Arizona State Senator Wendy Rogers Launches Petition to Decertify the 2020 Election

The speaker of the house doesn't need to be involved in impeachment hearings. door knocks interest moderate Democrats who would listen if they were given an actual evidence that by knowing that you cheated. as long as you get those Democrats on the board you can get enough votes to open an impeachment hearing. A remote to open impeachment hearing only need two seconds and it's mandatory that the Speaker of the House called the vote.

so if it they had the evidence that they claim they have they could easily open impeachment hearings on Biden

And just who are these "moderate" House Democrats that you're referring to? The House Democrats operate in lock step with the agenda of the DNC, per Pelosi's directives. There aren't any "moderate" democrats that fit your scenario.

I can't remember the last time a House Democrat diverged from the party line on any issue important enough to even be social media newsworthy, nonetheless something as monumental as impeaching a Democrat President who was selected by the DNC. There's not even a snowball's chance in hell of that happening.
 
Last edited:
I don't know if this will work, but anything is worth a try.

---Rogers has led the charge for decertification and a new election and she has been using her large social media platform constantly with powerful messages.---
---President Trump knows I am fighting hard for election integrity, which is why he quoted me twice in the same week.---


The Democrats should send her a contribution. She is calling for throwing out votes she doesn't like and disenfranchising voters.
 
How DARE she challenge the DemocraTaliban!

Has she been thrown off of Facebook, Twitter, YouTube & TikTok yet???
As long as there are guys like you & Wendy Rogers around, Trump will never have a problem finding someone to lick his ass.
 
An AZ election redo you say...the squad would all sync up their periods and go :aargh:then one of Pelosi's plastic surgery implants would pop off.
 
As long as there are guys like you & Wendy Rogers around,
I'm a guy?

And this Wendy chick's a guy?

You Democrats...
Trump will never have a problem finding someone to lick his ass.
Trump's large posterior - as well as the rest of him - has been living in your fevered brain for 5 years now, but what does your TDS have to do with the topic?
 
I'm a guy?

And this Wendy chick's a guy?

You Democrats...

Trump's large posterior - as well as the rest of him - has been living in your fevered brain for 5 years now, but what does your TDS have to do with the topic?
Because it's being attempted in order to curry favor with your boy Trump. That's why.
 
That's rich....The same assholes who've been obstructing, delaying, and withholding subpoenaed material are telling someone else to hurry up.

Yeah, fuck you Jack Sellers.

And what do you know of Wendy Rogers?

Here is one opinion:

Sen. Wendy Rogers spent a decade trying to convince voters to send her to Congress, going so far as to baselessly accuse a Republican rival of having ties to a sex-trafficking ring in 2018. When that didn’t work, she moved from Tempe to a travel trailer in Flagstaff last year, hoping the Legislature would be a springboard to D.C.

Rogers’ campaign was so obnoxious that her now-seatmate, state. Rep. Walter Blackman, a Snowflake Republican and staunch conservative, told the Arizona Capitol Times after the primary election that he would not campaign with her.

“If I don’t agree with the type of representation that she is going to give, based on her history, then, I’m not going to vote for her either,” Blackman said. “The main goal for Wendy Rogers is to get to Congress, and you can put that in your paper.”

Basically, Rogers is state GOP Chairwoman Kelli Ward on steroids.



Now about those sex-trafficing ring charges, the Arizona Supreme Court will decide whether a political candidate can be liable for defaming a third party while attacking a political opponent. That's some hero you have.

Arizona state Sen. Wendy Rogers attacked her opponent — former state Sen. Steve Smith — in multiple advertisements, including a radio commercial that called him a “slimy character whose modeling agency specializes in underage girls and advertises on websites linked to sex trafficking,” the Arizona Capitol Times reported Tuesday.

Rogers campaign’s website — www.slimysteve.com — also said Smith advertises on a website containing pornographic material.


 
And what do you know of Wendy Rogers?

Here is one opinion:

Sen. Wendy Rogers spent a decade trying to convince voters to send her to Congress, going so far as to baselessly accuse a Republican rival of having ties to a sex-trafficking ring in 2018. When that didn’t work, she moved from Tempe to a travel trailer in Flagstaff last year, hoping the Legislature would be a springboard to D.C.

Rogers’ campaign was so obnoxious that her now-seatmate, state. Rep. Walter Blackman, a Snowflake Republican and staunch conservative, told the Arizona Capitol Times after the primary election that he would not campaign with her.

“If I don’t agree with the type of representation that she is going to give, based on her history, then, I’m not going to vote for her either,” Blackman said. “The main goal for Wendy Rogers is to get to Congress, and you can put that in your paper.”

Basically, Rogers is state GOP Chairwoman Kelli Ward on steroids.



Now about those sex-trafficing ring charges, the Arizona Supreme Court will decide whether a political candidate can be liable for defaming a third party while attacking a political opponent. That's some hero you have.

Arizona state Sen. Wendy Rogers attacked her opponent — former state Sen. Steve Smith — in multiple advertisements, including a radio commercial that called him a “slimy character whose modeling agency specializes in underage girls and advertises on websites linked to sex trafficking,” the Arizona Capitol Times reported Tuesday.

Rogers campaign’s website — www.slimysteve.com — also said Smith advertises on a website containing pornographic material.


What does that have to do with anything?
 
:auiqs.jpg:
She's just grandstanding for gullible Drumpf supporters.
And you voted for a moron with a drool cup:auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg:
4m6pbm.jpg
 
Osiris-ODS
And just who are these "moderate" House Democrats that you're referring to? The House Democrats operate in lock step with the agenda of the DNC, per Pelosi's directives. There aren't any "moderate" democrats that fit your scenario.

I can't remember the last time a House Democrat diverged from the party line on any issue important enough to even be social media newsworthy, nonetheless something as monumental as impeaching a Democrat President who was selected by the DNC. There's not even a snowball's chance in hell of that happening.
there are those on both sides who listen to reason when confronted with clear evidence.

The issue is that they haven't shown any clear evidence. The so-called audit in Arizona has basically just been a clown show. They refused to allow the news coverage except by extreme far right networks like one America news who are openly trumpist and aren't even remotely unbiased. And they refused to allow any form of third-party verification of their so-called "proof"
 
It would take a constitutional amendment in order to decertify the election. if she wants to write in a minute she's free to do so any state can legally put forth an Amendment to the US Constitution as long as it passes their legislature. But then it has to be ratified by two-thirds of the country and that is not going to happen.

They say they have enough evidence why don't they just impeach Bidenl?
WRONG. She is a state legislator, not Federal. She can only affect Arizona.
 
WRONG. She is a state legislator, not Federal. She can only affect Arizona.
States are allowed to put fourth amendments just like Congress can. it just has to go through the same ratification process and pass at least three-fifths of the states.

There are multiple paths to get amendments passes
 
They haven't been allowed to.
show the multiple judges during Trump's lawsuits to ask them to show evidence and they refused?

the multiple times they were asked to show the evidence they say they were uncovering during the audit and allow it to be independently verified?

they've been given countless opportunities to show concrete evidence and they've either refused or just spouting nonsense that we can't be considered evidence
 

Forum List

Back
Top