TRUMP for Prez

Originally Posted by 95sn

You sure about those final words? Pretty sure he concluded with "And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore."
Thought the FBI was the instigator?

Fight like hell for all of Trumps life meant in court and public opinion. His final words were peacefully let your voices be heard, but we all know that you are a narrative based gaspumper who lies for a living. Of course they are, how do you think they cleared Trump. They know who did it.

Originally Posted by 95sn

Why dont you just answer?
Biden has nothing to do with it. And FYI, I dropped off more trump votes than Biden votes when i vote harvested...so i helped trump more.
Why are you defending domestic terrorists? Its really anti American. Are you a closet Timmy McVeigh fanboi too?

voter harvesting is illegal in the rest of the country and was illegal in kalifornia until....drum role please.....just before the democrat vote totals sky rocketed beyond anything ever seen in election history.

I thought you said you could not see the ballots? Thought you could not know who voted for who thus it is safe. Who says the others are handing in Trump votes. Kind of interesting they handed in a few hundred thousand biden votes in one area and not a single one for Trump. Really really strange. Nothing to see there.

Why would I believe the tresspasers are terrorists when you believe that democrats who light police departments and federal courthouses on fire are not? Those are just the more noted ones. Police were hurt all the time at my wifes work when you democrats would riot all the time in Oakland. Don't hear you guys calling those democrat protestors terrorists. Is it just terrorism then some dumb a$$es do it to democrats?

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Fight like hell for all of Trumps life meant in court and public opinion. His final words were peacefully let your voices be heard, but we all know that you are a narrative based gaspumper who lies for a living. Of course they are, how do you think they cleared Trump. They know who did it.

You should have been in DC to transcribe his mafia speak for him.
Do you know how simple it is to google trump 1/6 transcript? Do you know what happens when you go to the end? It isnt peaceful.
This is his exact words. Mr. Liar. Maybe you could point it out for all of us, i'll wait. Who lied beside you and trump?

You know, the wall is built. We're doing record numbers at the wall. Now, they want to take down the wall. Let's let everyone flow in. Let's let everybody flow in. We did a great job in the wall. Remember, the wall, they said it could never be done. One of the largest infrastructure projects we've ever had in this country, and it's had a tremendous impact, that we got rid of catch and release. We got rid of all of this stuff that we had to live with.

But now, the caravans, I think Biden's getting in, the caravans are forming again. They want to come in again and rip off our country. Can't let it happen.

As this enormous crowd shows, we have truth and justice on our side. We have a deep and enduring love for America in our hearts. We love our country.

We have overwhelming pride in this great country and we have it deep in our souls. Together, we are determined to defend and preserve government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Our brightest days are before us. Our greatest achievements, still away.

I think one of our great achievements will be election security. Because nobody until I came along had any idea how corrupt our elections were.

And again, most people would stand there at 9 o'clock in the evening and say I want to thank you very much, and they go off to some other life. But I said something's wrong here, something is really wrong, can have happened.

And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore.

Our exciting adventures and boldest endeavors have not yet begun. My fellow Americans, for our movement, for our children, and for our beloved country.

And I say this despite all that's happened. The best is yet to come.

So we're going to, we're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I love Pennsylvania Avenue. And we're going to the Capitol, and we're going to try and give.

The Democrats are hopeless — they never vote for anything. Not even one vote. But we're going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don't need any of our help. We're going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.

So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.

I want to thank you all. God bless you and God Bless America.

Thank you all for being here. This is incredible. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

voter harvesting is illegal in the rest of the country and was illegal in kalifornia until....drum role please.....just before the democrat vote totals sky rocketed beyond anything ever seen in election history.

I thought you said you could not see the ballots? Thought you could not know who voted for who thus it is safe. Who says the others are handing in Trump votes. Kind of interesting they handed in a few hundred thousand biden votes in one area and not a single one for Trump. Really really strange. Nothing to see there.

Why would I believe the tresspasers are terrorists when you believe that democrats who light police departments and federal courthouses on fire are not? Those are just the more noted ones. Police were hurt all the time at my wifes work when you democrats would riot all the time in Oakland. Don't hear you guys calling those democrat protestors terrorists. Is it just terrorism then some dumb a$$es do it to democrats?

How many times you wanna re-hash this? I didnt see your ballot but i am 99% sure who the vote went to, also. Same with my friends ballots.
You trying to claim MORE voter fraud without a shread of proof? Shall i call you "Rudy" or Sidney Powell? Both did the same, both losing their license to practice. Great club you joined.
We call a spade a spade, they are domestic terrorists.
"premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience
Federal statute defines domestic terrorism to include dangerous criminal acts intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or to influence or affect government policy or conduct within the jurisdiction of the United States.
Anyway you define it, if the shoe fits...

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

I am not the only one that feels that way. I think the democrat party is racist and so does half the country. So, who is right?

Not true! There are only 75 million people that believe democrats are the ones that are racist and all the lies spun on fox, they all voted for Trump. Not even close to Half the country! Even if Most people in America were republican, it would not make it true, but we all know if everyone in America voted, republicans would lose.You live in an alternate World who refuses to believe the truth, but just like the confederate flag, which Is racist, you believe it is a religious symbol, which was true for hundreds of years, but today in America it Is the symbol of the Nazis and you know it is racist, but refuse to admit it!

Originally Posted by 95sn

You should have been in DC to transcribe his mafia speak for him.
Do you know how simple it is to google trump 1/6 transcript? Do you know what happens when you go to the end? It isnt peaceful.
This is his exact words. Mr. Liar. Maybe you could point it out for all of us, i'll wait. Who lied beside you and trump?

You know, the wall is built. We're doing record numbers at the wall. Now, they want to take down the wall. Let's let everyone flow in. Let's let everybody flow in. We did a great job in the wall. Remember, the wall, they said it could never be done. One of the largest infrastructure projects we've ever had in this country, and it's had a tremendous impact, that we got rid of catch and release. We got rid of all of this stuff that we had to live with.

But now, the caravans, I think Biden's getting in, the caravans are forming again. They want to come in again and rip off our country. Can't let it happen.

As this enormous crowd shows, we have truth and justice on our side. We have a deep and enduring love for America in our hearts. We love our country.

We have overwhelming pride in this great country and we have it deep in our souls. Together, we are determined to defend and preserve government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Our brightest days are before us. Our greatest achievements, still away.

I think one of our great achievements will be election security. Because nobody until I came along had any idea how corrupt our elections were.

And again, most people would stand there at 9 o'clock in the evening and say I want to thank you very much, and they go off to some other life. But I said something's wrong here, something is really wrong, can have happened.

And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore.

Our exciting adventures and boldest endeavors have not yet begun. My fellow Americans, for our movement, for our children, and for our beloved country.

And I say this despite all that's happened. The best is yet to come.

