freeman and Moss.

The settlement with the Gateway Pundit is notable because of the influential role the site plays in spreading misinformation. One recent analysis by the group Advance Democracy found that the site is continuing to spread false information about voting and seed the idea that the 2024 election could be stolen.

The two women have already settled a settled suit with One America News, another far-right outlet. The network issued an on-air apology after the settlement.

They are also seeking to collect on the money Giuliani owes them. Their lawyers recently asked a New York judge to allow them to take control over Giuliani’s assets.

The Gateway Pundit still faces a libel suit from Eric Coomer, a former employee of the voting system company Dominion who was falsely accused of subverting the 2020 election.

The site had declared bankruptcy in an attempt to delay the case, but a judge dismissed the effort earlier this year.

The case was one of several libel lawsuits filed against Trump allies and conservative networks that aired false claims about the 2020 election. Nearly all of those cases have settled, which observers have said may underscore the limited role defamation law can have in curbing misinformation.

>>1351987
they rich

Time to ban filter gateway pundit

For a party that won fair and square, leftists certainly are vindictive.

>>1352007
>Even after Georgia election officials debunked the video, the site continued to publish numerous articles falsely accusing Moss and Freeman of fraud. Rudy Giuliani, Trump’s lawyer, also attacked the two women publicly. A Washington DC jury ordered Giuliani to pay nearly $150m to the two women last year for libel, a decision the former New York mayor is appealing. At the trial, Giuliani’s lawyer at one point accused the Gateway Pundit of being the basis of the false claims about the two women.

>>1352008
>debunked
Oh well, that settles it. Everything's on the up and up. Nothing to see here.

>>1351987
Reminder that Gateway Pundit is run by Jim Hoft, a self admitted brain damaged pedophile

>>1352007
>The fascist right doesn't realize their actions to harm others has consequences
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4vIBijzg4w

>>1352010
Yes. Shut the fuck up.

>>1352007
>OMG you won't just roll over and let us maliciously ruin your life for political points?
>So much for the tolerant left

>>1352025
Who’s life is being ruined by humbly petitioning the government for free and fair elections

>>1352028
if that were the case they wouldn't be guilty of defamation

>>1352028
Shouting at someone that you really won because they cheated isn't humble and it isn't a petition.

>>1352028
>Who’s life is being ruined
The women in the story you're commenting on. They were receiving so many death threats so frequently they had to change phone numbers and Ruby Freeman had to move after an angry mob of Trumpists showed up at her door.
That's why they're being awarded damages from right wing shitrags and Trump lackies who riled up the brainless mobs
>humbly
Lol you're pathetic

>>1352033
>>1352030
>>1352029
good posts

>>1352020
Yeah it's so true you can't even criticize it without being sued lol
>georgia election officials debooonked the video
lmaooo
Retards don't understand that "debunking" and "fact checkers" are modern day pravda.
Of course election workers are going to say nothing is wrong. They're being paid to do their jobs correctly.
Surely this won't cause any problems in the next thirty days.

>>1352088
>Yeah it's so true you can't even criticize it without being sued lol
You can criticize anything you want. What you can't do is knowingly lie and publicly smear the character of people in. Its funny you try to conflate the two things.

>Retards don't understand that "debunking" and "fact checkers" are modern day pravda.
We know, cultist. Anything that goes against your narrative is fake. Facts are only real if you like them and they agree with you.

>Of course election workers are going to say nothing is wrong. They're being paid to do their jobs correctly.
Gosh, I guess it sucks you have absolutely no evidence of this massive election worker conspiracy.

>Surely this won't cause any problems in the next thirty days.
If it does cause problems it'll be because of brain rotted dumbfucks like you.

>>1352098
>You can criticize anything you want.
No you can't.
Not even the president can.

>>1352116
>No you can't.
You absolutely can. What you're trying to do is the "but I'm just asking questions" meme. Actively, knowingly lying about specific claims and "criticizing" are two wildly different things but defending Trump and his legion of liars requires you to pretend like they're the same thing. They're not.

>Not even the president can.
Yes he can. Trump has bitched literally every day since 2020 about losing the election.

>>1352117
>You absolutely can.
No, you literally can't.
Democrats are undermining presidential immunity precisely because he tried to investigate election fraud.
If the leader of the free world can't question elections, neither can you.

