Posts for: LAPhil
Apr 7, 2021 17:09:31 #
(Main)
F.D.R. wrote:
STERILIZE BOTH OF THEM then shoot 'em.
Well you wouldn't have to sterilize them first in that case.
Apr 7, 2021 14:16:19 #
(Main)
billy a wrote:
Phil, the quotation marks suggest sarcasm.
Sorry. Must have been too early in the morning for me.
Apr 7, 2021 14:15:26 #
(Main)
Oldsailor65 wrote:
Those two evil little brats are being coddled just because of their ages And their RACE
Of course. How could I have overlooked that?
Apr 7, 2021 11:14:10 #
(Main)
billy a wrote:
Well I'll be... Look at how fast "justice" works down here among us "common folk".
Justice? Those two evil little brats are being coddled just because of their ages. By the time both of them are 21 they'll be completely free of any further punishment. I would hardly call that justice.
Apr 6, 2021 11:12:51 #
(Main)
lindajoy wrote:
A must... ~~
When the world goes mad, one must accept madness as sanity; since sanity is, in the last analysis, nothing but the madness on which the whole world happens to agree.
George Bernard Shaw
When the world goes mad, one must accept madness as sanity; since sanity is, in the last analysis, nothing but the madness on which the whole world happens to agree.
George Bernard Shaw
Linda:
I asked you this earlier, but I guess you missed it. That's the trouble with this forum, you often don't see your replies without reading all the way through the comments. You indicated that you had some contact with the Supreme Court after their refusal to take the Texas case where you expressed your displeasure with their non-decision. Can you tell us more about that?
Apr 5, 2021 14:40:01 #
(Main)
nwtk2007 wrote:
img src="https://static.onepoliticalplaza.com/ima... (show quote)
At least you two can rib each other and still keep your sense of humor.
Apr 5, 2021 14:08:51 #
(Main)
lindajoy wrote:
It was total BS and the day I lost all respect for... (show quote)
How did you tell them?
Apr 5, 2021 10:49:57 #
(Main)
son of witless wrote:
The US Supreme Court refused to reverse the partis... (show quote)
I'm still fuming over their refusal to take the case of Texas. Even the Trump appointees v**ed against it, claiming that Texas had "no standing". Something totally smelled like bulls**t there.
Apr 5, 2021 10:16:40 #
(Main)
nwtk2007 wrote:
Well said! Changing e******n laws to alter the outcome of e******ns is corrupt at its heart, and the way they did it is unconstitutional as well.
You're right about that.
Apr 5, 2021 10:14:14 #
(Main)
nwtk2007 wrote:
Why would she want to be a fraud?
I have no idea.
Apr 5, 2021 10:10:25 #
(Main)
eden wrote:
I would concur. I recall Phil calling out a particularly insulting character for threatening people, including myself here.
Could you refresh my memory about this? It sounds interesting.
Apr 4, 2021 21:38:18 #
(Main)
slatten49 wrote:
https://leadstories.com/h**x-alert/2021/02/fact-check-mike-lindell's-absolute-proof-video-promising-to-expose-e******n-f***d-is-full-of-false-and-unproven-claims.html
https://leadstories.com/h**x-alert/2020/12/fact-check-sydney-powell-witness-navid-keshavarz-nia-references-several-debunked-e******n-h**xes.html
Also, FYI.....https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/lead-stories/
https://leadstories.com/h**x-alert/2020/12/fact-check-sydney-powell-witness-navid-keshavarz-nia-references-several-debunked-e******n-h**xes.html
Also, FYI.....https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/lead-stories/
Anyone who claims to have irrefutable proof of something but isn't at liberty to reveal their sources until some future time is automatically suspect in my book. I thought Sydney Powell was a flake from the beginning, and I was hoping someone more credible would come forward with some hard evidence of fraud. Unfortunately for us Trump supporters, that never happened.
Apr 4, 2021 20:26:17 #
(Main)
nwtk2007 wrote:
Like I said, the "evidence" hasn't been presented or heard. We have no clue as yet. It's an unknown, as they want it to be so they, the left, can continue to claim there is no evidence. Disinformation by the courts and "press," if you still want to call it that.
So why would you assume that the e******n was s****n if the evidence hasn't bee presented?
Apr 4, 2021 20:05:08 #
(Main)
nwtk2007 wrote:
I join Trump and his various teams to say, yes, we do, but it needs to be heard in a court of law. It hasn't been yet.
I base my opinion on the lack of any recounts which indicated a significant difference in the number of v**es for each candidate, and also the lack of any proof of the assumption that millions, or at least hundreds of thousands of fraudulently cast v**es were cast for Biden. How do we know that a lot of them weren't cast for Trump? And again, for the e******n to have been rightfully won by Trump, we would have to have seen a switch in several hundred thousand v**es in Pennsylvania and Michigan, and even those states alone would not have been enough to have given Trump the e*******l v**e majority. It's all just way too unlikely.
Apr 4, 2021 19:53:54 #
(Main)
nwtk2007 wrote:
What evidence have you seen that it wasn't enough malfeasance to alter the e******n??
I don't claim to have evidence that it wasn't. I just said I didn't believe it. Do you have evidence that it was?