Originally posted by CivilDiscourse
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
ARMED protest are planned in all 50 state capitals and DC
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View Post
Then why no demands/requests for Republican votes to be examined as well? It is odd that Trump only wanted votes recounted in swing states that he lost.
- 1 like
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
I'm afraid you don't actually get to set such rules. Licona got spanked on that a while back.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Ronson View Post
There was fraud. Most everyone acknowledges that.
- 1 like
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
The rule in this thread is be civil or go argue somewhere else.
You only get one warning.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Zara View Post
What was that commie, did you say something?
- 1 like
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Ronson View Post
And you accuse me of exaggeration? Please.
More often than not that was an accurate description of the response to the 'evidence. In some cases it was more angry, like 'how dare you waste the courts time on this ridiculousness. At least once giulliani admitted he didn't even have evidence of fraud to submit!
Not having sufficient court evidence is not the same thing as something not existing. Perhaps you should try to convince a court that black holes exist. The burden of proof for Trump's attorneys was quite heavy.
I believe that's what I said.
If YOU understand Donald Trump's campaign that has completely undermined the peaceful transfer of power is itself fraudulent - i.e YOU know there is not evidence of sufficient fraud to change the result - how in the world do you justify supporting him as he has lied about that fact for nearly three months and as he has undermined the trust of the American people wrt one of the most critical elements of our democracy - to the point many are willing to threaten armed protests of the inauguration in 50 capitols and DC?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Psychic Missile View Post
Destruction of what?
The violent mob involved in the insurrection was not in any way primarily motivated by destruction of property, but anarchists are.
And as to the term "insurrection"...
Inigo.gif
How can you know whether or not someone is a BLM protestor or an anarchist?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
When you say "the courts", you mean individual judges who never let any of the cases go to trial where the evidence could have a full and fair hearing.
Unfortunately in Trump's case, he had a deadline to battle against. They had to go with what they had and it wasn't enough. But some fraudsters may flip in the future, confess, and expose much more evidence. We'll see.
The main thing is reform. McConnell fought against reform previously (on the pretense it was a partisan bill). It makes me quite suspicious of him.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
That would be an exaggeration. In most cases there wasn't enough legitimate evidence to keep them from being laughed out of the court room.
Not having sufficient court evidence is not the same thing as something not existing. Perhaps you should try to convince a court that black holes exist. The burden of proof for Trump's attorneys was quite heavy.
As for some fraud. There is bound to be some anomalies in any event involving millions. Taking those all the way to fraud requires some work, and if the sum total of all the anomalies are stiil in the noise, the only people that care enough to do that work are people that are paranoid or obsessed.
There needs to be evidence of a problem big enough to have some reasonable expectation it could have affected the result. Anything else is just wasting everyone's time, or as in this case, fodder for creating unrest and doubt and fomenting chaos.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostAfter the 2016 election the democrats claimed Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the election, that the Russians hacked the voting machines, they rioted in the streets, burning half of Washington DC, and then we had faithless electors vote against Trump...
There were also far more faithless electors who voted against Clinton, which you have either forgotten or deliberately omitted and which completely reverses whatever point you though you were making.
Your other complaints may have some merit, but this one is so bad it detracts from their impact.Last edited by Roy; 01-13-2021, 06:52 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
If that's incitement, most every politician would be in handcuffs. Remember Mr. Barack "If They Bring A Knife To The Fight, We Bring A Gun" Obama? LAWL
- 1 like
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Ronson View Post
There was fraud. Most everyone acknowledges that. There just wasn't enough evidence for the courts to be satisfied it was widespread enough to affect the election.
Leave a comment:
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by rogue06, Today, 09:33 AM
|
8 responses
55 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by oxmixmudd
Today, 03:41 PM
|
||
Started by whag, Yesterday, 10:43 PM
|
50 responses
241 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Today, 04:07 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 09:38 AM
|
0 responses
27 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Yesterday, 09:38 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, Yesterday, 06:47 AM
|
83 responses
349 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 01:46 PM
|
||
Started by carpedm9587, 04-14-2024, 02:07 PM
|
57 responses
345 views
2 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Today, 03:46 PM
|
Leave a comment: