What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

I Fear For Justice Thomas’ Life

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
20,711
Reaction score
4,258
Points
290
The Left has been known to stop at nothing.


1.While the Supreme Court as a whole embarrassed itself in refusing to confront the theft of the election, the clear refusal by some swing states, Pennsylvania in particular, to observe the mandates of the US Constitution, the most courageous and conservative, the most brilliant of Justices, Clarence Thomas called out the injustice.
This week he did more, putting his life on the line in confronting the cash cows of the internet. Corrupt individuals will, I fear, not give up their $billions, their control of the dissemination of information without a fight. A bloody fight.



2. Justice Thomas is an originalist, a textualist, and a believer in our God-granted unalienable rights, the single most prominent one being free speech. Thomas called out the control by big tech, and the oligarchs allied with the Democrats/Progressives who have stolen our freedom.

“ On Monday, Justice Clarence Thomas announced that the Supreme Court soon will have to put an end to Big Tech tyranny. Amen. If the high court fails to act, it could mean the end of free speech in the 21st century and the shriveling of our constitutional rights to mere “paper rights” — still there on paper but functionally hollowed out.”
Justice Thomas shows how we can end Big Tech censorship for good



3. Just three unelected power mad Leftists….Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and Jack Dorsey deserves dishonorable mention, control Facebook and Google…..and have the power to disappear every opposing voice in the United States. Even the Commander in Chief.

Justice Thomas correctly claims that the Supreme Court must do what the spineless Republicans didn’t do….reign in this unaccountable tyranny.



4. The totalitarians and their Libertarian go-alongs claim that these are private companies, and government should never impost restrictions on any privately owned endeavors. But there are clear examples that fly in the face of that excise.

“The Skyway was operated and maintained by the City of Chicago until January 2005 when Skyway Concession Company, LLC assumed its operations under a 99-year operating lease. The lease agreement between Skyway and the City of Chicago was the first privatization of an existing toll road in the United States.”
The Skyway – Chicago Skyway

Anyone willing to pay the toll gets to use the skyway.
Who would make the argument that you cannot use that skyway based on your political views?




5. The Big Tech companies are information highways. The aim of these companies should be to increase the amount of information, communication, speech, available…..not just the state version of speech.

Justice Thomas, taking them on, is akin to Mel Gibson’s character in ‘Braveheart,’ shouting FREEDOM!!
Because only Republicans are allowed to cheat like McConnell & Trtump.

McConnell would not consider Garland as per the Constitution.

Trump bribed Kennedy to retire probably by threatening to take down his son with him when his German bank loans are found to be fraudulent.

"McConnell would not consider Garland as per the Constitution."


I certainly can see why someone known as RealDumb would want Garland.



Twitter removed the dozen times he claimed not to know anything.

HAWLEY: Do you believe that illegal entry at America’s borders should remain a crime?

GARLAND: Well, I haven’t thought about that question. I just haven’t thought about that question. I think the president has made clear that we are a country with borders, with a concern about national security. I don’t know of a proposal to decriminalize but still make it unlawful to enter. I just don’t know the answer to that question. I haven’t thought about it.

HAWLEY: Will you continue to prosecute unlawful border crossings?

GARLAND: Well, again, this is a question of allocation of resources. We will … the Department will … prevent unlawful crossing. I don’t know … I have to admit, I just don’t know … what exactly the conditions are and how this is done. I think if … I don’t know what the current program even is with respect to this … so I assume that the answer would be yes but I don’t know what the issues surround it are.








"Merrick Garland defends DOJ nominee Kristen Clarke, who called Blacks superior

Attorney General nominee Merrick Garland defended Kristen Clarke, the attorney tapped to lead the Justice Department’s civil rights division, during a heated exchange with Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, at his confirmation hearing on Monday.” Merrick Garland defends DOJ nominee Kristen Clarke, who called Blacks superior

The fact is that Garland is a moderate. He was also was in his 60s when he was nominated. He would not have been on the court for decades.

I see no need to prosecute people unless they are criminals. Prosecutors have discretion on when they prosecute. Josh Hawley is a right wing fascist. Kristen Clarke is no menace to this country. Even if she does believe this so what. It has nothing to do with what she is being nominated for. Mike4 Lee shows he is a right wing fascist as well,.


"I see no need to prosecute people unless they are criminals."


Not the view of the party you voted for and support.

Let's check.


..... the riots were perpetrated by Biden voters.


And in 'payment,'.....

‘We Will Not Prosecute’: Left-Wing Prosecutors, Many Backed By Soros Cash, Implement Soft-On-Crime Policies Across America

  • Left-wing prosecutors overseeing Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Philadelphia and San Francisco have embraced soft-on-crime approaches, a Daily Caller News Foundation review found.
  • Several top district attorneys vowed not to prosecute specific crimes as a matter of policy.
  • Multiple analyses have shown left-wing prosecutors dropping or diverting more charges than their predecessors.
  • Super PACs backed by billionaire George Soros are major funders for several left-wing prosecutors taking soft-on-crime approaches.



dailycaller.com




‘We Will Not Prosecute’: Left-Wing Prosecutors, Many Backed By Soros Cash, Implement Soft-On-Crime Policies Across America
Left-wing prosecutors have implemented soft-on-crime approaches to criminal justice across America, in some instances making it a matter of policy not to prosecute specific crimes.


dailycaller.com



"Oregon State Police pull out of Portland after prosecutors refuse to prosecute Antifa criminals
What's the point of law enforcement arresting people for committing crimes if county prosecutors are going to give them unlimited get-out-of-jail cards?


The “woke” Democrat-filled government of the city and state have done everything they can to advance the rioting by Antifa and Black Lives Matter “activists” who are committing constant acts of wanton violence and destruction."


"Chicago police worried that prosecutors will drop all charges against vandals, rioters and those who attacked cops

“Criminals took to the street with confidence there would be no consequences. We have to have consequences for the arrests Chicago police officers make.”


Brown continued:

“Not many of those cases [past protests] were prosecuted to the full extent. These looters, these thieves, these criminals being emboldened by (the last of) consequences…emboldened to do more.”


www.lawenforcementtoday.com



Chicago police worried prosecutors will drop all charges against vandals, rioters and those who attacked cops
Prosecutors in the city have a track record of dropping charges against vandals, and now Chicago police are afraid it's about to happen en masse.
www.lawenforcementtoday.com


www.lawenforcementtoday.com




Make a note to yourself, to save time in the future......

...I'm never wrong.

You are always wrong.
 

MadChemist

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2017
Messages
2,345
Reaction score
1,203
Points
940
I Fear For Justice Thomas’ Life

Well that is because are unwell and have crazy paranoid fantasies running through your disturbed head 24/7.

I bet when overweight Thomas dies in about a decade or so you will scream at the internets that your conspiracy theory was proven true, no matter what the official cause of death is.

Interesting prognostication.
 

busybee01

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
20,711
Reaction score
4,258
Points
290
RealDumb: "So, as I always knew, you hate the US Constitutrion (sic)when following it does not fit your agenda"

Me: "Can you quote from your vaunted knowledge of the Constitution to support your point about McConnell and the Republicans? "





I hate to dispute the finest President in a century.....but....RealDumb really is ignorant.

