Sam Asghari saw The US Congress' open letter to Britney

[Slayer]

Interesting...

[Z-dawg]

Im going to continue to ignore who invited Brit, because they’re just the worst, and will focus on how huge this could be for her and for the Conservatorship reform that this broken and corrupt system so desperately needs 💪🏻😎

[Andros]

So she’ll know about this 

but will she accept ? 

[dfffff]

Maybe that was Britney who saw it and liked that post 

[DuranDuran]

I think it's Britney who likes all posts related to her/FreeBritney movement, using Sam's insta

For example this screams Britney:

 

[Matou]

THIS IS IT

[s&m]

Come on Sam, make those veins come out 

[K3yN]

I have a question for the US fans. What do you think it’s better, accept the proposal despite who is signing the letter or deny it because of it? Is it really that bad? Sorry but I’m not really informed about US politics .

[Scrappy]

Let’s go!

[Matou]

6 minutes ago, Andros said:

So she’ll know about this 

but will she accept ? 

Why not ? It's exposure & she talked about how is it possible the state of CA let this happen to her. Imo it's a chance to change this. This will be MASSIVE !

No one will never say "oh it's Britney, how is it possible things she said are real?"

She wants people to listen and believe her, because I think she has more to say.

[Matou]

Just now, K3yN said:

I have a question for the US fans. What do you think it’s better, accept the proposal despite who is signing the letter or deny it because of it? Is it really that bad? Sorry but I’m not very informed about US politics .

Who cares who signs ? This is not about it but her to tell her story

[K3yN]

2 minutes ago, Matou said:

Who cares who signs ? This is not about it but her to tell her story

Yes, this is what I think too but I see so many people concerned about it 

[Matou]

4 minutes ago, K3yN said:

Yes, this is what I think too but I see so many people concerned about it 

Drama queens

[Lil-Jay]

Yasssssss

[ElenaB]

let’s ignore who’s inviting her and embrace the opportunity. i highly doubt she is going to actually do it but it’s nice to know someone close to her actually knows about this and will definitely tell her. 

[SlayOut]

1 hour ago, K3yN said:

I have a question for the US fans. What do you think it’s better, accept the proposal despite who is signing the letter or deny it because of it? Is it really that bad? Sorry but I’m not really informed about US politics .

I think that this meeting is all political theater for a few reasons:

1. The signatories of the letter are all embroiled in some form of scandal. Matt Gaetz for s** trafficking, Marjorie Taylor Greene has been stripped of all House committee assignments for promoting political violence against her colleagues, among her other incendiary/horrible comments, Andy Biggs has perpetuated the Big Lie (aka election was stolen, and Burgess Owens is new to Congress and doesn’t have much experience…
2. The letter does not indicate that she is speaking to a specific committee in the House of Representatives. And they do not have power to let her speak to the full House or Senate.
3. Due to Point 2, it’s unclear if her testimony will be public or even submitted to the Congressional record.
4. None of them are representatives in California, where her conservatorship is based. Therefore, they cannot change California law based on whatever Britney says. They could potential start legislation at the federal level, but I’m not sure if they’re on the appropriate committees to make that happen.
5. His letter is addressed to “Ms. Britney Spears” with her address being in “Beverley Hills, CA 90210.” She obviously does not live there.

In my opinion, it seems like they’re trying to capitalize off of Britney’s testimony for their own gain (they hate California because it’s run by Democrats, so why not drag the California court system using Britney’s story as proof) and to distract from their own political issues.

TLDR; Don’t fall for the grift.

[K3yN]

13 minutes ago, SlayOut said:

I think that this meeting is all political theater for a few reasons:

1. The signatories of the letter are all embroiled in some form of scandal. Matt Gaetz for s** trafficking, Marjorie Taylor Greene has been stripped of all House committee assignments for promoting political violence against her colleagues, among her other incendiary/horrible comments, Andy Biggs has perpetuated the Big Lie (aka election was stolen, and Burgess Owens is new to Congress and doesn’t have much experience…
2. The letter does not indicate that she is speaking to a specific committee in the House of Representatives. And they do not have power to let her speak to the full House or Senate.
3. Due to Point 2, it’s unclear if her testimony will be public or even submitted to the Congressional record.
4. None of them are representatives in California, where her conservatorship is based. Therefore, they cannot change California law based on whatever Britney says. They could potential start legislation at the federal level, but I’m not sure if they’re on the appropriate committees to make that happen.
5. His letter is addressed to “Ms. Britney Spears” with her address being in “Beverley Hills, CA 90210.” She obviously does not live there.

In my opinion, it seems like they’re trying to capitalize off of Britney’s testimony for their own gain (they hate California because it’s run by Democrats, so why not drag the California court system using Britney’s story as proof) and to distract from their own political issues.

Thanks for the detailed explanation!

[Vivianka]

💞

[toxiccriminal]

24 minutes ago, SlayOut said:

In my opinion, it seems like they’re trying to capitalize off of Britney’s testimony for their own gain (they hate California because it’s run by Democrats, so why not drag the California court system using Britney’s story as proof) and to distract from their own political issues.

TLDR; Don’t fall for the grift.

Omg my naive @ss didn't even think of that... Great explanation btw!

[IsraeliMatt]

1 hour ago, K3yN said:

I have a question for the US fans. What do you think it’s better, accept the proposal despite who is signing the letter or deny it because of it? Is it really that bad? Sorry but I’m not really informed about US politics .

I think she should go. Ultimately, all politicians provoke controversy or disagreements. Nevertheless, speaking to Congress could be an even bigger turning point for this situation than the recent court conversation.