- Messages
- 20,654
- Location
- Springfield
democRATs dont like that their criminal theft of the election has been exposed. This reminds me of Stalanist and Maoist purges from history books. This will end in massive bloodshed.
democRATs dont like that their criminal theft of the election has been exposed. This reminds me of Stalanist and Maoist purges from history books. This will end in massive bloodshed.
Like the property you rent
The Federalist? Sorry. Try the NY Times. Washington Post. A credible news agency
He never cared about the truth, only posturing.The Federalist? Sorry. Try the NY Times. Washington Post. A credible news agency
Sorry Sea, you're not gonna get the truth out of those people.
He never cared about the truth, only posturing.The Federalist? Sorry. Try the NY Times. Washington Post. A credible news agency
Sorry Sea, you're not gonna get the truth out of those people.
Rougly 60 lawsuits lost by Trump because of the lack of evidence? How can you keep denying the truth?If that would have happened, then the same would apply. It is all imaginary, but if it would be true I would also call for the guilty to be punishedYou mean America doesn't allow a stolen election to not proceed.... lulz
It did happen.
Dude, roughly 60 lawsuits are lost by Trump.... Do you think a judge decides based on anything else than evidence? It's proven. False claims by a lying bastard.democRATs dont like that their criminal theft of the election has been exposed. This reminds me of Stalanist and Maoist purges from history books. This will end in massive bloodshed.
What is crazy to me, is they dont want to investigate the fraud til after Joe gets in, yet they are quickly trying to get Trump out. Makes sense to me, that fraud investigating is more important.
Rougly 60 lawsuits lost by Trump because of the lack of evidence? How can you keep denying the truth?If that would have happened, then the same would apply. It is all imaginary, but if it would be true I would also call for the guilty to be punishedYou mean America doesn't allow a stolen election to not proceed.... lulz
It did happen.
Whether you like it or not, it is proven to be a false claim. Multiple times.
Why would it not be worth investigating? The event was severe enough...The OP is completely meaningless posturing as no one has been convicted of anything so far. The courts will laugh at it and toss it out so it is just posturing for the low IQ set. Just another attempt at nonsense spin.
Whatever would have happened, the "conspiracy theorists" had thought of something. The lawsuits are lost, that's what counts. In a civilized country like america that is enough.Rougly 60 lawsuits lost by Trump because of the lack of evidence? How can you keep denying the truth?If that would have happened, then the same would apply. It is all imaginary, but if it would be true I would also call for the guilty to be punishedYou mean America doesn't allow a stolen election to not proceed.... lulz
It did happen.
Whether you like it or not, it is proven to be a false claim. Multiple times.
Truthfully, all were rejected on procedural grounds (and about 50 of those suits were not filed by Trump). The merits of the case have never been evaluated by any court so far. I personally doubt there was enough fraud to change the outcome of the election but the proper course wod have been to investigate and then post line by line where the claims were incorrect or factual untrue. Sadly, Dems never wanted to do that and that is what gives the conspiracy theorists air to breath.
Whatever would have happened, the "conspiracy theorists" had thought of something. The lawsuits are lost, that's what counts. In a civilized country like america that is enough.Rougly 60 lawsuits lost by Trump because of the lack of evidence? How can you keep denying the truth?If that would have happened, then the same would apply. It is all imaginary, but if it would be true I would also call for the guilty to be punishedYou mean America doesn't allow a stolen election to not proceed.... lulz
It did happen.
Whether you like it or not, it is proven to be a false claim. Multiple times.
Truthfully, all were rejected on procedural grounds (and about 50 of those suits were not filed by Trump). The merits of the case have never been evaluated by any court so far. I personally doubt there was enough fraud to change the outcome of the election but the proper course wod have been to investigate and then post line by line where the claims were incorrect or factual untrue. Sadly, Dems never wanted to do that and that is what gives the conspiracy theorists air to breath.
