What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

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!

What are people thinking as they hear the Senate arguments?

Leo123

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
15,385
Reaction score
8,736
Points
1,265
NFBW wrote: After reading your fiction I looked up where you once had asked Leo123 the following question 21NOV25-POST#1098

Leo123 wrote: BTW have you asked yourself why BLM and Antifa are not being investigated like the Proud Boys? 21SEP26-POST#63

NFBW wrote: I asked you the following question Leo123 21NOV25-POST#1098

NFBW wrote: Why would the FBI investigate BLM? Kyle “libslayer” Rittenhouse supports BLM you dumbass. 21NOV24-POST#1092,

NFBW wrote: ANTIFA is being investigated per the following Reuters report. 21NOV25-POST#1098

NFBW wrota: You can read about Antifa being investigated Leo123 here 21NOV25-POST#1098

REUTERS THU SEP 24, 2020 / 3:08 PM EDT - - - FBI chief says U.S. 'Antifa' demonstrators are targets of multiple probes Mark Hosenball and Sarah N. Lynch
FBI chief says U.S. 'Antifa' demonstrators are targets of multiple probes
President Donald Trump and his allies have sought here to blame what they calls left-wing extremists for violence and looting at U.S. protests over police brutality, while local authorities and watchdog groups have often pointed to the threat posed by right-wing movements

NFBW wrote: My point was about BLM because Kyle Rittenhouse did not say he supports ANTIFA. He said he supports BLM. The FBI has no reason to investigate an organization identified as BLM because they cannot prosecute a slogan. The FBI cannot prosecute an organized movement that does not condone or commit violence or crimes. It is not illegal to scare white men who are running around carrying assault “cool looking” rifles because some day all those black and brown and ‘other’ kind of people will outnumber white Christian Americans because the commie libs keep letting murderers and rapists of color in around the Trump wall. 21NOV25-POST#1098

NFBW wrote: And here is the kicker Leo123 Why would the FBI INVESTIGATE an organization identified as BLM that was publicly supported on the Tucker Carlson Show by a rising star to the real WHITE Patriot defenders of America at the early age of seventeen. One who already has two Lib Kills notched on the butt of his cool looking AR-15. And one who is free to kill more. Kyle Rittenhouse supports BLM and he went to Mar A Lago to celebrate his kills with the actual President of angry white Americans llike Correll 21NOV25-POST#1098 HAPPY TURKEY DAY white PATRIOTS everywhere Lib Slayer is free.
Of course Kyle said he supports BLM he doesn’t want them stalking him.
 

Leo123

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2017
Messages
15,385
Reaction score
8,736
Points
1,265
The Stone isn't called to testify, I don't think they're going to get to the bottom of this. While trump was psyching up the mob at the White House, Stone was coordinating the attack plan with the heads of the militias at the Capitol. Those people, hiding in plain sight, egged the crowd on. trump and those far-right leaders used those fools as a front for their assault on our democracy.
That's a MSM fairy tale.
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
15,050
Reaction score
2,270
Points
245
Correll wrote: I do not know what you are referring to with your "safe harbor" comment 21NOV25 -POST#1100

NFBW wrote: Do you really think there is the possibility that Mike Pence, one special man, not restrained by the rule of any law, had some constitutionally legitimate authority to cancel the national election selections of the president, Senators and Congressman etc in seven states, when Pence himself was on the losing losing ticket? 21NOV25 -POST#1103

NFBW wrote: Do you really think Correll for one second that Jan 6 was some kind of provision in the Constitution that would allow one white man to void, cancel, eliminate millions of votes from seven states that the one white good Christian man could not win and see that win placed into “safe harbor” on December 14. I’m sure Pence knows what safe harbor is. 21NOV25 -POST#1103

