Didn't they go to court in the states and lose?
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 12:45 PM Steve Jones <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> " I think the argument your making (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that
> they won't feel like they really lost unless they get to make their
> arguments in a courtroom and THEN lose. I'm saying they'll feel like they
> didn't really lose no matter what,"
> Yes. but its separating the Tim McVeighs from the Housewife Bettys.
> So you have something like 80 percent of the trump voters thinking he was
> robbed (oddly enough a CNN poll showed 10 percent of democrat voters
> agreeing). Of that 80 percent, there probably 25 percent youre not going to
> get to ever listen to anything, theyre the ones who know alex jones is
> garbage but still listen to him, they also believe theres a pizza joint
> selling child sex slaves to rich people, theyre as bad as the cult of left
> 25 percent that still believe the russian collusion delusion. The remaining
> 55 percent will accept an actual case result from supreme court, as much as
> most of us dont care for unelected officials making decisions, the
> constitution matters. the biggest problem is that as we speak, the ilk of
> alex jones are onboarding them left and right. It doesnt help what West,
> who by most measures is respected (aside from bigot libs who call him Tom,
> but thats a whole other bucket of hypocrisy) is talking openly about
> constitutional secession, not new speak, but given the climate, a very
> bloody prospect. He would tone down with a legitimate, constitutional
> ruling. Without it, the scotus is literally saying there is no recourse
> against a percieved wrong in the united states, at which point, the 2A
> becomes active.
> Like it or not, this is what it is.
>
> Like I said, the ilk of mcveigh, weather underground, black liberation
> army, ted Kaczynski, theyre all going to do what they do, regardless
>
> I dont personally care either way, Ill survive the two years biden is a
> half threat, Im not opposed to reeducation being not illegal for a period
> either. I just cant tolerate coawardice at the supreme court (the 3 last
> placements), and I dont like living in grey areas and I dont like the likes
> of alex jones being given credibility to my mother.
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 12:15 PM Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> This case was dismissed for lack of standing. Other cases were dismissed
>> for a variety of reasons including the evidence being specious or
>> deficient. That's losing. All of that is losing. If it was Steve Jones
>> vs McCown Tech and it was dismissed then you'd say you lost. There'd be no
>> doubt in your mind.
>>
>> I think the argument your making (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that
>> they won't feel like they really lost unless they get to make their
>> arguments in a courtroom and THEN lose. I'm saying they'll feel like they
>> didn't really lose no matter what, and a courtroom just gives them another
>> pulpit to preach from. If the evidence sucks, the arguments are illogical,
>> and/or they're asking for relief that the court can't give them, then
>> dismissing is the right move.
>>
>>
>> On 12/14/2020 12:34 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
>>
>> Thats the issue, they havent "lost in court" they never went to court.
>> The court responsible for hearing it. No one is saying hear every case, but
>> cases of national importance and with immense national consequence need not
>> ever be punted. The vast majority of pro 2A people understand the 2a
>> isnt there for hunting game adn the lack of action on scotus part will
>> result in action elsewhere. There will be blood over this, and its not
>> necessary. Once scotus actually ruled after hearing the case, most would
>> move on. The tim mcveighs out there are building their bombs regardless.
>> But Jane Q would probably go back to canning beets. Instead right now shes
>> listening to alex jones (why does covid take charlie pride, but not alex
>> jones, somebody explain this)
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 11:18 AM Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> If they heard every argument and *then* dismissed it, isn't that just a
>>> different kind of political messaging? Expedience mattered in this case
>>> because the EC vote was imminent.
>>>
>>> I realize there are nutters who will rationalize the outcome as "we were
>>> right, but the court didn't want to hear it because of a technicality."
>>> But if they went all the way through with it the same people would come up
>>> with some other reasoning why they actually were right. There are still
>>> people who insist Nixon was framed, and people still think Iraq had
>>> functional WMD's. Forevermore there will be people who believe Donald
>>> Trump actually won the 2020 election, and nothing the court says will ever
>>> change their minds. Losing in court >50 times didn't matter to them, why
>>> would one more?
>>>
>>> I'm ready for "justsumname" to pipe and prove me right.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/14/2020 11:55 AM, Steve Jones wrote:
>>>
>>> That's exactly why the supreme court needed to do their job and hear it.
>>> Then smack it down, I don't like the supreme court making decisions out of
>>> political expedience as they did here (hint the last 3). Hell, these arent
>>> even states actually at each other, its elected state officials. Scotus
>>> needed to put case law with a ruling (this wasnt a ruling) in the books.
