Jump to content

the trump election lawsuit thread of dominance


henrygandorf

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

The allegation concerning both of those is not very "strenuous."  Just notes, incorrectly, that they are undated (the certificate and test report).

Just more evidence of incredible sloppiness.

 

7 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Probably is.  I tend to apply Hanlon's razor and I see as much evidence of incompetence as malice.

 

7 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

It could be knowing, it could be stupid.  I might guess one of the stupid bitches (Haller or Powell) screen shotted the certificate instead of just downloading it, thereby cutting off the bottom.  The test report is dated on the front page, about 3 inches below the cited signature, so that one's gonna require some splainin.  I can't see the actual exhibits, but the reference is one paragraph (12) of the Original Complaint.

Found the exhibits.  https://edgarcountywatchdogs.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/01-7.pdf  See exhibits 5 and 6

Something is superfucky about the way those were downloaded or screenshot.  In a way that makes me think incompetence rather than intentionality.  Every page of both exhibits is truncated at the bottom.

Nevertheless, it is now incumbent upon Powell to correct the record.  Someone should probably email her about it so we can make sure she eats some doodoo in front of the court.  Or is truly, deeply unethical.

 

7 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Not really,  I just resist the mob mentality that tends to take over here.  Particularly when a weak understanding of the way legal things work drives the groupthink.

More than anything, I am a contrarian.

You're not nearly so contrarian when it comes to a police officer filling a false report against a citizen. That could always just be sloppiness. You are transparently lenient with other attorneys time and time again. That leniency is exactly why Powell and others like her are still continuing this sham. 

Just like cop leniency with other cops is exactly why there are so many bad cops. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy God.  Look at this affidavit from a "cybersecurity expert," name redacted.  Exhibit 7.
https://edgarcountywatchdogs.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/01-9.pdf
That's some Qanon shit under oath, right there.
Particularly amusing is that Dominion granted HSBC Bank Canada a security interest in its patents.  Totally normal thing that happens with any decent-sized corporate loan.
Of course, HSBC, while a British HQ bank, traces its origins to HONG KONG!!!!!!
Dominion sold its patents to Jyna.
There'a a bunch of equally ludicrous shit inferred from port scans and domain name registrations.
Sweet.  Baby.  Jesus.
If I am allowed to run amok at USPTO Assignments on the Web to construct conspiracy theories based on security interests, I am supremely confident I can show a cabal involving Trump, Hillary Clinton, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Facebook, Chinese state owned enterprises, and Israeli financiers. And that's just to start.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Huckleberry said:

 

 

 

You're not nearly so contrarian when it comes to a police officer filling a false report against a citizen. That could always just be sloppiness. You are transparently lenient with other attorneys time and time again. That leniency is exactly why Powell and others like her are still continuing this sham. 

Just like cop leniency with other cops is exactly why there are so many bad cops. 

Show me where I have ever defended a cop for filing a false report.  I double dog dare you.

I am saying nothing more than it is more likely than not, in my opinion, that that particular falsehood was attributable to a mistake rather than intentional misrepresentation.

The most important reason for that opinion is that the date, or lack thereof, of those documents, is almost completely immaterial.  It doesn't serve Powells purpose to lie about it.  At the very most, it casts some vague doubt on those two documents, but it is never argued or referred to again anywhere in the briefing.

I'm not excusing it. I'm just calling it something different from what the madding horde here seems to want to call it.  I'm not absolving Sydney Powell and her team of being shithead fuckers.  I'm just saying this is more evidence that they are sloppy shithead fuckers.

And if you want to come at her for falsifying evidence, which I would support, you're gonna have to do better than that.

My writing must be terribly imprecise, because everyone seems to read something into it that isn't there.

 

 

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Show me where I have ever defended a cop for filing a false report.  I double dog dare you.

I am saying nothing more than it is more likely than not, in my opinion, that that particular falsehood was attributable to a mistake rather than intentional misrepresentation.

The most important reason for that opinion is that the date, or lack thereof, of those documents, is almost completely immaterial.  It doesn't serve Powells purpose to lie about it.  At the very most, it casts some vague doubt on those two documents, but it is never argued or referred to again anywhere in the briefing.

I'm not excusing it. I'm just calling it something different from what the madding horde here seems to want to call it.  I'm not absolving Sydney Powell and her team of being shithead fuckers.  I'm just saying this is more evidence that they are sloppy shithead fuckers.

And if you want to come at her for falsifying evidence, which I would support, you're gonna have to do better than that.

My writing must be terribly imprecise, because everyone seems to read something into it that isn't there.

 

 

Additionally. I believe you have mistaken my explanations of why things that seem like slam dunk disbarment or discipline cases aren't for some kind of desire for leniency for the legal profession.

I don't even like attorneys that much.  I actively disliked about half the people in my law school class and probably about that percentage of the practicing attorneys I have encountered in my career.  I didn't have that problem with engineers, which is one reason I chose a branch of law where my clients are engineers and where, currently, I generally don't have to deal with other lawyers in an adversarial context.

