@FarmGirlCarrie Violation of oath equals indictment, arrest, prosecution and prison
English
Michael Coitrone
26K posts
I’m sick of these woke judges giving a pass to criminals. It’s time to remove these rogue judges once and for all!
Raise your hand if you agree 🙋♀️
English
@RealJamesWoods Boycott until rules violations are dealt with....fire the commissioner
English
The coaches, refs, and owners know who their audience is, so Caitlin Clark is just going to be red meat for the hyenas.
English
@catturd2 Violation of oath and dereliction of duty...Court martial
English
Send this traitor to Leavenworth.
Eric Daugherty@EricLDaugh
🚨 UPDATE: Active Duty Air Force Major Jason Watson faces MASS CALLS for disciplinary action by SecWar Pete Hegseth after in UNIFORM, he demanded President Trump be removed from office in a demonstration where he got ARRESTED The stunt is connected to leftist NGOs and Rep. Al Green BRING FAFO, SEC. HEGSETH! 🔥
English
🚨 JUST IN: Americans nationwide are livid after MULTIPLE CITIES are flying the SOMALI FLAG during America's 250th birthday
Buffalo, Boston and Minneapolis just went full SOMALI 3RD WORLD SAVAGE MODE over America.
Utterly DISGRACEFUL.
Columbus, Ohio was forced into RETREATING from flying the Somali flag, after a "firestorm" erupted against them
Move to Somalia if you love it so much!
English
@EricLDaugh @matjendav4 Political insurrection and violation of oath
English
🚨 NOW: An activist federal court with a DEI judge has just BLOCKED President Trump from firing nearly two dozen DEI INTELLIGENT OFFICERS, 2-1
LGBTQ Judge Nicole Berner for the majority has BLOCKED the implementation of a Trump EO from *January 2025*
IMPEACH AND IGNORE! They are NOT president of the United States!
We are more than halfway through 2026 and the judicial coup is still stonewalling policies from a year and a half ago!
English
July 1, 2026 Active-duty U.S. Air Force Major Jason Watson was arrested by U.S. Capitol Police on the steps of the U.S. Capitol while in uniform, holding a sign reading “IMPEACH. CONVICT. REMOVE.” and calling for the impeachment and removal of President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance.
English
Should judges be held accountable when they let criminals out on the streets over & over again?
a. Yes
b. No
🦅 Eagle Wings 🦅@CRRJA5
🚨 39 prior arrests. 25 felonies. And career criminal Alexander Dickie was STILL on the streets. He broke into the home where 22-year-old aspiring teacher Logan Federico was staying, dragged her naked from her bed, forced her to kneel execution-style, and shot her while she begged for her life. How the hell was this monster free to terrorize? Judges and the soft-on-crime system repeatedly let him walk. Enough is enough. These judges who keep releasing violent repeat offenders with rap sheets spanning over a decade — they have blood on their hands. Should judges be held personally accountable for the crimes committed by the criminals they release? Yes or No? Rest in Peace Logan Federico. Think of your kids’ safety next time you vote. We need leaders who put law-abiding Americans first — not criminals
English
Michael Coitrone がリツイート
WNBA Commissioner Kathy Engelbert
There’s one person who sits at the top of the WNBA who’s responsible for the product we see that’s filled with thuggery, horrible officiating, bruising/overly physical play and a bunch of woke decision-making.
SHOULD SHE BE FIRED??
English
@AprilSpark1890 @NowPammsy Violation of oath to the constitution..termination
English
👀🤬 On the steps of the US Capitol, a disgraceful act of dissent took place. Active Duty USAF Major Jason Watson called for the impeachment, conviction, and removal of President Trump. He was arrested shortly thereafter. 🤬👀
English
The Cowards at SCOTUS try to justify the Results they wanted.
