IMO, the Fix is in

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by OrangeShogun, Oct 12, 2020.

  1. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    It depends on the specific allegation, but generally I would need to hear sworn testimony in court (can be cross examined and rebutted). If we're talking about hacking of voting software, I'd need to hear from eye witnesses (preferably) and/or computer forensic experts who examined the relevant machines and testified that they'd been hacked. Then I'd want to hear evidence of who the actual bad apples were.
     
  2. Phil Elliott

    Phil Elliott 2,500+ Posts

    So you say that what you call "evidence" must be presented in court, yet you and others are complaining that you have not been shown any evidence?
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Hot Hot x 1
  3. horninchicago

    horninchicago 5,000+ Posts

    No, if it isn't on Tucker's show or presented in a press conference by crackpots, then no evidence exists.

    <sarc>
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  4. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    MrD
    When one of the acclaimed cyber experts testified and was cross examined would you accept their testimony?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    If it's shown in court, I will hear about it. The problem with vague claims and promises of evidence in press conferences is that it's of no legal value and therefore can't impact the outcome (unless the real intent isn't legal but political and/or monetary which I'm starting to suspect to be the case). Trump's legal team knows this. Therefore, if it's not offered in court, I'm going to question it's existence and certainly its reliability.
     
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2020
  6. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Well, I'd view it like a trier-of-fact is supposed to view any other piece of evidence offered in court. That means I'd listen to it as well as controverting evidence and accept the one that's more believable.

    That's what happened when I offered evidence in court. If I offered a medical record and the defense counsel did nothing to rebut it, the jury was pretty much sure to defer to my client's doctor about what that doctor did and that it was necessary to treat my client. However, sometimes the defense would retain an expert witness (often this guy) to say my client's injuries were ******** and that my client's doctor screwed up and shouldn't have given him the treatment he did. When that happened I had to call my client's doctor as a live witness and let him explain his treatment further and explain why the insurance carrier's hack doctor was full of crap. The jury weighed both doctors' testimony and decided who they thought was telling the truth and rendered their verdict accordingly. That's what I'd do with a cyber expert.
     
  7. iatrogenic

    iatrogenic 2,500+ Posts

    Now you suddenly reject conspiracy theories? You have been nestled in Adam Schiff’s butt crack for the last four years when it came to false claims of “Russian Collusion”, and you continue to believe that ridiculously false claim despite actual evidence to the contrary. You are a shining example of a Dem angered by the truth. You just tend to change your interpretation of the facts rather than your false beliefs.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Of course it's worth noting that guys from Mobilhoma are into that sort of thing anyway.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    Any of you guys watch Krebs on 60 minutes. Impressive dude. Can he run for president?
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  10. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Of course, to guys from Mobilhoma, Maynard G. Krebs seems like a smart, impressive guy.

    Getting on a roll with the Oklahoma-bashing.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  11. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    I’m ok with it. It made me laugh. This place has really toughened me up, cyberly speaking, of course. A few of my Facebook snowflake conservatives could learn from me.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    I virtually never talk politics on Facebook. Way too big of a waste.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. horninchicago

    horninchicago 5,000+ Posts

    Oh okay, that explains it. She's a celebrity. They can do whatever they want.
     
  14. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  15. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

     
  16. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    I remember Kuehl from when she was in the California legislature. She's nauseating, and I'm not surprised she's a hypocrite on this.
     
  17. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    Barr says DOJ hasn't uncovered widespread voter fraud in 2020 election

    And on cue...
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  18. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    If you don't buy into the narrative or just question it pending the introduction of evidence, they're going to crap on you. They're doing it to Brian Kemp and the SoS of Georgia.

    I'm becoming less and less optimistic of winning the runoffs. The chair of the Republican National Committee is having piss her time away by going to Georgia to tell dumbass Trump supporters who think their vote won't count in the run-off that they need to turnout or we'll lose the Senate. If you're having to do that, you're not in a position of strength.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  19. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    Trump has raised more than $150M since election day. That appears to be his ultimate goal with these fraud allegations. I'll say it again, if the Senate is in the hands of the D's it makes the Biden Admin an easier target for Trump. If you believe that Trump sees the Republican party as simply a tool for his own means, he really doesn't care about those Senate races and stemming the demise of America in D hands.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  20. Garmel

    Garmel 2,500+ Posts

    Hmm. Has Barr interviewed any witnesses or had any hearings? Meanwhile, several cyber-security experts and witnesses say differently. In Michigan right now we have a ton of witnesses explaining to what they saw. Whistleblowers galore!
     
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2020
  21. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

     
  22. Garmel

    Garmel 2,500+ Posts

    Into what? I've seen no witnesses nor cyber experts from them. Barr talks with no action. Example would be what he and Durham have produced so far.

    They've looked into "various complaints'. Whatever that means.
     
  23. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    Barr is part of the deep state too?
     
  24. Garmel

    Garmel 2,500+ Posts

    No, he's just is a talker and not a doer. I'll go with the witnesses that I've seen so far.
     
  25. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    I'd expect nothing less.
     
  26. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    It's just hard imagine that he would plan to run again in four years. He'll be 78 in 2024 - 5 years older than Reagan when he was running for his second term.
     
  27. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    Never underestimate Trump's ego.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  28. cnb

    cnb 500+ Posts

    Uh I believe the orange special genius does that.
     
  29. cnb

    cnb 500+ Posts

    He's going to be spending the next 4 yrs trying to stay out if prison.
     
  30. Garmel

    Garmel 2,500+ Posts

    Well, who else am I supposed to listen to?
     

Share This Page