Doesn’t matter what some judge thinks.... depends on what the SCOTUS thinks. Seems within reason all votes counted after they forced all pole watchers to leave should be thrown out
The problem is that it doesn't say shall watch, it says shall be allowed. They are going to argue that the watchers left on their own. That's where all the public statements that they were "sent" home are going to be critical.
But there is video of that jerk off telling everyone to go home and they will meet up and start counting in the morning. Have you seen that video of that fuck face with the penis shaped head and goofy hair
This type of "thinking" is one of the reasons professional requirements documents are moving their language to MUST instead of SHALL for requirement descriptions.
All because people can't understand how language was used when it was originally written. I don't think "shall" is ambiguous at all in a requirement, but I'm not a Supreme Court Justice.
Maybe this is a backdoor way to weaken the 2nd Amendment even more, "shall not be infringed" doesn't mean we can't infringe, it just means we're not supposed to, but we'll do it anyways.
Yeah, apparently this came up while desegregating schools. Schools were told they 'shall' integrate the minority students, and the schools said 'sure'. Just kept delaying it until finally the courts said 'now'.
I hope you're right, they obviously violated the spirit of the law, but they're saying that no official stoppage was announced, they were under the impression it would stop and left of their own volition.
It's obvious BS, especially considering they wanted to be there and were available and deceit was used to subvert the law but still that is what they're saying.
They will argue they WERE allowed and that everyone left of their own free will. How do we turn this into a legal argument before a court? Is the allegation that they were not allowed to watch and were forced to leave, if so, by whom?
"allowed" is the slippery one though. They've been saying "they were allowed to observe, it was their choice to leave, we made no official stop announcement. Hur durr".
"The witnesses are all lying, your honor! We did NOT tell them all to GTFO! They all just happened to leave at the same time and not come back. I mean, that's not our problem, your honor."
Oh how I wish someone was audio recording and got it on tape that the announcement was made for everyone to leave. Maybe they have that and they're saving it for a time when they actually get to present their evidence in court? No point in providing that tape when your suit is getting bounced out anyway. Save it for the surprise shock and awe.
"poll watchers shall be allowed to observe the [ballot tabulation] process"
If they were deceived into leaving by falsely being told work was done for the night, they were thereby NOT ALLOWED to observe. Clear violation of the law.
What the hell are you smoking? Are you talking about the statements by the GA SoS and his cronies? You're calling statement by the accused parties an "official report"? Yes, and Bernie Madoff is totally on the up and up, because he said so! Jfc.
The official investigation is still ongoing.
Fact: The cheaters counted ballots without witnesses.
Fact: Counting ballots without witnesses is against the law in Ga.
Fact: The cheaters counted the same ballots multiple times as seen in the video.
gorman: Well the investigator for the SOS who won't lift a finger to do anything for some weird reason said everything was ok. So that ends it.
Even if you concede that they choose to leave because everyone was told that they would stop counting, you have the same problem.
You cannot attend a party if you don't know where and when the party is taking place. No one would say they were allowed to go to a party if they don't know where and when it is happening.
To constrain the problem further, you wouldn't be allowed to go to a party that you knew where and had a general idea of when was happening, but the party organizer told you it would not be happening at the specific time the party was happening.
The injury in this sense it to all poll watchers who were not allowed to go to the State Farm arena, because they did not know an election process was taking place during that time.
The weaker injury is to the poll watchers who left.
I said that if you allow someone to observe a process, you cannot say that they were allowed if the organizers misled them on the time and the place of the process in question.
They didn't choose to leave. They were told to leave. It's an idiotic argument. Saying they chose to leave when they were told to leave is a lie. Lies are all the pedocrats have, but relying on lies is not a good argument.
You admit it's not true, then you say we have to live in reality.
Do you think every Republican poll watcher that was told to leave is going to lie to cover for the pedocrats? Or do you think every poll watcher that was told to leave will confirm that they were told to leave?
