Home / Be The Change / 10 Sinister State Moves, Including Killing Protesters, Prove 1st Amendment is Dying

10 Sinister State Moves, Including Killing Protesters, Prove 1st Amendment is Dying

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

President Donald Trump’s first week in office has seen a tumultuous mix of sweeping executive actions peppered with a few pleasant surprises; but if one thing proves true — as with the first term of any new president — there will be cause for someone to protest something.

Indeed, before Trump even took the oath of office, protesters descended on Washington, D.C. — marching en masse down the middle of typically congested roadways, chanting, screaming, and generally causing the sort of disruptions demonstrators seek in order to draw attention to a cause.

But that most basic right — to air one’s grievances to elected leaders in a public forum, often through disruption — might soon be a risky endeavor in at least ten states, as protest is gradually being criminalized in rather astonishing ways.

Lawmakers from North Dakota and Minnesota, to Virginia and the state of Washington, have proposed or passed legislation levying hefty penalties against anyone who dares to exercise the basic right to protest against — ironically enough — legislation and policy found to be untenable.

At the rate such laws have rapidly come to fruition, even if legislators in your state have yet to propose obstacles to protesting, the following list should serve as a guide for potential future strictures regarding your right to speak out.


North Dakota lawmakers have proposed arguably the most crushing measures against protesters — seemingly specifically targeting water protectors opposing construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline.

Under House Bill 1203, drivers would be permitted to run down protesters — literally — so long as they claim they didn’t intend to do so. As the proposed bill states,

“Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a driver of a motor vehicle who unintentionally causes injury or death to an individual obstructing vehicular traffic on a public road, street, or highway, is not guilty of an offense.”

In other words, if a protester in a roadway were to be struck by a vehicle and killed, the driver would not be charged with a crime if they claimed, for example, accidentally hitting the accelerator instead of the brakes.

House Majority Leader Al Carlson proffered a second bill criminalizing wearing masks to protests; and, though the legislation would allow exceptions for harsh weather conditions and holidays wear face coverings are traditional, it’s an open question how police might interpret those exemptions.

“I would be the first to defend your right of free speech and freedom of assembly,” Carlson told a state legislative committee hearing on Tuesday of House Bill 1304, according to the Billings Gazette. “I’m always concerned when there’s a reason that, I believe, may be used to hide your identity when you’re creating some kind of disturbance.”

Should the legislation pass, masks would not be permitted at demonstrations on public property or roadways — nor on private property, unless the owner gives explicit, written consent.


READ MORE:  VIDEO: Cyclist Unlawfully Accosted & Charged by a Tyrant Cop -- But He Fought Back and Won!

Missouri legislators are also hoping to criminalize mask-wearing at protests in a bill that would make intentional concealment of one’s “identity by the means of a robe, mask, or other disguise” at any gathering deemed an “unlawful assembly” punishable as a Class A misdemeanor — with a penalty of up to one full year behind bars.


As alarming as it might be that a mask could land you in jail in Missouri or that North Dakota drivers can run down protesters without facing charges, Minnesota lawmakers took the criminalization of demonstrations in an equally shocking but wholly different direction — the wallet.

Minnesotans whose protests force police to intervene would be financially liable for the cost of the intervention should Rep. Nick Zerwas’ legislation by written into law.

As the Star Tribune reports, a committee meeting on Tuesday “ended abruptly after a House panel passed Zerwas’ proposed legislation that would give cities authority to charge protesters for police services if the demonstrators are convicted of illegal assembly or public nuisance. The measure would also give cities the option of suing convicted protesters to recoup expenses from policing the demonstration.”

Furious residents disrupted that meeting, rightly questioning the measure’s constitutionality and what the bill would mean for future ability to demonstrate against acts of police violence, as in the shooting death of Philando Castile in 2016 — or in any instance where complaint falls on deaf ears and public assembly stands as the only option.

Zerwas and the bill’s supporters, however, side with Minnesotans who resent large demonstrations, and say the financial onus of policing protests should fall on those participating.

“I have an entire constituency that feels as though protesters believe that their rights are more important than everyone else’s,” Zerwas explained in an interview cited by the Guardian. “Well, there is a cost to that. Rosa Parks sat in the front of the bus. She didn’t get out and lay down in front of the bus.”

