Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
18 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

Irrelevant.

 

Please point where in the Constitution a 10 day delay is permissible.

 

thanks

I wasn't clear.  The only thing relevant to my question was your perspective on legal maneuvering to delay certification.  

 

To your second point, your question is presumptuous and ambiguous. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I wasn't clear.  The only thing relevant to my question was your perspective on legal maneuvering to delay certification.  

 

To your second point, your question is presumptuous and ambiguous. 

 

So you can't point to the statute in the Constitution that allows for a 10 day delay?  Got it.

 

smfh

 

 

Posted
5 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

So you can't point to the statute in the Constitution that allows for a 10 day delay?  Got it.

 

smfh

 

 

Dude, you're pussyfooting around a question about whether or not you're comfortable with legal maneuvering.  There's no trick question in play, resolution through our civil justice system is a hallmark of our way of life.  

 

When you syfh, do you hear rattling? 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Dude, you're pussyfooting around a question about whether or not you're comfortable with legal maneuvering.  There's no trick question in play, resolution through our civil justice system is a hallmark of our way of life.  

 

When you syfh, do you hear rattling? 


I know Lenny - the GQP is always above the law.

Posted
15 minutes ago, BillStime said:


I know Lenny - the GQP is always above the law.

Well, no, Billsy, that's a separate issue altogether.   If your safe space is dealing in absolutes, we can do that.

 

The GQP should be prosecuted when the GQP is involved in criminal activity.  

 

I don't think the GQP should be prosecuted, harassed or threatened when there is no criminal activity. That's where we probably disagree. 

17 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Wasn’t Bush Gore contested? Or did dream that?

Of course.   

 

I don't recall anyone  lobbying for the Gore team to be prosecuted for questioning the sanctity of our elections, or sowing seeds of discontent.    Even though it's clear W prevailed on election day, sometimes these things are litigated.  

Posted
4 hours ago, JDHillFan said:

Clearly I am punching above my intellectual weight class and am outmatched here so I am going to ask for your help. Will you please point out the part of the conversation that led you to that conclusion? It’s flying right past me. Thank you in advance for a helping hand. 

The liar got an invite from THE liar 

 

 

Posted
19 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Well, no, Billsy, that's a separate issue altogether.   If your safe space is dealing in absolutes, we can do that.

 

The GQP should be prosecuted when the GQP is involved in criminal activity.  

 

I don't think the GQP should be prosecuted, harassed or threatened when there is no criminal activity. That's where we probably disagree. 

Of course.   

 

I don't recall anyone  lobbying for the Gore team to be prosecuted for questioning the sanctity of our elections, or sowing seeds of discontent.    Even though it's clear W prevailed on election day, sometimes these things are litigated.  

 

Well of course, in that case it was the Democrats challenging...they are allowed to do that.  Because, um, they are on the right side of History, that's why

Posted
1 hour ago, BillStime said:

 

Knowing Trump, he will run them in circles. If the Committee's smart, they'll threaten to, but never actually call him in.  Just like Joe should've never let Obama steal the spotlight. 

Posted
3 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Knowing Trump, he will run them in circles. If the Committee's smart, they'll threaten to, but never actually call him in.  Just like Joe should've never let Obama steal the spotlight. 

They will never bring Trump in.  NEVER!

 

They would get their asses kicked to the moon, and the coverage would be so intense, they couldn't get away with their lies.

  • Agree 2
Posted
7 hours ago, BillStime said:

 

That would be great, he would explain  he asked for National Guard troops and others said no. He would then ask why he was overruled and the entire committee would shut down.

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Agree 1
Posted
1 hour ago, BillStime said:

 

You know as well as I do that anything that is a CNN exclusive for more than 24 hours is complete garbage. When others report it I will take a look.

  • Agree 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

You know as well as I do that anything that is a CNN exclusive for more than 24 hours is complete garbage. When others report it I will take a look.


After the election, Don received numerous messages from supporters and others. Given the date, this message likely originated from someone else and was forwarded."

 

giphy.gif?cid=5e214886jay39ou3g0vp8ltcl7

 

 

×
×
  • Create New...