The President appoints USSC Justices and the Senate advises & consents. It says the Senate. Not one man, not the majority leader of the Senate.

"He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, ......."


It doesn't say what the Senate Majority Leader must do, does it.

Can I see your posts objecting to Harry Reid making decisions for the entire Senate?

Democrats held the majority when Thomas was nominated. They could have let it die as they did not have the votes to overcome a filibuster. Yet Democrats allowed a vote. Garland was entitled to a vote. What McConnell did was corrupt.
 

RealDave

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Messages
26,506
Reaction score
3,517
Points
290
Gee.....I simply asked RealDumb to back up his claims......and no one has heard from him since!!!

Has anyone seen a milk carton with his picture on it?????

So what time frame do you demand for a response?


Was 4 minutes OK?
I wasn't the one complaining and having a fit. That was you. I don't care when or if you ever respond as your posts are always so juvenile.


I didn't complain.

I enjoy showing what a dolt you are.

You couldn't find anything in the Constitution that denied the Majority Leader the right to say what comes up for a vote.

If you can......please provide same.



At least you've learned how to spell 'Constitution.'

Say 'thank you.'
So you think it is OK for McConnell to decide to ignore the Constitution. Just as I thought. The Constitution becomes irrelevant when it goes against your Anti-American efforts.


"So you think it is OK for McConnell to decide to ignore the Constitution."

Can you post where the Constitution makes demands on the Majority Leader of the Senate?


No?


Why can't you?


Probably because it says no such thing.
Look dimwit, I posted what the Constitution says.

As Majority Leader, it was McConnell's duty to do what the Constitution says.

Your defense argument of Mitch is so juvenile, illogical, and outright ridiculous.

Constitution says the Senate is to consider, Mitch said fuck the Constitution and you agree.
 

Bush92

GHBush1992
Joined
May 23, 2014
Messages
34,007
Reaction score
9,803
Points
1,330
The Left has been known to stop at nothing.


1.While the Supreme Court as a whole embarrassed itself in refusing to confront the theft of the election, the clear refusal by some swing states, Pennsylvania in particular, to observe the mandates of the US Constitution, the most courageous and conservative, the most brilliant of Justices, Clarence Thomas called out the injustice.
This week he did more, putting his life on the line in confronting the cash cows of the internet. Corrupt individuals will, I fear, not give up their $billions, their control of the dissemination of information without a fight. A bloody fight.



2. Justice Thomas is an originalist, a textualist, and a believer in our God-granted unalienable rights, the single most prominent one being free speech. Thomas called out the control by big tech, and the oligarchs allied with the Democrats/Progressives who have stolen our freedom.

“ On Monday, Justice Clarence Thomas announced that the Supreme Court soon will have to put an end to Big Tech tyranny. Amen. If the high court fails to act, it could mean the end of free speech in the 21st century and the shriveling of our constitutional rights to mere “paper rights” — still there on paper but functionally hollowed out.”
Justice Thomas shows how we can end Big Tech censorship for good



3. Just three unelected power mad Leftists….Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and Jack Dorsey deserves dishonorable mention, control Facebook and Google…..and have the power to disappear every opposing voice in the United States. Even the Commander in Chief.

Justice Thomas correctly claims that the Supreme Court must do what the spineless Republicans didn’t do….reign in this unaccountable tyranny.



4. The totalitarians and their Libertarian go-alongs claim that these are private companies, and government should never impost restrictions on any privately owned endeavors. But there are clear examples that fly in the face of that excise.

“The Skyway was operated and maintained by the City of Chicago until January 2005 when Skyway Concession Company, LLC assumed its operations under a 99-year operating lease. The lease agreement between Skyway and the City of Chicago was the first privatization of an existing toll road in the United States.”
The Skyway – Chicago Skyway

Anyone willing to pay the toll gets to use the skyway.
Who would make the argument that you cannot use that skyway based on your political views?




5. The Big Tech companies are information highways. The aim of these companies should be to increase the amount of information, communication, speech, available…..not just the state version of speech.

Justice Thomas, taking them on, is akin to Mel Gibson’s character in ‘Braveheart,’ shouting FREEDOM!!
The DemNazis were so sure Hillary Rotten Clinton had it rigged that they offed Scalia imo, because they wanted to flip the courts. Also why Obama Bin Spying left 400 plus bench seats unfilled.



It certainly was strange, and unexpected.


But the recent inaction by the Supreme Court per the stolen election seems to indicate that the Wehrmacht....er, Democrats had nothing to worry about.


Best hopes for Thomas, the bravest of the Justices.

There was no stolen election. That is what you wanted the Supreme Court to do.

Clarence Thomas is the craziest of the justices.


…evidence of carefully planned theft of the election.



1. I voted early, and the lines were enormous. On more than one day the lines went as much as five blocks, with lots of people bringing lawn chairs, and settling in for the duration.

Imagine two hypothetical voters..

Voter A is willing to wait on the long line, get up to the ballot and mark the presidential, and then go down the line, usually along party lines. As I did.

Voter B is an apparatchik of the Bolshevik Democrat apparatus, there for one reason: to do what he had been instructed to do to purloin the election for Biden. This individual need to fill in tons of ballots, and doesn’t plan to spend a great deal of time on each one. It’s quantity, not quality.



2. Person B is essentially a spy for the Democrats, which is fitting as their presidential candidate has been bought and paid for by a foreign government.



3. Here comes the circumstantial/mathematical evidence, specifically from the Georgia election: how do you explain 95,000 votes with only Biden marked…..the rest of the Democrat candidates for office ignored?
Only one way: the Democrat agent was sent in to win the election for Biden, and spent no time on any other aspirant.





4. “In most elections, the majority of votes are cast “down the ticket” – meaning, a voter supports both party’s presidential nominee and state Congressional candidates. In fact, according to Pew Research, “overwhelming shares of voters who are supporting Trump and Biden say they are also supporting the same-party candidate for Senate.”

Typically, this means that that the number of votes for a presidential candidate and that party’s Senate candidates are relatively close. …the number of votes cast for Joe Biden far exceeds those cast for that state’s Senate candidates in swing states, while those cast for Trump and GOP Senators remains far closer.

In Georgia, there was an 818 vote difference between Trump and the GOP Senator, vs. a 95,000 difference between Biden and the Democratic candidate for Senator.” Why Does Biden Have So Many More Votes Than Democrat Senators In Swing States?









In Michigan, for example, there was a difference of just 7,131 votes between Trump and GOP candidate John James, yet the difference between Joe Biden and Democratic candidate Gary Peters was a staggering 69,093.



www.theburningplatform.com

Why Does Biden Have So Many More Votes Than Democrat Senators In Swing States?
Via ZeroHedge In most elections, the majority of votes are cast “down the ticket” – meaning, a voter supports both party’s presidential nominee and state Congressional candi…
www.theburningplatform.com

There were no extra votes cast. The number of votes cast were approximately the same as the number of voters. You are the one who is programmed.

You think you can slander people because they don't agree with you. You are spreading misinformation provided by Putin you Bolshevik.

