It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
It is now written in law illegal for a woman to become prevented from being sworn into office as a President of the United States of America simply because she is female, and all conditions of law must be enforced as prejudice making it impossible to be entered into Judicial Court Federal and State without prejudice. Who is abusing a women’s United States Constitutional Rights other than other women when all men are no longer to be held as equal by their creator. The legal creator being "President. “The two sides of this historically long legal argument are.
The two sides of this historically long legal argument are. The common defense is a women is Presadera of the United States of America as these states of the union are made by American Consitutional Right. Forever bound in truth, whole truth and nothing but truth.
Side 1. By changing the legal precedent of what is to be describing a President by law, and a Constitutional Amendment Ratified that was written as law and not Constitutional right. The illegal grievance is to be nullified always by alibi. Regardless of the unknown public understanding of the crime that is committed (Much like a person may argue self-defense for a crime involving lethal force.)
Side 2. Changing the assigned name of a women who is to be held by the republic in a contest assured to human safety and tranquility align all such candidates as Presadera as to limit criminal acts of perjury by the voter. As the original conditions brough across from English Parliament of land ownership be only a legal right of men. Was failing a new much higher standard of law United States Constitutional Right.
In whole truth there is only one choice in understanding what had made a President of the United States of America a President it was not at one time the identical condition of law which placed them in the executive chair of the oval office.
Debra AI Prediction
Post Argument Now Debate Details +