- Joined
- Sep 10, 2010
- Messages
- 38,200
- Reaction score
- 15,843
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Derp! Ah kin git sumbuddy bah maykin it ownly wuns trump filded!Can't name the "60" suits filed by Trump? Awwwwww
Derp! Ah kin git sumbuddy bah maykin it ownly wuns trump filded!Can't name the "60" suits filed by Trump? Awwwwww
With respect, the tanks on the street, the 60,000 security forces, snipers, and the banishment of Americans from parts of American soil, should convince you, there is a serious problem. Me I'm only stating the easy remedy, from November, the employed statutory bodies in authority, in America, who are responsible to take the necessary step, but didn't, you my friend delight, in your own downfall, but hey, that's American exceptionalism, all over! Everything's all over, from now on, you will see, in every day life, instability...... social instability, but not just in the poverty stricken floatsom created by your corrupt systems, as you have now, the middle classes organising , undermining the political authority of the establishment.In the end, you just want to delight in your ignorance. There is a bunch of stuff out there in the world and if you need to feel like anything you don't understand, which is apparently quite a bit, is a conspiracy... go with that. However, all of us people who actually understand stuff are in on it so you can stop trying to convince us about it.
You are absolutely correct, if the authorities had carried out there responsibilities correctly, this whole situation world never of happened, had they investigated or audited the process, as was there legal responsibility they would of opened a can of worms!The actual proof you request would only be found in the investigation/audit to a necessary depth and degree that Trump was requesting. As I'm sure you know by now, he was not Constitutionally authorized to request that investigation/audit, only Congress in association with state legislatures are Constitutionally authorized to issue such investigation audits.
Again, your presenting disingenuously, as I would think you would know this by now.
WaPo huh? They have a history of lying.Last week Trump fired the US Attorney in Georgia because he hadn't found any election fraud. He sent a hand-picked lackey in his place. His lackey brought a couple of his own lackeys. They were going to find the fraud.
They were going to "stop the steal."
Surprise, surprise. They found nothing.
Christine said on the call with the Northern District staff that he brought the two election fraud prosecutors to tackle what he expected would be a “dump truck full” of election files. Instead, he found “very, very few” and dismissed two cases on his first day in office."'We don’t have these huge colossal issues that if you turn on the TV, you’d think it’d be,' he said."
Read all about it.
There were a bunch of ignorant witnesses who had no clue what they were seeing but were already "programmed" that anything unusual or that they couldn't explain (regardless of their knowledge or intelligence levels) must indicate election fraud. The vast majority of the affidavits from these "eyewitnesses" were subjective, uninformed opinions. This has been proven.Trump is a malignant narcissist, true.
But there were many, many, many eyewitnesses and documents all over professional and social media that testify that there was election fraud, maybe massive election fraud.
Trump hating to lose was just great motivation for him to do all he could to get it exposed .. which was a good thing, as Americans don't want to think that there are no longer fair elections in their country, I would think .. unless, apparently, those Americans are unethical power-starved leftists.
Eyewitness testimony is considered one of the weakest forms of evidence because people are highly flawed. That is a fact. In fact, convictions by eyewitness accusations alone are highly rare. You would need other evidence to collaborate their story, such as a victim and/or body, information regarding the person in question, evidence that they were in the area that day/night, lighting that would allow the "witness" to actually be able to see the person, distance between the witness and the accused, and so much more.Meaningless. Your analogy could be used as an argument against any eyewitness, such as, "you say you saw the accused attack the woman in that alley and drag her behind the trash can, but how do we know you saw what you said you saw -- heck, people declare they've "eyewitnessed" ghosts and aliens, but they don't exist".
The difference here is that ghosts and aliens have not been objectively verified by the eyewitness showing them to others. Thus such "sightings" are not considered credible.
But the many, many, many eyewitness accounts of election fraud were validated by others, including in the professional media, social media, and organizations like Veritas, for one.
Thus these eyewitness accounts are considered credible, obviously.
Again, your argument is quantity of witness statements without any regard for quality of witness statements. That is a huge flaw in any reasoning. State exactly which witnesses or documents indicate voter fraud so that those specific ones can be examined.I'm afraid you're obviously projecting when it comes to declaring what's a fantasy.
There were many, many, many eyewitness accounts and documented references in both professional and social media last summer fall of definite election fraud, likely testifying to the fact that the fraud might have been massive.
The court admissible evidence could only be derived by the investigation/audit Trump wanted .. which he was Constitutionally unauthorized to litigate for.
