Culture

Sidney Powell & Others Ordered To Reeducation Camps For Daring To Challenge Election (Yes, Really)

The people that brought you the election fortification have decided that questioning election results shall not be allowed in the future. They have decided to punish, sanction, and fine the lawyers who had the temerity to question the 2020 election, in a clear effort to discourage future challenges.

Sidney Powell, Lin Wood, and others were found guilty in Michigan of audacity. They were “sanctioned”, ordered to pay court fees, ordered to pay the attorney’s the Michigan government hired to lie, and ordered to reeducation camps.

Yes, and they have to pay the reeducation camp costs out of their own pockets:

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ attorneys shall each complete at least twelve (12) hours of continuing legal education in the subjects of pleading standards (at least six hours total) and election law (at least six hours total) within six months of this decision. Any courses must be offered by a non-partisan organization and must be paid for at counsel’s expense. Within six months of this decision, each attorney representing Plaintiffs shall file an affidavit in this case describing the content and length of the courses attended to satisfy this requirement.

Read all the sanctions here.

The insufferable judge—a barely literate black woman well chosen for her task—had one of her clerks write this (the italics are original): “And this case was never about fraud—it was about undermining the People’s faith in our democracy and debasing the judicial process to do so.

Yours Truly is mentioned:

Plaintiffs “intentional[ly] lie[d]” by filing the “analysis” of William M. Briggs, who relied on “survey” results posted in a tweet by Matt Braynard and the “survey” “misrepresents Michigan election laws”; “disregards standard analytical procedures”; contains “a baffling array of inconsistent numbers”; and includes “conclusions [that are] without merit” (id. at Pg ID 3654-58).

Every word of this is a blatant, bold-faced, blustering lie. The attorneys who said this lied. Except for spelling my name, and Braynard’s name, correctly, everything they said is verifiably false. Which they must have known. So they lied. Openly, willfully, and brazenly lied. For money. Money that will come from the lawyers they accused.

Which is a pretty sweet way to make a living. Competence, integrity, and intelligence aren’t needed.

The lying lawyers who lied were never called on their lies. Just as I, and the others who prepared affidavits were never, not even once, not for a moment, not in the least degree, were allowed to defend our findings. The lying liars simply claimed what we did was wrong, and their word was taken for it.

The government hired their Experts well, it must be admitted. Other lawyers might have choked on their consciences. Not these.

I did not send in an “analysis”, but an analysis. I did not rely on “survey” results in a tweet, but on a survey. The survey was commissioned from a professional polling firm, not done by Braynard himself, and was in accord with all standard procedures in the field.

My analysis did not, in any way, “misrepresent[] Michigan election laws”. Indeed, it said not one word about election laws of any kind anywhere in any way. I never used the word “fraud”, or anything else along that line. I only showed that it was probable, given the evidence, many ballots went missing. That’s it, and nothing more.

Not only did I not “disregard[] standard analytical procedures”, I used standard analytical procedures, which is so easy to verify, and so obvious, that I count this as their wildest whopper. This lie was so ignorant that it must come in the software lying lawyers use as a standard option.

The threw in the lie “baffling array of inconsistent numbers” for free, I’m guessing, because this could be said of many statistical analyses. Not mine, though. All numbers were consistent and in accord with the evidence.

It’s also likely that “conclusions [that are] without merit” is boilerplate, pre-printed on their accusation forms. I’m willing to be corrected about this.

I’ve said before, and repeat here, that my work on the election was entirely pro bono.

I write all this only for the record. I know none of this is about me, and the lying lawyers have no interest in what I’ve done. They were just doing the job asked of them. They didn’t do it well, but they didn’t have to. The judgement was pre-ordained.

Future elections are now well fortified against challenges. Which will only encourage those who count the votes.

Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card or PayPal click here

Categories: Culture

58 replies »

  1. Democrat judges have names, faces, and home addresses. And many of them have families, or at least a collection of cats.

    Just stating an obvious fact.

  2. This seems to me to be a clear case of defamation. The problem however is that the clarity of that statement seems not to be sufficient to carry through to a verdict in a legal challenge via the US judiciary. The legal system is impossibly compromised by political puppets and stooges.