He added, “The meters are running and the taxpayers are holding the bag.”

And as the Intercept reports, “In addition to the highway-protesting bill, Minnesota lawmakers also proposed a separate piece of legislation that greatly increases penalties for nonviolent cases involving ‘obstructing the legal process.’ Under the bill’s language, nonviolent obstruction of authorities would carry ‘imprisonment of not less than 12 months’ and a fine of up to $10,000.”


Where North Dakota legislators want to permit, in essence, vehicular homicide to curb the blockage of roadways, and Minnesota lawmakers seek to make such protests too costly, politicians in Iowa would rather throw demonstrators who block highways in jail for five years.

Senator Jake Chapman proposed Senate File 111 in response to an incident in November in which some 100 protesters blocked Interstate Highway 80 and brought eastbound traffic to a standstill for around 30 minutes — much to the consternation of drivers caught in the unexpected jam.

“Look, we have the right to protest. No one disputes that,” the lawmaker explained in defense of his controversial bill, which, incidentally, isn’t without opposition. “We encourage that. But there is an appropriate time and an appropriate place to do so. Interstates are not one of those places. That is what this bill does. It aims to stop that.”

As COO of Midwest Ambulance Service, Chapman claims to be concerned such spontaneous highway blockages obstruct access for emergency services, as well as free commerce and travel.

If passed, Chapman’s law “would apply to people blocking the travel portion of Iowa highways with speeds posted at 55 mph or higher. Violators could be charged with a Class D felony, which includes a sentence of prison time and a fine of at least $750 and up to $7,500,” the Des Moines Register reports.


READ MORE:  Washington Lawmaker Proposes Bill To Charge Protesters With "Economic Terrorism"

In line with aforementioned proposals, Indiana State Senator Jim Tomes introduced the Block Traffic and You Die bill — or, at least, that’s how opponents are characterizing the Hoosier State’s anti-protest legislation.

Senate Bill 285 would require public officials to dispatch all available law enforcement to clear roadways — using “any means necessary” — if at least 10 protesters have attempted to obstruct traffic without first obtaining a permit.

Although indeed vague, it is the ‘any means necessary’ portion of Tomes’ proposed law that worries activists who have traditionally worked with police. Often officers will escort marchers in roadways, blocking cross traffic for them to pass, ensuring both protesters and drivers remain safe. Thus, opponents of the legislation find it frivolous and curiously worded — and far too open to interpretation.

And there are still more proposed laws restricting the constitutional right to protest.


“In Colorado,” the Intercept reports, “Republican state Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg has introduced a bill that would greatly increase penalties for environmental protesters. Under the proposed law, obstructing or tampering with oil and gas equipment would be reclassified from a misdemeanor to a ‘class 6’ felony, a category of crime that reportedly can be punished by up to 18 months behind bars and a fine of up to $100,000.”


Washington State Senator Doug Ericksen proposed creating a new crime to facilitate charging protesters with a felonies for blocking roads and other assorted activities — he hopes to deem them “economic terrorists.”

Ericksen seeks to allow felony prosecution “of those who intentionally break the law in an attempt to intimidate or coerce private citizens or the government by obstructing economic activity.” However, the broad brush language in his proposed legislation deeply concerns civil and constitutional rights advocates, like Doug Honig of the Washington ACLU, who noted in a statement quoted by Q13 FOX,

“The statement throws out a lot of broad rhetoric, and we’ll need to see an actual bill.  But we’re already concerned that some of its loose terms  appear to be targeting  civil disobedience as ‘terrorism.’  That’s the kind of excessive approach to peaceful protest that our country and state do not need.

“Let’s keep in mind that civil rights protesters who sat down at lunch counters could be seen as ‘disrupting business’ and ‘obstructing economic activity,’ and their courageous actions were opposed by segregationists as trying to ‘coerce business and government.’”

READ MORE:  Neil Young Joins Water Protectors at Standing Rock as Obama Admin Mulls Approving Pipeline

Lawmakers in two states have taken a more unusual route to combat protests.


North Carolina Senator Dan Bishop wants to provide controversial Governor Pat McCrory — and incidentally any politician — an official safe space away from hecklers who might approach to, well, scream unpleasant words.