These are the facts. I know, hard for leftists to swallow. But, they remain the facts nevertheless.
A simple NO would have sufficed.Derp! Ah kin git sumbuddy bah maykin it ownly wuns trump filded!
You are.You did not even read it which is the reason why you still have not been able to come with any counter artument and you simply mumbled the unsupported claim that I am comparing apples to oranges.
You and Lursa ... perfect together. Too funny.@ Lursa
I noticed it.
He posted Alito's statement which only two other judges joined and tried to isolate one quote from that statement to speculate that 4 judges shared the view that the PA decision was unconstitutional. And after all this time, he revealed his level of misinformation about the PA case when he tried to argue that it was the PA Supreme Curt which made the decision to extend the deadline of mail in ballots.
He did not realize that the state supreme court simply sided with the PA Secretary of State and the Democratic executive branch and did not make a decision contrary to what they sought.
It was the PA Supreme Court that was addressed by the USSC.I am not thinking of the GA case. Read who was sued in PA and for what reason !
Same person in the SCOTUS case where you tried to quote AlitoJudge Bars Pennsylvania State Secretary From Extending Deadline To 'Cure' Certain Mail-In Ballots
A commonwealth court judge barred Pennsylvania Secretary of State Kathy Boockvar from extending the deadline by three days to have more time to "cure" certain mail-in ballots.pittsburgh.cbslocal.com
The fact that the legislatures often let the executive branch take unilaterally emergency actions applies in many different areas from immigration laws to election or national security related laws, so you need to be more sophisticated with your thinking. And before talking about misinformation make sure that you are actually aware of what you are talking about.
The usurper and those that sold out the American republic, changed America today, and for ever more!
Spoken like a reliable troll-bot.WaPo huh? They have a history of lying.
The actual proof you request would only be found in the investigation/audit to a necessary depth and degree that Trump was requesting. As I'm sure you know by now, he was not Constitutionally authorized to request that investigation/audit, only Congress in association with state legislatures are Constitutionally authorized to issue such investigation audits.
Again, your presenting disingenuously, as I would think you would know this by now.
Derp is not a name. It's a soundA simple NO would have sufficed.
By the way, is calling someone a derp reportable? What if I reported you?
You descend to his level and he complains!Derp is not a name. It's a sound
imo, authorities carried out there responsibilities to correctly. AZ did its audits and checks. The election was certified. If you are saying the 2020 election needs further review. Then the 2016 and other elections need to be looked at along with other past elections. Those saying Arizona election was rigged or had massive fraud are not talking from the facts.You are absolutely correct, if the authorities had carried out there responsibilities correctly, this whole situation world never of happened, had they investigated or audited the process, as was there legal responsibility they would of opened a can of worms!
But hey, you get republicans or you get democrats, one set of the plutocracy, or the other set of the plutocracy, standing for election, hand picked, in financial circles, and vested interests, makes a mockery of democracy. One being more extreme that the other, neither beneficial to the masses. If they aren't hand picked, they don't stand! If they aren't allowed to suck the life's blood out of American people, the obstacle is removed.
No divisions..... honestly some people need there heads examined.
You are.
You and Lursa ... perfect together. Too funny.
I see you're still confused about the USSC view of State legislatures and election law. Take a look at the Wisconsin decision.
It was the PA Supreme Court that was addressed by the USSC.
Simple questions ....
Did the PA legislature allow the executive branch to change election law?
Is anyone other than a State Legislature Constitutionally permitted to make or change Federal election laws?
heh heh. You and Lursa! I'm still laughing.
The National Guard has been deployed by the Federal government 13 times in the last 60 years in response to national unrest. The significance and seriousness of this particular deployment is something that will eventually become clear. In each of those deployments someone cried about the seriousness of the problem and this being the end of America as we know it. Maybe it was and this is just that end, but I suspect that people just pretend to have greater insight than they actually do.With respect, the tanks on the street, the 60,000 security forces, snipers, and the banishment of Americans from parts of American soil, should convince you, there is a serious problem.
No you are not. In fact, you are stating the statutory bodies in authority are corrupted and that we should implement new statutory bodies because you didn't like the investigation of the existing statutory bodies. You are quite literally advocating for the creation of Kangaroo courts while decrying the death of Democracy. The irony is pretty thick.Me I'm only stating the easy remedy, from November, the employed statutory bodies in authority, in America, who are responsible to take the necessary step, but didn't, you my friend delight, in your own downfall, but hey, that's American exceptionalism, all over! Everything's all over, from now on, you will see, in every day life, instability...... social instability, but not just in the poverty stricken floatsom created by your corrupt systems, as you have now, the middle classes organising , undermining the political authority of the establishment.
