Comments by "" (@indonesiaamerica7050) on "Mark Levin: This is extraordinary" video.

@MikeW165 Um, in the USA judges are not to seek out cases to render rulings on. They must be petitioned.
4
@RorkesDriftVC LOL. The executives are.
3
@johnhenry3536 Oh. You're going to categorically "refute" him with that childish comment. LOL.
2
@mikeduke8350 He lost to Electoral College insurrectionists.
2
@JCGible Try to put together a more coherent comment before hitting the blue button.
2
@JCGible Explain how Jim Jordan is a "Traitor". A "Traitor" to what? Your church?
2
@jasonbarnett7747 A Constitutionalist is one that reads US rule of law properly by first properly understanding the words and doctrines of the US Constitution. Marxists posit a "living Constitution" that "lives" through anything they can do to bend it their way. For example they cite common law 'norms' like case precedent to hold sway over anything that they previously slipped through earlier courts that permitted unconstitutional actions. Like "separate but equal" as one example. Roe v. Wade is another. And now, the craziest of all, is treating Trump like he "faked" being President and got caught. Now he must be prosecuted for all of the things that only lawfully elected Presidents are permitted to do! Constitutionalists now that for both Biden and Trump, the fact that they got the Electoral College vote means they won all Constitutional prerogatives. Even if it's proven that Biden organized an illegal scheme to defraud voters and change ballots, he will must be Impeached and removed before anyone can act against him. And he can't be treated like a "spy" because yada yada national security information and so forth. And worst of all is that Biden already committed worse "national security information" crimes that can only be excused or Pardoned by Obama, who failed to do so. We already know that Biden acted unlawfully while Trump as merely accused by the actual criminals.
1
Republicans are blatant traitors to the Communist Manifesto. Unlike you, for example. Eh, comrade?
1
@jje8182 Why are you so confused? The most benign explanation is "textualist" (one that reads properly) versus "new understanding" AKA "living constitution" Marxists.
1
@lovemyalaskaful I guess you don't follow international relations at all and how Democrat Party Marxists have destroyed the rule of law in the USA in favor of "socialism".
1
@Bc232klm Communists hate Reagan as much as they hate Trump.
1
@duanehirini2078 You fail to understand what "whataboutism" is. Whataboutism is false equivalence in service of substituting Marxist "morality" for Constitutional rule-of-law morality. What about comparisons are not ipso fact "isms". Dummass.
1
@phillipellison4758 Rupert Murdoch and his sons hate Trump. So does his latest trophy wife. Dumbass.
1
@bigred0079 No he won't. The cult knows that it will never stick on appeal. And that is when they launch a new wave of attacks on Constitutionalist judges. It's baked in to the plan. You know NOTHING about this scheme launched by Hillary and Andrew Weismann. Nothing.
1
@COO113 Idiot, the indictment proves that they targeted Trump looking for a mendacious angle to be described as "breaking the law" when in fact he did not break "The Law of Presidents". It's in the freaking Constitution.
1
@bullycat_kickz5198 Chris Wray is not a Democratic Party loon. His boss is. Garland and Biden are both sociopaths. And a Partisan Republican means Constitutionalist. A Partisan Democrat in the USA is partial to the party of slavery and bad faith "Social Darwin" politics described fairly well under the open-canon Critical Theory religion.
1
@Bc232klm Guilty of what? Acting like a President when he was, um, President of the United States? He's guilty of offending lawless Marxists. I guess you're one of them.
1
@jasonbarnett7747 It's relevant, actually. He was unlawfully undermined by all of these people that are also reasonably suspected of doing unlawful things with election law in order to ensure the traitor Biden displaced the patriotic 'rule of law' President that threatened to prosecute traitors. And therefore not only is it technically lawful for Trump to keep his own "national security information" records but it is also prudent and patriotic to do so in defense of the nation against the criminals in power.
1
@ceerawlins3412 The only Federal official to ever put national security at risk by placing it next to a toilet is Hillary Clinton.
1
@sharonhowell7011 These morons just parrot talking points. Their IQ is not in comparison to humans but to talking birds.
1
@MikeW165 Cite the law you claim to have special knowledge on. Idiot. National security "violations" can't be applied to a POTUS. FFS. They own national security. In fact everything that Obama and his regime did with Iran (and Bill Clinton with the CCP) would have been Treason if not sanctioned by him. Even the treasonous holdovers are given a pass for their treason under Trump's tenure. You people are without question the dumbest Dunning Kruger dips hits of all human history.
1
@MikeW165 You obviously don't know how to read. It's lawful for sitting Presidents to "make available" ANY national security information. Nobody said it was unlawful for VPs to hold national security information while in office. And yet they can still be charged with mishandling up to the point that the President pardons them. So your latest cult's Presidential puppet must official Pardon himself. Instead of that we hear the same kind of gibberish all of you morons are known for. And anyone that wants to change Presidential powers over national security (including war and peace) must pass a Constitutional Amendment.
1