An interesting look into how potential voter fraud could have worked on election night...

[shoshin]

18 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Inherent in the premise of seeing the legal challenges through is the potential for loss.  
 

Your view on what constitutes a credible challenge, while interesting on some level, is unimportant to me. This judge(s) ruling is important, obviously, but unless it exhausts legal challenges across the board, it simply is what it is. 

 

The end game is all that matters.  
 

When it’s time to acknowledge Biden, it’ll be time to move on to the next phase of the process.  

At what point then will you acknowledge Biden is the president elect?

 

Would you agree that Trump’s lawsuits have not only been poorly received by the courts, but they have been almost completely devoid of credible evidence?

 

And at what point in your life did you acknowledge pres elects before? 

You seem to be white knuckle hoping for an alternate universe to present a miraculous new set of facts. 
 

My conclusions are based on historical precedent and facts currently presented, as well as the lack of credibility of the cases presented thus far and the people presenting them. 
 

I’m not a particular Biden fan. He’s the second dem president I’ve voted for in my 7 presidential elections. 

[TBBills]

17 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

Biden’s policies Resulted in 700 percent increase in minority prison population.  But I guess it’s ok cause during the debates he said him and Obama pardoned a few of the people he sent away.   This is who you vote for. He’s the poster child of why our government isn’t working right now.  All the problems that have surfaced he’s been a part of the last 50 years.  How do you not see this? 

Oh you mean the one that passed with both republican and democratic support? Yea I guess it makes everyone racist and everyone that voted those people also. 

 

Please find a better excuse, this one has gotten old.

 

What happened to the Hunter Biden thing? Oh *****, the flashdrive... My bad.

 

What about the fraud voting? Oh *****, no court wins... My bad.

 

How about coronavirus... Oh *****, he's playing golf.

Edited November 22, 2020 by TBBills

[aristocrat]

12 minutes ago, TBBills said:

Oh you mean the one that passed with both republican and democratic support? Yea I guess it makes everyone racist and everyone that voted those people also. 

 

Please find a better excuse, this one has gotten old.

 

What happened to the Hunter Biden thing? Oh *****, the flashdrive... My bad.

 

What about the fraud voting? Oh *****, no court wins... My bad.

 

How about coronavirus... Oh *****, he's playing golf.

Oh right they both supported it so that makes it ok.  Makes sense in no world. Justifying for your conscience.  This is the ***** you’ve preached for four years to stop. Hypocrisy. Pure and simple.

[shoshin]

46 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Inherent in the premise of seeing the legal challenges through is the potential for loss.  
 

Your view on what constitutes a credible challenge, while interesting on some level, is unimportant to me. This judge(s) ruling is important, obviously, but unless it exhausts legal challenges across the board, it simply is what it is. 

 

The end game is all that matters.  
 

When it’s time to acknowledge Biden, it’ll be time to move on to the next phase of the process.  

 

Were you this supportive of the Democratic Russia investigation?

 

It was, after all, legal. Though it had the potential for loss. No doubt you were as vocal in defending their rights to that and impeach, because legality is your low bar. 

[TBBills]

37 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

Oh right they both supported it so that makes it ok.  Makes sense in no world. Justifying for your conscience.  This is the ***** you’ve preached for four years to stop. Hypocrisy. Pure and simple.

Just shows you are picking on one man when a whole group of both sides agreed. You are the definition of hypocrite.

[aristocrat]

1 minute ago, TBBills said:

Just shows you are picking on one man when a whole group of both sides agreed. You are the definition of hypocrite.

Biden apologized for how poorly his policies performed. Even had to spend Obama’s presidency pardoning thousands who were wrongly imprisoned from it.  Imagine being responsible for imprisoning so many people and having people support that presidency?   Just to be clear...nobody who supported those bills should be anywhere near public policy right now. Not a damn person.  But you have supported those policies. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

38 minutes ago, shoshin said:

At what point then will you acknowledge Biden is the president elect?

 

Would you agree that Trump’s lawsuits have not only been poorly received by the courts, but they have been almost completely devoid of credible evidence?

 

And at what point in your life did you acknowledge pres elects before? 

You seem to be white knuckle hoping for an alternate universe to present a miraculous new set of facts. 
 

My conclusions are based on historical precedent and facts currently presented, as well as the lack of credibility of the cases presented thus far and the people presenting them. 
 

I’m not a particular Biden fan. He’s the second dem president I’ve voted for in my 7 presidential elections. 

