meco03211

Nah. I like to get a good head of steam on my stress before I go off the rails. Much more spectacular.

Honestly, if trump is the necessary evil, I think I'd just rather we not. Like maybe the country needs a hard reset. It could be part punishment part cleansing.

Reminds me of when Colbert had NPH on the Colbert Report. They are talking about NPHs sexuality and I forget what prompted the quip but it was glorious. Something like "and that's why you're one of the most threatening gays because of how non threatening you are."

That's kinda what I think they mean by "normal" gay.

She's campaigning for a WAP. Woman As President.

That says nothing about voting twice, it says attempting.

Had you read the actual statute you'd have found "voter fraud" to be the actual act of voting twice. In another section the modifier attempted is defined as basically attempting a crime defined elsewhere. So you can complain about justice not being served all you want, but the jury was not convinced he would have voted twice. You can say you'd have convicted him even, but you weren't on the jury. I'm not arguing whether he should or shouldn't have been convicted. The original question that prompted this chain was how he wasn't convicted. I was providing a simple explanation as to why. Accept it or not. The part you missed was the part you explicitly said you didn't look into. The actual law on this issue.

Bro.

Except he didn't vote twice. He got in line to do it. He was turned away. From there he could try to say he never actually intended to vote again and would have not filled out another ballot and submitted it.

The drink driving analogy to this is walking to your vehicle while drunk with your keys in your hand. Or sitting in your vehicle. In many states and jurisdictions if you are sitting in the car even without keys or actual intent to drive you can be convicted of "DUI".

So he apparently didn't actually vote twice. He voted early. Then, on the day of the election he went to a polling place to attempt to vote again. When they looked up his name, they saw he had already voted and presumably didn't allow him to vote again. Because he didn't actually vote twice, there's no way they'd be able to find him guilty of voting twice. That'd be like charging someone with murder where the victim is still alive. They ended up charging him with attempted voter fraud. And if he told them something like "Had they allowed me in and given me a ballot I would not have filled it out and voted again. I was just testing the system." I could see people going easy on one of their own.

Does the government define "hacking"? I'd imagine not that specific word.

There's still a window you could "fall" out of...

Miss me with that astrophysics ish. Come holla when you on that Ramsey theory and Graham's Number.

And proved it worked great. Task failed successfully.