Parler App

[Monkey Pox]

Why would you use numbers when you can be diminished with a charge against you rather than what you wrote? BTW, you left off that Obama won twice as many counties as Biden and yet Biden (that popular figure we all know) beat Obama's total voter count soundly by extremely high votes due to 5 counties? Unlike the immune system of the Repub side that went to the polls for verification, Covid was a deadly death threat for Biden voters. I think the end tally was slightly under 17% of the counties Biden won. No question and fully understandable why some people could have questions, but within the "process" only the results matter. You may notice that in attacks to your numbers..should the numbers be of interest.

The real question in going forward is there any interest in preventing the potential fraud so that everyone is satisfied and if not...why not and by who? Those that feel Biden won should welcome more things to prove there exists an interest going forward absent fraud accusations. Those that don't believe Biden won and see a lot of effort to ensure fraud will not take place in the future should have an easier time swallowing any pill of defeat. You would think both sides would want this, but they don't...which too ties into the "process" in enacting the visions. Instead, you will most likely get a deflection stating something like this was the most secure election in history and that deflection if not accepted will polarize teh country even more.

There is a common bond between both sides of the aisle, and that is no investigation into their wealth...

First let’s see some legitimate cases of widespread voter fraud before we entertain your spineless conspiracy theories that produced an attempted overthrow of our government.

Remember it wasn’t that long again the trump commission disbanded due to the lack of finding widespread fraud.

Report: Trump commission did not find widespread voter fraud

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — The now-disbanded voting integrity commission launched by the Trump administration uncovered no evidence to support claims of widespread voter fraud, according to an analysis of administration documents released Friday...

apnews.com

 

[tjreese]

First let’s see some legitimate cases of widespread voter fraud before we entertain your spineless conspiracy theories that produced an attempted overthrow of our government.

Remember it wasn’t that long again the trump commission disbanded due to the lack of finding widespread fraud.

Report: Trump commission did not find widespread voter fraud

PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — The now-disbanded voting integrity commission launched by the Trump administration uncovered no evidence to support claims of widespread voter fraud, according to an analysis of administration documents released Friday...

apnews.com

fully understand since I can't see that gravity thing either people have talked about.

 

[BoilerMadness]

Pretty much agree with your response. Here is another example of why this stuff really irks even reasonably intelligent people. I am working as a consultant on a legal case invoiving the Marriott Vacation Club. It's a long story, but when it changed to a points system it basically imho stole the fixed time share weeks from tens of thousands of people. It's a very elegant $3-4 billion white collar crime. Once we challenged this, in short order Marriott got a couple of state legislators in FL, where all the timeshare companies are domicled, to push through some changes to FL timeshare law that is going to make challenging this very difficult. When pressed, the guys who sponsored the legislation have admitted the really had no understanding of what they pushed through.

Upon doing some digging, these two guys and other FL legislators have pretty much been in Marriott's pocket for a long time. Now today, with much fanfare, Marriott comes out with its "values' based stand" on these campaign donations but apparently Marriott does not have any problem greasing these FL republican state legislators so it can continue to steal from its timeshare owners. This is why people like me find what's going on very difficult to tolerate. It's also a matter of public record, that the four Marriott execs who created this saw their comp triple in less than 18 months.

Timeshares are a monumental ripoff. If you have one, get out of it ASAP.

You have addressed one of the biggest reasons that I'm becoming a big fan of term limits. Our legislators, both on the State and Federal level have ALL been bought by special interests, so their desires are accommodated, well before ours. I always get a chuckle out of our Congressmen, who bring the Big Tech Oligarchs to the Capital and shake their fingers at them and chastise them before the cameras for our benefit, but everyone in the room realizes it's all political theater. They represent the highest bidder, not their constituents.

 

[bear_down_chicago_89]

Who the Hell is Parker and what has that got to do with anything? I was talking about three years of Dem & MSM ranting about Trump & Russian Collusion, WHICH DIDN'T EXIST, but you never let the facts get in the way of a good attack.

Good god man .. read. I was talking about PARLER (which this entire thread is about) .... auto-correct flipped it to Parker and I demonstrated the links to the funding of that company to Russia pretty clearly.