I’m not complicated, I’m not trying to trick anybody, I quite literally have told you exactly what I think.  Why is that so hard to believe?

 

In order:

At what point...

If DJT taps out, I’ll acknowledge;

 

If DJT gets the SC Algore hook, I’ll acknowledge;

 

If DJT gets the hook, but evidence convinces me that massive fraud took place, I’ll acknowledge simply because it would be silly not to.  

Would you acknowledge...

I would acknowledge he has not prevailed in litigation on a massive scale thus far.  I would not acknowledge they are completely devoid of evidence. 
 

At what point did I acknowledge President-Elects...

 

Pretty much the same time everyone else did.  
 

White knuckling...?

 

I think I’ve been the calmest, most rational guy (Non-lib) in the room for the last week. @oldmanfan has been hanging in there, you’ve been awwwwwiite, @WideNine was fine then jumped the rails IMO.   
 

 

I again acknowledge your perspective, have never suggested that you’re way out there, crazy or anything else.  I don’t believe I’ve said that about anybody.  In fact, I understand why you all feel you can take a victory lap, but I’m not at all interested in submitting simply because you all think it’s time.  
 

As for your vote for Biden, well, that’s nothing I personally can respect.  He’s an imbecile, and this generation of woke folk annointed a guy their parents and grandparents sent to the curb multiple times decades ago.  
 

 

 

 

 

 

44 minutes ago, shoshin said:

 

Were you this supportive of the Democratic Russia investigation?

 

It was, after all, legal. Though it had the potential for loss. No doubt you were as vocal in defending their rights to that and impeach, because legality is your low bar. 

No, I was not. I understood McCarthyism the first time I learned about it in school. It’s an emotional play, and all you need is enough people not to think independently...
 

Find a boogeyman.

Concoct a fanciful story.

Sell it to the masses. 
Sit back and watch. 

 

 

 

[shoshin]

7 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

 

 

 

No, I was not. I understood McCarthyism the first time I learned about it in school. It’s an emotional play, and all you need is enough people not to think independently...
 

Find a boogeyman.

 

Deep state Q et al.

 

7 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Concoct a fanciful story.

 

Election grand conspiracy involving many thousands of federal crime committing co-conspirators, Chavez voting machines, etc

 

7 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Sell it to the masses. 

 

Hold press conferences and tweet while admitting no fraud in court, presenting embarrassingly wrong evidence and admitting it, and losing 30 plus court cases, none pending now. 

 

 

7 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Sit back and watch. 

 

 

We are here. 

 

7 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

 

[TBBills]

7 hours ago, aristocrat said:

Biden apologized for how poorly his policies performed. Even had to spend Obama’s presidency pardoning thousands who were wrongly imprisoned from it.  Imagine being responsible for imprisoning so many people and having people support that presidency?   Just to be clear...nobody who supported those bills should be anywhere near public policy right now. Not a damn person.  But you have supported those policies. 

Hey at least out of every other politician he was willing to do what no one else would. Trump would never admit he was wrong... Look he cannot do it now with the election and coronavirus.

 

Thanks for making Biden look even more likeable compared to Trump.

Edited November 22, 2020 by TBBills

[shoshin]

In which we meet Trump lead Atty Sidney Powell, mayor of conspiracy town. Hang in there till she says she has no evidence. 
 

https://mobile.twitter.com/alexsalvinews/status/1330341145805611008

 

 

 

 

Edited November 22, 2020 by shoshin

[BullBuchanan]

It's over: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/7331957-Judge-Brann-Decision.html

 

In other words, Plaintiffs ask this Court to disenfranchise
almost seven million voters. This Court has been unable to find any case in which
a plaintiff has sought such a drastic remedy in the contest of an election, in terms
of the sheer volume of votes asked to be invalidated. One might expect that when
seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with
compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this
Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief
despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens.
That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained
legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative
complaint and unsupported by evidence. In the United States of America, this
cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its
sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At
bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants’ motions and dismiss
Plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.

 

Edited November 22, 2020 by BullBuchanan

[shoshin]

10 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

It's over: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/7331957-Judge-Brann-Decision.html

 

In other words, Plaintiffs ask this Court to disenfranchise
almost seven million voters. This Court has been unable to find any case in which
a plaintiff has sought such a drastic remedy in the contest of an election, in terms
of the sheer volume of votes asked to be invalidated. One might expect that when
seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with
compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this
Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief
despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens.
That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained
legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative
complaint and unsupported by evidence. In the United States of America, this
cannot justify the disenfranchisement of a single voter, let alone all the voters of its
sixth most populated state. Our people, laws, and institutions demand more. At
bottom, Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted. Therefore, I grant Defendants’ motions and dismiss
Plaintiffs’ action with prejudice.

