This Election Was Not Stolen, Do You Accept That Fact?

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Does George Stephanopoulos consider himself a "journalist"? Sure seems desperate to get Rand Paul to play along

 

[EyeBRollin]

Conservatives will never accept that Trump lost in 2020.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Conservatives will never accept that Trump lost in 2020.

See video below. Straight out of the jackass's mouth.

 

[sparky]

George Step and Fetch a lot ?

~S~

 

[Vrenn]

Conservatives will never accept that Trump lost in 2020.

Please stop referring to yourself as as conservative. You are following a wannabe King. G. Washington already turned down that job and a nation was born from it.

 

[task0778]

This Election Was Not Stolen, Do You Accept That Fact?​

The absence of proof of guilt does not translate to innocence. At this point, more than a year later from that election there is as yet no definitive proof of illegal voter fraud that shows the election was stolen. Nothing that has been accepted by a federal judge in a court of law according to the rules of evidence. But that does not mean the election was not stolen, only that it hasn't been proved. Yet.

 

[EyeBRollin]

This Election Was Not Stolen, Do You Accept That Fact?​

The absence of proof of guilt does not translate to innocence. At this point, more than a year later from that election there is as yet no definitive proof of illegal voter fraud that shows the election was stolen. Nothing that has been accepted by a federal judge in a court of law according to the rules of evidence. But that does not mean the election was not stolen, only that it hasn't been proved. Yet.

Gaslighting yourself again, conservative?

 

[Baron Von Murderpaws]

Conservatives will never accept that Trump lost in 2020.

You comedians keep posting in the WRONG threads!!!

 

[MisterBeale]

Conservatives will never accept that Trump lost in 2020.

This isn't a left/right issue.

This is about the oligarchical establishment, versus the people.

The establishment will never, ever prove that there was not wide scale fraud. And the left is just fine with that. . . they don't even have a clue what is really going on. Hell, a lot of folks on the right don't even know what is really going on at this point.

The establishment, worked with corporate voting administration companies, with proprietary technologies, to make sure the process was opaque, and thus, the whole thing, became a, "known unknown."

It is something everyone knows that we don't know, and this is why no court wanted to here it. IT CAN'T BE PROVED.

 

[Vrenn]

This Election Was Not Stolen, Do You Accept That Fact?​

The absence of proof of guilt does not translate to innocence. At this point, more than a year later from that election there is as yet no definitive proof of illegal voter fraud that shows the election was stolen. Nothing that has been accepted by a federal judge in a court of law according to the rules of evidence. But that does not mean the election was not stolen, only that it hasn't been proved. Yet.

At some point you should come up with the likelyhood that it wasn't stolen. In fact, almost every time a discrepancy was found, it went against the Republican Candidates at all levels. Multiple recounts, Courts and more, it all said that, although there was a tiny, tiny bit there, there wasn't enough found to overthrow anything. Rump lost. In fact, he lost even more than the real count showed.

 

[Baron Von Murderpaws]

See video below. Straight out of the jackass's mouth.

Straight from the puppets mouth! And yet, the DementiacRats won't even accept what their lord and savior spews out on live TV!!!

 

[Vrenn]

Gaslighting yourself again, conservative?

If I were to do it, it would be gaslighting since I am a conservative. He's not a conservative. He's trying to get his KING crowned. He's either completely insane of extremely stupid or both.

 

[Coyote]

This Election Was Not Stolen, Do You Accept That Fact?​

The absence of proof of guilt does not translate to innocence. At this point, more than a year later from that election there is as yet no definitive proof of illegal voter fraud that shows the election was stolen. Nothing that has been accepted by a federal judge in a court of law according to the rules of evidence. But that does not mean the election was not stolen, only that it hasn't been proved. Yet.

Ok, so we can say the same about 2016, right?

 

[Coyote]

This isn't a left/right issue.

This is about the oligarchical establishment, versus the people.

The establishment will never, ever prove that there was not wide scale fraud. And the left is just fine with that. . . they don't even have a clue what is really going on. Hell, a lot of folks on the right don't even know what is really going on at this point.

The establishment, worked with corporate voting administration companies, with proprietary technologies, to make sure the process was opaque, and thus, the whole thing, became a, "known unknown."

It is something everyone knows that we don't know, and this is why no court wanted to here it. IT CAN'T BE PROVED.

What if there was wide scale fraud in 2016?

 

[Vrenn]

Ok, so we can say the same about 2016, right?

2016 was determined by a press conference by one man and that man should have never done that press conference.

 

[Synthaholic]

Conservatives will never accept that Trump lost in 2020.

They're not conservatives.

 

[Coyote]

At some point you should come up with the likelyhood that it wasn't stolen. In fact, almost every time a discrepancy was found, it went against the Republican Candidates at all levels. Multiple recounts, Courts and more, it all said that, although there was a tiny, tiny bit there, there wasn't enough found to overthrow anything. Rump lost. In fact, he lost even more than the real count showed.

You will never be able to prove it was NOT stolen because they will not accept it. They will just come up with yet one more bit of “evidence” that it was stolen. The only acceptable answer is that Trump won. Period.

 

[toobfreak]

Does George Stephanopoulos consider himself a "journalist"? Sure seems desperate to get Rand Paul to play along

My reply to Stephanopoulos would have been to ask him on what does he base his claim that an unstolen 2020 election is now a "fact?" When did it become one? How? By what standard of proof? Before you can proceed in answering a question, you must first establish the veracity of the QUESTION, and had Paul just asked him that, he could have shot down the entire question because anytime you ask anyone the basis of considering the 2020 election a "closed case"--- factually debunked in every regard, they CAN'T. The presumption is always based on assumed truths rather than actual proof.

 

[bugs]

OK so how about This..
I BELIEVE They stole it.
AND I Believe NOTHING That THEY Say..

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

My reply to Stephanopoulos would have been to ask him on what does he base his claim that an unstolen 2020 election is now a "fact?" When did it become one? How? By what standard of proof? Before you can proceed in answering a question, you must first establish the veracity of the QUESTION, and had Paul just asked him that, he could have shot down the entire question because anytime you ask anyone the basis of considering the 2020 election a "closed case"--- factually debunked in every regard, they CAN'T. The presumption is always based on assumed truths rather than actual proof.

He's determined to "lead the witness." I object, your honor.