"We are witnessing an insidious shift in our relationship w/ government. We have gone from the burden being on the state to prove that the legal safeguards to prevent fraud were followed to the burden now being on the general public to prove there was fraud."
(twitter.com)
🛑 STOP THE STEAL 🛑
posted ago by Kimball_Kinnison
+2280 / -0
...and that is all because the Supreme Court is letting it happen. The Supreme Court could & should stop this bastardization of our legal system, but their cowardice has them hiding deeply inside their walls while our country crumbles all around them. ACB, Gorsuch, Alito, Thomas, & Kavenaugh need to form a united front & force a Supreme Court intervention & do it now & quickly before the damage is irreversible. You Justices need to get off your fannies & SAVE THIS COUNTRY, dammit.
Funny how people like Greenpeace, which isn't a party that is harmed in their cases get the green light (standing) to sue companies on matters where NO ONE has even been harmed, and they win cases yet the president or the states don't have standing to sue in cases where they have been harmed, and can show proof.
>irreversible
I believe it's already irreversible. We are way past the event horizon at this point, the globo-pedo-chicom alliance went full in, they are committed and can uncommit at this point. There is no coming back to the old normal anymore, imo. This doesn't mean the future isn't bright, it'll just be different from what we were used to up to now. Kinda like what the Soviets went through in the 1980s.
I guess they feel their numbers are too small. They want 17 colleagues.
This is true. They need to prove to us the election was secure rather than just saying “it was secure now move along”
The Dindu School of governance.
This is why I loved Lipitor's response to this (sorry, forgot the name, one of Trump's attorney's that went up against the screeching libtard judges in the zoom call):
"We don't have to prove fraud. All we have to do is show a mishandling of the process. Because it is assumed that, without these procedures and protections in place, fraud WILL take place."
Or something to that effect... It was a very well stated argument IMO.
Unfortunately we will also have to get around the subsequent response of "so the fuck what, Biden wins and fuck you" from our overlords in the bureaucracies. And I think the only way to overcome that is something more...kinetic.
The burden of proof hasn't changed, this guy needs to think a little. It's idiots like this guy who don't help things. The accuser still has the burden of proof.
Our problem has been that the courts are saying we have no standing to even sue and bring the proof.
Not quite right. You're thinking of this in terms of a citizen accusing a citizen, thus the burden of proof being on the accuser in order to preserve the rights of the accused citizens. First, government itself has no rights. People do.
Second, when dealing with legal documentation, it is always on the part of the one submitting the document or evidence to prove that it is genuine first. A cop can't even submit your breathalyzer test in court without demonstrating that the machine was properly tested and calibrated, that tests were given to ensure the effects of residual mouth alcohol weren't present, etc. He can't submit evidence of cocaine found on your person without proving it's cocaine and proving it was found on your person. It's assumed that it wasn't and he has to prove it was. If you show up to your family lawyer with a brand new will you say is from your grandfather and it supersedes the one the lawyer has on file, you have to prove it is genuine. There is never an assumption that presented evidence or court documents are genuine without a chain of custody and actual proof they are genuine. You can't even get a speeding ticket without a registration for a posted traffic control device being on file in the city or county office, and the police officer has to be able to prove that it was there.
So this is not the same situation you're thinking where an accused person gets the presumption of innocence. Documents and evidence have no such right, nor does the government itself.
High IQ post. More people need to understand this.
I don't think anyone disagrees with your second paragraph. But its a whole other issue. But the term "States rights" (the 10th amendment) pretty much debunks your assertion that states don't have rights.
The person who posted that tweet is incorrect that the burden of proof has shifted in any way. The government has a lot of rights. Not NO rights.
ill just leave this here... https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/we-people-united-states-request-president-trump-invoke-insurrection-act-take-back-our-republic-wmilitary
Facts and Evidence mean nothing anymore.
The tree if liberty is thirsty for Democrat blood.
We did prove fraud though.
We did that a month ago.
We are incredibly good at getting to the truth and then getting the truth out there.
We are terrible, however, at converting that truth into legal action. The primary reason for this is our DoJ. They do not enforce the law anymore. They only protect the corrupt and attack the innocent.
We are at war with our own government.
Has any of our court cases that were thrown out had the evidence looked at yet?
Or everyone was thrown out due to bs?
We can shift back to our 1776 relationship where we beyonetted our government until they fucked off and we replaced them.
It is only the law that will keep the state in check. Criminal trials are always about the state following the law. If the state does not follow the law regarding elections, then the only resort is revolution. Remember, the Constitution created the Federal government and left the other powers to the state governments. If they do not follow the laws that created them, they have no standing to govern.