 

[bear_down_chicago_89]

You're trying to rationalize biased bad behavior and you're not the least bit convincing.

I will just say your comment here applies more to you than me.

As last week clearly showed, the Orange man is in fact BAD!

 

[Riveting]

Would agree, but it wasn't a close election. It was a "landslide" of greater than 2016 proportions.

Try again.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/18/how-2020-election-was-closer-than-2016/

 

[BuilderBob6]

Both wrong. I'm hearing it was a landslide for trump.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Try again.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/11/18/how-2020-election-was-closer-than-2016/

Oh yeah, the Washington Post. That’s a reputable source. (Am I doing that right?)

It was obviously a dig at Trump’s prior statement. Maybe you knew that. Probably not, though.

My larger point was now that your ilk has shifted away from massive fraud and now you’re talking about all the ways that purported lies swayed the election, as if Trump doesn’t engage in the same thing. You credit him for living up to all his policies - Mexico didn’t pay for the wall, we still have troops overseas, he didn’t bring back manufacturing jobs and restore the 1950s for uneducated white people... That’s why they are all pissed off. Trump’s base has been left behind and is pining for the olden days. That’s not how this shit works. We advance. Christ, Trumpkins were marching the Confederate battle flag through the Capitol! THAT represents who you are. That is what you side with.

Catch up, or risk being marginalized and left behind. Stop crowing for the past.

 

[Crayfish57]

Oh yeah, the Washington Post. That’s a reputable source. (Am I doing that right?)

It was obviously a dig at Trump’s prior statement. Maybe you knew that. Probably not, though.

My larger point was now that your ilk has shifted away from massive fraud and now you’re talking about all the ways that purported lies swayed the election, as if Trump doesn’t engage in the same thing. You credit him for living up to all his policies - Mexico didn’t pay for the wall, we still have troops overseas, he didn’t bring back manufacturing jobs and restore the 1950s for uneducated white people... That’s why they are all pissed off. Trump’s base has been left behind and is pining for the olden days. That’s not how this shit works. We advance. Christ, Trumpkins were marching the Confederate battle flag through the Capitol! THAT represents who you are. That is what you side with.

Catch up, or risk being marginalized and left behind. Stop crowing for the past.

And you voted for a 78 year old man with dementia, I wouldn't be bragging much fatboy

 

[Riveting]

Oh yeah, the Washington Post. That’s a reputable source. (Am I doing that right?)

It was obviously a dig at Trump’s prior statement. Maybe you knew that. Probably not, though.

So when you said you 'would agree' with this statement, except that it was not a close election, you were not telling the truth?

" MSM gave Joe and Harris a free pass from tough questions beyond what flavor of ice cream Joe likes, and blacked out the Hunter PC story and corroboration by a former business associate. In a close election, that was enough to do it."

 

[JHetfield99]

I'm not reading this whole thread, first couple pages were enough, but here's some real good stuff by reknown legit journalist Glenn Greenwald

How Silicon Valley, in a Show of Monopolistic Force, Destroyed Parler

In the last three months, tech giants have censored political speech and journalism to manipulate U.S. politics, while liberals, with virtual unanimity, have cheered.

greenwald.substack.com

 

[Monkey Pox]

And you voted for a 78 year old man with dementia, I wouldn't be bragging much fatboy

Classy. No wonder your party appeals to the domestic terrorists.

 

[Carnival_Barker_for_Truth]

And you voted for a 78 year old man with dementia, I wouldn't be bragging much fatboy

I would rather have a 78 year old with dementia than a paranoid schizophrenic who tried to overthrow the democratically elected government of the country because his feelings were hurt that more people liked the other guy.

As far as the claims of election fraud, the dems wanted to do something on election security post-2016. The GOP decided because it worked for them in 2016 not to engage. You cannot turn around and cry foul when you refused to try and fix the system because you believed it benefited your party. The issues with our electoral system are myriad. HBO had a very interesting documentary a few months ago, namely Kill Chain. The ease at which hackers at Def Con were able to gain access and control voting machines that are supposedly air gapped was rather alarming.