Bishop, reports the News & Observer, decided verbal criticism of politicians was worthy of legal protection after witnessing McCrory being followed and yelled at over inaugural weekend in Washington, D.C. Should the proposed legislation pass, it would thus be “a crime to threaten, intimidate, or retaliate against a present or former North Carolina official in the course of, or on account of, the performance of his or her duties.”


Rather than worrying about political or environmental protesters, Michigan lawmakers turned their attention to union workers with two proposed pieces of legislation aimed to sharply curtail the right to picket for grievances such as pay or safety conditions.

“One bill would increase fines against picketers to $1,000 per person per day of a picket and $10,000 per day for an organization or union involved in the picket that is deemed to be an illegal mass picket,” the Detroit Free Press reported last month.

“The other would repeal a law that requires employers to include information about an ongoing strike when they advertise to hire employees who will replace existing, but striking employees at a company.”


Only in Virginia did a lone lawmaker stand in opposition to their party’s proposed legislative crackdown on protest, as the Daily Press reports,

“Senate Bill 1055 would have increased penalties for failing to disperse when police declare an unlawful assembly, upping a misdemeanor that brings only a fine now to one with potential jail time. It was one of four bills on protest punishments filed this session by state Sen. Richard Stuart, R-Montross, and the last of the four to die.”

* * *

All told, this collection of anti-protest legislation constitutes an overarching attempt to quash the right of the people to demonstrate when the government errs against them — and the result will only increase near unbearable police state conditions already choking out First Amendment protections in the United States.

With division at unprecedented levels over politics, police violence, and, really, any nameable issue, such extraneous laws can only be attempting one thing.

As Lee Rowland, a senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union, warned in a statement to the Intercept,

“This trend of anti-protest legislation dressed up as ‘obstruction’ bills is deeply troubling. A law that would allow the state to charge a protester $10,000 for stepping in the wrong place, or encourage a driver to get away with manslaughter because the victim was protesting, is about one thing: chilling protest.”

  • The Cat’s Vagina

    But, hey… at least Hillary didn’t win!

  • Civil disobedience is not constitutional. It is not by definition a “peaceful” assembly. It is already illegal for adults to wear masks in public assemblies via anti kkk laws. It is already illegal to block a roadway or public thoroughfare without a parade permit. If you stand in the middle of the freeway and you get run over that’s already your liability, not the drivers. A group of black guys sitting at a lunch counter waiting to place orders are not impeding commerce, they are engaged in commerce. Only if they block the cafe entrance is there any hint of analogy.

    • Anonymous

      “It is already illegal for adults to wear masks in public assemblies via anti kkk laws.” No it is not. If someones religion requires it, then it is legal regardless.

    • henrybowmanaz

      Civil disobedience is the commission of illegal acts *by definition.* If what you’re doing is legal, it’s merely protest — not disobedience.

    • Carey Allison

      People should not be at risk for high-speed collisions with motor vehicles, as they may be physically unable to avoid an approaching vehicle moving at high speed. On the other hand, bulldozers move quite slowly and anybody who is run over by a bulldozer chose to stand it its way. If protesters are illegally blocking construction equipment such as a bulldozer or trackhoe, I’m OK with putting it in gear and moving – either past the protesters who step aside, or over those who don’t.

  • Oh, this is nothing compared to what is coming, not that there is much “freedom” left in America.

    Wake up stupid!

  • Blaine

    Would the Missouri law re covering faces apply to LE as well? And why not?

    Bottom line there are already laws in place to charge protesters for civil disobedience. Changing the law to apply punishments in a group setting that far outstrip the same offense if done as an individual might very well be unconstitutional.

    • Anonymous

      “Would the Missouri law re covering faces apply to LE as well? And why not?” Of course not! They are above the law. Just like in CA if YOU are driving while holding a mobile phone, it’s a criminal act. If a cop does it, it is ok.

  • tz1

    abridging the freedom of speech,
    But you dont’ want to speak, you want to smash things, hit people, and block traffic.
    or the
    right of the people peaceably to assemble

    What part of “peaceably” don’t you understand. Creating a nuisance isn’t peaceably assembling.
    and to petition the
    Government for a redress of grievances.

    I’ve seen no petitions, documents, or attempts to petition the government, just to cause trouble.

