Ultra Vires - Latin for "Wisconsin will Flip for Trump"

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > Ultra Vires - Latin for "Wisconsin will Flip for Trump"

Page 1 of 2

Ultra Vires - Latin for "Wisconsin will Flip for Trump"04-12-2020 21:24
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	The reason we aren't hearing so much about Wisconsin (thus giving us the impression that the State Assembly isn't pursuing the matter as are those of other States) is that the Wisconsin election fraud is being addressed in a different type of lawsuit. It is not being carried out in State Senate Hearings nor are Election Board officials testifying as witnesses before the State General Assembly therefore it appears that nothing is happening. However in Wisconsin Trump has filed a rather unique lawsuit naming himself as the plaintiff and naming every single member of the Wisconsin Elections Commission as defendants. Also, the lead attorney in this special case is not Rudy Giuliani but rather is William Bock III, an attorney licensed in Indiana. This suit claims Trump was harmed by the ultra vires of the Wisconsin Elections Commission (Latin for "acting outside the bounds of the law/authority"). This case is not being thrown out and makes the case that the very nature of the wrongdoing within the context of this election makes it a bona fide Federal issue. The important thing to remember is that this suit does not simply allege voting irregularities, it claims specific harm to Donald Trump, Candidate for President of the United States by willful illegal actions on the part of all the named defendants, including: - Ignoring and/or compromising State law restrictions on mail-in voting - proliferating illegal unmanned ballot drop boxes - counting mail-in votes secretly outside any scrutiny from observers - reducing/eliminating voter identity certification requirements for mail-in ballots - permitting ballot tampering Wisconsin Statute 6.84(1) is very clear that its many safeguards are put in place to thwart exactly the kind of fraud perpetrated in this election by discarding these safeguards. Wisconsin Statute 6.84(1) Legislative policy. The legislature finds that voting is a constitutional right, the vigorous exercise of which should be strongly encouraged. In contrast, voting by absentee ballot is a privilege exercised wholly outside the traditional safeguards of the polling place. The legislature finds that the privilege of voting by absentee ballot must be carefully regulated to prevent the potential for fraud or abuse; to prevent overzealous solicitation of absent electors who may prefer not to participate in an election; to prevent undue influence on an absent elector to vote for or against a candidate or to cast a particular vote in a referendum; or other similar abuses. Wisconsin State Law on Absentee Voting This suit is going to win on its merits, and when it does, the only remedy Wisconsin will have for Trump is to reverse the election. Wisconsin will be flipping for Trump. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
04-12-2020 21:37
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	Trump's Wisconsin Lawsuit Announcement Key points: 1. The lawsuit alleges 220K votes were wrongfully counted, 10x Biden's leading margin 2. Wisconsin cannot simply recount those same 220K wrongfully counted votes. . Edited on 04-12-2020 21:43
04-12-2020 22:17
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	Some Analysis of Trump's Wisconsin lawsuit.
04-12-2020 22:34
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	The media will never run any story in Trump's favor, unless the ruling is final, and will be acted on, and effects a major change, that can't be ignored. The can still deny, and diminish, but they would have to acknowledge. The media is the only one who called Joe, the "winner". They are they only ones promoting that there was no fraud at all. Come on, man... There hasn't been an election in modern times, where at least a few dead people voted. They automatically mailed out ballots, based on registration, not request. I'm sure there are a lot of covid fatalities the registered, but weren't home to check their mail. Probably quite a few people moved out of state, to avoid virus restriction. Did the bother to inform their home state, or just register in Florida too? Or which ever state they were staying in. A lot of states rushed into the no-excuse, mail-in ballots, and didn't think it through. I don't think they were right to make the change in an election year, just because of a virus.