  3. Isn’t this the same judge who earlier dismissed the case on technicalities?
    I presume an appeal is in order.

  4. Look, those dam* Michiganders LOVE living in hell, in a lie and a communist dictatorship. If they won’t get off their backsides, I suggest staying out of the hellhole. You’re not stupid enough to go to the Kabul airport, yet you to Michigan, California and New York. One has to question your sanity. Actually, there is no question…..

    Michiganders may try a couple of softball pitches at this, but when it fails, they run home to their puppies and crayons. I fully expect the rescued Taliban fighters that relocate here to pick Michigan as one of their homes. Stay away or don’t complain.

  5. “And this case was never about fraud—it was about undermining the People’s faith in our democracy and debasing the judicial process to do so.”

    Chutzpah.

  6. DARVO tactics all the way.

    Saying that audits undermine a people’s faith in democracy is like an abusive husband telling his wife “Don’t tell your friends about how you got those bruises. You wouldn’t want make them think we have a bad marriage, would you?”

  7. Briggs, I am proud of you. You did the right thing for the right reasons, and you did it well, and you did it boldly. This judge cannot erase the example of courage and honor you have shown for many of us cowering in the trenches.

  8. Evidence is turning up that the Newsome Screwsome recall is also being fortified.

    But Briggs, the judge’s statement is so looney, it will obviously be appealed.

    The point of her statement is not to be an official judgment, but a useful statement on the record that the press and propaganda organs can run with in all the headlines for the next few months in order to fortify the narrative in people’s minds before the risk of actual findings drop.

    It’s another form of vexxine. Which is why the media so loves to defend those things.

  9. Getting to the point of appearing that Matt actually believes the nonsense he spews here; thought he was engaging in parody, but now seems obviously more like paranoia… oyyyy.
    Curiouser and curiouser.

  10. McChuck

    Democrat judges have names, faces, and home addresses. And many of them have families, or at least a collection of cats. Just stating an obvious fact.

    Most despicable comment ever.

  11. And this case was never about fraud—it was about undermining the People’s faith in our democracy and debasing the judicial process to do so.

    Totally agree with the judge. The only reason this sorry episode happened in the first place was that liar-in-chief and man-child Trump was too thin-skinned and immature to accept that he’d lost.

    The insufferable judge—a barely literate black woman well chosen for her task

    How is the fact that the judge is black relevant to anything?

  12. Maybe you can sue the opposing lawyers for defamation, Matt. And the judge. And the clerk she rode in on.

  13. swordfishtrombone didn’t question whether it was relevant for the judge to be a woman, thus displaying his intense misogyny.

  14. Experts are using the same methodology as the judge to explain away vexxine fortification efforts.

    All those adverse reactions to the vexxine? That’s all because of your mind, not the vexx! You trauma over feeling forced to do something against your will is what is causing your vexxine injuries!

    So if you are suffering from vexxine injuries, you need psychological help and reeducation and even psychiatric drugs!

    Follow THE SCIENCE(tm)!

    One of the more insulting recent examples of linguistic weaponization involves a dubious psychiatric cover term, “functional neurological disorder” (FND), that is suddenly being trumpeted as an explanation for the tsunami of adverse events — especially severe neurological reactions — being reported all over the world in the aftermath of COVID vaccination.

    Psychiatrists conveniently define FND — which they also refer to as a “psychogenic” (originating in the mind) or “conversion” disorder — as “real” nervous system symptoms that “cause significant distress or problems functioning” but are “incompatible with” or “can’t be explained by” recognized neurological diseases or other medical conditions.

    Lest members of the public derive a “simplistic impression of potential links between the [COVID] vaccine and major neurological symptoms,” neurologists pushing the FND story have hastened to reassure people that the “close development of functional motor symptoms after the vaccine does not implicate the vaccine as the cause of those symptoms.”

    One of these individuals is National Institutes of Health-funded neurologist Alberto Espay, who implausibly adds that COVID vaccination (which entails injection with high-risk substances and technologies) is just “a stressor or precipitant, much like any other stressor … such as a motor vehicle accident or sleep deprivation.”

    Officials and the media are audaciously trotting out the FND narrative on both sides of the pond, as evidenced by a recent Daily Mail headline that read, “Videos of people ‘struggling to walk’ after getting their COVID vaccine are NOT result of jab itself but a condition triggered by stress or trauma.”

