2020 U.S. Presidential Election - Took place November 3, 2020. Former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden assumed office January 20, 2021.

[ConfederateIrishman]

If you can't express your political opinions without breaking the 'imminent lawless action' threshold then your opinions are shit.

You know I bet they say the exact same thing in China

 

[FAQnews Correspondent]

By themselves it's nothing immediate or damning, they just look like some random, old woman livestreaming inane shit on Facebook. Under scrutiny you start to see mildly odd things, not the least of which being that she and her daughter seemingly have all but unsupervised access to the ballots in the back room, and can just come and go whenever they please, and have private cubicles set up where they're just left alone with entire batches of ballots.

One of the more interesting parts is that one of the videos is from October 19th, and she still has a big box of ballots sitting around, that curiously don't seem to have a return address on the envelopes. I do not remember when early ballot voting began in Georgia, though. I'm not implying there's anything immediately nefarious in these videos, only that it's very, very odd for the Supervisor of Elections to be livestreaming this shit.

View attachment 1766345

https://sos.ga.gov/admin/files/2020%20Revised%20Short%20Calendar.pdf

General election early voting started October 12.

 

[Secret Asshole]

They're not really loading here, trying to download to view. Can I get a tl;dr?

I honestly have no idea what I just watched. It was just an election supervisor saying they got tested for COVID for the first one and then the second one she's just showing around her work place and got hand sanitizer and got annoyed by office gossip. I have no idea.

Just add /sneed or "in minecraft" to prevent your terrorist plots being undermined. Judges and lawyers can't parse irony and get stuck in a legal loop.

When in doubt, reassert your right as a sovereign citizen and ask to speak to the judge's supervisor.

Preferably while you are speeding and screaming that you're just traveling while you assert the NAP

Also if you are going to do something that retarded (and you shouldn't), use a VPN so if the FBI ask Null for information he doesn't have anything useful to give.

I'm assuming no one registered here with their real email (I certainly didn't, and if you're trying to get information from pointless.pedant@animalfetishporn.us you're going to be a bit disappointed), but that might be a bit too much given the speds we have here.

Yeah, I don't recommend that at all.

You don't live in a free country, simple as.

This is an idiotic take. We certainly do. The Supreme Court declared, 9-0 with Ruth Bader Ginsberg, that Hate Speech does not exist. What Sig did was basically present a 'Clear and Present Danger'. He made a specific threat, for a specific event at a specified time.

From the Supreme Court Case:

Under the imminent lawless action test, speech is not protected by the First Amendment if the speaker intends to incite a violation of the law that is both imminent and likely. While the precise meaning of "imminent" may be ambiguous in some cases, the court provided later clarification in Hess v. Indiana (1973) in which the court found that Hess's words were protected under "his rights to free speech",[1] in part, because his speech "amounted to nothing more than advocacy of illegal action at some indefinite future time,"[1] and therefore did not meet the imminence requirement.

Note, Sig met the imminent requirement because he specified a date as well. It wasn't nebulous.

How hard is it not to be a fucking sped and not make, you know, non-veiled threats? You don't have a right to make non-veiled threats, which is what he did.

You can say: "I think everyone should pick up guns and kill 'X'." That's not imminent or clear. You CAN'T say: "I'm going to do harm to X at X this time at X". That's a specific threat. You're fucking retarded if you think you have the right to do that anywhere on the fucking planet where rule of law exists.

 

[Syaoran Li]

Just add /sneed or "in minecraft" to prevent your terrorist plots being undermined. Judges and lawyers can't parse irony and get stuck in a legal loop.

When in doubt, reassert your right as a sovereign citizen and ask to speak to the judge's supervisor.

Don't forget to check if the flag in the court room has gold fringes.

A gold fringe flag is only for an Admirality Court, which signifies a naval court martial. You cannot be court martialed twice!

And if cops find you with illegal items, tell the judge you were using them as fishing bait and you caught a wide mouth bass that was this big!

 

[It's HK-47]

I honestly have no idea what I just watched. It was just an election supervisor saying they got tested for COVID for the first one and then the second one she's just showing around her work place and got hand sanitizer and got annoyed by office gossip. I have no idea.

I pulled it from some QAnon account who's making some fairly extreme assertions about what's in the video, but I'm not exactly going to take his opinions without a heap of salt. I just think that it's deeply unusual for an elections supervisor to be livestreaming their day-to-day at work, because you'd genuinely think there'd be a bit more OpSec than that, and I think there might be more unintentionally interesting information in her videos as people comb through more of them.

I wasn't implying that her videos were going to be immediately explosive because reality is not a movie and QAnon's crowd tends to hyperventilate about... I don't even fucking know. I'll put a picture at the ass end of this just to illustrate why I don't bother keeping up with QAnon because I'm not nearly schizophrenic enough to decipher even half of it.

