Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
1. Stop pointing to only one dirty trick, when I listed about 20. You and I both know that there are many Never-Trumpers around, so they hate Trump even though they are "Republicans".Maybe he wasn't "loyal" to Trump. Nor should any Attorney General or in his case, acting Attorney General, be "loyal" to a president. They should be loyal to the United States. But even if he wasn't loyal, he was still a Republican, not a Democrat. So stop blaming Democrats. He still appointed a Republican, not a Democrat. So stop blaming Democrats. And even though Mueller hired a lot of Democrats to investigate, they still found Trump did not collude with Russia. So stop blaming Democrats.
Good for you. I agree with you, Biden sucks as president. What you need to suck up is Democrats going after Republicans as Republicans go after Democrats. You don't like it? Tough shit. That's how it is. Suck it up.
And right on cue, the rubes are as fired up and engaged as ever. You have to admit, it's a pretty smart plan. If you're not worried about that whole "American democracy as a beacon for the free world" thing.
We call you stupid for a reason.
Spot the disconnect...1. True, the LAW didn't nail Hillary, but it should have. Specifically 18 U.S. Code § 1924, regarding the unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents. Also, it was NOT Comey's call to say she lacked "criminal intent". That should have been investigated by the DOJ.
Some people are apparently more equal than others. If you step into the political ring, you better have really good lawyers. Trump does.
The LAW nailed Hillary...
True, the LAW didn't nail Hillary...
2. I have no problem truly hunting crimes, my problem is with the double standard. Like Hunter's laptop, his "paintings", his no show Burisma job, his $1.5b from China to "invest", etc.
LOLOLOLIf you step into the political ring, you better have really good lawyers. Trump does.
I would refer you to the points raised in the OP.
Overall the lack of credibility undermines everything that they do.
If they actually find anything they would need to send in a competent team to examine it.
Above all auditors are supposed to be fair and open minded. These people are the opposite of that.
So when one side of the spectrum doesn't "feel better" about an election, we're supposed to run recount after recount, and if that doesn't work out for them, it's okay for the aggrieved party to unilaterally hire a partisan audit company which hasn't done this kind of audit before, runs it against the rules of election audits, and is run by a CEO who has pushed election fraud conspiracy theories about that very election for our party?Heaven forbid that be a reason for an audit to begin with.
I mean, after all, what's the point in helping half the country to feel better about our elections.
1. True, the LAW didn't nail Hillary, but it should have. Specifically 18 U.S. Code § 1924, regarding the unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents. Also, it was NOT Comey's call to say she lacked "criminal intent". That should have been investigated by the DOJ.
2. I have no problem truly hunting crimes, my problem is with the double standard. Like Hunter's laptop, his "paintings", his no show Burisma job, his $1.5b from China to "invest", etc.
Some people are apparently more equal than others. If you step into the political ring, you better have really good lawyers. Trump does.
So when one side of the spectrum doesn't "feel better" about an election, we're supposed to run recount after recount, and if that doesn't work out for them, it's okay for the aggrieved party to unilaterally hire a partisan audit company which hasn't done this kind of audit before and runs it against the rules of election audits, and is run by a CEO who has pushed election fraud conspiracy theories about that very election for our party?
Wow, that's....
"Absurd" isn't quite strong enough of an adjective. "Comical", "farcical" and "embarrassing" are close.
Good thing this is almost over.
It shows that they do not know what they are doing. = shamThere are no points raised in the OP.
Except these:
1. The article is from the Guardian which automatically makes it suspicious.
2. The fact that they call it a "sham" tells you what the article will be about.
Next, the article is hardly about Arizona....it is more about what is happening in other states as people become emboldened to actually question their results (how dare they ?).
It does point to one really stupid move on the part of the auditors. Which is well documented and can't be disputed.
I am not on board with the way this is being done, but I would like a good bipartisan review so people can feel better (and some never will....so be it).
However, the Guardian is hardly better than used toilet paper and if you want a credible article you need to look for something that is, at least, from Charmin.
It shows that they do not know what they are doing. = sham
Which candidate was that?Mate, they had one of the defeated candidates doing the recount. FFS how does that work ?
You're just one of their partisan hacks. Old song.
You're just one of their partisan hacks. Old song.
As we say to voter fraud cheaters, "go fuck yourself", we're auditing the votes.
We'll see what the audit finds, if nothing, fine.
1. A special counsel either indicts or he does not indict. Mueller did NOT indict = innocent, period.
2. Everything is political.
3. Elections have consequences.
Not talking out of both sides of my mouth, there never should have been a Mueller Investigation in the first place, there was zero evidence of collusion, even AFTER the FBI illegally spied on Trump.
1. I listed all of the dirty scummy tricks the democrats and deep state used to hurt Trump, from operations crossfire-hurricane, and razor, to the FBI falsifying FISA evidence to illegally spy on Trump, to democrats colluding with Russia for the Steele Dossier, to the faux Muller Investigation, to leakers and whistleblowers, to two bullshit impeachments, to a 95% negative press and their fake news. That democrats hated Trump and always tried to hurt him is a fact.
2. We were discussing Mueller, and you put up a quote about Rosenstein, WTF?
Heaven forbid that be a reason for an audit to begin with.
I mean, after all, what's the point in helping half the country to feel better about our elections.
There are no points raised in the OP.
Except these:
1. The article is from the Guardian which automatically makes it suspicious.
2. The fact that they call it a "sham" tells you what the article will be about.
Next, the article is hardly about Arizona....it is more about what is happening in other states as people become emboldened to actually question their results (how dare they ?).
It does point to one really stupid move on the part of the auditors. Which is well documented and can't be disputed.
I am not on board with the way this is being done, but I would like a good bipartisan review so people can feel better (and some never will....so be it).
However, the Guardian is hardly better than used toilet paper and if you want a credible article you need to look for something that is, at least, from Charmin.
You are the partisan hack.
The FBI did not illegally spy on Trump. The investigation was justified.
1. All of the investigations were justified. The IG confirmed that. The Russians wanted Trump to win. The Steele dossier correctly exposed Russia's attempt to interfere in our elections. A fact that was unknown to Steele at the time. Also it outed a Russian spy working as a diplomat and Russia was eventually forced to recall him. The Mueller investigation was justified. The whistleblowers exposed Trump's corruption. The impeachments were clearly justified. Trump hurt himself and no one else can be blamed.
From the democrat playbook, make the opposition look totally UNACCEPTABLE.
Trump did not collude with Russia, just ask the Mueller Commission.
The voter fraud audits are still in-progress.
We can make democrats look worse than the MSM can make Republicans look, so we win more voters, you'll see in 2022 and 2024. This is not even looking at "Heels up" Kamala, who will be their nominee in 2024.
Call Xiden Putin's Whore (for giving him a cash cow in Nord Stream 2)
Call democrats lawless criminals (who want to defund the police)
Call Xiden a criminal for his open borders policies, (he needs to be impeached)
Call Xiden for his violation of the emoluments clause (for Hunter's "art" sales)
Call Xiden ineffective for his mismanagement of covid and the delta variant
Call Xiden a senile POS for his frequent gaffes
Call Xiden failing, for his falling up the stairs (remember when the MSM made fun of Trump for walking down a slippery ramp too slowly?)