    Helping with the spin, a member of the UK’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization straight-facedly attributed this “stress” to coercion, stating: “If people begin to feel they are being kind of forced against their will to do something, then in a sense that’s quite a damaging thing to do because it gives people the impression vaccination is something being imposed on them.”

    Hammering home the point that “there is nothing to see here,” Kings College London physician Matthew Butler solemnly (and without evidence) agrees that FND — though “serious and debilitating” — “does not implicate any vaccine constituents and should not hamper ongoing vaccination efforts.”

    Butler is the lead author of a May 2020 paper proposing FND patients’ “abnormal body-focussed attention” be treated with psychedelics such as LSD and psilocybin — never mind that psychedelics themselves, admit Butler and co-authors, “sometimes produce abnormal physical and motor effects,” including seizures.

    https://www.globalresearch.ca/bombshell-uk-data-destroys-entire-premise-vaccine-push/5754173

  15. Upvote for this…

    The point of her statement is not to be an official judgment, but a useful statement on the record that the press and propaganda organs can run with in all the headlines for the next few months in order to fortify the narrative in people’s minds before the risk of actual findings drop.

  16. The only reason this sorry episode happened in the first place was that liar-in-chief and man-child Trump was too thin-skinned and immature to accept that he’d lost.

    FACT CHECK!

    https://rsbnetwork.com/video/live-trump-campaign-legal-team-holds-press-conference-in-dc-11-19-20/

    https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/02/08/proof-that-the-us-november-election-was-stolen-exists-in-abundance/

    https://www.stonecoldtruth.com/2020-election-fraud-evidence-compiled/

    https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/05/17/if-no-election-fraud-why-are-democrats-desperate-to-block-maricopa-county-arizona-audit/

    https://www.bitchute.com/video/oV2Bp07vvWxw/

    https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/12/paul-craig-roberts/the-proof-is-in-the-election-was-stolen/

    “You’re being played by liars and falling for it every time. Don’t make it so easy for them!”

    How is the fact that the judge is black relevant to anything?

    It’s humour implying the judge is a democrat based on statistics that blacks and women lean democrat.

    Do we reaaaalllyy have to explain every joke to you? Sigh… typical lefty…

  17. It doesn’t matter if this sticks or not. The point is to delay any further fillings of election fraud information. They need to run down the clock past the 22 months that they have to hold onto the elections information.

    The other part is that if Sydney or anyone else does file more information, they can crank up the sanctions or take away their licenses because there has already been one complaint filed (veracity of the judgement not withstanding).

  18. Johnno,

    Reminds me of the discussion of the question about whether the vaccines can result in shingles. The “fact checked” explanation is that they cannot, because they do not carry the virus (Varicella Zoster) which causes shingles. The explanation of why some people get shingles after a COVID-19 vaccine is that “the vaccine may tax your immune system, allowing an already present infection of Varicella Zoster to overwhelm it, thus causing the symptoms of shingles.”

    But the thing is, that’s exactly what shingles is. If you are infected with Varicella Zoster initially you don’t get shingles, you get chicken pox. Shingles occurs because the body never rids itself of the Varicella Zoster virus, it just puts it into a dormant state in your nervous system. Shingles results when the body is no longer able to keep the virus in check for whatever reason, and it travels along your nerves to reemerge in your skin as painful blisters. Thus saying “the vaccines don’t give you shingles, they just can cause your immune system to weaken to allow the varicella zoster virus to reemerge” is really saying “the vaccines don’t give you shingles, they can just cause you to develop shingles.”

    Beyond that the incidence of shingles is very high. Theoretically any vaccine could cause you to develop shingles, assuming that you had previously had chicken pox or been exposed to varicella through a vaccine, because they all can stress your immune system. But the COVID-19 vaccines are really good at it. They account for 23.38% of all herpes zoster (shingles) reactions from vaccines. The only other vaccines to account for more than 2% of the reactions are the shingles vaccine and the live varicella zoster virus, which obviously expose you to some form of varicella and thus have clear risks of causing shingles.