So we're going to, we're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I love Pennsylvania Avenue. And we're going to the Capitol, and we're going to try and give.

The Democrats are hopeless — they never vote for anything. Not even one vote. But we're going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don't need any of our help. We're going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.

So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.

I want to thank you all. God bless you and God Bless America.

Thank you all for being here. This is incredible. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Looks like Trump was correct again. They tried to stop him from building a wall and the caravans did form again to the tune of a million plus entering the country illegally If a million man army tried to invade, there would be carnage. Apparently all an invading force needs to do is walk across with nothing or carrying drugs, have kids and influence American policy within a generation.

As far as walking down the avenue. So. So what. Not illegal and not a call to violence. You certainly have an odd interpretation of events.

BTW that was an extremely long speech. However in your thrust to post something to help your cause, you lie about what you are presenting and support exactly what I have been saying. You kind of forgot this part of an extremely long speech.

Because you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.

I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.

Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections. But whether or not they stand strong for our country, our country. Our country has been under siege for a long time. Far longer than this four-year period. We've set it on a much greater course. So much, and we, I thought, you know, four more years. I thought it would be easy.

Originally Posted by joeshmoe

Not true! There are only 75 million people that believe democrats are the ones that are racist and all the lies spun on fox, they all voted for Trump. Not even close to Half the country! Even if Most people in America were republican, it would not make it true, but we all know if everyone in America voted, republicans would lose.You live in an alternate World who refuses to believe the truth, but just like the confederate flag, which Is racist, you believe it is a religious symbol, which was true for hundreds of years, but today in America it Is the symbol of the Nazis and you know it is racist, but refuse to admit it!

Making up stuff again. Where have I ever said the confederate flag was a religious symbol?

I don't have to watch fox to know democrats are racists. All I have to do is pay attention to what you vote for and the words you say. Everything is about race for you people. Eventually you will understand the language of your people enough to understand when all you speak about race and base everything on race including blaming race on your problems, you are a racists.

Kind of funny. NAZI's were around maybe 60 years after confederates. The confederates were democrats. Guess what. NAZI's blamed the Jews for their issues. Sound familiar? A group of people blamed a race for their problems and then they went a created laws to rectify that. This does not sound familiar at all to you? A particular political party in the US does not do business that way? Not one little bell going off in your mind? not one?

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Looks like Trump was correct again. They tried to stop him from building a wall and the caravans did form again to the tune of a million plus entering the country illegally If a million man army tried to invade, there would be carnage. Apparently all an invading force needs to do is walk across with nothing or carrying drugs, have kids and influence American policy within a generation.

As far as walking down the avenue. So. So what. Not illegal and not a call to violence. You certainly have an odd interpretation of events.

BTW that was an extremely long speech. However in your thrust to post something to help your cause, you lie about what you are presenting and support exactly what I have been saying. You kind of forgot this part of an extremely long speech.

Because you'll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated.

I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.

Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections. But whether or not they stand strong for our country, our country. Our country has been under siege for a long time. Far longer than this four-year period. We've set it on a much greater course. So much, and we, I thought, you know, four more years. I thought it would be easy.

You said
"His final words were peacefully let your voices be heard, but we all know that you are a narrative based gaspumper who lies for a living. Of course they are, how do you think they cleared Trump. They know who did it."
Then failed again he never concluded the speech that way.
trump NEVER said it at the end. In reality, he said exactly what I told you he said at the end, "Fight like hell....."
Delta: defending felons and lying daily.
Why dont you give a try at defending him trying to get the Justice dept to seize voting machines, when they denied him he tried Homeland security to seize them, when they refused he tried to get the military to seize them. Sure thats 100% Pro America, Pro Democracy.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/ny-tim...nges-narrative

Originally Posted by 95sn

You said
"His final words were peacefully let your voices be heard, but we all know that you are a narrative based gaspumper who lies for a living. Of course they are, how do you think they cleared Trump. They know who did it."
Then failed again he never concluded the speech that way.
trump NEVER said it at the end. In reality, he said exactly what I told you he said at the end, "Fight like hell....."
Delta: defending felons and lying daily.
Why dont you give a try at defending him trying to get the Justice dept to seize voting machines, when they denied him he tried Homeland security to seize them, when they refused he tried to get the military to seize them. Sure thats 100% Pro America, Pro Democracy.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/ny-tim...nges-narrative

So his speech is not final words?

We can play this game:

I want to thank you all. God bless you and God Bless America.

Thank you all for being here. This is incredible. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Those were his final words. At which part to we disregard a whole speech and only pay attention to the parts you f$cking little marxists want to use to justify your position?


Yep. If you know something shady is going on, it is worth the question.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Making up stuff again. Where have I ever said the confederate flag was a religious symbol?

I don't have to watch fox to know democrats are racists. All I have to do is pay attention to what you vote for and the words you say. Everything is about race for you people. Eventually you will understand the language of your people enough to understand when all you speak about race and base everything on race including blaming race on your problems, you are a racists.

Kind of funny. NAZI's were around maybe 60 years after confederates. The confederates were democrats. Guess what. NAZI's blamed the Jews for their issues. Sound familiar? A group of people blamed a race for their problems and then they went a created laws to rectify that. This does not sound familiar at all to you? A particular political party in the US does not do business that way? Not one little bell going off in your mind? not one?

If you pay so much attn to democrats and what they do you missed a little. Biden choose a black woman as VP and won with her. He will shortly pick a black female to appoint to SC. Republicans are livid. You, personally questioned her qualifications despite not even knowing whos experience you were questioning. See the racists? He is choosing one of the most diverse cabinet and administration in history.
You can count the number of Black republican senators and black republican congress members on one hand. 50senators +212 in the house, 3 or 4 out of 162? Yet you believe you pay attention? WTF? FYI, 150 years is 100% irrelevant.

Originally Posted by 95sn

If you pay so much attn to democrats and what they do you missed a little. Biden choose a black woman as VP and won with her. He will shortly pick a black female to appoint to SC. Republicans are livid. You, personally questioned her qualifications despite not even knowing whos experience you were questioning. See the racists? He is choosing one of the most diverse cabinet and administration in history.
You can count the number of Black republican senators and black republican congress members on one hand. 50senators +212 in the house, 3 or 4 out of 162? Yet you believe you pay attention? WTF? FYI, 150 years is 100% irrelevant.

I did not bash anyone you moron. You don't understand the language you are arguing in.

I don't care how many there are. I don't use color or gender as metric, because guess what? It is racist to do so. You being a racist are all into that.

Do you know who said these words:

"I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."

Do you know who wrote the following?

"There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs—partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs."

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

I did not bash anyone you moron. You don't understand the language you are arguing in.

I don't care how many there are. I don't use color or gender as metric, because guess what? It is racist to do so. You being a racist are all into that.

