3 ms·

Yeah no. We didn't choose this war; I'm banging no drum. Thanks for the baseless character assassination. You may want to read this sites terms of service, if t

Yeah no. We didn't choose this war; I'm banging no drum. Thanks for the baseless character assassination. You may want to read this sites terms of service, if they matter so much. This is simply a billionaire taking international issues into their own hands, in favor of their preferred foreign government. Treating with a foreign government as a civilian (not a member of the State department) is actually treasonable. Go read your law again.

lenkite 3y ago
> Treating with a foreign government as a civilian (not a member of the State department) is actually treasonable. Go read your law again. Of-course you are banging the drums of war - you are terming the CEO of a commercial civil company denying the extension of his platform for the purposes of war as treasonous. There is no character assasination here. It is a very simple statement of fact. You are also making the classical strawman argument. He did not make any treaty with a foreign government. He instead refused a foreign government the extension of his commercial civil service against another sovereign government for the purpose of War. He protected his business - which is lawful by his rights. As I said dude - call out the law where the CEO of a commercial company cannot do this. Call out the declaration of war made by Congress or the President. Without either, calling it treasonous only makes it treasonous in your febrile imagination.