    If it is claimed that the high proportion could just be due to the large number of COVID vaccines being distributed, I calculated the percentage of shingles reactions as a percent of all negative reactions to be 1%. In comparison, the rate for the flu vaccine and MMR was about .5%, and the rate for TDAP was about .3%. These calculations are also of the incidences of herpes to negative reactions, so if COVID vaccines have a higher general rate of complications it would mean that the risk of shingles generally would also be greater.

  19. Johnno,

    It’s humour implying the judge is a democrat based on statistics that blacks and women lean democrat.

    Ah, the “it was only a joke” defence, well known to bullies the world over. Sorry, but this:

    The insufferable judge—a barely literate black woman well chosen for her task

    Isn’t humorous.

    And, your links to low-rent, right-wing propaganda sites do not constitute a “fact check”. Why can’t you post links to REAL fact check sites?

  20. No surprise – the judicial system and the legal profession as a whole are utterly corrupt (perhaps only politicians – themselves mostly lawyers – and media, and Big Pharma are more corrupt). Most judges these days are nothing but regime servants and/or woke activists, and clearly only punish one side for alleged “professional misconduct” (notice no one has ever even actually proven the election fraud claims wrong, they simply assert it as an article of liberal faith). You think the many DOJ attorneys who’ve falsified affidavits, complaints, etc., against the Jan 6 political prisoners will ever be sanctioned for “professional misconduct” by the courts or their bar associations? Yeah right, LOL).

    Every institution in this country – especially the election system – is corrupt and useless and only fit for the ash-heap of history.

    This is why I’ve been telling people for years to expect nothing meaningful from the SCOTUS in terms of preventing the woke overhaul of the culture, overturning Roe, protecting election integrity, etc. Despite a majority having been nominated by GOP presidents, they are generally only marginally better in practice than their overtly leftist peers, and most are bought (except Thomas and Alito). And despite leftist media hyperventilating about a “hard-right” 6-3 super-majority, it’s really a barely reliable 5-4 for milquetoast conservatism (i.e. moderate liberalism). Roberts has clearly been owned for years (or someone has something on him), and look at ACB – only on the bench for a couple months before she took what amounts to an open bribe in exchange for her regime compliance in the form of a multi-million dollar book advance (should be illegal; politician and other “public servant” book advances are little more than money-laundering/bribery schemes – few real people actually buy or read the books).

  21. Another case-in-point: See this scientifically illiterate judicial ruling decision that depended upon the bought testimony of an “expert” claiming, against all evidence for the past 18 months (not to mention every actually RCT study of mask ever done) there is “sufficient data supporting the effectiveness and need to implement mask mandates” for children in schools. https://sputniknews.com/us/202108271083734808-florida-judge-overturns-gov-desantis-prohibition-on-mask-mandates-in-schools/

    Absolutely sickening. The only solution is mass non-compliance with insane and medically/scientifically illiterate and useless mask mandates, or parents pulling their children out of the corrupt and failing public school system. Unfortunately there is no way to opt out of being forced to pay for the the system’s failures and corruption through exorbitant taxes extracted by force (every parent should receive an education voucher able to be used at the school of the parent’s choice. The only way real school reform will be accomplished).

  22. Matt,

    Thank you and high fives for standing up to these tyrants. The election was rife with fraud and cheating. We got a senile traitor for President as a result. The cowards responsible are scrambling for the sewers from whence they came. They corrupted democracy in favor of their Marxist pedophile pervert Hate America fantasy. Such low life slime!

    New attacks on the USA are mounted daily. They have destroyed the rule of law, the military, the schools, the economy. They have promoted an invasion of FauciFlu drug runner terrorists and bused them to every city in the country in attempt to poison and kill American citizens. They riot, rape, murder, loot, and burn. They especially like killing unborn babies. They are Satan worshiping pure evil sickos.

    No Sheri. Please don’t blame the victims. The Marxists are not average Americans. Nobody asked for these scum. We don’t love living in hell holes with demon trash. The reckoning is coming.

  23. Notice swordfish trombone’s insistence on approved “fact checkers.”

    He’s regurgitated their arguments without his own elaboration on numerous occasions, and rejects any sources outside of the holy “fact checkers.”