    When you block roads and cause traffic jams, you are blocking fire trucks and ambulances but you don’t care if someone is killed in a fire or their house burns down or someone dies because they couldn’t get to the ER before they died. You aren’t just causing a nuisance, you are threatening the lives of people.

    Sometimes people here speak of voluntarism and the Non-Aggression principle. Well, your protests aren’t hurting just “government”, they are hurting other people who might even be sympathetic but have to bear the costs of your virtue signalling.

    a crime to threaten, intimidate, or retaliate That is incitement, not covered by the first amendment.

    “Let’s keep in mind that civil rights protesters who sat down at lunch counters could be seen as ‘disrupting
    business’ and ‘obstructing economic activity,’ and their courageous actions were opposed by segregationists as trying to ‘coerce business and government.’”

    That’s right – they broke the law and it wasn’t covered by the first amendment.
    But they had courage and were willing to go to jail for breaking the law, not whine about how nasty and unfair it was that they were arrested for breaking the law.

    Today “protestors” get arrested, and it’s whine whine whine whine whine even if they are released immediately, unlike the Bundys and LeVoy Tillicum.

    • Wendy Colby

      LeVoy Finnicum may he rest in peace, But I agree 10000%.

  • David McElroy

    Peaceful protests and mild civil disobedience should not be stifled by law. America was born in protests, often even violent protests. But destroying property, hurting people, and blocking major thoroughfares (which will impede emergency vehicles like ambulances as well as people with appointments) do draw the ire and legal responses this article speaks of. Government should not isolate itself from protesters, as often it is the gov’t that people are protesting. Gov’t officials should not preclude or punish peaceful protests on gov’t property, as that would alleviate much of the problems associated with protests. Police protection’s always abundant on those gov’t campuses, so there should be no need for billing protesters for police “services”.

    • Anonymous

      “But destroying property…do draw the ire and legal responses this article speaks of.” Such as the Boston Tea Party?

  • Seth Tyrssen

    Anyone actually READ the so-called “Patriot Acts?” They, and an edict from King George Bush II, destroyed the last vestiges of actual freedom some time ago.

  • buy A judge key to cover up

    free dumb

  • buy A judge key to cover up

    nationwide assembling of taxpayer funded labor union rioters wearing disguises,committing acts of terrorism

  • buy A judge key to cover up

    make a cup of coffee and read this.

    harry reid chooses Gloria Navarro for federal judge bench .


    Fed Judge Gloria Navarro tries to hide misdeeds of BLM agents in Bundy Ranch …


    – Feds try to hide misdeeds of BLM agents in Bundy Ranch Standoff

    trial … Nevada District Court Judge Gloria Navarro – Defends Harry

    Reid by blocking

    Sep 11, 2014 – .. Nevada Senator Richard Bryan – Praises UNLV Boyd School of Law Judge Gloria Navarro

    Cliven Bundy Sues President Obama, Sen. Harry Reid and Judge Gloria Navarro …

    http://www.lawyerherald.com/…/cliven-bundy-sues-president-obama-sen-harry-reid-judge-…May 11, 2016 –

    Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy sues… Harry Reid and Judge Gloria Navarro Over Plot to Steal his Land

    Clinton appointed judge stops at nothing to protect corruption

    Clinton-appointed judge dismisses case … –


    11, 2015 – Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation

    (15-cv-80388 S.D. Fla), a federal judge appointed to the bench by

    President Bill Clinton, coincidentally continually gets cases involving



    the high cost of corruption is always funded by the taxpayer.

    under color of law…

    corruption requires the power of law enforcement agencies and courts to also break the law .

    ..in order to maintain their cover up.

    ..the govt insiders never go without.

    $wampland D.C.

    dont trust the tell-lie-vision.

    .the FBI is only protecting it’s own butt.

    another taxpayer funded cover up underway.


    the corrupt FBI agents are tied to harry reid.

    harry reid trying to save his own butt

    by bringing in handpicked FBI agents with the election of corrupt catherine cortez masto to fill dirty harry senate seat .

    Catherine .. who’s husband is FBI agent masto ..

    along with FBI — Laura A. Bucheit

    who harry reid appointed and has been grooming for years.

    this country does not need any more taxpayer funded criminals in law enforcement.

    follow the money.

    jason chaffettz … mormon

    harry reid ….mormon

    how deep is the mormon clinton land grab-rabbit hole going to go ??