NFBW wrote: Do you think Correll that Mike Pence had the authority to satisfy DJT’s lust for power and the same for so many very white Republicans with scarce exception to the whiteness, politicians, and the same for the mostly white mob that gathered at the Capitol on Jan6 by demand of DJT, . . . Did Pence possess the authority to declare fraud in seven states where large portions of the votes against him came from a bloc of voters wherein a large percentage were from the not white minority in this country of ours? 21NOV25 -POST#1103

NFBW wrote: Do you think Correll that Mike Pence, one white, good Christian patriotic Republican special man should have the power over millions of black voters to say their votes will not count because he “believed” without proof the machines were rigged against him, because he believed ballots made with bamboo were inserted for Biden flown in from China or because he believed that endless list of election fraud shit from the likes of PoliticalChic 21NOV25 -POST#1103

Correll wrote: 1. Is it not Pence's job to make that call himself? 21OCT16-POST#887 - - - 2. IF Pence believed that the ballots were fraudulent, is that not what SHOULD have happened? 21OCT16-POST#887

NFBW wrote: You are in a fascist frame of mind Correll in favor of one man authoritarian rule when you asked “ IF Pence “believed” that the ballots were fraudulent… “ after the election results were placed in safe harbor in mid-December 2020. 21NOV25 -POST#1103
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
83,146
Reaction score
20,981
Points
2,220
Correll wrote: I do not know what you are referring to with your "safe harbor" comment 21NOV25 -POST#1100

NFBW wrote: Do you really think there is the possibility that Mike Pence, one special man, not restrained by the rule of any law, had some constitutionally legitimate authority to cancel the national election selections of the president, Senators and Congressman etc in seven states, when Pence himself was on the losing losing ticket? 21NOV25 -POST#1103

NFBW wrote: Do you really think Correll for one second that Jan 6 was some kind of provision in the Constitution that would allow one white man to void, cancel, ....


I stopped reading here. I'm am not going to play along pretending to have a discussion, when all you are doing is spreading racist hate.


If you want to discuss "Safe harbor", post it again, without the racism, you racist ass.
 

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
114,589
Reaction score
49,284
Points
2,300
Location
Brooklyn, NY
When forced to release the vids of the "insurrection," this is what we saw:




Now....who ya' gonna believe, the Democrats, or your lyin' eyes?????
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
15,050
Reaction score
2,270
Points
245
“”” About a quarter of voting members (23%) of the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate are racial or ethnic minorities, making the 117th Congress the most racially and ethnically diverse in history. There has been a long-running trend toward higher numbers of non-White lawmakers on Capitol Hill: - - / Overall, 124 lawmakers today identify as Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander or Native American, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of data from the Congressional Research Service. This represents a 97% increase over the 107th Congress of 2001-03, which had 63 minority members. “”” see link below

Correll wrote: I do not know what you are referring to with your "safe harbor" comment 21NOV25 -POST#1100

NFBW wrote: According to PEW the 117th Congress that was seated last January doubled the number of it’s members that identify as racial or ethnic minorities. That makes the 117th Congress the most racially and ethnically diverse in history. Is that FACT ok with you Correll ? Can you keep reading? 21NOV26 -POST#1106

NFBW wrote: The historically diverse 117th Congress was on Jan6 under a severe threat to not be seated because the sitting first term president DJT demanded his VP to disregard the election results in seven state that were in what is commonly called safe harbor according to constitutionally required deadline dates that must be met for presidential elections and the subsequent peaceful transfer of power. January 6 is one of those dates. 21NOV26 -POST#1106

NFBW wrote: Mike Pence refused the pressure from DJT, DJT’s constitutional lawyer John Eastman, Republican members of Congress, and the right wing mob gathered outside the US Capitol at DJT’s request which was a sea of angry people at least 20,000 strong. 21NOV26 -POST#1106

NFBW wrote: I commend Mike Pence for refusing to follow orders from the outgoing Commander in Chief to torpedo the certified election results on Jan6 that were (all fifty ststes) in safe harbor since December 14. Do you Correll praise Mike Pence for upholding the Constitution when his partner on the losing presidential ticket did not. 21NOV26 -POST#1106