 

 

Evidence shmevidence

 

He's a  conservative member of The Federalist Society. What does he know?

 

Even Pat Toomey backs this decision. 

 

Trump lost. It remains alarming that no one can accept losing is actually possible. It does happen. 

[BullBuchanan]

6 minutes ago, shoshin said:

 

Evidence shmevidence

 

He's a  conservative member of The Federalist Society. What does he know?

 

Even Pat Toomey backs this decision. 

 

Trump lost. It remains alarming that no one can accept losing is actually possible. It does happen. 

I guess the real Silent Majority were Biden voters.

[shoshin]

9 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

I guess the real Silent Majority were Biden voters.

 

the polling mess showed them to be Trump voters, but they still didn't have enough. It's just a loss. No need for them to fabricate stories like the Dems did in the last 4 years. 

[Coach Tuesday]

Was hoping Brann’s decision would be posted.

 

Hoping some posters in these parts read it.

19 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

I used those words to allow people to make up their own minds...my goal was to just present info that the MSM was not, and let the chips fall where they may...

 

But, ultimately, the evidence presented might not be there...we will have to wait for the supposed sworn testimony...

Do you now accept that the evidence does not exist?

[Backintheday544]

1 hour ago, shoshin said:

 

Evidence shmevidence

 

He's a  conservative member of The Federalist Society. What does he know?

 

Even Pat Toomey backs this decision. 

 

Trump lost. It remains alarming that no one can accept losing is actually possible. It does happen. 

But they had boat parades!

[GaryPinC]

19 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

You may be right...but do we fully know what’s in the sworn affidavits?

 

Its so hard to know if what’s being reported is accurate...the MSM hates Trump so their inherent bias is not going to allow them to do the investigative journalism required in this situation...their HOPE is that there is no evidence, so they will report that way...

 

This is why many people, who want to know what’s really going on, go elsewhere for more info...

 

But again, you could be 100% right- there may be nothing there...

There's very little investigative journalism needed for documented court results:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/with-scathing-order-judge-dismisses-trump-effort-to-block-pennsylvania-vote-certification/ar-BB1bfqeI?li=BBnbfcL

 

Keep in mind Brann is a repub judge.  Now Trump is trying to persuade repub state lawmakers to intervene, disregard the vote and send repub electors instead!

 

Honestly, JaCrispy, does this make any sense for a president who likes to preach "rule of law"?  It's extremely subversive IMO. 

 

There's been a lot of hot air with no significant legal evidence presented by his team as needed in these courtrooms.

 

Yes the MSM has shamefully advocated against Trump but the courtroom results and Trump's subversive tactics speak for themselves.

 

Look at the judges words in all these states, Trump's argument's present no evidence and thus have no legal grounds.  Over and over.

 

At what point do Trump supporters get off their knees and stop taking it in the face from him and his campaign?

[aristocrat]

2 hours ago, TBBills said:

Hey at least out of every other politician he was willing to do what no one else would. Trump would never admit he was wrong... Look he cannot do it now with the election and coronavirus.

 

Thanks for making Biden look even more likeable compared to Trump.

Some people enjoy seeing minorities suffer I guess.  

[TBBills]

2 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

Some people enjoy seeing minorities suffer I guess.  

Yes you obviously do. You are obviously not able to change who you are which is something Trump loves in his supporters, it allows him to lie to your face and you will accept it.  You keep allowing one thing to cloud you and it makes you the ignorant one.

 

While everyone else of all races look past and together for a brighter future while you wallow in the past with butter hatred.

Edited November 22, 2020 by TBBills

[aristocrat]

Just now, TBBills said:

Yes you obviously do.

not my candidate bud. Not who I voted for. My conscience is clean

[TBBills]

1 minute ago, aristocrat said:

not my candidate bud. Not who I voted for. My conscience is clean

You voted for a racist. Your own fault. I voted for a man who has put racism in the past to better the future of this country.

[aristocrat]

3 minutes ago, TBBills said:

You voted for a racist. Your own fault. I voted for a man who has put racism in the past to better the future of this country.

