One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Who’s violent
Page <<first <prev 3 of 5 next> last>>
Jan 14, 2021 16:22:47   #
moldyoldy
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
The evidence has not been heard. Period. This article proves nothing. Things that are not adjudicated simply "are not."


The claim was a video of after hours v**e counting, but the expanded view shows the normal activity with the people in place.

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 16:25:15   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
moldyoldy wrote:
The claim was a video of after hours v**e counting, but the expanded view shows the normal activity with the people in place.


The video, is one bit out of thousands which needs examination, questioning,cross examination, etc.

It has not been adjudicated just like all the other massive amounts of evidence.

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 16:31:25   #
moldyoldy
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
The video, is one bit out of thousands which needs examination, questioning,cross examination, etc.

It has not been adjudicated just like all the other massive amounts of evidence.


Massive amounts of ridiculous claims that don’t even deserve a court hearing. Silliness that no sane person would consider.

Reply
 
 
Jan 14, 2021 17:15:11   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
moldyoldy wrote:
Massive amounts of ridiculous claims that don’t even deserve a court hearing. Silliness that no sane person would consider.


How could you possibly know?

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 17:47:07   #
moldyoldy
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
How could you possibly know?


Did you read any of the sworn statements? First grade Scribbles in crayon.

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 17:58:49   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
moldyoldy wrote:
Did you read any of the sworn statements? First grade Scribbles in crayon.


Show us what you have. There were over 230 pages of sworn statements, most being eyewitness accounts.

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 18:05:57   #
moldyoldy
 
nwtk2007 wrote:
Show us what you have. There were over 230 pages of sworn statements, most being eyewitness accounts.


Too stupid to be considered evidence by the courts. The lawyers should be cited for frivolous lawsuits.

Reply
 
 
Jan 14, 2021 18:08:36   #
LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago
 
moldyoldy wrote:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2020/12/04/no-atlanta-didnt-count-b****ts-in-secret-or-in-suitcases/amp/


Old Mold. If this was so, why are you and the left afraid of a forensic audit?

Logically Right

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 18:11:30   #
GoCubs Loc: Earth
 
LogicallyRight wrote:
***Hey Illogically Wrong...
>>>Still logically Right and more so then you will ever be
***what happened to all the A****a infiltrators of The Capitol?
>>>Yes, I made that accusation and it was logically right. I saw video of A****a arriving. I saw video of Trump supporters pulling down people trying to break in. I heard testimony of people who said they saw someone shoot a flare at the cops and then run when they saw him. These were the very tactics of a****a for at least the last 8 months and well before that. I said all along that those people breaking in were using a****a attacks of inflitrating other protests. Yes, my assumption was based on information I had, and based on months of a****a Insurrestionists acting out day after day. That was LOGICALLY RIGHT
***You remember.... the ones you assured us were the violent mob that stormed The Capitol? Where are they?
>>> I agree that there were many bad elements on the right that were behind the break in of the Capital Building. Saisified?
***Why have none of them been arrested?
>>>The more important questions are why weren't a****a arrested by one Democrat entity after another and when they were apprehended? Why were almost all immediately released by Democrat States Attorneys? Did this eventually encourage those that broke into the Capital Building that there would be no consequences? Why would they think they were a part of I**********n when none of these other attacks all summer and fall were not considered I**********n, when they were far more I**********n then 1*6.
***Why has EVERY SINGLE PERSON ARRESTED BEEN A TRUMPSTER?
>>>They haven't. Many have been avid Trump supporters and many were also just avid supporters of other causes trying to make their points through association with Trump supporters.
***What gives? Can you NEVER admit that you were wrong?
>>>I did under the narrow assumptions I made based on the available information at the time. The more important question is why you can never admit you are wrong despite how often, actually near 100% of the time, you are shown or proven to be wrong? Why you feel the need for cheap slurs? Why you need to try and twist anything and everything into a cheap childish attack agains President Trump, a greater man then you will ever be. You aren't worthy of shining his shoes.

Logically Right
***Hey Illogically Wrong... br >>>Still ... (show quote)


"I did under the narrow assumptions I made based on the available information at the time"? The "available information" you refer to was only available to NewsMax and OANN viewers. I told you that very thing at the time. Every other network was accurately reporting who it was.

I've told you this several times... maybe you'll finally become a believer someday - if you keep listening to either of those two "networks", you will continue to be misinformed.

As for "cheap slurs", read your last two sentences.

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 18:12:05   #
moldyoldy
 
LogicallyRight wrote:
Old Mold. If this was so, why are you and the left afraid of a forensic audit?