NFBW wrote: Further to all of the above I truly commend and respect Mike Pence who happens to be white, Christian and male for respecting safe harbor and the rule of law, but mostly for respecting the democratic process and the will of millions of Americans who are identifiable as part of America’s ethnic and religious minority. 21NOV26 -POST#1106

FT_21.01.25_RaceEthnicityCongress_feature.jpg.webp

Racial, ethnic diversity increases yet again with the 117th Congress

BY KATHERINE SCHAEFFER - - - About a quarter of voting members (23%) of the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate are racial or ethnic minorities, making the 117th Congress the most racially and ethnically diverse in history. There has been a long-running trend toward higher numbers of non-White lawmakers on Capitol Hill: Overall, 124 lawmakers today identify as Black, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander or Native American, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of data from the Congressional Research Service. This represents a 97% increase over the 107th Congress of 2001-03, which had 63 minority members.

Among today’s senators and representatives, the overwhelming majority of racial and ethnic minority members are Democrats (83%), while 17% are Republicans. This represents a shift from the last Congress, when just 10% of non-White lawmakers were Republicans. Our analysis reflects the 532 voting members of Congress seated as of Jan. 26, 2021.
 
Last edited:

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
15,050
Reaction score
2,270
Points
245
Correll wrote: I do not know what you are referring to with your "safe harbor" comment 21NOV25-POST#1100

NFBW wrote: Read the following conversation Correll it may clue you in. 21NOV27-POST#1107

@ThisIsMe wrote: If you read the Eastman memo, what it does is cite all the violations of election laws that the states in question had committed, and give an outline for what Pence could do in regards to only those states. - - - The memo outlines a plan based on their thought that the election had been stolen. It doesn't indicate that they knew they lost but plotted to send back the electors anyway in an effort to overturn the election. 21OCT30-POST#680

@Faun wrote: Two things... one, it would have been unconstitutional for Pence to unilaterally reject electors; widespread fraud which could have changed the outcome of the election had not been proven. 21NOV01-POST#681

NFBW wrote: Allow me to add to what Faun is explaining to further your edification on the CONSTITUTION that you are unwittingly kind of proving that DJT does not give a flying fuck about the Constitution and John Eastman was lying to his client the entire time. - - - Faun has it right and I will add the concept of “safe harbor” that let’s say by mid December the safe harbor status “constitutionally” ends any chance for SORE losers (may I call them that ThisIsMe ) to legally challenge each states’ certification that is sealed and is to be submitted to Congress. Hence a specific deadline is set to open and read them no later than January 6. I’m sure the founders in colonial times wanted to give the sealed documents time to make the journey to the Capitol. - - - If you were to read this I think you will be able to answer all your questions and not need the help of a hifallutin lawyer./ This part Aint complicated, even for a clueless moron like DJT. 21NOV01-POST#685

“”””” It may come and go without much fanfare, but on Tuesday, the U.S. will pass a key deadline cementing President-elect Joe Biden's victory as the 46th president
DJT

Biden's Victory Cemented As States Reach Key Electoral College Deadline

© 2020 npr The day, Dec. 8, is known as the "safe harbor" deadline for states to certify their results, compelling Congress to accept those results “””””

NFBW wrote: I understand you may think NPR is part of the DEEP STATE out to destroy poor victim Trump but their explanation of “safe harbor” is factual and cannot be faked. 21NOV01-POST#685
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
15,050
Reaction score
2,270
Points
245
Correll wrote: I do not know what you are referring to with your "safe harbor" comment 21NOV25-POST#1100

NFBW wrote: Get it now Correll 21NOV27-POST#1108


Electoral College electors are scheduled to meet in states across the country on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December (Dec. 14 this year) to cast their votes.


And if a state has finalized its results six days before then, according to the ECA, then those results qualify for "safe harbor" status — meaning Congress must treat them as the "conclusive" results, even if, for example, a state's legislature sends in a competing set of results.

