If blame is to be assigned for the Jan. 6th protest, our S.C. should be at the top of the list!

johnwk

Gold Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
2,429
Reaction score
744
Points
200
When our Supreme Court refused to give the Texas BILL OF COMPLAINT an evidentiary hearing ___ a complaint which listed and detailed illegal election activities in four States ___ it effectively rejected that State’s right, and the people of the United States right, to a redress of grievances guaranteed by our Constitution.



Keep in mind the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in this matter, and refusing to take up the case and at the very least hear and rule on the arguments, our Supreme Court left 18 States, and 75 million citizens of the United States, with no one left to adjudicate the numerous election violations listed in the Bill of Complaint, and thus were denied a fundamental right to a redress of grievances.

I sincerely suspect had the Supreme Court did its job, and hear the Texas case and ruled upon its particulars, the vast majority of Trump’s 75 million voters would have accepted the court’s ruling and moved on.

Where, I ask, are the people to go, when the Supreme Court’s door is slammed in their face?

I think it’s time to at least put some blame, if not most of the blame, on the Supreme Court of the United States which I believe neglected its duty in a time of great need.



JWK



When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
 

andaronjim

Platinum Member
Joined
May 6, 2015
Messages
26,453
Reaction score
12,512
Points
1,100
Location
Floor E Da
When our Supreme Court refused to give the Texas BILL OF COMPLAINT an evidentiary hearing ___ a complaint which listed and detailed illegal election activities in four States ___ it effectively rejected that State’s right, and the people of the United States right, to a redress of grievances guaranteed by our Constitution.



Keep in mind the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in this matter, and refusing to take up the case and at the very least hear and rule on the arguments, our Supreme Court left 18 States, and 75 million citizens of the United States, with no one left to adjudicate the numerous election violations listed in the Bill of Complaint, and thus were denied a fundamental right to a redress of grievances.

I sincerely suspect had the Supreme Court did its job, and hear the Texas case and ruled upon its particulars, the vast majority of Trump’s 75 million voters would have accepted the court’s ruling and moved on.

Where, I ask, are the people to go, when the Supreme Court’s door is slammed in their face?

I think it’s time to at least put some blame, if not most of the blame, on the Supreme Court of the United States which I believe neglected its duty in a time of great need.



JWK



When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
If that is the case, then you can blame George W. Bush, establishment Republican for putting John Roberts as chief...
 

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
160,497
Reaction score
23,261
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri
When our Supreme Court refused to give the Texas BILL OF COMPLAINT an evidentiary hearing ___ a complaint which listed and detailed illegal election activities in four States ___ it effectively rejected that State’s right, and the people of the United States right, to a redress of grievances guaranteed by our Constitution.



Keep in mind the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in this matter, and refusing to take up the case and at the very least hear and rule on the arguments, our Supreme Court left 18 States, and 75 million citizens of the United States, with no one left to adjudicate the numerous election violations listed in the Bill of Complaint, and thus were denied a fundamental right to a redress of grievances.

I sincerely suspect had the Supreme Court did its job, and hear the Texas case and ruled upon its particulars, the vast majority of Trump’s 75 million voters would have accepted the court’s ruling and moved on.

Where, I ask, are the people to go, when the Supreme Court’s door is slammed in their face?

I think it’s time to at least put some blame, if not most of the blame, on the Supreme Court of the United States which I believe neglected its duty in a time of great need.



JWK



When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
The federal govt. is not able to do anything concerning the election of a president that is all done by the state according to the Constitution. So the Supreme Court could not make judgement on an issue that they have no control over. Only the states can make the rules for election of a president in their own state, they can't change how another state votes because there is no such law governing the ability to do as such.
 

Claudette

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
41,979
Reaction score
12,530
Points
2,180
When our Supreme Court refused to give the Texas BILL OF COMPLAINT an evidentiary hearing ___ a complaint which listed and detailed illegal election activities in four States ___ it effectively rejected that State’s right, and the people of the United States right, to a redress of grievances guaranteed by our Constitution.