04-12-2020 23:45
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Thanks for the summary post. I just noticed this lawsuit today, thanks to the Epoch Times (obviously I haven't read through it yet), and also just learned about the various affidavits associated with it. Very interesting, to say the least, and it does lend reason to why WI has been much more "in the weeds" than other States. Our legislature has still been all but useless in numerous very important matters, and doesn't have the "fight" that it needs to have to stand up to demonrat tyranny, but thankfully this looks to be going down much more of a legally-guided avenue that need not wake up our sleeping legislature too much. I am well aware that we have rather strict election laws here, but I wasn't aware of the way that that particular statute was worded... That's very interesting, and should make for a strong clear-cut case for the Trump side regarding our absentee ballot issues... This brightened up my prospects about WI a bit... Edited on 04-12-2020 23:49

05-12-2020 01:18
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	IBdaMann wrote: The reason we aren't hearing so much about Wisconsin (thus giving us the impression that the State Assembly isn't pursuing the matter as are those of other States) is that the Wisconsin election fraud is being addressed in a different type of lawsuit. It is not being carried out in State Senate Hearings nor are Election Board officials testifying as witnesses before the State General Assembly therefore it appears that nothing is happening. However in Wisconsin Trump has filed a rather unique lawsuit naming himself as the plaintiff and naming every single member of the Wisconsin Elections Commission as defendants. Also, the lead attorney in this special case is not Rudy Giuliani but rather is William Bock III, an attorney licensed in Indiana. This suit claims Trump was harmed by the ultra vires of the Wisconsin Elections Commission (Latin for "acting outside the bounds of the law/authority"). This case is not being thrown out and makes the case that the very nature of the wrongdoing within the context of this election makes it a bona fide Federal issue. The important thing to remember is that this suit does not simply allege voting irregularities, it claims specific harm to Donald Trump, Candidate for President of the United States by willful illegal actions on the part of all the named defendants, including: - Ignoring and/or compromising State law restrictions on mail-in voting - proliferating illegal unmanned ballot drop boxes - counting mail-in votes secretly outside any scrutiny from observers - reducing/eliminating voter identity certification requirements for mail-in ballots - permitting ballot tampering Wisconsin Statute 6.84(1) is very clear that its many safeguards are put in place to thwart exactly the kind of fraud perpetrated in this election by discarding these safeguards. Wisconsin Statute 6.84(1) Legislative policy. The legislature finds that voting is a constitutional right, the vigorous exercise of which should be strongly encouraged. In contrast, voting by absentee ballot is a privilege exercised wholly outside the traditional safeguards of the polling place. The legislature finds that the privilege of voting by absentee ballot must be carefully regulated to prevent the potential for fraud or abuse; to prevent overzealous solicitation of absent electors who may prefer not to participate in an election; to prevent undue influence on an absent elector to vote for or against a candidate or to cast a particular vote in a referendum; or other similar abuses. Wisconsin State Law on Absentee Voting This suit is going to win on its merits, and when it does, the only remedy Wisconsin will have for Trump is to reverse the election. Wisconsin will be flipping for Trump. . Well described. Wisconsin is a special case because of the way their election law is set up. 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 While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
06-12-2020 01:37
