Seriously, can you just take someone's degree away?

@windinhishair Ted Cruz and a few others, students wanted their degrees revoked.

@SatanBurger Well, if they're honorary degrees perhaps, otherwise that's ridiculous.

@SatanBurger Honorary degrees, or earned degrees? There is a difference. Cruz deserves condemnation for inciting violence.

@windinhishair So does every person on Twitter who incited rioting on either side yet you don't see that happening. If you're going to be like the Joker, at least be consistent and burn everything instead of hiding behind a good reason, just saying.

@SatanBurger Not every person on Twitter who incited rioting on either side has an honorary degree.

Also, not every person with an honorary degree is a sitting senator who made a formal objection to the election results even though he knew full well there was no widespread fraud.

@SatanBurger People that commit violence should face consequences. Cruz and Hawley are even worse because their violence was intended to destroy our democratic system. That deserves additional consequences.

@windinhishair I'm not sure it was though.

@SatanBurger It was, and you know it.

@SatanBurger Clearly both Hawley and Cruz incited violence to disrupt the electoral vote count by committing violence in and around the Capitol. Thousands of people took part, egged on by the Senators, the President, and others. Just as you are liable if you yell "Fire!" falsely in a crowded theater, they are liable for the violence they created, supported, and enhanced for their own benefit.

@windinhishair Cruz criticized Trump and the only thing I saw was that he said the allegations of Arizona should be taken into account. You're telling me that was the main cause of the riot?

Nah bro.

@SatanBurger Cruz condemned the violence after it occurred, because he realized that he was in legal jeopardy based on his prior statements. He knew exactly what he was doing before inciting the insurrection. He was a cause, not the main cause, but he still has responsibility. Up until the moment that the insurrection occurred, he was still claiming voter fraud, which he knew to be a big lie. You can't keep telling lies that people will believe and then cowering behind a false condemnation.

Cruz, and Hawley, should be removed from the Senate and charged with sedition.

@windinhishair They can't take Cruz's law degree but he could lose his license.

@Crazywaterspring He should lose his license to practice law.

@windinhishair Quite a few law students and professors in Texas have mentioned the state bar association to do that. State bar associations are private organizations that grant licensure and examinations. The government has nothing to do with it.

@Crazywaterspring Yes, but Texas is very conservative, so it may not be likely that they will take away his license to practice.

@windinhishair I don't feel like Cruz incited rioting in the first place, all he did was say that fraud should be properly investigated. People say Cruz "knew" that there was no fraud but that doesn't seem like the case.

Insisting that someone "knew" something was false for sure when you're not them is a bad argument. How are you going to prove that in court?

[b]Judge:[/b] "Please present evidence implicating Ted Cruz to the court please" (or whatever judges say.)

[b]The prosecution:[/b] "Your honor, we have no evidence but Ted Cruz knew, we just know he knew because we say so, please take away his degree and put him in prison."

Yeah I don't know, seems like a bad argument.

@SatanBurger Cruz is not an idiot like many of the Trump Cult. He knew there was no voter fraud. He saw the 60+ failed lawsuits. He's been in many elections and seen many more. There is no doubt whatsoever he knew what he was saying was a lie. None.

In court, all the plaintiffs would have to show is that there was no significant voter fraud, and that Cruz continued to say there was, without any factual basis whatsoever. That's a slam dunk to prove. It can also be proven that long after purported evidence of fraud was proven to be nothing but lies and supposition, Cruz continued to support and spout the lies. Again, this can be easily proven. He appeared at Stop The Steal rallies he knew to have no factual basis. Cruz has a right to say what he wants, but he is also responsible for what he says. The consequences of his actions were an insurrection to take down democracy based on deliberately misleading and false information. Cruz should be removed from the Senate, disbarred from practicing law, and charged with sedition.

@windinhishair I know this is off point. I just couldnt help laugh at the image of a bunch of cowboy hatted tooled leather booted moustached guys who would be overdressed for the Village people auditions being called "Conservative"😷

@whowasthatmaskedman Live in West Texas for awhile, as I did. You will see all that, and more.

@whowasthatmaskedman Yeah but same can be said for leftists, I kind of laughed at the CHAZ LARPERS dressed in black, with guns and then crying for the police later.

@SatanBurger To quote someone. "I am sure there are fine people on both sides."😷

@windinhishair No not really, it's a lot more complicated and wouldn't hold up in court.

[b]https://spectator.us/topic/evidence-actually-rudy-giuliani-voter-fraud/[/b]

Most importantly, if fraud wanted to be committed at a govt level can the govt be trusted to fact check itself?

[quote]In court, all the plaintiffs would have to show is that there was no significant voter fraud, and that Cruz continued to say there was, without any factual basis whatsoever. That's a slam dunk to prove.[/quote]

@SatanBurger Every single claim of voter fraud was dismissed by the courts. Every. Single. One. Despite what your "Spectator" source says, there was no evidence of widespread voter fraud. If there was, at least one of the 60+ court cases would have so ruled. They did not, because there was nothing provided. In fact, the bogus charges were dismissed, often with strongly-worded language chiding the Trump Team for submitting supposition instead of facts.

So you take the claims of denial of voter fraud by multiple states who conducted multiple recounts as prima facie evidence of fraud, because they can not attest to their own elections? That's a very interesting, though looney, approach to take.

To this day there has been no evidence of significant voter fraud in ANY of the states Trump lost, despite knowingly false claims to the contrary by Trump's sycophants and partners in crime.

Oh, and by the way, using an opinion piece in Spectator as a source is like using Alex Jones at Infowars. The single named individual's affidavit that was cited was not able to be corroborated, was unsuccessful in court, and is not a reason to throw out millions of ballots and disenfranchise those voters, no matter how much Trump, Cruz, Hawley, and others bellow about it. Being the loudest on an issue doesn't matter. Facts matter, and there were no verifiable facts supporting massive voter fraud.

@windinhishair [b]https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/17/no-voter-fraud-isnt-myth-10-cases-where-its-all-to/[/b]

Sorry but if the shoe fits... if this can happen then it's pretty easy to imagine it happening now too.

@windinhishair Here's some recent examples that are mildly entertaining:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/06/26/1_in_5_ballots_rejected_as_fraud_is_charged_in_nj_mail-in_election_143551.html

https://thefederalist.com/2020/10/09/gov-gavin-newsom-tried-to-own-a-voter-on-mail-in-ballot-fraud-but-it-backfired/

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/25/pennsylvania-ballots-trump-421908