Covid19 does not kill. A cartoon isn't going to change that.
So all these Conservatives dropping dead from COVID aren't really dead?
Covid19 does not kill. A cartoon isn't going to change that.
Covid19 doesn't kill.
An affidavit is already a testimony made under oath.
It is already a deposition. They are from actual witnesses.
The affidavits were made by witnesses, not lawyers.
Inversion fallacy.
An affidavit IS a deposition.
It requires no hearing. It requires no judge.
There was no election.
The evidence has already been shown to you. It is public record. No court is needed.
You do not get to judge her life. You are not God. Omniscience fallacy.
Obama isn't President. We are now importing oil.
We imported oil under Obama too. During Trump, we were a net exporter of oil. Get up to date, dude.
The disaster of the Treaty of Versailles, for one.
Over speculation for another.
The Federal Reserve for another.
This caused the initial downturn.
After that, FDR made the Great Depression Great. It lasted until after WW2. It took that long to recover after FDR's influence was removed.
Personal computer prices have been dropping over the years. Denial of history.
According to what Trump told Woodward in secret, it does.
So all these Conservatives dropping dead from COVID aren't really dead?
NO IT ISN'T!
NO IT ISN'T!
Depositions don't feature anonymous sources...a deposition would be calling the witnesses the affiants mention in their affidavits to testify to what the attorney put in the affidavit.
You understand that the affidavits are not witness testimony, right? They are a lawyer's sworn statement that someone told them something.
A deposition would force the affiant (Let's use Powell as the affiant since Powell filed more affidavits than any other attorney) to testify under oath during the deposition that someone told them this, and then the opposing attorney or judge would ask the affiant who the source is for this claim...that's the part where Trump's people come up short because they know any of these "witnesses" that they identified in their affidavits won't be able to keep their stories straight.
NO THEY WEREN'T!
The affidavits are made by the attorneys and in the affidavit, it is the attorney who makes the claim that an anonymous source told them they witnessed something.
You don't know what you're talking about.
But you don't.
You first said they were a deposition (they aren't), then you said they were "a form of a deposition" (still not correct).
Affidavits have very little legal standing, particularly when the source described within it is anonymous, as is the case for almost every single affidavit Trump's people filed.
NO IT ISN'T.
Right, which is why they have very little legal standing and why they are almost never used in actual court cases.
The affidavits you're talking about are submitted and signed by the attorneys, and they represent rumors that the attorneys heard from their witnesses...who they keep anonymous in the affidavit for no real purpose or reason.
NO IT ISN'T.
Right, which is why they have very little legal standing and why they are almost never used in actual court cases.
The affidavits you're talking about are submitted and signed by the attorneys, and they represent rumors that the attorneys heard from their witnesses...who they keep anonymous in the affidavit for no real purpose or reason.
More mantra repetition and it's obvious why you're doing it...you are witnessing your entire argument fall apart before your very eyes and the best you can do to defend yourself is to repeat the mantra.
I can judge whatever the fuck I want and what are you gonna do about it besides repeat mantras to give yourself comfort?