The pedocrats and their pedo enabling supporters are in trouble. Their argument is based on a lie. That's not a strong position to be in.
The question is if the poll watchers were aware of the continued counting and I find it rather hard to believe they chose not to be present. If no attempts were made to contact them and they were left in the dark then they were effectively denied access. Clearly their intent was to circumvent the law with semantic subterfuge.
The argument against us here is that “allowed” doesn’t mean facilitated, it just means not denied access. Which is also a horrible argument because people were told to leave the building for a number of reasons. Poll watchers are not omnipotent, they can’t just know when ballots are being counted with no announcement.
The point is, if they were told go home/ counting is over for the night, as even the media has admitted, then the count that occured after is by definition, fraudulent, as they tricked legal challengers, observers, and media into leaving, waited till the coast was clear, and proceeded to count holders full of ballots that were out of sight the entire day, for hours on end.
It is legally airtight, as it has affidavit, video, and even media testimony (before they backpedalled) backing it up.
To say nothing of the fact that it coincided with a massive vote dump from that same county for biden.
I see your point now. To be honest, I think we will see a Trump win without Georgia at this point.
They weren't told to go home. They just all decided to go home at the same time that the FAKE NEWS reported that they were told to go home. The ballots are legal. It's been DEBOOONKED.
we do not have to argue that they were not allowed to be there, but that they were deceived into leaving, which there is more than enough evidence to show. kiukcing them out by force would be the open close case, but the threshold of "they said counting was done for the night and we believed them" is only slightly harder to prove.
I find it rather hard to believe that the poll watchers chose not to be present when those ballots were counted. If they were left in the dark then they were effectively denied access.
Disagree on grounds that poll watchers are required to be given the opportunity to observe any time a ballot is being processed. If these employees said "Y'all should go home for the night." then I would agree with you. However, if they said "We are done counting ballots until tomorrow morning, nothing to see here." then they would be in violation as the watchers were lied to and not given the opportunity to observe. This has been confirmed by media on that night when they stated no more ballots will be counted until morning as well as the sworn affidavits.
How can one be ALLOWED to observe a process that is not taking place as stated by the person in charge of that process? If that process then does take place in direct contradiction to what was relayed to the media and watchers (again, confirmed by the media on election night as well), how would this NOT violate election code? This seems pretty cut and dry.
Shall is a contractual term meaning no way out of it. Learned this early on with Government contracts and documents. There is no wiggle room. Sterling said otherwise and he is wrong. Once they were kicked out and the counting starts again that is a breech of agreement. They should either be tossed out or recounted with observers. They don't want to do either because they know they would be busted for fraud.
So that one douchebag press secretary for the GA SOS, says that watchers are allowed, not required. His legal argument I think is solid. I’d say the counter argument of being lied to and manipulated into leaving by workers violates their right to be allowed to be there and goes against the spirit of the law.
GA Governor-Brian Kemp ... we must be getting to him!! He doesn't show his email anymore!!!! Kemp's trying to make it harder to contact him!! WE THE PEOPLE deserve the ability TO COMMUNICATE w/our Politicians AS EASILY AS POSSIBLE!! http://www.ciclt.net/sn/leg_app/po_detail.aspx?ClientCode=gsba&P_IDEO=gasw01 Doesn't it make your blood BOIL??
Yes, and the elections officials said, "just because we said we were done counting for the night doesn't mean the observers had to leave." The law states they "shall be allowed to observe", they're trying to say they were allowed, they just didn't know the counting wasn't done. We have the tapes though, the news reported about the water main break the night of the election, not the next day, like they're trying to claim. These people are enemies of the Republic.
They were lied to and told no counting was going to happen; however, they were not told to that they had to leave. They could have hung around. So "technically" they were allowed to observe.
This is why they're saying they KNEW the fake results would get tossed. They were trying ro get caught. They don't care. They want us at eachothers throats.
