• Rottcodd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      I did read the text, and at the time I posted that response, it included an entire section in which the judge said that it had to be a certain fact that he engaged in insurrection and it was not yet an established fact and not within her authority to establish it as a fact - that that was up to the appropriate courts to decode.

      And all of that has apparently since been removed from the article.

      Which is… odd, to say the least.