Every state except Wisconsin appears to have met the deadline, according to The Associated Press. Wisconsin's 10 electoral votes are still expected to be cast for Biden on Monday; he won the state by just over 20,000 votes.


Key Election Dates

Dec. 8: States finish vote certification
Dec. 14: Electors vote
Jan. 6: Congress formalizes the outcome
Jan. 20: Inauguration Day
»Read a full timeline from Election Day to Inauguration Day.
"If a state can conclude its process of appointing electors by that [safe harbor deadline] then Congress is bound by federal law to accept the slate of electors that is arrived upon by that date," said Rebecca Green, the co-director of the Election Law program at William and Mary
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
83,146
Reaction score
20,981
Points
2,220
About a quarter of voting members (23%) of the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate are racial or ethnic minorities, making the 117th Congress the most racially and ethnically diverse in history.


Got it. All you want to do is spread racism and hate. You can talk to yourself then.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
83,146
Reaction score
20,981
Points
2,220
Correll wrote: I do not know what you are referring to with your "safe harbor" comment 21NOV25-POST#1100

NFBW wrote: Read the following conversation Correll it may clue you in. 21NOV27-POST#1107

@ThisIsMe wrote: If you read the Eastman memo, what it does is cite all the violations of election laws that the states in question had committed, and give an outline for what Pence could do in regards to only those states. - - - The memo outlines a plan based on their thought that the election had been stolen. It doesn't indicate that they knew they lost but plotted to send back the electors anyway in an effort to overturn the election. 21OCT30-POST#680

@Faun wrote: Two things... one, it would have been unconstitutional for Pence to unilaterally reject electors; widespread fraud which could have changed the outcome of the election had not been proven. 21NOV01-POST#681

NFBW wrote: Allow me to add to what Faun is explaining to further your edification on the CONSTITUTION that you are unwittingly kind of proving that DJT does not give a flying fuck about the Constitution and John Eastman was lying to his client the entire time. - - - Faun has it right and I will add the concept of “safe harbor” that let’s say by mid December the safe harbor status “constitutionally” ends any chance for SORE losers (may I call them that ThisIsMe ) to legally challenge each states’ certification that is sealed and is to be submitted to Congress. Hence a specific deadline is set to open and read them no later than January 6. I’m sure the founders in colonial times wanted to give the sealed documents time to make the journey to the Capitol. - - - If you were to read this I think you will be able to answer all your questions and not need the help of a hifallutin lawyer./ This part Aint complicated, even for a clueless moron like DJT. 21NOV01-POST#685

“”””” It may come and go without much fanfare, but on Tuesday, the U.S. will pass a key deadline cementing President-elect Joe Biden's victory as the 46th president
DJT

Biden's Victory Cemented As States Reach Key Electoral College Deadline

© 2020 npr The day, Dec. 8, is known as the "safe harbor" deadline for states to certify their results, compelling Congress to accept those results “””””

NFBW wrote: I understand you may think NPR is part of the DEEP STATE out to destroy poor victim Trump but their explanation of “safe harbor” is factual and cannot be faked. 21NOV01-POST#685



1. Faun and you believe that fraud had not been proved. Trump and many other people believe that it was. This touches on your constant inability to understand that other people think differently than you. There is something seriously wrong with you.


2. So, your safe harbor comment is just addressing that 1/6 was the deadline? OK. Yes, we knew that. Not really.... saying anything there. Did you have a further point associated with that, that you think is clear in your head?
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
83,146
Reaction score
20,981
Points
2,220
Correll wrote: I do not know what you are referring to with your "safe harbor" comment 21NOV25-POST#1100

NFBW wrote: Get it now Correll 21NOV27-POST#1108


Electoral College electors are scheduled to meet in states across the country on the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December (Dec. 14 this year) to cast their votes.


