FIERY OPEN by @JudgeJeanine 🔥“When 100M people vote before an election & a huge portion are mail-in ballots, extraordinary regulatory oversight is required. When election laws are changed for a Presidential Election on the eve of that election, in violation of the
WHY was the counting stopped?
WHY were observers not
WHY were observers removed from counting areas?
WHY did counters cheer when Republican observers were removed?
WHY were windows boarded up in Detroit so that observers could not observe?
WHY when observers were allowed
And why was there a failure to match signatures on mail-in ballots?
WHY was there destruction of mail-in ballots envelopes, which must contain
WHY does the Voter Integrity Project [@MattBraynard] in GA estimate that over 20k people who no longer meet residency requirements were casting ballots in GA? Where Biden’s margin is only 12k votes.
Why are statistical anomalies in the chain of custody
WHY are there record numbers of dead people voting?
HOW is it that ballots in pristine condition, w/ out creases, suggesting they had not been in mail-in envelopes, as required by law?
WHY is Joe Biden the 1st candidate to lose FL + OH & still become President?
WHY are 18-19 bellwether counties historically indicative of a presidential win, won by Trump and not Biden?
HOW is it that Biden underperformed Clinton in NY, Chicago & LA, but won in the
How is it that Joe Biden underperformed w/ African Americans everywhere, BUT in those swing-states?
WHY were ballot watchers in PA not allowed to observe to the
HOW is it that the NYTimes, Jimmy Carter & James Baker all agree that absentee ballots are the largest source of fraud that allow for the changes of votes, but now
Bill, did you really have answer to all those questions before your premature comment? Have your US Attorneys even finished their investigations? —
Where are the prosecutions of individuals referred to you by the Inspector General like James Comey
How is it that as soon as you became AG you affirmatively came out protecting Barack Obama and Joe Biden?
Since when does an AG say that? Unless the investigation was complete and you knew they had no involvement? But the again, if the
Do you really want America to believe that one low-level FBI Attorney by the name of Kevin Clinesmith is the only one person responsible for the Russian Collusion delusion?
You affirmatively exonerate Joe Biden
Gee, that would only help Biden, doesn’t it?
You say you don’t want to weaponized the DOJ against political enemies. Charging someone
You admit the DOJ used one standard for Hillary and another for Trump. You said that. And “you can’t ever allow that to happen again.” How?
Should we write another nonsensical BS
Like I said, Bill. You talk a big game. So
More from Murray 🇺🇸
More from Law
Pretty much every professional field EXCEPT police have clear, rigorous, transparent consequences for unethical behavior, negligence and malpractice.
The idea that we can "disbar" lawyers but not police is absolute foolishness.
All the factors that make disbarment a necessary tool for lawyers apply to cops... except that cops don't need to be qualified in the first place.
It is a rank absurdity of the criminal justice system that one needs to be educated and certified with a degree in order to argue on behalf of someone's life in court, but to have no qualifications necessary to detain, assault, or prematurely end that same life.
There are countless circumstances in which a lawyer's unethical behavior will result in them not only losing their job but never being able to practice it again.
But corrupt and murderous cops can be rehired indefinitely.
A lawyer's entire career can be ended forever if they were found to have knowingly put someone on a stand to lie.
Police officers however are allowed to lie in court on the stand under oath.
So much that lawyers aren't penalized for putting cops on the stand to lie.
And as a former EMT let me tell you, you will find dropout cops in training classes that just want power over people - difference is our system has CONSEQUENCES for negligence and malpractice. We get the same chuds every now and then but they still have to help or else.
— Love Potion No. Nines (@NineJackals) January 29, 2021
The idea that we can "disbar" lawyers but not police is absolute foolishness.
All the factors that make disbarment a necessary tool for lawyers apply to cops... except that cops don't need to be qualified in the first place.
It is a rank absurdity of the criminal justice system that one needs to be educated and certified with a degree in order to argue on behalf of someone's life in court, but to have no qualifications necessary to detain, assault, or prematurely end that same life.
There are countless circumstances in which a lawyer's unethical behavior will result in them not only losing their job but never being able to practice it again.
But corrupt and murderous cops can be rehired indefinitely.
A lawyer's entire career can be ended forever if they were found to have knowingly put someone on a stand to lie.
Police officers however are allowed to lie in court on the stand under oath.
So much that lawyers aren't penalized for putting cops on the stand to lie.
You May Also Like
Recently, the @CNIL issued a decision regarding the GDPR compliance of an unknown French adtech company named "Vectaury". It may seem like small fry, but the decision has potential wide-ranging impacts for Google, the IAB framework, and today's adtech. It's thread time! 👇
It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details): https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha
I've read it so you needn't!
Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.
The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.
Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.
It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details): https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha
I've read it so you needn't!
Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.
The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.
Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.