 

[Riveting]

I would rather have a 78 year old with dementia than a paranoid schizophrenic who tried to overthrow the democratically elected government of the country because his feelings were hurt that more people liked the other guy.

You believe Trump tried to overthrow the government?

 

[tjreese]

I'm not reading this whole thread, first couple pages were enough, but here's some real good stuff by reknown legit journalist Glenn Greenwald

How Silicon Valley, in a Show of Monopolistic Force, Destroyed Parler

In the last three months, tech giants have censored political speech and journalism to manipulate U.S. politics, while liberals, with virtual unanimity, have cheered.

greenwald.substack.com

Thank you. I had to delay reading for a few minutes due to a conference call that ended, but some very good points are listed.

 

[QuadBoiler]

And you voted for a 78 year old man with dementia, I wouldn't be bragging much fatboy

You know the picture isn't him right? I do enjoy that the people who constantly crow about name calling and showing decency devolve into name calling so easily. You all must really enjoy the view from up on that high horse...

 

[bear_down_chicago_89]

You know the picture isn't him right? I do enjoy that the people who constantly crow about name calling and showing decency devolve into name calling so easily. You all must really enjoy the view from up on that high horse...

It’s pretty funny because what i know of G8 is he is likely one of the most ‘fit’ people on this board.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

So when you said you 'would agree' with this statement, except that it was not a close election, you were not telling the truth?

"MSM gave Joe and Harris a free pass from tough questions beyond what flavor of ice cream Joe likes, and blacked out the Hunter PC story and corroboration by a former business associate. In a close election, that was enough to do it."

You caught me - I don't think that was the difference in the election which Trump lost by 8,000,000 popular votes/80 electoral votes. I was, in fact, lying. I think Trump's complete mismanagement of the country for the last four years, his rhetoric, his sowing of discord, etc. etc. etc. was the difference in the election.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

You know the picture isn't him right? I do enjoy that the people who constantly crow about name calling and showing decency devolve into name calling so easily. You all must really enjoy the view from up on that high horse...

Crayfish doesn't crow about name-calling. That's Riveting. Both are more than willing to engage in it. I just laugh at the "fat boy" jokes because these simpletons (1) wouldn't understand comedic irony if it punched them in the face; and (2) don't have the first ****ing clue what my handle means even though they're supposedly Purdue people. Someone calling me "fat boy" is just... the best.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

You believe Trump tried to overthrow the government?

I don't think Trump personally tried to, but he did incite violence, and if by some cataclysmic turn of events his supporters had managed to overthrow the government, Trump would've happily played along as Supreme Leader for Life. I do not - not for one second - believe that Trump values American Democracy over his own power and ego.

 

[Carnival_Barker_for_Truth]

You believe Trump tried to overthrow the government?

No, of course not, he just riled up a mob and pointed it at the capital with the expectation that they would visit the capital and have a nice coffee klatch where his supporters and congress would have a spirited exchange of ideas about electoral reforms . . . Trump knew exactly what buttons he was pushing and what he wanted the crowd to do. Just because he did not put his wish into a simple declarative sentence does not mean it was not his intent. Spend two seconds looking at any of the reporting about why all the living former defense secretaries felt it was necessary to put out a letter making clear the military had no role in US elections. Clue, it was because Dick Cheney and his former deputy were both hearing reports that Trump was leaning on the military to intervene. Whatever else you want to say about Dick Cheney, he is not a weak kneed liberal. He gave the order to shoot down a passenger airliner with 40 American citizens onboard on 9/11, and he was worried about the threat Trump represented to the country.

Plus, spare me the he is trying to enforce his legal rights. He has brought 64 cases. He has lost all but one. You cannot tell me that 64 bites at the apple is not sufficient legal due process. Nobody else would get 1/10 as many chances. If there was fraud on a scale sufficient to change the outcome of the election, it would have surely come to light in the last two months. What is being alleged would require hundreds if not thousands of people. Our government cannot keep secret the name of the dog that went on the Bin Laden raid for 24 hours, but a group of people wants to believe that a group that size could avoid detection for months. Give me a break. It is one thing to have an open mind. It is a completely different thing to engage in willful suspension of disbelief.