    …..Clinton dealing in uranium acquired in BLM land grabs ?

    a BLM group which includes harry reid and clinton have come up with a very complex scam.

    it uses the fbi and nevada city council and county commissioners

    who racketeer together in order to take land from people to sell to foreign

    investors by making it look like the ranch owners have broken the law

    when they have not.

    harry reid has a land grab partner named richard bryan who was a Nevada

    senator. richard bryan ran a lawfirm in nevada called lionel sawyer collins.

    richard bryan sold bundy’s land to the chinese.

    bryan took millions of dollars from Chinese solar clients who

    secretly purchased bundy’s land before the land grab attempt.

    reid and bryan sold the land because the Chinese needed it for minerals to make solar panels .

    BUT….the land grab backfired .. it did not go as reid and bryan planned.

    ..reid and bryan had local county commissioners de-value bundy’s land at only

    $3.4 million when bundy ranch is worth around $50 million .

    so…… through reid orchestrated federal mumbo jumbo and his internal govt agency trickery.

    reid tried to take the bundy land after reid and bryan pocketed the Chinese money.

    but blm was not able to evict bundy…….


    because reid and bryan were unable to deliver on the bundy land sold to chinese.

    reid/bryan hatched a plan to file bankruptcy at lionel sawyer collins to prevent having to give the

    chinese back their millions in bundy land purchase money….

    cover up .

    bryan allowed the Lionel sawyer Collins law firm to file for bankruptcy

    and richard bryan relocated quietly to another lawfirm

    …………eventually the oregon land grab will reveal reid and bryan handle mineral deals

    for hilary clinton’s daughter’s husband……………

    ..chelsea’s husband who has Russian clients who deal in buying BLM acquired land plentiful in earth minerals.


    BLM’s bundy ranch land grab

    was attempted because reid and senator richard bryan failed to acquire bundy land for chinese solar investors .

    after richard bryan’s law firm went bankrupt because they could not pay

    back the retainer to the Chinese solar clients who did not get bundy land .

    the bundy land grab scam organized by reid and his mormons

    has not even been fully exposed yet.



    would harry reid be part of a scam. ?

    harry reid could run this out of a payday loan business’ in nevada to launder money.

    a hard to trace bribe scam,

    rawle’s pay day loan business

    is where harry reid laundered his previous million dollar bribe through.

    who would ever find out ?


    emails surface exposing reid accepting bribes.

    reid bribe was initially $2 million dollars.

    Swallow wanted $2 million to enlist Harry Reid’s help to block online gaming investigation .

    .copies of emails show Swallow worked to arrange meetings between Johnson and top Utah officeholders.

    Then, with the FTC investigation continuing, Johnson said Swallow

    suggested Harry Reid could make all the problems with regulators go away — for a


    “I said, ‘OK, what do I need to do?’

    He’s like,………. ‘OK, it costs money,’

    ” Johnson said, Swallow was adamant he make a deal.

    “he told me, he has a connection with Harry Reid,’ ” Johnson said.

    He said Swallow wanted $2 million to enlist Reid’s help.

    But he did not have the money, Johnson

    said, so they eventually agreed on $300,000 upfront and $300,000 later.

    Swallow put Johnson in contact with Rawle, whose company has

    operations in Nevada. Rawle had given generously to Swallow’s failed

    congressional bids and hired Swallow as Check City’s lobbyist and

    in-house legal counsel, a position Swallow held until he became chief

    deputy attorney general in December 2009.

    Rawle, died of cancer before federal investigators could question him

    On Sept. 29, 2010, Swallow sent an email to Johnson with the subject line “Mtg. with Harry Reid’s .”

    ” Traveling to LV tomorrow and will be able to meet with Reid’s contact,

    who he has a very good relationship with. He needs a

    brief narrative of what is going on and what you want to happen….I don’t know the cost, but it probably won’t be cheap.”…

    eric holder blocked the american people from learning harry reid took a million bribe.FBI

    agents working alongside Utah state prosecutors in a wide-ranging

    bribery corruption investigation have uncovered wrongdoing by two

    of the U.S. Senate’s most prominent Mormon figures — Majority Leader

    Harry Reid and rising Republican Sen. Mike Lee — but Eric Holder and the Justice

    Department has thwarted their bid to launch a full federal



    who got the biggest kickback ?

