BC POLITICS
Saved by @Mollyycolllinss

THREAD:
Good afternoon, followers of frivolous election litigation. There's a last-minute entry in the competition for dumbest pre-inauguration lawsuit - a totally loony effort to apparently leave the entire USA without a government.

We'll start with the complaint in a minute.

 But first, I want to give you a quick explanation for why I'm going to keep talking about these cases even after the inauguration.

They're part of an ongoing effort - one that's not well-coordinated but is widespread - to discredit our fundamental system of government.
It's a direct descendent, in more ways than one, of birtherism. And here's the thing about birtherism. It might have been a joke to a lot of people, but it was extremely pernicious. It obviously validated the racist "not good enough to be President" crowd. But that wasn't all.
Don't get me wrong, that was bad enough. Validating racism helped put the kind of shitbird who would tweet this from an official government account into power. But it didn't stop there.

https://t.co/097srhcwmd
(Also, if you agree with Pompeo about multiculturalism - the legendary melting pot - not being what this country is all about, you need to stop following me now. And maybe go somewhere and think about your life choices and what made you such a tool.)
The birther racism was bad enough. But it also delegitimized Obama and contributed to the idea that Democrats only win by cheating - which is what got us to today.

Part of the reason for this, I think, is that people didn't pay enough attention to what the birthers were doing.
They were dismissed as a joke, but they were taking themselves seriously to (and beyond) the end of the Obama years - and they were doing so in the precursors to 8kun and Q.

I think dismissing these neo-birthers in the same way would be a bad mistake.
I don't plan to make that mistake. I'm going to keep watching, and trying to figure out what else I can do to combat the harm they cause.

With that in mind, let's turn to the complaint.
The complaint is filed on behalf of two organizations which may or may not be incorporated (we'll see in a bit; I haven't looked), one named individual, and 4 people who have the courage to demand to challenge the whole country's election pseudonymously.
They are represented by two lawyers. One is presently practicing law on his own after being dumped from his job after being identified as one of the livestreamers at the seditious riot of 6 Jan. The other is a failed Republican political candidate.
You are supposed to catch attention with headings, and credit where due this kind of does do this. Maybe not in a great way, but it does it.
The first paragraph is a thing. I don't have another word for it, really. It's a strange strange paragraph.
Also, this is one GEM of a footnote.

I mean, it's right. But it's not exactly -- I don't know what the hell it's trying to do.
My bad. Thanks for the reminder.

https://t.co/YlB9RwZSfg

https://t.co/XVM6S77hS2
This is a new theory. And when we say "new theory" in this context, we should be clear about what that means:

It means that this is so bonkers that even Ellis, Giuliani, Powell, Wood, and Eastman could not - not even by focusing their combined venial incompetence - think of it.
So the legal theory here seems to be that votes which aren't HAVA-compliant are not legal votes. This is consistent with the developing Republican orthodoxy in this area - which claims that the government can deprive you of your vote if they mess up election procedures.
Seeing this sentence, I'm genuinely surprised that they're not alleging Popehat's least favorite claim.
*reads next paragraph*
This is just - oh my.

They have really taken the bananapants clownshoes to a whole new level. The entire 117th Congress - apparently including those who were seated in the Senate in prior years - needs to be thrown out. Not just POTUS.
This is, needless to say, not going to happen.
Hasn't HAVA been around for like nearly 20 years or something? How the hell could this be the first year there was an issue?

(Also laches but let's not get too far ahead of ourselves.)
BRB got tea in my nose.
"The only conceivable remedy is...for the Court to order the 50 states to conduct a new federal election that conforms to the minimum standards of HAVA."

That's an inconceivable remedy. And, yes, Inigo. I know what inconceivable means.
I'm cracking up with every paragraph. Just every last one.

We've apparently hit "if literally every last federal official except Trump is illegitimate maybe Trump can stay President."

