assassinatedbyCIA

Noam Chomsky talked about how self-serving it is to the powerful to portray the mainstream media as left-leaning. If people think that the NYT is pushing left, then anything further left of that is seen as being so far off that it must be uttered by loony radicals who spend 17 hrs a day buried in leftist theory.

Remember people Luigi didn’t do it and it’s very important that twelve people in either new york or Pennsylvania say the same. But if he did do it, which he absolutely didn’t, I think it was pretty [redacted] (not condoning it 👉👈 unless).

Just dropping by to make sure people get out there and speak to the less online folk of Pennsylvania and New York about your legitimate and reasonable doubts that Luigi is the guy as well informing about the horrors US health insurers conduct on a daily basis and the concept of jury nullification because it will be really interesting.

If I know anything about among us it is that it’s very pro corporate and anti-violence. No one and I repeat no one who played that game could have killed anybody. The police have the wrong guy. It just doesn’t match his character. The jury must find him innocent. If you are terminally online like me and you live in Pennsylvania or new york I implore you to tell your less online ‘normie’ friends and associates about this. If they are brought upon the jury they must know about how unlikely this makes as a suspect.

On unrelated note, jury nullification an interesting quirk of the US justice system. I think they will find it quite fascinating to research. Let them know about because they would probably find it very interesting. Spread the word guys.

They’re afraid. Good

Now I would never advocate for jury nullification because it’s illegal. Even though if you did do jury nullification there would be no way to punish you and Luigi would go free with the state having no ability to charge him again for the same crime. I would never say that if you are aware of jury nullification to not bring it up when they are selecting witnesses and, I certainly wouldn’t say that once you get on the jury you should not explicitly mention jury nullification but instead protest the fact that you have reasonable doubts and encourage others to also have reasonable doubts because of the aforementioned jury nullification being illegal. I would definitely not do any of that.

If i was responsible for defense in Jordan, I'd start constructing defensive fortifications, anti air and military communications infrastructure as soon as possible.

Only problem is israel would bomb them as soon as they started to be constructed claiming ’self defence’. The zionist plan for greater israel literally subsumes the region. Yet we’re meant to believe that israel is acting in self defence?

I’m convinced. I have reasonable doubts that the police got the right guy. The jury should find the same.

‘Your honor, the jury requests to see the defendant shirtless to verify if he really is the shooter’

Usually stuff like that is just a distraction so companies can do greenwashing while delaying the implementation of real solutions. I’m going to guess that’s the case but, I haven’t really looked into it.

I was thinking more along the lines of deny claims for clinics you don’t own but approving claims for clinics you do own. Effectively shifting premiums away from outside clinics and into your own pockets all while staying under the 80/20 rule.