Do you know who said these words:

"I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."

Do you know who wrote the following?

"There is a class of colored people who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs, and the hardships of the Negro race before the public. Having learned that they are able to make a living out of their troubles, they have grown into the settled habit of advertising their wrongs—partly because they want sympathy and partly because it pays. Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances, because they do not want to lose their jobs."

Booker T, in F'ing 1911. 110 years ago he had the GOP talking points figured out. At the time, he was 2/3rds a citizen, couldnt vote, couldnt attend the white school, couldnt drink out of the white water fountain, couldnt own real estate, couldnt ride on the public bus, couldnt stay at the white hotel, couldnt play baseball, couldnt walk into a white bathroom, couldnt enter a white resaurant, the whole Fing country was Segregated...... You trying to say black folks got too much food stamps in 1911? Just gaming the system? Smart dude.

Originally Posted by 95sn

Booker T, in F'ing 1911. 110 years ago he had the GOP talking points figured out. At the time, he was 2/3rds a citizen, couldnt vote, couldnt attend the white school, couldnt drink out of the white water fountain, couldnt own real estate, couldnt ride on the public bus, couldnt stay at the white hotel, couldnt play baseball, couldnt walk into a white bathroom, couldnt enter a white resaurant, the whole Fing country was Segregated...... You trying to say black folks got too much food stamps in 1911? Just gaming the system? Smart dude.

You obviously ignored MLK's talking point and so did the whole democrat party. MLK did not want to be known for being a black this or that. We wanted him and all people to be recognized for merit. He did not want to be included nor excluded due to the color of skin. He was appealing for merit. That is something the democrat know nothing about.

Booker T Washington, even with all those things going on could see plain as day what was going on and the democrats a 110 years later are using the playbook he warned about. Wise man. He knew too about those who wish to profit about race hustling even a 110 years ago and apparently 110 years ago, he too was making an appeal to merit.

Democrats don't want merit, they want power and position based on marxism and through extension morphing race hustling as a substitute for class struggle as defined by marx.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

You obviously ignored MLK's talking point and so did the whole democrat party. MLK did not want to be known for being a black this or that. We wanted him and all people to be recognized for merit. He did not want to be included nor excluded due to the color of skin. He was appealing for merit. That is something the democrat know nothing about.

Booker T Washington, even with all those things going on could see plain as day what was going on and the democrats a 110 years later are using the playbook he warned about. Wise man. He knew too about those who wish to profit about race hustling even a 110 years ago and apparently 110 years ago, he too was making an appeal to merit.

Democrats don't want merit, they want power and position based on marxism and through extension morphing race hustling as a substitute for class struggle as defined by marx.

One has to really stretch to get as brainwashed as you are. Friggen idiot. Those damn Blacks taking advantage of white american generosity in 1911.

Just listened to a report that trump regularly used to rip up documents presented to him if he didn't like them. Another story about him eating some notes in the white house. Hilarious. You should definitely elect him again.

Originally Posted by 95sn

One has to really stretch to get as brainwashed as you are. Friggen idiot. Those damn Blacks taking advantage of white american generosity in 1911.

It had nothing to do with white generosity. Sounds pretty elitist of you to put it that way. It also has nothing to do with me. This was a black intellectual who saw the game then as it is now. He believes like Republicans have always believed it should be about merit not your looks. Sorry if a black man from over 100 years in the past triggers you.

Another one for you. You know who said this:

"The liberal is more hypocritical than the conservative. Both want power, but the white liberal is the one who has perfected the art of posing as the Negro's friend and benefactor; and by winning the friendship, allegiance, and support of the Negro, the white liberal is able to use the Negro as a pawn or tool in this political "football game" that is constantly raging between the white liberals and white conservatives. "

Originally Posted by ralph

Just listened to a report that trump regularly used to rip up documents presented to him if he didn't like them. Another story about him eating some notes in the white house. Hilarious. You should definitely elect him again.

you out of lock down?

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

you out of lock down?

Yes out of lockdown. Bad news is our covid death toll is now up to 53 people.

Originally Posted by ralph

Yes out of lockdown. Bad news is our covid death toll is now up to 53 people.

sorry to hear that.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

sorry to hear that.

All good, just come back from 5 day mtb trip. So mint.

Those sheep sure look nervous.....

Originally Posted by joeshmoe

Not true! There are only 75 million people that believe democrats are the ones that are racist and all the lies spun on fox, they all voted for Trump. Not even close to Half the country! Even if Most people in America were republican, it would not make it true, but we all know if everyone in America voted, republicans would lose.You live in an alternate World who refuses to believe the truth, but just like the confederate flag, which Is racist, you believe it is a religious symbol, which was true for hundreds of years, but today in America it Is the symbol of the Nazis and you know it is racist, but refuse to admit it!

Revisiting this. Kind of funny. You democrats have toppled status of Washington, Jefferson, Grant and a whole host of other political figures. They made a big deal of removing a Jefferson statue from New York City Hall for being racist. I don't think any of you democrats have a leg to stand on by telling others what is racist or not. Your needle for truth is clearly bent. It is bent toward marxism in which case the goal is to wipe out the history so you can rewrite it to your narrative. Democrat accusations of anything are not based in truth, they are only based to get the results they desire.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Revisiting this. Kind of funny. You democrats have toppled status of Washington, Jefferson, Grant and a whole host of other political figures. They made a big deal of removing a Jefferson statue from New York City Hall for being racist. I don't think any of you democrats have a leg to stand on by telling others what is racist or not. Your needle for truth is clearly bent. It is bent toward marxism in which case the goal is to wipe out the history so you can rewrite it to your narrative. Democrat accusations of anything are not based in truth, they are only based to get the results they desire.

Hey, is it Marxist to seize voting machines after an election loss where you claimed fraud? or is that just a trump thing?
Toppled statues, Delta praising false gods

Originally Posted by 95sn

Hey, is it Marxist to seize voting machines after an election loss where you claimed fraud? or is that just a trump thing?
Toppled statues, Delta praising false gods

wow Gaspumper, you sure are reaching. Take another hit.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

wow Gaspumper, you sure are reaching. Take another hit.

2 questions, ok 3.
What does gaspumper mean?
Are you purposely ignoring treasonous acts?
https://www.foxnews.com/media/ny-tim...nges-narrative
https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...achines-report
https://www.fox5ny.com/news/presiden...on-report-says
https://nypost.com/2022/02/01/trump-...chines-report/
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/02/p...committee.html
https://www.vox.com/2022/2/1/2291239...hines-military

You inferring these 6 sources are wrong?

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Revisiting this. Kind of funny. You democrats have toppled status of Washington, Jefferson, Grant and a whole host of other political figures. They made a big deal of removing a Jefferson statue from New York City Hall for being racist. I don't think any of you democrats have a leg to stand on by telling others what is racist or not. Your needle for truth is clearly bent. It is bent toward marxism in which case the goal is to wipe out the history so you can rewrite it to your narrative. Democrat accusations of anything are not based in truth, they are only based to get the results they desire.