What you describe is interesting but it is not proof of anything. The US Attorneys were instructed to look for voter fraud. The AG said there was no evidence of fraud that would have changed the election. There are no mathematics involved.
Mail-in ballots are untraceable and we're only created to stuff ballot drop boxes and steal elections.

Not true.
For example, OR has switched to mail in ballots only for almost a decade because they automatically allow for address and name verification.
Why are Democratic Party operatives allowed to collect ballots and "harvest" them from public housing projects and apartment complexes and deliver them days later? Who tracks this process? During the shutdowns people went to the grocery store and post office. They can go to the poll, show a fucking ID and vote.
 

Bush92

GHBush1992
Joined
May 23, 2014
Messages
34,007
Reaction score
9,803
Points
1,330
RealDumb: "So, as I always knew, you hate the US Constitutrion (sic)when following it does not fit your agenda"

Me: "Can you quote from your vaunted knowledge of the Constitution to support your point about McConnell and the Republicans? "





I hate to dispute the finest President in a century.....but....RealDumb really is ignorant.

The President appoints USSC Justices and the Senate advises & consents. It says the Senate. Not one man, not the majority leader of the Senate.

"He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, ......."


It doesn't say what the Senate Majority Leader must do, does it.

Can I see your posts objecting to Harry Reid making decisions for the entire Senate?

Democrats held the majority when Thomas was nominated. They could have let it die as they did not have the votes to overcome a filibuster. Yet Democrats allowed a vote. Garland was entitled to a vote. What McConnell did was corrupt.
Garland was on the ballot in 2016 and was rejected by the voters.
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
106,950
Reaction score
41,640
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Gee.....I simply asked RealDumb to back up his claims......and no one has heard from him since!!!

Has anyone seen a milk carton with his picture on it?????

So what time frame do you demand for a response?


Was 4 minutes OK?
I wasn't the one complaining and having a fit. That was you. I don't care when or if you ever respond as your posts are always so juvenile.


I didn't complain.

I enjoy showing what a dolt you are.

You couldn't find anything in the Constitution that denied the Majority Leader the right to say what comes up for a vote.

If you can......please provide same.



At least you've learned how to spell 'Constitution.'

Say 'thank you.'
So you think it is OK for McConnell to decide to ignore the Constitution. Just as I thought. The Constitution becomes irrelevant when it goes against your Anti-American efforts.


"So you think it is OK for McConnell to decide to ignore the Constitution."

Can you post where the Constitution makes demands on the Majority Leader of the Senate?


No?


Why can't you?


Probably because it says no such thing.
Look dimwit, I posted what the Constitution says.

As Majority Leader, it was McConnell's duty to do what the Constitution says.

Your defense argument of Mitch is so juvenile, illogical, and outright ridiculous.

Constitution says the Senate is to consider, Mitch said fuck the Constitution and you agree.


Exactly.....and nothing in that post mandated the Majority Leader's actions.


Did you want to try again?
 

RealDave

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Messages
26,506
Reaction score
3,517
Points
290
Gee.....I simply asked RealDumb to back up his claims......and no one has heard from him since!!!

Has anyone seen a milk carton with his picture on it?????

So what time frame do you demand for a response?


Was 4 minutes OK?
I wasn't the one complaining and having a fit. That was you. I don't care when or if you ever respond as your posts are always so juvenile.


I didn't complain.

I enjoy showing what a dolt you are.

You couldn't find anything in the Constitution that denied the Majority Leader the right to say what comes up for a vote.

If you can......please provide same.



At least you've learned how to spell 'Constitution.'

Say 'thank you.'
So you think it is OK for McConnell to decide to ignore the Constitution. Just as I thought. The Constitution becomes irrelevant when it goes against your Anti-American efforts.


"So you think it is OK for McConnell to decide to ignore the Constitution."

Can you post where the Constitution makes demands on the Majority Leader of the Senate?


No?


Why can't you?


Probably because it says no such thing.
Look dimwit, I posted what the Constitution says.

As Majority Leader, it was McConnell's duty to do what the Constitution says.

Your defense argument of Mitch is so juvenile, illogical, and outright ridiculous.

Constitution says the Senate is to consider, Mitch said fuck the Constitution and you agree.


Exactly.....and nothing in that post mandated the Majority Leader's actions.


Did you want to try again?
You are just plain ignorant. The US Constitution gave the US Senate a duty. Did it follow it? No. Who determined that? McConnell.
 

RealDave

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Messages
26,506
Reaction score
3,517
Points
290
RealDumb: "So, as I always knew, you hate the US Constitutrion (sic)when following it does not fit your agenda"

Me: "Can you quote from your vaunted knowledge of the Constitution to support your point about McConnell and the Republicans? "





I hate to dispute the finest President in a century.....but....RealDumb really is ignorant.

The President appoints USSC Justices and the Senate advises & consents. It says the Senate. Not one man, not the majority leader of the Senate.

"He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, ......."


It doesn't say what the Senate Majority Leader must do, does it.

Can I see your posts objecting to Harry Reid making decisions for the entire Senate?

Democrats held the majority when Thomas was nominated. They could have let it die as they did not have the votes to overcome a filibuster. Yet Democrats allowed a vote. Garland was entitled to a vote. What McConnell did was corrupt.
Garland was on the ballot in 2016 and was rejected by the voters.
So why wasn't Barrett put up for a vote? Can't wait for the answer & stupid excuse you will give.
 

RealDave

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Messages
26,506
Reaction score
3,517
Points
290
The Left has been known to stop at nothing.


1.While the Supreme Court as a whole embarrassed itself in refusing to confront the theft of the election, the clear refusal by some swing states, Pennsylvania in particular, to observe the mandates of the US Constitution, the most courageous and conservative, the most brilliant of Justices, Clarence Thomas called out the injustice.
This week he did more, putting his life on the line in confronting the cash cows of the internet. Corrupt individuals will, I fear, not give up their $billions, their control of the dissemination of information without a fight. A bloody fight.



2. Justice Thomas is an originalist, a textualist, and a believer in our God-granted unalienable rights, the single most prominent one being free speech. Thomas called out the control by big tech, and the oligarchs allied with the Democrats/Progressives who have stolen our freedom.

“ On Monday, Justice Clarence Thomas announced that the Supreme Court soon will have to put an end to Big Tech tyranny. Amen. If the high court fails to act, it could mean the end of free speech in the 21st century and the shriveling of our constitutional rights to mere “paper rights” — still there on paper but functionally hollowed out.”
Justice Thomas shows how we can end Big Tech censorship for good



3. Just three unelected power mad Leftists….Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and Jack Dorsey deserves dishonorable mention, control Facebook and Google…..and have the power to disappear every opposing voice in the United States. Even the Commander in Chief.

Justice Thomas correctly claims that the Supreme Court must do what the spineless Republicans didn’t do….reign in this unaccountable tyranny.



4. The totalitarians and their Libertarian go-alongs claim that these are private companies, and government should never impost restrictions on any privately owned endeavors. But there are clear examples that fly in the face of that excise.

