1
michaelsuede 1 point ago +1 / -0

Given that the courts have refused to do anything about it, it's certainly looking like he can. All of these lockdown orders are unconstitutional and passed by decree - no one seems to give a shit about those "laws" either.

1
michaelsuede 1 point ago +1 / -0

It was unilaterally changed by Kemp under the "Compromise and Settlement Agreement and Release" with the Democratic Party of Georgia Inc. https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/41/2020/03/GA-Settlement-1.pdf

Lin Wood is suing over this, because the law says one thing, but the election regulations are completely different.

1
michaelsuede 1 point ago +1 / -0

It was unilaterally changed by Kemp under the "Compromise and Settlement Agreement and Release" with the Democratic Party of Georgia Inc. https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/41/2020/03/GA-Settlement-1.pdf

Lin Wood is suing over this, because the law says one thing, but the election regulations are completely different.

1
michaelsuede 1 point ago +1 / -0

No, that is old law, it was just changed.

3
michaelsuede 3 points ago +3 / -0

No, it's about 50 democrats and 2 republicans on the city council. The 2 republicans are from Staten Island.

4
michaelsuede 4 points ago +4 / -0

That's all protests ever do. The point of a protest rally is to show elected officials that people are organizing against them. Staten Island is the only area of NY City that has elected Republican city council members, so they are being punished excessively for their rebellion. It also lets the Sheriff know that people are mad, and it's a great opportunity to remind the cops that are standing their that they are destroying the lives of people by enforcing unconstitutional "laws".

1
michaelsuede 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well contact Daniel and tell him to start one for you!

358
michaelsuede 358 points ago +358 / -0

130 Lincoln Ave, Staten Island. NY’ERS SHOW THE FUCK UP!

Owner Danny Presti was taken away in handcuffs by sheriffs at 7:15 p.m. last night (12/1/2020) for violating China Virus unconstitutional lock-down orders.

Update: Hell yeah! Protest outside of Mac's Public House in Staten Island last night after the commie police arrested owner Danny Presti for running his business.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DugB9ojfWy0

17
michaelsuede 17 points ago +17 / -0

These are all for people claiming that a courthouse is their primary residence. They are all fraudulent by default.

26
michaelsuede 26 points ago +26 / -0

These are for people who claim their primary residence is a court house. They are fraudulent by default.

25
michaelsuede 25 points ago +25 / -0

Link to tweet: https://twitter.com/LLinWood/status/1333494695230582785?s=20

One other thing to keep in mind, this is just for the three courthouse addresses - how many more are for vacant lots, warehouses, fake home addresses, etc..etc.. etc.. that were never identified?

1
michaelsuede 1 point ago +1 / -0

Anyone got any links to support this? I hate these picture posts.

7
michaelsuede 7 points ago +7 / -0

Barr talks a mad game. I could listen to his lectures all day. That said, talk is cheap.

4
michaelsuede 4 points ago +4 / -0

If you need a mobile server to conduct a re-count, it stands to reason you need one to conduct a normal count - either way there's no way these machines can be air gapped to conduct a count if they need to be lan administered to conduct a re-count.

Even if they are LAN administered, who is in control of the mobile server? Is the mobile server tied to the internet?

Ask yourself how all of these major metropolitan areas knew exactly how many votes Biden needed to beat Trump. The only way that's possible is for there to be a coordinated reporting of the vote counts in real time. And now we find out they can't conduct a count without a mobile server?

3
michaelsuede 3 points ago +3 / -0

If you live in PA or Georgia and are out of state, you can use Google Voice to get a local number so you don't look like you're an out of state caller.

0
michaelsuede 0 points ago +1 / -1

That article is suggesting the original lawsuit had bad claims, implying that whoever put them in was incompetent - but that's not what the problem is because Rudy is trying to put those exact same claims BACK into the lawsuit!

1
michaelsuede 1 point ago +1 / -0

A sitting President cannot be indicted. Once the electors vote, Biden is the President. The oath happens after Biden becomes the President but before he is allowed to exercise his power. Once he is named the President by the electors, the only way to remove him is through impeachment or the 25th for being senile.

"In 1973, in the midst of the Watergate scandal engulfing President Richard Nixon, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel adopted in an internal memo the position that a sitting president cannot be indicted.

The department reaffirmed the policy in a 2000 memo, saying court decisions in the intervening years had not changed its conclusion that a sitting president is “constitutionally immune” from indictment and criminal prosecution. It concluded that criminal charges against a president would “violate the constitutional separation of powers” delineating the authority of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the U.S. government."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-indictment-explainer-idUSKCN1QF1D3

Once Biden is elected by the electors, he IS the President,

0
michaelsuede 0 points ago +1 / -1

OMG. Listen to Trump's attorney repeat everything I just said. May be you will believe her since you clearly aren't believing me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-bApNuCLjk You can't just keep filing lawsuits. They are appealing ONLY the decision by the judge to prevent them from amending their complaint. If this goes to SCOTUS, that is the ONLY thing the SCOTUS can rule on. This is a purely procedural appeal. The Trump team is running out of time.

1
michaelsuede 1 point ago +1 / -0

I DO know that! They can appeal again, but it's totally pointless. They CAN NOT resubmit their case with new evidence, because that's what the judge just barred them from doing! The judge just told them they could not amend their complaint!

1
michaelsuede 1 point ago +2 / -1

Oh shit, look what the article you just linked said!

"But, more significantly in my view, the Amended Complaint also deleted some of the anecdotal episodes that formed the basis for some of the factual allegations of election fraud by the County Election Board as alleged in the original complaint."

"There are still other passages which were removed in the Amended Complaint, and it is hard to know why without an explanation from counsel."

"Making changes in the manner in which they have been made can reflect negatively on the attorneys who were responsible for the original complaint — especially in the eyes of the Court. Changes of this nature can raise questions bout the diligence of the preparation that went into the first complaint before it was filed."

What in that article contradicts what I said?

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›