waitโฆpreserve their records?! ๐๐๐ he is saying theyโre useless and heโs not going to follow suit, so why does he think they should keep the records ๐ @Jess
hmmmm ok.
I mean, it would make sense because they would need them, because the work is related to the businessโฆitโs necessary records. I guess thatโs why Iโm so confused he wanted them in the first place, if he intends to not keep up the same businessโฆ
Which I guess conveys that I still donโt see how itโs a threat ๐ฅด
but youโre probably right!! itโs their bully-MO. @opie @Jess
explicitly requesting someone do something they would obviously already do is implied threat 101
ever had an adversary say to you "hey...get home safe"?
publicly telling govt officials to preserve their records implies using those records against them
@opie @Armchaircouch because in his brainworm conspiracy addled mind they're all criminals
It is a legal thing that puts someone you intend to sue (or investigate re crime) that they now have a legal duty to preserve potential relevant discovery information/evidence. Failure to preserve can lead to a variety of sanctions if it willfully spoils likely evidence.
Of course there is a big issue whether some random post on social media by a speculative future authority has even the slightest legal effect. Can we all say Bluster and Threat?
isn't bluster and threat the mantra?
@Armchaircouch @Jess
if you got fired and your boss said:
your services are no longer required...hand over your files...we'll be in touch...
would that sound like friendly bookkeeping to you?