 

[Crayfish57]

I would rather have a 78 year old with dementia than a paranoid schizophrenic who tried to overthrow the democratically elected government of the country because his feelings were hurt that more people liked the other guy.

As far as the claims of election fraud, the dems wanted to do something on election security post-2016. The GOP decided because it worked for them in 2016 not to engage. You cannot turn around and cry foul when you refused to try and fix the system because you believed it benefited your party. The issues with our electoral system are myriad. HBO had a very interesting documentary a few months ago, namely Kill Chain. The ease at which hackers at Def Con were able to gain access and control voting machines that are supposedly air gapped was rather alarming.

Carnival Barker For Truth, not even sure where to start with that crap.Leftist like you do create a carnival like atmosphere of frivolity. It is really fun to watch

Classy. No wonder your party appeals to the domestic terrorists.

No wonder side appeals to absolute pussys that have nothing to say except here. You are just delusional. I love it ! Every post you make just shows what a group of idiots leftist are.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

It is a completely different thing to engage in willful suspension of disbelief.

It's called "Cognitive Dissonance" and it is running rampant with Trump's supporters.

 

[Carnival_Barker_for_Truth]

Carnival Barker For Truth, not even sure where to start with that crap.Leftist like you do create a carnival like atmosphere of frivolity. It is really fun to watch

No wonder side appeals to absolute pussys that have nothing to say except here. You are just delusional. I love it ! Every post you make just shows what a group of idiots leftist are.

Um, yeah, okay. I agreed that there are issues with how our elections are conducted but pointed out that the GOP elected not to engage in meaningful efforts to improve electoral security. Yup, color me a pinko commie.

One small problem, you putz. I have historically probably given more to the GOP and its candidates on an annual basis than you make in a year, and I sit on the advisory committee of a PAC that gives about 75% of its donations to Republicans. So yes, your incredible powers of deduction are bang on just like your reading comprehension skills.

It is rather sad that when facts do not fit your narrative your only option is to call others names. Let me guess, you are one of the rabid Trump followers that have been left behind by a society that is becoming increasingly information based and you are unhappy that women are allowed to have jobs and minorities can have the same opportunities as you. I believe there is a party you are most well suited for membership in, sir. It is called the Taliban.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

not even sure where to start

That's because you lack the mental capacity to produce a cogent debate and simply resort to name calling, "LOL" and other things that must've been prevalent on your personal Parler feed.

 

[bear_down_chicago_89]

I don't think Trump personally tried to, but he did incite violence, and if by some cataclysmic turn of events his supporters had managed to overthrow the government, Trump would've happily played along as Supreme Leader for Life. I do not - not for one second - believe that Trump values American Democracy over his own power and ego.

I’m not sure there’s anything different about ‘overthrowing the government’ or whatever he could do to stay in power. I certainly believe he was willing to do whatever he could to stay in office.

Luckily he doesn’t have anybody sane or smart working with him on this. Rudy is on tape at 7pm that night (after the riots) trying to get senators to object in order to ‘buy more time’. Who knows what they were actually thinking about trying.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Um, yeah, okay. I agreed that there are issues with how our elections are conducted but pointed out that the GOP elected not to engage in meaningful efforts to improve electoral security. Yup, color me a pinko commie.

One small problem, you putz. I have historically probably given more to the GOP and its candidates on an annual basis than you make in a year, and I sit on the advisory committee of a PAC that gives about 75% of its donations to Republicans. So yes, your incredibly powers of deduction are bang on just like your reading comprehension skills.

It is rather sad that when facts do not fit your narrative your only option is to call others names. Let me guess, you are one of the rabid Trump followers that have been left behind by a society that is becoming increasingly information based and you are unhappy that women are allowed to have jobs and minorities can have the same opportunities as you. I believe there is a party you are most well suited for membership in, sir. It is called the Taliban.

Hey look! Another moderate Republican standing for what's right in the face of Trumpism. Huh. It's like it's a "thing" or something! But yeah, we're "leftists", you and I.

 

[Carnival_Barker_for_Truth]

It's called "Cognitive Dissonance" and it is running rampant with Trump's supporters.

