Well, answer the question, did Ashii Babbitt deserved to be “tuned up” as you would say?Slightly different than a gang banging drug dealer with a rap sheet 20 pages long.
Well, answer the question, did Ashii Babbitt deserved to be “tuned up” as you would say?Slightly different than a gang banging drug dealer with a rap sheet 20 pages long.
How is one plaintiff supposed to be in all of those places at once?So, if voter fraud was as serious as y’all said it was, why weren’t the right plaintiffs involved. It’s not hard. What you are saying is bogus.
So, what about the fake electors. Explain away that for us.
What about the fake electors?How is one plaintiff supposed to be in all of those places at once?
What? I have no idea how this relates to what I just wrote.What about the fake electors?
Thanks for answering. As you can imagine I probably don't agree with some of what you wrote but instead of trying to rebut each answer let me ask one follow-up question:Fine, I'll respond.
Do I think he won? Yes. Do I think he won fairly? Fukk no.
Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania are the one's he most likely won. You have to remember that from an electoral side of things, Trump only lost by 40,000 votes. The election was MUCH closer than people here try to make it sound.
There were plenty of Republicans that wanted to get rid of Trump. However, you don't necessarily need Republicans colluding with Democrats. The Covid rule changes opened the door for mass cheating, and that's how Biden won. People on video stuffing ballots into drop boxes in every single swing state at 2 and 3 am proves that there were bad actors. Biden only won Georgia by a little over 11,000 votes for example.
A recount is a recount. What we wanted was a full audit, which never happened.
Yes of course he was, but he was doing so legally. He filed many law suits, most of which were thrown out due to procedural error. Most claimed that the person filing the suit had no basis to do so, which IMO was BS. The few cases that were seen, they won, but the judge would also claim that it wasn't enough to overturn the election because it was something like 400 votes. If all cases had been heard, I think we'd be in a different place. There were many that I think would have gone nowhere, but there were very real area's of voter fraud that never saw it's day in court.
Yes, and he had precedent to do so. What Trump was asking Pence to do was to send the matter back to the state legislatures, so they could look into the matter and see if we needed a re-vote. I watched most of the testimony that was brought to the swing state legislatures and there was a TON of evidence that there was mass wrongdoing.
Trump asked people to go to the Capitol, to have their voices heard peacefully and patriotically. Bad actors, arrived at the Capitol while Trump was still speaking and broke through the barricades. When the people from the Trump rally finally made it to the Capitol, there were already people on the steps by the doors. Bad actors like Epps and many others like the dude in the tower with the bull horn telling people to move up and go into the Capitol. MOST Trump supporters got caught up in the moment, not knowing that they weren't supposed to move up onto the steps.
Who knows what they really believed. I think most knew that their presence did nothing to effect the outcome. They were just there to show support for their President.
No. I think he truly believed he was screwed and wanted to have his cases heard. I do not think he would do anything possible to stay in power, because if he would have, why didn't he? He didn't concede because he believed he was screwed, but ultimately he stepped down, right? It's not like we had to send in the MP's to physically remove him, right? He felt screwed and IMO rightfully so.
I think the most serious accounts of voter fraud is the ballot harvesting. It happened in every swing state. There is video of people stuffing drop boxes with dozens of ballots at a time and they were tracked to over 20 or more drop boxes each. There were over 2,000 people tracked doing this activity over the swing states.Thanks for answering. As you can imagine I probably don't agree with some of what you wrote but instead of trying to rebut each answer let me ask one follow-up question:
Specifically, in your view what are the most credible accusations of voter fraud?
If you could be specific and point to the states it occurred in, I'd appreciate it. This isn't a trick question. I'd just like to do some research to educate myself because the only accusations I have heard about have been either debunked or rendered meaningless by the recounts.
I think the most serious accounts of voter fraud is the ballot harvesting. It happened in every swing state. There is video of people stuffing drop boxes with dozens of ballots at a time and they were tracked to over 20 or more drop boxes each. There were over 2,000 people tracked doing this activity over the swing states.
I highly recommend you actually watch this and see the evidence for yourself, vs reading what the media had to say about it because most of what they media claimed was either false or not what this film was actually saying.
I asked this question about fake electors and you did not answer. It has everything to do with Chump trying to steal the 2020. Do you believe Chump and his consiglieres tried to use fake electors?What? I have no idea how this relates to what I just wrote.