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: Trump's Wisconsin Lawsuit Announcement ... This was from Dec 1st. Trump attempted to get the Wisconsin Supreme court to hear the case and they refused. https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2020/12/04/trump-appointed-judge-calls-presidents-request-wisconsin-bizarre/3826351001/ "For the third time in less than 30 hours, four justices on the state Supreme Court dealt President Donald Trump a setback Friday, saying they wouldn't accept a lawsuit by Trump allies who wanted to let Republican lawmakers instead of voters decide how to cast the state's electoral votes. " Epoch times, https://www.theepochtimes.com/c-wisconsin is actually really great in that they provided the case number. Here is the case: https://wscca.wicourts.gov/appealHistory.xsl?caseNo=2020AP001971&cacheId=7ED7F6D7D2D2B983F362ACADF2CA655D&recordCount=1&offset=0&linkOnlyToForm=false&sortDirection=DESC You'll note that it shows the Supreme Court of Wisconsins refusal to hear the case: "Petition for an Original Action Filed By: R. Burnett Submit Date: 12-1-2020 Decision: (D) Deny Decision Date: 12-3-2020 ORD that the petition for leave to commence an original action is denied. " So there it sits, on t he 5th of December, where maybe it will go on to a final death in a lower court. How do I "know" that the supreme court of Wisconsin refused to take the case? Because they are online and provide the information directly. Edited on 06-12-2020 01:39
06-12-2020 03:00
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Trump's Wisconsin Lawsuit Announcement ... This was from Dec 1st. Trump attempted to get the Wisconsin Supreme court to hear the case and they refused. https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2020/12/04/trump-appointed-judge-calls-presidents-request-wisconsin-bizarre/3826351001/ "For the third time in less than 30 hours, four justices on the state Supreme Court dealt President Donald Trump a setback Friday, saying they wouldn't accept a lawsuit by Trump allies who wanted to let Republican lawmakers instead of voters decide how to cast the state's electoral votes. " Epoch times, https://www.theepochtimes.com/c-wisconsin is actually really great in that they provided the case number. Here is the case: https://wscca.wicourts.gov/appealHistory.xsl?caseNo=2020AP001971&cacheId=7ED7F6D7D2D2B983F362ACADF2CA655D&recordCount=1&offset=0&linkOnlyToForm=false&sortDirection=DESC You'll note that it shows the Supreme Court of Wisconsins refusal to hear the case: "Petition for an Original Action Filed By: R. Burnett Submit Date: 12-1-2020 Decision: (D) Deny Decision Date: 12-3-2020 ORD that the petition for leave to commence an original action is denied. " So there it sits, on t he 5th of December, where maybe it will go on to a final death in a lower court. How do I "know" that the supreme court of Wisconsin refused to take the case? Because they are online and provide the information directly. Denial of history. Denial of Wisconsin State law. TDS. 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 While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
06-12-2020 03:19
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote: "Petition for an Original Action Filed By: R. Burnett Submit Date: 12-1-2020 Decision: (D) Deny Decision Date: 12-3-2020 ORD that the petition for leave to commence an original action is denied. " Denial of history. Denial of Wisconsin State law. TDS. Actually that's the Supreme Court of Wisconsin Denial of the Trump lawsuit. But you got the "denial" part right Edited on 06-12-2020 03:19
06-12-2020 07:14
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	tmiddles wrote: "[b]Petition for an Original Action Filed By: R. Burnett Submit Date: 12-1-2020 It's not this lawsuit. Get your lawsuits straight. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
06-12-2020 12:58
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	He watches too much CNN... The media only reports Trump-negative stories. Should have learned that over the past 4 years... There are dozens of lawsuits, different people, and at different levels of the courts. Trumps lawyers are just being thorough. They never expected to win every case. Many of them are just formalities, so the higher courts can't deny, based on they didn't file in the lower courts first. It's frustrating, to have the media exclusively reporting for the losing side, since they have easier access to what's going on in the courts, have people who do nothing else but follow the cases. Should be a tip-off, that they are only obsessing over the lesser cases, that weren't likely to move forward. Totally silent on the more substantial cases. I do think that mail-in ballots will be rejected, since it was a late addition, specific to this election in several states. All states allow absentee ballots, but they must be requested, and the must be a specific reason why they are unable to vote in person. I don't believe a signature is valid proof of identity, unless witnessed. Too easy to have a machine sign documents anymore, including all the standard points used to verify.