I almost spit out my coffee. I can’t understand how gullible you are. It’s so sad 

[TBBills]

Who do the people support a racist...

Who does the KKK support... Trump

Who do the Proud Boys support... Trump

Who do the confederate flag waving idiots support... Trump

 

You would think if Biden was a racist any of the racist groups would support him.

Let's go even further...

Biden was a VP to a president of race who chose him.

Biden chose a WOMAN who isn't white to be his VP.

Trump has chosen nothing but white people, says disgusting things about women, makes fun of the disabled. Has multiple racist groups supporting him.

 

 

Yea I think we got all we need here.

Edited November 22, 2020 by TBBills

[aristocrat]

6 minutes ago, TBBills said:

Who do the people support a racist...

Who does the KKK support... Trump

Who do the Proud Boys support... Trump

Who do the confederate flag waving idiots support... Trump

 

You would think if Biden was a racist any of the racist groups would support him.

Let's go even further...

Biden was a VP to a president of race who chose him.

Biden chose a WOMAN who isn't white to be his VP.

Trump has chosen nothing but white people, says disgusting things about women, makes fun of the disabled. Has multiple racist groups supporting him.

 

 

Yea I think we got all we need here.

who actually had a positive effect on minorities. Trump.  Who made a career of putting minorities in prison? Biden.   Not even a question.  But I do enjoy you constantly having to justify your decision.  
 

biden may have made awful decisions seemingly at every point in his political career but he’s gonna get it right this time!  I swear!  

[TBBills]

2 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

who actually had a positive effect on minorities. Trump.  Who made a career of putting minorities in prison? Biden.   Not even a question.  But I do enjoy you constantly having to justify your decision.  
 

biden may have made awful decisions seemingly at every point in his political career but he’s gonna get it right this time!  I swear!  

Look at my post above all you need to know, racist groups support Trump. You lost your battle long ago but keep trying. You support a guy who racists support. They hate Biden b.c he isn't a racist... Simple as that.

Edited November 22, 2020 by TBBills

[GaryPinC]

26 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

I almost spit out my coffee. I can’t understand how gullible you are. It’s so sad 

You know what gullible is?  Believing that getting even one of these various cases to the Supreme court while presenting no evidence along the way is a sound strategy.

[aristocrat]

1 hour ago, GaryPinC said:

You know what gullible is?  Believing that getting even one of these various cases to the Supreme court while presenting no evidence along the way is a sound strategy.

what?

[shoshin]

1 minute ago, aristocrat said:

what?

You know what gullible is?  Believing that getting even one of these various cases to the Supreme court whilepresenting no evidence along the way is a sound strategy.

[SoTier]

1 hour ago, aristocrat said:

not my candidate bud. Not who I voted for. My conscience is clean

 

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, the chances of it being something other than a duck are slim to none.  

Edited November 22, 2020 by SoTier

[RiotAct]

On 11/21/2020 at 10:26 AM, JaCrispy said:

If Biden won fair and square, we should all rEsIsT

 

 

 

Fixed it for ya

[JaCrispy]

23 hours ago, GaryPinC said:

Thanks for posting an entirely reasonable topic and wanting to discuss it respectfully.  That is key to trying to heal this country.

This video, does not appear to be any reputable news organization.  It looks like something was staged and pasted together.  Every video they cut to has Trump campaign people in it.  Are there any in there you consider truly neutral?

 

A CIA operation around Joe"Chinese" Biden?  Does that sound like a professional assessment?  It sounds hokey to me.

 

As far as news sources, what about many of Trump's legal challenges being shot down and light on evidence?  What do you think about Georgia certifying and Michigan moving to do so Monday?

 

I've heard a lot of big words and theories from the Trump campaign about massive fraud but no one there has any evidence other than trivial problems, ie nothing significantly impacting election results.  

 

As a 2016 Trump voter I ask you, do you really feel the Trump campaign has something concrete or this is all just smoke and mirrors and why?

I don’t have anything specific, but I do listen to Jimmy Dore, Tim Pool, Joe Rogan, and Glen Beck, to name a few...some are liberal, some moderate, and some conservative...I also go back and forth CNN, MSNBC, and FOX, even though I can’t stand any of them- it’s more of a forced feeding...lol

 

With regards to your final question, I don’t know if there is something concrete there...But, I still lean in the direction that there could be something there, but it’s more of a hunch, based on how Democrats have acted over the last 4 years...and here is why...

