Remember me
▼ Content

King



Page 6 of 8<<<45678>
02-12-2020 11:50
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3728)
HarveyH55 wrote:...A lot of these early cases aren't going to meet the burden, they are just formalities. We have gotten into the more serious cases yet....
I hope that Trump supporters are satisfied that he's not weak and incapable of sticking up for himself. His team will have not lack of resources and allies in finding anything that they can.

But if they cannot find anything at all that should say something to those who insist there has been massive fraud. Trump will continue to lie.

Bill Bar is not someone I respect but he is certainly capable.
https://apnews.com/article/barr-no-widespread-election-fraud-b1f1488796c9a98c4b1a9061a6c7f49d
Barr told the AP that U.S. attorneys and FBI agents have been working to follow up specific complaints and information they've received, but "to date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election."

Most of the states at issue are "purple" and teaming with Republicans who would happily report democratic fraud, and vice versa.

We should all hope that this goes to SCOTUS as soon as possible.
02-12-2020 16:51
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9190)
tmiddles wrote: I hope that Trump supporters are satisfied that he's not weak and incapable of sticking up for himself.

Trump supporters are well aware of Trump's strengths and considered them in electing him.

tmiddles wrote: But if they cannot find anything at all ...

They already have insurmountable evidence. Thousands of signed affidavits from election officials and other witnesses to criminal fraud. Your denial does not count for anything as you continue to lie.

tmiddles wrote:We should all hope that this goes to SCOTUS as soon as possible.

We should all hope this type of fraud never happens again. We should all hope this serves as a wake-up call to all Americans to take the corrective steps necessary to ensure all potential for such fraud is eliminated hereafter.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
02-12-2020 21:53
HarveyH55Profile picture★★★★★
(3400)
tmiddles wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:...A lot of these early cases aren't going to meet the burden, they are just formalities. We have gotten into the more serious cases yet....
I hope that Trump supporters are satisfied that he's not weak and incapable of sticking up for himself. His team will have not lack of resources and allies in finding anything that they can.

But if they cannot find anything at all that should say something to those who insist there has been massive fraud. Trump will continue to lie.

Bill Bar is not someone I respect but he is certainly capable.
https://apnews.com/article/barr-no-widespread-election-fraud-b1f1488796c9a98c4b1a9061a6c7f49d
Barr told the AP that U.S. attorneys and FBI agents have been working to follow up specific complaints and information they've received, but "to date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election."

Most of the states at issue are "purple" and teaming with Republicans who would happily report democratic fraud, and vice versa.

We should all hope that this goes to SCOTUS as soon as possible.


I didn't click your link, but saw a similar story. Doesn't the headline, "No widespread fraud", confirm they did find fraud? Widespread, is subjective. The story I read didn't specify the scope of their investigation, nor did it mention taking a peek at the voting machines, counting machines, or post office sorting machines.
02-12-2020 23:15
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3728)
IBdaMann wrote:
They already have insurmountable evidence. Thousands of signed affidavits from election officials and other witnesses to criminal fraud.

And do you have confidence in the US Judicial branch in evaluating that?
03-12-2020 00:00
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9190)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
They already have insurmountable evidence. Thousands of signed affidavits from election officials and other witnesses to criminal fraud.

And do you have confidence in the US Judicial branch in evaluating that?

My confidence is immaterial.

The overwhelming and compelling evidence is concrete.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
03-12-2020 00:06
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
And yet the court threw it out. Why is that?
Try to refrain from paranoid reasoning in answering.
03-12-2020 00:25
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3728)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
They already have insurmountable evidence. Thousands of signed affidavits from election officials and other witnesses to criminal fraud.

And do you have confidence in the US Judicial branch in evaluating that?

My confidence is immaterial.

The overwhelming and compelling evidence is concrete.


.


And if the courts don't concur with your assessment?

You haven't revealed where you are getting your information.
03-12-2020 00:27
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3728)
keepit wrote:
And yet the court threw it out. Why is that?
Try to refrain from paranoid reasoning in answering.


