If Trump were to run in 2024, a new poll shows he will easily win.

Keeping hope alive. Meanwhile...


And the biggest crashes in recent years occurred while we had a Republican president...

Record Highs in the stock market when Trump was in power.
 
LOL

If you mean you want to get inside Dominion machines, yeah, ya can't. That's proprietary software and firmware and you're a nobody. But accredited companies did have such access, analyzed the equipment, and determined they weren't accessible to outside communications and determined they did not switch votes.
BULLSHIT - they even had internet access, forbidden for election machinery.
 
It's been nearly 14 months so far, and counting, and they still can't prove widespread fraud occurred.
1644479669328.png
1644479751060.png
 
You are making a total fool out of yourself by saying the opposite of what is being shown here, I just showed Wikipedia is liberal biased, and than you assininely claim I didn't. People reading this, will think you are either insane, incredibly stupid or both,

Here's more on Wikipedia's left bias >>

.


The studies, originally reported in Breitbart, No doubt you are high on drugs. You are trying to tell us Wikipedia is Liberal through Breitbart. :laughing0301: :laughing0301: :laughing0301: :laughing0301: :laughing0301:
 
BULLSHIT - they even had internet access, forbidden for election machinery.
They also had paper ballots.

So even if votes were changed in the machines, when Georgia (for example) did a hand recount, they would have discovered a discrepancy.

But they didn't.

None of the recounts, or audits found a discrepancy.
 
Of course you didnt read it. You didnt have to tell me that, Mr Airhead.

And you dont have to read it anyway. YOU KNOW about all the fraud, Mr Pretender.
Your first one was utter bullshit. Why should I expect any of the others carry water?
 
They are lies simply because they don't correspond with the electoral votes. You've been conned.
The popular vote doesn't always align with the electoral college. That's by design. Not my problem if you want to reject reality; but the reality remains, a higher percent of Republicans voted for Trump in 2020 than in 2016 and a lower percent voted for the Democrat in 2020 than in 2016.
 
HA HA. Look at the stupid liberal wailing about "Documentation" It's all these goofballs know. Documentation from sources friendly TO THEM.

In their little deranged world, something is real, if a piece of paper says so. Wow. Even a team of doctors couldn't help these fools.

So obviously you have NO VIDEO of Sydney Powell saying what you laughably claim she said, so all you have is a bunch of liberal liars repeating the words of another liberal liar. How impressive.
LOLOL

You moron, there is no video of her saying that because it was stated in a legal document she submitted to the court in a motion to dismiss the case against her. You're beyond brain-dead to assert it's not true because there's no video.

:cuckoo: :cuckoo: :cuckoo:
 
Prove what ? I DID do that in this thread, in larger size posts (594-601) than anyone has ever done in the history of this forum. You are a complete IDIOT.

I wonder why I even bother talking to you.
You posted bullshit, gramps. Don't expect others to fall for such bullshit just because you're dumb enough to fall for it.
 
It not enough for THIS FORUM. This forum is not a courtroom. You have no video. You have no way to prove what you claim about Sydney Powell, and all you have is bullshit from lying liberals., You're a joke.
LOL

You're such a retard, gramps. This is a legal document submitted to a court. It's more real than a video.

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS

3. The statements at issue are protected and not actionable

Determining whether a statement is protected involves a two-step inquiry: Is the statement one which can be proved true or false? And would reasonable people conclude that the statement is one of fact, in light of its phrasing, context and the circumstances surrounding its publication. Keohane, 882 P.2d at 1299. This inquiry is determined as a matter of law. Bucher v. Roberts, 595 P.2d 235, 241 (Colo. 1979) (“Whether a particular statement constitutes fact or opinion is a question of law.”). Analyzed under these factors, and even assuming, arguendo, that each of the statements alleged in the Complaint could be proved true or false, no reasonable person would conclude that the statements were truly statements of fact.
 

Forum List

Back
Top