June 24, 20223 yr Just now, JohnSnowsHair said: No, they would have turned it into a clown show. And that isn't even getting into the conflict of interest where evidence may lead to one or more of them being investigated for their actions leading up to Jan 6. The only purpose they would serve would be to undercut the investigation. It would be like having low level mafia stooges part of the unit investigating the don. Circular reasoning. There couldn't have been a legit reason for the attempted legal process of sending it back to the states, and there couldn't have been an agenda for Fed incitement, so by reason of having your stance, alone, must mean its morally superior. and anything else must be for destruction. Amazing.
June 24, 20223 yr 8 minutes ago, matchew88 said: So they would be perfect for counterpoint on whether this was insurrection or incitement by federal agencies to prevent the evidence of fraud from being brought to light and being heard on C-SPAN. They depend on people not understanding this nuance.
June 24, 20223 yr Author 2 minutes ago, matchew88 said: Circular reasoning. There couldn't have been a legit reason for the attempted legal process of sending it back to the states, and there couldn't have been an agenda for Fed incitement, so by reason of having your stance, alone, must mean its morally superior. and anything else must be for destruction. Amazing. "Circular reasoning. There couldn't be a legit reason the Mafia Don was profiting from trafficking drugs. So these Mafia stooges need to be part of the investigation." No, there wasn't a legit reason to send it back to the states. 60 cases thrown out of court prove that. There has been ample time given and investigation done on every remotely credible claim of vote fraud, and it has amounted to nothing. Jim Jordan is a clown show. The guy is one of the biggest partisan pieces of ish ever to serve in the House, and he's not even in the top 5 insane members of the Republican House 2022.
June 24, 20223 yr 3 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: "Circular reasoning. There couldn't be a legit reason the Mafia Don was profiting from trafficking drugs. So these Mafia stooges need to be part of the investigation." No, there wasn't a legit reason to send it back to the states. 60 cases thrown out of court prove that. There has been ample time given and investigation done on every remotely credible claim of vote fraud, and it has amounted to nothing. Jim Jordan is a clown show. The guy is one of the biggest partisan pieces of ish ever to serve in the House, and he's not even in the top 5 insane members of the Republican House 2022. Why were they thrown out? Why was Texas vs PA thrown out?
June 24, 20223 yr Author 1 minute ago, matchew88 said: Why were they thrown out? Why was Texas vs PA thrown out? Because Texas doesn't have standing to sue another state Why doesn't California sue Texas over their election laws? Guiliani in court: "this is not a fraud case" They had NO EVIDENCE. None. Nothing that would withstand the bare minimum of judicial scrutiny. They were throwing crap against the wall. We don't live in a nation where allegations with no basis are given unlimited consideration. Which is exactly what you're asking for. Get over it.
June 24, 20223 yr 11 minutes ago, mr_hunt said: The state investigation found all sorts of issues, including lack of signature verification. And then there was canvassing of homes. The primary source data was there. It was in process to be presented. But you need to be spoonfed things that are entertaining.
June 24, 20223 yr 13 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: Because Texas doesn't have standing to sue another state Why doesn't California sue Texas over their election laws? Guiliani in court: "this is not a fraud case" They had NO EVIDENCE. None. Nothing that would withstand the bare minimum of judicial scrutiny. They were throwing crap against the wall. We don't live in a nation where allegations with no basis are given unlimited consideration. Which is exactly what you're asking for. Get over it. States can sue each other- its called Original Jurisdiction. The evidence is impropriety. The investigations might have happened could very well have proven intent. You not looking at evidence and citing corporate press when the primary source material was available to be consumed does not mean no evidence. The entire argument boils down to 1 side not letting the other contest the results, which is what happens in a healthy, functioning republic. Did you not see the videos of people boarding up the windows in Detroit so election watchers couldn't see what was going on? No, you didn't. That alone should have invalidated the count. Lastly, you probably still believe in RussiaGate from 2016, in which it was proven that Hillary literally created false evidence to frame a sitting President. That's real insurrection.
June 24, 20223 yr 29 minutes ago, matchew88 said: The state investigation found all sorts of issues, including lack of signature verification. And then there was canvassing of homes. The primary source data was there. It was in process to be presented. But you need to be spoonfed things that are entertaining. Signature verification for voting is not a thing. Did the Founders have to show ID when they signed the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution?
June 24, 20223 yr Author 3 minutes ago, ThinkGreen said: Signature verification for voting is not a thing. Did the Founders have to show ID when they signed the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution? Don't waste your time. The most scrutinized presidential election in history turned up no evidence of widespread fraud. They're not looking for evidence, they're looking for something to hang their conspiracy hats on.
June 24, 20223 yr 3 hours ago, DrPhilly said: You need to find something to do I've got plenty to do thank you very much.
June 24, 20223 yr 29 minutes ago, ThinkGreen said: Signature verification for voting is not a thing. Did the Founders have to show ID when they signed the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution? For Mail-in, it is. No, they created it.
June 24, 20223 yr 1 hour ago, JohnSnowsHair said: "Circular reasoning. There couldn't be a legit reason the Mafia Don was profiting from trafficking drugs. So these Mafia stooges need to be part of the investigation." Once again, automatic assumption of guilt. This is why we can't converse with a foundation of integrity.
June 24, 20223 yr Author PA Supreme Court ruled on it. It's settled law. Not in the Kavanaugh lying under oath sense. In the "the 2020 election was administered in a manner consistent with state law and Trump lost" way. Courts do not disenfranchise voters lightly no matter how much you'd like them to. Again: Trump lost. Get over it. he's a loser.
June 24, 20223 yr 9 minutes ago, lynched1 said: I've got plenty to do thank you very much. Why did you say otherwise?
June 24, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, DrPhilly said: Yes Not a bad band. One of the few that sound just as good live.
June 24, 20223 yr 3 minutes ago, lynched1 said: Not a bad band. One of the few that sound just as good live. My 1st concert
June 25, 20223 yr Top GOP pollster says Trump is 'paying a price' — even among Republicans — for what the January 6 hearings have revealed https://www.yahoo.com/news/top-gop-pollster-says-trump-041402910.html Frank Luntz, a GOP pollster, told CNN that Trump is "paying a price" over the January 6 hearings. He added that Trump can "send out his emails," but they're "having less and less of an impact." Luntz also commented on Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, calling him "more than a threat" to Trump. Conservative pollster Frank Luntz said this week that he thinks former President Donald Trump's popularity is being damaged by the January 6 panel's public hearings on the Capitol riot. Speaking on CNN's New Day program, Luntz said the panel focused "too much" on politicians but commented that the hearings are still hurting Trump. "Donald Trump is actually paying a price for what these hearings are showing. So it's having an impact, even among Republicans," Luntz said. He also commented on the public hearings not providing enough visual material of the actual riot. "And in the end, the American people react to the visuals, not just the verbal, not just the conversation, and it is those visuals that proved to them that something really awful happened on January 6," he added.
June 25, 20223 yr 9 hours ago, Eaglesfandan said: So when do the poosay hat parades start? It’s already started. There’s a pedestrian bridge over the highway on my way home from work and I looked up last night and saw someone holding a sign that said "Stay in your lane, SCOTUS” I chuckled
Create an account or sign in to comment