>>1352121
>No, you literally can't.
Saying it over and over doesn't make it true. Trump has been on national TV every day for months complaining about the election with zero consequence. Lying and "criticizing" aren't the same thing no matter how many times you try to sell that dogshit meme.

>Democrats are undermining presidential immunity precisely because he tried to investigate election fraud.
Incorrect. First, there was no presidential criminal immunity before the supreme courts decision. There's no precedent for that. Secondly, he's under indictment for attempting to overturn the results, not investigate election fraud. He was allowed to investigate. He had his recounts, he had his audits, he had his FBI and DOJ investigations and he had his court cases. All of those failed to produce any evidence of voter fraud. So, because he didn't get what he wanted out of his investigations, he and his team submitted forged elector slates in 7 states to congress in an attempt to defraud the states, personally called state election officials and pressured them to overturn their results, pressured his vice president to throw out the state electors and chose him as the next president and told his DOJ to lie and sign letters to the states stating they found voter fraud. He only changed his mind on the DOJ letter after half of the department threatened to quit if he went through with the plan.

>If the leader of the free world can't question elections, neither can you.
You're doing the "I'm just asking questions" meme again. Nobody is in trouble for asking questions. Trump is in trouble for trying to defraud the states and illegally overturn election results, not asking questions.

>>1351987
dw it'll be overturned on appeal when trump takes office and they'll not only not see a single cent they'll have to pay for the court fees and spend the rest of their life in prison for election fraud.

>>1352122
>Trump has been on national TV every day for months complaining about the election with zero consequence.
The media and the democratic party painted him as literal traitor to the United States for attempting to fulfill his constitutional oath.
>There's no precedent for that
Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts.
>Trump is in trouble for trying to defraud the states and illegally overturn election results, not asking questions.
That's what the democrats are accusing him doing, retard, not what actually happened. They're trying to ruin his life for daring to question the election.

>>1352126
>The media and the democratic party painted him as literal traitor to the United States for attempting to fulfill his constitutional oath.
Filing fake elector slates to congress and pressure his vice president to pick the fake slates instead of the real ones is not his constitutional oath. Its the opposite, in fact. He is a traitor to the United States. That's not even a question.

>Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority.
Wrong.

>And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts.
Well, I guess its a good thing that pressuring states to overturn the election results and forge fake elector slates isn't an official act. The executive has absolutely no authority over state elections.

>That's what the democrats are accusing him doing, retard, not what actually happened.
Trump and his team recruited dozens of private citizens in 7 swing states, had them lie on federal documents claiming that they were the states duly appointed electors and then sent these fake slates to congress choosing Trump for president instead of who the states actually voted for. This is objectively true. Trump's team isn't even denying this happened.

>They're trying to ruin his life for daring to question the election.
Trump is being indicted for defrauding the government and attempting to overturn a legal election through fraudulent means, not "questioning the election". You can say it as many times as you like, you're still a liar and a subhuman moron.

Reminder that ALL Trump voters are inherently bad faith. It's just question of to what degree.

>>1352135
I feel genuinely sad for Mitt Romney-types. Their party was hijacked by smear merchants and retards.

>>1352135
all democrats are human garbage or ignorant losers who ignore the evils of left because they've been conditioned that it doesn't matter what they do just look at what trump might do.

>>1352138
>all rightards are human garbage and ignorant losers
ftfy

>>1352145
Good post

>>1352126
>Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution
Where in the constitution does it say the president gets 'absolute immunity from criminal prosecution'
Because last i checked, the Republican Supreme Court created that out of whole cloth to cover for Trump

>>1352154
Article II. And it was implied all throughout the federalist papers.
>>1352129
>Filing fake elector slates to congress and pressure his vice president to pick the fake slates instead of the real ones is not his constitutional oath.
Dueling Electors have been a part of every single election since the Constitution was ratified, and the wording of the VP as elector certifier can - and has - been read as total discretion over accepting or refusing them (at least 3x prominent influential cases, the biggest Jefferson in his own favor).
>Wrong.
I literally just quoted the ruling of SCOTUS in Trump v. United States
>The executive has absolutely no authority over state elections.
The President of the United States has a constitutionally prescribed duty to ensure the authenticity and security of federal elections.
>Trump's team isn't even denying this happened.
Yes, this is how dueling electors function. But the president of Congress is the one who certifies the votes, and so they are the ones which decide if a slate of electors is legitimate or not.
>Trump is being indicted for defrauding the government
According to the Biden administration, which has not only tried to strip away presidential immunity, but has also tried to police free speech, violate bodily autonomy, and threaten Trump voters with violence.
You are a traitor to the country.