You really are too far gone to even question any more, the whole statue tear down was for any statue of CONFEDERATES who happen to have Lost the civil war that were put up in the South Years After the Civil war was OVER! You go down South and you would think the South won the war with all the Losers put up on pedestals as statues. I don't care if they tear down any confederate(loser)statue put up years After that war. Any statue put up before the war should Not be torn down even if the person Is racist, That would be a part of history. Leave it to you to jump on the bandwagon that thinks tearing down a statue put up After the Civil war is a bad thing, these people are called Republicans! If you do Not want to be called racist, do Not vote republican.

Originally Posted by 95sn

2 questions, ok 3.
What does gaspumper mean?
Are you purposely ignoring treasonous acts?
https://www.foxnews.com/media/ny-tim...nges-narrative
https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...achines-report
https://www.fox5ny.com/news/presiden...on-report-says
https://nypost.com/2022/02/01/trump-...chines-report/
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/02/p...committee.html
https://www.vox.com/2022/2/1/2291239...hines-military

You inferring these 6 sources are wrong?

Titles such as "changes the narrative" explains the whole thing. It is all about narrative. I would not blame him for asking law enforcement if they can seize them and to an audit on them. If the statistics say there is cheating going on, then by all means look at them. Ultimately they did look at them correct? Didn't they end up auditing the machines? Trying to find out what legal channels to do it does not change anything. Ultimately they found the right channels and did it the correct way. Just another made up story.

Gaspumper haha... Well it is not good but I modified it for you as a professional gaslighter. The other version is not so kind.

Originally Posted by joeshmoe

You really are too far gone to even question any more, the whole statue tear down was for any statue of CONFEDERATES who happen to have Lost the civil war that were put up in the South Years After the Civil war was OVER! You go down South and you would think the South won the war with all the Losers put up on pedestals as statues. I don't care if they tear down any confederate(loser)statue put up years After that war. Any statue put up before the war should Not be torn down even if the person Is racist, That would be a part of history. Leave it to you to jump on the bandwagon that thinks tearing down a statue put up After the Civil war is a bad thing, these people are called Republicans! If you do Not want to be called racist, do Not vote republican.

You can call me what ever you want. you are just projecting as your whole party is racist. They just did not tear down confederate statues unless you count Grant, Jefferson, Washington as confederates. Can we just go back to burning books again? Funny thing is, you guys are moving closer and closer to the Puritans you mock so willingly. Demcorat party is just trying to bring all the worst people of history into one big tent. Marxists, NAZI's, Racists, you name it. Look at pretty much every authoritarian murderer of their own citizens and the democrats think they are heros.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Those sheep sure look nervous.....

With good reason!

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Titles such as "changes the narrative" explains the whole thing. It is all about narrative. I would not blame him for asking law enforcement if they can seize them and to an audit on them. If the statistics say there is cheating going on, then by all means look at them. Ultimately they did look at them correct? Didn't they end up auditing the machines? Trying to find out what legal channels to do it does not change anything. Ultimately they found the right channels and did it the correct way. Just another made up story.

Gaspumper haha... Well it is not good but I modified it for you as a professional gaslighter. The other version is not so kind.

Why pick on the FOX headline? Did the other 5 miss something? Its illegal, its not a narrative. Are you saying you are in favor of the feds having local law enforcement seizing voting machines? Straight up 3rd world authoritarian handbook stuff. It was done in Myanmar when the army took over last year too. Trump is the single source for all the fraud claims tho not a single one has been confirmed. Tried in over 60 lawsuits lost. That makes it a lie.
Yes, they audited multiple times in each swing state. Zero fraud found other than 400ish republicans, single issue across the country.
When you have the paperwork from the WH, it isnt made up. is it?
Stick w/ Gaspumper. i like it.

Originally Posted by 95sn

Why pick on the FOX headline? Did the other 5 miss something? Its illegal, its not a narrative. Are you saying you are in favor of the feds having local law enforcement seizing voting machines? Straight up 3rd world authoritarian handbook stuff. It was done in Myanmar when the army took over last year too. Trump is the single source for all the fraud claims tho not a single one has been confirmed. Tried in over 60 lawsuits lost. That makes it a lie.
Yes, they audited multiple times in each swing state. Zero fraud found other than 400ish republicans, single issue across the country.
When you have the paperwork from the WH, it isnt made up. is it?
Stick w/ Gaspumper. i like it.

It does not make it a lie. It is not illegal to ask. They told him the law and they went with it. Again, they did look at them. so.....

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

It does not make it a lie. It is not illegal to ask. They told him the law and they went with it. Again, they did look at them. so.....

While that's true, you kinda want your President to not ask you to do illegal things.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

It does not make it a lie. It is not illegal to ask. They told him the law and they went with it. Again, they did look at them. so.....

He asked 60+ times, every time the judge, including trump appointed judges said "NO".
He asked asked several state AG's to push his lie, they all said "NO", its illegal.
He asked the Sec of State in Georgia to create more votes for him a month after the election, he said "NO". Its illegal.
He asked the DOJ to seize the voting machines, they said "NO", its illegal.
He asked the Pentagon to seize the voting machines, they said "NO" its illegal.
He asked Homeland Security to seize voting machines, they said "NO", its illegal.
He asked (begged) VP Pence to throw out the results, he said "NO, its illegal.
His attys wrote up a 6 point memo on "How to" steal the election. Its illegal.
He is offering pardons to the 1/6 people arrested in the riot if they keep quiet. (crime of obstruction) illegal.
He is asking his "people" (the ones who attacked the capitol) to " “If these radical, vicious, racist prosecutors do anything wrong or illegal," FYI, the prosecutors in NY, Georgia and Manhattan DA are all black. Racist and illegal.
He asked Rudy to go to the swing states and have them prepare "alternate" (fake) electors that state Trump is the winner of their electoral votes, 7 of them did it and sent the fake electoral trump votes to the Library of Congress to count for trump. They were caught. DOJ is on them, 1/6 committee is getting them to come in for questioning. All illegal.
There is not a single source of ANY election fraud in the entire country, except from trumps mouth.
Why does the POTUS keep trying to do illegal ****?
Sure looks like he was actively trying to steal an election.

Originally Posted by ralph

While that's true, you kinda want your President to not ask you to do illegal things.

Not illegal. They ended up auditing them. I guess I don't understand the distinction. It is perfectly legal to do, you just have to get to the correct department. So if I want get a permit to build something but I started at the wrong department asking the question I am now illegal? uh huh...

