Comments by "Jacob Watson" (@jacobwatson3781) on "Rebel HQ" channel.

  1. I'm confused, what are you trying to say?
    7
  2. The bill says money can only be spent on veterans. Mandatory vs discretionary is a different argument. Again, the bill says money can be spent on veterans.
    6
  3.  @lynnrunningdeerB4  exactly, either you support freedom or you don't.
    4
  4. Can you give an example of 10 doctors giving 10 different opinions for the same patient? Also is the NY case finished, aren't they still working on the case? Didn't someone pled the 5th for 6 hours recently?
    4
  5.  @maxbrazil3712  nice try on the spin. I never said he is guilty, I was referring to the search being lawful. Don't try and strawman this. There is nothing showing either the DOJ or AG didn't anything outside of the law or for political reasons.
    4
  6. You say that only if you do not make a stand on issues that are important to you. Democracy will work if people are engaged, when people stand back and watch thee world go by Democracy fades.
    3
  7. I thought Republicans were the ones who hate laws and regulations and especially laws that fix a problem that doesn't exist. Seems like circular logic.
    3
  8.  @lynnrunningdeerB4  that my new best friend is a lie.
    2
  9. He asked why she brought it up, what did he get wrong?
    2
  10.  @aussiebloke8781  that she brought it up, she asked about martial law. She was probably correct that she didn't know about it if it could happen, but she did ask.
    2
  11.  @aussiebloke8781  yes, but why bring it up? Like someone saying "hey what about drinking and driving, not sure if you can do it." Question would be, why are you even bringing this up.
    2
  12. Asking to take down dick pics, how do I not have that ability?
    2
  13. I'm confused, are you saying there wasn't an attack on the capital?
    2
  14.  @maxbrazil3712  see, you try and get away from what I was actually saying. You must agree with my statements. The search was lawful and not based on political beliefs. The former president had documents he shouldn't have had AND he didn't have them properly secured, AND either he or his attorney lied about not having more. The president had 18 months and didn't comply with the subeona. He left the DOJ with no choice but to search the home. Please, tell me if any of that is incorrect?
    2
  15.  @maxbrazil3712  okat, is this example, what was political?
    2
  16. Or they could have just try to ignore it. There is also a group of people who won't believe what is infront of their face, but majority of people can change their view once confronted with reality.
    1
  17. What example are you referring to?
    1
  18.  @DarkPuppy9  what are examples of that over the last 20 years?
    1
  19.  @davidwalter2002  sorry, what do you mean?
    1
  20.  @davidwalter2002  it's not an apples to apples comparison to news reporting over 100 years ago to today. The internet kind of is a big deal right?
    1
  21.  @davidwalter2002  alright, your nonsensical statements are hard to understand.
    1
  22. Can you clarify, do you mean they shouldn't have given the former president 18 months to turn over top secret documents? Also they are at fault for stating all documents were returned when all documents were not returned. They are at fault for defying a subpoena? They're at fault for providing evidence that documents were at property, AND the documents were at the property?
    1
  23. What is Tim Pool doing there?
    1
  24. That's why the average voter kicked him out in 2020, they thought he was a shitstain.
    1
  25. ​@BreakingtheFlaw why speak in generalities?
    1
  26. ​ @BreakingtheFlaw What does that mean?
    1
  27. Just to clarify, you care about disrespect?
    1
  28. @Charlton Singleton  well that is the issue to an extent. Freedom of speech doesn't mean someone can say anything at any time without any consequences.
    1