>it's pretending to be persecuted now
yawn

>>1352228
isn't he just the biggest faggot

>>1352235
he's a faggot to be sure but not the biggest faggot, that's >>1351521

>>1352227
>Dueling Electors have been a part of every single election since the Constitution was ratified
Electors are selected and appointed by the state, not the losing candidate's lawyers. Dueling electors have nothing to do with Trump's attempts to defraud the electoral college by convincing a bunch of his supporters to forge documents claiming they were the state's electors.

>and the wording of the VP as elector certifier can - and has - been read as total discretion over accepting or refusing them (at least 3x prominent influential cases, the biggest Jefferson in his own favor)
100% false. The electoral count act of 1887 allows the VP absolutely no ability to refuse or accept electors.

>The President of the United States has a constitutionally prescribed duty to ensure the authenticity and security of federal elections.
100% false. The executive has zero authority over state elections.

>Yes, this is how dueling electors function.
100% false. Alternate electors are appointed by states, not the losing candidate's lawyers. Trump's legal team found random citizens and had them lie on federal documents claiming that they were the electors chosen by the states when they were not. It was fraud.

>But the president of Congress is the one who certifies the votes, and so they are the ones which decide if a slate of electors is legitimate or not.
100% false. The electoral count act of 1887 allows the VP no ability to refuse or accept electors. The role is strictly ceremonial.

>According to the Biden administration, which has not only tried to strip away presidential immunity
There has never been any legal precedent for presumptive criminal immunity for the president.

>but has also tried to police free speech, violate bodily autonomy, and threaten Trump voters with violence.
The only person who has done any of these things is Trump. Pure projection.

>You are a traitor to the country.
You are mentally ill and should be taken in as a ward of the state.

>>1352227
>Article II
Quote it
Also implication is not proof

>>1352248
>Electors are selected and appointed by the state
You don't understand how dueling electors works.
Joe Schmoe submitting a slate of electors to congress is literally how dueling electors work. They don't need to be appointed by the states. That's something the Biden administration invented to cover their ass.
>The electoral count act of 1887 allows the VP absolutely no ability to refuse or accept electors.
Again, another established precedent the Biden administration made to cover their ass. Jefferson, Nixon and various other VPs have selectively chosen which slates are valid.
>The executive has zero authority over state elections.
One of the President's constitutional duties is to ensure that the law is enforced. This includes election law.
Failing to investigate election fraud would have violated the constitution, further proving that the free press is the enemy of the people.
>There has never been any legal precedent for presumptive criminal immunity for the president.
A keen distinction, but SCOTUS still disagrees with you.
>The only person who has done any of these things is Trump.
COVID vaccine, Hunter Biden's laptop censorship campaign, the Burisma scandal.

this faggot loves losing arguments over and over doesn't he. maybe this time your lie will be true trumpfag

>>1351987
These are the n-, uh people in charge of elections?
No wonder the votes are never counted right.

>>1352269
anon, you're brown

>>1352270
You mom is brown.

>>1352265
>Joe Schmoe submitting a slate of electors to congress is literally how dueling electors work.
It is not. Whoever told you this lied to you. Electors are chosen by the state. Dueling electors, like in Hawaii in 1960, is when the state sends two slates of electors. Random citizens do not get to file elector slates with congress. Trump's legal team had citizens file fraudulent documents claiming they were the state's chosen electors. That was a lie.

>That's something the Biden administration invented to cover their ass.
The Biden administration did not invent state electoral law.

>Again, another established precedent the Biden administration made to cover their ass. Jefferson, Nixon and various other VPs have selectively chosen which slates are valid.
The electoral count act of 1887 allows the VP absolutely no power to reject electors. Neither the election with Jefferson or Nixon allowed the VP to chose whatever electors they wanted. In fact, John Eastman, Trump's lawyer disagrees with you. His legal theory argued that the ECA was unconstitutional and could be ignored, not that the ECA allows the VP to choose electors. You're just making shit up.