“The Skyway was operated and maintained by the City of Chicago until January 2005 when Skyway Concession Company, LLC assumed its operations under a 99-year operating lease. The lease agreement between Skyway and the City of Chicago was the first privatization of an existing toll road in the United States.”
The Skyway – Chicago Skyway

Anyone willing to pay the toll gets to use the skyway.
Who would make the argument that you cannot use that skyway based on your political views?




5. The Big Tech companies are information highways. The aim of these companies should be to increase the amount of information, communication, speech, available…..not just the state version of speech.

Justice Thomas, taking them on, is akin to Mel Gibson’s character in ‘Braveheart,’ shouting FREEDOM!!
The DemNazis were so sure Hillary Rotten Clinton had it rigged that they offed Scalia imo, because they wanted to flip the courts. Also why Obama Bin Spying left 400 plus bench seats unfilled.



It certainly was strange, and unexpected.


But the recent inaction by the Supreme Court per the stolen election seems to indicate that the Wehrmacht....er, Democrats had nothing to worry about.


Best hopes for Thomas, the bravest of the Justices.

There was no stolen election. That is what you wanted the Supreme Court to do.

Clarence Thomas is the craziest of the justices.


…evidence of carefully planned theft of the election.



1. I voted early, and the lines were enormous. On more than one day the lines went as much as five blocks, with lots of people bringing lawn chairs, and settling in for the duration.

Imagine two hypothetical voters..

Voter A is willing to wait on the long line, get up to the ballot and mark the presidential, and then go down the line, usually along party lines. As I did.

Voter B is an apparatchik of the Bolshevik Democrat apparatus, there for one reason: to do what he had been instructed to do to purloin the election for Biden. This individual need to fill in tons of ballots, and doesn’t plan to spend a great deal of time on each one. It’s quantity, not quality.



2. Person B is essentially a spy for the Democrats, which is fitting as their presidential candidate has been bought and paid for by a foreign government.



3. Here comes the circumstantial/mathematical evidence, specifically from the Georgia election: how do you explain 95,000 votes with only Biden marked…..the rest of the Democrat candidates for office ignored?
Only one way: the Democrat agent was sent in to win the election for Biden, and spent no time on any other aspirant.





4. “In most elections, the majority of votes are cast “down the ticket” – meaning, a voter supports both party’s presidential nominee and state Congressional candidates. In fact, according to Pew Research, “overwhelming shares of voters who are supporting Trump and Biden say they are also supporting the same-party candidate for Senate.”

Typically, this means that that the number of votes for a presidential candidate and that party’s Senate candidates are relatively close. …the number of votes cast for Joe Biden far exceeds those cast for that state’s Senate candidates in swing states, while those cast for Trump and GOP Senators remains far closer.

In Georgia, there was an 818 vote difference between Trump and the GOP Senator, vs. a 95,000 difference between Biden and the Democratic candidate for Senator.” Why Does Biden Have So Many More Votes Than Democrat Senators In Swing States?









In Michigan, for example, there was a difference of just 7,131 votes between Trump and GOP candidate John James, yet the difference between Joe Biden and Democratic candidate Gary Peters was a staggering 69,093.



www.theburningplatform.com

Why Does Biden Have So Many More Votes Than Democrat Senators In Swing States?
Via ZeroHedge In most elections, the majority of votes are cast “down the ticket” – meaning, a voter supports both party’s presidential nominee and state Congressional candi…
www.theburningplatform.com

There were no extra votes cast. The number of votes cast were approximately the same as the number of voters. You are the one who is programmed.

You think you can slander people because they don't agree with you. You are spreading misinformation provided by Putin you Bolshevik.

What you describe is interesting but it is not proof of anything. The US Attorneys were instructed to look for voter fraud. The AG said there was no evidence of fraud that would have changed the election. There are no mathematics involved.
Mail-in ballots are untraceable and we're only created to stuff ballot drop boxes and steal elections.

Not true.
For example, OR has switched to mail in ballots only for almost a decade because they automatically allow for address and name verification.
Why are Democratic Party operatives allowed to collect ballots and "harvest" them from public housing projects and apartment complexes and deliver them days later? Who tracks this process? During the shutdowns people went to the grocery store and post office. They can go to the poll, show a fucking ID and vote.
OMG someone made it easier to vote. How does this differ from picking up voters and taking them to the polls?
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
106,950
Reaction score
41,640
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Gee.....I simply asked RealDumb to back up his claims......and no one has heard from him since!!!

Has anyone seen a milk carton with his picture on it?????

So what time frame do you demand for a response?


Was 4 minutes OK?
I wasn't the one complaining and having a fit. That was you. I don't care when or if you ever respond as your posts are always so juvenile.


I didn't complain.

I enjoy showing what a dolt you are.

You couldn't find anything in the Constitution that denied the Majority Leader the right to say what comes up for a vote.

If you can......please provide same.



At least you've learned how to spell 'Constitution.'

Say 'thank you.'
So you think it is OK for McConnell to decide to ignore the Constitution. Just as I thought. The Constitution becomes irrelevant when it goes against your Anti-American efforts.


"So you think it is OK for McConnell to decide to ignore the Constitution."

Can you post where the Constitution makes demands on the Majority Leader of the Senate?


No?


Why can't you?


Probably because it says no such thing.
Look dimwit, I posted what the Constitution says.

As Majority Leader, it was McConnell's duty to do what the Constitution says.

Your defense argument of Mitch is so juvenile, illogical, and outright ridiculous.

Constitution says the Senate is to consider, Mitch said fuck the Constitution and you agree.


Exactly.....and nothing in that post mandated the Majority Leader's actions.


Did you want to try again?
You are just plain ignorant. The US Constitution gave the US Senate a duty. Did it follow it? No. Who determined that? McConnell.



The constitution provides an option. As Hussein Obama noted, elections have consequences.
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
106,950
Reaction score
41,640
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
RealDumb: "So, as I always knew, you hate the US Constitutrion (sic)when following it does not fit your agenda"

Me: "Can you quote from your vaunted knowledge of the Constitution to support your point about McConnell and the Republicans? "





I hate to dispute the finest President in a century.....but....RealDumb really is ignorant.

The President appoints USSC Justices and the Senate advises & consents. It says the Senate. Not one man, not the majority leader of the Senate.

"He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, ......."


It doesn't say what the Senate Majority Leader must do, does it.

Can I see your posts objecting to Harry Reid making decisions for the entire Senate?

Democrats held the majority when Thomas was nominated. They could have let it die as they did not have the votes to overcome a filibuster. Yet Democrats allowed a vote. Garland was entitled to a vote. What McConnell did was corrupt.
Garland was on the ballot in 2016 and was rejected by the voters.
So why wasn't Barrett put up for a vote? Can't wait for the answer & stupid excuse you will give.


For the same reason you will never be a Supreme Court Justice.










Twitter removed the dozen times he claimed not to know anything.



HAWLEY: Do you believe that illegal entry at America’s borders should remain a crime?



GARLAND: Well, I haven’t thought about that question. I just haven’t thought about that question. I think the president has made clear that we are a country with borders, with a concern about national security. I don’t know of a proposal to decriminalize but still make it unlawful to enter. I just don’t know the answer to that question. I haven’t thought about it.



HAWLEY: Will you continue to prosecute unlawful border crossings?



