3rd Times a Charm? Question: How have GOP/Trump acted "against" Democracy?

[daveman]

“You have nothing and this is the part where you continue to run your mouth without actually saying anything meaningful.”

Right on schedule, dunce.

That's nice.

 

[colfax_m]

I've never even heard that one.

Meanwhile, Democrats did everything they could to remove transparency from the process. If they cared at all about election integrity, they would have invited the entire world to watch.

They didn't.

You don't have to agree with me; I'd be surprised if you did. But a lot of people have a lot of questions, and all y'all are doing is screeching TRUMP INSURRECTION.

Trump’s illustrious legal team came up with that one. If you didn’t hear it, the courts did. They tossed it out because it’s ridiculous yet this the best he could come up with.

There were cameras and observers present for every part of the process.

 

[The_Lyrical_Miracle]

Let's look at how Democrats have acted against Democracy:

1. Questioned the legitimacy of the 2106 election, saying Russia stole the election.​

2. All-Out smeared SCOTUS Kavanaugh for nothing but political reasons and painted him as a sexual predator.​

3. Attacked SCOTUS Amy Coney Barret because she's religious and painted her as an evil zealous radical.​

4. Threatening to pack the Supreme Court to get their way when in power because they can't win naturally.​

5. Federalize local elections to impose their non-ID, ballot-harvesting ideals on all states.​

6. Fight against providing ID to vote and calling it Jim Crow 2.0​

7. Supporting the censorship of Conservative speech by Big tech, and having their leaders command Big Tech to do so.​

8. Threatening to add states to get more senators to achieve political power​

If anyone is attacking Democracy, it's the Democrats.

 

[XponentialChaos]

I’m saying that they were looking at and being informed of Trump’s tweets as they were storming the Capitol.



1:54


1:08

Can’t admit that you’re wrong huh?

The_Lyrical_Miracle still can't admit when he's wrong.

His statement: “The few hundred rioters who were busy being violent aren't going to stop, look at their twitter, and say "HEY GUYS, TRUMP JUST CRITICIZED PENCE, LET'S TURN UP THE HEAT!!" That's just a dumb thing to believe.”

 

[Lastamender]

It doesn’t. The legislature writes law. The executive implements it. That means filling in the gaps of the law. Lots of details are left out of legislation.

But at the end of the day, if you think it’s illegal, it’s too late to challenge it after the election.

They have admitted it was illegal. No one was held accountable. And the state intends to do nothing about it.

 

[colfax_m]

They have admitted it was illegal. No one was held accountable. And the state intends to do nothing about it.

Who is “they” and when did they admit it?

 

[XponentialChaos]

Meanwhile, in current news: Trump asks federal judge to toss Jan. 6 lawsuits

Binnall said none of the president's comments after the rally indicated that he supported what the rioters did. But the judge asked, "What do I do about the fact that the president didn't denounce the conduct immediately and in fact sent a tweet that arguably exacerbated things, to the extent anybody saw it who was inside the Capitol.

"What do I do about those facts that he doesn't do anything for about two hours to tell people to stand down and leave the Capitol?" he continued. "Isn't that enough to at least plausibly infer that the president agreed with the conduct of the people who were in the Capitol that day?"

The judge asks a very reasonable question that I've brought up. The judge is looking at this from a legal perspective, and I would honestly be surprised if anything is determined by this from a legal standpoint.

However, from a moral standpoint, the judge says the same thing that I've been saying. Notice that none of the Trumpsters here have been able to defend those actions. All they've managed to do is demonstrate how ignorant they are of this entire event.

"Bu-bu-but Pence wasn't even in the building." Yes, he was.

"Bu-bu-but did the people rioting even read those tweets?" Yes, they did.

They can't defend those actions and they're desperately trying not to see any moral issue with how Trump acted that day.

 

[Lastamender]

Meanwhile, in current news: Trump asks federal judge to toss Jan. 6 lawsuits

Binnall said none of the president's comments after the rally indicated that he supported what the rioters did. But the judge asked, "What do I do about the fact that the president didn't denounce the conduct immediately and in fact sent a tweet that arguably exacerbated things, to the extent anybody saw it who was inside the Capitol.

"What do I do about those facts that he doesn't do anything for about two hours to tell people to stand down and leave the Capitol?" he continued. "Isn't that enough to at least plausibly infer that the president agreed with the conduct of the people who were in the Capitol that day?"