>One of the President's constitutional duties is to ensure that the law is enforced. This includes election law.
That is absolutely not true. The executive has zero constitutional authority over state election law. You can provide zero evidence or precedent where state election law is enforced by the president.

>Failing to investigate election fraud would have violated the constitution, further proving that the free press is the enemy of the people.
He did investigate it. When all the investigations came back with zero evidence of voter fraud he took steps to steal the election through compelling his DOJ employees to push false claims of election fraud, the fake electors scheme, and encouraging Pence to violate the ECA by rejecting the electors chosen by the state and choose Trump's fake electors instead.

>>1352265
>A keen distinction, but SCOTUS still disagrees with you.
SCOTUS does not disagree with me. Roberts' decision essentially invented a novel constitutional interpretation which allowed for this brand new criminal immunity that's never been used before. The case he cited as precedent, Nixon v Fitzgerald, was regarding civil immunity, not criminal. You cannot provide a single legal example of a case where a president was able to successfully argue criminal immunity against civil charges. I'll give you all day. You won't be able to find one.

>COVID vaccine
Nobody was forced to take the vaccine.

>Hunter Biden's laptop censorship campaign
There was no campaign. Twitter censored it for one day and then completely changed their leaked materials policy to allow it.

>the Burisma scandal.
There was no scandal. Zero charges. Zero indictments. Zero evidence of wrongdoing. All you have are your feelings. The wild thing is I think you're one of those rare schizos who actually believes what he's saying. I hate to be the one to tell you this but your mind has been completely captured by propaganda. Everything you've told me in our brief interaction has been invented out of thin air, but the confidence with which you spew blatant misinformation tells me you must have gotten it from somewhere. Re-examine your media bubble, anon. Everything you think you know about the world is a lie.

>>1352276
>It is not. Whoever told you this lied to you.
Three presidents were decided this way, including Jefferson in his own favor.
>Neither the election with Jefferson or Nixon allowed the VP to chose whatever electors they wanted.
Nixon was the VP running against Kennedy. He chose the alternate slate in favor of Kennedy.
Jefferson used his authority as VP to exclude his Federalist competitors, restricting the runoff to a two-man race between himself and Aaron Burr.
>That is absolutely not true.
Article II, Section 3, Take Care clause.
>When all the investigations came back with zero evidence
Every court dismissed cases of election fraud on technicalities.
If they sued before the election was over, the courts ruled they were too ripe.
If they sued after the election was over, the courts ruled that they could not provide a remedy.
If individuals who won the election sued, the courts ruled that they were not the only ones disaffected by the fraud, because literally every other person who voted was similarly disaffected, and so they had no right to sue at all.
>>1352277
>SCOTUS does not disagree with me.
I copy and pasted SCOTUS's ruling. You said 'nuh uh'.
>Nobody was forced to take the vaccine.
If they wanted to keep their jobs, they were forced to take the vaccine.
>There was no campaign.
The twitter files revealed a years-long series of censorship, first beginning with the Trump administration.
>All you have are your feelings.
Biden's son, a qualified crackhead and whoremonger, was assigned to the board of an energy company. When investigated by the Ukrainians, Biden threatened to withhold international aid.
>Everything you think you know about the world is a lie.
You are a traitor to the United States.

>>1352282
you've lost this argument multiple times in this thread alone. give it up

>>1352282
>Three presidents were decided this way, including Jefferson in his own favor.
There has never been an election decided where a bunch of random people signed a document saying they are chosen state electors and sent them in to be legitimately counted by congress. There has never been an election decided where the VP only certified the electors he wanted to and tossed the others out. That is 100% false. You're lying.

>Nixon was the VP running against Kennedy. He chose the alternate slate in favor of Kennedy.
Alternate electors are chosen by THE STATES, not the losing candidate's legal team. Trump's sycophants FORGED documents stating they were the state's chosen electors when they absolutely were not and LIED on those documents claiming that they were certified in the state capitol. You keep skipping over this detail because you know you're full of shit.

>Every court dismissed cases of election fraud on technicalities.
False. The vast majority of them were dismissed on evidentiary grounds.

