Which means it’s now the US administration’s position that US courts can hold foreign presidents, but not the US president, accountable for crimes.
*was this a military or law enforcement action?
*what is the legal justification for either?
*if it is military “self-defense,” what is the justification for “running” the country?
*does U.S. recognize Maduro (or his VP) as Venezuela’s leader?
*If so, why doesn’t this give him immunity?
This is not a problem just for Venezuela.
This is not a problem just for Venezuela.
soooo not an imminent threat justifying self-defense
Which means it’s now the US administration’s position that US courts can hold foreign presidents, but not the US president, accountable for crimes.
Which means it’s now the US administration’s position that US courts can hold foreign presidents, but not the US president, accountable for crimes.
It’s medieval—which makes sense because we’re rewinding to before the Treaty of Westphalia.
It’s medieval—which makes sense because we’re rewinding to before the Treaty of Westphalia.
Thank you for your service, Jack Smith.
“The attack that happened at the Capitol … does not happen without him. The other co-conspirators were doing this for his benefit”
youtu.be/1NOVLkzycPI?...
Thank you for your service, Jack Smith.
He is covering up kidnapping, trafficking & horrific detention.
He is covering up child rapes.
He is covering up stealing classified documents & selling them.
He is covering up details of his coup attempt.
He is covering up who he’s really working for.
He is covering up kidnapping, trafficking & horrific detention.
He is covering up child rapes.
He is covering up stealing classified documents & selling them.
He is covering up details of his coup attempt.
He is covering up who he’s really working for.
This is where America is now
This is where America is now
GOP: Wouldn’t that feel soooo good???
www.nytimes.com/2025/12/14/w...
#NoWords 🤮