Many of us still think the e******n w*s f********t.
Nov 25, 2021 13:31:02 #
RandyBrian wrote:
LOL ! Yeah, that was another sewer lid I declined to open.
Isn't that the movie that has Jesus pulling a Toobin somewhere in the movie?
Nov 25, 2021 13:48:24 #
RandyBrian
Loc: Texas
Mikeyavelli wrote:
Isn't that the movie that has Jesus pulling a Toobin somewhere in the movie?
IDK, I did not see it. But the advertisements about it were clear enough that it's purpose was to defame Jesus and his life, so that let me and my family out.
Nov 25, 2021 15:24:08 #
crazylibertarian wrote:
You've been touting this misrepresentation since the e******n. NO COURT CONSIDERED THE EVIDENCE!!!!!! The cases were dismissed due to technicalities. And Amy Barrett was reported to have said that they didn't want to overturn the results due to fear of r**ting.
You're as predictable as the tide, PeterS.
You're as predictable as the tide, PeterS.
Once again intimidation by the radical left thwarts justice. Get a clue limpeters.
Nov 25, 2021 17:23:28 #
RandyBrian wrote:
IDK, I did not see it. But the advertisements about it were clear enough that it's purpose was to defame Jesus and his life, so that let me and my family out.
I saw it years ago. Wasn't very good one way or another. It did have an anti religious slant, but it was just a bad movie.
Nov 25, 2021 20:31:12 #
crazylibertarian
Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island
elledee wrote:
Once again intimidation by the radical left thwarts justice. Get a clue limpeters.
PeterS can't get a clue. His opinion is the final fact of any argument.
Nov 27, 2021 21:25:54 #
LogicallyRight
Loc: Chicago
woodguru wrote:
Dozens of courts did exactly that, courts gave the fraud pushers the chance to prove it and they failed.
False.
Nov 27, 2021 22:30:46 #
LogicallyRight wrote:
False.
The judges looked at their bank accounts, and then made the decision to claim "No Standing" .
Crooked all, to a man.
Nov 28, 2021 15:18:22 #
Nov 28, 2021 15:40:19 #
RandyBrian
Loc: Texas
pegw wrote:
How do you explain how Trump lost in states yhat wete controled by Republicans?
Which do you mean? Arizona or Georgia? Each of which were heavily contested and in which Trump lost (if he really dide) by less than 12,000 v**es. Are those the ones you mean?
Nov 28, 2021 16:16:06 #
RandyBrian
Loc: Texas
pegw wrote:
How do you explain how Trump lost in states yhat wete controled by Republicans?
Let's talk counties for a moment. Biden won in 509 counties. T***p w*n in 2,547 counties. But Biden's counties have 67,000,000 more people that Trumps. More large cities. Higher concentration of poor, disadvantaged, and uninformed. Easily swayed by advertising and media lies. Almost all controlled by Democrats at the local level, and the majority controlled by Democrats at the State level. That makes it much easier to manipulate e******n rules, easier to encourage and/or overlook v***r f***d, easier to suddenly "discover" boxes/trucks with 'uncounted' v**es, easier to 'accidently' connect the v****g machines to the internet (against the law--I think a felony), and VASTLY easier to see to it that no serious 'review' of fraud allegations are done.
Nov 29, 2021 03:52:27 #
crazylibertarian wrote:
You've been touting this misrepresentation since the e******n. NO COURT CONSIDERED THE EVIDENCE!!!!!! The cases were dismissed due to technicalities. And Amy Barrett was reported to have said that they didn't want to overturn the results due to fear of r**ting.
You're as predictable as the tide, PeterS.
You're as predictable as the tide, PeterS.
So what you are telling me is that neither Guliani nor any of his lawyers could write a brief that was free from technicalities and they had over 60 tries? There wasn't a single lawyer that was privy to e******n law? As for your argument that not one court heard his case, I know of at least one...The Third Circut Court of Appeals gave a 21-page review for why it was rejecting the case. As for Amy Barrett, is she saying that Roberts only rejected Texas claim because he was terrified of Democrats not because what Texas was trying to do was unconstitutional and without grounds--which Amy Barrett sure as hell should have known given that she's supposed to be a Supreme Court judge...
And even though I know you won't open the link to the Appeals Court ruling here it is anyway... https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/203371np.pdf
Nov 29, 2021 04:29:54 #
RandyBrian wrote:
Let's talk counties for a moment. Biden won in 50... (show quote)
Is that what we Democrats did in Georgia, Nevada, and Arizona? And cities don't administer state or national e******ns so they don't have any ability to hide e******n f***d as that falls to the county auditor, county clerk, or commissioner. And if you have any evidence of any c***ting going on there then bring it forward or are accusations the only thing you cons can come up with?
Nov 29, 2021 04:43:24 #
Nov 29, 2021 05:09:47 #
nwtk2007 wrote:
And yet, like Ted Cruz, we are told that they are ... (show quote)
Trump got his shot before over 60 state and federal courts plus twice before the Supreme Court. And don't sit there and tell me that--boohoo, no judge would hear Trump's case--because that's the biggest pile of crap you people have peddled yet because he (one of Trump's lawyers) got a 21-page roasting by the Third Circut Court of Appeals. So for him to be roasted by the Third Circut they had to have read the lawsuit which means that all the lower courts were correct in rejecting Trump's bogus claims. And Roberts was very clear that one state can't sue another state over their e******n laws. He didn't have to read the suit to know that it was unconstitutional...for that, he simply had to read the US constitution...something the Texas AG apparently never did.
https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/203371np.pdf
Nov 29, 2021 07:31:47 #
nwtk2007
Loc: Texas
PeterS wrote:
So what you are telling me is that neither Guliani... (show quote)
Dude, an explanation of why they rejected a case means they did not try the case/the evidence was not heard. The court only heard what the plaintiff said the evidence would show, nothing more.
Duh!!
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.