Respectfully, no, that would suggest that the issue is that they have inconsistent beliefs. That is not my point. My point is that they are willfully ignoring quantitative and empirical fact in favor of their feelings despite the fact that any rational person would see that their feelings are in direct conflict with empirical evidence to the contrary. That is willful suspension of disbelief not cognitive dissonance.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

Respectfully, no, that would suggest that the issue is that they have inconsistent beliefs. That is not my point. My point is that they are willfully ignoring quantitative and empirical fact in favor of their feelings despite the fact that any rational person would see that their feelings are in direct conflict with empirical evidence to the contrary. That is willful suspension of disbelief not cognitive dissonance.

I'd argue there's a lot of both going on. For example, corporations are the answer, maximizing corporate profits is what Capitalism is all about and American Capitalism and a free market is best... until Twitter cancels Trump's account, and Apple and Google take Parler off their app stores. Anti-vaxxers are moron leftists... until the COVID vaccine comes out and now I don't want to take it. I support America and believe in the Constitution... until my candidate loses a free and fair election and then I want to take the government by force.

You can argue that suspension of disbelief has led to widespread cognitive dissonance in the far right: they are taking actions contrary to their baseline ideology because they've been misled and lied to. In other words, not only are they ignoring evidence, they have also suspended their own principles because of it.

 

[Riveting]

No, of course not, he just riled up a mob and pointed it at the capital with the expectation that they would visit the capital and have a nice coffee klatch where his supporters and congress would have a spirited exchange of ideas about electoral reforms . . . Trump knew exactly what buttons he was pushing and what he wanted the crowd to do. Just because he did not put his wish into a simple declarative sentence does not mean it was not his intent. Spend two seconds looking at any of the reporting about why all the living former defense secretaries felt it was necessary to put out a letter making clear the military had no role in US elections. Clue, it was because Dick Cheney and his former deputy were both hearing reports that Trump was leaning on the military to intervene. Whatever else you want to say about Dick Cheney, he is not a weak kneed liberal. He gave the order to shoot down a passenger airliner with 40 American citizens onboard on 9/11, and he was worried about the threat Trump represented to the country.

I was asking because you said he tried to overthrow the government in the post above, and I was surprised to hear a lawyer say that and wondered why. Now you seem to be saying what, you misspoke?

 

[Carnival_Barker_for_Truth]

I'd argue there's a lot of both going on. For example, corporations are the answer, maximizing corporate profits is what Capitalism is all about and American Capitalism and a free market is best... until Twitter cancels Trump's account, and Apple and Google take Parler off their app stores. Anti-vaxxers are moron leftists... until the COVID vaccine comes out and now I don't want to take it. I support America and believe in the Constitution... until my candidate loses a free and fair election and then I want to take the government by force.

You can argue that suspension of disbelief has led to widespread cognitive dissonance in the far right: they are taking actions contrary to their baseline ideology because they've been misled and lied to. In other words, not only are they ignoring evidence, they have also suspended their own principles because of it.

Yes, I agree that both are present in large quantities in what passes for today's GOP. However, in the context of my specific point, I was referring to the willingness to believe things that can only be true if you disregard all the evidence to the contrary. Sorry, didn't appreciate you were making a more general point.

I fully agree with the issues your raise in para 1. It is one of the things that p*sses me off most about what the GOP has become under Trump. There has always cognitive dissonance in both parties' views (e.g. supporting the death penalty but being against abortion and vice versa), but today's GOP takes it to an insane level. The only thing that annoys me more are the clowns that carry around their pocket Constitution and wave it around as a prop but lack even a basic understanding of its construct or how it works (See generally, all the folks screaming about freedom of speech w/r/t to Twitter; when the relevant amendment starts "Congress shall make no law" it does not take a Blackstone to understand that its application is limited to government actors not private actors.)

 

[Riveting]

Crayfish doesn't crow about name-calling. That's Riveting. Both are more than willing to engage in it. I just laugh at the "fat boy" jokes because these simpletons (1) wouldn't understand comedic irony if it punched them in the face; and (2) don't have the first ****ing clue what my handle means even though they're supposedly Purdue people. Someone calling me "fat boy" is just... the best.