And if a state has finalized its results six days before then, according to the ECA, then those results qualify for "safe harbor" status — meaning Congress must treat them as the "conclusive" results, even if, for example, a state's legislature sends in a competing set of results.

Every state except Wisconsin appears to have met the deadline, according to The Associated Press. Wisconsin's 10 electoral votes are still expected to be cast for Biden on Monday; he won the state by just over 20,000 votes.


Key Election Dates

Dec. 8: States finish vote certification
Dec. 14: Electors vote
Jan. 6: Congress formalizes the outcome
Jan. 20: Inauguration Day
»Read a full timeline from Election Day to Inauguration Day.
"If a state can conclude its process of appointing electors by that [safe harbor deadline] then Congress is bound by federal law to accept the slate of electors that is arrived upon by that date," said Rebecca Green, the co-director of the Election Law program at William and Mary


My God, your brain is wired poorly.

Trump and the 1/6 protestors believe that the election was fraudulent. So, in their minds, what RIGHTFULLY should have happened, is that "congress" specifically PENCE, should have refused to "formalizes the outcome".
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
15,050
Reaction score
2,270
Points
245
Correll wrote: 1. Faun and you believe that fraud had not been proved. 21NOV27-POST#1110

NFBW wrote: And we I am sure believe that we are not living on a flat surface which has four corners upon which if we traveled to the edge we would fall off. In my case I have never circumnavigated the globe personally, but I do believe it can be done based on the evidence. - - - The point I’m driving at Correll is that “safe harbor” is a fact that sets aside your Easter Bunny right to believe the earth is flat or that the election was stolen in deference to the founding father’s desire to establish a perpetually immortal nation of the people by the people and for the people knowing full well that such a nation would face a lot of those people dangerous delusionaly and detrimentally believing in the Easter Bunny while having lots and lots of guns to force that belief in others. 21NOV27-POST#1112 - - - Stay tuned more on this will be forthcoming.I’ve got “The” Game to watch today it’s a national holiday. Go Bucks - Muck Fichigsn.
 
Last edited:

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
83,146
Reaction score
20,981
Points
2,220
The point I’m driving at @Correll is that “safe harbor” is a fact that sets aside your Easter Bunny right


Are you trying to argue that Pence's job of certifying the vote was purely ceremonial and he had no actual power to NOT certify it?


Cause if that is what you are trying to say, then why the fuck don't you just say it?

SERIOUSLY DUDE, SOMETHING IS REALLY THE FUCK WRONG WITH YOU.
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
15,050
Reaction score
2,270
Points
245
NFBW wrote: Trump told his vigilante mob on the ellipse right before telling them to march to the Capitol to take the law into their own hands. because “States want to revote. The states got defrauded, They were given false information. They voted on it. Now they want to recertify. They want it back. All Vice President Pence has to do is send it back to the states to recertify and we become president and you are the happiest”

NFBW wrote: One of many problems you have Correll in your fantasy argument is that there were no states that wanted their certifications back after they were put into safe harbor on December 14. If you dissagree, please name those states them. 21NOV27-POST#1114
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
83,146
Reaction score
20,981
Points
2,220
NFBW wrote: Trump told his vigilante mob

Protest crowd. That you have to lie, shows that you know you are in teh wrong.


on the ellipse right before telling them to march to the Capitol to take the law into their own hands. because “States want to revote. The states got defrauded, They were given false information. They voted on it. Now they want to recertify. They want it back. All Vice President Pence has to do is send it back to the states to recertify and we become president and you are the happiest”

NFBW wrote: One of many problems you have Correll in your fantasy argument is that there were no states that wanted their certifications back after they were put into safe harbor on December 14. If you dissagree, please name those states them. 21NOV27-POST#1114

Got it. You disagree with Trump on this issue.

So what? I thought for a minute that I was getting to your point. What the fuck are you even talking about, you lunatic.
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
15,050
Reaction score
2,270
Points
245
Got it. You disagree with Trump on this issue.

