The Evidence Against Trump

I beg to differ.
They released videos last month showing cops attacking peaceful Trump supporters in the Capital rotunda. Some of them were seen being dragged off by cops and arrested.

Last week they released videos of cops trying to resuscitate Rosanne Boyland (DOA) who was last year shown on video being beaten unconscious by Capital police on Jan 6th. They first tried to claim she died of a drug overdose, then later claimed she was crushed by Trump supporters. Clearly videos showed her being kicked and beaten with nightsticks by uniformed police.



I think there was a lot of idiots that went into the Capital and they got involved in fights with the cops....but how can you blame Trump for a fight that the cops started from the beginning? We also know now that there were dozens of CIA and FBI agents in the crowd, and some, if not all, were encouraging people to go into the Capital. You cannot say for sure that a FBI agent was a Trump supporter just because he was wearing a red hat or some other silly patriotic clothing.



Fact is....no police officers died on Jan 6th. NONE.
One died later from an unrelated medial condition and several other's committed suicide.

Are you proud of the mob who broke into the Capitol?
 
1691252109444.png


See? 🤣
 
Except that he didn't. His role was purely ceremonial.
Bull Fucking Shit!!!!

According to US election laws the VP had the power to send the electors back to the states.
That's why they changed that law after Jan 6 to prevent it from happening in the future.

Here's an article that covers it:

Lawmakers have said over and over that they want to prevent another Jan. 6-style attack on the U.S. Capitol from ever happening again.


It took almost two years, but on Friday, as part of a government spending package, Congress passed the first federal elections legislation to that aim.


The omnibus spending bill includes a section that would reform the Electoral Count Act, a 1887 law that governs the counting of Electoral College votes in Congress.


For years, legal scholars have worried the law was poorly written and in need of clarification, and former President Donald Trump and his allies targeted the law's ambiguities in their attempts to overturn the 2020 election.

 
Ok. Two years of investigation by the Republican run Secretary of State’s office in Georgia. How much more investigation do you want? What would you believe?

In Arizona the investigators (I suppose we could stretch the definition to include the fools) wanted to go door to door and ask every single person who they voted for.

The believers even tried to do that.


You guys are crazier than the Flat Earthers. You just won’t accept any proof.
Are you kidding? What party someone is in has 0 to do with anything. The fraud is the only bipartisan thing our Congress and state legislatures have done for 50 years.
 
Jim Ferguson
@JimFergusonUK

Listen carefully: Trump is about to play an ace card. I don't think the two interviewing Jan Halper-Hayes understand the clever manoeuvring of the Trump team. He can subpoena and call witnesses. Its all about to all come out. "Trump has got the goods" He has the evidence of it all. Nice journalists but coming across as a little bit dim here. This reminds me of Liz Truss trying to deal with Putin. Completely out of their depth. #TrumpArrest

Oh Oh!!!!
 
I did. Can't you read?
This is what you quoted from the article:

Lawmakers have said over and over that they want to prevent another Jan. 6-style attack on the U.S. Capitol from ever happening again.


It took almost two years, but on Friday, as part of a government spending package, Congress passed the first federal elections legislation to that aim.


The omnibus spending bill includes a section that would reform the Electoral Count Act, a 1887 law that governs the counting of Electoral College votes in Congress.


For years, legal scholars have worried the law was poorly written and in need of clarification, and former President Donald Trump and his allies targeted the law's ambiguities in their attempts to overturn the 2020 election.

It says nothing about the Vice-President's duties or powers.

Try again. Grow a brain first.
 
This is what you quoted from the article:



It says nothing about the Vice-President's duties or powers.

Try again. Grow a brain first.
It says that the VP's powers had to be changed. It explains the changes later in the article

Can't you read the article yourself, or are you like my dog Rambo who has to have his face rubbed in it to get him to notice it?
I can see why you're a Democrat because you have a short attention span. You have to be told how to think and what to think.
A typical leftist news tactic. They tell you first what you're supposed to think about the story because you can't figure it out for yourself.
 
It says that the VP's powers had to be changed. It explains the changes later in the article

Can't you read the article yourself, or are you like my dog Rambo who has to have his face rubbed in it to get him to notice it?
I can see why you're a Democrat because you have a short attention span. You have to be told how to think and what to think.
A typical leftist news tactic. They tell you first what you're supposed to think about the story because you can't figure it out for yourself.
Then why aren't you quoting the relevant parts? I'm not chasing articles just because you link to them and want to waste my time.

Quote the part that says that Mike Pence had the authority in January 2021 to send votes back to the states.
 

Forum List

Back
Top