GARLAND: Well, again, this is a question of allocation of resources. We will … the Department will … prevent unlawful crossing. I don’t know … I have to admit, I just don’t know … what exactly the conditions are and how this is done. I think if … I don’t know what the current program even is with respect to this … so I assume that the answer would be yes but I don’t know what the issues surround it are.




Now, say 'duhhhhhhh' so I know you got the point.
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
106,950
Reaction score
41,640
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
The Left has been known to stop at nothing.


1.While the Supreme Court as a whole embarrassed itself in refusing to confront the theft of the election, the clear refusal by some swing states, Pennsylvania in particular, to observe the mandates of the US Constitution, the most courageous and conservative, the most brilliant of Justices, Clarence Thomas called out the injustice.
This week he did more, putting his life on the line in confronting the cash cows of the internet. Corrupt individuals will, I fear, not give up their $billions, their control of the dissemination of information without a fight. A bloody fight.



2. Justice Thomas is an originalist, a textualist, and a believer in our God-granted unalienable rights, the single most prominent one being free speech. Thomas called out the control by big tech, and the oligarchs allied with the Democrats/Progressives who have stolen our freedom.

“ On Monday, Justice Clarence Thomas announced that the Supreme Court soon will have to put an end to Big Tech tyranny. Amen. If the high court fails to act, it could mean the end of free speech in the 21st century and the shriveling of our constitutional rights to mere “paper rights” — still there on paper but functionally hollowed out.”
Justice Thomas shows how we can end Big Tech censorship for good



3. Just three unelected power mad Leftists….Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and Jack Dorsey deserves dishonorable mention, control Facebook and Google…..and have the power to disappear every opposing voice in the United States. Even the Commander in Chief.

Justice Thomas correctly claims that the Supreme Court must do what the spineless Republicans didn’t do….reign in this unaccountable tyranny.



4. The totalitarians and their Libertarian go-alongs claim that these are private companies, and government should never impost restrictions on any privately owned endeavors. But there are clear examples that fly in the face of that excise.

“The Skyway was operated and maintained by the City of Chicago until January 2005 when Skyway Concession Company, LLC assumed its operations under a 99-year operating lease. The lease agreement between Skyway and the City of Chicago was the first privatization of an existing toll road in the United States.”
The Skyway – Chicago Skyway

Anyone willing to pay the toll gets to use the skyway.
Who would make the argument that you cannot use that skyway based on your political views?




5. The Big Tech companies are information highways. The aim of these companies should be to increase the amount of information, communication, speech, available…..not just the state version of speech.

Justice Thomas, taking them on, is akin to Mel Gibson’s character in ‘Braveheart,’ shouting FREEDOM!!
The DemNazis were so sure Hillary Rotten Clinton had it rigged that they offed Scalia imo, because they wanted to flip the courts. Also why Obama Bin Spying left 400 plus bench seats unfilled.



It certainly was strange, and unexpected.


But the recent inaction by the Supreme Court per the stolen election seems to indicate that the Wehrmacht....er, Democrats had nothing to worry about.


Best hopes for Thomas, the bravest of the Justices.

There was no stolen election. That is what you wanted the Supreme Court to do.

Clarence Thomas is the craziest of the justices.


…evidence of carefully planned theft of the election.



1. I voted early, and the lines were enormous. On more than one day the lines went as much as five blocks, with lots of people bringing lawn chairs, and settling in for the duration.

Imagine two hypothetical voters..

Voter A is willing to wait on the long line, get up to the ballot and mark the presidential, and then go down the line, usually along party lines. As I did.

Voter B is an apparatchik of the Bolshevik Democrat apparatus, there for one reason: to do what he had been instructed to do to purloin the election for Biden. This individual need to fill in tons of ballots, and doesn’t plan to spend a great deal of time on each one. It’s quantity, not quality.



2. Person B is essentially a spy for the Democrats, which is fitting as their presidential candidate has been bought and paid for by a foreign government.



3. Here comes the circumstantial/mathematical evidence, specifically from the Georgia election: how do you explain 95,000 votes with only Biden marked…..the rest of the Democrat candidates for office ignored?
Only one way: the Democrat agent was sent in to win the election for Biden, and spent no time on any other aspirant.





4. “In most elections, the majority of votes are cast “down the ticket” – meaning, a voter supports both party’s presidential nominee and state Congressional candidates. In fact, according to Pew Research, “overwhelming shares of voters who are supporting Trump and Biden say they are also supporting the same-party candidate for Senate.”

Typically, this means that that the number of votes for a presidential candidate and that party’s Senate candidates are relatively close. …the number of votes cast for Joe Biden far exceeds those cast for that state’s Senate candidates in swing states, while those cast for Trump and GOP Senators remains far closer.

In Georgia, there was an 818 vote difference between Trump and the GOP Senator, vs. a 95,000 difference between Biden and the Democratic candidate for Senator.” Why Does Biden Have So Many More Votes Than Democrat Senators In Swing States?









In Michigan, for example, there was a difference of just 7,131 votes between Trump and GOP candidate John James, yet the difference between Joe Biden and Democratic candidate Gary Peters was a staggering 69,093.



www.theburningplatform.com

Why Does Biden Have So Many More Votes Than Democrat Senators In Swing States?
Via ZeroHedge In most elections, the majority of votes are cast “down the ticket” – meaning, a voter supports both party’s presidential nominee and state Congressional candi…
www.theburningplatform.com

There were no extra votes cast. The number of votes cast were approximately the same as the number of voters. You are the one who is programmed.

You think you can slander people because they don't agree with you. You are spreading misinformation provided by Putin you Bolshevik.

What you describe is interesting but it is not proof of anything. The US Attorneys were instructed to look for voter fraud. The AG said there was no evidence of fraud that would have changed the election. There are no mathematics involved.
Mail-in ballots are untraceable and we're only created to stuff ballot drop boxes and steal elections.

Not true.
For example, OR has switched to mail in ballots only for almost a decade because they automatically allow for address and name verification.
Why are Democratic Party operatives allowed to collect ballots and "harvest" them from public housing projects and apartment complexes and deliver them days later? Who tracks this process? During the shutdowns people went to the grocery store and post office. They can go to the poll, show a fucking ID and vote.
OMG someone made it easier to vote. How does this differ from picking up voters and taking them to the polls?



You mean easier to cheat.
 

RealDave

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Messages
26,506
Reaction score
3,517
Points
290
The Left has been known to stop at nothing.


1.While the Supreme Court as a whole embarrassed itself in refusing to confront the theft of the election, the clear refusal by some swing states, Pennsylvania in particular, to observe the mandates of the US Constitution, the most courageous and conservative, the most brilliant of Justices, Clarence Thomas called out the injustice.
This week he did more, putting his life on the line in confronting the cash cows of the internet. Corrupt individuals will, I fear, not give up their $billions, their control of the dissemination of information without a fight. A bloody fight.



2. Justice Thomas is an originalist, a textualist, and a believer in our God-granted unalienable rights, the single most prominent one being free speech. Thomas called out the control by big tech, and the oligarchs allied with the Democrats/Progressives who have stolen our freedom.