06-12-2020 13:58
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: "Petition for an Original Action Filed By: R. Burnett Submit Date: 12-1-2020 It's not this lawsuit... IBD's strategy: avoid the humiliation of being wrong by simply ensuring no one knows what he is talking about. Epoch times, https://www.theepochtimes.com/c-wisconsin That is the only one of the 3 lawsuits listed which was filed by Trump. IBdaMann wrote:... in Wisconsin Trump has filed.. HarveyH55 wrote: He watches too much CNN... My source is the Wisconsin Supreme Court directly Harvey, not CNN. But hey this is all good news for Trump. He made another $7,000,000 off you chumps in the last 24 hours. Winning! HarveyH55 wrote:There are dozens of lawsuits, different people, and at different levels of the courts. .. This is exactly the game you play with physics issues. No Harvey it's not so complicated no one knows. There either are or are not lawsuits. If you want to refer to one you can name it. Otherwise you're just being intentionally vague. HarveyH55 wrote:I do think that mail-in ballots will be rejected, Just to be clear: you thing ballots cast through the mail by voters, legally entitled to vote, and following the instructions they were given, should be invalidated? Edited on 06-12-2020 14:18
06-12-2020 15:04
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: "Petition for an Original Action Filed By: R. Burnett Submit Date: 12-1-2020 It's not this lawsuit... IBD's strategy: avoid the humiliation of being wrong by simply ensuring no one knows what he is talking about. Epoch times, https://www.theepochtimes.com/c-wisconsin That is the only one of the 3 lawsuits listed which was filed by Trump. IBdaMann wrote:... in Wisconsin Trump has filed.. HarveyH55 wrote: He watches too much CNN... My source is the Wisconsin Supreme Court directly Harvey, not CNN. But hey this is all good news for Trump. He made another $7,000,000 off you chumps in the last 24 hours. Winning! HarveyH55 wrote:There are dozens of lawsuits, different people, and at different levels of the courts. .. This is exactly the game you play with physics issues. No Harvey it's not so complicated no one knows. There either are or are not lawsuits. If you want to refer to one you can name it. Otherwise you're just being intentionally vague. HarveyH55 wrote:I do think that mail-in ballots will be rejected, Just to be clear: you thing ballots cast through the mail by voters, legally entitled to vote, and following the instructions they were given, should be invalidated? It's not just a single dispute, and just one lawsuit. There were multiple separate issues to be resolved. You are over-simplifying, reducing it to something ridiculous. They were given bad instructions, to do something they weren't legally entitled to do. They still had the option of getting off their lazy asses, and vote in person. Do you think the people who gave the bad instructions, should have known that it wasn't legal? They should have but knew it favored their choice in the election. Do you think it's fair to all the voters, who followed the law, be denied their choices, because some officials, decided to cut some legal corners, to make voting easier for Biden supporters? But, you seem to believe that it's only illegal, if you get caught. Only cheating, if you lose....
06-12-2020 15:21
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	HarveyH55 wrote: tmiddles wrote:There either are or are not lawsuits. If you want to refer to one you can name it. Otherwise you're just being intentionally vague.... It's not just a single dispute, and just one lawsuit. There were multiple separate issues to be resolved. You are over-simplifying, reducing it to something ridiculous... I'm not "over simplifying" by naming a specific lawsuit. If you want to refer to one name it. There are not some unknown number. It's all public information. HarveyH55 wrote:They were given bad instructions, to do something they weren't legally entitled to do..... Do you think it's fair to all the voters, who followed the law, be denied their choices, because some officials, decided to cut some legal corners, to make voting easier for Biden supporters? ...... So someone who followed the instructions to vote by mail given by their own government, someone legally entitled to vote, should have their vote cancelled because they are "lazy" and it would be unfair to the other voters? You can see it's a bit unclear how you are justifying that.
06-12-2020 17:49
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	tgoebbles wrote:IBD's strategy: avoid the humiliation of being wrong by simply ensuring no one knows what he is talking about. tgoebbles' strategy: wander through life, too lazy to think for himself and have others do his thinking for him, barking orders whenever he is confused. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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

06-12-2020 18:01
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: ...too lazy to think for himself .... IBD starts a thread referencing a lawsuit. I find the direct link to it. He then claims it's not the right lawsuit but refuses to clarify. ...then claims I'm being lazy. Another round of Hide The Ball. Edited on 06-12-2020 18:03
06-12-2020 18:53
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	tmiddles wrote: So someone who followed the instructions to vote by mail given by their own government, someone legally entitled to vote, should have their vote cancelled because they are "lazy" and it would be unfair to the other voters? You can see it's a bit unclear how you are justifying that. This is what the courts will decide. The election laws were broken, by mailing out ballots, that were never requested, or didn't require a reason for not being able to vote in person. Is it okay to break laws, as long as you get what you want? There are victims, when laws are broken. Who's right count the most? The lawbreaker, or the victim? We aren't talking about just tossing out Biden votes, just the illegal mail-in ballots. Some are likely Trump ballots. I'd think it kind of odd, if there wasn't...
