Regarding the court application for an injunction to prevent the Dominion machines being wiped in PA, if there are reasonable grounds for election fraud (a crime) having been committed (there is ample evidence on the record) then wiping the machines is "DESTROYING EVIDENCE OF SERIOUS CRIME" . . . Should the machines be seized by the Police (or even Military in a state of emergency)?????

When was a "State of Emergency" declared by POTUS ?

if there is a State of Emergency in force, is it only valid for a particular purpose, or useful for and threat to mational security ? ?

*any

is there any evidence of a pandemic ? ? ?

but regardless of the "pandemic", election results being tabulated in Germany by Venesuelan machines which were designed by Chavez specifically to defraud election results, . . . . a threat to National Security ?

lol, they tried 😉

(sorry, replied to the wrong comment)

I thought Captain Kirk beat the klingons YEARS ago 😄

voting machines are NOT supposed to be 2online" at all !

there was sworn testimony yesterday in the AZ hearing that the backup was done manually, although without proper security)

the witnesses were giving oral evidence which was also submitted as sworn affadavits in each case

aye, rather than leaving the field open to treasonous MSM !

affadavits are a very minor, although important part of the case, thre it TONS of evidence of fraud

US Code 42: “ALL RECORDS GENERATED IN CONNECTION WITH A FEDERAL ELECTION MUST BE SAVED FOR 22 MONTHS.”

@24.55 minutes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnDkB1AwT7E

IF RECORDS MUST BE SAVED, WHY DO POTUS' TEAM NEED INJUNCTIONS TO PREVENT DOMINION MACHINES BEING WIPED ? ? ? ?

@busillis many thanks 🙂

@Maw just jumping in on your discussion, are you talking about the Doctrine of Strict Liability of a professional person ?

@Maw as far as I know that is known as Strict Liability in Tort Law, where the mental element of KNOWINGLY or INTENTIONALLY is not required for criminal behaviour, because a professional person is expected to have that knowledge . . . .not sure Im being entirely clear, do you get my meaning ?

I would argue that the universal standard of "lawfulness" is that which is "reasonable" in the given circumstances, which might be generally different for a police officer than for a war veteran, or a pacifist. There are 2 tests of what is reasonable, the subjective and the objective.

A person ia allowed to use "reasonable force" in the prevention of a crime

@Maw that is how precedent is created, an "impartial" judgement of what was reasonable in the circumstances, it is the beauty and the difficulty of a Common Law jurisdiction rather than a Napoleonic jurisdiction

@Maw the average reasonable person does not exist, each person is unique, which is why each case has to be judged on its own merits

that is why there are 2 tests of what is reasonable, the subjective (what the person thought was reasonable) and the objective 9what an observer would thinkwas reasonable) . . . Iwould saythat a person who had received training in restraint would be held to a higher standard than someone who had no trainiing , , , , , the uniform standard between the two people beiinig what was "reasonable"

right

neither would I, except to hold them both to the standard of that which is reasonable, which would be different for each person 🙂

@Whithers we are all subject to the standard of that which is (judged to be ) reasonable, but it is different for each person and each circumstance . . .. .in a sense there are as many tiers in the justice system as there are individual people and cicumstances ! (practically infinite!)

only if their mental states are also identical, there are 2 elemnts to any crime, the same unlawful (injurious) action can be done accidentally, knowingly or intentionally, in English parlance "negligent" Reckless or intentional. In the extreme case of injury which is to kill, it is the difference between Accidental Killing (no prison sentence), Knowingly killing, Manslaughter (5 yrs inside), or intentional (murder) life imprisonment

mental state IS the difference between murder, manslaughter, accidental killing, and justifiable killing !

the same standard is "reasonable" but that which is reasonable is differentin each case , , , I can say no more

I didn't use eithe r of those terms . . . I am from UK so there is some difference in parlance, but the principles of "accidental", "kknowingly" or "intentionally" are common to all Common Law jurisdictions

my keyboard is the same !

negligent is without knowing, criminal negligence is when you didnt know but should have known (strict liability), reckless is knowingly, and intentinoally is with intent

it would be good to be able to talk rather than text !

is there a voice room on this server ?

isn't it a Full Moon about now ? ?

with or without intent !

I see that the ONLY "excuse" for the USA states by-passing the constitution and changing voting procedure was COVID. If they use that as a justification, I reckon it is quite possible that BOTH frauds will be exposed on or around 21st Dec = no more vaccines + Trump wins 💪😊

what do you mean ?