Keep in mind the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in this matter, and refusing to take up the case and at the very least hear and rule on the arguments, our Supreme Court left 18 States, and 75 million citizens of the United States, with no one left to adjudicate the numerous election violations listed in the Bill of Complaint, and thus were denied a fundamental right to a redress of grievances.

I sincerely suspect had the Supreme Court did its job, and hear the Texas case and ruled upon its particulars, the vast majority of Trump’s 75 million voters would have accepted the court’s ruling and moved on.

Where, I ask, are the people to go, when the Supreme Court’s door is slammed in their face?

I think it’s time to at least put some blame, if not most of the blame, on the Supreme Court of the United States which I believe neglected its duty in a time of great need.



JWK



When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
I agree. Great post. The SC sure didn't fulfill their duties and it was a slap in the face to the American people.
 

TheParser

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Messages
5,490
Reaction score
3,402
Points
940
When our Supreme Court refused to give the Texas BILL OF COMPLAINT an evidentiary hearing ___ a complaint which listed and detailed illegal election activities in four States ___ it effectively rejected that State’s right, and the people of the United States right, to a redress of grievances guaranteed by our Constitution.



Keep in mind the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in this matter, and refusing to take up the case and at the very least hear and rule on the arguments, our Supreme Court left 18 States, and 75 million citizens of the United States, with no one left to adjudicate the numerous election violations listed in the Bill of Complaint, and thus were denied a fundamental right to a redress of grievances.

I sincerely suspect had the Supreme Court did its job, and hear the Texas case and ruled upon its particulars, the vast majority of Trump’s 75 million voters would have accepted the court’s ruling and moved on.

Where, I ask, are the people to go, when the Supreme Court’s door is slammed in their face?

I think it’s time to at least put some blame, if not most of the blame, on the Supreme Court of the United States which I believe neglected its duty in a time of great need.



JWK



When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.

The Supreme Court is made up of 9 human beings.

They want to keep their dignified jobs.

It's fun to be a Justice.

The Dems have told them to toe the party line or be packed.

In fact, they have already "requested" that one male Justice retire now so that he can make room for a nice liberal.

So, of course, they did not have the guts to touch the hot potato of voter fraud.

Poor President Trump! He actually thought the Court would do its job in this instance.
 
OP
J

johnwk

Gold Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
2,429
Reaction score
744
Points
200
When our Supreme Court refused to give the Texas BILL OF COMPLAINT an evidentiary hearing ___ a complaint which listed and detailed illegal election activities in four States ___ it effectively rejected that State’s right, and the people of the United States right, to a redress of grievances guaranteed by our Constitution.



Keep in mind the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in this matter, and refusing to take up the case and at the very least hear and rule on the arguments, our Supreme Court left 18 States, and 75 million citizens of the United States, with no one left to adjudicate the numerous election violations listed in the Bill of Complaint, and thus were denied a fundamental right to a redress of grievances.

I sincerely suspect had the Supreme Court did its job, and hear the Texas case and ruled upon its particulars, the vast majority of Trump’s 75 million voters would have accepted the court’s ruling and moved on.

Where, I ask, are the people to go, when the Supreme Court’s door is slammed in their face?

I think it’s time to at least put some blame, if not most of the blame, on the Supreme Court of the United States which I believe neglected its duty in a time of great need.



JWK



When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
I agree. Great post. The SC sure didn't fulfill their duties and it was a slap in the face to the American people.
Unfortunately it appears that Justice Roberts has joined the cancel culture and told 18 states and 76 million citizens of the United States to go pound sand when it refused to give an evidentiary hearing to the Texas BILL OF COMPLAINT

JWK

When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
 
OP
J

johnwk

Gold Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
2,429
Reaction score
744
Points
200
So the Supreme Court could not make judgement on an issue that they have no control over.
The truth is, federal elections laws within the various states are indeed subject to federal regulation! Let us look at some facts.

Our Constitution by its 14th Amendment provides for a penalty for any abridgement of the right to vote making any abridgement federally protected.

By our Constitution’s 15th Amendment, the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, making this right federally protected.

By the 19th Amendment the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex making any abridgement federally protected.

By the 24th Amendment The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reasons of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

And by the 26th Amendment, the right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of age.

And, Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 declares “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors …” Keep in mind the Legislatures of the various States are bound by their state constitution and the Constitution of the United States.