06-12-2020 19:44
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	tmiddles wrote:So someone who followed the instructions to vote by mail given by their own government, ... should have recognized that those were illegal instructions, i.e. erroneous. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. If you voted by mail just because you wanted to help your political party legitimize the process for cheating then, yes, you threw away your vote to do so. You can see it's a bit unclear how you are justifying that. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
06-12-2020 20:02
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote: "Petition for an Original Action Filed By: R. Burnett Submit Date: 12-1-2020 It's not this lawsuit... IBD's strategy: avoid the humiliation of being wrong by simply ensuring no one knows what he is talking about. Epoch times, https://www.theepochtimes.com/c-wisconsin That is the only one of the 3 lawsuits listed which was filed by Trump. IBdaMann wrote:... in Wisconsin Trump has filed.. HarveyH55 wrote: He watches too much CNN... My source is the Wisconsin Supreme Court directly Harvey, not CNN. But hey this is all good news for Trump. He made another $7,000,000 off you chumps in the last 24 hours. Winning! HarveyH55 wrote:There are dozens of lawsuits, different people, and at different levels of the courts. .. This is exactly the game you play with physics issues. No Harvey it's not so complicated no one knows. There either are or are not lawsuits. If you want to refer to one you can name it. Otherwise you're just being intentionally vague. HarveyH55 wrote:I do think that mail-in ballots will be rejected, Just to be clear: you thing ballots cast through the mail by voters, legally entitled to vote, and following the instructions they were given, should be invalidated? Fake ballots don't count, dumbass. Keep your lawsuits straight. 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 While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
06-12-2020 20:03
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: HarveyH55 wrote: tmiddles wrote:There either are or are not lawsuits. If you want to refer to one you can name it. Otherwise you're just being intentionally vague.... It's not just a single dispute, and just one lawsuit. There were multiple separate issues to be resolved. You are over-simplifying, reducing it to something ridiculous... I'm not "over simplifying" by naming a specific lawsuit. If you want to refer to one name it. There are not some unknown number. It's all public information. HarveyH55 wrote:They were given bad instructions, to do something they weren't legally entitled to do..... Do you think it's fair to all the voters, who followed the law, be denied their choices, because some officials, decided to cut some legal corners, to make voting easier for Biden supporters? ...... So someone who followed the instructions to vote by mail given by their own government, someone legally entitled to vote, should have their vote cancelled because they are "lazy" and it would be unfair to the other voters? You can see it's a bit unclear how you are justifying that. 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 While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
06-12-2020 20:03
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: ...too lazy to think for himself .... IBD starts a thread referencing a lawsuit. I find the direct link to it. He then claims it's not the right lawsuit but refuses to clarify. ...then claims I'm being lazy. Another round of Hide The Ball. 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 While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
06-12-2020 20:15
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: ... should have recognized that those were illegal instructions.... So a voter should realize that the instructions on how to vote their own government gives them are illegal when as we speak there has yet to be a ruling by a court to that effect. That is some exotic logic. But! It's worth $7,000,000 a day to team Trump so keep that train rolling right? MAGA! Headlines "Venezuela to Vote in an Election the Opposition Calls a Charade" "President Trump delivers remarks outlining election fraud" After 4 years under Trump in states with Republican control across the board we have achieved a Venrmezualan level of GREAT AGAIN. How? 007 Men In Black Harry Potter level DNC Magic Tricks. So skilled are the DNC they did it all without leaving enough evidence for a single conviction.
06-12-2020 20:21
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: ... should have recognized that those were illegal instructions.... So a voter should realize that the instructions on how to vote their own government gives them are illegal Yes. What part of "ignorance of the law is no excuse" do you not fully grasp? It doesn't matter what person is telling you to break the law. It simply doesn't matter. If the law says that you cannot vote by mail unless you fall into a specific category and follow certain procedures then no, you cannot vote by mail if you do not fall into any of the specified categories or have not followed the specified procedures. Please tell me what you don't understand about that. Please help me understand how you don't think the law must be followed if someone is telling/urging you to break the law. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
06-12-2020 20:49
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: Yes. What part of "ignorance of the law is no excuse" do you not fully grasp?. The laws are made by legislation and clarified/resolved by the court. So once again you are wrong. If the government has instructed voters on how to cast a vote, and they follow those instructions, then they have not violated the law. That is an oxymoronic argument you are trying to make. How do you, IBD, "KNOW" what the law is?
