Just sick. Hopefully these weirdos will finally understand that the blue pill is the antidote.
1 Like
You’re literally Cypher from the Matrix eating a steak right now.
Um…right, right…says the guy who claimed he was 100% sure Mike Flynn was Q and also entertaining the idea its a quantum computer.
You’ve got it all under control GSC. Sure.
Complete misquotes.
I said I’m pretty sure Q “is the voice of Flynn”. That doesn’t mean it is indeed Flynn.
And I said I know someone that believes Q is a quantum computer and that I don’t buy it.
#mrintegrity
His point still stands
You flirting with this shit is an embarrassment to your existence.
Go ahead and hide behind your fictitious scenarios so that when you are wrong, and you are wrong, you can pretend not to be
Did your daughter hug you today? I hope she did.
You should spend more time with her and less with us.
Absolutely.
GSC skirts the fringes of Q idiocy. He’s too careful to go all in with dumb theories, but he secretly hopes they’re true. This is a guy, mind you, who HOPES ELECtION FRAUD IS TRUE. This is a guy who wanted Biden arrested. This is a guy who wanted his president to illegally assume power. This is a guy who almost never pushes back against Storm, even when the old lady is talking about ex-president’s dogs being killed. He needs kinship so badly that he goes along with it, all the way to the bitter end.
I would be thrilled if Q I’d true. I’ve openly stated that.
Nope- I don’t want it to be true. But there’s too much evidence to ignore.
Really? Do tell. None has been presented in court a single time, yet we have the people claiming election fraud to YOU admitting in court it’s bullshit.
So…do tell
Hard when the courts (plural) deny an evidentiary hearing based on standing and jurisdiction. Kind of hard to get the evidence to be validated in those circumstances.
So, like nothing then? Gotcha
This is, actually, how courts work. Do you want special privileges for your side?
1 Like
Sigh…
It’s actually NOT how courts have historically worked.
Standing as a doctrine is extremely new to jurisprudence. Go ahead and look up the history.
There was a time when the courts would review anything they had jurisdiction over. Now you have to prove you are damaged before you can prove you are damaged lol.
It’s an easy way for coward courts to review what they want and throw out what they don’t want.
Who said the word historically? What’s with all your semantic arguments all of a sudden?
I said this was how courts worked. I didn’t mention greater than or less than 100 years.
And your same argument fails when considering jurisdiction anyway.
Jurisdiction and standing are not identical.
Sure but you cited them both.
To show the distinction between them.
Jurisdiction is concerned with either physical location (United States or a state/municipality itself) where a litigant, even if denied in that court would simply have to appeal to the correct court
OR
a topic law or a stage of matter.
So if I sue my wife I need to take her to family court not the Federal Rocket Docket courts that review IP cases…. Or if I want to sue her for the first time, I shouldn’t file my summons with the appeals court but with the trial court. Again- I’d be able to simply find the right court.
No no- not anymore. Now a court is able to say - show me damages first then I’ll decide if I will let you prove damages. Lol. It’s an absurd, circular concept that should be stopped immediately.
No, you claimed about evidence validation and cited 2 reasons:
When you afterword introduced the word historical to the conversation, I merely said that argument didn’t imply to the “jurisdiction” half of your objection.
All the while we have Rudy stating in court he wasn’t claiming election fraud, Powell admitting in court, that nobody in their right mind would take her seriously, and over 80 judges, including many Trump appointees throwing this shit out.
Lots of legal jargon trying to skate the point there isn’t shit there