The text clearly states that the observation cannot interfere with poll officials. As transparent observation is incapable of coexisting with blatant fraud the very act of observation is a violation of this law. Therefore this case has been dismissed with prejudice. Further, I authorize the destruction of all evidence. Additionally, the court records must say “Orange Man Bad”.
Wasn't it in Michigan where the witness said every time she challenged a ballot they yelled at her to stop interfering? Then they chased him or her out? Think it was the Indian gal who said they would cheer when someone got ran out.
Interfering with our cheating = interfering with the poll workers in their minds
Sorry but you’re misreading the text. “Shall be allowed” means only that they must have the option to watch. The GA officials are arguing the observers left on their own (which is BS, but still)
I agree but the election officials are claiming the observers left on their own accord, which is clearly a load of crap but that’s their way of pretending this was legal
Laws governing recall in Georgia
-an act of malfeasance or misconduct while in office,
-violation of the oath of office,
-failure to perform duties prescribed by law, or
-willfully misusing, converting, or misappropriating, without authority, public property or public funds entrusted to or associated with the elective office to which the official has been elected or appointed.
https://ballotpedia.org/Laws_governing_recall_in_Georgia
Judge: language is a livjng thing and it changes when demonrats are in danger
Bill Clinton is a rapist.
InfoWars dot com
THE ANSWER TO 1984 IS 1776
BANNED.VIDEO
Bill Clinton shall rape.
That's it! My password!
lmao. God speed, pede.
It will be on my headstone.
26+ flights on Lolita Express
RULES IS RULES, MON!
Technically all ballots should be thrown out since Republican poll watchers were not allowed to see anything, even while present.
But they claim being 6 to 100 feet away is still considered "observing" the process.
I don't know about that. Asking someone to go home under threat of having the police called on them sounds like intimidation to me.
Doesn’t matter what some judge thinks.... depends on what the SCOTUS thinks. Seems within reason all votes counted after they forced all pole watchers to leave should be thrown out
Seriously?
Judge: they were allowed we don’t know why they all left suddenly after being told the counting was done for the night.
I hate that
The problem is that it doesn't say shall watch, it says shall be allowed. They are going to argue that the watchers left on their own. That's where all the public statements that they were "sent" home are going to be critical.
But there is video of that jerk off telling everyone to go home and they will meet up and start counting in the morning. Have you seen that video of that fuck face with the penis shaped head and goofy hair
Correct.
"Shall" means "must".
This is long-established legal language.
This type of "thinking" is one of the reasons professional requirements documents are moving their language to MUST instead of SHALL for requirement descriptions.
All because people can't understand how language was used when it was originally written. I don't think "shall" is ambiguous at all in a requirement, but I'm not a Supreme Court Justice.
Maybe this is a backdoor way to weaken the 2nd Amendment even more, "shall not be infringed" doesn't mean we can't infringe, it just means we're not supposed to, but we'll do it anyways.
Right, but shall also doesn't establish timeline or consequences for failure. I shall eat right, is a matter of life or death! Just not today....
True. If there's no penalty, or no will to enforce the law, then they usually get away with it. Unfortunately.
It's ultimately up to us, the people, to hold their feet to the fire.
Yeah, apparently this came up while desegregating schools. Schools were told they 'shall' integrate the minority students, and the schools said 'sure'. Just kept delaying it until finally the courts said 'now'.
They 100% will argue that, but it 100% won't fly. Observers must be informed about the when and where of the process to be able to observe.
I hope you're right, they obviously violated the spirit of the law, but they're saying that no official stoppage was announced, they were under the impression it would stop and left of their own volition.
It's obvious BS, especially considering they wanted to be there and were available and deceit was used to subvert the law but still that is what they're saying.
Except they made them leave and then locked the doors on them, which is literally the opposite of being allowed in.
Devils advocate - so they “Must be allowed”
They will argue they WERE allowed and that everyone left of their own free will. How do we turn this into a legal argument before a court? Is the allegation that they were not allowed to watch and were forced to leave, if so, by whom?
