Wouldn't it be more beneficial to order a forensic audit of the ballots? Because who knows what sort of data or applications were already wiped on the voting machines
A thorough inspection of the machines would show exactly how to change votes and erase all tracks of doing so, though, so it would show the method of the crime.
Yes. If they get into the code they'll find the fuckery. Dominion can cry "intellectual property" and sue the United States if they want, or Sydney Powell for that matter. She'll just find herself with a half-billion dollars in a go-fund me account to fight the suit. In the meantime, the whole damn election is a fraud.
Not because Dominion wants IP protected. I support that idea, even if it works against me in the present circumstances. I am rather fond of the idea that I can own property and protect it from being stolen.
The part I have a big issue with is that is Dominion's case to argue, not the states. The states don't own the IP. For example: I have a computer. It starts counting zeros as ones. I call the manufacturer and they say it's working fine. I say fuck you and call a computer repair guy. Am I going to sue the computer repair guy and not allow him to open up the computer? No. The manufacture needs to do that if they want to. Then I will appear in court with the repair guy and say, "Fuck you. Your shit doesn't work and you refused to fix it. Now pay me."
I also have problems with Dominion's IP claims, but that is long and wonky.
I've had a rude awakening about how little these local judges actually care about that, and how there's very few paths for regular people to contest elections.
I'm confident SCOTUS is more flexible and will be willing to make a broad ruling in the name of justice. (they have no trouble creating laws out of whole cloth when the occasion warrants)
Are we going to fall for this every time? The judges let them do their evidence gathering to keep up appearances, and then as soon as they find something, they dismiss the case.
The AZ judge let them inspect the 100 duplicated ballots, they found fraud, and then the case was dismissed today. Why are we pretending over and over that the courts are somehow going to do something at this point?
Where this helps is that several cases have been weak because we've lacked direct, physical evidence and have been relying on affidavits to get courts to allow the legal tools to investigate and obtain additional evidence.
Pretend you're the judge:
"Your honor, I am asking you do invalidate 100,000 votes that the state claims are certified because these 100 good citizens say that they saw things that are didn't look right. Yes, I know that the state has also offered witnesses that have work in elections full time that say otherwise, but they are lying and my witnesses are not."
You almost have to toss that.
Now, if I say, "Your honor, I am asking instead that, based on the evidence we have, to authorize us to inspect the machines and subpoena information, and get deposition from the state's witnesses..."
Now you have to be a liberal hack judge to toss it.
But little by little, you start getting more and more compelling evidence when a judge that isn't a total hack allows it. Hopefully you end up with enough of it, on record in lower courts, that when you end up at appeals courts, including SCOTUS, you have a giant, insurmountable case. You don't get to do all that once you're at SCOTUS.
😲 Unpossible! A judge interested in something illegal happening and willing to allow people to investigate?
Next you'll tell me that elections aren't just graft and circuses. / sarc
This is good news.
A judge doing the right thing? DEEEEBOOOOONKED
I see you Pre-BOOOOONKED and raise you one RACISTBOOOONKED
I wish someone would booonk me
Not gonna lie I have a raging boonker right now
https://thedonald.win/p/11QlB8kxzG/you-are-here-with-preboonkening/c/
REBOOOOONKED!
it is weird that out of all the judges President Trump and the Senate got through, we always manage to get Obama leftovers judging our cases
All this BOOOOOOOONKING is making me COOOOOOOOOOOM
Wouldn't it be more beneficial to order a forensic audit of the ballots? Because who knows what sort of data or applications were already wiped on the voting machines
A thorough inspection of the machines would show exactly how to change votes and erase all tracks of doing so, though, so it would show the method of the crime.
nigga da raid happened like last month brah
I assume (yup, ass u me), that they're going for the machine code and function issues on this.
Yeah, a forensic audit of the ballots is needed too. The prohibition of destruction of evidence Kerik mentions should help there.
Yes. If they get into the code they'll find the fuckery. Dominion can cry "intellectual property" and sue the United States if they want, or Sydney Powell for that matter. She'll just find herself with a half-billion dollars in a go-fund me account to fight the suit. In the meantime, the whole damn election is a fraud.
The IP thing bothers me.
Not because Dominion wants IP protected. I support that idea, even if it works against me in the present circumstances. I am rather fond of the idea that I can own property and protect it from being stolen.
The part I have a big issue with is that is Dominion's case to argue, not the states. The states don't own the IP. For example: I have a computer. It starts counting zeros as ones. I call the manufacturer and they say it's working fine. I say fuck you and call a computer repair guy. Am I going to sue the computer repair guy and not allow him to open up the computer? No. The manufacture needs to do that if they want to. Then I will appear in court with the repair guy and say, "Fuck you. Your shit doesn't work and you refused to fix it. Now pay me."
I also have problems with Dominion's IP claims, but that is long and wonky.
Some judge here understands the value of redress of grievances
Judge needs a POTUS security detail or he might just end up slipping in the kitchen and fall on 18 knives.
I've had a rude awakening about how little these local judges actually care about that, and how there's very few paths for regular people to contest elections.
I'm confident SCOTUS is more flexible and will be willing to make a broad ruling in the name of justice. (they have no trouble creating laws out of whole cloth when the occasion warrants)
Are we going to fall for this every time? The judges let them do their evidence gathering to keep up appearances, and then as soon as they find something, they dismiss the case.
The AZ judge let them inspect the 100 duplicated ballots, they found fraud, and then the case was dismissed today. Why are we pretending over and over that the courts are somehow going to do something at this point?
what now? i thought they got a second sample of 1500 to audit
Yep, happened just a couple hours ago: https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Order-2.pdf
This is about Wisconsin though!
thank you
nigga so who’s right. did them niggas dismiss da case or audit more ballots
I agree for the most part.
Where this helps is that several cases have been weak because we've lacked direct, physical evidence and have been relying on affidavits to get courts to allow the legal tools to investigate and obtain additional evidence.
Pretend you're the judge:
"Your honor, I am asking you do invalidate 100,000 votes that the state claims are certified because these 100 good citizens say that they saw things that are didn't look right. Yes, I know that the state has also offered witnesses that have work in elections full time that say otherwise, but they are lying and my witnesses are not."
You almost have to toss that.
Now, if I say, "Your honor, I am asking instead that, based on the evidence we have, to authorize us to inspect the machines and subpoena information, and get deposition from the state's witnesses..."
Now you have to be a liberal hack judge to toss it.
But little by little, you start getting more and more compelling evidence when a judge that isn't a total hack allows it. Hopefully you end up with enough of it, on record in lower courts, that when you end up at appeals courts, including SCOTUS, you have a giant, insurmountable case. You don't get to do all that once you're at SCOTUS.
Are they new or something ? Lol ... this is so unswampy