And nothing is stopping the Trump team from appealing to the Supreme Court and the courts is free to take up the case.

But it looks like we are dealing with blind faith in a man, TRUMP, and not faith in our system of government.
03-12-2020 02:29
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9190)
tmiddles wrote:But it looks like we are dealing with blind faith in a man, TRUMP, and not faith in our system of government.

That's an utterly stupid thing to say.

When a tort claim is filed and a boatload of evidence is presented to a court for discovery, in what person is that considered "blind faith"?

Yup, your comment was pretty stupid.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
03-12-2020 02:35
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
IBD,
What do you think you accomplish by calling so many people stupid? Or is it that you can't help yourself?
03-12-2020 02:56
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3728)
IBdaMann wrote:...a tort claim is filed and a boatload of evidence is presented...
Where? What "claim" are you referring to and what evidence? Where are you getting your information? Directly from the court? The media? Trump?

My understanding is the Rudy Guliani is the lead attorney on this and he presented his first choice of a witness at Four Season Landscaping.

tmiddles wrote:"Direct" Evidence example (Giuliani's first witness):
"It's such a shame. This is a democracy," Daryl Brooks, who said he was a GOP poll watcher, said at the press conference, held at Four Seasons Total Landscaping in Northeast Philadelphia. "They did not allow us to see anything. Was it corrupt or not? But give us an opportunity as poll watchers to view all the documents — all of the ballots."
Mr. Brooks is a convicted sex offender, isn't a resident of Philadelphia (comes from New Jersey) and no, has not convinced a Judge of anything.



Is that all there is? Is there a better piece of evidence to prove the case in court?

Are any cases even still pending?

A case must be proven in court with evidence. No kicking back and musing about theories of science and pretending the point doesn't need to be proven.

You are well into FLAT EARTHER territory at this point IBD.
03-12-2020 04:17
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9190)
tmiddles wrote: Where? What "claim" are you referring to and what evidence?

That is not any sort of answer to my question, which is "When a tort claim is filed and a boatload of evidence is presented to a court for discovery, in what person is that considered "blind faith"?

Let's stay on your point and address it before EVADING and fleeing.

tmiddles wrote: Where are you getting your information?

The correct question is "From where am I not being told what to believe and what lies to regurgitate?"


tmiddles wrote: My understanding is the Rudy Guliani is the lead attorney on this and he presented his first choice of a witness at Four Season Landscaping.

Your misunderstanding is woefully incomplete.

Pull your head out of the sand and answer your questions to your satisfaction. Your insistence on repeatedly mischaracterizing the situation shows that you are quite satisfied with the misunderstanding you have been ordered to hold.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
03-12-2020 05:16
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3728)
IBdaMann wrote:...my question,...a boatload of evidence ....is that considered "blind faith"?
Not if the evidence exists no. But your question has all the integrity of a Flat Earther asking if they are foolish to believe the Earth is flat when they too claim there is a boatload of evidence that it is.

What evidence? Daryl Brooks?

I would love to know what it is you find compelling but you have so far refused to share.

IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: Where are you getting your information?
The correct question is "From where am I not being told what to believe and what lies to regurgitate?"
OK so where from? INFOWARS? What?

Why wouldn't you want others to get better sources of information?
Don't keep it a secret. Share.
Edited on 03-12-2020 05:18
03-12-2020 05:35
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9190)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...my question,...a boatload of evidence ....is that considered "blind faith"?
Not if the evidence exists no.

You mean "Not since the evidence exists, no."

I'm listening to another live hearing right now. The whole election fraud was well planned and coordinated.


... and your EVASION shows all the integrity of supporting violent riots as "mostly peaceful."

tmiddles wrote:I would love to know what it is you find compelling but you have so far refused to share.

All of the testimony you deliberately avoid learning.

I would love to know why you deliberately avoid researching the answers to your own questions. You sit here and demand me to tell you what you can just as easily learn for yourself.