An example in which a State Legislature has violated Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of our federal Constitution is the State of Pennsylvania, allowing no-excuse mail in ballots to be counted without the PA Constitution being amended to allow such ballots.


Yes. Insuring only legal votes are counted is a federal question

JWK

When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
 

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
160,497
Reaction score
23,261
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri
So the Supreme Court could not make judgement on an issue that they have no control over.
The truth is, federal elections laws within the various states are indeed subject to federal regulation! Let us look at some facts.

Our Constitution by its 14th Amendment provides for a penalty for any abridgement of the right to vote making any abridgement federally protected.

By our Constitution’s 15th Amendment, the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude, making this right federally protected.

By the 19th Amendment the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex making any abridgement federally protected.

By the 24th Amendment The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reasons of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

And by the 26th Amendment, the right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of age.

And, Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 declares “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors …” Keep in mind the Legislatures of the various States are bound by their state constitution and the Constitution of the United States.

An example in which a State Legislature has violated Article II, Section 1, Clause 2 of our federal Constitution is the State of Pennsylvania, allowing no-excuse mail in ballots to be counted without the PA Constitution being amended to allow such ballots.


Yes. Insuring only legal votes are counted is a federal question

JWK

When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
All legal votes were counted.
 

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
160,497
Reaction score
23,261
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri
When our Supreme Court refused to give the Texas BILL OF COMPLAINT an evidentiary hearing ___ a complaint which listed and detailed illegal election activities in four States ___ it effectively rejected that State’s right, and the people of the United States right, to a redress of grievances guaranteed by our Constitution.



Keep in mind the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in this matter, and refusing to take up the case and at the very least hear and rule on the arguments, our Supreme Court left 18 States, and 75 million citizens of the United States, with no one left to adjudicate the numerous election violations listed in the Bill of Complaint, and thus were denied a fundamental right to a redress of grievances.

I sincerely suspect had the Supreme Court did its job, and hear the Texas case and ruled upon its particulars, the vast majority of Trump’s 75 million voters would have accepted the court’s ruling and moved on.

Where, I ask, are the people to go, when the Supreme Court’s door is slammed in their face?

I think it’s time to at least put some blame, if not most of the blame, on the Supreme Court of the United States which I believe neglected its duty in a time of great need.



JWK



When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
I agree. Great post. The SC sure didn't fulfill their duties and it was a slap in the face to the American people.
Unfortunately it appears that Justice Roberts has joined the cancel culture and told 18 states and 76 million citizens of the United States to go pound sand when it refused to give an evidentiary hearing to the Texas BILL OF COMPLAINT

JWK

When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
One state can't sue another state to force them to change their laws on voting..
 
OP
J

johnwk

Gold Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
2,429
Reaction score
744
Points
200
It's fun to be a Justice.
“It's good to be the King.”

We are getting to look more and more like Venezuela where elections are rigged and the opposition is canceled


JWK


First the President is cut off from twitter, then Sen. Hawley’s book is cancelled, then the WalkAway Facebook page is taken down. . . Is it not self-evident a dangerous and un-American pattern is developing to cancel conservative speech?
 
OP
J

johnwk

Gold Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
2,429
Reaction score
744
Points
200
I agree. Great post. The SC sure didn't fulfill their duties and it was a slap in the face to the American people.
See: How the Supreme Court Caused the Riot at the Capitol

January 11, 2021

"The Court’s stated reason for turning down the case brought by Texas against Pennsylvania and other swing states was its ruling that one state has no “judicially cognizable interest in the manner in which another state conducts its elections.” That should go down in history as one of the dumbest things the Court ever said, right up there with “separate but equal” as a justification for racial segregation or “three generations of imbeciles is enough” as a justification for mandatory sterilization.

The question was not how Pennsylvania conducted “its” election, as the Court wrongly characterized the issue. The allegations went to the constitutional legitimacy of election procedures in a presidential election in which voters in both Texas and Pennsylvania participated. If one state may illegally manipulate votes in a presidential election, the influence of all the other states that do play by the rules is undermined. The Court was essentially saying that one team has no interest in whether the other team is cheating."