WHICH IS STILL WRONG.
If there's no new President or VP, and no Speaker, and no President Pro Tem of the Senate, then Mike Pompeo, racist escapee from a pufferfish imitation club though he may be, would presumably become President provided his resignation was not yet effective.
"...this Court should rest assured that [literally yeeting the entire Congress] will not result in the destruction of democracy."
OK. This is something I feel like a lot of Trumpian MAGAts need to hear:

"Consent of the governed" does not mean anyone gives a damn whether you personally consent to any specific officeholder.
When I think "simple enough for a 3rd grader" I generally don't think of 8-point explanations resting on volumes of evidence, but maybe that's just me.
OK. So as to point 4, anyone who is talking about enforceable contracts in this context is one very short step away from rolling around the courtroom floor gibbering about fringy flags and screaming incoherently about joinder while being repeatedly tased.
Beyond that, the "self-evident" in point seven is doing a metric fuckton and a half of work in this argument.

But it's a great example for "if you say it is, it ain't."
Also, what the hell - do these pangalactic garglebrains not understand that Senators serve for 6 years and nearly 2/3 of the Senate wasn't elected on the ballots they claim were illegal?
This person shares a name with one of the nitwits who got arrested for driving up to Philly during the vote count with a bunch of weapons. But that person apparently lives in Virginia Beach, so dunno.
I have no idea whether either of the two "political organizations" have the capacity to sue.
Not sure why they're using a pseudonym for JB and yet providing this much detail.
There are a lot of defendants. Although a TRO is being sought, the plaintiffs have apparently not requested that summonses issue as to ANY defendant.

Also: citing "https://t.co/LsPDjUepwD" instead of actually bothering to list all your defendants is an interesting choice.
ARRRRRGHHHHHHHHHHH - these people are soooo bloody bloody stupid what the everlovingmotherfuck
For the nonlawyers:
In order for the court to have diversity jurisdiction, NONE of the plaintiffs can be from the same state as ANY of the defendants.

They are suing EVERYONE in the 117th Congress and all 50 governors.

Do you see their problem?
I mean, OK, I can't totally fukking rule out the possibility of complete diversity. It's possible that these transcendental nincompoops are literally, as well as figuratively, domiciled somewhere beyond the second star to the right.

But it's pretty damn unlikely, now, innit?
This personal jurisdiction section is funny, but it's funny to lawyers in a way that's going to take too long to explain. Also, @AkivaMCohen said it's his favorite and I don't want to steal his thunder.
And - whoops! - so much for the lunar domicile theory of diversity jurisdiction. They just said that some of the plaintiffs live in the same district as some of the defendants.
Neither, actually. They meant "haled into court." https://t.co/FDCB93UUs9
Not a lot of facts really being stated. And the whole "not stating the specific sections of the law that we think were violated" thing is also an interesting choice when they want preliminary relief.
Or maybe I spoke too soon.

Except, no, they don't seem to be bothering to explain how any of these changes fail to comply with HAVA.
I'm going to scroll through the 50 states relatively quick. I'll stop and do a screenshot if anything seems noteworthy enough.
Seriously, I think they're just doing copypasta from some memo someone did, because why the hell am I reading about a court decision that resulted in election rules not being changed?
Wait wut??

You're suing Colorado because they made changes except you say they made no changes? Are you on crack? Did you fall down and hit your head on something? What the hell is going on here? Give me a reason for this. Something. Anything. COME ON!
GUAM?? GUAM????

What the hell? They have no electoral votes, no voting member in Congress, AND YOU AREN'T SUING THEM YOU COMPLETE BUMBLEFUCKING BANANAPANTS BUFFOONS.
OK, we're up to 3 states now being sued who according to the plaintiffs did not do anything wrong.
5 with no changes.

This is not the "reasonable inquiry" Rule 11 requires.
6 with no changes.
Ohjustkillmenow
LMFAO - SUCH AS???

I mean that's not exactly unimportant, now, is it???
OK. Now y'all just messing with me. Really.
And what in the name of the ichor god Bel-Shamharoth is this ratfuckery even? Every other change anyone made violated HAVA *except* Texas? GTFO.
Another no-change state. I think it's 7 now but I'm not going to waste the time looking back upthread to confirm that.
And one last no-change state. These people should not be trusted around objects.
Why are you only suing the members of the 116th Congress who won reelection if you're complaining about this.
Does it count as alleging that the defendants Did Teh RICO if you chicken out and don't add the cause of action?
*double checks* - yup. No RICO claim.