Don't be a dishonest fuuk. Be a decent human being for once.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
03-12-2020 05:50
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3728)
IBdaMann wrote:...The whole election fraud was well planned and coordinated.
When do you expect the first conviction? What criminal or legal cases are pending?

IBdaMann wrote:... and your EVASION ...
of what?

IBdaMann wrote:I would love to know why you deliberately avoid researching the answers to your own questions.
I looked and I can't find anything at all that is credible evidence of voter fraud (other that Lindsey Graham's phone call). So how can I know what it is you find compelling.
03-12-2020 05:57
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9190)
tmiddles wrote:I looked and I can't find anything at all that is credible evidence of voter fraud

I presume that you know what a "No True Scotsman" fallacy is.

At least you are acknowledging either your blatant dishonesty or your utter incompetence.

Which one should we go with?


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
03-12-2020 07:04
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3728)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:...credible evidence of voter fraud

I presume that you know what a "No True Scotsman" fallacy is.

Doesn't matter because, unless we are on the jury, the judicial branch of the US government has got this and it's not up to either of us.

Credibility will be, and has been, determined there.

How about a "No True Felon" fallacy? Nope, that makes no sense. A court either has or has not made a paricular ruiling.
03-12-2020 17:10
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2107)
keepit wrote:
And yet the court threw it out. Why is that?
Try to refrain from paranoid reasoning in answering.

What is "the court" that you are referring to? What is the "it" that you are referring to? There are many courts... There are many "its"...

Try to refrain from becoming a bumbling buffoon in answering.
03-12-2020 17:16
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2107)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
They already have insurmountable evidence. Thousands of signed affidavits from election officials and other witnesses to criminal fraud.

And do you have confidence in the US Judicial branch in evaluating that?

My confidence is immaterial.

The overwhelming and compelling evidence is concrete.

.


And if the courts don't concur with your assessment?

What if the courts don't concur with YOUR assessment??

What's your point in obsessing about this?? As IBD said, the overwhelming and compelling evidence is concrete.

tmiddles wrote:
You haven't revealed where you are getting your information.

RQAA.
03-12-2020 17:19
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2107)
tmiddles wrote:
keepit wrote:
And yet the court threw it out. Why is that?
Try to refrain from paranoid reasoning in answering.


And nothing is stopping the Trump team from appealing to the Supreme Court and the courts is free to take up the case.

But it looks like we are dealing with blind faith in a man, TRUMP, and not faith in our system of government.

The cases are working their way up to the Supreme Court as we speak. It takes time.
03-12-2020 17:25
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2107)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...a tort claim is filed and a boatload of evidence is presented...
Where? What "claim" are you referring to and what evidence? Where are you getting your information? Directly from the court? The media? Trump?

RQAA. RQAA. RQAA. RQAA. RQAA. RQAA. RQAA.

tmiddles wrote:Is that all there is? Is there a better piece of evidence to prove the case in court?

Are any cases even still pending?

RQAA. RQAA. RQAA.

tmiddles wrote:
A case must be proven in court with evidence.

You still don't know the difference between 'proof' and 'evidence'... Evidence is not a proof, dude...

tmiddles wrote:
No kicking back and musing about theories of science and pretending the point doesn't need to be proven.

You are well into FLAT EARTHER territory at this point IBD.

You are well into FULL MORON territory, ipiddle...
03-12-2020 19:59
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3728)
gfm7175 wrote:
What is "the court" that you are referring to?

The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals is just one example. Only SCOTUS is higher.
https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/203371np.pdf

gfm7175 wrote:
What is the "it" that you are referring to?

No. 20-3371 brought by DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC.
Again just one example of many.

Try to pay attention.

gfm7175 wrote:
And if the courts don't concur with your assessment?
Then I will have made an incorrect assessment. I will have guessed wrong as an entirely unqualified and ill informed man on the street as we all are. Because it is the courts decision we are merely speculating on.

