Can the left and right even converse at this point?

[cabse5]

Yeah, so what does that have to with judges? Barr didn't say this in a court case. He said it based on an investigation.

Why did you bring up Barr's decision, again?

 

[apdst]

The people who said that were not trying to overturn the 2016 election results, like Trump is trying to do now. So, no, they were not traitors.

And the final chapter regarding Trump's crimes has not been written yet. A sitting President can't be charged with a crime, according to DOJ. So that's a stupid question.

The Democrats tried to overturn the election through impeachment.

 

[cabse5]

There's no investigation because there is no evidence! This is what's being shown by all the cases getting thrown out. You can't just go to court and say something as your only evidence. This is your side's fault. Where is the evidence of fraud that will will move it forward, oh never mind, times up!

There's precedent for investigation w/o evidence. I introduce the investigation into the Trump campaign and the impeachment of the Zelensky phone call as examples of investigations w/o evidence.

 

[Casper]

No, just impeached a president on bullshit accusations.

Maybe trump should not have abused his power and he would not have been impeached. But hey it worked out for him since he own the court that was supposed to view the case.

Thankfully the American People realized trump is unfit and Fired him on November 3, 2020, there is hope for the Republic once again.
January 20, 2021 is going to be a great day for the Nation and the World, we made a huge Mistake in 2016 and have now corrected it.

 

[less right]

Why did you bring up Barr's decision, again?

Because you did.

everybody else didn't need proof to launch an investigation of the Trump campaign over the freeness and fairness of the 2016 election.

Raise you hand if you get behind.

 

[cabse5]

He's all in with some hoax. But apparently there are several. I'm still trying to find out about the others.

It seems, having your political candidate win an election is more important than free and fair elections...Prove me wrong.
Prove that free and fair elections isn't at the backbone of American government and should always be guaranteed (or, at least, investigated when necessary).

 

[cabse5]

Because you did.


Raise you hand if you get behind.

No you introduced Barr into the conversation.

 

[apdst]

Maybe trump should not have abused his power and he would not have been impeached. But hey it worked out for him since he own the court that was supposed to view the case.

Thankfully the American People realized trump is unfit and Fired him on November 3, 2020, there is hope for the Republic once again.
January 20, 2021 is going to be a great day for the Nation and the World, we made a huge Mistake in 2016 and have now corrected it.

He didn't abuse his power.

 

[Casper]

He didn't abuse his power.

Sadly you actually believe that nonsense, but then again I doubt you believe trump could ever abuse his power.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

The Democrats tried to overturn the election through impeachment.

No. If that were true, the Democrats would have impeached Trump immediately after the election. Why wait 3 years?

Trump committed a crime with his phone call to the Ukranian President. Trump tried to pressure the man to interfere in the 2020 election by fabricating dirt about Biden. Good men like Lt Col Vindman had their careers destroyed by reporting the truth about Trump, not that you care about that.

You're not intellectually honest enough to ever accept that, so there's no point discussing this any further.

 

[less right]

It seems, having your political candidate win an election is more important than free and fair elections...Prove me wrong.
Prove that free and fair elections isn't at the backbone of American government and should always be guaranteed (or, at least, investigated when necessary).

Trump got a free and fair election. Why won't the judges listen to Trump? Because he got a free and fair election. They've repeated that more than 30 time now. Trump supporters aren't listening to the judges but still hanging on every hoax-word Trump utters.

 

[cabse5]

Cite the "extreme irregularities".

Extreme irregularities like ballots with no other votes other than for Biden as president...batches of those types of ballots.. It's highly astronomical that those odds would be fulfilled.
Extreme irregularities like mailing mail-in ballots to all voters on states' voting roles.
Extreme irregularities like having to justify the investigation of a valid American vote when a valid American vote is at the heart of American government.

 

[less right]

No you introduced Barr into the conversation.

Yes I did. Serious question. Are you even old enough to vote?