What you call "procedural grounds" is still enough. When a court of justice does not even want to start a lawsuit, that's for a reason: NOT wasting time and money
Whatever would have happened, the "conspiracy theorists" had thought of something. The lawsuits are lost, that's what counts. In a civilized country like america that is enough.Rougly 60 lawsuits lost by Trump because of the lack of evidence? How can you keep denying the truth?If that would have happened, then the same would apply. It is all imaginary, but if it would be true I would also call for the guilty to be punishedYou mean America doesn't allow a stolen election to not proceed.... lulz
It did happen.
Whether you like it or not, it is proven to be a false claim. Multiple times.
Truthfully, all were rejected on procedural grounds (and about 50 of those suits were not filed by Trump). The merits of the case have never been evaluated by any court so far. I personally doubt there was enough fraud to change the outcome of the election but the proper course wod have been to investigate and then post line by line where the claims were incorrect or factual untrue. Sadly, Dems never wanted to do that and that is what gives the conspiracy theorists air to breath.
What you call "procedural grounds" is still enough. When a court of justice does not even want to start a lawsuit, that's for a reason: NOT wasting time and money
You are contradicting your earlier claim, that courts some how ruled on the merits of the cases, when they manifestly avoided doing just that. They mostly dismissed them for lack of standing and specifically said they made no evaluation as to the merits of the cases or lack there of.
So your original claim was wrong.
Are you really asking a dipshit like sewage major for a credible response?
Are these pics supposed to vindicate how wrong youve been?
How wrong I been? No Sea, this points out hypocrisy.
You’re like DD. You keep striking out. In other words, completely wrong. Conspiracy therapy hold zero truths.
What conspiracy theory am I striking out on, and you havent told me what Im wrong on.
The plain and simple fact, is that these corrupt politicians, incited violence and destruction all summer, til it came home to bite them on the ass.
Remember when Saddam Hussien first took power and had several baath party members walked out of an auditorium to their deaths?democRATs dont like that their criminal theft of the election has been exposed. This reminds me of Stalanist and Maoist purges from history books. This will end in massive bloodshed.
I am not contradicting my earlier claim, he lost. If a court is not even willing to start a lawsuit, because of "procedural grounds" it simply means that there is no reason to start a lawsuit. That by itself is already enough evidence that the lawsuit would be a waste of timeWhatever would have happened, the "conspiracy theorists" had thought of something. The lawsuits are lost, that's what counts. In a civilized country like america that is enough.Rougly 60 lawsuits lost by Trump because of the lack of evidence? How can you keep denying the truth?If that would have happened, then the same would apply. It is all imaginary, but if it would be true I would also call for the guilty to be punishedYou mean America doesn't allow a stolen election to not proceed.... lulz
It did happen.
Whether you like it or not, it is proven to be a false claim. Multiple times.
Truthfully, all were rejected on procedural grounds (and about 50 of those suits were not filed by Trump). The merits of the case have never been evaluated by any court so far. I personally doubt there was enough fraud to change the outcome of the election but the proper course wod have been to investigate and then post line by line where the claims were incorrect or factual untrue. Sadly, Dems never wanted to do that and that is what gives the conspiracy theorists air to breath.
What you call "procedural grounds" is still enough. When a court of justice does not even want to start a lawsuit, that's for a reason: NOT wasting time and money
You are contradicting your earlier claim, that courts some how ruled on the merits of the cases, when they manifestly avoided doing just that. They mostly dismissed them for lack of standing and specifically said they made no evaluation as to the merits of the cases or lack there of.
So your original claim was wrong.
Who do you mean, There is nobody here called MaxiQueer. Or do you mean @Blazor? Yes, that dude, is really a fucking hypocriteWhatever would have happened, the "conspiracy theorists" had thought of something. The lawsuits are lost, that's what counts. In a civilized country like america that is enough.Rougly 60 lawsuits lost by Trump because of the lack of evidence? How can you keep denying the truth?If that would have happened, then the same would apply. It is all imaginary, but if it would be true I would also call for the guilty to be punishedYou mean America doesn't allow a stolen election to not proceed.... lulz
It did happen.