>If they sued after the election was over, the courts ruled that they could not provide a remedy.
Another falsehood. The courts dismissed these cases because the remedies Trump's team was looking for were insane i.e. we have this affidavit saying someone scanned ballots three times therefore our remedy is to toss 300,000 ballots and replace the electors.

>If individuals who won the election sued, the courts ruled that they were not the only ones disaffected by the fraud, because literally every other person who voted was similarly disaffected, and so they had no right to sue at all.
This is called standing. If you're not an injured party you don't get to sue. If you punch your neighbor in the face I don't get to sue you for pain and suffering. I have no standing. I suffered no damages. Texas can't sue because they don't like Georgia's laws.

>>1352282
>I copy and pasted SCOTUS's ruling. You said 'nuh uh'.
You didn't engage with what I said. What I said is that Roberts' decision is a novel interpretation of the constitution with no legal precedent.

>If they wanted to keep their jobs, they were forced to take the vaccine.
That isn't what forced means. If you don't want the vax you can get another job - just like if you don't want to drug test you can get another job. You have no right to employment.

>Biden's son, a qualified crackhead and whoremonger, was assigned to the board of an energy company. When investigated by the Ukrainians, Biden threatened to withhold international aid.
Yeah, that isn't true. The Ukrainians were never investigating Hunter Biden. You're repeating conspiracy again.

>You are a traitor to the United States.
There is no universe in which anything that comes from your mouth deserves to be taken seriously.

It's wild how a /pol/ppet's argument looks valid to the laymen who knows nothing about what he's talking about.
But when someone knowledgeable comes along, they get BTFO hard

>>1352265
>Joe Schmoe submitting a slate of electors to congress is literally how dueling electors work. They don't need to be appointed by the states. That's something the Biden administration invented to cover their ass.
Yes retard. 200 million people can all just send any amount of electors to the capitol whenever they want to. There's no paperwork. They just need to walk in and declare themselves the elector for a certain state.

>>1352282
>Article II, Section 3, Take Care clause.
Also, the "Take Care" clause states that the U.S. constitution requires the president enforce the laws. The issue that dumbfuck schizo here is avoiding is that the executive, by the definition of its office and the separation of powers, enforces laws created by congress. The constitution separates executive and state powers. The president of the U.S. has zero jurisdiction over enforcing state election laws. The Take Care clause has nothing to do with that claim.

>>1352301
I wasn't going to respond to whatever that other fag said because he was clearly lying from the jump, but this is so laughable I can't help myself.
>The president of the U.S. has zero jurisdiction over enforcing state election laws.
The Supremacy Clause in Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution states that federal law and the Constitution are the supreme law of the land. This means that federal law takes priority over conflicting state laws.
This means that state elections, such as those specifically engineered to defraud federal elections, are under the purview of the Department of Justice.
The DoJ is headed by the U.S. attorney general, who reports directly to the president of the United States and is a member of the president's Cabinet.
If you sincerely believe that the President of the United states does not have a particularized interest in maintaining the integrity of state elections, you are a faggot of the highest caliber. Even moreso than the galaxy-brained cognitive dissonance trannies who say that J6 was an insurrection, but then go along with the idea that alternate electors don't exist, disregarding 200 years of precedent.

>>1352313
>The Supremacy Clause in Article VI, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution states that federal law and the Constitution are the supreme law of the land. This means that federal law takes priority over conflicting state laws.
You have no clue what you're talking about. The supremacy clause is in reference to which law takes precedence when state and federal statutes conflict - meaning that if the states say marijuana is legal but the feds say its illegal the feds retain the power to arrest and convict people of drug charges regardless of the state statute. This does not apply to election law. There is no federal law on state election procedures for state law to conflict with. States run their elections. The federal government has zero jurisdiction. Its a power separation enumerated in the constitution.

>This means that state elections, such as those specifically engineered to defraud federal elections, are under the purview of the Department of Justice.
100% false. State election laws are under the purview of the state courts. The federal government has zero jurisdiction to investigate or prosecute violation of state law. Additionally, the DOJ is not the executive in the case of Trump. Trump's DOJ explicitly told him there was no evidence of fraud - this is why he brought in his personal lawyers and called state election officials personally to influence them. William Barr refused to participate in Trump's election interference scheme - that's why he quit and why Trump tried to appoint some random lawyer from the EPA who had never lead a criminal trial before to the head of the DOJ so he would sign fake documents alleging they found evidence of voter fraud.