    This is the exact type of person that led us to the current “expectocracy” where where science matters not but instead what matters is “the consensus of expert scientists.” Where all that matters in terms of health is what is uttered by Dr. Fauci and the CDC (or at least, whatever they happen to be saying this week.) The Wikipedia-zation of knowledge, where we pretend that we all reason towards a conclusion but in reality it is dictated by a small group of approved “credible sources.”

    There is a famous paper “The Earth is Round (p < .05)" which attacks the validity of p-value testing, and mocks the tendency for many fields to not accept any knowledge not gained through these exact statistical methods. We need a new paper titled "The Earth is Round (as has been confirmed by reputable fact checkers.)"

  24. Don’t let the star-blank-star s get to you.

    As the angriest comment writers here demonstrate there is a certain amount of “too stupid to live” going around – and, of course, they know they’ll eventually be found out.

  25. Along the lines of good analysis and truth triumphing over lies- Have you worked with Dr. Doug Frank or looked at his work? It is incomprehensible to me that your work was never allowed into evidence but more so that Dr, Frank’s work is not blowing the lid off the effort to suppress the “no fraud evidence story”. I await the results of the Arizona audit and the efforts of grass root organizations using canvassing to prove the extent of the fraud. It ain’t over yet. Here’s hoping you get a chance to challenge the lying attorney on appeal.

  26. Everyone over 65 has every single medical system interaction in CMS. Every CPT… Would be interesting, if, ahem, someone, with solid statistics, took a look at it.

  27. “Notice swordfish trombone’s insistence on approved ‘fact checkers.’ [Well, who approved them? swordfishtombone doesn’t know.]

    “He’s regurgitated their arguments without his own elaboration on numerous occasions, and rejects any sources outside of the holy ‘fact checkers.’

    “This is the exact type of person that led us to the current ‘expectocracy’ where science matters not but instead what matters is ‘the consensus of expert scientists.’ Where all that matters in terms of health is what is uttered by Dr. Fauci and the CDC (or at least, whatever they happen to be saying this week.) The Wikipedia-zation of knowledge, where we pretend that we all reason towards a conclusion but in reality it is dictated by a small group of approved ‘credible sources.'”

    Well, obviously. How much you wanna bet he’s vaxxed and he’s gonna get the booster. And supposedly, he’s got kids, who are probably vaxxed, too. Which is very sad.

    Plus, he’s a complete troll. Just in my exchanges with him, he has accused me of not caring about deaths among the elderly, only caring about deaths of “foetuses”, and being a Bible Literalist. All without even the slightest bit of justification, just his presumption.

    He claims he has been here for “years”, but 1) that can be faked, 2) I don’t remember him, and 3) he doesn’t come across as someone who is interested in statistics for their own sake, only “fact checkers”. And he is not the sort of person who would hang out here for the fun.

  28. Phil, FYI SFT is a homo. He doesn’t have kids, at least not his own, because you can’t get your boyfriend pregnant via sodomy. SFT thus has no stake in the future. His bloodline is self-Darwinized. He’s only here to make hate, sodomize the world, kill babies, and die a useless death. Typical Demoncrat. He could find Jesus. Jesus is waiting for him. But it’s his choice. Free will and all. Many are called, few pick up the phone.

  29. “How is the fact that the judge is black relevant to anything?” advancement via racial group membership is not a meritocracy. In fact is looks like ethnic and sexual advancement on both has lead us to an Idiotocracy. That what race has to do with it. After 50 years of this you have not noticed the stupidity that has moved into the public square where a Supreme Court Nominee use her race as a reason why she should be on the bench.

  30. swordfish, if you don’t think the mention of the judge as black is relevant, you have been skipping out on your CRT courses. Bad boy.

  31. The black female judge has become a caricature in the US, making decisions based on her personal convictions and not the law. When interviewed, she will proudly admit to that, as she truly believes she is Doing Good. When she feels that a law is bad she will ignore or purposely misinterpret it, but she is rarely brave enough to declare the law unconstitutional and risk being slapped down by a higher court. This is one of the inevitable consequences of affirmative action and quotas – people can attain important positions, but not the respect that should accompany that position. I’m sure there must be some fantastic black female judges, but the caricature is so powerful that they all get painted with the same brush. Affirmative Action is truly evil all around.