Also, I was mistaken, she's not the suitcase woman, that was her daughter.

 

[Gustav Schuchardt]

You know I bet they say the exact same thing in China

I thought someone would say something like this but I'd argue that a ban on speech inciting imminent lawless action is optimal. If the law was tighter - e.g. in the UK anything 'offensive' is potentially illegal - then you end up with less freedom. If the law was laxer then the far left and far right would use their ability to incite violence to take over and you'd end up with less freedom. In fact, you'd probably end up somewhere very close to China.

It's something Karl Popper mused about in 'The Open Society And Its Enemies'. It's true the far left cite him as a justification for speech controls but they're being very dishonest when they do so. Popper wanted Nazis and Commies prevented from using threats of violence. They want commies to be allowed to do it but 'Nazis' prevented. By 'Nazis' they mean you and the speech they want to be controlled is anything that disputes their narrative.

They're actually exactly the sort of people he was warning about and the people they want to censor are the ones Popper would have championed.

 

[murdered meat bag]

I pulled it from some QAnon account who's making some fairly extreme assertions about what's in the video, but I'm not exactly going to take his opinions without a heap of salt. I just think that it's deeply unusual for an elections supervisor to be livestreaming their day-to-day at work, because you'd genuinely think there'd be a bit more OpSec than that, and I think there might be more unintentionally interesting information in her videos as people comb through more of them.

I wasn't implying that her videos were going to be immediately explosive because reality is not a movie and QAnon's crowd tends to hyperventilate about... I don't even fucking know. I'll put a picture at the ass end of this just to illustrate why I don't bother keeping up with QAnon because I'm not nearly schizophrenic enough to decipher even half of it.

Also, I was mistaken, she's not the suitcase woman, that was her daughter.

View attachment 1766357

that's some hotep "you worship the Son because you worship the Sun" "we are from Canaan because we are africanaan" levels of shit.

 

[AnOminous]

Of all the people on this thread who should be sucking cocks in the slammer for glowposting, it's @SIGSEGV? Smdh tbh fam.

 

[Secret Asshole]

I thought someone would say something like this but I'd argue that a ban on speech inciting imminent lawless action is optimal. If the law was tighter - e.g. in the UK anything 'offensive' is potentially illegal - then you end up with less freedom. If the law was laxer then the far left and far right would use their ability to incite violence to take over and you'd end up with less freedom. In fact, you'd probably end up somewhere very close to China.

It's something Karl Popper mused about in 'The Open Society And Its Enemies'. It's true the far left cite him as a justification for speech controls but they're being very dishonest when they do so. Popper wanted Nazis and Commies prevented from using threats of violence. They want commies to be allowed to do it but 'Nazis' prevented. By 'Nazis' they mean you and the speech they want to be controlled is anything that disputes their narrative.

They're actually exactly the sort of people he was warning about and the people they want to censor are the ones Popper would have championed.

Its a reasonable restriction. I don't know how people don't see that. You can't be allowed to just threaten whoever you want. And its not like it takes a fucking idiot to figure that out, which is why people constantly say "In Minecraft" or go out of their way to say that its "I'M ONLY JOKING, THIS IS JUST A JOKE, I AM NOT GONNA DO THIS".

I pulled it from some QAnon account who's making some fairly extreme assertions about what's in the video, but I'm not exactly going to take his opinions without a heap of salt. I just think that it's deeply unusual for an elections supervisor to be livestreaming their day-to-day at work, because you'd genuinely think there'd be a bit more OpSec than that, and I think there might be more unintentionally interesting information in her videos as people comb through more of them.

I wasn't implying that her videos were going to be immediately explosive because reality is not a movie and QAnon's crowd tends to hyperventilate about... I don't even fucking know. I'll put a picture at the ass end of this just to illustrate why I don't bother keeping up with QAnon because I'm not nearly schizophrenic enough to decipher even half of it.

Also, I was mistaken, she's not the suitcase woman, that was her daughter.

View attachment 1766357

That's some fucking dementia tier shit there. I mean, plenty of people do. Its not like she revealed anything like a password or people's votes or illegal activity or anything remotely suspicious. It just seems like what every day, normal people do.

 

[Extremist Frank]

Can’t wait to see the FBI/DOJ fuck up in court and admit Sig is an agent of theirs and his statements were the basis for more digital surveillance

 

[Pointless Pedant]

Its a reasonable restriction. I don't know how people don't see that. You can't be allowed to just threaten whoever you want. And its not like it takes a fucking idiot to figure that out, which is why people constantly say "In Minecraft" or go out of their way to say that its "I'M ONLY JOKING, THIS IS JUST A JOKE, I AM NOT GONNA DO THIS".