Indeed! When Justice Roberts refused to hear the Texas lawsuit joined in by 17 other states, and refused to hear the grievances of 76 million American Citizens, he opened the door to predictable outrage and frustration!

JWK

MLK was spot on when he said . . . "A riot is the language of the unheard".
 
OP
J

johnwk

Gold Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
2,429
Reaction score
744
Points
200
All legal votes were counted.
Along with illegal votes.

JWK

When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
 
OP
J

johnwk

Gold Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
2,429
Reaction score
744
Points
200
So the Supreme Court could not make judgement on an issue that they have no control over.
The Supreme Court has "original jurisdiction" over such matters.


Let us not forget our Supreme Court spat in the face of 76 million Americans and 18 States by refusing to do its job and grant an evidentiary hearing of the Texas BILL OF COMPLAINT which itemized illegal voting practices in a number of States that blatantly violated Article II, Section 1, Clause 2, of the United States Constitution, and the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process and equal protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution.

Why is our Supreme Court not being pointed to for its part in causing anger and helping to incite 76 million people who merely wanted their day in Court and a redress of grievances addressed?

JWK

When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
 
OP
J

johnwk

Gold Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
2,429
Reaction score
744
Points
200
One state can't sue another state to force them to change their laws on voting..
Oh, my dear, to the contrary! When a state adopts rules or laws which violate the provisions of our Constitution, you bet another state can sue, and the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over such cases.


Let me suggest you take a moment and read our Constitution, and specifically the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, Clause 2, in which all the States are commanded that “Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors.”

This particular provision of our Constitution, and the protection afforded by the requirement, was ignored by defendant States mentioned in the Texas BILL OF COMPLAINT

JWK


“If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides that such protection was afforded, would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?”___ Justice Story
 

C_Clayton_Jones

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2011
Messages
59,309
Reaction score
17,207
Points
2,180
Location
In a Republic, actually
When our Supreme Court refused to give the Texas BILL OF COMPLAINT an evidentiary hearing ___ a complaint which listed and detailed illegal election activities in four States ___ it effectively rejected that State’s right, and the people of the United States right, to a redress of grievances guaranteed by our Constitution.



Keep in mind the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in this matter, and refusing to take up the case and at the very least hear and rule on the arguments, our Supreme Court left 18 States, and 75 million citizens of the United States, with no one left to adjudicate the numerous election violations listed in the Bill of Complaint, and thus were denied a fundamental right to a redress of grievances.

I sincerely suspect had the Supreme Court did its job, and hear the Texas case and ruled upon its particulars, the vast majority of Trump’s 75 million voters would have accepted the court’s ruling and moved on.

Where, I ask, are the people to go, when the Supreme Court’s door is slammed in their face?

I think it’s time to at least put some blame, if not most of the blame, on the Supreme Court of the United States which I believe neglected its duty in a time of great need.



JWK



When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
This is as ignorant as it ridiculous and wrong.
 
OP
J

johnwk

Gold Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
2,429
Reaction score
744
Points
200
When our Supreme Court refused to give the Texas BILL OF COMPLAINT an evidentiary hearing ___ a complaint which listed and detailed illegal election activities in four States ___ it effectively rejected that State’s right, and the people of the United States right, to a redress of grievances guaranteed by our Constitution.



Keep in mind the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in this matter, and refusing to take up the case and at the very least hear and rule on the arguments, our Supreme Court left 18 States, and 75 million citizens of the United States, with no one left to adjudicate the numerous election violations listed in the Bill of Complaint, and thus were denied a fundamental right to a redress of grievances.

I sincerely suspect had the Supreme Court did its job, and hear the Texas case and ruled upon its particulars, the vast majority of Trump’s 75 million voters would have accepted the court’s ruling and moved on.

Where, I ask, are the people to go, when the Supreme Court’s door is slammed in their face?

I think it’s time to at least put some blame, if not most of the blame, on the Supreme Court of the United States which I believe neglected its duty in a time of great need.



JWK



When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
This is as ignorant as it ridiculous and wrong.
And yet, you offer no intelligent rebuttal.