But when the hoi polloi on this board starts screaming for someone's head, and there are legal reasons they aren't going to get it, I'm the one that tends to explain that.  Take that how you will, but don't take it as excuse making or some desire for leniency.  It's an injection of reality into the rage machine.

More than anything, though, I find the criticism of Powell or the complaint drafter for those two exhibits to be rather simplistic and facile.  I get that everyone wants to bbq Sydney Powell on a spit, and I'm good with that, but those two exhibits is not a basis on which to do so.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Additionally. I believe you have mistaken my explanations of why things that seem like slam dunk disbarment or discipline cases aren't for some kind of desire for leniency for the legal profession.

I don't even like attorneys that much.  I actively disliked about half the people in my law school class and probably about that percentage of the practicing attorneys I have encountered in my career.  I didn't have that problem with engineers, which is one reason I chose a branch of law where my clients are engineers and where, currently, I generally don't have to deal with other lawyers in an adversarial context.

But when the hoi polloi on this board starts screaming for someone's head, and there are legal reasons they aren't going to get it, I'm the one that tends to explain that.  Take that how you will, but don't take it as excuse making or some desire for leniency.  It's an injection of reality into the rage machine.

 

So I think you are saying engineers should be doing lawerying?

As an engineer I completely agree,  after I check my simulation software and put the numbers into the spreadsheet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Shaddie said:

So I think you are saying engineers should be doing lawerying?

As an engineer I completely agree,  after I check my simulation software and put the numbers into the spreadsheet.

Engineers make pretty good lawyers.  I forgot to add that most of lawyer colleagues are also engineers (easy to forget we have colleagues these days), and tend to be more tolerable than more generic lawyers, although we produce some assholes too.

At any rate, while I don't really love lawyers as a class, I don't want to see them all disbarred except the patent lawyers I like, nor do I advocate leniency for those who fuck up.  I do have a bit of a soft spot for those who fuck up because of alcohol and drugs, but believe they need to suffer the consequences of their actions.

Oddball fact.  The lawyer who took the case about the Oklahoma law raising the drinking age for young men versus young women to the Supreme Court and won that sex discrimination case, was a patent lawyer.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_v._Boren

 

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I am allowed to run amok at USPTO Assignments on the Web to construct conspiracy theories based on security interests, I am supremely confident I can show a cabal involving Trump, Hillary Clinton, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Facebook, Chinese state owned enterprises, and Israeli financiers. And that's just to start.

c3e7690c6c84818bcaaeae7711d29bba.jpg


4. Whereas the Dominion and Edison Research systems exist in the Internet of things...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:


c3e7690c6c84818bcaaeae7711d29bba.jpg


4. Whereas the Dominion and Edison Research systems exist in the Internet of things...

That affidavit is insane in the brain.  Unlike most of them, it includes some factoids, but draws dubious to insane conclusions from them.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

After more than 11 years of practicing law, I can wholeheartedly say this is wrong. Well, I guess it may *seem* that way, but a JD and passing the bar exam isn’t quite the feat you may believe. A lot of morons are able to practice law and file lawsuits. A shocking amount of morons. 

spacer.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TXSG8R said:

I’m more worried about local law enforcement going rogue than any militia nerds. That makes locals have to make a tougher choice on following along.  It’s easier to ignore gun nerds in cosplay gear.  Law enforcement backing it gives it an air of feasibility, and will amplify any resistance a lot more than seal team snacks.

And then the city/county/state takes their badge and paycheck, and they are in a world of shit.  They can't pay their bills with MAGA hats. 

Look at how much they lose their shit when they lose their job or are suspending for harming/murdering an innocent person.  Have them go rogue, which probably means instant firing.  They'll either come crawling back, or pray that the internet is on and they can get a GoFundMe going.

Plus, they hate challenges to their authoritah.  Once one of those militias declare themselves to be in charge, the cops get to roll out the MRAP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gil Bang said:

 

That lawsuit is hilariously racist. Trump says some votes are invalid (they list some reasons but they’re all absurd), and he is asking the court to throw these ballots out but only the affected ballots in Milwaukee and Dane counties (the black counties) but not ones similarly affected in the other 70 counties. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Pretty sure that at any given moment, Trump is just a few tweets away from talking about how Sherman knew how to handle Georgia.

The assumption, of course, is that Trump has any idea who General William Tecumseh Sherman was.

I'm just going to assume he doesn't.

 

 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

The assumption, of course, is that Trump has any idea who General William Tecumseh Sherman was.

I'm just going to assume he doesn't.

 

 

 

 

Sherman William? The paint guy? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gil Bang said:

 

Quote

President Trump’s demand that  928,395 voters in Dane and Milwaukee Counties who
self-designated as indefinitely confined be
disenfranchised, based simply on a sampling of
seven (7) non-authenticated Facebook posts, is as
baseless as it is outrageous.

The Office Lol GIF

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...