AuntiE
Loc: 45th Least Free State
billlingle wrote:
Allegations. If you can prove it take it to court. If you can't there is a reason. No one that was not a registered voter received ballots.
Except Michigan has over 26,000
registered voters who are deceased (some for decades) and yet the Secretary of State has refused to remove them from the rolls. Why? Does mail in voting ring a bell?
AuntiE wrote:
Except Michigan has over 26,000 registered voters who are deceased (some for decades) and yet the Secretary of State has refused to remove them from the rolls. Why? Does mail in voting ring a bell?
So how many of them cast votes. A dead guy on a voter roll is not changing the vote count.
XXX
Loc: Somewhere north of the Mason-Dixon
billlingle wrote:
While Trump was involved in discussions in the days prior to Jan. 6 about the National Guard response, he issued no such order before or during the rioting. Speaker Pelosi does not control National Guard troops. It was reported that the National Guard discussions concerned making sure that the guard would be kept from participating.
I read a few more articles and I stand corrected.
Below is an article that seems to have the most unbiased reporting in regards to what actually happened with the NG
If anyone wants to read it, that is
https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-trump-order-national-guard-156055113284
AuntiE
Loc: 45th Least Free State
billlingle wrote:
So how many of them cast votes. A dead guy on a voter roll is not changing the vote count.
I think the issue is the potential for misuse of a mail in ballot. It would be very easy to fill out a ballot, using the deceased name, and mailing it in. Even one fifth of 26,000 could alter the outcome of an election.
As you seem so gullible, why would the Secretary of State refuse to remove these names? What purpose does it serve her to retain the names in the voter rolls?
AuntiE
Loc: 45th Least Free State
His Assistant Secretary of Defense has clearly stated Trump brought up the use of the National Guard. Even the WaPo posted that story.
XXX
Loc: Somewhere north of the Mason-Dixon
AuntiE wrote:
I thought for sure you would be on the phone with the Lincoln Project trying to donate to Rick Wilson to hire an assassin for Trump. Think how much happier you would be to see him assassinated.
Assassinating Trump would simply give all the knuckle draggers reason to use their AR-15's. I would rather chance another 4 years of Trump than that.
And since I have never advocated violence against anyone why would your mind even go there? Unplug yourself from Fox or anything else right-wing for the next three months and only listen to one of the big three--take your pick--and no cable news then ask yourself if anything the mainstream news is saying is true.
The above is because when I had my first stroke my mother-in-law came and stayed with us for 3 months after I got home. She still hasn't gone back to Fox News even though she is very much a conservative...simply able to think for herself.
Excellent work in your research, KnightLady.
I suspect many will dismiss it as not fitting their preferred narrative.
Again, thanks.
.
AuntiE
Loc: 45th Least Free State
PeterS wrote:
Assassinating Trump would simply give all the knuckle draggers reason to use their AR-15's. I would rather chance another 4 years of Trump than that.
Yet, you would find that an odd reaction to an assassination. You still refuse to clearly enunciate/repudiate Rick Wilson’s call for Trump’s assassination. That silence says you would have no issue with it being done.
Quote:
And since I have never advocated violence against anyone why would your mind even go there? Unplug yourself from Fox or anything else right-wing for the next three months and only listen to one of the big three--take your pick--and no cable news then ask yourself if anything the mainstream news is saying is true.
I wish I could say i hate to have to correct, yet you are so often wrong about me. I have not watched a single television news program in seven years. I still use old fashioned newspapers delivered to my door. You seem to limit all your knowledge to teleprompter readers. Spend some time with some think tank sites. You might learn something the teleprompter readers did not tell you.
Quote:
The above is because when I had my first stroke my mother-in-law came and stayed with us for 3 months after I got home. She still hasn't gone back to Fox News even though she is very much a conservative...simply able to think for herself.
Your
cult is so threatened by the most watched news media in the US. One wonders if you have the cognitive ability to understand there is a difference between their news division and opinion division.
I, actually, pity your mother-in-law having to live with you and your possible attempted brain washing of an elder.
Excellent work in your research, KnightLady.
I suspect many will dismiss it as not fitting their preferred narrative.
Again, thanks.
AuntiE
Loc: 45th Least Free State
slatten49 wrote:
Excellent work in your research, KnightLady.
I suspect many will dismiss it as not fitting their preferred narrative.
Again, thanks.
I do not dismiss it.
On the face, it is accurate. What many ignore is he did, in fact, sit in the Pentagon and bring up the possibility of deploying the National Guard. There is a transcribed copy of that conversation. It is a fact someone, at the Pentagon, contacted the DC Mayor as to whether she wanted troops deployed and she declined.
AuntiE wrote:
His Assistant Secretary of Defense has clearly stated Trump brought up the use of the National Guard. Even the WaPo posted that story.
In reading the article, I'm surprised you didn't notice that being mentioned within it....
"Trump did say during a 30-second call on Jan. 5 with then Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller that “they” were going to need 10,000 troops on Jan. 6, according to a statement Miller provided to a House committee in May 2021.
But Miller added that there was “no elaboration,” and he took the comment to mean “a large force would be required to maintain order the following day.” He noted that domestic law enforcement believed they had sufficient personnel."
XXX
Loc: Somewhere north of the Mason-Dixon
PeterS wrote:
Assassinating Trump would simply give all the knuckle draggers reason to use their AR-15's. I would rather chance another 4 years of Trump than that.
And since I have never advocated violence against anyone why would your mind even go there? Unplug yourself from Fox or anything else right-wing for the next three months and only listen to one of the big three--take your pick--and no cable news then ask yourself if anything the mainstream news is saying is true.
The above is because when I had my first stroke my mother-in-law came and stayed with us for 3 months after I got home. She still hasn't gone back to Fox News even though she is very much a conservative...simply able to think for herself.
Assassinating Trump would simply give all the knuc... (
show quote)
I don't see what others get out of fox. I don't use it unless I search for something and they have an article. NBC or NYT for me.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.