    As far as the election, I’m still waiting for the thoughtful counter-arguments for all the malodorous things that happened, but all I ever see is vacuous statements belittling any possibility of fraud. There has been enormous effort put forth by those suspicious of the results to understand what actually happened and try to prevent a repeat of any problems found, but all we get from the other side is belittlement and stonewalling. This might work if it’s just a small kook fringe, but we are talking about half of the electorate having grave doubts about the integrity of our elections under Democrat supervision, and it must be addressed if we hope to avoid another civil war. Yes, civil war. Another thing the left doesn’t fully appreciate about the election is the deep intense anger that remains. The huge liberal overreaction to the January 6th mass-trespass event compared to the destructive BLM riots illustrates how fearful the liberal politicians are of half their constituents. And rightly so – freedom-loving Americans are not going to give up their cherished freedoms without a fight, and the 2nd amendment has, so far at least, allowed them to retain the means to fight back against an increasing tyrannical government. Don’t forget that the Revolution was fought over tea and taxes, things that seem minor in comparison to the left’s current push for socialism.

    Other than the tragic death, I am glad that January 6th happened the way it did, and that Congress-critters are reacting the way they are. I believe that our elected class should have some measure of fear of their constituents, it’s a powerful motivator. I don’t believe the people of this country will peacefully acquiesce to socialism; those that promote socialism are either ignorant of that fact, or are willing to accept the violence as necessary to achieve their ends.

    Trump didn’t instigate anything. He just saw what the libs refuse to see, and gave it a voice, which is a necessary first step to avoid civil war. People who feel they don’t have a voice will take desperate measures when continually tread upon.

  32. Anon_1,

    This, for instance?

    Your link doesn’t work for me (“access denied”), and as I’m not an American, I don’t really know what you’re going on about. Sorry.

  33. Rudolph Harrier,

    Notice swordfish trombone’s insistence on approved “fact checkers.”

    If you mean fact checkers that actually check facts, then yes. A video of a Trump campaign team press conference obviously doesn’t count, any more than a video of a Biden campaign team press conference would.

  34. If you mean fact checkers that actually check facts, then yes.

    How quaint that you believe this.

  35. Uncle Mike,

    Phil, FYI SFT is a homo. He doesn’t have kids, at least not his own, because you can’t get your boyfriend pregnant via sodomy.

    Not true. Isn’t bearing false witness a sin? So much for Christian absolute morality.

    He’s only here to make hate, sodomize the world, kill babies, and die a useless death.

    Seems to me that all the hate is coming from you. As for killing babies, my wife had five miscarriages if that counts, although that would seem to be God’s fault (well, it would be he existed).

    Typical Demoncrat. He could find Jesus. Jesus is waiting for him.

    As I’ve said repeatedly, I’m from the UK, so I’m not a Democrat, and I’ve never voted for the Labour Party (UK equivalent to the Democrats) in my entire life. In any case, the majority of Democrats are Christians (unlike Trump).

    If you’re an example of the kind of person Christianity produces, then I’m not interested in finding Jesus.

  36. “If you’re an example of the kind of person Christianity produces, then I’m not interested in finding Jesus.”

    Great insult, well-played! You owned him!! (If understand the current vernacular; I hope I’m not offending the recovering former slaves in the audience.)

    And excellent life advice to boot. It’s always best to base one’s life-altering decisions on adventitious contact with adherents.

  37. Oh sure, it was a sound election alright. We know this, of course, from the fact that the democrats are now advocating the HR1 bill which allows the federal government to set standards for voting, which violates the US Constitution. Only the states are allowed by the Constitution to set up laws for voting. Perhaps the Founders had this in our Constitution to prevent a party or elected officials from keeping themselves in office through election fraud. I mean, can’t you can trust the democrats to have honest elections considering their endorsement of the HR1 bill? (OBVIOUSLY NOT!)

    Well, I guess the democrats will really have to secure the voter fraud for 2024, considering that in less than a year, Biden’s presidency has proven to be an utter disaster. The recent sad events in Afghanistan illustrate this point well along with the shrinking approval of the Biden administration and the democrat party.

    At any rate, I’m tired of hearing the news and our seemingly growing totalitarian government that doesn’t do much for us.

    Moreover, even if Biden won the election fairly or if there wasn’t enough voter fraud to turn the election, he should never have been made president because of his mental condition. Again, it’s unconstitutional to elect someone who is not mentally competent enough to take the role of commander in chief.

