Cormac

Eluvatar

Eluvatar

TNPer
-
-
-
Pronouns
he/him/his
TNP Nation
Zemnaya Svoboda
Discord
Eluvatar#8517
#tnp:
12:32 <+Koth> He was actually Prime Minister of LKE for a while
12:32 <+Koth> He was hardly involved with Exshaw before he had to leave for many months
12:32 <+Cormac> Exshaw is fairly dead anyway, unfortunately.
12:33 <+Koth> >fairly
12:33 <@Eluvatar> I'm aware
12:33 <@Eluvatar> I meant when JAL sent Exshaw into TNP xD
12:33 <+Koth> It's as dead as a doornail
12:33 <+Cormac> He did? News to me...
12:33 <+Mahaj> yeah
12:34 <@Eluvatar> http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae163/Topid/Divinefire1.png
12:34 <@Eluvatar> um Cormac?
12:34 * Eluvatar coughs
12:34 <@Eluvatar> That was a bad idea.
12:34 <+Cormac> What was?
Click to expand...

Looks like Cormac just tried to lie... o_o

Would it be appropriate to charge him with fraud?

(In my book, lying about having been sent in to TNP as troops before is indicative of ill intent now, so it may be appropriate to act.)
 
#tnp:
12:34 <+Cormac> What was?
12:34 <@Finn|Busy> huh?
12:35 <+Koth> You know I can totally go onto a forum and use javascript to edit any text I want, right?
12:35 <@Eluvatar> um JAL admitted to that
12:35 <@Eluvatar> and I'm sure he would have, when doing that, pointed out any falsification in the screenshot
12:35 <@Eluvatar> also I don't think the person who took it has that kind of skill
12:35 <+Koth> If I recall it was Windsor right
12:37 <@Eluvatar> So JAL said
12:40 <@Eluvatar> But the source of that screenshot denied being Windsor.
12:40 <+Koth> *shrug*
12:41 <@Asta> Oh JAL
12:41 <@Asta> <3
12:41 <@Eluvatar> Cormac: why'd you deny knowledge of that just now? o_o
12:41 * Finn|Busy slaps Asta around with a trout
12:41 <@Asta> Hey!
12:42 <+Cormac> Sorry, a little busy with things that occur around this time frame every day. I was kidding Elu. :P
Click to expand...
 
Interesting. About the only thing you could charge Cormac with is being a jackass which I don't think we have a law against. :p
 
Hmm. What a stupid thing to lie about given the photo of it.. Koth is Anonymouse. I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him.

Up to you whether you pursue fraud charges, I think given the current state of things, perhaps this isn't needed right now.
 
I think we have enough to deal with at the moment without fraud charges. But feel free to pursue it if you wish.
 
I want him out of the Regional Assembly because I believe he is seeking to stack the vote.

Fraud is a good indicator that he doesn't intend us well, in my opinion.
 
Any chance you could motion for treason charges? I guess it would need to be argued that BWII intended to illegally suspend the constitution and thus Durk's provision of troops were part of that act of attempted treason.
 
One thought I had is.. Durk's story was that he didn't collaborate with BWII.. so what if he could be charged for withholding information of an alleged coup by defenders from the Security Council. Instead of informing the proper authorities, he informed Exshaw and arranged his own group to endorse BWII.

Is there an obligation on the books somewhere to report threats you know of to the Security Council?
 
I don't think we can link BW to these charges against Cormac.

Treason charges laid against BW coup attempt would have to come under the old legal code, i was of the impression their was too many loop holes for this to be prosecutable.
 
I'm thinking we're overthinking this:

A - "Treason" is defined as taking arms or providing material support to a group or region for the purpose of undermining or overthrowing the lawful government of The North Pacific or any of its treatied allied groups and regions as governed by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Click to expand...

Did Blue Wolf intend to suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and thus undermine the Lawful Government? Yes.

Thus any material support intended to help BW with this aim is treasonous. Is Cormac's deliberate lie about his knowledge telling us that what he did with Exshaw was not reputable? Yes, Yes it is.

We should be pushing for Treason charges against Blue Wolf, Durk and Cormac.
 
Isn't that definition of treason new? Wouldn't we need to make the legislation retrospective for it to work with Blue Wolf II?
 
No that definition is not new.

That said it's far from clear that it applies to Blue Wolf, given that he did not actually declare the constitution void etc.
 
Eluvatar:
That said it's far from clear that it applies to Blue Wolf, given that he did not actually declare the constitution void etc.
Click to expand...
It's "for the purpose", not any past-tense wording. All that needs to be shown is reasonable grounds to suggest that BWII intended and motioned in some way to suspend the Constitution illegally.

If you would like me to form some reference questions on this subject and asking for BWII to recuse himself for the judgement, I could.
 
But it requires the action of "taking arms or providing material support to a group or region" for that purpose.
 
True, in order for treason to be treason, just planning it is not treason, actually acting to accomplish it is treason.

Incidentally, Cormak as an Op on #tnp boot/banned Tyler from #tnp last night, although I'm not clear as to why it was done.
 
Eluvatar:
But it requires the action of "taking arms or providing material support to a group or region" for that purpose.
Click to expand...
And if he was not there to endorse would he not be material support?
 
Your argument was based on the notion that Blue Wolf II was committing Treason.

If he wasn't, and he was the Delegate, then I dont' see how one can argue that endorsing him was Treason.

Fraud is far clearer, in this case.
 
Eluvatar:
Your argument was based on the notion that Blue Wolf II was committing Treason.

If he wasn't, and he was the Delegate, then I dont' see how one can argue that endorsing him was Treason.

Fraud is far clearer, in this case.
Click to expand...
I don't understand how it fits under "fraud". >_>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top