The judge asks a very reasonable question that I've brought up. The judge is looking at this from a legal perspective, and I would honestly be surprised if anything is determined by this from a legal standpoint.

However, from a moral standpoint, the judge says the same thing that I've been saying. Notice that none of the Trumpsters here have been able to defend those actions. All they've managed to do is demonstrate how ignorant they are of this entire event.

"Bu-bu-but Pence wasn't even in the building." Yes, he was.

"Bu-bu-but did the people rioting even read those tweets?" Yes, they did.

They can't defend those actions and they're desperately trying not to see any moral issue with how Trump acted that day.

What about the Feds starting the trouble?

 

[Lastamender]

Who is “they” and when did they admit it?

The SOS admitted changing the law was not his job.

 

[XponentialChaos]

What about the Feds starting the trouble?

I'm still waiting on you to give us the 14 cases that the GOP won.

One nutty conspiracy theory at a time please.

 

[Lastamender]

I'm still waiting on you to give us the 14 cases that the GOP won.

One nutty conspiracy theory at a time please.

There is video of Epps leading the initial breech. Another Fed barked orders through a bullhorn. They have a clear picture of him and the FBI says they can't find him. The narrative is shot.

 

[XponentialChaos]

There is video of Epps leading the initial breech. Another Fed barked orders through a bullhorn. They have a clear picture of him and the FBI says they can't find him. The narrative is shot.

So another conspiracy theory when you couldn't even provide evidence for the last one.

And you wonder why you constantly get sent to the conspiracy theory forum.

 

[Lastamender]

So another conspiracy theory when you couldn't even provide evidence for the last one.

And you wonder why you constantly get sent to the conspiracy theory forum.

I posted a video of a press conference. The first 5 minutes destroy the narrative. Watch it.

Censored On Every Channel

You can see why they do not want people to see this.

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[XponentialChaos]

I posted a video of a press conference. The first 5 minutes destroy the narrative. Watch it.

And you seem really credible when you still won't admit that your 14 trial victories were bullshit.

 

[dudmuck]

There is video of Epps leading the initial breech. Another Fed barked orders through a bullhorn. They have a clear picture of him and the FBI says they can't find him. The narrative is shot.

yea, Epps is a Trump supporter with ties to the oath keepers. He encouraged others to enter the capitol peacefully, but never did himself. Epps committed no crimes, so the FBI didnt pay any attention to him.

 

[colfax_m]

The SOS admitted changing the law was not his job.

Changing the law isn’t his job.

He didn’t change the law.

 

[Lastamender]

And you seem really credible when you still won't admit that your 14 trial victories were bullshit.

I am past that point. I already told you I believe the source. You believe liars. Anything on credibility is a joke coming from you.

How about Epps and that other guy? The Feds caused the violence.

 

[Lesh]

1. Questioned the legitimacy of the 2106 election, saying Russia stole the election.

We KNOW Russia was involved. That SHOULD be investigated. It's a big deal

2. All-Out smeared SCOTUS Kavanaugh for nothing but political reasons and painted him as a sexual predator.

Advise and consent...as per the Constitution, The fact that it pisses you off means nothing

3. Attacked SCOTUS Amy Coney Barret because she's religious and painted her as an evil zealous radical.

See above. Also note that the treatment of Merick Garland actually WAS unconstitutional(refusal to consider advise and consent)

4. Threatening to pack the Supreme Court to get their way when in power because they can't win naturally.

The Constitution does not stipulate the number of Justices. You may not like it but it's not unconstitutional and definitely not undemocratic

5. Federalize local elections to impose their non-ID, ballot-harvesting ideals on all states.

Horse shit

6. Fight against providing ID to vote and calling it Jim Crow 2.0

The GOP has moved on to more sophisticated voter suppression methods

7. Supporting the censorship of Conservative speech by Big tech, and having their leaders command Big Tech to do so.

That's private enterprise. No government and no Dems involved

democratic8. Threatening to add states to get more senators to achieve political power

Adding states is neither unconstitutional NOR undemocratic. In fact getting representation for those citizens is EXACTLY democratic

 

[Lesh]

How about Epps and that other guy? The Feds caused the violence.

How about Epps. There's nothing there. Just another Trump Humper. That "other guy" is Sullivan? Associated with the Proud Boys

I am past that point. I already told you I believe the source.

What source?

 

[XponentialChaos]

I am past that point. I already told you I believe the source. You believe liars.

LoL. You can’t even verify what your own source said.

Your sources are lying to you and you’re too stupid to know it.