Barr provided the answer to your misunderestimated take on an investigation started concerning the 2016 election. You brought up the 2016 election/investigation.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

Extreme irregularities like ballots with no other votes other than for Biden as president...batches of those types of ballots.. It's highly astronomical that those odds would be fulfilled.
Extreme irregularities like mailing mail-in ballots to all voters on states' voting roles.
Extreme irregularities like not wanting to validate voting results as if voting results were the most important thing to American government. In other words, having to justify a valid vote when a valid vote is at the heart of American government.

Explain how this is far different than previous elections. Trump's lawyers haven't been able to do this. Neither can you.

 

[cabse5]

Trump got a free and fair election. Why won't the judges listen to Trump? Because he got a free and fair election. They've repeated that more than 30 time now. Trump supporters aren't listening to the judges but still hanging on every hoax-word Trump utters.

According to non-investigated ballots, judges say that Trump got a free and fair election.

 

[cabse5]

Yes I did. Serious question. Are you even old enough to vote?

Barr provided the answer to your misunderestimated take on an investigation started concerning the 2016 election. You brought up the 2016 election/investigation.

I received my answer. Barr's interpretation of whether the 2020 election should be investigated is not pertinent to judges (but is pertinent with the FBI and Mueller).

 

[element94]

There's precedent for investigation w/o evidence. I introduce the investigation into the Trump campaign and the impeachment of the Zelensky phone call as examples of investigations w/o evidence.

There was plenty of evidence from firsthand witnesses Vindman and Williams under oath, but they were poo-pooed by a hideously corrupt radical anti-American right wing majority Senate!
Quite, quite different!

 

[less right]

According to non-investigated ballots, judges say that Trump got a free and fair election.

No, according to judges Trump's claims of a rigged election have lacked evidence and therefore dismissed.

 

[less right]

I received my answer. Barr's interpretation of whether the 2020 election should be investigated is not pertinent to judges (but is pertinent with the FBI and Mueller).

Have a nice day.

 

[cabse5]

Explain how this is far different than previous elections. Trump's lawyers haven't been able to do this. Neither can you.

Why are Trump's lawyers not allowed the opportunity to demonstrate a preponderance of circumstancial evidence to facilitate an investigation or forensic recount of the 2020 election when decisions on innocence or guilt in a court of law have been determined (let alone investigated) on a preponderance of circumstancial evidence?

 

[cabse5]

No, according to judges Trump's claims of a rigged election have lacked evidence and therefore dismissed.

I repeat. That's cause no one has investigated the validity of said votes that won Biden the presidential election.

 

[apdst]

Sadly you actually believe that nonsense, but then again I doubt you believe trump could ever abuse his power.

He was impeached because the Democrats were pissed off that he won the election.

 

[apdst]

No. If that were true, the Democrats would have impeached Trump immediately after the election. Why wait 3 years?

Trump committed a crime with his phone call to the Ukranian President. Trump tried to pressure the man to interfere in the 2020 election by fabricating dirt about Biden. Good men like Lt Col Vindman had their careers destroyed by reporting the truth about Trump, not that you care about that.

You're not intellectually honest enough to ever accept that, so there's no point discussing this any further.

Because for two of those years the Democrats were the minority party....lol

 

[cabse5]

He was impeached because the Democrats were pissed off that he won the election.

Right. The FBI didn't need evidence to investigate the Trump campaign. The Mueller team didn't need evidence to investigate the Trump campaign. The house didn't need evidence to impeach Trump over the Zelensky phone call.

 

[element94]

I repeat. That's cause no one has investigated the validity of said votes that won Biden the presidential election.

Again! There's no evidence of anything corrupt, except in the minds of the Trump cult , because they can't get over a hard fact: Trump LOST the election. The election was the most secure in U.S. history and carried out by patriots for the fair process. It is a nitwit's cause to keep pushing this fallacy.