This plus the Hagar thing is starting to give me the same feeling I get when I'm grading a paper where the student changed topics mid-paper without realizing it because hey stream of semiconsciousness always works, right?
Does anyone but Zuckerberg qualify? Were they planning on suing about eleventyjillion more people?

Don't answer that.
They were soooo going to try and sue for Teh RICO and then chickened out.
There is no named plaintiff J. James in this case. There is, however, someone with the initials J.J.
WHATTHEHELLISTHISEVEN???

Competence, motherfukkers, do you know what that is??
I get the sense that they might not know how RAM works. Or what it is.
And always a good choice to make the Court read more on a case like this. Especially vaguely titled and poorly described exhibits.
OFFS. Learn to write you semiliterate seditionist pussbuckets.
And here are the other claims that they fail to state.

As far as I can tell, they are claiming that they were deprived of their right to vote and therefore the entire election of Congress should be overturned because....

Yeah, I'm just kidding. I've got no clue what they claim.
You want to invalidate the entire 117th Congress by having a court issue an ex parte TRO?

No, seriously, what do you want?
Because there's no way you could seriously ask a court to issue ex parte relief doing that....

But they are.

*sigh*
They're "calling on the courage of this court." Yeah, that always works. Great heading there. Really.

You crappants clown.
Also: subject-verb agreement. It's a thing. It might not be a thing in this pleading, except perhaps by accident, but it really is a thing.
Fuck you, you seditionist little shitbirds. The fuck your plea is made on my behalf.
Oh my god they included a footnote defining "Founding Fathers" becuase how the hell else would we know who they are referring to in this insane screed.
Oh, they're worrying about the political question doctrine. That's so cute. It's like worrying about an ingrown eyebrow hair when you're the Black Knight post-Arthur.
Wow. Sense of self-importance much?
So they address political question but not really - they just say it should be ignored. Which it will be - there are too many other reasons to dismiss this steaming turdmountain for the court to get that far.
1: Sentences end with periods.
2: Undersigned counsels' don't know very much. There was an evidentiary hearing in Wisconsin. The parties simply avoided witnesses in that case by agreeing to a set of stipulated facts during a recess in that hearing.
You're filing the lawsuit less than 48 hours from inauguration and you are claiming that laches doesn't apply because the plaintiffs didn't lawyer up sooner?

That ain't how laches work, y'all. Not even close.
Oh, just gag me with a sp--- no, better yet, gag them.
"If investors come to view their investments in assets held in the United States as inherently unstable...that would have a devastating effect on the Plaintiff's ability to plan for retirement by investing" is my new favorite worst irreparable harm argument ever.
Not only does it use up so much nocturnal flying mammal excrement that it threatens the global guano supply, it doesn't even work. That's a financial harm claim - it's fixable with money and therefore not irreparable.
Also -
You think a court yeeting the Congress and Presidency would be viewed by investors as *improving stability*???
No.
No. No. No.

This isn't real.
There's a *gold standard* argument for irreparable harm???

This can't be real.
"Y'all might have the memory of a lobotomized goldfish, counsel, but I read the complaint. You said that you weren't sure if Texas violated HAVA."
Also, I'm still trying to wrap my mind around "failure to comply with HAVA renders every ballot cast in the election invalid."
It always ends well when lawyers try to argue entire key elements with single sentences. This is particularly true when the sentences start with "it is self-evident that."
You want the TRO to be entered without notice? WHAT are you smoking and no I don't want any.

Also, RICO!
How much bond would be appropriate for a TRO that destroys the very fabric of the nation?
Oh, cool. Now we get to the fun stuff.

The requests.
LOL. No.
LOL. Hell no.
We knew Davis was involved in the Capitol sedition because of the whole getting fired thing, but was Kellye SoRelle on anyone's radar for this? Or did she just out herself as a participant?