    Harry Reid personally bypassed DHS terrorism laws on behalf of son’s casino project

    Senate Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid took an intense interest in

    pushing through visas for dozens of shady Asian investors for a Las

    Vegas casino represented by his son, Rory Reid, documents and reports


    The investors, who were flagged under terrorists guidelines for “suspicious financial

    activity,” had initially been denied visas by the Department of Homeland

    Security in a process that does not allow for appeals.

    In a Dec. 5, 2012 email to officials at the Department of Homeland

    Security obtained by The Washington Times, U.S. Citizenship and

    Immigration Services (USCIS) Legislative Affairs official Miguel

    Rodriguez wrote, “This one is going to be a major headache for us

    all because Sen. Reid’s office/staff is pushing hard and I just had a

    long yelling match on the phone.”

    The investors were renovating the SLS Hotel — which was

    once the Sahara. SLS is represented by Sen. Reid’s son, Rory Reid, who


    at the law firm Lionel, Sawyer & Collins. In their 2012 “Year in

    Review,” the Nevada firm hyped “Lionel Sawyer & Collins” benefits

    from working with Harry Reid .

    “Rory Reid’s previous experience as chairman of the Clark County

    Commission is put to good use assisting with general legal advice for

    the law firm and helps circumvent the maze of regulations

    required to access economic incentives offered on the state and local

    levels,” the article, called “Redeveloping a Classic Strip Property,” continued.


    questioned on Sen. Reid’s intervention on behalf of SLS investors, Sen.

    Reid spokeswoman Kristen Orthman told Ralston Reports —

    where Rory’s connection was first reported — that “The SLS project

    is none of your business”

    “That is the calculus in Sen. Reid’s support of the project,” Orthman continued.

    “We have a long-standing office policy that strictly bars any member of

    the staff’s family or the Senator’s family from lobbying our office on

    behalf of their clients. That policy applies in this case.”

    Initial attempts by Sen. Reid’s office to expedite the visa requests

    were denied on Dec. 17, 2012, prompting the majority leader to

    personally call Obama who contacted USCIS Director Alejandro Mayorkas.

    “Within a few short weeks of Mr. Reid’s personal DHS intervention, the

    decision not to issue the visas was reversed, allowing the hotel to


    major funding from JP Morgan Chase,” the Times reports.Sen. Reid “has

    supported Lionel Sawyer & Collins a spokeswoman for the senator told

    the media


    October , 2010

    Reid terrorist ties cover up

    “An aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

    repeatedly lied to federal immigration and FBI agents and submitted

    false federal documents to the Department of Homeland Security to cover

    up her illegal seven-year marriage to a Lebanese national who was the

    subject of an Oklahoma City Joint Terror Task Force investigation.”

    what is odd is that no criminal terrorist charges are brought against

    rory for his SLS clients or the long history of the lionel sawyer

    collins lawfirm facing the same terrorist charges.

    for some convenient reason LAST MONTH the law firm was allowed to skate

    around the feds and quietly just vanish out of sight and relocate to


    while harry reid (taxpayers stuck funding it ) handled the DHS terrorist

    scandal fall out & cover up here in nevada.


    October , 2010

    Reid terrorist ties cover up

    “An aide to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid

    repeatedly lied to federal immigration and FBI agents and submitted

    false federal documents to the Department of Homeland Security to cover

    up her illegal seven-year marriage to a Lebanese national who was the

    subject of an Oklahoma City Joint Terror Task Force investigation.”



    the public will learn harry reid used the FBI to block investigations

    into his well organized multi billion dollar corruption schemes which

    took place within the country known as deseret.

    harry reid used his

    ties to the blm as well as his long time friend and previous nevada

    senator richard bryan who both have now gone into the business of

    selling land they do not own to Chinese corporations who need raw

    materials to build solar and electric car batteries.

    harry reid and richard bryan don’t realize the public is not as dumb as they think.

    and the tax exempt corporation known as the mormons who operate the legal system within deseret will also be exposed .

    your govt reminds you…

    ..when you see something say something