No Trump is a liar. There were no states that wanted their certifications back. Trump is a liar. It is an established fact right now that you cannot name the states that wanted their certifications back. So you are an accomplice in trumps lie by calling it just a disagreement right now. You have joined the vigilante mob in support of trumps lie. And yes they were vigilantes because Trump told him if they did march to the capital and if Pence did what he was supposed to do that he would win the election and they would be happy. The truth is After safe Harbor according to the constitution of the United States of America there is no win of the election for DJT. He was basically telling them to take the law constitutional law into their own hands by telling him to go for telling the constitution to go fuck itself because it means nothing.

This is a lie it is not a disagreement

“”””” States want to revote. The states got defrauded, They were given false information. They voted on it. Now they want to recertify. They want it back. All Vice President Pence has to do is send it back to the states to recertify and we become president and you are the happiest” “””””
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
83,146
Reaction score
20,981
Points
2,220
No Trump is a liar. There were no states that wanted their certifications back. Trump is a liar. It is an established fact right now that you cannot name the states that wanted their certifications back. So you are an accomplice in trumps lie by calling it just a disagreement right now. You have joined the vigilante mob in support of trumps lie. And yes they were vigilantes because Trump told him if they did march to the capital and if Pence did what he was supposed to do that he would win the election and they would be happy. The truth is After safe Harbor according to the constitution of the United States of America there is no win of the election for DJT. He was basically telling them to take the law constitutional law into their own hands by telling him to go for telling the constitution to go fuck itself because it means nothing.

This is a lie it is not a disagreement

“”””” States want to revote. The states got defrauded, They were given false information. They voted on it. Now they want to recertify. They want it back. All Vice President Pence has to do is send it back to the states to recertify and we become president and you are the happiest” “””””


Let's pretend for a second, that you are correct on the objective, factual reality of the case.


Hypothetically, do you understand the concept of "wishful thinking"?
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
15,050
Reaction score
2,270
Points
245
Let's pretend for a second, that you are correct on the objective, factual reality of the case.


Hypothetically, do you understand the concept of "wishful thinking"
Name the states and evidence that Trump was not lying to the angry mob when he purposely and precisely told them states “wanted” their certifications back. Trump did not say the state wished they could’ve had their certifications back. He lied. Trump did not say that if Pence did the right thing he wished he would be President - so what were the states that wanted their certifications back?
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
83,146
Reaction score
20,981
Points
2,220
Name the states and evidence that Trump was not lying to the angry mob he purposely and precisely told them states “wanted” their certifications back. Trump did not say the state wish they could’ve had their certifications back. He lied. Trump did not say that if Pence did the right thing he wished he would be President - so what where the states that wanted their certifications back?


Let's pretend for a second, that you are correct on the objective, factual reality of the case.


Hypothetically, do you understand the concept of "wishful thinking"
 

NotfooledbyW

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Messages
15,050
Reaction score
2,270
Points
245
Correll wrote: Are you trying to argue that Pence's job of certifying the vote was purely ceremonial and he had no actual power to NOT certify it? 21NOV27-POST#1106

NFBW wrote: That is not an argument- that is Federal Election Law 21NOV27-POST#1120

“”” The safe harbor deadline, however, is something of a guarantee.


If, for example, a state legislature decided to send in its own slate, the law says the electors chosen by popular vote and certified by the governor must be counted by Congress from states that met the safe harbor deadline “””

Correll wrote: 1. Faun and you believe that fraud had not been proved. 21NOV27-POST#1110

NFBW wrote: Therefore it is not about what Faun and I believe or what DJT and his vigilsnte mob believed about election fraud on Jan6. You have no point. TRUMP LIED to that mob there was a way he could and should win. That lie made them afraid of losing their country and angry. He was inciting them.
The law says all fifty states’ elections were legit and certified and had to be counted on Jan6. There is no exemption for sore losers. 21NOV27-POST#1120
 
Last edited:

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$120.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top