It sounds like Maricopa County has yet to be counted yet (?), so there's a chance that Trump can still turn AZ, from what I understand. The man behind the curtain, Arnon Mishkin, treats the suggestion with disdain, but. . . it's a possibility.

Ah ok, good to know. Thanks!

Why such hostility for Discord?

It's a pretty good system, all-in-all.

I think, yes, all things being equal, if AZ stays for Biden and Trump picks up PA, NV, NC, and GA, Trump wins by a hair

if nothing else, this is the biggest graphic this entire stream

Now THAT is sketchy.

like

What the HECK is that?

lol

"hey, guys, we just found 150,000 votes ONLY for Biden lying around."

rofl

I think the graphic was created based on the numbers reported

so

that's all they had to go on

but yea, that is weird

2 separate states

i guess guys entering numbers into an Excel table isn't the way to go

Who knew?

still possible for Biden so squeak it out

gotta hope that some kind of miracle happens in AZ and NV

There have been rumors flying around about postal workers receiving a "directive" (from whom?) that they are to round up every ballot that they can find (in mailboxes, collection boxes, etc) , sort them to a special bin, collect them in express mail bags, and stamp them with Nov 3rd postmarks

but

who knows the validity of this

it's a Project Veritas investigation with an anonymous source in USPS

so, take that for whatever it's worth

still a bunch of votes left to be counted in the border counties

He is at 264 counting WI and MI

according to Fox, Trump's lead in Georgia is getting narrower and narrower

but idk anymore lol

yea it's pretty sad whatwe have seen here

the thing with the "error" in Wisconsin or Michigan (can't remember) as a result of some guy putting an extra 0 into an Excel spreadsheet

like

how does this even happen in the U.S in 2020?

lol

https://i.imgur.com/oS6nojd.jpg

Where would you move?

When you take a look around, we are pretty much the only center-right developed nation left

no good alternatives

Anyone else watch the video of his last hearing? I was confused as to why Huber's father and Grosskreutz were even there and their statements solicited by the court commissioner

A Kenosha reporter answered my question on Twitter - this year, the state of Wisconsin passed a constitutional amendment by ballot initiative called Marcy's Law which added a host of "victims rights" during court process

which seems...kinda odd to me, since a trial is about the State vs the Defendant, but, ok. One of those rights is that victims can speak at any and every hearing.

Of course, the logic is somewhat flawed because this law stacks the deck against the defendant by insisting that there are "Victims" and, therefore, a crime must have occurred against them because they are "Victims"

all of this before the defendant has had a chance to even make a statement about their innocence

oh woops i wrote Michigan, haha

I meant Wisconsin. 🙂

thanks for picking that up

as a New Yorker, I get those two states confused all the time. I'll edit my post

This Marcy's Law has, apparently, been pushed across the country to other states by a billionaire in California

as in, it's not a homegrown initiative to amend the Constitution, just cookie-cutter text adopted by the states

oh I agree. Victim Impact Statements are pretty standard at the sentencing stage.

Marcy's Law, specifically, gives "victims" the right to speak at ANY hearing....even, apparently, a pre-trial hearing like this to set bail

Hence i think that while some parts of the law are practical and easy to implement, parts of the law like this are wholly unnecessary and, perhaps, even unconstitutional with respect to he 6th Amendment

the*

I place "victims" in quotes because, well, it treats these parties as victims before it has been established that there are victims. The idea that there can be a victim before the defense has had a chance to make a case seems ethically questionable to me, but, hey.

hm

I'm not a mathematician, so I don't really understand that

I got a 450 on quantitative reasoning in my SATs

lol

https://www.marsyslaw.us/what_is_marsys_law

"To be notified of specific public proceedings throughout the criminal justice process** and to be present and heard during those proceedings"**

emphasis added

and sorry it's Marsy's Law, not Marcy's Law

TL;DR: A billionaire in California started this organization after his sister was killed and the family encountered her killer in a grocery store a week later and weren't notified by the court that he was out on bail.

Some aspects of the law seem pretty reasonable, like notifying alleged victims after an alleged defendant is released on bail. I don't see any issue with that

But, as per usual with these things, the comprehensive list of points in this cookie-cutter amendment to states' constitutions includes too much.

including giving alleged victims the right to "be heard" at every proceeding

My main morale argument is against the declaration of victimhood before a trial has even begun. On principle I just don't think that this ensures a fair trial.

I'm not an expert in statistics by any means (I'm a Health Policy graduate, not Epidemiology), but, generally, just because a variable doesn't follow a defined distribution (normal or otherwise) doesn't mean that there's something nefarious going on.

right

like having a 95% confidence interval

but, that's getting into another topic

just that the probability is 5% or w/e that it deviates?

ok, got ya

the language of this organization and in the cookie-cutter amendments adopted by states doesn't use the term "alleged"

just declares them victims. so that's problematic

over/under on how long the Pennsylvania lawsuit will take to get to the supreme court?

the mail-in ballot lawsuit, that is

not sure if it's enough at this point

no recount in the history of the country has changed the vote in a state by more than 1 percentage point

Rule #1: Do not talk to the police

EVER

That was Kyle's first mistake, not immediately requesting a lawyer

I understand that emotions run high and he just wanted to explain himself, but you never...ever...under any circumstances...talk to the police.

all due respect to the venerable Mr. Ayoob...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE

Yea, he wasn't.

But when you're on the other end of the system, well

you have to protect yoursellf

The reasoning is that anything you say can be used against you. It can never be used FOR you, but it can be used against you. And even if you are absolutely positively telling the truth, there is no way that you can know that you haven't said anything that can be used to implicate you in something

That may be, but that is far and away not similar to what we are talking about here

which is being in an interrogation room with a police officer

Even then, how does that help you?

The police would have to build a case against you

doesn't matter what you know. it matters what you can prove

how does the LEO know that the guy's firearm in his buddy's pocket is the guy's firearm anyway?

i just don't see that helping you

MAYBE it can

but...

either way, the likelihood that speaking to a police officer about your guilt/innocence in a manner that will actually help you is astronomically low compared to the likelihood that it will help them build a case agaisnt you