06-12-2020 21:09
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Yes. What part of "ignorance of the law is no excuse" do you not fully grasp?. The laws are made by legislation and clarified/resolved by the court. Nope. Once again you are wrong. The courts clarify/resolve cases per the law, not the laws themselves. The courts do not get to "interpret" any law or somehow establish what the law "really means." That would be legislating from the bench. Only the legislature legislates. Once the legislature establishes a law, the only option any judge has is to follow that law and to apply it, as written. People who are capable of thinking for themselves are able to read the Constitution and see that that is the case. tmiddles wrote:If the government has instructed voters on how to cast a vote, and they follow those instructions, then they have not violated the law. You obviously aren't smart enough to be addressing this topic. I don't know what to tell you. 1. It doesn't matter what person tells/urges you to break the law and it doesn't matter what person assures you that you won't be breaking the law or that it is somehow OK. If you break the law then you are guilty of breaking the law. I can't help you out any more than that. Perhaps if you weren't such a moron you might be able to grasp some of these concepts. One more time, it doesn't matter who tells you what. You can't break the law. 2. Ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law, nor is "Someone told me it was OK." You breaking the law is all that matters and is all that is required for you to be punished under the penal code. One more time, it doesn't matter who tells you what. You can't break the law. It would be a more productive use of our time to instead focus on your cognitive shortcomings preventing you from understanding what most teenagers intuitively understand. You aren't going to get anywhere in any discussion or somehow find your way out of your confusion by continuing to pursue topics above your maturity level. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
06-12-2020 21:36
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: The courts clarify/resolve cases per the law, not the laws themselves. Wrong. The legislature frequently pass laws that are in conflict and it is the courts roll to clarify that. For example: The Supreme Court ruled there was a conflict between the miseggregation laws and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment in the ACLU 1967 case Loving v. Virginia Federal law supercedes state law. Interracial marriage was legalized when court cleared up that conflict in the law. That's their job. Here today there is an argument by Trump that there is a conflict in the laws of Wisconsin and guess where its decided? In court. You again pretend that: IBdaMann wrote:...what person tells/urges you to break the law.... as though private citizens created mail in voting in Wisconsin. "The Law" of Wisconsin is the body of all of its governmental rules and regulations (which are all extensions of the law) including those for voting. Mail in votes were part of the law of the state. You again dodged: How do you, IBD, "KNOW" what the law is? Did you learn them from the same guy who orally instructed you on physics? IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote:So help me out here. How did you learn the Stefan-Boltzmann Law and why do you trust that it's not made up garbage? Someone explained the science to me, as I have to you, and then I was able to go into a lab and apply the scientific method. I could not show it to be false so I can't call it garbage. You DIY Wisconsin law too? Your commitment to never having any sources is so consistent. Edited on 06-12-2020 21:46
06-12-2020 23:43
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	tmiddles wrote:Wrong. The legislature frequently pass laws that are in conflict and it is the courts roll to clarify that. Once again you are wrong and I am right. If the legislature makes conflicting laws then it is the legislature's responsibility to sort it out. No court gets to step in and legislate any fixes to legislation. It's rather amazing that with so much explained to you by people who know so much more than you that you actively choose to remain ignorant and mistaken. tmiddles wrote:Federal law supercedes state law. Stupid wording on our part. Federal law only reigns supreme outside the sovereignty of the States, i.e. interstate commerce, where of course the Federal law exists for that purpose. You should break your personal ignorance standard one of these days and just read the Constitution for comprehension. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
07-12-2020 00:58
keepit ★★★★★ (3060)	The SCOTUS decides conflicts between state laws and the us constitution, or it decides if there is actually a conflict. Judicial review is what they call it.
