ubiquitin

Healt h dearest

“Don’t put words in my mouth!”

I am not,
Help me understand

You claimed her case would be heard by the Supreme court, and that “she will” (note: not that she did already) release her evidence then.
you said this Dec 20 AFTER her briefs were in. She has provided NO new information since then.

I replied (correctly) that her case won’t be heard.
what did You think I meant

“At that time I didn’t read her file – so I didn’t know that her motion contained her evidence.”

Lol. so when you said “she will provide evidence” You were lying correct? ( To be c lear: you are big on calling people liars, I dont think you were lying (then) . I think you were simply mistaken, and perhaps hopeful that somehow things would go your way. but inexplicably view it ias a weakness to admit it now, and instead come up with increasingly bizarre explanations and redefinition.

“Btw, the case is Still pending,”

Yes, as I told you confrence is scheduled fro 2/19 (note: nOT a court case)

” but you know that the SCOTUS will give a Judgement of “Moot”.”
no not a judgment of moot, but they will dismiss it without judgment (probably for being moot)

How do you know that?”

What can I say, these are things we learn in kindergarten

“If you had a drop of honesty – you’d ask her.”
I dont have any questions for her. I do have a question for you though : When (if?) Powell settles or loses her court case against Dominion, and either agrees that she lied, or it is ruled that she lied.
Will you then agree that she lied

Health

” that your interpretation ”

Interpretation of what?

“Moot is a judgment”
not in the sense that we have been discussing for months. And it certainly isnt a “court case” being heard. It is literally the opposite .
And you really thought all this time I was saying the court was just going to ignore the case , without formally dismissing it?
cmon, even for you that is a stretch ,
(Furthermore Your claim, of what you meant isn’t plausible since AFTER her briefs were submitted, you still insisted she would reveal more evidence in court when her “case is heard” (an event I told you wouldn’t happen) Even if the conference counts as a court case, no new information will be provided by her, so your claim is still wrong)

but, Ok
So lets pretend a case being dismissed as moot, is the same as a case that is heard. (though even typing those words out as a hypothetical is bizarre)

Fine moving on, back to the subject at hand

When (if?) Powell settles or loses her court case against Dominion, and either agrees that she lied, or it is ruled that she lied.
Will you then agree that she lied

Health

Lets keep it simple
On 12/20 you said ““Then that will be the first time in history – that SCOTUS accepted a petition, but didn’t have a Court case afterwards””

today are you saying:
1) that there was/ will be a court case (on the topic in question)
2) there wasn’t/wont be and this is a historic development – “first time in history”
3) Your assertion on 12/20 was mistaken

I cant think of another option

MadeAliyah

you wish

“Do you have a problem understanding simple posts?!?”

Nope

“She put all her proofs in her Files/Motion.”

You changed to this position later, at first you insisted (over and over) that she would have a hearing. and that if her case was dismissed it would be the first time in history remeber when yo said this “Then that will be the first time in history – that SCOTUS accepted a petition, but didn’t have a Court case afterwards!”

It is quite a redefinition of ” a court case” to include a case being thrown out as moot, as coun

“So either you are too Lazy to read the File”
read it already

“Is it because that you have a Lot of Gaiva?!?”

No. It is becasue I find our discussions fascinating.

“I tried to explain this before to you – if the SCOTUS decides that a case is Moot – that is a judgment.”

Yes, I got your new definition of judgment. And I suppose it is also “hav[ing] a court case” correct?

I’m not sure why you are copying wikipedia. I know what a moot case is, As I told you months (literallly) ado that the case wouldn’t be heard since would be moot.

There was no judgment and will be none.
As You correctly quote from Wikipedia …a moot case must be dismissed,…” there is no decision, there is no judgment it is “dismissed”

See later on in Wikipedia whci h YOU quoted) where they compared t to “ripeness” where it is even more explicit “..that holds that judges SHOULD NOT RULE on cases based entirely on anticipated disputes…”

The question posed was whether enough evidence to support claims of violations of elections (among other things)
What did the court decide?
What will they decide?

They of course won’t (as I’ve ben saying for months)

They aren’t “deciding” it is moot. That wasn’t (and isn’t) the question
The case will be dismissed (because it is now moot)

Health

“Btw, this is called a judgment.
You sure don’t know legal terms!”

Lol!

for months the right has been saying that dismissing a case on procedural grounds doesnt count as a judgment . but fine its a juddgement.

However that was not our disagreement. I told you over and ovver that her case would not get heard, and that she would not be releasing any evidence she claimed she had , making her a liar.

You called me a liar for saying that.

I stand by that claim, her case will not get heard. She lied to you

“I just posted that I was just quoting from the Evangel Xitians.
They believe that Trump will still be president for 4 more years.
They think Biden will be removed.”

yes, and like almost everything you post, that is nonsense.