 

1. Everyone mocked Trump when he said people were spying on his campaign...but he turned out to be right.  The FBI sought and got a warrant to investigate a member of Trump’s campaign- which gave them access to conversations with Trump.

 

2. Everyone mocked Trump when he said the Russia collusion claim was a hoax.  Trump turned out to be right again...According to special prosecutor Muller, no evidence could be found connecting Trump to Russia.  And an FBI attorney has even plead guilty to altering a CIA email, in order to help secure the necessary warrants.

 

3. Over the summer I thought it odd when Democrats referenced that “at all costs” they would not allow Trump win...I remember telling a friend how odd it sounded, on its surface, considering they were trying to remove him from office all throughout his presidency with, what appeared to be flimsy arguments at best imo.

 

4. Mail-in ballots...logically, I never understood the push for these...Democrats tried to use the Covid excuse, but Dr. Fauci had made clear it was ok to go to the polls.  Yet Democrats continued to push them...so this was pretty curious until you start to think of potential motivations...They have always been against presenting ID when voting, yet nothing disenfranchises citizens more than if a fraudulent vote is able to be placed because ID was not required...To me, every American should want ID to be required to protect their vote- just like protecting your bank account against imposters trying to withdraw funds...if you’re against voter ID, it doesn’t really seem like you are genuinely against voter suppression or disenfranchisement imo...But then again, some democrats have said they are ok with non-citizens voting, which, I guess, starts to bring into focus why they would be against such regulations.

 

Now, of course, all of this is circumstantial...which is why I’m not 100% convinced Trump has the goods...however, given the history, and their willingness to “put everything on the table”, and even how they’ve treated members of their own party, I put nothing passed the Democrats, and would not be surprised if something more sinister was at hand.

3 hours ago, Coach Tuesday said:

Was hoping Brann’s decision would be posted.

 

Hoping some posters in these parts read it.

Do you now accept that the evidence does not exist?

I will probably wait to the final court rulings, just to be sure...unfortunately this is the place both parties have put the country in by not having uniform voting standards that protect against fraud...you’re just never secure in the outcome...

Edited November 22, 2020 by JaCrispy

[GaryPinC]

2 hours ago, aristocrat said:

what?

Check Rudy on Trump's ultimate strategy to overturn the election.  Anyone Trump supporter who believes in this is the pinnacle of gullible.  I know Rudy, as a lawyer, knows better.  

[HappyDays]

1 hour ago, JaCrispy said:

Mail-in ballots...logically, I never understood the push for these...Democrats tried to use the Covid excuse, but Dr. Fauci had made clear it was ok to go to the polls.  Yet Democrats continued to push them...so this was pretty curious until you start to think of potential motivations...They have always been against presenting ID when voting, yet nothing disenfranchises citizens more than if a fraudulent vote is able to be placed because ID was not required...To me, every American should want ID to be required to protect their vote- just like protecting your bank account against imposters trying to withdraw funds...if you’re against voter ID, it doesn’t really seem like you are genuinely against voter suppression or disenfranchisement imo.

 

Except voter fraud doesn't actually happen at the level that would be needed to swing elections. Every independent review that tries to find mass voter fraud has failed. There is already a process in place to catch voter fraud which is why every election cycle we hear of a few people that stupidly tried to register their dead parent or whatever and end up going to prison, all for the risk of one extra vote that wouldn't have made a difference in the result. Voting should be easy. I waited in line for over an hour to vote this year. It's ridiculous that anyone should have to spend that much time on a weekday to exercise their most important right. And every election cycle we act like that's normal. In Arizona mail-in voting has been the standard for a long time now and I haven't seen Republicans raise it as an issue until this year. I wonder why?

 

Trump's election team keeps telling the media that there were "hundreds of thousands of fraudulent votes" yet they aren't actually raising that claim in their court cases. Why do you think that is? They're making public claims like "more people voted in Wisconsin than live there" - which should be an incredibly easy fact to prove! - but then in court they're just trying to argue mail in voting was illegally enacted. So they are not actually trying to prove that widespread voter fraud happened, they're just looking for some federal judge to bail them out of an election they know they lost. The alarming thing is that so many Americans are buying their BS.

[GaryPinC]

3 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

I don’t have anything specific, but I do listen to Jimmy Dore, Tim Pool, Joe Rogan, and Glen Beck, to name a few...some are liberal, some moderate, and some conservative...I also go back and forth CNN, MSNBC, and FOX, even though I can’t stand any of them- it’s more of a forced feeding...lol

 

With regards to your final question, I don’t know if there is something concrete there...But, I still lean in the direction that there could be something there, but it’s more of a hunch, based on how Democrats have acted over the last 4 years...and here is why...

