Before I read the article I assumed she was proud of bomb threats against her by libs she pissed off... but no. She is proud she inspired her followers to make bomb threats. What a psycho.
@kbin.social
Your average Indian citizen is probably not as tuned in to the conflict as people in Western nations. Poor men in rural areas are pitched high wages (to them) for some easy work like building barracks away from the frontline. The same thing was happening in Cuba. Then once they arrived in Ukraine they were put in combat roles.
Yeah I don't understand why they would go to the hospital and then not accept the treatment. For a diagnosis? How can they trust the diagnosis if they don't trust the treatment?
Based on the picture, he was definitely a collector. There are multiple collector's items in there. That said, he could be a black market dealer who also purchased collector's items for himself when he came across them. Also, does California not have more restrictive laws regarding Suppressors, short barreled rifles, and fully automatic machine guns? I thought they had laws regulating magazines to 10 rounds?
Article confirms that machine guns are illegal in California. He had multiple World War 1 era machine guns and other pieces that could be in museums. This guy should have just moved to a neighboring state. He had the money.
I would try soap and water and a brush. The rubber itself looks to be in rough shape so if you care enough to clean them, I would just replace them. You can even upgrade the wheels while you're at it.
They didn't actually lie under oath. They say that the ruling is precedent and settled law. They do not say that they would not overturn precedent.
And they will always argue that you do not want a justice that is not willing to overturn pass precedents. If not for overturning past precedents, segregation, etc. would still be legal.
I think its expected for a conservative to make bad-faith arguments. In principle I agree that since justices are not supposed to be partisan politicians should not be asking how the justice would rule on a future case. But it is bullshit that the nominee doesn't have to give real answers to their thoughts on past cases.
Could be 2 people shooting at each other. Could be 1 shooter and 1 "good guy" with a gun trying to stop the shooter. Could be 2 shooter working together. Could be loud sound mistaken for gunfire and then 2 "good guys" try to save the day and shoot at each other.
In my opinion these are in order of most to least likely.
thanks for using Leebra!
go to feed...