As we navigate life without Pat 'Rebarcock.' Flood, who passed on Sept 21, 2025, we continue to remember the profound impact he had on our community. His support was a cornerstone for our forum. We encourage you to visit the memorial thread to share your memories and condolences. In honor of Pat’s love for storytelling, please contribute to his ‘Rebarcock tells a story’ thread. Your stories will help keep his spirit alive among us.
I'll circle back to you after workjust curious what your interpretation was.
just before chapter 62, it’s allocating money to a few different debts in the tens of thousands. And then 300 thousand to puget sound, owned by Hudson’s bay company. During this time HBC was owned by Rothschild‘s Inernational Financial Society.
Is goes right into titled “an act to provide a government for the District of Columbia”.
First, is that even constitutional? could the federal government vote to not recognize any other states government and “provide” them another one?
Second, the District of Columbia is 10 square miles, why would it need a new government with a new legislative body? I honestly don’t know, but weird that it encompasses the US capital.
Third, it states in the first paragraph of chapter 62, that the new government will be a corporation.
Fourth, it refers to its legislative powers being consistent with the Constitution of the United States. If you read the preamble, it clearly states that it is the Constitution for the United States of America. Well no big deal, right? Everything you look at now says constitution of the United States. Look up legal definition of “of” and the legal definition of “for“. There’s a huge difference.
Finally, you are correct regarding the constitution created by the people, it can’t be changed by congress, and it still applies to our country. It is the law of the land. But it doesn’t apply when you make any contract with the District of Columbia, and operate under their title, your birth certificate, SSN, Drivers license. You then fall under the constitution created by the US.
I‘m in healthcare, I know Jack shit about our legal system. But I know when something doesn’t look or smell right, and that if it doesn’t make sense, it ain’t what it looks like. Legal definitions of simple words, made things a lot more clear. Try doing ”person”.
So, they're going to turn all abandoned buildings into jails? Somewhere there is an exemption for Congress except for Congresswoman Boebert. This is really a wealth confiscation bill with fines that steep.I guess they are wanting to see a battle in our own land. From our congressman Jeff Duncan.
I've received many questions about HR 127, The Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act introduced by Congresswoman Jackson Lee.
First of all, this is one of those bills that's actually worse than what you've probably heard. It also proves that yes, there are plenty of politicians out there who want to take your guns.
Here's an overview of the legislation:
1) Establishes a firearms registration system within the ATF
2) Registered individuals must notify the ATF every time they loan their firearms
3) May not loan firearms to anyone under the age of 18, does not seem to have any exception for hunting or recreation
4) All firearms acquired before this legislation must also be registered
5) Creates a firearms and ammunition licensing system
6) Must be in possession in order to purchase or posses firearms or ammunition
7) Must be 21 years old to obtain a license
8) Must go through psychological evaluation
9) Must have firearms insurance, like car insurance, to cover damages resulting from the use of any firearm by the person
10) Need a separate license for Antique Firearm Display
11) Must describe how it will be displayed and demonstrate that it is stored in a manner as approved by the AG.
12) Need a separate license for “Military-Style Weapons”
13) Licenses may be suspended if individual is under indictment, not even charged, for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.
14) Must renew licenses every year for 5 years, then once every three years (this provision has already been ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, but the author doesn't seem to care).
15) Prohibits possession of certain ammunition, and based on my reading does not provide an exception for shotguns, so 12 and 20 gauge could be prohibited under this legislation.
16) Prohibits “large” capacity feeding devices (10 rounds)
17) Possessing a firearm or ammunition without a license and registration is a minimum fine of $75K and minimum sentence of 15 years
18) Transferring a firearm or ammunition to a person who is not licensed is a minimum fine of $50K and minimum sentence of 10 years
19) Selling or giving a firearm or ammunition without notifying the Attorney General is a minimum fine of $30K and minimum sentence of 5 years
20) Loaning a firearm or ammunition without notifying AG is a minimum fine of $5K
21) Transferring firearm to an individual under 18 is a minimum fine of $75K and minimum sentence of 15 years.
This bill is designed to scare people out of gun ownership. The penalties are so steep, and the rules so strict that the chances of a law abiding citizen accidentally breaking the law is high, and it goes without saying that this bill is a clear violation of the Second Amendment.
I will absolutely, 100% oppose this bill with every fiber of my being. I will be tracking this legislation closely, and if it moves an inch in Congress, I will be the first to sound the alarm.