07-12-2020 01:26
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote:...No court gets to step in and legislate any fixes to legislation. Really? So what do you call this?: The Supreme Court ruled there was a conflict between the miseggregation laws and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment in the ACLU 1967 case Loving v. Virginia Where was the legislature in that process? State laws against interracial marriage were cancelled overnight with the strike of the gavel. And you, Mr. NOTHING CAN BE KNOWN! are still dodging: How do you, IBD, "KNOW" what the law is? Edited on 07-12-2020 02:22
07-12-2020 03:14
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: ... should have recognized that those were illegal instructions.... So a voter should realize that the instructions on how to vote their own government gives them are illegal when as we speak there has yet to be a ruling by a court to that effect. Denial of the justice system. Denial of Wisconsin law. tmiddles wrote: That is some exotic logic. You deny logic. tmiddles wrote: But! It's worth $7,000,000 a day to team Trump so keep that train rolling right? MAGA! Headlines "Venezuela to Vote in an Election the Opposition Calls a Charade" "President Trump delivers remarks outlining election fraud" After 4 years under Trump in states with Republican control across the board The House is Democrat control, bozo. tmiddles wrote: we have achieved a Venrmezualan level of GREAT AGAIN. We are considerably better off than Venezuela. We have a constitution, and Trump is trying to defend it. tmiddles wrote: How? 007 Men In Black Harry Potter level DNC Magic Tricks. So skilled are the DNC they did it all without leaving enough evidence for a single conviction. Denial of history. Denial of justice system. Some Democrats have already been convicted. More will follow. 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 While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan

07-12-2020 03:16
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: Yes. What part of "ignorance of the law is no excuse" do you not fully grasp?. The laws are made by legislation and clarified/resolved by the court. So once again you are wrong. WRONG. Courts to NOT have authority to write law. tmiddles wrote: If the government has instructed voters on how to cast a vote, and they follow those instructions, then they have not violated the law. The voters haven't, but the election commission that wrote those instructions did. tmiddles wrote: That is an oxymoronic argument you are trying to make. Fallacy fallacy. Contextomy fallacy. tmiddles wrote: How do you, IBD, "KNOW" what the law is? Read the law, stupid. It's not secret. 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 While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
07-12-2020 03:19
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	tmiddles wrote:How do you, IBD, "KNOW" what the law is? The law was exressed in English ... and I happen to have a solid command of the English language. Does this also explain why you do NOT know what the law is? . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
07-12-2020 03:24
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: The courts clarify/resolve cases per the law, not the laws themselves. Wrong. The legislature frequently pass laws that are in conflict and it is the courts roll to clarify that. WRONG. The court does NOT have authority to write law. tmiddles wrote: For example: The Supreme Court ruled there was a conflict between the miseggregation laws and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment in the ACLU 1967 case Loving v. Virginia Federal law supercedes state law. Interracial marriage was legalized when court cleared up that conflict in the law. WRONG. They threw out the law. They didn't clarify it. tmiddles wrote: That's their job. You don't know what their job is. Read Article III of the Constitution of the United States, and the constitutions of each of the States. tmiddles wrote: Here today there is an argument by Trump that there is a conflict in the laws of Wisconsin and guess where its decided? In court In the legislature. Trump is not suing because there is a conflict in any law. He is suing because the election commission broke the law. tmiddles wrote: You again pretend that: IBD is not pretending. You do, however, all the time. IBdaMann wrote:...what person tells/urges you to break the law.... as though private citizens created mail in voting in Wisconsin.[/quote] Mail-in voting in Wisconsin is illegal. See the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin. tmiddles wrote: "The Law" of Wisconsin is the body of all of its governmental rules and regulations (which are all extensions of the law) including those for voting. Mail in votes were part of the law of the state. Mail-in voting is illegal in the State of Wisconsin. tmiddles wrote: You again dodged: He is not dodging. You are. tmiddles wrote: How do you, IBD, "KNOW" what the law is? RQAA tmiddles wrote: Did you learn them from the same guy who orally instructed you on physics? RQAA tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: tmiddles wrote:So help me out here. How did you learn the Stefan-Boltzmann Law and why do you trust that it's not made up garbage? Someone explained the science to me, as I have to you, and then I was able to go into a lab and apply the scientific method. I could not show it to be false so I can't call it garbage. You DIY Wisconsin law too? RQAA tmiddles wrote: Your commitment to never having any sources is so consistent. RQAA. Your questions have already been answered. Stop asking them. 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 While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