Originally Posted by 95sn

He asked 60+ times, every time the judge, including trump appointed judges said "NO".
He asked asked several state AG's to push his lie, they all said "NO", its illegal.
He asked the Sec of State in Georgia to create more votes for him a month after the election, he said "NO". Its illegal.
He asked the DOJ to seize the voting machines, they said "NO", its illegal.
He asked the Pentagon to seize the voting machines, they said "NO" its illegal.
He asked Homeland Security to seize voting machines, they said "NO", its illegal.
He asked (begged) VP Pence to throw out the results, he said "NO, its illegal.
His attys wrote up a 6 point memo on "How to" steal the election. Its illegal.
He is offering pardons to the 1/6 people arrested in the riot if they keep quiet. (crime of obstruction) illegal.
He is asking his "people" (the ones who attacked the capitol) to " “If these radical, vicious, racist prosecutors do anything wrong or illegal," FYI, the prosecutors in NY, Georgia and Manhattan DA are all black. Racist and illegal.
He asked Rudy to go to the swing states and have them prepare "alternate" (fake) electors that state Trump is the winner of their electoral votes, 7 of them did it and sent the fake electoral trump votes to the Library of Congress to count for trump. They were caught. DOJ is on them, 1/6 committee is getting them to come in for questioning. All illegal.
There is not a single source of ANY election fraud in the entire country, except from trumps mouth.
Why does the POTUS keep trying to do illegal ****?
Sure looks like he was actively trying to steal an election.

He is using every legal mean he could to fight what we know was a rigged election from the democrats. statistics DO NOT LIE. It does not matter what you think anyway. He runs, he will get my vote. I would do it twice on Sunday if I could so I could stick it in your eye.

Originally Posted by 95sn

He asked 60+ times, every time the judge, including trump appointed judges said "NO".
He asked asked several state AG's to push his lie, they all said "NO", its illegal.
He asked the Sec of State in Georgia to create more votes for him a month after the election, he said "NO". Its illegal.
He asked the DOJ to seize the voting machines, they said "NO", its illegal.
He asked the Pentagon to seize the voting machines, they said "NO" its illegal.
He asked Homeland Security to seize voting machines, they said "NO", its illegal.
He asked (begged) VP Pence to throw out the results, he said "NO, its illegal.
His attys wrote up a 6 point memo on "How to" steal the election. Its illegal.
He is offering pardons to the 1/6 people arrested in the riot if they keep quiet. (crime of obstruction) illegal.
He is asking his "people" (the ones who attacked the capitol) to " “If these radical, vicious, racist prosecutors do anything wrong or illegal," FYI, the prosecutors in NY, Georgia and Manhattan DA are all black. Racist and illegal.
He asked Rudy to go to the swing states and have them prepare "alternate" (fake) electors that state Trump is the winner of their electoral votes, 7 of them did it and sent the fake electoral trump votes to the Library of Congress to count for trump. They were caught. DOJ is on them, 1/6 committee is getting them to come in for questioning. All illegal.
There is not a single source of ANY election fraud in the entire country, except from trumps mouth.
Why does the POTUS keep trying to do illegal ****?
Sure looks like he was actively trying to steal an election.

And know those methods were not illegal. They are written in the constitution. The difference is, they would not exercise that right because it will open up a box of worms and they certainly were not going to do that for Trump. It is what it is, but much of that was not illegal, but we all know that if someone uses their rights under the constitution against something you are for it is illegal in your mind. you are very binary in that mode of operation.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Not illegal. They ended up auditing them. I guess I don't understand the distinction. It is perfectly legal to do, you just have to get to the correct department. So if I want get a permit to build something but I started at the wrong department asking the question I am now illegal? uh huh...

Originally Posted by Orange Messiah

What I want to do is this. I just want to find 11,780 votes

Yeah, sure thing Mr President, does it matter where I find them?

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

He is using every legal mean he could to fight what we know was a rigged election from the democrats. statistics DO NOT LIE. It does not matter what you think anyway. He runs, he will get my vote. I would do it twice on Sunday if I could so I could stick it in your eye.

The only reason you say it was rigged election is because trump said it. There is no other source. You feel its a good choice to believe someone who tried a dozen illegal ways to steal an election? You sure?
Statistics? like there are more voting dems than voting R's?
statistics, lol, what statistics from the 2020 election. The statistics say Biden got more votes, more electoral votes. Thats the stats.
Congrats on a well thought through vote, for a criminal. Another accomplice.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

And know those methods were not illegal. They are written in the constitution. The difference is, they would not exercise that right because it will open up a box of worms and they certainly were not going to do that for Trump. It is what it is, but much of that was not illegal, but we all know that if someone uses their rights under the constitution against something you are for it is illegal in your mind. you are very binary in that mode of operation.

How ridicules are you going to get? Maybe time to open a book, perhaps one on election fraud.
It is illegal to ask the Georgia Sec of State to "find more votes". Its illegal to seize voting machines, to push State AG's to "say there was fraud" , Pence to change the electoral count, illegal to create false electors.... illegal for all the things i posted. Its all election fraud of one kind or another. You seem to think if you attempt bank robbery, but fail, they dont arrest your azz. trump fails at everything.

Indeed, if it's ok for the Vice President to select his own electors to install whoever he wants why wouldn't the dems do it at the next election? They are 100% evil and wot not, seems like something they would have no problem with.

Originally Posted by ralph

While that's true, you kinda want your President to not ask you to do illegal things.

He didn't ask them to do illegal things. he is trying to solve a problem and asking people to do it. They say no because they know their job and finally they arrived at the correct place and it happened. Not much harder than that.

Originally Posted by 95sn

The only reason you say it was rigged election is because trump said it. There is no other source. You feel its a good choice to believe someone who tried a dozen illegal ways to steal an election? You sure?
Statistics? like there are more voting dems than voting R's?
statistics, lol, what statistics from the 2020 election. The statistics say Biden got more votes, more electoral votes. Thats the stats.
Congrats on a well thought through vote, for a criminal. Another accomplice.

Uh, you can go back in this very thread when they reported what they did with sending ballots everywhere that it was going to be viewed as rigged. I know how this is operating in kalifornia and it is pretty easy to scale to the country especially when all you need to do is influence maybe 6 places to rig and election. It has nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with kalifornia's corruption.

Only criminals are people like you.

Originally Posted by ralph

Indeed, if it's ok for the Vice President to select his own electors to install whoever he wants why wouldn't the dems do it at the next election? They are 100% evil and wot not, seems like something they would have no problem with.

VP cannot select his own electors. He can reject the ones and send it back to the state legislatures. The state legislatures at that point can vote on electors I believe is the procedure. Again the state are not required to ask citizens for their presidential votes. They simply can elect them from their legislatures. It is that procedure has to be in place before the agreed on national election date. Except if the electors by the original process are rejected due to fraud or other reasons, I believe the states can elect their own and send them. In this case the democrats went around the state legislatures in like 42 states and got a judge to change the law (which is illegal because judges can not write laws) and went around the state legislatures. That is what all this is about. Nice of you to try and keep up with the democrats narrative, but this is all legal and in the constitution.

