• 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.