“ On Monday, Justice Clarence Thomas announced that the Supreme Court soon will have to put an end to Big Tech tyranny. Amen. If the high court fails to act, it could mean the end of free speech in the 21st century and the shriveling of our constitutional rights to mere “paper rights” — still there on paper but functionally hollowed out.”
Justice Thomas shows how we can end Big Tech censorship for good



3. Just three unelected power mad Leftists….Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and Jack Dorsey deserves dishonorable mention, control Facebook and Google…..and have the power to disappear every opposing voice in the United States. Even the Commander in Chief.

Justice Thomas correctly claims that the Supreme Court must do what the spineless Republicans didn’t do….reign in this unaccountable tyranny.



4. The totalitarians and their Libertarian go-alongs claim that these are private companies, and government should never impost restrictions on any privately owned endeavors. But there are clear examples that fly in the face of that excise.

“The Skyway was operated and maintained by the City of Chicago until January 2005 when Skyway Concession Company, LLC assumed its operations under a 99-year operating lease. The lease agreement between Skyway and the City of Chicago was the first privatization of an existing toll road in the United States.”
The Skyway – Chicago Skyway

Anyone willing to pay the toll gets to use the skyway.
Who would make the argument that you cannot use that skyway based on your political views?




5. The Big Tech companies are information highways. The aim of these companies should be to increase the amount of information, communication, speech, available…..not just the state version of speech.

Justice Thomas, taking them on, is akin to Mel Gibson’s character in ‘Braveheart,’ shouting FREEDOM!!
The DemNazis were so sure Hillary Rotten Clinton had it rigged that they offed Scalia imo, because they wanted to flip the courts. Also why Obama Bin Spying left 400 plus bench seats unfilled.



It certainly was strange, and unexpected.


But the recent inaction by the Supreme Court per the stolen election seems to indicate that the Wehrmacht....er, Democrats had nothing to worry about.


Best hopes for Thomas, the bravest of the Justices.

There was no stolen election. That is what you wanted the Supreme Court to do.

Clarence Thomas is the craziest of the justices.


…evidence of carefully planned theft of the election.



1. I voted early, and the lines were enormous. On more than one day the lines went as much as five blocks, with lots of people bringing lawn chairs, and settling in for the duration.

Imagine two hypothetical voters..

Voter A is willing to wait on the long line, get up to the ballot and mark the presidential, and then go down the line, usually along party lines. As I did.

Voter B is an apparatchik of the Bolshevik Democrat apparatus, there for one reason: to do what he had been instructed to do to purloin the election for Biden. This individual need to fill in tons of ballots, and doesn’t plan to spend a great deal of time on each one. It’s quantity, not quality.



2. Person B is essentially a spy for the Democrats, which is fitting as their presidential candidate has been bought and paid for by a foreign government.



3. Here comes the circumstantial/mathematical evidence, specifically from the Georgia election: how do you explain 95,000 votes with only Biden marked…..the rest of the Democrat candidates for office ignored?
Only one way: the Democrat agent was sent in to win the election for Biden, and spent no time on any other aspirant.





4. “In most elections, the majority of votes are cast “down the ticket” – meaning, a voter supports both party’s presidential nominee and state Congressional candidates. In fact, according to Pew Research, “overwhelming shares of voters who are supporting Trump and Biden say they are also supporting the same-party candidate for Senate.”

Typically, this means that that the number of votes for a presidential candidate and that party’s Senate candidates are relatively close. …the number of votes cast for Joe Biden far exceeds those cast for that state’s Senate candidates in swing states, while those cast for Trump and GOP Senators remains far closer.

In Georgia, there was an 818 vote difference between Trump and the GOP Senator, vs. a 95,000 difference between Biden and the Democratic candidate for Senator.” Why Does Biden Have So Many More Votes Than Democrat Senators In Swing States?









In Michigan, for example, there was a difference of just 7,131 votes between Trump and GOP candidate John James, yet the difference between Joe Biden and Democratic candidate Gary Peters was a staggering 69,093.



www.theburningplatform.com

Why Does Biden Have So Many More Votes Than Democrat Senators In Swing States?
Via ZeroHedge In most elections, the majority of votes are cast “down the ticket” – meaning, a voter supports both party’s presidential nominee and state Congressional candi…
www.theburningplatform.com

There were no extra votes cast. The number of votes cast were approximately the same as the number of voters. You are the one who is programmed.

You think you can slander people because they don't agree with you. You are spreading misinformation provided by Putin you Bolshevik.

What you describe is interesting but it is not proof of anything. The US Attorneys were instructed to look for voter fraud. The AG said there was no evidence of fraud that would have changed the election. There are no mathematics involved.
Mail-in ballots are untraceable and we're only created to stuff ballot drop boxes and steal elections.

Not true.
For example, OR has switched to mail in ballots only for almost a decade because they automatically allow for address and name verification.
Why are Democratic Party operatives allowed to collect ballots and "harvest" them from public housing projects and apartment complexes and deliver them days later? Who tracks this process? During the shutdowns people went to the grocery store and post office. They can go to the poll, show a fucking ID and vote.
OMG someone made it easier to vote. How does this differ from picking up voters and taking them to the polls?



You mean easier to cheat.
Where is all this cheating? Show me proof or STFU.
 

RealDave

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Messages
26,506
Reaction score
3,517
Points
290
Gee.....I simply asked RealDumb to back up his claims......and no one has heard from him since!!!

Has anyone seen a milk carton with his picture on it?????

So what time frame do you demand for a response?


Was 4 minutes OK?
I wasn't the one complaining and having a fit. That was you. I don't care when or if you ever respond as your posts are always so juvenile.


I didn't complain.

I enjoy showing what a dolt you are.

You couldn't find anything in the Constitution that denied the Majority Leader the right to say what comes up for a vote.

If you can......please provide same.



At least you've learned how to spell 'Constitution.'

Say 'thank you.'
So you think it is OK for McConnell to decide to ignore the Constitution. Just as I thought. The Constitution becomes irrelevant when it goes against your Anti-American efforts.


"So you think it is OK for McConnell to decide to ignore the Constitution."

Can you post where the Constitution makes demands on the Majority Leader of the Senate?


No?


Why can't you?


Probably because it says no such thing.
Look dimwit, I posted what the Constitution says.

As Majority Leader, it was McConnell's duty to do what the Constitution says.

Your defense argument of Mitch is so juvenile, illogical, and outright ridiculous.

Constitution says the Senate is to consider, Mitch said fuck the Constitution and you agree.


Exactly.....and nothing in that post mandated the Majority Leader's actions.


Did you want to try again?
You are just plain ignorant. The US Constitution gave the US Senate a duty. Did it follow it? No. Who determined that? McConnell.



The constitution provides an option. As Hussein Obama noted, elections have consequences.
No it doesn't. Quit lying.
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
106,950
Reaction score
41,640
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
The Left has been known to stop at nothing.


1.While the Supreme Court as a whole embarrassed itself in refusing to confront the theft of the election, the clear refusal by some swing states, Pennsylvania in particular, to observe the mandates of the US Constitution, the most courageous and conservative, the most brilliant of Justices, Clarence Thomas called out the injustice.
This week he did more, putting his life on the line in confronting the cash cows of the internet. Corrupt individuals will, I fear, not give up their $billions, their control of the dissemination of information without a fight. A bloody fight.