I don't remember calling you any childish names (correct me if I did and I will apologize), but I did fall for your clever ruse about your handle by calling you couch guy (but not fat boy) because I don't know anything about Purdue even though I'm a grad. Will you ever share that special knowledge you have of Purdue?

I could now start calling you a liar since you admitted it, but I appreciate that you admitted you are a liar so I see no need to belabor it.

 

[Carnival_Barker_for_Truth]

I was asking because you said he tried to overthrow the government in the post above, and I was surprised to hear a lawyer say that and wondered why. Now you seem to be saying what, you misspoke?

Umm . . . no, the first sentence is called sarcasm. Yes, I think there is a colorable basis for asserting a charge of insurrection but not treason or conspiracy to commit insurrection because the necessary elements are not satisfied. See 18 USC 2383 ("Whoever incites . . . rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof . . . shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States"). If advocating the use of force to prevent Congress from performing a constitutionally mandated function does not constitute rebellion against the authority of the United State I am not sure anything can ever reach that level. Is it a slam dunk? No. What constitutes protected speech is only a slightly less tortured area of Supreme Court jurisprudence than 4th Amendment exceptions. The fact that the relevant speech is political speech cuts against the government, but the imminent incitement to violence doctrine applies to political speech. But would I put my money on a reasonably competent mid-level prosecutor being able to make the case stick, yes. There is a reason Pat Cipollone was advising staff to stay away from the President last Wednesday to avoid a possible charge of insurrection.

 

[Riveting]

Umm . . . no, the first sentence is called sarcasm. Yes, I think there is a colorable basis for asserting a charge of insurrection but not treason or conspiracy to commit insurrection because the necessary elements are not satisfied. See 18 USC 2383 ("Whoever incites . . . rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof . . . shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States"). If advocating the use of force to prevent Congress from performing a constitutionally mandated function does not constitute rebellion against the authority of the United State I am not sure anything can ever reach that level. Is it a slam dunk? No. But would I put my money on a reasonably competent mid-level prosecutor being able to make the case stick, yes.

Ok, sorry, I misunderstood. What really threw me were the words, 'who tried to overthrow the democratically elected government of the country.' I thought that odd since Trump is at the head of the government you seemed to be saying he tried to overthrow.

There is another guy in this thread who has admitted being a liar, so I was being vigilant and became concerned after you made that statement that you are not really an attorney. Glad it was just sarcasm because it is useful and interesting to have an attorney weigh in at times.

 

[Bethboilerfan]

You caught me - I don't think that was the difference in the election which Trump lost by 8,000,000 popular votes/80 electoral votes. I was, in fact, lying. I think Trump's complete mismanagement of the country for the last four years, his rhetoric, his sowing of discord, etc. etc. etc. was the difference in the election.

And why the Democrats won Georgia

 

[Carnival_Barker_for_Truth]

Ok, sorry, I misunderstood. What really threw me were the words, 'who tried to overthrow the democratically elected government of the country.' I thought that odd since Trump is at the head of the government you seemed to be saying he tried to overthrow.

There is another guy in this thread who has admitted being a liar, so I was being vigilant and became concerned after you made that statement that you are not really an attorney. Glad it was just sarcasm because it is useful and interesting to have an attorney weigh in at times.

Got it. No, the first sentence of my response to your question was sarcasm. Sorry, I was mixing legal meanings with common usage. I was using government in the legal sense of all branches of government not just the executive. Attempting to prevent the duly elected Congress from performing a role that is unambiguously granted to it under the Constitution constitutes an attempt to subvert a co-equal branch in its exercise of its power, which in the general sense is attempting to overthrow the duly elected government by preventing a branch from discharging its power. More precisely, I think his actions constitute a facial case for insurrection. Whether there are countervailing 1st amendment considerations applicable here is less clear. The USSC's 1st Amendment jurisprudence w/r/t speech is not linear, and there are competing doctrines that would apply here. The short time period between his speech and what happened supports the application of imminent incitement to violence as an exception to the 1st Amendment, but political speech is the most protected speech under the 1st Amendment so when you toss in the speaker was the President it is far from a slam dunk.