It is always comical when you of all people complain about not answering questions.Well, answer the question, did Ashii Babbitt deserved to be “tuned up” as you would say?
Yeah, I would have shot them all.It is always comical when you of all people complain about not answering questions.
Not speaking for bone, but a small, unarmed woman who was no threat to anyone did not deserve to be tuned up - let alone shot to death. Do you think she deserved either tuning or death?
That's because you're a racist.Yeah, I would have shot them all.
And you call me a sadistic person.Yeah, I would have shot them all.
Even all the FBI informants/agitators?Yeah, I would have shot them all.
Nope, because my life was in danger. Isn’t that how it works?That's because you're a racist.
That officer, who had previously proven himself incompetent by leaving his loaded service revolver in a public restroom, was the only officer who fired a weapon that day, killing an unarmed female.Nope, because my life was in danger. Isn’t that how it works?
I called the Boneman sadistic. But if you also agree that cops should purposely drive erratic and kill a handcuffed person in the back of a police transport, then I reckon you are sadistic.And you call me a sadistic person.
As a Capitol police officer, you ain’t going to know who is an informant let alone an agitator.Even all the FBI informants/agitators?
You called me sadistic. Is it still your position you didn’t?So you are ok with someone getting the crap beat out of them by police and dying for no reason? So you are ok with cops purposely driving erratic killing a hand cuffed dude in the back of the police transport? You, the Boneman and others are some sadistic people.
That’s what I’m saying. If you agree with the Boneman then yes you are sadistic.You called me sadistic. Is it still your position you didn’t?
That’s not what you said. It had nothing to do with agreeing with anyone. It’s ok if that’s your opinion. I’ve been called and thought of a lot worse. I’m a sticks and stones guy.That’s what I’m saying. If you agree with the Boneman then yes you are sadistic.
Nope, it's all about gaming the system. And guess who uses it every chance they can. Could it be? Not the honest Democrats? Noooo!States and parties that allowing ballot harvesting are NOT serious about voter integrity in their state.
Would any posters here like to explain a case for such an abhorrent practice?
Dude, there's other times in history where states have sent two separate sets of electors. If you did any research you'd know this. Stop swallowing the Dem narrative whole.I asked this question about fake electors and you did not answer. It has everything to do with Chump trying to steal the 2020. Do you believe Chump and his consiglieres tried to use fake electors?
How the Trump fake electors scheme became a 'corrupt plan,' according to the indictment
The role fake electors played in Donald Trump’s desperate effort to cling to power after his 2020 election loss is at the center of a four-count indictment against the ex-president.apnews.com
You'd be in federal prison if there was any real justice.Yeah, I would have shot them all.
Nope, it's all about gaming the system. And guess who uses it every chance they can. Could it be? Not the honest Democrats? Noooo!
THIS is why Democrats fight voter ID laws and why Republicans want voter ID laws. Curbs cheating. But if you ask @BNIBoiler he'll tell you that he believes the Democrat narrative that voter ID is about racism. FFS
Could it possibly be because they used all of these things to their advantage? The Dem voters here would have you believe that there's little to no cheating. If that's the case, then why is the Democrat establishment against these things? Shouldn't they also want voter integrity if they are so honest?Several things can mak voting more secure.....among them....
*Voter ID
*NO ballot harvesting allowed
*Purging voter roles of dead and those moved away
And yes, DEMS are against these as they are NOT serious about voter integrity.
Like they say, if you’re not cheating you’re not winning.Could it possibly be because they used all of these things to their advantage? The Dem voters here would have you believe that there's little to no cheating. If that's the case, then why is the Democrat establishment against these things? Shouldn't they also want voter integrity if they are so honest?
Cheating is trying to manufacture 11,000 GA votes.Like they say, if you’re not cheating you’re not winning.
Cheating is Mail in ballots with false signatures and ballot harvesting. Cheating is voting with no ID required.Cheating is trying to manufacture 11,000 GA votes.
Yes it would be. Good thing nobody tried to do that.Cheating is trying to manufacture 11,000 GA votes.
Nice try cult man.Yes it would be. Good thing nobody tried to do that.
NAME THEM AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES!Dude, there's other times in history where states have sent two separate sets of electors. If you did any research you'd know this. Stop swallowing the Dem narrative whole.
He can't and he won't.NAME THEM AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES!
Are you talking about Hawaii?
The cheating was debunked by 60 judges, mostly Chump appointed.Cheating is Mail in ballots with false signatures and ballot harvesting. Cheating is voting with no ID required.