"allowed" is the slippery one though. They've been saying "they were allowed to observe, it was their choice to leave, we made no official stop announcement. Hur durr".
whod have thunk the state of georgia is more corrupt than the country?
"Allowed" instead of "required" is the excuse they're using.
It's not just about knowing they could. It's about misleading observers into thinking the process was halted.
"The witnesses are all lying, your honor! We did NOT tell them all to GTFO! They all just happened to leave at the same time and not come back. I mean, that's not our problem, your honor."
Oh how I wish someone was audio recording and got it on tape that the announcement was made for everyone to leave. Maybe they have that and they're saving it for a time when they actually get to present their evidence in court? No point in providing that tape when your suit is getting bounced out anyway. Save it for the surprise shock and awe.
Excellent point!
Yup.
If they were deceived into leaving by falsely being told work was done for the night, they were thereby NOT ALLOWED to observe. Clear violation of the law.
What the hell are you smoking? Are you talking about the statements by the GA SoS and his cronies? You're calling statement by the accused parties an "official report"? Yes, and Bernie Madoff is totally on the up and up, because he said so! Jfc.
The official investigation is still ongoing.
Fact: The cheaters counted ballots without witnesses. Fact: Counting ballots without witnesses is against the law in Ga. Fact: The cheaters counted the same ballots multiple times as seen in the video.
gorman: Well the investigator for the SOS who won't lift a finger to do anything for some weird reason said everything was ok. So that ends it.
gorman newsflash: You're a fucking idiot!
what if you approach it as:
They were told to leave the building, which means they were not allowed to remain.
Why wouldn’t that be enough? They MUST be allowed but WERE NOT allowed. And the claims of fraud all stem from those hours when they were not allowed.
It's almost as if they planned this.
That's not how they work though.
Right, but if we're not careful, we're painting ourselves into our own corner...
"Likely illegal ballots..." Is that what those were? Can we prove it?
"...allowed to determine the outcome of the election." Is that what happened here? Can we prove it?
They don't even have to be illegal ballots. You can commit fraud in the count with perfectly legal ballots in plenty of ways.
Yes.
The key factor that seems to be missing in all of this is, "Can we prove it?"
^ THIS
If this was the "kracken", we're screwed.
Are you kidding, that would be the will of the fraud perpetrators
How about they see judges swinging from their necks for denying the cases? Think that could change their fucking mind.
Even if you concede that they choose to leave because everyone was told that they would stop counting, you have the same problem.
You cannot attend a party if you don't know where and when the party is taking place. No one would say they were allowed to go to a party if they don't know where and when it is happening.
To constrain the problem further, you wouldn't be allowed to go to a party that you knew where and had a general idea of when was happening, but the party organizer told you it would not be happening at the specific time the party was happening.
The injury in this sense it to all poll watchers who were not allowed to go to the State Farm arena, because they did not know an election process was taking place during that time.
The weaker injury is to the poll watchers who left.
I never did.
I said that if you allow someone to observe a process, you cannot say that they were allowed if the organizers misled them on the time and the place of the process in question.
It’s not in dispute. They were told counting would be be taking place.
They counter this by saying they were not told to leave.
This is irrelevant because not knowing counting would be talking leave disallows other observers from viewing the counting.
They didn't choose to leave. They were told to leave. It's an idiotic argument. Saying they chose to leave when they were told to leave is a lie. Lies are all the pedocrats have, but relying on lies is not a good argument.
You admit it's not true, then you say we have to live in reality.
Do you think every Republican poll watcher that was told to leave is going to lie to cover for the pedocrats? Or do you think every poll watcher that was told to leave will confirm that they were told to leave?
The pedocrats and their pedo enabling supporters are in trouble. Their argument is based on a lie. That's not a strong position to be in.
It means we start visiting these judge's houses with 1st and 2nd amendment in tow.
Looks like Antifa is back on the menu, boys!