 

[BoilerJS]

You quote the MSM as being fake and then talk about Mark Levin. Interesting take.

Barr became Trump's personal lawyer. Why do all of you not believe our intelligence agencies but believe a guy that spent four years dealing in "alternative facts"

Levin calls for McConnell to be REPLACED after he congratulated Biden for win

CONSERVATIVE host Mark Levin has called for Mitch McConnell to be replaced after he congratulated Joe Biden for beating Donald Trump. The Kentucky Republican broke his silence on the Democrat’…

www.thesun.co.uk

Levin actually interviews people on his show.
Barr was on his show for a very informative interview. It lasted the whole hour and he talked about the Durham Investigation, Hunter Biden, the upcoming election and Trump.
This was before the election fyi.
Levin doesn't put words in peoples mouths, he lets them talk.
He has had an all star cast of politicians, intelligence agency officials, persons in academia and heads of State on his show.
His opinion pieces are opinionated but his interviews are not.
He is a constitutionalist.
Keep watching Rachel Maddow for your information.

 

[Riveting]

Respectfully, no, that would suggest that the issue is that they have inconsistent beliefs. That is not my point. My point is that they are willfully ignoring quantitative and empirical fact in favor of their feelings despite the fact that any rational person would see that their feelings are in direct conflict with empirical evidence to the contrary. That is willful suspension of disbelief not cognitive dissonance.

My concerns are completely allayed after reading that 'My point' sentence.

Yes, you must be an attorney, Barker Esq!

 

[BoilerJS]

Just so much hypocrisy. Riots, burning, looting and shooting cops for months and months in multiple sites and there is crickets and some saying it is okay and needed, in government positions. Same people see riots for a couple of hours in one day where royalty spends a few days out of the year and now speak out…correctly, but now speak out. People blame Trump for inciting crowds and making people do what they think Trump wants passing the buck on those really responsible. Obama fans the fires of Ferguson and crickets again. Mueller’s report on Russian collusion full coverage every day in multiple sites, and yet Muller doesn’t even know what is in it, and then we find out projection in the dems did what they projected on Trumps people. It is so confusing I’m still trying to figure out why the Nuremberg trials, none of those people were responsible (and used as a defense)…it was only Hitler as I'm told, and in that case “he” really did have the power of threat with lives rather than Trump with zero threat power. Herd thought doesn’t stop there…you have intersectionality where herd size is reduced, but still herd mentality hopeful that nobody thinks enough about it to realize the only logical conclusion is the individual. There are other examples, but why would those convey more than just stated?

Then you mention something that you would think all would care… something that everyone on each side of the aisle that says they want the best for this country should be interested in how those people in the gov. grow rich by selling out the country and crickets… I’m not saying we fell out of the stupid tree and hit every branch, but we clearly hit a lot on our way down.

If people don't think the Dems stirred the racial justice BLM movement go back and listen to Obama after Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown or Eric Garner.
How about his 2015 speech in South Carolina or his invitation of the BLM gang to a dinner in the White House,
shortly after they marched the streets calling for cops to be fried like bacon.
Listen to Maxine Waters speech to BLM members where she calls them to attack the right in Walmart, at the gas stations or in restaurants.
How about Harris nd her remarks about there should be protests in the streets and than she said riots are a way for those suppressed to be heard.
Nadler and Biden have also make provocative racial remarks.

 

[Crayfish57]

Um, yeah, okay. I agreed that there are issues with how our elections are conducted but pointed out that the GOP elected not to engage in meaningful efforts to improve electoral security. Yup, color me a pinko commie.

One small problem, you putz. I have historically probably given more to the GOP and its candidates on an annual basis than you make in a year, and I sit on the advisory committee of a PAC that gives about 75% of its donations to Republicans. So yes, your incredible powers of deduction are bang on just like your reading comprehension skills.

It is rather sad that when facts do not fit your narrative your only option is to call others names. Let me guess, you are one of the rabid Trump followers that have been left behind by a society that is becoming increasingly information based and you are unhappy that women are allowed to have jobs and minorities can have the same opportunities as you. I believe there is a party you are most well suited for membership in, sir. It is called the Taliban.

Bullshit