Those judges are probably in on it too. We see nothing. I know of situations personally that cheating occurred. Must be my friends and I were the only people who experienced the cheating that happened.The cheating was debunked by 60 judges, mostly Chump appointed.
If a strong majority of blacks support voter ID laws, why do the dems oppose them? Is it yet another example of dems telling blacks what is good for them, instead of listening to what blacks are telling them? More Dem condescension that you, Uncle Fauxgrad (or 'boy' as Joe would call you), swallow whole because the dems tell you to?Nice try cult man.
First of all voter ID is not so much of an issue anymore. Y’all seem to fixated on voter ID. This actually stated back after the 2008 and 2012 elections where the repubs were quite taken by surprised losing to a black man. It’s not so much voter ID in of itself. It’s the timing of when it all of a sudden became an issue. After Obama was elected president. For various reasons a segment of blacks in the large cities that voted for Obama did not have a state issued ID. Republican strategist smartly capitalized on this and suggested that the GOP make it a requirement in future elections. Prior to 2008, voter ID was never an issue. Sure, most anybody including blacks, myself and even the Dems support voter ID. Just the timing and the targeting is what sucks.If a strong majority of blacks support voter ID laws, why do the dems oppose them? Is it yet another example of dems telling blacks what is good for them, instead of listening to what blacks are telling them? More Dem condescension that you, Uncle Fauxgrad (or 'boy' as Joe would call you), swallow whole because the dems tell you to?
"Despite the racial motivations often underpinning the enactment of voter ID laws, clear majorities across racial and ethnic groups support them. 70% of White respondents support strict voter ID laws, as do 66% of Hispanic respondents, 56% of Black respondents, and 61% of those who did not self-identify as White, Hispanic, or Black."
That was a lot of words to avoid answering the question, which is:First of all voter ID is not so much of an issue anymore. Y’all seem to fixated on voter ID. This actually stated back after the 2008 and 2012 elections where the repubs were quite taken by surprised losing to a black man. It’s not so much voter ID in of itself. It’s the timing of when it all of a sudden became an issue. After Obama was elected president. For various reasons a segment of blacks in the large cities that voted for Obama did not have a state issued ID. Republican strategist smartly capitalized on this and suggested that the GOP make it a requirement in future elections. Prior to 2008, voter ID was never an issue. Sure, most anybody including blacks, myself and even the Dems support voter ID. Just the timing and the targeting is what sucks.
After the 2020 election the repubs found other ways to suppress, not necessarily the black vote but the democrats in general. The repubs changed or try to change voting laws that the democrats enjoyed. Such as absentee, mail in, drop boxes, etc. In GA, in particular they removed drop boxes in the urban areas and added drop boxes in the rural areas.
You argue one way or another that these voting changes were an attempt to make it harder for democrats to vote whether they worked or not. I think it backfired. I do know one thing for sure and it started after one of the Obama elections and again after 2020. The red states either took away or tried to take away Sunday voting. This more so than anything else targeted blacks as black people enjoyed Sunday voting. They called it “Souls to the poles”. GA tried to to remove it after 2020 but caught so much backlash they surprisingly did not go through with it.
No. I just told you. It was a GOP tactic to try and suppress the votes. It has nothing to do with voting integrity. If it did why wasn't it an issue before 2008?That was a lot of words to avoid answering the question, which is:
If a strong majority of blacks support voter ID laws, why do dems oppose them? Is it yet another example of dems telling blacks what is good for them, instead of listening to what blacks are telling them?
Regardless of what type of tactic it was or you think it was, blacks poll a strong majority in favor of voter ID laws. Why don't dems respect and support that, instead of telling blacks to do what dem elites think is good for them.No. I just told you. It was a GOP tactic to try and suppress the votes. It has nothing to do with voting integrity. If it did why wasn't it an issue before 2008?
I support voter ID laws as well as most people in the US, including blacks. However, I don't know if there is a poll but if someone does a poll on the same blacks that were polled as to whether the GOP law changes to add voter ID is a tactic to suppress the votes, most will say yes. But again, please stop saying that the dems tell blacks what to think. That is offensive and not true. So, you are going to have to ask the Dems why they don't support it.Regardless of what type of tactic it was or you think it was, blacks poll a strong majority in favor of voter ID laws. Why don't dems respect and support that, instead of telling blacks to do what dem elites think is good for them.