Yep, election is over. Trump won
The question is if the poll watchers were aware of the continued counting and I find it rather hard to believe they chose not to be present. If no attempts were made to contact them and they were left in the dark then they were effectively denied access. Clearly their intent was to circumvent the law with semantic subterfuge.
Then they were not allowed access and the ballots were illegally counted.
Civilization is the construct of the ebil white man.
PA and MI statutes also have such a provision.
The argument against us here is that “allowed” doesn’t mean facilitated, it just means not denied access. Which is also a horrible argument because people were told to leave the building for a number of reasons. Poll watchers are not omnipotent, they can’t just know when ballots are being counted with no announcement.
That is the law so my question is who will enforce it??????????????????????????????????????????????
"shall be allowed" does not mean "shall"
They are required to be allowed, but aren't required for votes to count.
These LARPs are getting out of control.
The point is, if they were told go home/ counting is over for the night, as even the media has admitted, then the count that occured after is by definition, fraudulent, as they tricked legal challengers, observers, and media into leaving, waited till the coast was clear, and proceeded to count holders full of ballots that were out of sight the entire day, for hours on end.
It is legally airtight, as it has affidavit, video, and even media testimony (before they backpedalled) backing it up.
To say nothing of the fact that it coincided with a massive vote dump from that same county for biden.
I see your point now. To be honest, I think we will see a Trump win without Georgia at this point.
They weren't told to go home. They just all decided to go home at the same time that the FAKE NEWS reported that they were told to go home. The ballots are legal. It's been DEBOOONKED.
we do not have to argue that they were not allowed to be there, but that they were deceived into leaving, which there is more than enough evidence to show. kiukcing them out by force would be the open close case, but the threshold of "they said counting was done for the night and we believed them" is only slightly harder to prove.
I find it rather hard to believe that the poll watchers chose not to be present when those ballots were counted. If they were left in the dark then they were effectively denied access.
Disagree on grounds that poll watchers are required to be given the opportunity to observe any time a ballot is being processed. If these employees said "Y'all should go home for the night." then I would agree with you. However, if they said "We are done counting ballots until tomorrow morning, nothing to see here." then they would be in violation as the watchers were lied to and not given the opportunity to observe. This has been confirmed by media on that night when they stated no more ballots will be counted until morning as well as the sworn affidavits.
How can one be ALLOWED to observe a process that is not taking place as stated by the person in charge of that process? If that process then does take place in direct contradiction to what was relayed to the media and watchers (again, confirmed by the media on election night as well), how would this NOT violate election code? This seems pretty cut and dry.
Democrats: That law is racist
No, they need to be able to interfere when there's fraudulent votes.
Shall is a contractual term meaning no way out of it. Learned this early on with Government contracts and documents. There is no wiggle room. Sterling said otherwise and he is wrong. Once they were kicked out and the counting starts again that is a breech of agreement. They should either be tossed out or recounted with observers. They don't want to do either because they know they would be busted for fraud.
Suspects are Dems, therefore the law doesn't apply. That's been the rule for quite a few years now....
One might say... it's mandatory.
Laws don't matter when you have hack judges. Case dismissed!
The line above that too. It states that when shutting down what the shall do as well.
If we're expecting anyone in the justice system to know wtf 'SHALL' means - let me introduce you to the Second Amendment - /sigh.
They did observe it in a matter that didn't interfere with poll officials. They observed from their homes after they were all kicked out.
Not sure of the equivalence of those two things.
I'm allowed to go to the grocery store today. I'm not required to do that.
The observers aren't required to be there, but **THEY are required ** to allow them. Not allowing them is where they broke the law.
So that one douchebag press secretary for the GA SOS, says that watchers are allowed, not required. His legal argument I think is solid. I’d say the counter argument of being lied to and manipulated into leaving by workers violates their right to be allowed to be there and goes against the spirit of the law.