What if MLB didn't agree with your assessment of who won the World Series?

gfm7175 wrote:What's your point in obsessing about this?? As IBD said, the overwhelming and compelling evidence is concrete.
Because though I sure don't like the segment of the country embracing Trump's ruthless dishonesty proclaiming unproven fraud, abandoning our system of government and not respecting the authority of our judicial branch, we need you.. Maybe it's just 1/4 now, but if things continue to develop the US may not survive. We are in a very similar moment to Germany after WWI and the myth that Jews had caused defeat was spread as fact.

Give it 10 more years of Qanon Republican brain rot. A Trump 2.0. Our country could fall easily.

And don't assume it will be a right wing dictator. Could go either way.

gfm7175 wrote:
The cases are working their way up to the Supreme Court as we speak. It takes time.
I hope they hear at least one case to satisfy people. It is their choice though so if it doesn't happen there is no conspiracy there.

gfm7175 wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
A case must be proven in court with evidence.

You still don't know the difference between 'proof' and 'evidence'... Evidence is not a proof, dude...
ALL in a court of law where evidence is required to prove a case. What you or I know is irrelevant as the court decides.
Edited on 03-12-2020 20:04
03-12-2020 21:05
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15560)
keepit wrote:
And yet the court threw it out. Why is that?
Try to refrain from paranoid reasoning in answering.

The Court? Which court?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
03-12-2020 21:06
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15560)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
They already have insurmountable evidence. Thousands of signed affidavits from election officials and other witnesses to criminal fraud.

And do you have confidence in the US Judicial branch in evaluating that?

My confidence is immaterial.

The overwhelming and compelling evidence is concrete.


.


And if the courts don't concur with your assessment?

You haven't revealed where you are getting your information.

RQAA.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
03-12-2020 21:07
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15560)
tmiddles wrote:
keepit wrote:
And yet the court threw it out. Why is that?
Try to refrain from paranoid reasoning in answering.


And nothing is stopping the Trump team from appealing to the Supreme Court and the courts is free to take up the case.

But it looks like we are dealing with blind faith in a man, TRUMP, and not faith in our system of government.

The supreme court is REQUIRED to take up this case.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
03-12-2020 21:08
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15560)
keepit wrote:
IBD,
What do you think you accomplish by calling so many people stupid? Or is it that you can't help yourself?


Argument of the stone fallacy.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
03-12-2020 21:09
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15560)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...a tort claim is filed and a boatload of evidence is presented...
Where? What "claim" are you referring to and what evidence? Where are you getting your information? Directly from the court? The media? Trump?

My understanding is the Rudy Guliani is the lead attorney on this and he presented his first choice of a witness at Four Season Landscaping.

tmiddles wrote:"Direct" Evidence example (Giuliani's first witness):
"It's such a shame. This is a democracy," Daryl Brooks, who said he was a GOP poll watcher, said at the press conference, held at Four Seasons Total Landscaping in Northeast Philadelphia. "They did not allow us to see anything. Was it corrupt or not? But give us an opportunity as poll watchers to view all the documents — all of the ballots."
Mr. Brooks is a convicted sex offender, isn't a resident of Philadelphia (comes from New Jersey) and no, has not convinced a Judge of anything.



Is that all there is? Is there a better piece of evidence to prove the case in court?

Are any cases even still pending?

A case must be proven in court with evidence. No kicking back and musing about theories of science and pretending the point doesn't need to be proven.

You are well into FLAT EARTHER territory at this point IBD.


The shape of the Earth is not being discussed in court, dumbass.
RQAA.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
03-12-2020 21:10
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15560)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...my question,...a boatload of evidence ....is that considered "blind faith"?
Not if the evidence exists no. But your question has all the integrity of a Flat Earther asking if they are foolish to believe the Earth is flat when they too claim there is a boatload of evidence that it is.

What evidence? Daryl Brooks?

I would love to know what it is you find compelling but you have so far refused to share.

IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: Where are you getting your information?
The correct question is "From where am I not being told what to believe and what lies to regurgitate?"
OK so where from? INFOWARS? What?

Why wouldn't you want others to get better sources of information?
Don't keep it a secret. Share.

RQAA


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
03-12-2020 21:10
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15560)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:...The whole election fraud was well planned and coordinated.
When do you expect the first conviction? What criminal or legal cases are pending?

IBdaMann wrote:... and your EVASION ...
of what?

IBdaMann wrote:I would love to know why you deliberately avoid researching the answers to your own questions.
I looked and I can't find anything at all that is credible evidence of voter fraud (other that Lindsey Graham's phone call). So how can I know what it is you find compelling.

RQAA


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
03-12-2020 21:11
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15560)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote:...credible evidence of voter fraud

I presume that you know what a "No True Scotsman" fallacy is.

Doesn't matter because, unless we are on the jury, the judicial branch of the US government has got this and it's not up to either of us.

Credibility will be, and has been, determined there.

How about a "No True Felon" fallacy? Nope, that makes no sense. A court either has or has not made a paricular ruiling.

Contextomy fallacy. Strawman fallacy. RQAA.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
03-12-2020 21:12
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(15560)
tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
What is "the court" that you are referring to?

The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals is just one example. Only SCOTUS is higher.
https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/203371np.pdf

gfm7175 wrote:
What is the "it" that you are referring to?

No. 20-3371 brought by DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC.
Again just one example of many.

Try to pay attention.

gfm7175 wrote:
And if the courts don't concur with your assessment?
Then I will have made an incorrect assessment. I will have guessed wrong as an entirely unqualified and ill informed man on the street as we all are. Because it is the courts decision we are merely speculating on.

What if MLB didn't agree with your assessment of who won the World Series?

gfm7175 wrote:What's your point in obsessing about this?? As IBD said, the overwhelming and compelling evidence is concrete.
Because though I sure don't like the segment of the country embracing Trump's ruthless dishonesty proclaiming unproven fraud, abandoning our system of government and not respecting the authority of our judicial branch, we need you.. Maybe it's just 1/4 now, but if things continue to develop the US may not survive. We are in a very similar moment to Germany after WWI and the myth that Jews had caused defeat was spread as fact.

Give it 10 more years of Qanon Republican brain rot. A Trump 2.0. Our country could fall easily.

And don't assume it will be a right wing dictator. Could go either way.

gfm7175 wrote:
The cases are working their way up to the Supreme Court as we speak. It takes time.
I hope they hear at least one case to satisfy people. It is their choice though so if it doesn't happen there is no conspiracy there.

gfm7175 wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
A case must be proven in court with evidence.

You still don't know the difference between 'proof' and 'evidence'... Evidence is not a proof, dude...
ALL in a court of law where evidence is required to prove a case. What you or I know is irrelevant as the court decides.

...and it's going to the supreme court. RQAA.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan
03-12-2020 21:20
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★★
(2120)
tmiddles wrote:
What if MLB didn't agree with your assessment of who won the World Series?


Just one question...

Were the umpires officiating the game from the parking lot?


ANY mask is better than no mask, even if you have to resort to putting a tightly fit plastic bag over your head-COVIDEXPERTGFM

I don't have a GoFundMe, but I do have a PO Box (#666)-COVIDEXPERTGFM
03-12-2020 21:21
keepit
★★★★★
(2235)
Who says it's going to the SCOTUS.
03-12-2020 21:32
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★★
(2120)
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
keepit wrote:
And yet the court threw it out. Why is that?
Try to refrain from paranoid reasoning in answering.


And nothing is stopping the Trump team from appealing to the Supreme Court and the courts is free to take up the case.

But it looks like we are dealing with blind faith in a man, TRUMP, and not faith in our system of government.

The supreme court is REQUIRED to take up this case.


OK educate me please.