07-12-2020 03:26
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	keepit wrote: The SCOTUS decides conflicts between state laws and the us constitution, or it decides if there is actually a conflict. Judicial review is what they call it. SCOTUS has no authority to change or interpret the Constitution of the United States, nor the constitution of any State. These are laws that SCOTUS cannot decide. 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 While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
07-12-2020 03:27
Into the Night★★★★★ (21600)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:...No court gets to step in and legislate any fixes to legislation. Really? So what do you call this?: The Supreme Court ruled there was a conflict between the miseggregation laws and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment in the ACLU 1967 case Loving v. Virginia Where was the legislature in that process? State laws against interracial marriage were cancelled overnight with the strike of the gavel. And you, Mr. NOTHING CAN BE KNOWN! are still dodging: How do you, IBD, "KNOW" what the law is? 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 While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
07-12-2020 03:41
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	Into the Night wrote:...Some Democrats have already been convicted.... ??? Let me guess what you'll say about that entirely bazaar statement. RQAA? Into the Night wrote:.The House is Democrat control.. Trump had a Republican House and Senate for his first 2 years. Into the Night wrote:WRONG. Courts to NOT have authority to write law..They threw out the law. Yes they did. They settled a conflict between two laws. Did you think I stated that they had written a new law? Like with a fresh piece of paper? No I didn't say that. Into the Night wrote: tmiddles wrote: How do you, IBD, "KNOW" what the law is? Read the law, stupid. It's not secret. IBdaMann wrote:The law was exressed in English ... Ah but it seems it is with you guys. How/where do you ITN read Wisconsin law? IBD? INFOWARS? Into the Night wrote:.. the election commission broke the law... What would you say his chances are to win in court and what will you think if he doesn't?
07-12-2020 03:49
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	tmiddles wrote: What would you say his chances are to win in court and what will you think if he doesn't? Wrong question ... you haven't been paying attention. What will you say when Trump wins in the legislature? Answer: You will deny the Constitution in a dire snowflake meltdown. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
07-12-2020 03:57
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote:What will you say when Trump wins in the legislature? In all fours states he needs to win the presidency or in just the one state he'd needs to destroy the country? I guess I'd say that the US died faster that I though it could.
07-12-2020 04:52
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14414)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote:What will you say when Trump wins in the legislature? In all fours states he needs to win the presidency or in just the one state he'd needs to destroy the country? I guess I'd say that the US died faster that I though it could. You could have just written that I was correct in predicting that Trump would win and that you would have an irrational denial-laden snowflake meltdown. The operative word in your case is "denial." Trump is going to win because Democrats perpetrated massive election fraud, all of which you deny because those who do your thinking for you have so ordered it. It needs to be corrected, so it will be. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit 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
07-12-2020 06:01
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote:...Trump is going to win ... How many states will he "flip"? All 50? Come on let's get a prediction as you seem toknow so many things all of a sudden. Hey do you know which democrats have been convicted? ITN knows somehow. Into the Night wrote:Some Democrats have already been convicted. More will follow. You tell me and then I'll alert the press. The guys who insisted NOTHING CAN BE KNOWN are now just full of knowledge it's amazing. Is it INFOWARS again? Edited on 07-12-2020 06:01

Page 1 of 2

Join the debate Ultra Vires - Latin for "Wisconsin will Flip for Trump":

Threads	Replies	Last post
Do you think the Supreme Court will ban Trump	64	31-01-2024 22:27
How many of the unreleased FBI-Swan Interview files does Trump have?	4	16-09-2023 03:05
How many of the unreleased FBI-JFK assassination files does Trump have?	45	13-09-2023 22:50
The deep state has a choice, destroy Trump, or help him get reelected	1	13-09-2023 01:14
Trump appointed federal Judge Limits Federal Government's Contact with Social Media Companies	3	06-07-2023 18:11