 

1. Everyone mocked Trump when he said people were spying on his campaign...but he turned out to be right.  The FBI sought and got a warrant to investigate a member of Trump’s campaign- which gave them access to conversations with Trump.

 

2. Everyone mocked Trump when he said the Russia collusion claim was a hoax.  Trump turned out to be right again...According to special prosecutor Muller, no evidence could be found connecting Trump to Russia.  And an FBI attorney has even plead guilty to altering a CIA email, in order to help secure the necessary warrants.

 

3. Over the summer I thought it odd when Democrats referenced that “at all costs” they would not allow Trump win..

 

4. Mail-in ballots...logically, I never understood the push for these...Democrats tried to use the Covid excuse, but Dr. Fauci had made clear it was ok to go to the polls.  

 

3 hours ago, JaCrispy said:

Now, of course, all of this is circumstantial...which is why I’m not 100% convinced Trump has the goods...however, given the history, and their willingness to “put everything on the table”, 

I'm in agreement on you with 1 and 2.  But why would you assume Trump is some purveyor of truth and honesty because of it?  He wasn't the most honest guy pre presidency.   3 is not odd given Trump's efforts on climate change, the environment, his rudeness, perceived dishonesty, use of conspiracy theories, and overt targeting and demonization of democrats as a whole.  

4.  Mail in ballots are not new.  The push is for a convenient way to ensure people vote.  No waiting in line.  I see much more waiting  in line in the urban areas over my suburban or even rural areas so that may be a factor.  I am in agreement with you about proper ID as the law requires.

 

Funny how Trump is not willing to put his massive evidence of voter fraud on the table or in the courtroom for that matter...

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

9 hours ago, shoshin said:

 

 

 

We are here. 

 

On this we agree. We are here. 

[ExiledInIllinois]

Wear 'em if you gott 'em folks...

There's a sale on Reynold's...

 

[shoshin]

On 11/21/2020 at 12:45 PM, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

 

I would humbly suggest you follow Sidney Powell.  She’s made specific comments and named key individuals that she claims are guilty of wrongdoing.  She’ll have it, or not, and she’s at the right hand of DJT.  
 

 

 

You were saying?

 

 

Come on LS. I'm not asking you to revisit your comments about the Trump "vaunted" legal team, but you have to admit the Trump legal strike farce would be funny if it wasn't such a serious thing going on. 

Edited November 22, 2020 by shoshin

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

12 minutes ago, shoshin said:

 

You were saying?

 

 

Come on LS. I'm not asking you to revisit your comments about the Trump legal team, but you have to admit the Trump legal strike farce would be funny if it wasn't such a serious thing going on. 

 

When I saw this, I searched on google (I prefer duck duck go but figure the algorithm on G would find this more quickly). 
 

My search returned 5 pages of references to Trump’s legal team, several referencing Sidney Powell as his most recent conspiracy enabler,  and several photos in front of Trump/Pence signs.

 

I visited his campaign website, drove around there for about 60 seconds and saw no press release or news article on this subject.  

I’ve said all along I’m trying to be as honest as possible. Are you? 

 

 

[shoshin]

2 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

 

When I saw this, I searched on google (I prefer duck duck go but figure the algorithm on G would find this more quickly). 
 

My search returned 5 pages of references to Trump’s legal team, several referencing Sidney Powell as his most recent conspiracy enabler,  and several photos in front of Trump/Pence signs.

 

I visited his campaign website, drove around there for about 60 seconds and saw no press release or news article on this subject.  

I’ve said all along I’m trying to be as honest as possible. Are you? 

 

 

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-powell/trump-campaign-says-sidney-powell-not-a-member-of-legal-team-idUSKBN2820UB

 

Now that we're past the "I don't believe you" part of this, care to respond to the clown car show Trump's "vaunted" legal team is putting on? 

[SoTier]

5 hours ago, GaryPinC said:

Check Rudy on Trump's ultimate strategy to overturn the election.  Anyone Trump supporter who believes in this is the pinnacle of gullible.  I know Rudy, as a lawyer, knows better.  

 

Maybe Rudy knew better thirty years ago but I'm not sure he knows anything these days that isn't filtered through his tin-foil hat in the voice of Covid Donnie.