I think De Suza “jumped the shark” long time ago”. Originally Posted by Jackie S
Then you don't think he presented the evidence/ truth "this time", no matter what he may or may not have done in the past which people seem to get hung up on way to easily in my opinion.I certainly agree about the MSM. Hell, it goes all the way back to the “great” Walter Cronkite, who in truth was a liberal progressive and if alive today would be one of the biggest enemies of “anything Trump”.
BTW the entire MSM jumped the shark for over 5 years now Originally Posted by HedonistForever
Then you don't think he presented the evidence/ truth "this time", no matter what he may or may not have done in the past which people seem to get hung up on way to easily in my opinion.... As I already mentioned, they are waiting until
BTW the entire MSM jumped the shark for over 5 years now Originally Posted by HedonistForever
... You want them to trust the same FBI/DOJ
with every attempt to justify your far leftist socialist/communist agenda you prove your "worker's utopia" a false narrative.
thank you valued poster
bahahahahhaaaaaaaa Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
... As I already mentioned, they are waiting until
next year, when the Republicans control the House and
maybe the Senate also - to show everything.
WHY do it now - when puppet Garland can just wick it away.
who told us - along with the fifty (50) Intelligence
people - that the Hunter laptop was false?? ... REALLY?!
Some o' you liberal lads really make me laugh...
You'll surely see the Investigations on this NEXT YEAR.
### Salty Originally Posted by Salty Again
This particular matter simple can't wait till Republicans retake the House because it could darn well de-rail that effort if we just let them cheat with no consequences.
I want this evidence evaluated in a court of law and if the SC says it isn't enough, then it isn't enough but one would have to be deaf dumb and blind not to see what is right in front of them.
Let any one of those people that went to 50 drop boxes at 3 am, make their case that they were merely delivering ballots for family members.
I've heard the argument that because someones phone was "close to the drop box and could have just been passing by, passing by 50 of them"?
They said the technology was so precise it could measure the time that phone was in front of that drop box, not merely passing.
Now the case could be made I imagine that we can't know who all those extra ballots favored defying common sense but OK, you still have massive fraud whether we know who it benefited or not. We don't have to know who robbed a bank to know the bank was robbed and know it was against the law to rob a bank. Originally Posted by HedonistForever
Sounds good to me. A public airing of the information and the methods used to gather it.OAN....just had to admit that they were broadcasting nonsense about election officials in Georgia.
But we already have a problem.
You are assuming an outcome you see as obvious to anyone who isn't deaf, dumb, and blind.
I thought the criteria you just specified applied to the 2020 election. The evidence that has been provided to show the election was "stolen" has been underwhelming at best.
Also, before we start calling "mules" to testify, we need to call the people who claim there are mules to take the stand. So they can tell us, under oath of course, exactly how they arrived at the info/conclusions that they are basing their accusations on.
It seems to me that we need to make sure we're getting the truth.
And you're right, people need to know there are consequences for lying.
Your "deaf, dumb, and blind" comment shows you'll deal with finding out the D'souza film/claims are BS as well as you did to seeing all the BS about the 2020 election being stolen.
Not well.
You saying you'll accept the SC's take is a lie. They've ruled on the election and you still don't accept that.
On a side note, your assumptions of what common sense is, what's "obvious", etc. is totally asinine and self serving. You aren't real big on links because there aren't many factual links that support your brand of BS. I'm looking forward to finding out the details of these claims that come from a convicted felon who invented people to use to funnel illegal campaign money to a friend of his.
Your bank robbery analogy falls short too. There is no evidence of any money missing or signs of "breaking and entering" other than in your head. It's only obvious to Trumpys. Originally Posted by VerySkeptical
