The previous standard for studying the 2020 election merely said, “Examine issues related to the election of 2020 and its outcome.” The new version is more expansive: “Identify discrepancies in 2020 elections results by looking at graphs and other information, including the sudden halting of ballot-counting in select cities in key battleground states, the security risks of mail-in balloting, sudden batch dumps, an unforeseen record number of voters, and the unprecedented contradiction of ‘bellwether county’ trends.”

“Identify discrepancies” is very leading implying that they did exist.

Then everything that follows imply they happened, it lends credence by being discussed even if they didn’t happen.

I inherited a NAA-22lr. It literally fits in the palm of my hand.

They make a purple one now, which is cute: https://www.northamericanarms.com/shop/naa-22lr-orchid/

Even a .22 can kill someone.

It’s straight weaponization of the Justice department.

Ya know. With how much social security helps people. Im okay with a portion of my social security payments going to a couple fraudsters.

I’d almost love it if that ruling screwed over polices qualified immunity for their “official acts.”