6333
Comments (286)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
23
Phins360_FL 23 points ago +25 / -2

how can they say "allegedly" when they have sworn testimony verifying that shit?

32
deleted 32 points ago +32 / -0
10
Phins360_FL 10 points ago +11 / -1

the allegation here is that the election officials allowed fraud to occur.

that has yet to be tried.

that fraud did occur is a FACT and sworn to attest by multiple individuals

4
ShrikeDeCil 4 points ago +4 / -0

But Cup's point is still precisely on point.

They (mostly, didn't dig here) frame the discussion such that they can use "allegation", instead of focusing on the affidavits on hand.

It's a twist of "Republican's Pounce" - "covering the story" by actually covering something else.

They love setting up some strawman and torching it to the ground.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
7
slaphappy2 [S] 7 points ago +7 / -0

al•lege ə-lĕj′► transitive verb To assert to be true; affirm. transitive verb To assert prior to a final determination. transitive verb To state (a plea or excuse, for example) in support or denial of a claim or accusation.

6
Phins360_FL 6 points ago +7 / -1

so if you see a dude steal a car. Cops come and as a result you end up giving a sworn testimony to the DA via affidavit that you saw the thief perpetrate the crime.

That is a determination.

Under penalty of perjury you've testified that what you wrote/spoke is truthful.

Now, don't be pedantic with your definitions. The word allegedly use d by the BB reporter takes away from the FACT there is sworn testimony to the FACT crimes and fraud were committed. that is not alleging anything. That is giving lawful, bound testimony to crimes being committed. nothing alleged about it. BIG difference dude

5
slaphappy2 [S] 5 points ago +5 / -0

Breitbart is one of the few friendly media outlets that we have.

We can find more important reasons that this to battle Breitbart.

It's mildly annoying - but let it go. They are an ally.

-1
Phins360_FL -1 points ago +2 / -3

im not bangin on BB

missing my point

an allegation would be: "joe is a pedo"

sworn testimony that proves "joe is a pedo" is not allegation. it is FACT.

see the diff?

2
HuggableBear 2 points ago +2 / -0

Until there is a conviction, it remains alleged, even if the person alleging it swears it's true. That's just how evidence works. That's why affidavits like this are considered circumstantial and hearsay. They are evidence of a person's belief that something happened, not evidence that it definitely did.

4
FireannDireach 4 points ago +4 / -0

They're not a court, they're not under oath, and they're not a judge. They can say anything they want - and they can demand "evidence" all they want, but the judges gets it first, they can pound sand.

4
Phins360_FL 4 points ago +5 / -1

sworn affidavits are absolutely valid. just like being in court.

You are sworn and give testimony. Under penalty of perjury

3
FireannDireach 3 points ago +3 / -0

I'm well aware of that, pede. No worries. I'm just saying, Rudy needs to ask these whores "Are you a judge? Because they get evidence - you report on it happening."