2. Justice Thomas is an originalist, a textualist, and a believer in our God-granted unalienable rights, the single most prominent one being free speech. Thomas called out the control by big tech, and the oligarchs allied with the Democrats/Progressives who have stolen our freedom.

“ On Monday, Justice Clarence Thomas announced that the Supreme Court soon will have to put an end to Big Tech tyranny. Amen. If the high court fails to act, it could mean the end of free speech in the 21st century and the shriveling of our constitutional rights to mere “paper rights” — still there on paper but functionally hollowed out.”
Justice Thomas shows how we can end Big Tech censorship for good



3. Just three unelected power mad Leftists….Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and Jack Dorsey deserves dishonorable mention, control Facebook and Google…..and have the power to disappear every opposing voice in the United States. Even the Commander in Chief.

Justice Thomas correctly claims that the Supreme Court must do what the spineless Republicans didn’t do….reign in this unaccountable tyranny.



4. The totalitarians and their Libertarian go-alongs claim that these are private companies, and government should never impost restrictions on any privately owned endeavors. But there are clear examples that fly in the face of that excise.

“The Skyway was operated and maintained by the City of Chicago until January 2005 when Skyway Concession Company, LLC assumed its operations under a 99-year operating lease. The lease agreement between Skyway and the City of Chicago was the first privatization of an existing toll road in the United States.”
The Skyway – Chicago Skyway

Anyone willing to pay the toll gets to use the skyway.
Who would make the argument that you cannot use that skyway based on your political views?




5. The Big Tech companies are information highways. The aim of these companies should be to increase the amount of information, communication, speech, available…..not just the state version of speech.

Justice Thomas, taking them on, is akin to Mel Gibson’s character in ‘Braveheart,’ shouting FREEDOM!!
The DemNazis were so sure Hillary Rotten Clinton had it rigged that they offed Scalia imo, because they wanted to flip the courts. Also why Obama Bin Spying left 400 plus bench seats unfilled.



It certainly was strange, and unexpected.


But the recent inaction by the Supreme Court per the stolen election seems to indicate that the Wehrmacht....er, Democrats had nothing to worry about.


Best hopes for Thomas, the bravest of the Justices.

There was no stolen election. That is what you wanted the Supreme Court to do.

Clarence Thomas is the craziest of the justices.


…evidence of carefully planned theft of the election.



1. I voted early, and the lines were enormous. On more than one day the lines went as much as five blocks, with lots of people bringing lawn chairs, and settling in for the duration.

Imagine two hypothetical voters..

Voter A is willing to wait on the long line, get up to the ballot and mark the presidential, and then go down the line, usually along party lines. As I did.

Voter B is an apparatchik of the Bolshevik Democrat apparatus, there for one reason: to do what he had been instructed to do to purloin the election for Biden. This individual need to fill in tons of ballots, and doesn’t plan to spend a great deal of time on each one. It’s quantity, not quality.



2. Person B is essentially a spy for the Democrats, which is fitting as their presidential candidate has been bought and paid for by a foreign government.



3. Here comes the circumstantial/mathematical evidence, specifically from the Georgia election: how do you explain 95,000 votes with only Biden marked…..the rest of the Democrat candidates for office ignored?
Only one way: the Democrat agent was sent in to win the election for Biden, and spent no time on any other aspirant.





4. “In most elections, the majority of votes are cast “down the ticket” – meaning, a voter supports both party’s presidential nominee and state Congressional candidates. In fact, according to Pew Research, “overwhelming shares of voters who are supporting Trump and Biden say they are also supporting the same-party candidate for Senate.”

Typically, this means that that the number of votes for a presidential candidate and that party’s Senate candidates are relatively close. …the number of votes cast for Joe Biden far exceeds those cast for that state’s Senate candidates in swing states, while those cast for Trump and GOP Senators remains far closer.

In Georgia, there was an 818 vote difference between Trump and the GOP Senator, vs. a 95,000 difference between Biden and the Democratic candidate for Senator.” Why Does Biden Have So Many More Votes Than Democrat Senators In Swing States?









In Michigan, for example, there was a difference of just 7,131 votes between Trump and GOP candidate John James, yet the difference between Joe Biden and Democratic candidate Gary Peters was a staggering 69,093.



www.theburningplatform.com

Why Does Biden Have So Many More Votes Than Democrat Senators In Swing States?
Via ZeroHedge In most elections, the majority of votes are cast “down the ticket” – meaning, a voter supports both party’s presidential nominee and state Congressional candi…
www.theburningplatform.com

There were no extra votes cast. The number of votes cast were approximately the same as the number of voters. You are the one who is programmed.

You think you can slander people because they don't agree with you. You are spreading misinformation provided by Putin you Bolshevik.

What you describe is interesting but it is not proof of anything. The US Attorneys were instructed to look for voter fraud. The AG said there was no evidence of fraud that would have changed the election. There are no mathematics involved.
Mail-in ballots are untraceable and we're only created to stuff ballot drop boxes and steal elections.

Not true.
For example, OR has switched to mail in ballots only for almost a decade because they automatically allow for address and name verification.
Why are Democratic Party operatives allowed to collect ballots and "harvest" them from public housing projects and apartment complexes and deliver them days later? Who tracks this process? During the shutdowns people went to the grocery store and post office. They can go to the poll, show a fucking ID and vote.
OMG someone made it easier to vote. How does this differ from picking up voters and taking them to the polls?



You mean easier to cheat.
Where is all this cheating? Show me proof or STFU.


1618846451116.png




“Data scientists testified nearly 18,000 electronic votes in Georgia switched from Trump to Biden
A team of data scientists testifying before a state Senate panel in Georgia earlier this week said thousands of votes were switched from President Donald Trump to his Democratic challenger Joe Biden during balloting last month.” Data scientists testified nearly 18,000 electronic votes in Georgia switched from Trump to Biden





Georgia Recount Worker Describes “Pristine” Batch of Ballots – 98% for Joe Biden!


Extremely suspicious.



Published

7 hours ago

on

Nov 22, 2020

By

Richard Moorhead



Top of Form​
A Fulton County, Georgia woman is describing handling a “pristine” batch of ballots that were marked “98%” of the time for Joe Biden in election recount duties, describing the suspicious phenomenon in a sworn affidavit.

Susan Voyles identifies herself as a participant in Georgia’s post-election recount in the affidavit, filed in litigation against Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger by Trump campaign attorney Lin Wood.

Voyles describes seeing ballots that differed considerably from the other ballots she was entrusted to count in the remix.

Voyles describes the batch of ballots as unusual in their texture and level of handling, and that she estimates 98% of them were cast for Joe Biden. Voyles even speculates that these ballots could’ve been processed through a ballot-marking device!



Voyles earlier described election recount supervisors as tasking them to process ballots in a “selective” fashion. Boxes of absentee ballots were signed by no one, without markings one might expect the Georgia Secretary of State to outfit absentee ballots with.

Another witness describes viewing election workers count 500 straight ballots for Joe Biden, all of which were marked with perfect black bubbles.”