GA Governor-Brian Kemp ... we must be getting to him!! He doesn't show his email anymore!!!! Kemp's trying to make it harder to contact him!! WE THE PEOPLE deserve the ability TO COMMUNICATE w/our Politicians AS EASILY AS POSSIBLE!! http://www.ciclt.net/sn/leg_app/po_detail.aspx?ClientCode=gsba&P_IDEO=gasw01 Doesn't it make your blood BOIL??
The Supreme Court has ruled that the word shall means must and mandatory.
But. There was a water main break and a flood to rival Noah.
THIS is the WAY
The meaning of “shall” has been drilled into my head as an electrician studying for licensing tests.
"shall be allowed"
Even if you define shall as 'required', which in and of itself is a dubious overreach, all that is required then is that they be allowed.
Were they not allowed?
Were they denied access or denied the opportunity? No.
There's an argument to be made but it's not the one you're making, and not using the definitions you are.
Who enforces these rules
Magic word in government.
Yes, and the elections officials said, "just because we said we were done counting for the night doesn't mean the observers had to leave." The law states they "shall be allowed to observe", they're trying to say they were allowed, they just didn't know the counting wasn't done. We have the tapes though, the news reported about the water main break the night of the election, not the next day, like they're trying to claim. These people are enemies of the Republic.
They were lied to and told no counting was going to happen; however, they were not told to that they had to leave. They could have hung around. So "technically" they were allowed to observe.
This is why they're saying they KNEW the fake results would get tossed. They were trying ro get caught. They don't care. They want us at eachothers throats.
The (dis)Honorable Judge Rino has ruled:
The text clearly states that the observation cannot interfere with poll officials. As transparent observation is incapable of coexisting with blatant fraud the very act of observation is a violation of this law. Therefore this case has been dismissed with prejudice. Further, I authorize the destruction of all evidence. Additionally, the court records must say “Orange Man Bad”.
You can't just disenfranchise all those ink jet printers like that!
LAUNCH THIS POST TO THE TOP PEDES!!! This should be a sticky!!
Wasn't it in Michigan where the witness said every time she challenged a ballot they yelled at her to stop interfering? Then they chased him or her out? Think it was the Indian gal who said they would cheer when someone got ran out. Interfering with our cheating = interfering with the poll workers in their minds
Sorry but you’re misreading the text. “Shall be allowed” means only that they must have the option to watch. The GA officials are arguing the observers left on their own (which is BS, but still)
I agree but the election officials are claiming the observers left on their own accord, which is clearly a load of crap but that’s their way of pretending this was legal
Is this the best we've got? Because as I see it...
They were allowed, they were given the opportunity.
I want to catch'em just as much as the next guy, but we've gotta be iron-clad here. This is weaksauce, IMO.
Is that like the "shall" in "shall not be infringed"?
I think it's just a legal term of art that, in this case, means that if you observe the election they will send someone to shoot your dog.
Not as solid as you may thing as it says they shall be allowed so all they have to prove is no one stopped them.
"Shall be allowed to observe" and they couldn't during the day or the night.
Dems: "They were interferring with us trying to steal the election so we threw them out."
Judge: "Ejection for interferring is in the law. So I'll allow it."
Laws governing recall in Georgia -an act of malfeasance or misconduct while in office, -violation of the oath of office, -failure to perform duties prescribed by law, or -willfully misusing, converting, or misappropriating, without authority, public property or public funds entrusted to or associated with the elective office to which the official has been elected or appointed. https://ballotpedia.org/Laws_governing_recall_in_Georgia
Committee to Recall Gov Kemp (@recallgovkemp) | Twitter https://twitter.com/recallgovkemp?lang=en
Group working to remove Kemp from office https://www.wjcl.com/article/recall-georgias-governor-group-working-to-remove-kemp-from-office-for-how-hes-handled-covid-19/33850737
Recall Governor Brian Kemp - Home | Facebook https://www.facebook.com/RecallGovernorBrianKemp/
Petition · Recall Governor Kemp · Change.org https://www.change.org/p/citizens-of-georgia-recall-governor-kemp