California Republicans Face More Losses as Late Votes for Democrats Continue to Trickle In

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: RadioRobert

You devoted a post to me.
Why not a thread?

Here's a sympathy hug.

*hug*

a reply to: Wardaddy454

When your job to to secure an area, part of that is identifying suspicious behavior and making note of it, or confronting it.

Yes.
But "suspicious behavior" is not probable cause. It is not evidence of a crime. Which is what the current discussion is about. Evidence.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Wardaddy454

When your job to to secure an area, part of that is identifying suspicious behavior and making note of it, or confronting it.

Yes.
But "suspicious behavior" is not probable cause. It is not evidence of a crime. Which is what the current discussion is about. Evidence.

No, but an arrest can be made if facts discovered during the detention provide probable cause.

a reply to: Wardaddy454

No crap.

That evidence thing we've been talking about.

The ants are crawling for the honey now 😆

a reply to: xuenchen

This is the "insurance plan" talked about. I'm surprised no one is talking about that anymore.

We have laws about tax fraud. We also have laws about giving access to auditors to your financial information to help prevent such fraud. If you refuse to abide by those latter laws and will not provide that information or grant access to it, you are committing a violation of the latter laws which is also evidence of violating the former.

There is a local restaurant "TheGUT: Pizza, Burgers, and Brews". The owner refuses to grant access to health inspectors as required by law. A court issues an emergency order, and the owner still will not provide access. Would you line up to go eat there? Why not? According to phage there is absolutely no evidence of unsanitary conditions or violation of health codes.

a reply to: RadioRobert

According to phage there is no evidence of unsanitary conditions or violation of health codes.

Right.

But the business would be probably be shut down by local authorities so your hypothetical is not really applicable.

a reply to: Phage

Can't you at least log into your Sillyolme account for posts of that quality to protect your legacy?

a reply to: RadioRobert

Can you please start that thread about me so you don't have to post off topic?

a reply to: Phage

I think you've made your intellectual dishonesty of central relevance to the dialogue at this moment. How can it then be off-topic?

a reply to: RadioRobert

Your opinion is noted. And duely disregarded.

But you may continue to play to your base.

a reply to: Phage

I'm not a political figure nor a lamp. I have no base.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: xuenchen

Why don't you wont ALL the votes to be counted?

What are you so afraid of?

The distinction is "valid" ballots. What is he afraid of? My guess would be election fraud.

Double post.

a reply to: xuenchen

People can say what they want. I stopped listening.

I'm just waiting for it now. Ready.

a reply to: tadaman

Ready to do what?

Ready to deny the concept of inferential evidence exists in law, science, or philosophy in order to drag conversations we don't like to the ground or to prevent people from making their own inferences we don't approve of. It's all the rage!

a reply to: RadioRobert

You know RR you got unlike many here, half a brain.

I enjoyed schooling you the other night.

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: RadioRobert

You know RR you got unlike many here, half a brain.

I enjoyed schooling you the other night.

The day the guy who said people of colour are unable to make abstractions or see what you see "schools me" will be the day I log out. I don't even know which topic you're talking about.