- Feb 22, 2017
- 104,233
- 35,040
- 2,290
Really, GG? Show me a single hearing where the GOP decided which Democrats sat on the committee?
They did not have any Dems involved at all. Which seems worse
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.
Really, GG? Show me a single hearing where the GOP decided which Democrats sat on the committee?
And I don't know what you're talking about when you claim that nobody was ever put under oath during other hearings...
Because they were barred from participating or because they just chose not to?They did not have any Dems involved at all. Which seems worse
Because they were barred from participating or because they just chose not to?
Show me a single hearing that had no Democrats involved.They did not have any Dems involved at all. Which seems worse
Are you being vague on purpose? What election hearings are you talking about?The election hearings the GOP held after the elections nobody was put under oath. In the first one the Michigan GOP held at the hotel it was asked if they would be put under oath and that person was told they were out of order. I watched it happen live.
How did the minority party hold hearings? Can anyone in Congress just hold a hearing?Because they were not invited to be part of the hearings
Are you being vague on purpose? What election hearings are you talking about?
How did the minority party hold hearings?
Oh these are state legislatures. Not my monkey's not my circus.The Repubs are not the minority party in Georgia, or Michigan or Arizona
Oh these are state legislatures. Not my monkey's not my circus.
So what you're claiming is that in all three there were no Democrats? That in all three witnesses were not under oath? Really, GG?Georgia held one on December 30 2020. In that one a Data analyst said that a individual precinct going more than 75% for one candidate was rare and that a precinct going more than 90% for one candidate was a sure sign of fraud. Then I did some of my own research and found out it is actually pretty common for it to happen in past elections for both Repubs and Dems.
Michigan held one on December 3, 2020. Surely you remember Rudy and his star witness Mellissa Carone? That was also the one where it was asked if people would be sworn in and they were told no.
Az held one on July 15, 2021. That is the one where they had a "expert mathematician" speak...though it turned out he was not an expert nor a mathematician and had no data analysis expertise at all, he was merely a financial planer that they for some reason lied about
So what you're claiming is that in all three there were no Democrats? That in all three witnesses were not under oath? Really, GG?
WE GOT HIM NOW! Part 46,735 in a continuous seriesIt’s also confirmation that Trump engaged in a treasonous coup attempt to overturn a fair and honest election, that Trump allowed the rightwing terrorist attack on America’s democracy to occur, and that Trump did nothing to stop that rightwing terrorist attack.
Another day, another leftist pants-on-fire apparatchik plugging for another alms-collecting traitorous liar.It’s also confirmation that Trump engaged in a treasonous coup attempt to overturn a fair and honest election, that Trump allowed the rightwing terrorist attack on America’s democracy to occur, and that Trump did nothing to stop that rightwing terrorist attack.
She'll end up doing facials on Porn Hub when the libturds drain all the plasma out of hertick tock motherfuckers.
It's going to be delicious.
Half correct. Conservs see what IT IS in true colorsThese days people see what they want.
This is why I put the good word in for ya.I cannot find verification of it, thus I will withdraw the claim.
I'm mostly conservative.Half correct. Conservs see what IT IS in true colors
Like I said half. The other half has problems next yrI'm mostly conservative.
I know better.