“I personally don’t have an opinion either way,”

Lol Sure you do. And you express your wrong opinion quite strongly, with lots of name calling.

“But if they end up being right, are you going to Sue Some DemonCrats for Traumatizing Your Hopes?!?”

what hopes? I’m not traumatized. I dont still harbor any irrational beleiefs that Trump will still win . you have us mixed up again

Amazon has every right to shut down Parler
You have every right to boycott Amazon, twitter and Facebook

I’m not sure the chidush of this thread.

Of course Democrats are scared of Trump. He is an unhinged (something many of his supporters agree too!) liar with a lot of support. That is dangerous

He said it best “I could shoot someone on 5th avenue and not lose any support” (parpahrasing)
That statement is probably true. and It is scary.

Syag

“I can’t for the life of me figure out how impeaching someone soley to prevent american citizens from having their choice of president isn’t interfering in an election.”

Here to help!

There is nothing wrong with “interfering in an election”

Every time a politician says “vote for me” he or she is “interfering in an election” certainly endorsements from other politicians from newspapers etc is all “interfering in an election”

Nobody ever said interfering in an election is bad.

What they did say is bad is FOREIGN interference in an election. The idea being that Americans care best for American interests, and Russians/Chinese/Israelis/Togolese would put their interests first possibly underming American interests. (you can of course disagree with this argument and say there is nothing wrong With foreign interference, but that has nothing to do with impeachment)

Of course ILLEGAL interference is bad too, such as illegally making it difficult for people to vote .

But “interfering” in of itself when done legally isn’t really a thing . let alone wrong.

Yw

“The way i interpret the above, is that he meant everyone should protest ORALLY with “gevald” in similar fashion as lib’s do, … If you and other lib’s choose to interpret it otherwise, that’s your opinion,”

That’s great that you interpret it that way. And as I told DY in a court of law he can probably claim thats what he meant

But You an I are not the only ones who heard (read) the speech. His supporters many of whom DID FIGHT heard it too. how did THEY interpret it. and is fighting a reasonable interpretation of “go fight” ?

“Are you saying that they won’t give a Judgment?”

Yes, that is exactly what I’m saying (and have been for > 2 months)

“Look – I told you many times that the Goyishe Prophets …”

I don’t care about Goyishe prophets

You have said On more than one occasion, that she would have her case heard by the Supreme court . you called me a Liar when I said she wouldn’t .

I’m curious if YOU have changed your mind.

It sounds like you haven’t “but I don’t count them out – that they aren’t telling the Truth!”

Do you mean you think Trump will get sworn in Jan 20 2021?

I did see a report from Q that biden was arrested and his face switched with Trump, so that “Biden” who will get sworn in on Jna 21 is actually Trump. Thsi is why he will stutter alot becasue Trump is adjusting to biden’s voice . Is this your view?

Health

Got it
so you still think they’ll hear it.
correct?

Health

“She is going to SCOTUS and I even posted the 2 case numbers here,”

As I told you over and over she isn’t going to the Supreme court- Her motion to expedite was denied on Jan 14

To which you replied “Ok – she isn’t Lying – You are! Now why would you lie? Are you Afraid she’ll win those cases?!?”

Do you still think a court case will take place? Or are we witnessing history in the making ““Then that will be the first time in history – that SCOTUS accepted a petition, but didn’t have a Court case afterwards!”” ?

Now granted she will be sued for the lies she told (that you fell for) Though I doubt a court case will take place there either, she will probably settle.

You may have seen the apology from Right wing American thinker:

“American Thinker and contributors Andrea Widburg, R.D. Wedge, Brian Tomlinson, and Peggy Ryan have published pieces on www. AmericanThinker .com that falsely accuse US Dominion Inc., Dominion Voting Systems, Inc., and Dominion Voting Systems Corporation (collectively “Dominion”) of conspiring to steal the November 2020 election from Donald Trump. These pieces rely on discredited sources who have peddled debunked theories about Dominion’s supposed ties to Venezuela, fraud on Dominion’s machines that resulted in massive vote switching or weighted votes, and other claims falsely stating that there is credible evidence that Dominion acted fraudulently.

These statements are completely false and have no basis in fact. Industry experts and public officials alike have confirmed that Dominion conducted itself appropriately and that there is simply no evidence to support these claims.

It was wrong for us to publish these false statements. We apologize to Dominion for all of the harm this caused them and their employees. We also apologize to our readers for abandoning 9 journalistic principles and misrepresenting Dominion’s track record and its limited role in tabulating votes for the November 2020 election. We regret this grave error. ” *

I’m so sorry you had to find out this way. I know how deeply you beleived her eyes and were hoping things would turn out different, and hoping that her obviously blatant lies would be true.

Maybe Secret Supreme court will still hear her case?