Also, no, the court isn't going to save your ass.
1: That's not how it would work.
2: Also, no, seriously, how do you think that would even work?
Seriously, in just One Day More - not even - Trump will no longer be a lawfully and constitutionally remaining federal public official. So how would this work?
And, no, the courts are not going to "forever restrain[]" all 50 Governors, all 50 Secretaries of State, and all the Congresscritters of the nation from future office.
And where's the unicorn? Why are they not requesting a unicorn? It would be such a reasonable request compared with the rest.
Oh, and yeah, the signature block is just beautiful. Legendary, even.
Thoughts:
1: There's also, lord have mercy, a motion for TRO. I'll look at that tonight.
2:
Seriously, I barely scratched the surface on this one. This is the product of flop sweat, panic, and time that would better have been spent by these lawyers putting their affairs in order in preparation for arrest.

/fin

More from Mike Dunford

Mike Dunford
Mike Dunford
@questauthority
You know what?

I *will* without a doubt regret this.

But I'm going to watch Mike Pence read out the last returns before I go to sleep.

Also.

FUCK YEAH, AMERICA!!!!

That was not sarcasm. Hell, I've got Lee damn Greenwood running through my head right now.

We had a no-kidding attempted coup today. One of the two guys who would have benefitted from that coup is standing in the chamber of the House - which was occupied by seditionists hours ago - signing off on his electoral defeat.

I never, in a thousand years, thought I would say this.

But I say thee ye, Michael Pence.
FOR LATER READ
Mike Dunford
Mike Dunford
@questauthority
This is an excellent question, and it's something that I've thought about some over the last couple of months.

Honestly, I think the answer is that the rationales for these rulings are not likely to unreasonably harm meritorious progressive OR conservative challenges.


The first thing to keep in mind is that, by design, challenges to the outcomes of elections are supposed to be heard by state courts, through the process set out in state law.

That happened this year, and the majority of those challenges were heard on the merits.

The couple of cases where laches determined the outcome of state election challenges were ones where it was pretty clear that the challenges were brought in bad faith - where ballots cast in good faith in reliance on laws that had been in force for some time were challenged.

The PA challenge to Act 77 is one example. The challengers, some of whom had voted for passage of the bill, didn't make use of the initial, direct-to-PA-SCt challenge built into the law or sue pre-election; they waited until post-election.

The WI case is another. That one had a challenge to ballots cast using a form that had been in use for a literal decade.

Those are cases where laches is clear - particularly the prejudice element.
GOVERNMENT
Advertisement
Mike Dunford
Mike Dunford
@questauthority
Nonlawyer Explainer Thread: On Keeping One's Mouth Shut

It occurs to me that certain private-jet-flying seditionists who continue to yammer on Twitter about their DC excursions provide us with the opportunity to do a little hypo to explore the benefits of silence.

So let's explore what a hypothetical law enforcement interview *might* look like in this situation. I'm not - I want to make clear - drawing from experience as a lawyer here.

I AM NOT A CRIMINAL LAW ATTORNEY.

Instead, I'm mostly drawing from discussions with my father-in-law.

My father in law is a now-retired homicide cop, and we've had a lot of discussions (especially since I started law school) about criminals and interviews over the years.

So with that in mind, let's look at this hypo.

ALSO - Simplifying for Twitter character counts.

*Knock*
*Door opens*
Agent: Ms [Name]? I'm Agent Smith, and this is Agent Jones. We're with Agency. We'd like to talk to you if you've got a minute.

Ms X: Oh? Is this about that thing at the Capitol?

[Yes, it seems insane but if you're worried about something specific and the cops show up, blurting out something like that is totally a thing that can happen.]
FOR LATER READ
Mike Dunford
Mike Dunford
@questauthority
Good afternoon, followers of frivolous performative litigation.

New filing in Orly Tatiz's bonkers attempt to halt the 2nd Impeachment trial. It's a gloriously burning train wreck of mangled formatting and hideous typography.