I thought the SCOTUS was independent and could decline anything they want. If memory serves I think they vote and 4 yes votes means they will rule on it. Less than 4 and the lower court ruling stands. Wrong?


ANY mask is better than no mask, even if you have to resort to putting a tightly fit plastic bag over your head-COVIDEXPERTGFM

I don't have a GoFundMe, but I do have a PO Box (#666)-COVIDEXPERTGFM
03-12-2020 22:07
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9190)
GasGuzzler wrote:OK educate me please.

I thought the SCOTUS was independent and could decline anything they want.

They decline that which does not meet the requirements to be heard by the Supreme Court. They cannot simply decide to be lazy and to decline to hear cases because they would rather play golf.

They are required to hear all cases in Law and Equity that fall within their jurisdiction, which involve public Ministers and Consuls, for example (such as the President), or that involve controversies to which the United States shall be a party, such as the election of the President.

I am assigning you some reading homework ... of Article III, Section 2 of the US Constitution which is:

Article III, Section. 2 of the US Constitution:
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;— between a State and Citizens of another State,—between Citizens of different States,—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.


OK, so it's very light homework reading, but that is to what Into the Night referred.

GasGuzzler wrote: If memory serves I think they vote and 4 yes votes means they will rule on it. Less than 4 and the lower court ruling stands. Wrong?

That might be a procedure they have in place but if they "vote" to be derelict in their duties then they would be derelict in their duties.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
03-12-2020 22:07
gfm7175Profile picture★★★★★
(2107)
tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
What is "the court" that you are referring to?

The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals is just one example. Only SCOTUS is higher.
https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/203371np.pdf

gfm7175 wrote:
What is the "it" that you are referring to?

No. 20-3371 brought by DONALD J. TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT, INC.
Again just one example of many.

Try to pay attention.

keepit did not specify what he was discussing, so I asked him to clarify. I am aware of what you and I have been discussing.

tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
And if the courts don't concur with your assessment?
Then I will have made an incorrect assessment.

You, sir, are a certifiable moron who has sold your mind to your "masters"...

tmiddles wrote:
I will have guessed wrong as an entirely unqualified and ill informed man on the street

Is this your attempt to finally be honest about your lack of knowledge?

tmiddles wrote:
as we all are.

Speak for yourself... I am not an unqualified and ill informed moron like you are.

tmiddles wrote:
Because it is the courts decision we are merely speculating on.

Speak for yourself. I am not speculating.

tmiddles wrote:
What if MLB didn't agree with your assessment of who won the World Series?

They set the rules of their league, and they decide whether or not they wish to enforce their own rules.

I find that all major "sports" (such as MLB, NBA, NFL, etc.) are not actually sports, but are rather entertainment. In other words, I believe that the results of their games are controlled by the leagues themselves (if not fully, at least to some significant degree). They are selling a product, and need to keep it interesting so that "eyes stay glued onto the TV screen". Ever wonder why soooooo many NFL games are "nailbiters" or "go into overtime"?

Take the Colts/Packers game... The Colts had committed barely any offensive holding penalties (or simply weren't called for them) throughout the whole season leading up to this game, yet at the end of this game, they commit not one, not two, but FIVE offensive holding penalties, and on the SAME DRIVE to boot... C'mon now..... Did these professionals all of a sudden completely forget how to play?? See, the game would've boringly ended with the Colts running out the clock if that whole fiasco wouldn't've happened, but with that happening, the Packers were able to tie the game as time ran out and send it into overtime... MUCH more entertaining!!!


See how that works??? I'd be a millionaire if I received a dollar for every similar example of such BS in the NFL that has occurred even just during my short lifetime... That's why I can't get into "professional sports" anymore, and that's before the BLM bullshit that they pulled...

tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:What's your point in obsessing about this?? As IBD said, the overwhelming and compelling evidence is concrete.
Because though I sure don't like the segment of the country embracing Trump's ruthless dishonesty proclaiming unproven fraud, abandoning our system of government and not respecting the authority of our judicial branch, we need you.. Maybe it's just 1/4 now, but if things continue to develop the US may not survive. We are in a very similar moment to Germany after WWI and the myth that Jews had caused defeat was spread as fact.