KrisAnne Hall, LibertyAddict@RealKahall
Once Again, Justice Barrett Misses the Constitutional Mark. Sorry I Told You So.🗳️ Constitutionally Speaking: Watson v. Republican National Committee- Mail in Ballots: by KrisAnne Hall, JD Today, in the Supreme Court, Justice Amy Coney Barrett leads the majority of liberals claiming to follow the Constitution's original meaning. She quotes Alexander Hamilton in Federalist No. 59, speaks of the Framers' intent, and repeatedly invokes history as its guide. But when the historical evidence becomes inconvenient, Barrett quietly sets it aside. Barrett engages in judicial activism disguised as selective originalism. This Isn't a Victory for Federalism. It's a Victory for Judicial Activism. Barrett, in her effort to appear as a constitutionalist, begins with a correct statement of constitutional authority. Article I, Section 4 gives state legislatures the primary authority to regulate the "Times, Places and Manner" of congressional elections, while Congress retains the ultimate authority to alter those regulations. Barrett even quotes that Alexander Hamilton described exactly that arrangement in Federalist No. 59, in her effort to feign Originalism. But that's where Barretts efforts end. This Decision Expands Judicial Power, Not Constitutional Liberty. Instead of asking what Congress meant when it exercised that constitutional authority by establishing a uniform Election Day, the majority narrows its analysis almost exclusively to dictionary definitions of the word "election." It concludes that because "election" simply means the act of choosing, ballots may continue arriving for days after Election Day so long as the voter completed the ballot earlier. The problem is that history overwhelmingly points in the opposite direction. For nearly two centuries, Americans understood Election Day to mean exactly what its name suggests, the day on which election officials received ballots and completed the voting process. Before the Civil War, voting occurred almost entirely in person. Election Day naturally became ballot-receipt day. Even during the Civil War, when soldiers were scattered across distant battlefields, states did not abandon that principle. They adapted the mechanics while preserving the rule. Military officers acted as election officials, collected ballots in the field, verified voters, and ensured those ballots were received according to Election Day requirements. The method changed. The deadline did not. Ironically, Barrett acknowledges that words should be interpreted according to their ordinary meaning when Congress enacted them. Yet after stating that principle, she largely ignores the strongest evidence of what Congress actually understood that meaning to be: nearly two centuries of uninterrupted governmental practice. Instead, Barrett treats those historical practices as little more than interesting coincidences. The dissent exposes the weakness in that reasoning with a simple question: If Congress never intended Election Day to serve as a ballot-receipt deadline, why did virtually every state, including those facing enormous logistical challenges during the Civil War, go to extraordinary lengths to ensure ballots were received by Election Day? Barrett has no satisfying answer and, instead, suggests perhaps the states simply chose to operate that way voluntarily. But that explanation requires believing that states consistently imposed significant logistical burdens upon themselves for nearly 200 years without any legal necessity whatsoever. That is not impossible but it is historically implausible. Barrett also invokes Federalist No. 59 to argue that the Framers wanted flexibility because they could not foresee every future circumstance. This is your typical "non-originalist" misunderstanding about what our founders intended. Hamilton's point was not that courts should rewrite election statutes whenever circumstances change. His point was that Congress possesses the constitutional authority to adapt election law as conditions evolve. That distinction matters. The Constitution assigns election policy to legislatures, not judges. If Congress wishes to permit ballots received after Election Day, Congress may amend the statute. Until Congress does so, courts are obligated to apply the law Congress actually enacted, not the law judges believe Congress should have enacted. Barrett says history matters, but ultimately relies on dictionaries. The dissent begins with constitutional text, confirms it through historical practice, measures it against nearly two centuries of consistent implementation, and harmonizes that evidence with existing precedent. The dissent is engaging in classic originalist methodology. Original intent is not proven by selectively quoting the Federalist Papers while ignoring two centuries of governmental practice that demonstrate what those principles became in law. Barrett begins with history, but leaves it behind when that history points toward a different conclusion. Constitutional Originalists will see this clearly. Political loyalists will either be "shocked" by Barrett's errors or pleased by them, depending on what side of the political coin they sit. I'm not shocked. I made many warnings about Barrett BEFORE her confirmation. Learn Constitutional Truth. Join me on this journey! LibertyFirstSociety.com
English
@TheRealDrWard @JeannieGiering Follow the money to corruption
English
$60 BILLION “Company” Tied to a Sitting Congresswoman Just Got BUSTED as a TOTAL GHOST FIRM — Journalist Angela Rose Walked Every Floor and Found NOTHING!
No office. No signage. NO ONE had even heard of it.
A supposed $60B powerhouse... operating out of a WeWork mailbox?!
FOLLOW ME, THE NEXT DROP WILL BE SHOCKING!
English
They are racist.
Farm Girl Carrie 👩🌾@FarmGirlCarrie
How can the officials allow this to happen?!
English
Michael Coitrone がリツイート
Here it is:
Nick Shirley confirms ballot-fraud operation run by the g’ddamn Somali Ilhan Omar. All paid for by the American taxpayer.
“They all vote together, and there’s ballot harvesting.”
“Major, massive apartment complex— that entire block will then go and vote for one specific candidate. They’ll have one person go there and collect all the ballots, and nobody tracks it. They could say they have nine people living in an apartment. They’re going to send them nine ballots, and then they have someone who comes along and collects all the ballots.”
“You’re talking probably 100,000 or more people, and they’re all living rent-free. They’re driving a vehicle that you paid for. They’re eating food that you paid for. Everything they do is something that you paid for.”
Ballot-fraud operation in Minnesota run by @IlhanOmar — 300 ballots at a time.
Q: “Who is the one filling out the absentee ballots?”
“A: People who work with Ilhan Omar and other candidates; they work for them.”
English
Michael Coitrone がリツイート
The Obamas slither onto Fake News preaching oppression and systemic chains while lounging in their $45 million stolen empire of mansions built on the backs of American taxpayers they STOLE FROM and bled dry!
Liz Churchill@liz_churchill10
Instead of saving millions of African children…Obama chose a $45M real estate portfolio
English
Michael Coitrone がリツイート
Michael Coitrone がリツイート
@ginamilan_ @RhodaMc10528882 Agreed...turned into a clown show for profit
English
IF the WNBA actually had integrity and valued their reputation, this woman would’ve been fired already.
English