That's some fucking dementia tier shit there. I mean, plenty of people do. Its not like she revealed anything like a password or people's votes or illegal activity or anything remotely suspicious. It just seems like what every day, normal people do.

QAnon is the boomer version of Chris Chan's dimensional merge and isn't worth taking seriously at all.

 

[It's HK-47]

Of all the people on this thread who should be sucking cocks in the slammer for glowposting, it's @SIGSEGV? Smdh tbh fam.

All of the other glow-posters got reported and their content was deleted. SIG's never got reported because everyone knew he was just shitposting and didn't mean it; I never even noticed the post or I would have nuked it just to avoid the hassle. There's a palpable sense of irony somewhere in there, like some kind of Boy Who Cried Shitpost.

 

[ConfederateIrishman]

I thought someone would say something like this but I'd argue that a ban on speech inciting imminent lawless action is optimal. If the law was tighter - e.g. in the UK anything 'offensive' is potentially illegal - then you end up with less freedom. If the law was laxer then the far left and far right would use their ability to incite violence to take over and you'd end up with less freedom. In fact, you'd probably end up somewhere very close to China.

It's something Karl Popper mused about in 'The Open Society And Its Enemies'. It's true the far left cite him as a justification for speech controls but they're being very dishonest when they do so. Popper wanted Nazis and Commies prevented from using threats of violence. They want commies to be allowed to do it but 'Nazis' prevented. By 'Nazis' they mean you and the speech they want to be controlled is anything that disputes their narrative.

They're actually exactly the sort of people he was warning about and the people they want to censor are the ones Popper would have championed.

Well here is the rundown of my beliefs on this: If there should be any restriction on speech to deal with imminent threats, it should be through constitutional amendment, and not an overpowered branch of Government (because the Federalists foolishly thought they would be in power to always control the judiciary so they ignored the anti-federalist's fears about it) which gave itself the power to start "interpreting" the constitution whichever way it wanted.

For example, I find it very depressing when people constantly quote "don't shout fire in a crowded theater" when a Judge basically used that as an excuse originally for Wilson's unconstitutional actions during WW1 to suppress domestic dissent.

Ultimately I see no reason this trend will not continue over the decades until really there is nothing left on rights but pieces of paper with too many exceptions (and in many ways I feel like it is already at that point).

By then, the Chinese will be ultimately better off than Americans because they will hold no illusions that they are free compared to Americans.

But regardless, I am aware this is an extremely fringe and controversial opinion to take, I just wanted to lay it out on the table.

All of the other glow-posters got reported and their content was deleted. SIG's never got reported because everyone knew he was just shitposting and didn't mean it; I never even noticed the post or I would have nuked it just to avoid the hassle. There's a palpable sense of irony somewhere in there, like some kind of Boy Who Cried Shitpost.

>The one guy who was making fun of glowposters is the only one who gets v8'd
It is genuinely hilarious the more I think about it.

 

[Trans Fat 41g]

SIGSEV was just a concept.

SIGSEV was never real.

 

[babadook]

Snip

tl;dr disrespect

 

[murdered meat bag]

we're going to lose A&H aren't we? even if 230 never gets repealed.

 

[WhimsicalTrolli]

HHH's reign of terror in WWE is like HHH's reign of terror on Kiwi Farms

But you haven't buried a black person yet.

 

[AnOminous]

>The one guy who was making fun of glowposters is the only one who gets v8'd
It is genuinely hilarious the more I think about it.

Sometimes, the sheer stupidity of glowbois is a thing of beauty. How did they get so stupid? How do they stay so stupid? On a thread full of insanity and death threats they arrest the literally one guy who was being sarcastic.

 

[Irritable Bowel Syndrome]

Of all the people on this thread who should be sucking cocks in the slammer for glowposting, it's @SIGSEGV? Smdh tbh fam.

Next the FBI will be asking for info on all the people who upvoted him and Null will probably hand over that info.

 

[HTTP Error 404]

Of all the people on this thread who should be sucking cocks in the slammer for glowposting, it's @SIGSEGV? Smdh tbh fam.

Eh, he won't go to jail. He'll lose all his computers and anything that can store electronic data in his house to the van, and he'll have to explain what "humor" is to a bunch of people who are paid not to understand the concept. Oh, and every person he knows will be interviewed by the feds so they make sure everyone knows he was making threats to murder people online, just to fuck with him.

But I don't see him going to jail.

If I was SIGSEGV, though, I'd be nuking the ever-loving FUCK out of my computer equipment if I do have anything a glowy could make a case out of. He doesn't technically know he's under investigation yet, so he can do so. Lawyer up, as well.