JWK

Our socialist/fascist revolutionaries, which now control the Democrat Party Leadership, are known for accusing others of what they themselves are guilty of
 
OP
J

johnwk

Gold Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
2,429
Reaction score
744
Points
200
When our Supreme Court refused to give the Texas BILL OF COMPLAINT an evidentiary hearing ___ a complaint which listed and detailed illegal election activities in four States ___ it effectively rejected that State’s right, and the people of the United States right, to a redress of grievances guaranteed by our Constitution.



Keep in mind the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in this matter, and refusing to take up the case and at the very least hear and rule on the arguments, our Supreme Court left 18 States, and 75 million citizens of the United States, with no one left to adjudicate the numerous election violations listed in the Bill of Complaint, and thus were denied a fundamental right to a redress of grievances.

I sincerely suspect had the Supreme Court did its job, and hear the Texas case and ruled upon its particulars, the vast majority of Trump’s 75 million voters would have accepted the court’s ruling and moved on.

Where, I ask, are the people to go, when the Supreme Court’s door is slammed in their face?

I think it’s time to at least put some blame, if not most of the blame, on the Supreme Court of the United States which I believe neglected its duty in a time of great need.



JWK



When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
This is as ignorant as it ridiculous and wrong.
Oh, to the contrary!


In answer to your post, members on our Supreme Court have aided domestic Revolutionaries in undermining the sanctity of our federal election process and our very system of government!

.

There is no question in the minds of honorable people, that our Supreme Court members not only spat upon our Constitution, but also spat upon 18 States and 76 million people when they refused to give an evidentiary hearing, listen to sworn witnesses, evaluate evidence, and provide a remedy for a redress of grievances they, and only they, have original jurisdiction over.

For members of our Supreme Court to allege that corruption of a federal election in one state, as distinguished from a local election in that state, does not cause an actual cognizable injury or threat to the remaining states, and to the people of those states, is to falsely assert that the corruption in one state is not a threat and direct assault upon, and injury to, our democratic system of government and its rule of law, and thus, a cognizable injury to the United States and the law abiding and freedom loving people thereof.

Indeed! The corruption of a federal election in one state is without question an assault and cognizable injury upon the entire United States, her citizens, and their very system of government.

As succinctly stated by a Justice of our Supreme Court, when acts of corruption infect a federal electoral process in one state "they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain" ___ Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941).

JWK

When our federal judicial system ignores our written Constitution and assents to legislative acts contrary to our supreme law of the land, it not only opens the door to anarchy, but participates in such treachery.
 
OP
J

johnwk

Gold Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
2,429
Reaction score
744
Points
200
The federal govt. is not able to do anything concerning the election of a president that is all done by the state according to the Constitution. So the Supreme Court could not make judgement on an issue that they have no control over. Only the states can make the rules for election of a president in their own state, they can't change how another state votes because there is no such law governing the ability to do as such.
Pennsylvania abridged the voting rights of citizens in other States and our Supreme Court ignored enforcing the rule of law!

Let us look at the facts.

Electors are chosen by a popular vote of the people.

If a state’s employees, e.g., in Pennsylvania, violate the State’s Constitution and corrupt the electoral process by introducing a million illegal ballots in a federal electoral process with the intention of favoring a particular candidate, not only has that State’s voters’ right to vote been abridged, but the illegal activity has corrupted the federal electoral process for voters across the nation who have cast ballots in accordance with the rule of law


Elevating a particular candidate in one state by illegal methods is most certainly an abridgement of the right to vote of people in others states whose legal votes are rendered meaningless, and diminished by the amount of illegal ballots counted in another state. [1]


As succinctly stated by Justice Douglas eighty years ago, when acts of corruption infect a federal electoral process in one state "they transcend mere local concern and extend a contaminating influence into the national domain" ___ Justice DOUGLAS in United States v. Classic (1941)".


[1] NOTE: Over 1 million illegal no-excuse mail in ballots were counted in PA’s election results.

JWK


When it comes to healthcare and helping the needy, our socialist Democrat Party Leadership has no moral compass whatsoever. They refuse to make the distinction between CHARITABLE GIVING and tax tyranny to support the health care needs of millions of illegal entrants and foreign aliens.
 
Last edited:

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top