Jump to content

Trump's conspiracies pose 'existential' threat to electronic voting industry -Smartmatic


webfact

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

To have a full blown trial there has to be evidence. The evidence has to be submitted  to the court, and the prosecution, those alleging the offence, have to prove - by the evidence, that the allegations are true.

 

They are unable to provide any evidence (uncorroborated affidavits are not sufficient), without evidence there can be no trial; that is why these allegations are being so regularly and inevitably dismissed by the courts. 

 

Sorry, but you are the one not listening!

The judges were not listening lol. Corrupt rats. I been following closely.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PattayaJames said:

No, he was a 17 year old kid across state lines violating a curfew (breaking the law) looking to shoot his rifle at somebody and play Militia...he got what he wanted. He killed somebody, tried to run behind the cops for protection...got chased for what he did and shot up some more people....but he was not "defending property" and certainly not his own property.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Blue Muton said:

But this thread isn't about bank tellers so your above statement is completely irrelevant to the discussion. Oooh look, there's a unicorn.

Then just  go into any bank in Thailand and try to withdraw 50 or more thousand baht with no id card or passport, then come back and tell us all the result. 

 

All banks now use electronic data so it makes the post relevant.

 

Unicorns,OTOH are completely irrelevant to the discussion.

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tie Dye Samurai said:

No, he was a 17 year old kid across state lines violating a curfew (breaking the law) looking to shoot his rifle at somebody and play Militia...he got what he wanted. He killed somebody, tried to run behind the cops for protection...got chased for what he did and shot up some more people....but he was not "defending property" and certainly not his own property.

 

Your opinion and far from the facts.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, PattayaJames said:

 

Your opinion and far from the facts.

Its one thing defending your own property or being an official policeman. 

 

He was a vigilante.

 

Thats illegal.

 

Its funny that people that say they support law and order also support vigilantes.

Edited by Jingthing
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Its one thing defending your own property or being an official policeman. 

 

He was a vigilante.

 

Thats illegal.

 

Its funny that people that say they support law and order also support vigilantes.

 

i dunno.  it's not all black&white.  i suppose the individual had been consuming a steady diet of fox news, following reports of protests turning violent, looting and burning of businesses, and police ordered to stand down and give the protesters space to protest.  seems the idea was to dress up in camo and carry a rifle, stand in front of the businesses looking intimidating to prevent looting.  not super smart, but it's not like he was dressing up like batman, pummeling criminals into submission and dragging them to the police station, vigilante-style.  more like mall-cop on steroids.

 

i'm not sure exactly what happened, but some clever folks on the opposing side got the bright idea to chase an armed man-boy down the street and attack him.  at that point, regardless of the original intent of the exercise, he was trying to escape but had no choice other than to defend himself.  had he not, we'd surely be ridiculing him for allowing himself to be disarmed and shot with his own weapon, serves him right, y'know.

 

he may face some penalties due to age or crossing state lines with a weapon, i'm obviously not a lawyer, but am confident the shooting charges will be dropped under self-defense.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Tie Dye Samurai said:

OK James, I said that he was a 17 year old kid across state lines violating a curfew (breaking the law) looking to shoot his rifle at somebody and play Militia...he got what he wanted. He killed somebody, tried to run behind the cops for protection...got chased for what he did and shot up some more people....but he was not "defending property" and certainly not his own property.

 

 

He worked in Kenosha, he was there to defend property.

He was not looking to kill, he was attacked and defended himself.

He immediately tried to surrender to police.

He was chased down, attacked by an armed mob and defended himself again.

He surrendered to the police.

 

Strange how some are so happy to side with the violent mobs destroying property.

 

 

  • Confused 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, PattayaJames said:

 

He worked in Kenosha, he was there to defend property.

He was not looking to kill, he was attacked and defended himself.

He immediately tried to surrender to police.

He was chased down, attacked by an armed mob and defended himself again.

He surrendered to the police.

 

Strange how some are so happy to side with the violent mobs destroying property.

 

 

He worked as a lifeguard in Kenosha (he was not "defending" the pool or the beach.

he was still breaking the law being out after curfew across state lines roaming the streets with a rifle

He chased somebody down in the car dealership parking lot and shot them then is recorded saying "I just killed somebody"

He never surrendered to the police until he got all the way home the next morning...he left the scene of the crime without telling the Kenosha police what he did

 

Strange how some are so happy to side with a murderer...at least I left your facts in my post James and didnt edit them out...try it sometime

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

nobody can't blame trump for what he's doing! i'm not american, yet i knew one couldn't trust that man, so how comes he was elected on the first place? anyway, from now on, the usa aren't entitled to start lecturing other states like china or russia about democracy

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Pique Dard said:

nobody can't blame trump for what he's doing! i'm not american, yet i knew one couldn't trust that man, so how comes he was elected on the first place? anyway, from now on, the usa aren't entitled to start lecturing other states like china or russia about democracy

When Xi or Putin get voted out of office you'll have a point. Until then, not so much.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/17/2020 at 3:23 PM, Pique Dard said:

nobody can't blame trump for what he's doing! i'm not american, yet i knew one couldn't trust that man, so how comes he was elected on the first place? anyway, from now on, the usa aren't entitled to start lecturing other states like china or russia about democracy

 

Quite right, with the state of that election.

  • Sad 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Looks like slowly Dominion is threatening Powell to go back down or she will be taken to court. With the fraud claims shouted from the roof tops but no evidence at all provided IMO they stand a very good chance in court.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2020/12/17/dominion-demands-sidney-powell-retract-knowingly-baseless-voting-machine-conspiracy-theory/

Just sue her, and the others, for defamation.  That's they only way they'll listen.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.








×
×
  • Create New...