(* note no copyright violation 1) because I am telling you what I am quoting, if I pretended it was may own it MAY be copyright violation, 2) a small Quote like this is protected under “fair use”)

ywnjudy

“Syag, thanks for taking on ubiquitin’s response, as i couldn’t tackle it!”

she didnt sorry to let you down
Here is my response again

“Seriously though they aren’t interested in debate. and we dont need them:
I provided quotes and context.
If you think when Trump said “Go fight” he meant a friendly pillow fight say so. IF you think he meant “Go right ” (ie towards the lincoln memorial) but his word slurring tendency make it sound like “Go fight” say so. I’m trying to understand what you think he meant:”

(note “seriously though”, the pervious part wasn’t serious)

rightwriter

“wrote suggesting that if someone wants privacy then theh must be doing or saying something wrong.”

I did not mean to suggest that.
and your bathroom analogy is getting me confused again. My question was NOT about the desire to “take back” something that was said. We have all (at least most) been there. Nor about the need for privacy. My confusion was when you said that 80% of what you text are things that you later want to “take back”
worth noting , that if a person spends 80% of his time in the bathroom something is wrong. That doesn’t make him a bad person, and I am not judging. A doctor MAY be able to help, but should definitely be consulted.
similarly if 80% of what a person texts are things he later regrets, that isn’t typical. Again it isnt “bad” but something is atypical. That is what prompted my question. I couldn’t imagine why a person wanted to retract so much of what was said

You response answered it, now I see

“-then why is it ok to request it for a picture but not message isn’t it the same concept?”
Pictures are different for several reason
(Note not all these differences apply to all texts vs all pictures just generally speaking)
1- Text that you sent – by definition – was wit h your consent. If you later regret it that is “your problem” not mine , as opposed to a picture we I take where you look “unflattering” you never agreed to the picture in the first place
2- You cant control how you look in picture maybe you were scratching your nose and from angle looks more embarrassing , certainly a person should delete that and wouldn’t be weird for someone to ask . Text YOU composed you have no one else to blame (I’m not sure that this is different than #1)
3- Picture is unmistakably you. Thus You “own it” more than words which even if I were to forward it would lose their connection to you .
4- Pictures have a tendency to live on, words are typically forgotten about. I cant imagine someone scrolling back to laugh at the time so-an-so was constipated. If they dont look for it they wont find it. Pictures get saved in album, often transferred to cloud, and live on on a computer pop up when google reminds you of this day 8 years later etc etc

If you don’t think any of these differences are real, thats ok to of course.
The gist is the same. In both cases you cant FORCE them to delete it and in both cases they should delete it

“I don’t see what the big deal is or why someone would get offended.”

Its not a big deal, and I dont think people would get offended, it is just “odd” ie atypical. I text 20 people daily probably another 30 people I “chat” with in groups. I can recall 1 time someone asked to delete something that was sent and a handful of times that a message was deleted from the group. It isnt typical that things are later deleted. and certainly not near 80% (for most people) which is what prompted my question

rightwriter

“quite simple, ubiquitin wanted to share with us that he can only think dirty.”

for the life of me I don’t understand how you got that from my question.

I asked “why is t 80% of what you are saying stuff that you wouldn’t want a record of?
Even 20% seems like too much””

When I first saw your question, I thought back to maybe 2 texts over the course of a year that I wanted retracted. considering I text multple times daily (aside from Shabbos and Y”T) Your question related to < 1% of things I texted.

I didn’t reply, because Flower’s points seemd so obvious (namely if yo uwant people to delete it they should but they don’t have to, they dont belong to you)

I asked my question when you said that 80% of what you want to text are things you had to withold if they wont be deleted. This baffled me. So I asked what you were referring to.

You answered in a needlessly hostile and angry way. Though you did answer. so thank you.

“Ugh, why did this conversation turn nasty?”

I don’t know either.
But it did help me understand the op , his question , and why 80% of his texts are things he doesn’t want a record of

DY

“The chosson’s father said he agreed that it’s a good idea, and that they should split it. The kallah’s father responded that he will pay the two thirds line the rest of the chasunah.”

Lol DY I KNEW there was some catch with this thread. I assumed it was some mashal that I coudlnt put y finger on.

IT was far better!
Nicely done

“What if you discussed a medical issue which you didn’t want recorded.”

I wouldnt text it. And that is very rare maaaaaaaaybe 2% of things I text?

“What if you were constipated and we’re embarrassed of having it recorded and remained in a chat history.”

I cant imagine ever texting about being constipated. And I don’t get whats embarrising about being constipated

“What if you were feeling very low and in a negative mood and shared which you didn’t want on record forever.”

Ok this makes sense I guess. thanks for your answer

“What if you had a relationship issue and needed to get something off your chest for the moment and didn’t want it there forever.”

80% of what you text?

“Should I go on? ”
no, thats ok. 80% of the time You text about what a low place you are in. That makes sense given your wildly rude reply .

“I bet in your dirty mind you thought the 80% of the conversation was something non tznius”
Interstign that you went there . Wait I thought I was a ” such a tzaddik”

“Thanks for projecting your own thoughts on us.”

who is Us?

So to sum up 80% of what you text is abou tmedical issues, being constipated , low mood, relationship issues and occasionaly somehting not tznius.

Thanks for your detailed reply .

I get it now

Ywn judy

“Be that as it may, they’re intellectually analytical, and they dispute the claims of incitement.”

Lol. Limbaugh and Levin are the opposite of intellectually analytical.

For example while I didnt listen to Limbaugh on THIS topic I have it on good authority that he “pointed out that [the lib media hardly ever, if at all, air the actual speech Trump made at the protest, and that’s because accusations in their own wording have more propagandist impact].”

I know crazy to think that a human would complain that a speech that incited violence wasn’t broadcast more ! But thats how unintellectual Limbaugh is. He totally would say something that silly.

Seriously though they aren’t interested in debate. and we dont need them:
I provided quotes and context.
If you think when Trump said “Go fight” he meant a friendly pillow fight say so. IF you think he meant “Go right ” (ie towards the lincoln memorial) but his word slurring tendency make it sound like “Go fight” say so. I’m trying to understand what you think he meant

“Do you think that the Lib Politicians bear some responsibility for the Presidential Election to be Stolen?!?”

Can you provide a politician who told thousands of supporters to go out and steal the election?

Otherwise I don’t understand the connection

DY

From my limited time there that is unquestionably true there is a feature that allows you to find people nearby with telegram. sure you can turn it off so yo ucant be “found”

but you, or anyone wit hthe app, can turn it on, and find or be found by anyone nearby and share whatever you want (or dont want)

deleted

see

IMPORTANT – READ THIS: Should We Be Leaving WhatsApp?

I don’t fully get it
I switched to Telegram too why?
do we think this free messaging app is doing it out of pure chessed and isnt interested in our data?

Is it just to show Zuckerberg whose in charge (don’t get me wrong I’m all for that) ?

participant

“in your prev post to me you say “nah this isn’t a deadline not so sure what this is saying.”
now reread post 930315.”

Great question! keep asking. dont forget Lo habayshan lomad.

There is no deadline Trump can bring evidence whenever he wants (post 1936857)
Trump never had any evidence it was all a charade*
with me ?

Now some supporters were hoping that he had evidence. different supporters had benchmarks that THEY created by which it would be apparent to them that there was no evidence (something most new almost right away).
Note these benchmarks or “deadlines” are not legal ones . They are benchmarks or deadlines by which he would have supplied evidence* if he had any or as I wrote in post # 930315. “There is a spectrum of how long people are willing to hold on to the fantasy that he can. some gave it until the Electoral college (a reaosnable benchmark as outlined above) others are giving it until Jan 6 still others until JAN 20. others even after that.”

Perhaps you do well with mesholim.

You invite your friend for Shabbos Lunch you tell him We start the meal 11:00 but come whenever. now this friend is a bit flaky and he has a tendency not to show up.
11;00 He doesnt show- you say well he certainly wont be on time lets give him some time
your wife says He never comes he’s not coming
11:30 People who davened at his minyan pass by your house
your son says, forget it hes not coming
You say no give him time theres no deadline of 11:30
your wife says He never comes he’s not coming
2:00 You’re done your meal deciding if you should go to mincha
your daughter says meal is over, hes not coming
You say no give him time there’s no deadline of 2:00
your wife says He never comes he’s not coming
6:00 Youve made Havdolah
you say ok I guess he isnt coming
your wife says yes I told He never comes
of course some wil lstill say maybe the supreme court will bring him.

Now. Was there A Deadline” by which he had to come, in one sense No. The meal starts at 11:00 maybe he’s running late. but on the otherhand everybody has there own benchmark by which THEY HAVE given up hope. You son isnt dumb for thinking that he would have come by 11:30 , althoug h you never told him He had to come then same for your daughter at 2:00

Hope this helps**

*Note Never had evidence, or the courts weren’t interested in evidence, or never had enough evidence are practically speaking all the same for this thread

** No mashal is perfect don’t get to caught up in it ITs supposed to make it easier for you to understand If it isnt helping forget it.

(also note: There are other reasons that make Dec 15 important too like faithless electors, and that legally I’m not sure it can be overturned even if was in errror, but I’m not sure about this last point, and the first more obvious point is giving you such a hard time it is probably best we steer clear of more advanced stuff) youve been ignoring too like faithless electors (other than the Clintons which is one point youve been write about See you can say smart things! Don;t be so hard on yourself they were unlikely to vote for Trump I grant that)

“this time it really is my last time”

all the best!
and refuah sheleimah to your stomach, but don;t neglect your blood pressure either