=========================================================
Did everyone see this whistle blower who saw the machinations in Democrat Detroit?



Ballots altered, Republican poll watchers kept out....










This lady was an IT employee of Dominion voting machines.

When she saw what was going on, she notified her boss, who didn't want to hear it.





Sworn affidavits are considered as evidence.



"Detroit Officials Cover-Up Windows During Ballot Count, Voters Outraged
Poll watchers blocked from witnessing vote count at TCF Center

By: Jay Greenberg |@NeonNettle
on 5th November 2020 @ 7.00pm



© press
The widows were covered in opaque cardboard by election officials
Chaos has erupted at the TCF Center in Detroit after election officials covered-up the windows of the ballot counting room, blocking poll watchers from witnessing the vote count."


Detroit Officials Cover-Up Windows During Ballot Count, Voters Outraged

Poll watchers blocked from witnessing vote count at TCF Center - Chaos has erupted at the TCF Center in Detroit after election officials covered-up the windows of... | NEON NETTLE

neonnettle.com













 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
106,950
Reaction score
41,640
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Gee.....I simply asked RealDumb to back up his claims......and no one has heard from him since!!!

Has anyone seen a milk carton with his picture on it?????

So what time frame do you demand for a response?


Was 4 minutes OK?
I wasn't the one complaining and having a fit. That was you. I don't care when or if you ever respond as your posts are always so juvenile.


I didn't complain.

I enjoy showing what a dolt you are.

You couldn't find anything in the Constitution that denied the Majority Leader the right to say what comes up for a vote.

If you can......please provide same.



At least you've learned how to spell 'Constitution.'

Say 'thank you.'
So you think it is OK for McConnell to decide to ignore the Constitution. Just as I thought. The Constitution becomes irrelevant when it goes against your Anti-American efforts.


"So you think it is OK for McConnell to decide to ignore the Constitution."

Can you post where the Constitution makes demands on the Majority Leader of the Senate?


No?


Why can't you?


Probably because it says no such thing.
Look dimwit, I posted what the Constitution says.

As Majority Leader, it was McConnell's duty to do what the Constitution says.

Your defense argument of Mitch is so juvenile, illogical, and outright ridiculous.

Constitution says the Senate is to consider, Mitch said fuck the Constitution and you agree.


Exactly.....and nothing in that post mandated the Majority Leader's actions.


Did you want to try again?
You are just plain ignorant. The US Constitution gave the US Senate a duty. Did it follow it? No. Who determined that? McConnell.



The constitution provides an option. As Hussein Obama noted, elections have consequences.
No it doesn't. Quit lying.



You're claiming that any nominee must be given a Senate vote?

Yet you couldn't find any such statement in the Constitution......could you.



Here's an example, RealDumb....

To those of us who think, who are actually educated, read books and all, we are living through a bizarre world in which the most absurd things have come to pass, and recognize that our nation is truly an example of the inmates running the asylum.

Once upon a time, an episode in our history that anticipated the current morass, Nixon nominated a moron for the Supreme Court…Republican Senator Hruska tried to defend the dolt: "Even if he [Carswell] were mediocre, there are a lot of mediocre judges and people and lawyers. They are entitled to a little representation, aren't they? We can't have all Brandeises and Frankfurters and Cardozos."

The nation was smart enough to dump Carswell.

The same for the moron Garland.





I know you'd like a moron selected so you can identify with him.....and you got Biden.

Here’s the ‘word salad’ President:








"...when they need to ...when they need to dis.....when they need to ah....when they ding the national guard.....we're gonna ....we're gonna depose....the.....we're gonna enforce the....excuse me, employ.....the reconfect act....go out there and dictate companies build and do....but if it waits, it takes a long time....."



Al Sharpton must be his elocution teacher.



BTW....the journalist asking the question then asked if she could pose the question to the vice-president elect so as to get a coherent answer......what does that tell you?



This is your man.
 

eddiew37

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2016
Messages
11,310
Reaction score
2,165
Points
275
One more time Repub DUPES
Supreme Court has once again declined to take up a lawsuit asserting the 2020 presidential election was tainted by voter fraud.
rump and the GOP suffer another humiliating Supreme Court defeat

According to CNN, the Supreme Court has once again declined to take up a lawsuit asserting the 2020 presidential election was tainted by voter fraud.
On Monday, the high court declined to take up a case filed by Republicans that the voting in Pennsylvania was tainted by changes to voting rules.
Noting that the latest dismissal by the court is signal that the justices want no part in Donald Trump's assertion that he was robbed of his second term, CNN reports, "Before Monday, the justices had already declined several requests to dive into one of the most litigious elections in history, denying petitions from then-President Donald Trump and other Republicans seeking to overturn election result in multiple states President Joe Biden won."

Addressing the slapping aside of the lawsuit, University of Texas School of Law Professor Steve Vladeck explained, "Once again, the court's involvement in the 2020 election is going out with a whimper, not a bang."
The report notes, "The case was brought by a former Republican congressional candidate, Jim Bognet, and four individual voters who argued the state high court exceeded its authority when it ordered the expansion of ballot deadlines amidst the pandemic."
CNN reports that there were no dissents included in the decision.
You can read more here.
 
OP
PoliticalChic

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
106,950
Reaction score
41,640
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
One more time Repub DUPES
Supreme Court has once again declined to take up a lawsuit asserting the 2020 presidential election was tainted by voter fraud.
rump and the GOP suffer another humiliating Supreme Court defeat

According to CNN, the Supreme Court has once again declined to take up a lawsuit asserting the 2020 presidential election was tainted by voter fraud.
On Monday, the high court declined to take up a case filed by Republicans that the voting in Pennsylvania was tainted by changes to voting rules.
Noting that the latest dismissal by the court is signal that the justices want no part in Donald Trump's assertion that he was robbed of his second term, CNN reports, "Before Monday, the justices had already declined several requests to dive into one of the most litigious elections in history, denying petitions from then-President Donald Trump and other Republicans seeking to overturn election result in multiple states President Joe Biden won."

Addressing the slapping aside of the lawsuit, University of Texas School of Law Professor Steve Vladeck explained, "Once again, the court's involvement in the 2020 election is going out with a whimper, not a bang."
The report notes, "The case was brought by a former Republican congressional candidate, Jim Bognet, and four individual voters who argued the state high court exceeded its authority when it ordered the expansion of ballot deadlines amidst the pandemic."
CNN reports that there were no dissents included in the decision.
You can read more here.



That's a statement about the Supreme Court, not about the evident fraud.
 

NightFox

Wildling
Joined
Jul 20, 2013
Messages
10,374
Reaction score
2,027
Points
280
Location
North beyond the Wall
The Left has been known to stop at nothing.

Yeah, I'm not a big fan of the left either but .....


3. Just three unelected power mad Leftists….Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and Jack Dorsey deserves dishonorable mention, control Facebook and Google…..and have the power to disappear every opposing voice in the United States. Even the Commander in Chief.

At least most of 'em I've come across can successfully COUNT TO 4.

The OP is yet more evidence that wallowing in wild conspiracy theories all the time melts your brain.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$400.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top