Let's dig

For those who may have forgotten, this is the case we saw last week - the one where Orly took the 12(b)(6) game to the next level by LITERALLY forgetting to include actual claims in her complaint.

So technically it's still unclear what she's suing over.

And, frankly, it's not like I can talk about the merits of this one because there aren't any. But the sheer stunning insanity of the formatting alone makes this worth a thread.

Even though, honestly, it's not the worst Orly has produced.

For context, the text below comes from the State of Hawaii's 2012 response to a motion for reconsideration in one of the birther cases.

"an inartfully collated, defectively stapled, and misordered collection of pages" is still one of my favorite descriptions of a filing ever.


Just to start with, apparently we're putting the caption on both sides of the (incomplete) line now. Single spaced on one side, double spaced on the other, no less. With everything but the judge's name in caps.
SOCIETY
Mike Dunford
Mike Dunford
@questauthority
OK. The Teams meeting that I unsuccessfully evaded (and which was actually a lot of fun and I'm really genuinely happy I was reminded to attend) is over, so let's take another swing at looking at the latest filings from in re Gondor.


As far as I can tell from the docket, this is the FOURTH attempt in a week to get a TRO; the question the judge will ask if they ever figure out how to get the judge's attention will be "couldn't you have served by now;" and this whole thing is a

The memorandum in support of this one is 9 pages, and should go pretty quick.

But they still haven't figured out widow/orphan issues.

https://t.co/l7EDatDudy


It appears that the opening of this particular filing is going to proceed on the theme of "we are big mad at @SollenbergerRC" which is totally something relevant when you are asking a District Court to temporarily annihilate the US Government on an ex parte basis.


Also, if they didn't want their case to be known as "in re Gondor" they really shouldn't have gone with the (non-literary) "Gondor has no king" quote.
POLITICS

More from Politics

Noah Smith
Noah Smith
@Noahpinion
Met a Brazilian-American Lyft driver from San Diego who passionately attacked the racism of Republicans, then switched to passionately defending Bolsonaro.

If I were Thomas Friedman, I could tell you what this means.

Met a Haitian-American in a restaurant who said he'd always vote for Democrats because of the immigration issue, but that he has conservative beliefs too. "I don't want to pay for someone's abortion!", he declared.

Met a Latino Lyft driver from San Jose who said that while he was liberal, California was getting too liberal for him and he was considering moving to San Antonio.

Again, not being Tom Friedman, I am unable to offer any commentary on the political and policy implications of these conversations.

I guess my only thought is that political opinions are pretty complex and multidimensional, out there in the real world.

(end)
POLITICS
Noah Smith
Noah Smith
@Noahpinion
1/Politics thread time.

To me, the most important aspect of the 2018 midterms wasn't even about partisan control, but about democracy and voting rights. That's the real battle.

2/The good news: It's now an issue that everyone's talking about, and that everyone cares about.

3/More good news: Florida's proposition to give felons voting rights won. But it didn't just win - it won with substantial support from Republican voters.

That suggests there is still SOME grassroots support for democracy that transcends

4/Yet more good news: Michigan made it easier to vote. Again, by plebiscite, showing broad support for voting rights as an

5/OK, now the bad news.

We seem to have accepted electoral dysfunction in Florida as a permanent thing. The 2000 election has never really
POLITICS
Advertisement
Hugo Gye
Hugo Gye
@HugoGye
Jacob Rees-Mogg has admitted the Tory leadership coup looks like being delayed to December - after the 'meaningful vote' on the PM's Brexit deal.

Speaking on his @ConHome 'Moggcast': "Some people don't want a leadership vote now, they would like it when the meaningful vote comes up and think that is the time to put in letters."

JRM: "I think the strength of feeling against the meaningful vote is much stronger than the number of letters that has gone in. If there are letters in, very few of those letters will be withdrawn - so the hurdle is much lower when the meaningful vote comes."

He tells @ConHome the apparent failure of the coup could be a blessing in disguise: "In a way it is better that there has been this delay, though I can't pretend that there has been some cunning plan, because we have allowed time for people to see the failures of the policy."

