A Challenge For Unbelievers (Impossible Challenge)

[the other mike]

 

[the other mike]

Simply because right-wingers are known false-witness bearing practitioners of the abomination of hypocrisy (unto God with a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge). Y'all can't prove it happened in the first place. Simply proclaiming it doesn't make it true.

I'm not a Republican and I know it was stolen. You should care too if you believe in having democratic elections.

 

[AntonToo]

Yep, that Bill Barr, Trump's own AG, who went out of his way to change department policy, so DOJ could follow up on 2020 election matters....covered up all the blockbuster evidence of electoral fraud against Trump.


How stupid do you have to be to just belive that uncritically?

 

[danielpalos]

I'm not a Republican and I know it was stolen. You should care too if you believe in having democratic elections.

A right-winger proclaimed something is the "gospel Truth". That is how I know it is Only right-wing fantasy.

 

[AntonToo]

I'm not a Republican

A lot of Trumpster crazies say that.

 

[dblack]

A lot of Trumpster crazies say that.

It's a valid claim. Trumpsters have little resemblance to traditional Republicans.

 

[the other mike]

A lot of Trumpster crazies say that.

And that applies to me how ?

 

[the other mike]

It's a valid claim. Trumpsters have little resemblance to traditional Republicans.

I voted for Dr Stein in 2016.
James Comey initially made me a Trump supporter in 2017.

 

[dblack]

I voted for Dr Stein in 2016.
James Comey initially made me a Trump supporter in 2017.

Was there painful surgery involved?

 

[the other mike]

Was there painful surgery involved?

Yeah from Brennan when they were cellmates at Guantanamo in my wet dream.

 

[Dr Grump]

Ballgames aren't won by elections though and aren't decided by the people.

Do you know how many people would need to be involved in such a conspiracy. Literally thousands. The rule of thumb is the maximum of people who should be in on a conspiracy is about 4/5. The chances of it unravelling go up exponentially every time someone else is added. In order for your 'they stole the election' conspiracy to be real, as well as your usual suspects (Dems), a whole ream of Trump appointed judges, as well as Republican state officials would have to be involved. All of them would have to be in on, and know every intricate detail, of such a conspiracy. And not one SINGLE one of them would be able to fuck up the narrative. Not one. Either this is the greatest conspiracy ever in the history of man kind or you and your kind are like little babies throwing their toys out the cot. All sane people know which category you are in.

 

[Road Runner]

Do you know how many people would need to be involved in such a conspiracy. Literally thousands. The rule of thumb is the maximum of people who should be in on a conspiracy is about 4/5. The chances of it unravelling go up exponentially every time someone else is added. In order for your 'they stole the election' conspiracy to be real, as well as your usual suspects (Dems), a whole ream of Trump appointed judges, as well as Republican state officials would have to be involved. All of them would have to be in the intricate details of such a conspiracy. And not one SINGLE one of them would be able to fuck up the narrative. Not one. Either this is the greatest conspiracy ever in the history of man kind or you and your kind are like little babies throwing their toys out the cot. All sane people know which category you are in.

What in the world does that have to do with anything we were just talking about?

 

[BlindBoo]

Either this is the greatest conspiracy ever in the history of man kind or you and your kind are like little babies throwing their toys out the cot. All sane people know which category you are in.

The lack of evidence only proves it's the greatest conspiracy ever. Only the greatest criminal gang could cover up such a crime like this.

The Hillary Gang.

 

[Dr Grump]

What in the world does that have to do with anything we were just talking about?

Um, the whole premise of your thread: 'If you believe that the 2020 election wasn't stolen. Prove it.'

 

[Road Runner]

Um, the whole premise of your thread: 'If you believe that the 2020 election wasn't stolen. Prove it.'

Yeah, but you or somebody else in this thread started comparing it to a baseball game. That was the subject you were replying to at the moment.

 

[Dr Grump]

Yeah, but you or somebody else in this thread started comparing it to a baseball game. That was the subject you were replying to at the moment.

Oh boy, you don't get metaphor do you?

 

[cnm]

I am not pretending when a case is dismissed itt prevents an evidentiary hearing. A judges opinion is still not good enough.

Evidentiary Hearing​

Evidentiary Hearing means a hearing at which one or more Participants submits evidence for the record. A Testimonial Hearing is an Evidentiary Hearing, but an Evidentiary Hearing does not necessarily include the presentation of testimony by witnesses in person. ​

Ffs, you raving loony. Evidence was submitted for the record in Michigan. The evidence was examined and found to be bullshit.

Be told.

 

[Lastamender]

Evidentiary Hearing​

definition. Evidentiary Hearing means a hearing at which one or more Participants submits evidence for the record. A Testimonial Hearing is an Evidentiary Hearing, but an Evidentiary Hearing does not necessarily include the presentation of testimony by witnesses in person. ​

Ffs, you raving loony. Evidence was submitted for the record in Michigan. The evidence was examined and found to be bullshit.

Be told.

So, all your saying was no real evidence was presented. And MI a committee decided that, not a judge.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

If you believe that the 2020 election wasn't stolen. Prove it. Prove there wasn't any fraud,

Since you started this thread, do you mind if I ask you to do the same thing for the Virginia Gov election this past week? Can you prove that Youngkin did not steal the election, prove that he did not win by fraud?

 

[Road Runner]

Oh boy, you don't get metaphor do you?

Not when it doesn't have anything to do with the topic at hand.

Since you started this thread, do you mind if I ask you to do the same thing for the Virginia Gov election this past week? Can you prove that Youngkin did not steal the election, prove that he did not win by fraud?

No, because I wasn't even following that election anyways.