thats a lie, ken is not ted cruz father.... or is he?
On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 2:02 PM Adam Moffett <dmmoff...@gmail.com> wrote:
> One case is actually still in court.
>
> In one case in Pennsylvania they were granted a court order saying they
> had to allow observers closer than 6 feet, but they lost that that one on
> appeal.
>
> Roughly 50 other cases were dismissed. Some were due to lack of standing,
> some because the court felt it couldn't provide the relief being asked for,
> some for being moot, some because the evidence was insufficient.
>
> In the famous "Release the Kraken" case, the judge responded that you have
> affidavits from people swearing that they believe something could have
> happened, not saying they actually saw something. Belief that something
> could have happened is not evidence that it did. Like I believe Ken Hohhof
> is old enough to be the second gunman on the grassy knoll. I could swear
> to that in an affidavit, but that's not evidence that he shot JFK.
>
>
> On 12/14/2020 2:52 PM, Chuck Macenski wrote:
>
> 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
>
--
AF mailing list
AF@af.afmug.com
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