  38. “As I’ve said repeatedly, I’m from the UK, so I’m not a Democrat, and I’ve never voted for the Labour Party (UK equivalent to the Democrats) in my entire life. In any case, the majority of Democrats are Christians (unlike Trump).”

    Ah, so you’re a Tory?

  39. Milton Hathaway,

    It’s always best to base one’s life-altering decisions on adventitious contact with adherents.

    I based my atheism on the lack of evidence for God, not on the behavior of individual Christians. Having said that, the fact that many Christians I interact with online seem to be irrational and full of hate is, like it or not, more evidence against Christianity.

  40. Milton Hathaway,

    The black female judge has become a caricature in the US, making decisions based on her personal convictions and not the law.

    Please say which parts of this judgement aren’t based on the law. And while you’re at it, please tell me if you think racial stereotypes are a good thing?

    As far as the election, I’m still waiting for the thoughtful counter-arguments for all the malodorous things that happened

    If you want to establish that there has been fraud, you need evidence, not arguments, not vague accusations. As far as I’m aware, no one has even stood up in court and claimed there has been fraud, as they know they can’t do that without good evidence.

    And rightly so – freedom-loving Americans are not going to give up their cherished freedoms without a fight

    Which freedoms are you being asked to give up?

  41. SFTB: “Please say which parts of this judgement aren’t based on the law.”

    Well, it’s a civil case, so we are probably talking rules rather than laws. But the ruling clearly violates the First Amendment. As a civil judgement, its an example of selective enforcement. Lawyers are fountains of hyperbole, its their stock in trade. I only read the first few pages of the ruling, but it’s just as hyperbolic as what the defendants are accused of. The defendants engaged in an “historic and profound abuse of the judicial process”? Historic? Something lawyers do every day? Nonsense. So it’s nothing more than a public debate, designed to be newsworthy; normally judges are excruciatingly careful to avoid having their rulings getting tossed on appeal, this judge appears to have made no such effort. Legally speaking, her whole ruling is based on assuming facts not in evidence. (How could there be any facts in evidence, since no court took up any of the election challenges? Indeed, courts repeatedly ruled against efforts to collect evidence.)

    SFTB: “And while you’re at it, please tell me if you think racial stereotypes are a good thing?”

    No, racial stereotyping is a bad thing, but it’s innate human nature to generalize. Which is why affirmative action and quotas are such a bad thing, rife with unintended consequences. It plants the seeds of doubt that a person in a position didn’t get there on merit. On a personal level, I wouldn’t go to a black doctor that didn’t have a foreign accent. Racist? Probably, but my health takes precedence, and I have a choice in the matter. (I’m talking the USA here, your country may be different.)

    SFTB: “If you want to establish that there has been fraud, you need evidence, not arguments, not vague accusations.”

    Would election audits count as evidence in your mind? Would premature destruction of election materials (ballots and mail-in envelopes destroyed, servers wiped, etc) count as circumstantial evidence in your mind? Why were all the election challenges thrown out by courts well before the evidence presentation phase? One side is arguing that we need to look at the evidence and figure out what happened. The other side is arguing that nothing happened, that looking for evidence would therefore be a fishing expedition, and any evidence uncovered couldn’t be trusted because, of course, nothing happened. One of these arguments seems a bit circular, no?

    Justin did bring up a rebuttal, and Briggs responded. See, now that’s the kind of stuff I’ve been looking for concerning the election, a point-counterpoint debate.

    SFTB: “Which freedoms are you being asked to give up?”

    Freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of religion, private property rights, etc. You know, all that silly life, liberty, pursuit of happiness stuff.

    This blog is actually a good place to start if you want to understand what conservatives are upset about lately. If you can get past the urge to dismiss the concerns as invalid and therefore not to be taken seriously, you can take this as an opportunity to “know your enemy”. We aren’t hiding, but we are being ignored and silenced.

    Another good place to start is Trump. Don’t think of him as an (somewhat abrasive) individual, think of him as a voice of the deep concerns of roughly half of the US population. And yes, he uses a lot of hyperbole. Liberals are some of the most hyperbolic people, it’s really curious that they find it so disorienting when they are on the receiving end.