>>1352313
>If you sincerely believe that the President of the United states does not have a particularized interest in maintaining the integrity of state elections, you are a faggot of the highest caliber.
The reason you're confused is because you're a conspiracy brained retard with no clue how our government works. The executive branch has zero jurisdiction to investigate or prosecute violation of state law. This is like civics 101. You can't find a single case or instance of the federal government being able to take over investigation and prosecution of people violating state law. You made it up. You should of learned this in like the 8th grade.

>The DoJ is headed by the U.S. attorney general, who reports directly to the president of the United States and is a member of the president's Cabinet.
Trump's DOJ, William Barr, investigated Trump's accusations of election fraud and found zero evidence. He released a statement saying he found no election fraud and Trump was so upset he told Barr to resign. The DOJ rebuked Trump's false claims and refused to lie for him.

>but then go along with the idea that alternate electors don't exist
You're being a dumbfuck on purpose again. Alternate electors absolutely exist. Alternate electors are a separate slate of electors selected BY THE STATE. Trump's scheme was fraudulent and has nothing to do with alternate electors because he gathered dozens of random citizens and had them lie on federal documents and state that they were chosen as the state's electors. States chose their alternate electors, not the losing candidate's legal team.

>disregarding 200 years of precedent.
Find me one time in the last 200 years that the losing candidate told a bunch of random people to lie on documents and say that that they were the state's chosen electors then congress accepted these electors.

>>1352313
>https://cha.house.gov/the-elections-clause

>Article 1, Section 4 of the Constitution explains that the States have the primary authority over election administration, the "times, places, and manner of holding elections". Conversely, the Constitution grants the Congress a purely secondary role to alter or create election laws only in the extreme cases of invasion, legislative neglect, or obstinate refusal to pass election laws.

Here you go retard. Enjoy your BTFO.

>>1352313
>https://www.justice.gov/usao/justice-101/faq

>The Department of Justice has no authority to intervene in matters of state law. The Department of Justice can assume jurisdiction only when there has been a violation of federal law.

Oh wow here's another one.

Holy god damn this is a satisfying thread.

>>1352313
>I wasn't going to respond to whatever that other fag said because he was clearly lying from the jump
That other fag has been been pounding you into the fucking dirt this entire discussion. That's why you're responding to this other anon and not him, you're running away.

>>1351987
black women in georgia rigged the 2020 election. dems even fucking bragged about it

>>1352348
This post was made at 3:53pm India time, 1:23pm Israel time.

>>1352349
I like how since I started posting that it made it so you shills stopped posting on /news/ at night. pretty funny all democrats are indian or jewish

I am typically awake during night hours, which is daytime on the opposite side of the world. Alleging someone is from another country because they post an opinion you disagree with at night time is beyond retarded, and I only did it here (>>1352349) to illustrate how retarded it is when gun schizo does it. It does nothing to counter the point being made. It's just an attempt to deflect and derail the discussion at hand.

>>1352357
posting at 6:30 am is not the same as you always posting at a quarter to 5 US time which is mid day in indian and israel

>>1352313
Interesting how Republicans suddenly think states rights don't matter when it's them seizing power unlawfully.
Typical conservatism.

>>1352372
nope, I'm white unlike you and obongo and harris

>>1352534
we all know you're not american anon. that's totally fine, just don't lie about it

>>1352569
I'm American, unlike you, harris and obongo, keep being mad

i guess he will keep lying. well, i tried

>>1352345
Notice the lack of counter-argument to all of the posts above. Actual /pol/ CHUD stunlock.

>>1352349
>>1352353
>>1352360
What mental illness is this?

>>1353169
multiple democrat shills would only post at like 4 or 5 am, but it would be normal times in israel and india. so I would post the local israel and indian times and now no one posts between 4 am and 8:30 am, which is funny because all the dems/lefties on this board aren't American

>>1353169
see >>1352357

>>1353169
this poster >>1353282 and >>1352357
is a paid communist shill who either lives in india or israel