Originally Posted by 95sn

How ridicules are you going to get? Maybe time to open a book, perhaps one on election fraud.
It is illegal to ask the Georgia Sec of State to "find more votes". Its illegal to seize voting machines, to push State AG's to "say there was fraud" , Pence to change the electoral count, illegal to create false electors.... illegal for all the things i posted. Its all election fraud of one kind or another. You seem to think if you attempt bank robbery, but fail, they dont arrest your azz. trump fails at everything.

No, it is not illegal.

Is it illegal to go around the state legislatures and pass election changes without their consent? YES.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

He didn't ask them to do illegal things. he is trying to solve a problem and asking people to do it. They say no because they know their job and finally they arrived at the correct place and it happened. Not much harder than that.

The problem, he created himself? Orange God lied to everyone saying there was voter fraud. The problem, There is zero evidence of fraud. Orange God had to find some or at least sow more question, thus, "Lets take the voting machines and say there was fraud", that will create enough confusion so I can stay in power. Its all illegal.
When you ask people to do illegal things it is called conspiracy to commit felony.

"They say no because they know their job and finally they arrived at the correct place and it happened"
What does this even mean?

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Uh, you can go back in this very thread when they reported what they did with sending ballots everywhere that it was going to be viewed as rigged. I know how this is operating in kalifornia and it is pretty easy to scale to the country especially when all you need to do is influence maybe 6 places to rig and election. It has nothing to do with Trump and everything to do with kalifornia's corruption.

Only criminals are people like you.

Again, the only one claiming mail in ballots=rigged, fraud, is Orange God.
The only one w/o standing is Orange God.
The only one to go to court and lose over 60 times because he had zero proof is Orange God.
The only one cheating is getting more bad news day after day.
No, you actually dont "know" how this operates in CA. Its just your feelings, you have zero to back up your feelings. Just like Orange Felon. Zero.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

VP cannot select his own electors. He can reject the ones and send it back to the state legislatures. The state legislatures at that point can vote on electors I believe is the procedure. Again the state are not required to ask citizens for their presidential votes. They simply can elect them from their legislatures. It is that procedure has to be in place before the agreed on national election date. Except if the electors by the original process are rejected due to fraud or other reasons, I believe the states can elect their own and send them. In this case the democrats went around the state legislatures in like 42 states and got a judge to change the law (which is illegal because judges can not write laws) and went around the state legislatures. That is what all this is about. Nice of you to try and keep up with the democrats narrative, but this is all legal and in the constitution.

No he cant do that. The electors are certified at state level in December. The VP is officiating a ceremony only.
You are mistaken, the republicans after the election Biden won, sent fake electors with counterfeit trump electoral votes to Congress. 7 states did it at Rudy's direction. That is the Pres personal atty.
Perhaps you can point out in the constitution where its legal to send fake electors to congress with counterfeit votes? Or where the constitution gives Orange God the right to seize voting Machines. Where it states president can request Sec of State to provide him more votes a month after the election. Where ? Love to see that.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

No, it is not illegal.

Is it illegal to go around the state legislatures and pass election changes without their consent? YES.

Where did you get your law degree? Trump University?

Pence said Trump Was Wrong!
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/04/u...-election.html
I thought it was interesting that Nobody on this thread backed Trump, even making a new thread on the presidency. And the news is just now questioning if the Trump supporters are waning?

Originally Posted by joeshmoe

Pence said Trump Was Wrong!
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/04/u...-election.html
I thought it was interesting that Nobody on this thread backed Trump, even making a new thread on the presidency. And the news is just now questioning if the Trump supporters are waning?

can't read the article. paywall

^^Search feature acting up again?
https://news.yahoo.com/pence-says-tr...213347510.html

Originally Posted by 95sn

^^Search feature acting up again?
https://news.yahoo.com/pence-says-tr...213347510.html

Your sides article. Don't link to pay wall stuff. One has to conclude that you did not read the article like usual and simply posted a title thinking is supports your argument. If I had a dollar for all the times you did that and the article supported my argument instead, I would just buy the internet and kick you off.

Originally Posted by 95sn

^^Search feature acting up again?
https://news.yahoo.com/pence-says-tr...213347510.html

And right on que. You did not read the article. Nothing of context on why he could not send it back to the states. Only thing being appealed to is it would look bad for our republic. It would look bad so basically he did not want to upset the apple cart. Don't really blame him, however there is nothing in the article that supports the headline.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

Your sides article. Don't link to pay wall stuff. One has to conclude that you did not read the article like usual and simply posted a title thinking is supports your argument. If I had a dollar for all the times you did that and the article supported my argument instead, I would just buy the internet and kick you off.

ok, FOXY enough for you?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pen...aim-unamerican

"President Trump is wrong," Pence said in a speech to the Federalist Society, a conservative legal organization, in Lake Buena Vista, Florida. "I had no right to overturn the election."

"The presidency belongs to the American people, and the American people alone. And frankly there is no idea more un-American than the notion that any one person could choose the American president,"

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

And right on que. You did not read the article. Nothing of context on why he could not send it back to the states. Only thing being appealed to is it would look bad for our republic. It would look bad so basically he did not want to upset the apple cart. Don't really blame him, however there is nothing in the article that supports the headline.

Right. He said specifically "And frankly there is no idea more un-American than the notion that any one person could choose the American president,"

Originally Posted by 95sn

Right. He said specifically "And frankly there is no idea more un-American than the notion that any one person could choose the American president,"

You don't know the difference between ones moral feeling and the law do you? What he is stating is a moral position. He could be correct in the law, however that was not an appeal to the law. That was an emotional statement.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

You don't know the difference between ones moral feeling and the law do you? What he is stating is a moral position. He could be correct in the law, however that was not an appeal to the law. That was an emotional statement.

No it isnt a moral, nor emotional question, it is one of legality, as in he had NO RIGHT to do it.
The only emotional part is your feelings on the matter. Snowflake.
The VP has only a ceremonial role, got it?
If we play by your emotional playbook, get use to Biden 2028!

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

You don't know the difference between ones moral feeling and the law do you? What he is stating is a moral position. He could be correct in the law, however that was not an appeal to the law. That was an emotional statement.

If he is correct in the law, how is it that you get to say that he's not referring to the law? You say the dumbest s**t all the time. Doesn't that ever give you an uneasy feeling about how others view your intelligence?

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

You don't know the difference between ones moral feeling and the law do you? What he is stating is a moral position. He could be correct in the law, however that was not an appeal to the law. That was an emotional statement.