Give it 10 more years of Qanon Republican brain rot. A Trump 2.0. Our country could fall easily.

And don't assume it will be a right wing dictator. Could go either way.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
The cases are working their way up to the Supreme Court as we speak. It takes time.
I hope they hear at least one case to satisfy people. It is their choice though so if it doesn't happen there is no conspiracy there.

No, it isn't their choice. They MUST hear this case.

tmiddles wrote:
gfm7175 wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
A case must be proven in court with evidence.

You still don't know the difference between 'proof' and 'evidence'... Evidence is not a proof, dude...
ALL in a court of law where evidence is required to prove a case. What you or I know is irrelevant as the court decides.

Evidence has been (and is still being) presented to the courts (and even some State Legislatures), moron. Your denial of said evidence does not make it go away.
Edited on 03-12-2020 22:12
03-12-2020 22:31
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★★
(2120)
IBdaMann wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:OK educate me please.

I thought the SCOTUS was independent and could decline anything they want.

They decline that which does not meet the requirements to be heard by the Supreme Court. They cannot simply decide to be lazy and to decline to hear cases because they would rather play golf.

They are required to hear all cases in Law and Equity that fall within their jurisdiction, which involve public Ministers and Consuls, for example (such as the President), or that involve controversies to which the United States shall be a party, such as the election of the President.

I am assigning you some reading homework ... of Article III, Section 2 of the US Constitution which is:

Article III, Section. 2 of the US Constitution:
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;— between a State and Citizens of another State,—between Citizens of different States,—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.


OK, so it's very light homework reading, but that is to what Into the Night referred.

GasGuzzler wrote: If memory serves I think they vote and 4 yes votes means they will rule on it. Less than 4 and the lower court ruling stands. Wrong?

That might be a procedure they have in place but if they "vote" to be derelict in their duties then they would be derelict in their duties.


.


I read this as where they CAN rule, not where the MUST rule. What am I missing?


ANY mask is better than no mask, even if you have to resort to putting a tightly fit plastic bag over your head-COVIDEXPERTGFM

I don't have a GoFundMe, but I do have a PO Box (#666)-COVIDEXPERTGFM
03-12-2020 22:34
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★★
(2120)
Don't get me wrong, I certainly think they need to hear the case. I just want to see where it is required.
03-12-2020 22:45
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(9190)
GasGuzzler wrote: Don't get me wrong, I certainly think they need to hear the case. I just want to see where it is required.

OK, so like in any job, the threat of being fired is the only thing that obligates anyone in government to do their work. There is nothing in Constitution that says the Supreme Court shall be imprisoned if they neglect to hear certain cases just like you cannot be imprisoned for not doing your job at your work or for not repaying your debts.

The Constitution specifies the cases the Supreme Court is to hear by delineating its jurisdiction. If they fail to hear a case within their jurisdiction then they are derelict in their duties. Performing their duties is not optional and they can be impeached for such dereliction, every single one of them.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
03-12-2020 22:59
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★★
(2120)
IBdaMann wrote:.....If they fail to hear a case within their jurisdiction then they are derelict in their duties.


This right here is what I'm hung up on what you're saying.

They must get thousands of case requests every year. No way nine judges can handle the load. They ARE refusing work within their jurisdiction. Yes?

Again, don't get me wrong. If there was ever a case for the SCOTUS, this election fraud is it. If they refuse it they SHOULD ALL BE IMPEACHED.


ANY mask is better than no mask, even if you have to resort to putting a tightly fit plastic bag over your head-COVIDEXPERTGFM

I don't have a GoFundMe, but I do have a PO Box (#666)-COVIDEXPERTGFM
Page 6 of 8<<<45678>





Join the debate King:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Coal Is Still King1107-04-2019 01:04
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact