“Trump is not going to win. I made effing sure of that”.

a reply to: Klassified

The full progressive agenda changes that equation.

The Green New Deal, gun confiscation (tax or buy back whatever pretty name they tack on it ...), increasing censorship, harsh lock downs killing more jobs and businesses, heavy regulation, jacking up the minimum wage ...

All those things make for hungry, desperate people.

a reply to: ketsuko
Yes they do. Things may get very ugly, especially in the second half of the Biden administration when Harris takes over, if she can wait that long. I seriously never thought I'd find myself on this side of the equation, but here I am.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Klassified
She hasn't said, but she has said in the past she would like to see this turn into a criminal investigation...

Criminal is out of the question, private attorneys cannot file Federal criminal suits.

Who is the aggrieved in a civil suit?

You said the other day that you're not a lawyer. Why don't we wait and see what the court tells the actual lawyers? They should know what they can and can't file in what court, right? All of this back and forth about who can do what is meaningless.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: maya27

I noticed you didn't address any of the questions I posted, you know, the stuff you said was 'disingenuous'. Do you know what that word means?

You're doing exactly what he said you've been doing and yet here you are again. You don't have to be a jerk, even though it's something you're really good at. Why can't you address his points? He nailed your behavior to a T. You answer questions with a question. You dance around things constantly. Even though I sometimes get a kick out of your responses I too have been skipping most of your posts because we don't have the ability to block users like every other site does. It's not that I don't want to see things I disagree with, but doggone man, sometimes you take things to a whole new level of absurdity. Are you that bored at home? I was accused by a user of poking my nose in "every thread" which is laughable, but every single thread I look at, there you are making either hyperbolic or ridiculous attacks in a very passive-aggressive manner.

If anyone should take a break from this place, it is seriously looking like you need to. I used to enjoy your posts. Now they're just dark and stupid most of the time.

I'm sure this post will get silenced for being off-topic, but it's not intended to be a personal attack, I'm genuinely concerned that you have a lack of understanding of what you're doing. Either that or you're doing it on purpose just to piss people off. Either way it's a concern.

originally posted by: HalWesten
You said the other day that you're not a lawyer. Why don't we wait and see what the court tells the actual lawyers? They should know what they can and can't file in what court, right? All of this back and forth about who can do what is meaningless.

Do you need to be an attorney to read a Supreme Court decision? No private citizen can file Federal criminal cases.

a reply to: HalWesten

His points about me are not the topic. I asked him about my comments regarding the topic.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: HalWesten

His points about me are not the topic. I asked him about my comments regarding the topic.

And again you're ignoring the issue. Nice job, you made my point.

Show me the law that says a private attorney can't file a federal claim. I'm looking for it and haven't found it yet.

I'll go one further, I did find a statement that private practice lawyers are allowed to file suits in SOME federal courts. Some require additional certification, some allow standard "can practice nation-wide" guidelines, some just won't. So where are you getting your information? I'd like to read it so I can educate myself.

originally posted by: HalWesten
And again you're ignoring the issue. Nice job, you made my point.

The issue is the topic isn't me, if you think my posts are against the T&C report them.

Show me the law that says a private attorney can't file a federal claim. I'm looking for it and haven't found it yet.

I just said it was a Supreme Court decision: (Leeke v. Timmerman, 454 U.S. 81 (1981))

Thank you. Nowhere in this thread did you state the source until this post.

a reply to: HalWesten

No one asked and I'm no longer inclined to proactively spoon feed people facts they can easily locate themselves if they were inclined to actually find out the truth.

a reply to: HalWesten

Either that or you're doing it on purpose just to piss people off. Either way it's a concern.

Rest assured... the troll has been well fed today.

we don't have the ability to block users

That would make this site so... much... better. I might even put up a little cash to save this place if that was a feature they brought in. Until then, ignoring them is about as good as it's gonna get.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: HalWesten

No one asked and I'm no longer inclined to proactively spoon feed people facts they can easily locate themselves if they were inclined to actually find out the truth.

That case is about prisoners trying to bring charges against prison guards for beating them in an 1973 prison riot. How do you equate that with Powell filing a case against Dominion?

You also stated at the beginning that "private attorneys cannot file Federal criminal lawsuits". That's what I'm asking, where is that ruling?

a reply to: HalWesten

That's the ruling. Private attorneys cannot file Federal criminal suits.

I'm feeling charitable:

In this case respondents had access to judicial procedures to redress any claimed wrongs. Respondents, in other words, were able to "set in motion the governmental machinery," Lane v. Correll, 434 F.2d 598, 600 (CA5 1970), and bring their complaints to the attention of the Magistrate.

I can't be the only one that doesn't see what you're interpreting that as. It does not say what you claim, it says the prisoners had other legal means to address their concerns or are you making the claim that the prisoners were acting as their own attorneys? If so, that has ZERO to do with Powell, as an actual attorney, bringing a case against Dominion.

a reply to: HalWesten

Let a professional explain it to you and then call them tomorrow and tell them they're wrong.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: HalWesten

Let a professional explain it to you and then call them tomorrow and tell them they're wrong.

Stuff your BS attitude. You just quoted a completely different source and that deals with a private CITIZEN filing a complaint against an INDIVIDUAL (see, I can emphasize too), not a private FIRM filing against a COMPANY.

You sir are blowing smoke up everyone's rear end to make yourself look brilliant. When you're ready to compare apples to apples I'll listen. I tried, you failed, I'm done.

a reply to: HalWesten

A 'firm', whether in all caps or not, is not a distinction the Constitution makes, you're either a private or public citizen/entity.

Oh, look, another attorney says the same thing.

a reply to: Klassified
One America News network (OAN) was banned from YouTube today because they did such a good job of exposing Election Fraud, and the latest round of CoronaFlu over-hype.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: HalWesten

A 'firm', whether in all caps or not, is not a distinction the Constitution makes, you're either a private or public citizen/entity.

Oh, look, another attorney says the same thing.

You are a Richard but you know that already so I'll address your statement. You are saying that there is no difference between a private citizen and an attorney in a federal criminal suit for filing purposes, that it would in fact have to go through a prosecutor to be legal. Am I right so far? That second article says otherwise in some states:

Virginia: private citizen complaints are permitted but must be made in writing. Va. Stat. § 19.2-72.

Georgia: criminal process may be issued based on a request by a private citizen, though only after a “warrant application hearing” at which the potential accused has an opportunity to argue that charges should not be issued. Ga. Code. 17-4-40.

Ohio: a private citizen “may file an affidavit charging the offense committed with a [judge, prosecutor, or magistrate] for the purpose of review to determine if a complaint should be filed by the prosecuting attorney.” Ohio Code § 2935.09. Apparently, this process was enacted in 2006, replacing a process by which a private citizen could charge a crime directly, without review by any official, by submitting an affidavit charging the offense. State v. Mbodji, 951 N.E.2d 1025 (Ohio 2011).

New Hampshire: at least certain minor offenses may be initiated – and prosecuted – by private citizens. State v. Martineau, 808 A.2d 51 (2002).

--- but we'll let that go for now. You are equating Sidney Powell Esq. with a private citizen in this case. Why would she, as a private attorney, claim she is going to file a case if she couldn't? That makes no sense. If you say because she's a nut-job, that's not good enough. If she as an attorney knows she has the legal right to file a case in a specific court, who are you or anyone else to say she's lying?

Neither of those sources came up in any search I did using DDG for the search term "can a private attorney file a case in federal court" so I appreciate you providing them.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Klassified
One America News network (OAN) was banned from YouTube today because they did such a good job of exposing Election Fraud, and the latest round of CoronaFlu over-hype.

Section 230. It's a thing.