>>>
>>> There will be violence that could have been avoided. Outcome of the
>>> "case" would have been the same either way.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 14, 2020, 7:24 AM Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> There's a school of thought that since their jurisdiction is exclusive,
>>>> the Supreme Court has an obligation to hear *any* case a state brings
>>>> no matter how flawed it might be. Their feeling is that since there's no
>>>> higher power to appeal to, that they *have *to hear the case so that
>>>> it gets heard. Thomas and Alito are in that school of thought, and that's
>>>> why they expressed the opinion they did.
>>>>
>>>> My reading of it is that the only disagreement was whether to tell
>>>> Texas to go away before or after they're allowed to file their complaints.
>>>> Either way, the court unanimously told Texas to pound sand. The only way
>>>> this is unclear is if someone willfully interprets it that way. If someone
>>>> is inclined it interpret it that way, then they would have been unhappy
>>>> with any outcome. There was absolutely zero chance that the Supreme Court
>>>> of the US would overturn one state's election at the behest of another.
>>>> Especially based on the argument that "their election processes hurt us."
>>>> If they did that, then similar suits would happen every 4 years henceforth.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 12/12/2020 10:31 PM, Steve Jones wrote:
>>>>
>>>> We need to have scotus do their damn job and get case law. If they keep
>>>> punting for politics it will get stupid. This team when one snaps out you
>>>> dont get some cross dresser popping through a crowd to bike lock someone
>>>> and scurrying off, you get Oklahoma city. They need to shut the shit down
>>>> or pay the cost of the product they purchased.
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Dec 12, 2020, 6:24 PM Bill Prince <part15...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Deep within this troll, the force runs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> bp
>>>>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/12/2020 4:10 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, thank you.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don’t know what was more bizarre, that music video, or Chuck being
>>>>> the one who sent it. Who knew.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> *On
>>>>> Behalf Of *Bill Prince
>>>>> *Sent:* Saturday, December 12, 2020 5:55 PM
>>>>> *To:* af@af.afmug.com
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT: Not all Texans are idiots
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> bp
>>>>>
>>>>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/12/2020 2:55 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a mind blown emoji?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>
>>>>> From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of
>>>>> Chuck McCown via AF
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2020 4:30 PM
>>>>>
>>>>> To: af@af.afmug.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Cc: Chuck McCown <ch...@go-mtc.com> <ch...@go-mtc.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Not all Texans are idiots
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://youtu.be/yModCU1OVHY
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Bill Prince
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2020 3:28 PM
>>>>>
>>>>> To: af@af.afmug.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Not all Texans are idiots
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> First place I heard it was from Molly Wood on Make Me Smart:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://twitter.com/mollywood/status/1169705055194247168?lang=en
>>>>>
>>>>> <https://twitter.com/mollywood/status/1169705055194247168?lang=en>
>>>>> <https://twitter.com/mollywood/status/1169705055194247168?lang=en>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> bp
>>>>>
>>>>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/12/2020 12:03 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I was not familiar with the term banana-pants. A Google search yields
>>>>>
>>>>> lots of results, mostly photos of banana pants, as well as some songs,
>>>>>
>>>>> none of which shed much light on the subject for me. I assume it
>>>>>
>>>>> means cra-cra?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>
>>>>> From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of
>>>>> Robert Andrews
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent: Saturday, December 12, 2020 1:42 PM
>>>>>
>>>>> To: af@af.afmug.com
>>>>>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT: Not all Texans are idiots
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This was similar to how the south leaders hauled all the regular
>>>>>
>>>>> people into the civil war. Yes they did a good job stirring things up
>>>>>
>>>>> before.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/12/2020 11:19 AM, Bill Prince wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The people who should really be looking at this are the citizens in
>>>>>
>>>>> the states who think it's appropriate for their AG to sue another
>>>>>
>>>>> state's election results.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The suit was what I would call banana-pants.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> bp
>>>>>
>>>>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 12/11/2020 4:19 PM, Jaime Solorza wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> All these craven lackeys got a big fuck you from the SCOTUS...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> AF mailing list
>>>>>
>>>>> AF@af.afmug.com
>>>>>
>>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> AF mailing list
>>>>>
>>>>> AF@af.afmug.com
>>>>>
>>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> AF mailing list
>>>>> AF@af.afmug.com
>>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> AF mailing list
>>>> AF@af.afmug.com
>>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> AF mailing list
>>> AF@af.afmug.com
>>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>>
>>
>> --
>> AF mailing list
>> AF@af.afmug.com
>> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>>
> --
> AF mailing list
> AF@af.afmug.com
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