It can be both. Un-American = Morally wrong. Un-American = against the constitution. There is zero chance that would be upheld by any court. It would be 100% DOA.

Do you think the founding fathers and all of the politicians that came after them, up to Trump, honestly believe that one man could toss an election? If you believe that, you deserve a dictator/autocrat.

Just send it back to the states and drag the whole thing out until you get the results you want.

Originally Posted by skiboarder

It can be both. Un-American = Morally wrong. Un-American = against the constitution. There is zero chance that would be upheld by any court. It would be 100% DOA.

Do you think the founding fathers and all of the politicians that came after them, up to Trump, honestly believe that one man could toss an election? If you believe that, you deserve a dictator/autocrat.

Just send it back to the states and drag the whole thing out until you get the results you want.

No body believes one man can toss an election just like a bunch of protestors including the idiots that went into the capitol can change the election, however there are procedures for certification and procedures the states can follow per the constitution. You may be right. I could be DOA in the courts, there is some precedence during the Bush and Gore election and a different time where a state wanted to have an election before the date selected by congress to kind of predetermine a winner or decide on a run off on election day. In both cases it was determined you could not have a redo election due to congress selecting on and only one date to have an election. Does not mean there is not a different angle to it. In any case it is still not this narrative that one person has control of the election by utilizing their position in the process. The process overall still would have checks and balances.

As far as dragging things out. That is exactly how the democrats have ran elections for generations.

Originally Posted by fly135

If he is correct in the law, how is it that you get to say that he's not referring to the law? You say the dumbest s**t all the time. Doesn't that ever give you an uneasy feeling about how others view your intelligence?

Because his statement as written in the article does not reference the law. It references his stance on what he believes is right or wrong in a political sense. Unless the article is mischaracterizing his stance and left out relevant words, this article does not support a statement about a specific law.

Originally Posted by fly135

If he is correct in the law, how is it that you get to say that he's not referring to the law? You say the dumbest s**t all the time. Doesn't that ever give you an uneasy feeling about how others view your intelligence?

and this is rich coming from someone who only votes for president so he can get free crap.

Originally Posted by 95sn

No it isnt a moral, nor emotional question, it is one of legality, as in he had NO RIGHT to do it.
The only emotional part is your feelings on the matter. Snowflake.
The VP has only a ceremonial role, got it?
If we play by your emotional playbook, get use to Biden 2028!

can you show me anywhere in that article that they referenced a law that propped up your opinion? There is plenty in the article to point that is it talking about his moral/ political stance.

Originally Posted by 95sn

Right. He said specifically "And frankly there is no idea more un-American than the notion that any one person could choose the American president,"

Can you point to the part of the constitution where "un-American" is referenced in the establishment of election law?

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

and this is rich coming from someone who only votes for president so he can get free crap.

What free crap would that be? Never collected a single unemployment check in my life. Maxed out the SS deduction many of my working years. Debt free and don't get govt assistance except what I paid into all my life. I.E. SS and medicare.

And not sure how Pence could reference a law that doesn't exist. Which was his point when he said Trump was wrong.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

can you show me anywhere in that article that they referenced a law that propped up your opinion? There is plenty in the article to point that is it talking about his moral/ political stance.

Once again demonstrating your stupidity. It's the responsibility of those trying to throw out the election to find a law that supports their position. It was attempted many times in court and failed. One would wonder how ignorant you'd have to be to hitch your integrity on an argument so throughly refuted.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

can you show me anywhere in that article that they referenced a law that propped up your opinion? There is plenty in the article to point that is it talking about his moral/ political stance.

There is no need.
If you are up to date on the insurrection, you would know how many times trump and his attys tried to push Pence to cheat. All of the pence attys told them to pound sand, Pence even consulted Dan Quayle and he said the same, the trump guys are nuts, crazy and completely illegal. The VP has a ceremonial role ONLY, clear enough for you?
Why dont you "search" and report back the findings....I can forward to VP Harris so the dems never leave office, according to you, the Trump University Grad.

Originally Posted by fly135

Once again demonstrating your stupidity. It's the responsibility of those trying to throw out the election to find a law that supports their position. It was attempted many times in court and failed. One would wonder how ignorant you'd have to be to hitch your integrity on an argument so throughly refuted.

That point being discussed was never tried in court and you know that. Again the article did not support the legal argument nor did the reported quote support the legality. That position could not have been tried in court because it has NEVER been done. You are just making stuff up. It was an appeal to his beliefs. I like Mike Pence, however he is not a constitutional scholar either.

Originally Posted by 95sn

There is no need.
If you are up to date on the insurrection, you would know how many times trump and his attys tried to push Pence to cheat. All of the pence attys told them to pound sand, Pence even consulted Dan Quayle and he said the same, the trump guys are nuts, crazy and completely illegal. The VP has a ceremonial role ONLY, clear enough for you?
Why dont you "search" and report back the findings....I can forward to VP Harris so the dems never leave office, according to you, the Trump University Grad.

VP is the head of the senate.

Congress meets in joint session in the House of Representatives on January 6 to count the electoral votes. The Vice President, as President of the Senate, is the presiding officer. Tellers open, present, and record the votes of the States in alphabetical order. The President of the Senate announces the results of the State vote and then calls for any objections. To be recognized, an objection must be submitted in writing and be signed by at least one member of the House and one Senator. If an objection is recognized, the House and Senate withdraw to their respective chambers to consider the merits of any objections, following the process set out in 3 U.S.C. §15. After all the votes are recorded and counted, the President of the Senate declares which persons, if any, have been elected President and Vice President of the United States.

The vice presidents role is not ceremonial, you grade school drop out.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

That point being discussed was never tried in court and you know that. Again the article did not support the legal argument nor did the reported quote support the legality. That position could not have been tried in court because it has NEVER been done. You are just making stuff up. It was an appeal to his beliefs. I like Mike Pence, however he is not a constitutional scholar either.

Nobody is making up stuff but you. It hasn't been tried in court because only idiots think that the VP can overturn the election. Are you one of them? Because you are the one arguing that it's an open question. My point was that Trump used every argument he could muster in court and it didn't save him from the boot. Pence overturning the election was so ridiculous that it wasn't even a plausible argument for the legal system to address.

Who cares if a magazine article doesn't have a legal argument in it? That's really unimportant. If it was an open question that had to be resolved in court, then you can rest assured that Trump's lawyers would have acted on it. It's amazing how desperate you become when you are clearly in the wrong. You switch the argument to something completely trivial and irrelevant like, in this instance, whether a magazine article fails to present a legal argument.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

The vice presidents role is not ceremonial, you grade school drop out.

How ironic.

The VP gets to vote when it's a tie while passing a bill. That's not ceremonial. But calling for the electoral votes is pretty much a ceremonial act. And if you look at your cut and paste of the law, it says that the VP "calls for any objections". Once again you have failed to make the point that the VP can invalidate the election, and are reduced to arguing the trivial matter of how ceremonial the VP's role in the Senate.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

VP is the head of the senate.