Blah Blah Blah... When losing a debate pull out the great decline of civilization and pretend you have insights no one else has.I can sit back, and watch, your society fail, the murder of defenceless people of colour by police forces. I'm not saying all police are rotten, but you have enough neurotic unstable representatives in the police force and there own inability to resolve the training issues, or take to justice, the instability of political situation, the institutional corruption of young, it's a recipe for just retribution.
However robust the roman legions were, Rome collapsed, for exactly the same problems, you as a nation, are exhibiting today...... rotten to the core. The next two years are going to be frightening for all of us!
Can't name the "60" suits filed by Trump? Awwwwww
Just one judge lead investigation without terms of reference.imo, authorities carried out there responsibilities to correctly. AZ did its audits and checks. The election was certified. If you are saying the 2020 election needs further review. Then the 2016 and other elections need to be looked at along with other past elections. Those saying Arizona election was rigged or had massive fraud are not talking from the facts.
Your stance of "if the authorities had carried out there responsibilities correctly" is the same stance that AE911T continues to promote regarding the collapse of the towers on 9/11.
How many audits, recounts do you need to be satisfied? (I bet the answer is they need to be done till Trump is shown to be the winner).
Time to move on. Trump lost.
sigh.Just one judge lead investigation without terms of reference.
As was requested, by the president, you know, the one who his officers of state admitted, they lied to him, just like so many other officers of state!
But it doesn't concern me, I'm not interested, if you destroy each other, other sovereign nations are getting the peace and harmony usually destroyed by the American military. Knock your selves out!
Hide behind a fantasy..... and it should be "an accountant", such a simple but telling mistake.The National Guard has been deployed by the Federal government 13 times in the last 60 years in response to national unrest. The significance and seriousness of this particular deployment is something that will eventually become clear. In each of those deployments someone cried about the seriousness of the problem and this being the end of America as we know it. Maybe it was and this is just that end, but I suspect that people just pretend to have greater insight than they actually do.
No you are not. In fact, you are stating the statutory bodies in authority are corrupted and that we should implement new statutory bodies because you didn't like the investigation of the existing statutory bodies. You are quite literally advocating for the creation of Kangaroo courts while decrying the death of Democracy. The irony is pretty thick.
Furthermore this has nothing to do with American exceptionalism. Absolutely nothing. I have dual citizenship, my wife and kids were all born in the U.K. and I have spent 40% of my adult life outside the U.S. American isn't a significant part of my identity. However, accountant is a significant part of my identity, as is auditor and fraud examiner . So, again with the irony, as you attempt to assert your belief supersedes my expertise while preaching about exceptionalism.
Blah Blah Blah... When losing a debate pull out the great decline of civilization and pretend you have insights no one else has.
But, as we all know, none of them are qualified to know that! Some of them simply made that statement for the sake of their political careers in the face of the cheating leftist Dems now running the show, and some said that in capitulation or codependent "peace making".Well, yes he did. 58 judges (many Trump appointed), 3 state supreme courts, the SCOTUS (with 3 justices hand picked by Trump), the DOJ, the AG, DHS, the Repub parties from multiple states and life long Repubs whom were seen as Trump loyalist on Nov 4th all said he lost fair and square.
Yep .. and it can also be the excuse one clings to when they find that they struggle to survive or succeed because of their own inability that has nothing whatsoever to do with racism of any kind.Terms like "structural"/"institutional"/"systemic" can roll easily off the tongue when you don't think of what they mean before you say them.
That can happen when you hear them often enough and you want so much to belong.
But, as we all know, none of them are qualified to know that!
The facts remain, that there were many, many, many eyewitness documented accounts in both the professional and social media, and the only way to prove anything one way or the other is to conduct the investigations/audits to the necessary degree of every ballot in every relevant swing state where the documented eyewitness accounts of voter fraud definitely suggest the likelihood of massive fraud.
Now you've just succumbed to the ludicrously absurd, have abandoned the facts, and have thus lost the debate.Yes, and neither does fraud on the level to steal the election from Trump. I am glad we got that worked out. Oh, and the faked moon landing and the flat earth folks have a shit ton more "evidence" than the "election was stolen" folks.