Whether you like it or not, it is proven to be a false claim. Multiple times.
Truthfully, all were rejected on procedural grounds (and about 50 of those suits were not filed by Trump). The merits of the case have never been evaluated by any court so far. I personally doubt there was enough fraud to change the outcome of the election but the proper course wod have been to investigate and then post line by line where the claims were incorrect or factual untrue. Sadly, Dems never wanted to do that and that is what gives the conspiracy theorists air to breath.
What you call "procedural grounds" is still enough. When a court of justice does not even want to start a lawsuit, that's for a reason: NOT wasting time and money
You are contradicting your earlier claim, that courts some how ruled on the merits of the cases, when they manifestly avoided doing just that. They mostly dismissed them for lack of standing and specifically said they made no evaluation as to the merits of the cases or lack there of.
So your original claim was wrong.
MaxiQueer is wrong about a lot things. Hes the biggest fucking hypocrite on this board.
If law enforcement kicks down the door in a drug dealers home and finds hundreds of pounds of cocaine but lacks a properly formatted warrant does the fact the coke was there in that home suddenly disappear due to this technicality ?I am not contradicting my earlier claim, he lost. If a court is not even willing to start a lawsuit, because of "procedural grounds" it simply means that there is no reason to start a lawsuit. That by itself is already enough evidence that the lawsuit would be a waste of timeWhatever would have happened, the "conspiracy theorists" had thought of something. The lawsuits are lost, that's what counts. In a civilized country like america that is enough.Rougly 60 lawsuits lost by Trump because of the lack of evidence? How can you keep denying the truth?If that would have happened, then the same would apply. It is all imaginary, but if it would be true I would also call for the guilty to be punishedYou mean America doesn't allow a stolen election to not proceed.... lulz
It did happen.
Whether you like it or not, it is proven to be a false claim. Multiple times.
Truthfully, all were rejected on procedural grounds (and about 50 of those suits were not filed by Trump). The merits of the case have never been evaluated by any court so far. I personally doubt there was enough fraud to change the outcome of the election but the proper course wod have been to investigate and then post line by line where the claims were incorrect or factual untrue. Sadly, Dems never wanted to do that and that is what gives the conspiracy theorists air to breath.
What you call "procedural grounds" is still enough. When a court of justice does not even want to start a lawsuit, that's for a reason: NOT wasting time and money
You are contradicting your earlier claim, that courts some how ruled on the merits of the cases, when they manifestly avoided doing just that. They mostly dismissed them for lack of standing and specifically said they made no evaluation as to the merits of the cases or lack there of.
So your original claim was wrong.
Yep, and we'd better get in the dirt and gutter just like them or we'll lose.Remember when Saddam Hussien first took power and had several baath party members walked out of an auditorium to their deaths?democRATs dont like that their criminal theft of the election has been exposed. This reminds me of Stalanist and Maoist purges from history books. This will end in massive bloodshed.
Libs are cheering the beginnings of THAT right here in the cradle of freedom. Pathetic
Remember when Saddam Hussien first took power and had several baath party members walked out of an auditorium to their deaths?democRATs dont like that their criminal theft of the election has been exposed. This reminds me of Stalanist and Maoist purges from history books. This will end in massive bloodshed.
Libs are cheering the beginnings of THAT right here in the cradle of freedom. Pathetic
Yep, and we'd better get in the dirt and gutter just like them or we'll lose.Remember when Saddam Hussien first took power and had several baath party members walked out of an auditorium to their deaths?democRATs dont like that their criminal theft of the election has been exposed. This reminds me of Stalanist and Maoist purges from history books. This will end in massive bloodshed.
Libs are cheering the beginnings of THAT right here in the cradle of freedom. Pathetic
*BOOM*Like the property you rent
He never cared about the truth, only posturing.The Federalist? Sorry. Try the NY Times. Washington Post. A credible news agency
Sorry Sea, you're not gonna get the truth out of those people.