Message from @Zuluzeit

Discord ID: 786685764931026984


2020-12-10 19:59:14 UTC  

Mr. T. 2024

2020-12-10 19:59:35 UTC  

Pitty we can

2020-12-10 19:59:42 UTC  

No, Candace Owen 2024.

2020-12-10 20:00:00 UTC  

Steph curry 2024

2020-12-10 20:00:11 UTC  

The first badass POTUS Mr. T.

2020-12-10 20:00:19 UTC  

What happened to the rock wasn’t he supposed to run

2020-12-10 20:01:13 UTC  

Then people might catch on to the notion that politics is like a wrestling match.

2020-12-10 20:01:16 UTC  

There is a distinction between allegations and evidence. An allegation does not become evidence unless it is corroborated with some form of proof. Prosecutors must decide whether an allegation or accusation can be proven in a court of law before they even bring a case. And even then, it is up to juries to decide if allegations stand up to scrutiny to the level of being evidence of a crime or wrongdoing. The volume or number of allegations don't matter if they don't provide any evidence of proof of wrongdoing under oath and cross examination. Otherwise, a collection of allegations carry about the same weight as a collection of nursery rhymes. And many of the best allegations have been heard in court and they did not stand up to scrutiny. (I know this is an oversimplification - there are whole books and courses on the subject)

2020-12-10 20:01:19 UTC  

New scotus info

2020-12-10 20:02:14 UTC  

The deadline to respond was 3pm est

2020-12-10 20:02:17 UTC  

It's not going to matter if you argue, present valid points, as no one's mind will be changed.

2020-12-10 20:02:35 UTC  

(Per the scotus channel.)

2020-12-10 20:04:10 UTC  

It's all too football-esque. @TaLoN132

2020-12-10 20:05:12 UTC  

All the YouTube lawyers are heaping Praise on how well the briefings are written. Makes me wonder if this hasn’t been prepared for months as a contingency plan for a trump loss.

2020-12-10 20:06:19 UTC  

The commonwealth strikes back

2020-12-10 20:07:01 UTC  

Only fools don't make preparations for all possible eventualities.

2020-12-10 20:07:01 UTC  

@yetiCodes is that the 3pm response

2020-12-10 20:07:46 UTC  

Or fake conspiracies just in case they are thwarted legitimately @busillis

2020-12-10 20:08:09 UTC  

I mean, ultimately, that's nothing new. Evidence is evidence by any reasonable definition. If a group of people is determined and set in their view then they'll call anything contradictory "not evidence". I think it's very telling just how many of the cases weren't even heard.

2020-12-10 20:08:22 UTC  

@james j It is the response.

2020-12-10 20:08:44 UTC  

From the PA response:

*"The Court recently recognized the primacy of voters’ reliance interests in Andino v. Middleton, 20A55 (Oct.5, 2020). There, a South Carolina District Court order (entered on September 18, 2020), enjoined that state’s witness requirement for absentee ballots during the COVID-19 pandemic. On October 5, this Court stayed the District Court’s decision,thus reinstating the wit-ness requirement. Recognizing that South Carolina voters submitted ballots without witnesses in the timeframe between the District Court’s September 18 injunction and this Court’s October 5 stay, however, this Court specified that “any ballots cast before this stay issues and received within two days of this order may not be rejected for failing to comply with the wit-ness requirement.” Andino v. Middleton,2020 WL 5887393 *1 (U.S. Oct. 5, 2020).

This Court thus acknowledged that voters should not be punished for relying upon the rules in place when they voted. Similar reliance interests here compel this Court to maintain the status quo for Pennsylvania voters at this late juncture. Overturning Pennsylvania’s election results is contrary to any metric of fairness and would do nothing less than deny the fundamental right to vote to millions of Pennsylvania’s citizens."*

2020-12-10 20:08:51 UTC  

To my knowledge yes.

2020-12-10 20:09:18 UTC  

The campaigns would likely have very accurate polling data.@james j

2020-12-10 20:09:31 UTC  

Exactly.

2020-12-10 20:09:42 UTC  

The cases were heard you just blame your opponents for presenting junk 😅

2020-12-10 20:09:57 UTC  

*Finally, if original jurisdiction is allowed, this type of litigation will crowdthe Court’s docketevery four years. Given the global pandemic, many States were forced to modify their election process, including mail-in voting procedures. Texas did.7And most, if not every, state has been sued during this election.Texas has.*

This is hilarious, lol.

2020-12-10 20:10:36 UTC  

Context?

2020-12-10 20:10:48 UTC  

Or at least page # 🙏🏼

2020-12-10 20:10:52 UTC  

There is a distinction... I can allege anything about anyone. I can allege that my neighbor is a serial killer because I saw him leaving his house at odd hours and taking things into his shed at night in a sneaky manner. That allegation means nothing without actual proof.

2020-12-10 20:11:05 UTC  

>rejected on laches
>many rejected on grounds of not being the offended party

That's not being heard.

2020-12-10 20:11:16 UTC  

without evidence*

2020-12-10 20:12:40 UTC  

> in any event, are barred by laches,
lol, the laches catch-22 again.

> and are moot, meritless,
so they say

> and dangerous.
It's very dangerous to call speech or allegations dangerous.

> Texas has not suffered harm simply because it dislikes the result of the election
Conjecture on motive [directly contradictory to stated motive], gross.

2020-12-10 20:12:50 UTC  

I just want to hear the cases. 🤷🏻‍♂️ Too much to ask?

2020-12-10 20:13:03 UTC  

Yes it is. They could have presented better cases not dismissed by such things but they didnt 🤷

2020-12-10 20:13:22 UTC  

Apparently so.

2020-12-10 20:13:52 UTC  

If Trumps legal team made good faith lawsuits they would have been heard

2020-12-10 20:14:05 UTC  

???

2020-12-10 20:14:11 UTC  

Perhaps that was never the intention.

2020-12-10 20:14:18 UTC  

@yetiCodes you heard their low quality arguments in the hearings. The mellisa carone lady was heard by the court and found to be non credible

2020-12-10 20:14:23 UTC  

I have not read or seen anything put forward in the Trump, Trump Campaign, Powell, Wood, etc. lawsuits that were anything other than allegations. If they had any substance, they would be able to point to arrests made. You mean to tell me that not one law enforcement officer supported Trump enough to investigate fraud and pursue any fraud cases?