My go to sipper has been Drambuie. Always have a bottle in my golf bag for anyone making a birdie or better.
My go to sipper has been Drambuie. Always have a bottle in my golf bag for anyone making a birdie or better.
I was in the Air Force stationed in Drambuie, off the Barbary Coast. I used to hang out at the Magumba bar. It was a rough place - the seediest dive on the wharf. Populated with every reject and cutthroat from Bombay to Calcutta. It's worse than Detroit. The mood in the place was downright ugly. You wouldn't walk in there unless you knew how to use your fists. You could count on a fight breaking out almost every night.
My group goes through a bottle a month usually. I'm really the only one who likes the stuff.So you’ve had the bottle for awhile.
I was in the Air Force stationed in Drambuie, off the Barbary Coast. I used to hang out at the Magumba bar. It was a rough place - the seediest dive on the wharf. Populated with every reject and cutthroat from Bombay to Calcutta. It's worse than Detroit. The mood in the place was downright ugly. You wouldn't walk in there unless you knew how to use your fists. You could count on a fight breaking out almost every night.
Perhaps you are correct, but CryPillow just has a better ring to it.BitethePillow.com seems more apropos.
Look up the YouTube video of her getting an examination by a doctor to prove that her breasts are real. It will make you wish that you paid more attention in school and became a doctor.Most important data point - martial status?
Just a reminder of whom I am asking about...
![]()
Goosemas is incredible every year. This year they outdid themselves. I can’t stop watching all of their shows. I have them on Nugs.net for in the car and snow blowing. They just released a 20m, 21 second version of Vampire Weekend’s “2021”. Spectacular.
My buddy tells me there will be election fraud shit coming out today.
They decode the Patrick Byrne messages about how Trump lost and how the good guys supposedly found a nuclear bomb at a neutron facility (I think) in Bethesda, MD.
What you should do is buy a bottle of scotch. Mix in about 1 part drambuie for 3-4 parts scotch, depending on how sweet you like it. It's called a Rusty Nail. Good stuff.My group goes through a bottle a month usually. I'm really the only one who likes the stuff.
Is your buddy Mike Lindell?My buddy tells me there will be election fraud shit coming out today.


I’m waiting on my red tumbler to ship. Pretty pretty excited about it.BTW @Croot_Overlord I'll order the tumbler for me, but the shirt is not exactly to my taste. However, my son likes it, but I'm not able to order it. I get an error message that the page is not available.
I suppose it's possible, but at this point, any action seems ulikely to me. I'm listening to the Michael Flynn interview with Doug Billings right now, and he said there is no plan at this point. He said the insurrection act was not signed, and that the military is not in control.So Ive stayed away from all sources of political info for the most part since Biden took office. Was pretty much out since a couple of days past the election to be honest. Needed to disengage.
That said I checked in with my good bro who swallowed the entire Q life whole. He was full in. I checked in to see if he still believed “its happening”.
His fervor has definitely ratcheted down but believes:
* Trumps executive order from 2018 regarding election fraud and foreign interference just kicked in recently
* The armed services have not communicated at all with Biden admin regarding classified info
* He believes the armed forces are going to start enforcing this EO and arrests will be coming
* Couldnt happen with Trump in office as it would look like a banana republic move
* New, secured election the most probably outcome
Sounds literally insane to me but is this any where near accurate? Is this anything close to what anons are saying? Are the anons still a thing or have they disappeared?
Great stuff. Post more.He shouldn’t testify if he is trying to limit his defense to the jurisdictional argument. (He is not a sitting President and cannot, therefore, be removed. The trial is a legal nullity).
If he was going to consider testifying it would be on the issues of his right to make the statements he made about the election, the veracity of those statements and whether those statements and his speech amounted to an insurrection. He might consider testifying on the condition that he be granted full discovery rights on election legitimacy and fraud issues to include enforceable subpoena power. Of course Senate Dems will never agree to that. If he can’t put on evidence corroborating his position that the election was illegitimate he shouldn’t testify.
I know President Trump likes to fight and has extreme confidence in his ability to persuade and win people over. His experience has justifiably given him that confidence but that doesn’t always work out. This would be like going to a knife fight in a straight jacket.
The letter requesting his appearance is a PR stunt. If they were serious they would have reached out to his attorneys.
TLDR: No he shouldn’t appear.