Congress meets in joint session in the House of Representatives on January 6 to count the electoral votes. The Vice President, as President of the Senate, is the presiding officer. Tellers open, present, and record the votes of the States in alphabetical order. The President of the Senate announces the results of the State vote and then calls for any objections. To be recognized, an objection must be submitted in writing and be signed by at least one member of the House and one Senator. If an objection is recognized, the House and Senate withdraw to their respective chambers to consider the merits of any objections, following the process set out in 3 U.S.C. §15. After all the votes are recorded and counted, the President of the Senate declares which persons, if any, have been elected President and Vice President of the United States.

The vice presidents role is not ceremonial, you grade school drop out.

Clown, VP's role is strictly ceremonial in the instance of certifying the electoral vote. 100% accurate. Name all those times the VP made a change, any ? Ever? Because its ceremonial. Nice work reciting how the CEREMONY goes.
As long as were here...how were they supposed to count the counterfeit electoral votes? Why did states send fake votes from fake electors? Who told them to do it? Why? Is it like passing counterfeit money? Do they just arrest you for felony counterfeiting? Is pretending to be an elector a federal or state crime? or both? Seems we need to investigate and get to the oranges.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

That point being discussed was never tried in court and you know that. Again the article did not support the legal argument nor did the reported quote support the legality. That position could not have been tried in court because it has NEVER been done. You are just making stuff up. It was an appeal to his beliefs. I like Mike Pence, however he is not a constitutional scholar either.

Know who else isnt a constitutional scholar? nor a constitutional kindergartener?

Originally Posted by 95sn

Know who else isnt a constitutional scholar? nor a constitutional kindergartener?

You. At least I understand the words and the language I am arguing in. You? Not so much.

Originally Posted by 95sn

Clown, VP's role is strictly ceremonial in the instance of certifying the electoral vote. 100% accurate. Name all those times the VP made a change, any ? Ever? Because its ceremonial. Nice work reciting how the CEREMONY goes.
As long as were here...how were they supposed to count the counterfeit electoral votes? Why did states send fake votes from fake electors? Who told them to do it? Why? Is it like passing counterfeit money? Do they just arrest you for felony counterfeiting? Is pretending to be an elector a federal or state crime? or both? Seems we need to investigate and get to the oranges.

It is ceremonial because it usually goes smoothy. That does not mean the VP does not have a defined role under the constitution. You really do not understand life do you? Been sheltered too much. Typical rich kid.

Originally Posted by fly135

How ironic.

The VP gets to vote when it's a tie while passing a bill. That's not ceremonial. But calling for the electoral votes is pretty much a ceremonial act. And if you look at your cut and paste of the law, it says that the VP "calls for any objections". Once again you have failed to make the point that the VP can invalidate the election, and are reduced to arguing the trivial matter of how ceremonial the VP's role in the Senate.

I was not making the point the VP can invalidate an election. I think you are confusing Sn's argument. You really need to keep better track.

My argument is the article does not support his claim.

Did Pence call for objections? Do we know what all happened that day. You guys argument is Pence could not have done anything. Sounds like he did have a duty. Did he do that? I don't know if he did or not. Was their other little known sub sections in the constitution that Trump's team was trying to push on that Pence would not do? I don't know and neither do you. It is the same bull$hit you guy always do and say. Trump did it or said it, so it is automatically wrong. You are not even open to anything else and that is your right but don't piss on our legs and tell us it is raining. You have been doing it for 4 years straight plus. He is not even president and he still owns you.

Originally Posted by fly135

Nobody is making up stuff but you. It hasn't been tried in court because only idiots think that the VP can overturn the election. Are you one of them? Because you are the one arguing that it's an open question. My point was that Trump used every argument he could muster in court and it didn't save him from the boot. Pence overturning the election was so ridiculous that it wasn't even a plausible argument for the legal system to address.

Who cares if a magazine article doesn't have a legal argument in it? That's really unimportant. If it was an open question that had to be resolved in court, then you can rest assured that Trump's lawyers would have acted on it. It's amazing how desperate you become when you are clearly in the wrong. You switch the argument to something completely trivial and irrelevant like, in this instance, whether a magazine article fails to present a legal argument.

I agree the magazine article is very much unimportant, however your buddy seems to think it is a smoking gun on why Trump was wrong. Just like all the bull$hit brought to the table for the last few years from the CNN's and MSNBC's which were all contrived talking points from the democrat party. In typical fashion, the article to refute and to support his claim does not even support his claim at all. It is a headline grab. That is the whole point.

As far as Trump using every argument in court, that happened after the election for the most part. No it did not save him from the boot. We don't know what Trump is talking about explicitly about Pence and what he could or should have done. You guys are grabbing a headline talking point and trying to make a federal case out of it. Just like you guys did with Confefe or what ever they hell that was. Anything Trump said was put in to all sorts of contexts and argued against. Vast majority of time, it was the premise the media contrived on what he must of meant and then created arguments against it. Strawman 24/7 and that bull was brought here and still is. Trump lives in your head all day every day. Tells me he is the right guy for the job.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

I agree the magazine article is very much unimportant, however your buddy seems to think it is a smoking gun on why Trump was wrong.

I didn't see anyone promoting that article as a smoking gun. This is just another one of your distortions. It was just a post citing Pence as declaring Trump was wrong. This information was present in all kinds of MSM.

Interesting how you don't have an opinion on whether Pence was wrong or right, but have opinions about the motives of people posting a link to the article. Not every post is evidence to prove a point. But apparently every post you don't like must meet that criteria or you get triggered into promoting a non argument.

Originally Posted by DeltaHoosier

ITrump lives in your head all day every day. Tells me he is the right guy for the job.

Really, that's your criteria for leading the country? It's not suprising America has the leaders it does.

Originally Posted by fly135

I didn't see anyone promoting that article as a smoking gun. This is just another one of your distortions. It was just a post citing Pence as declaring Trump was wrong. This information was present in all kinds of MSM.

Interesting how you don't have an opinion on whether Pence was wrong or right, but have opinions about the motives of people posting a link to the article. Not every post is evidence to prove a point. But apparently every post you don't like must meet that criteria or you get triggered into promoting a non argument.

SN did for christ sakes. I made the point of how does he know and he pointed to that very article. I pointed out that I bet it was just like all the other articles he posts that does not support his claim and usually ends up supporting mine and sure enough. Went and read it and it may not support my claim this time, it sure as heck does not support his claim at all. It basically Pence opinion and feelings against Trumps opinion and feelings. It had zero factual to refute the law on the matter. That was the only point.

I do have opinions about the peoples motives because they have a long body of work on the very topic that says what I am saying is more correct than anything.