Full report on the delayed coup from @NatashaC on @TheSun now:
POLITICS
Free to Disagree
Free to Disagree
@_freetodisagree
#Thread Take action to defend free speech 📢

Stage 2 scrutiny of the Hate Crime Bill begins tomorrow, Tuesday 2nd February. Members of the Justice Committee will debate and vote on various amendments. It is vitally important that more, significant changes are agreed.

We still believe the best course of action is to drop the controversial stirring up hatred offences altogether. At the very least, MSPs must back changes previously promised by the Scottish Government.

The govt has pledged to: restrict the offences to ‘intent’ only; strengthen a free speech provision covering religion and insert a new provision on trans identity; remove provisions on 'inflammatory material' and provide an objective test for what ‘abusive’ behaviour means.

Other useful amendments have been lodged to: remove the vague term 'abusive' altogether; insert a broader trans free speech provision; provide a ‘dwelling defence’ for words spoken in the home; and insert a 'prosecution lock' requiring consent from a senior law officer.

Please take the time to write to Justice Committee MSPs and ask them to back these vital changes. Details of the amendments and how to contact MSPs are below.

#FreeToDisagree
POLITICS
Brossentia @ Home!
Brossentia @ Home!
@Brossentia
Watching the Congress hearing on Gamestop/Robinhood/Reddit. I'll let people know if there's anything super interesting.

Right now, it seems like both Democrats and Republicans are sympathetic with average Americans rather than the companies. It'll be interesting to see what happens.

I kind of like Rep. Patrick McHenry's (R) take. Basically, he says it's dumb that it's easier to buy a lottery ticket than to invest.

Now, Congressional hearings in committees are often more about figuring out problems than attacking each other; I fully expect both Democrats and Republicans to have good insight here.

Rep. Al Green says that fines -have- to outweigh the benefits from breaking the law. I completely agree.
POLITICS

You May Also Like

Ryan Caldbeck
Ryan Caldbeck
@ryan_caldbeck
1/ I am seeing more and more founder secondary in venture rounds (Secondary = founders selling some of their shares before some other shareholders are able). Series B-D. I see both as an investor and through entrepreneur circles.

2/ I like secondary for entrepreneurs. Moderation is key but in a lot of situations I think it helps accelerate the co. Lots of very smart investors disagree. Here are my thoughts.

3/ Magnitude: My basic rule of thumb from what I see is market is 4+ yrs and up to 10% of founder’s equity stake with some $ cap that makes sense given stage etc. (typically <$10m)

4/ The entrepreneurial journey is brutally hard. Giving some financial relief helps remove one piece of pressure. I don’t think that secondary in the magnitude mentioned impacts the drive/persistence of great entrepreneurs.

5/ That secondary means they will be able to just sleep knowing they can pay their kids’ tuition. Secondary will make most founders better at their jobs, thus accelerating the co.
ALL
Meet Shah
Meet Shah
@ms89_meet
Strong Monopolies:

IRCTC 100% Market share in Rail Network.

IEX >90% market share in power trading.

Zydus wellness >90% market share in sugar free product.

Eicher motors >85% market share in 250cc bikes category.

MCX >85% market share in commodity trading.

Coal India >80% market share in coal production in India.

ITC >75% market share in cigarettes.

Honda Siel >75% in portable power generators.

Hindustan Zinc >75% market share in primary zinc industry.

Asahi India Glass >70% market share in automotive glass.

NRB Bearings >70% market share in needle roller bearings.

Pidilite >65% market share in adhesives.

CAMS >65% market share in RTA within mutual fund industry.

Time Technoplast >65% market share in polymer based industrial packaging.

Concor >65% market share in domestic container cargo transport.

Exide >60% market share in lead batteries.

Naukri >60% market share in the Indian job market space.

Praj >60% market share in ethanol plant installing.

Indiamart Intermesh >55% market share in the online B2B Classified space.

Borosil Renewables >55% market share in Lab glass.

Vst Tillers >50% market share in
Power tillers.

