What to do about Shifty?

Makes sense to me. Why communicate with an organization whose only goal is to destroy you?

2 Likes

california will find 3 or 4 vans filled with uncounted ballots giving thousands of votes to shifty…

watch the landslides

Mail in only in California. Eliminating those pesky situations that allow for conservatives to be elected.

Didn’t they just put out some booths because they were losing?

How is mail in not racist?

I’d like to see our representatives in the House and Senate held accountable for anything they say. If found to be a lie they lose their seat.

Perhaps under those parameters we’d get some honesty.

By not being racist.

The place would be empty in a week. :joy:

1 Like

Sad but true.

Why would anyone believe anything Trump says? He lies repeatedly, and all easily provable .

I live near Madison WI, and there is no way I will ever vote for Shifty, Shift, Shifter Adam for Congressman.

America will decide the Presidential election this November.

This thread is about Shifty. A few people from California voted for him.

Adam Schiff is the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. He is offered a challenge.

Why don’t you take a lie detector test? Why don’t you take a lie detector test so the American people can be sure that you, all over TV, ubiquitous, you might as well be on airport radar and sonograms. You’re everywhere, sir. You say you don’t leak. OK, take a lie detector test because I believe you do. ~ Mark Levin

Why doesn’t Trump take a lie detector test? Or hell, just answer questions in person? Instead of that ridiculous “take home test” they gave him, where is lawyers answered all the questions. Or let those in his administration testify? Seems he like he has something to hide doesn’t it?

Why would he not lose a libel charge?

" or a public figure to win a libel lawsuit than a private figure?

To win a libel lawsuit, a private person has to prove that the publisher of the false statements acted “negligently.” Negligence means that the publisher didn’t do his homework. Even if the publisher didn’t know that his facts were false when he published them, he can still be on the hook for libel if he should have known.

In contrast, to win their libel suit, a public figure has to prove that the publisher of the false statements acted with “actual malice.” Actual malice means that the publisher either knew that the statements were false, or acted with reckless disregard for whether they were true or false. This is a lot harder to prove than negligence."

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.freedomforuminstitute.org/first-amendment-center/primers/libellaw/&ved=2ahUKEwiU5tH_hLPpAhX3yDgGHbEbDRMQFjAKegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw3BOGcDwecRJuqyP3ujdjD7

PUBLISHER

Law Professor Law Professor

6 years ago

One whose business is the manufacture, promulgation, and sale of books, pamphlets, magazines, newspapers, or other literary productions.

Law Dictionary – Alternative Legal Definition

One who does by himself or his agents make a thing publicly known; one engaged in the circulation of books, pamphlets, and other papers. 2. The publisher of a libel is responsible as if he were the author of it, and it is immaterial whether he has any knowledge of its contents or not; and it is no justification to him that the name of the author accompanies the libel. 3. When the publication is made by writing or printing, if the matter be libelous, the publisher may be indicted for a misdemeanor, provided it was made by his direction or consent, but if he was the owner of a newspaper merely, and the publication was made by his servants or agents, without any consent or knowledge on his part, he will not be liable to a criminal prosecution. In either case he will be liable to an action for damages sustained by the party aggrieved. 7 John. 260. 4. In order to render the publisher amenable to the law, the publication must be maliciously made, but malice will be presumed if the matter be libelous. This presumption, however, will be rebutted, if the publication be made for some lawful purpose, as, drawing up a bill of indictment, in which the libelous words are embodied, for the purpose of prosecuting the libeler; or if it evidently appear the publisher did not, at the time of publication, know that the matter was libelous as, when a person reads a libel presence of others, without beforehand knowing it to be such. See Libel; Libeler; Publication.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://dictionary.thelaw.com/publisher/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwjAi8OwhrPpAhXuzTgGHVKTD84QFnoECAIQAA&usg=AOvVaw30LT35K2C5UEdGOOctofsn&ampcf=1

i guarantee i wont vote for him

So I can put you down that you believed him, still believe him and that what’s coming out saying he lied is the actual lie…amirite? :sunglasses:

Schiff is a loose cannon and will damage the D more if he isn’t called on the collision lies.

I’m going to hope that as a minimum, Schiff’s actions have been exposed to be egregiously working against our country, that he’ll be voted out of office by the same that put him in. The icing on the cake would be if he could be tried and potentially prosecuted for lying.

2 Likes

If in his eyes it was solid evidence, ( and I think there was) how is that a lie? If a prosecutor goes to trial and tells a jury, “I will prove to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that the defendant committed this crime”…but the jury later aquits the defendant. Did the prosecutor lie?

What do you mean “was”. Where the ■■■■ is it?

I think there was/is plenty in the Mueller report…IMO. And you didn’t answer the question.