Someone wants to use the 14th Amendment to fix the 2024 election for Dems.

[martybegan]

LOL

Yesterday, you implied you don't know.

Today, you say you do know.

But you still can't say what it was.

In that case I did, because it was out in the open for everyone to see.

Keep your cases straight.

 

[Faun]

You aren't paranoid when the other side is out to get you.

You're getting yourself.

I am shifting nothing.

Of course you are. Are you really this blind??

Your position WAS... courts don't ever find in favor of a plaintiff suing over ad-hoc changes to election laws.

After it was pointed out they have...

Your position IS NOW... courts do sometimes rule in favor of the plaintiff in such cases.

 

[martybegan]

You're getting yourself.



Of course you are. Are you really this blind??

Your position WAS... courts don't ever find in favor of a plaintiff suing over ad-hoc changes to election laws.

After it was pointed out they have...

Your position IS NOW... courts do sometimes rule in favor of the plaintiff in such cases.

why can't both be true?

 

[martybegan]

No one believes they’re wrong, but they’re open to the possibility with having to resort to conspiracy theories. You are demonstrating intellectual fragility. It takes a strong individual to consider the possibility they’re wrong.

Again, you claim they did sue before the election and rejected on standing when that’s just not true. Trump filed very few lawsuits before the election and numerous lawsuits challenging legality of election procedure changes were filed and were not rejected based on standing.

Carson v. Simon
Michigan All. for Retired Americans v. Benson

Hotze v Abbott

I notice you ignored my Wuhan flu reference.

EVERYONE WHO BELIVES ITS LAB BASED IS A NUTTER oh wait it may be lab based after all.

 

[Marener]

I notice you ignored my Wuhan flu reference.

EVERYONE WHO BELIVES ITS LAB BASED IS A NUTTER oh wait it may be lab based after all.

I ignored a reference that has nothing to do with the topic.

 

[martybegan]

I ignored a reference that has nothing to do with the topic.

You ignored the reference because it shows some things labelled as conspiracy theories by hacks like you turn out to be not so clear cut when new information comes out.

 

[Faun]

In that case I did, because it was out in the open for everyone to see.

Keep your cases straight.

So what was the evidence?

 

[Faun]

why can't both be true?

Because they're mutually exclusive. Either they do or they don't.

You changed your position from saying they don't to saying they do. That exhibits just how fragile your position is; which you're now reduced to propping up with paranoia.

 

[Marener]

You ignored the reference because it shows some things labelled as conspiracy theories by hacks like you turn out to be not so clear cut when new information comes out.

A conspiracy theory is that COVID was a biweapon designed to kill everyone except Jews.

But you psychos love conspiracy theories so you defend the psychos that hold them.

 

[martybegan]

So what was the evidence?

Connecticut judge orders new primary amid ballot stuffing allegations

 

[martybegan]

A conspiracy theory is that COVID was a biweapon designed to kill everyone except Jews.

But you psychos love conspiracy theories so you defend the psychos that hold them.

Wrong. Stop trying to retcon the past. The idea that the Wuhan flu came from a lab was denigrated as a conspiracy for a year or two. Now it's not.

 

[Marener]

Wrong. Stop trying to retcon the past. The idea that the Wuhan flu came from a lab was denigrated as a conspiracy for a year or two. Now it's not.

Stop trying to change the subject.

If you had an argument that wasn’t based on lies, you wouldn’t be trying to talk about something else.

 

[Faun]

Connecticut judge orders new primary amid ballot stuffing allegations

Now I'm confused. What's your beef? That's a case where plaintiffs filed a suit and had actual evidence of voter fraud. The court heard the case and ruled in favor of the plaintiff.

 

[martybegan]

Stop trying to change the subject.

If you had an argument that wasn’t based on lies, you wouldn’t be trying to talk about something else.

Not changing anything, you go on and on about Conspiracy theories and dismissing them and I brought up the Wuhan lab theory as an example of not being so fast to dismiss them.

What lie have I told? All I've done is voice opinions you don't like or believe in.

A lie has to be a deliberate telling of something someone KNOWS isn't the truth.

Like seeing a ball on the ground and saying it's hovering in the air.

 

[martybegan]

Now I'm confused. What's your beef? That's a case where plaintiffs filed a suit and had actual evidence of voter fraud. The court heard the case and ruled in favor of the plaintiff.

No beef, just proof of concept that it's possible, and on a larger scale.

 

[Faun]

No beef, just proof of concept that it's possible, and on a larger scale.

So? That has nothing to do with the 2020 election other than to show judges hear cases when plaintiffs bring actual evidence to court.

When they don't bring evidence to support their claims, they get dismissed.

 

[Marener]

Not changing anything, you go on and on about Conspiracy theories and dismissing them and I brought up the Wuhan lab theory as an example of not being so fast to dismiss them.

What lie have I told? All I've done is voice opinions you don't like or believe in.

A lie has to be a deliberate telling of something someone KNOWS isn't the truth.

Like seeing a ball on the ground and saying it's hovering in the air.

I will definitely dismiss any lunatic who calls COVID a bioweapon. That’s idiotic.

You keep saying that lawsuits before the election were dismissed on standing but I gave three examples that were not. This isn’t a matter of opinion. This is a factual inaccuracy.

A lie isn’t just when you say something that you know to be false. It’s also when you’re so negligent that you say something without knowing that it is true and failing to accept any facts otherwise. You cant avoid being a lair simply because you keep your head up your ass.

 

[martybegan]

So? That has nothing to do with the 2020 election other than to show judges hear cases when plaintiffs bring actual evidence to court.

When they don't bring evidence to support their claims, they get dismissed.

That's one thing to draw from it.

The other is that it does happen, and in this case is was so blatant even Dems had to do something about it.

 

[martybegan]

I will definitely dismiss any lunatic who calls COVID a bioweapon. That’s idiotic.

You keep saying that lawsuits before the election were dismissed on standing but I gave three examples that were not. This isn’t a matter of opinion. This is a factual inaccuracy.

A lie isn’t just when you say something that you know to be false. It’s also when you’re so negligent that you say something without knowing that it is true and failing to accept any facts otherwise. You cant avoid being a lair simply because you keep your head up your ass.

Where did I call COVID a bioweapon?

And maybe it was being researched as such, but if it was released from a lab, it was accidental more than likely.

That 3 weren't dismissed doesn't mean others were, or that the 3 in question were adjudicated fairly.

No, that's an omission or ignorance, not lying. To lie you have to KNOW what you are saying isn't true.

Like "if you like your plan, you can keep your plan, period" was a lie.

 

[Marener]

Where did I call COVID a bioweapon?

And maybe it was being researched as such, but if it was released from a lab, it was accidental more than likely.

That 3 weren't dismissed doesn't mean others were, or that the 3 in question were adjudicated fairly.

No, that's an omission or ignorance, not lying. To lie you have to KNOW what you are saying isn't true.

Like "if you like your plan, you can keep your plan, period" was a lie.

You assholes can’t just say whatever you want because you’re too stupid to know better.

You claimed that Trump couldn’t sue before the election because the courts wouldn’t take the case due to lack of injury. I proved you wrong. It was a lie. Or I guess you’re just ignorant. Either way, that’s how you would address election procedures.

What you don’t do is change the rules after the election. I can’t imagine anything less fair than that.