Delta corp >50% in online poker games.

Vinati Organics >50% market share in IBB.
GENERICLEARNINGS , GENERAL TWEER , INTRESTING TOPIC
Advertisement
Arif Hasan\U0001f1ee\U0001f1f3
Arif Hasan🇮🇳...
@arifhasan18
5 star RSI Strategy by @VishalMalkan

Unconventional approach of 60-40 RSI and range shift concept.

According to him,
whenever the market is bearish,
it won’t be able to cross 60,
and whenever in a bullish trend,
it won’t be able to cross 40.

Like & Retweet for Maximum Reach.

So, instead of the 70-30 Relative Strength Index,
we will use the 60-40 range for the RSI indicator for this strategy.

When the
Monthly and Weekly RSI>60,
& when the RSI takes support at 40 in the daily chart,
it may bounce back and most probably it will not go below 40.

If a bullish candle is formed at the 40 RSI level,
the prices may bounce back, and one can enter the stock.

The stoploss can be placed at the low of that bullish candlestick,
and the target can be the 60 RSI level.

When the
Monthly and Weekly RSI<40,
& when the RSI takes resistance at 60 in the daily chart,
it may bounce back and most probably it will not go above 60

If a bearish candle is formed at the 60 RSI level,
the prices may bounce back from there, & 1 can enter the stock 4 shorting

The stoploss can be placed at the high of that bearish candlestick, and the target can be the 40 RSI levels.

#banknifty

This range shift concept can be applied in any timeframe,
whether intraday, daily,weekly, etc.
ALL
Anshul Pandey
Anshul Pandey
@Anshulspiritual
LING PURANA: IMPORTANCE AND CHARACTERISTICS

Reading Ling Purana provides bhog and moksha to the reader and listeners. It is about Shiva's sermon to Brahma when Shiva entered the Agni Ling and preached about Dharma sidhhi through the stories of Agni Kalp.


Vyasji divided this into two parts. This book is different from others and has eleven thousand shlokas which depict the glory of Shiva. This Puran is the summary about importance of Tridev.
It starts first with a questions. Then it describes the Shrishti in brief.

Then there is description of Yog and Kalp. Next is the evolution of Ling and its puja Vidhi. It consists of dialogue between Sanat Kumar and Shail etc. It also mentions the character of Dadhichi, the dharma representation of that yug, Bhuvan kosh description,

Chandravansh and Surya vansh. Next there is elaborate description of Shrishti, story of Tripur, Ling and Pashu Paash vimoksha, Vrats for Shiva, Discipline, Repentance, Arisht, description of Shri Shail. Next is the story of Andhakasur, Varah, Narsingh,

k¡lling of Jalandhar, Shiv sahastra naam, story of Daksha's yagya and its destruction, killing of Madan and marriage of Parvati.

Next is Vinayak katha, Shiv tandav, Ambrish katha and Upmanyu .
RELIGION
antifa.drone
antifa.drone
@antifa_drone
Fake chats claiming to be from the Irish African community are being disseminated by the far right in order to suggest that violence is imminent from #BLM supporters. This is straight out of the QAnon and Proud Boys playbook. Spread the word. Protest safely. #georgenkencho


There is co-ordination across the far right in Ireland now to stir both left and right in the hopes of creating a race war. Think critically! Fascists see the tragic killing of #georgenkencho, the grief of his community and pending investigation as a flashpoint for action.


Across Telegram, Twitter and Facebook disinformation is being peddled on the back of these tragic events. From false photographs to the tactics ofwhite supremacy, the far right is clumsily trying to drive hate against minority groups and figureheads.


Declan Ganley’s Burkean group and the incel wing of National Party (Gearóid Murphy, Mick O’Keeffe & Co.) as well as all the usuals are concerted in their efforts to demonstrate their white supremacist cred. The quiet parts are today being said out loud.


The best thing you can do is challenge disinformation and report posts where engagement isn’t appropriate. Many of these are blatantly racist posts designed to drive recruitment to NP and other Nationalist groups. By all means protest but stay safe.
TRADING