Logically Right


nobody is afraid, you have nothing but idiocy on your side.

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 18:51:52   #
LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago
 
GoCubs wrote:
"I did under the narrow assumptions I made based on the available information at the time"? The "available information" you refer to was only available to NewsMax and OANN viewers. I told you that very thing at the time. Every other network was accurately reporting who it was.

I've told you this several times... maybe you'll finally become a believer someday - if you keep listening to either of those two "networks", you will continue to be misinformed.

As for "cheap slurs", read your last two sentences.
"I did under the narrow assumptions I made ba... (show quote)


As usual, you are to easy.
***"I did under the narrow assumptions I made based on the available information at the time"? The "available information" you refer to was only available to NewsMax and OANN viewers. I told you that very thing at the time. Every other network was accurately reporting who it was.
>>>False. I did not use those sources. I did watch on live TV and not some cable source, and on various Internet sources. I have now seen, today, more evidence that it was A****a and/or B*M that was behind the attack and well planned days before. I'll stand behind that. Yes, Some on the right got involved and wrapped up in the frenzy of the moment and a lot of just curious real Trump supporters also caught up in the crowd and just looking around within the Capital, often after being welcomed by the Police. We're talking about the inadequately supported police, when the Mayor knew that there might be trouble. Possibly some Congressional Leaders and Officials also.

***I've told you this several times... maybe you'll finally become a believer someday - if you keep listening to either of those two "networks", you will continue to be misinformed.
>>>Listening to what you might tell me is like listening to a uninformed kid trying to tell me something. Until you have facts and rational thought processes at work, why would I waste my time except to show everyone else how wrong your posts are.

***As for "cheap slurs", read your last two sentences.
>>>Reasonable responses considering who I was communicating with.

Logically Right

Reply
 
 
Jan 14, 2021 18:55:18   #
LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago
 
moldyoldy wrote:
nobody is afraid, you have nothing but idiocy on your side.


Old Mold
Then prove us wrong with a forensic audit. Gutless. Quit hiding and ducking the t***h.

Logically Right

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 19:08:41   #
GoCubs Loc: Earth
 
LogicallyRight wrote:
As usual, you are to easy.
***"I did under the narrow assumptions I made based on the available information at the time"? The "available information" you refer to was only available to NewsMax and OANN viewers. I told you that very thing at the time. Every other network was accurately reporting who it was.
>>>False. I did not use those sources. I did watch on live TV and not some cable source, and on various Internet sources. I have now seen, today, more evidence that it was A****a and/or B*M that was behind the attack and well planned days before. I'll stand behind that. Yes, Some on the right got involved and wrapped up in the frenzy of the moment and a lot of just curious real Trump supporters also caught up in the crowd and just looking around within the Capital, often after being welcomed by the Police. We're talking about the inadequately supported police, when the Mayor knew that there might be trouble. Possibly some Congressional Leaders and Officials also.

***I've told you this several times... maybe you'll finally become a believer someday - if you keep listening to either of those two "networks", you will continue to be misinformed.
>>>Listening to what you might tell me is like listening to a uninformed kid trying to tell me something. Until you have facts and rational thought processes at work, why would I waste my time except to show everyone else how wrong your posts are.

***As for "cheap slurs", read your last two sentences.
>>>Reasonable responses considering who I was communicating with.

Logically Right
As usual, you are to easy. br ***"I did unde... (show quote)


"I have now seen, today, more evidence that it was A****a and/or B*M that was behind the attack and well planned days before. I'll stand behind that."?

You CAN"T be serious!!! Just WOW! You are WAY too deep into the Kool-Aid.

"Reasonable responses"? Maybe. Maybe not. They were nonetheless "cheap slurs" and EXACTLY of the type you accuse me of. Pot, kettle black and all that.

Just the fact that you, a woman, thinks that trump (the guy who boasts about p#$$y grabbing) is a great man says it all. He is scum.

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 20:05:27   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
moldyoldy wrote:
Too stupid to be considered evidence by the courts. The lawyers should be cited for frivolous lawsuits.


You lie about something you haven't even seen. Good.

Reply
Jan 14, 2021 20:07:35   #
nwtk2007 Loc: Texas
 
moldyoldy wrote:
nobody is afraid, you have nothing but idiocy on your side.


Wwe have evidence and you haven't seen it because judges won't allow it to be presented, reviewed, examined, cross examined, adjudicated. But most certainly you haven't seen it.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 5 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.