  42. MH. You, I like you. That is a well reasoned response. I am like SFTB in two respects; I am British (though I do not live in the UK) and I am an atheist, for one of the reasons he cites, that I do not accept that there is sufficient evidence for a blind faith in or a need for a belief in a deity. Those similarities are wholly irrelevant to this argument.

    I hope that he/she responds because you have tendered an extremely reasonable invitation to engage in a meaningful debate. I look forward to hearing sensible arguments.

    A

  43. Milton Hathaway,

    Well, it’s a civil case, so we are probably talking rules rather than laws. But the ruling clearly violates the First Amendment.

    This already seems wrong as the Constitution is the supreme law of the US, so I’m not clear how something can violate it whilst only breaking a “rule”. Anyway, how do you think the ruling violates the First Amendment?

    Would election audits count as evidence in your mind?

    It doesn’t matter what would count as evidence in my mind, but the few weak allegations you cite aren’t evidence, they’re just allegations. For example, the claim that ballots were destroyed early itself requires supporting evidence, and there doesn’t seem to be any. Here are some facts:

    Before Election Day, the Trump administration invited a delegation of 28 international experts from the Organization of American States, which has reported on elections around the world, to observe the vote. Its preliminary report found zero evidence of significant fraud.

    Last month, the New York Times spoke to top election officials in 49 of 50 states. Not one, Democrat or Republican, reported “that fraud or other irregularities played a role in the outcome of the presidential race.”

    On Nov. 12, the coordinating council overseeing the voting systems used around the country said in an unprecedented statement distributed by Trump’s own Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) that “the November 3rd election was the most secure in American history” and that “there is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.”

    And all but one of the 60 post-election lawsuits filed by Trump and his allies to challenge the results has failed in the courts or been withdrawn. Dozens of those cases were dismissed by conservative judges appointed by Trump or other Republicans.

    https://news.yahoo.com/the-2020-election-wasnt-stolen-here-are-all-the-facts-that-prove-it-184623754.html

    One side is arguing that we need to look at the evidence and figure out what happened.

    The courts did look at the evidence, in that they looked at what quality of evidence there was, and they rejected it because it wasn’t anywhere near strong enough. If you make serious allegations but all you have is hearsay, the courts are fully justified in not examining your hearsay in detail. (Especially if you withdraw your serious allegations when faced with having to prove them in court.)

    This blog is actually a good place to start if you want to understand what conservatives are upset about lately.

    TBH, I’m not interested in politics, but as far as I can tell from this blog, conservatives are mostly upset about things that are either positive improvements to society, such as gay marriage; or things which aren’t even things, such as stop-the-steal, antivax conspiracy nonsense, or unfounded claims of Christian persecution. There are hardly any real problems mentioned on here.

    Freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of religion, private property rights, etc. You know, all that silly life, liberty, pursuit of happiness stuff.

    How have these freedoms and rights been violated? Be specific.

    Another good place to start is Trump. Don’t think of him as an (somewhat abrasive) individual, think of him as a voice of the deep concerns of roughly half of the US population.

    If I was a US citizen, I’d have voted for Trump the first time, but definitely not the second. He was totally out of his depth, and it was an embarrassment to watch him flounder around, cozying-up to dictators and making terrible “deals” like the one in Afghanistan. His reaction to losing should be a good-enough indication that he was totally unsuited to the office of President, and the Capitol insurrection was squarely on him. (Incidentally, I thought Obama was massively overrated.)

  44. The truth doesn’t need a cheer leader or a gaggle of bullies who think they’r e big and tough.
    Neither does God need (your) lying on his behalf.
    He gave you one job and that had to do with another L word

  45. Uncle Mike said,
    “Phil, FYI SFT is a….”
    Ahem, wrong, Swordfish has been married for thirty years and he is a father of three children.
    Maybe you missed the recent posts where this was discussed.?
    Still, it’s an odd thing to assert about someone who surely, given his comments, if he were gay, he’d say so?

    Especially for Mike D, a very odd thing.
    but then perhaps he’s following in the footsteps of Dean Ericson who now goes under the apt name of Hagfishbagpipe because he’s too cowardly proud, churlish to say he’s sorry. Anybody would think this site was frequented by fully grown men (and women?)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.