The Walls be Closing

[aristocrat]

8 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

“Just because he tried to remain in power after losing an election before doesn’t mean he’s the kind of guy who will try to remain in power illegitimately.”

 

Also, all of these conspiracies about the DNC having some secret plan to remove Biden are absolutely hilarious to anyone who has seen the unending stream of DNC incompetence over the years. If Biden wants to be the nominee, he will be the nominee. 

what's your thoughts on that?  the dems tried ousting trump for four years for losing a legit election. 

[ChiGoose]

4 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

what's your thoughts on that?  the dems tried ousting trump for four years for losing a legit election. 

There’s a difference between being a sore loser and orchestrating a multi-state plot to have fake electors certified by Congress in order to overturn the results. 

[daz28]

5 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

what's your thoughts on that?  the dems tried ousting trump for four years for losing a legit election. 

The tweet already explained what the "Dems" were doing: Challenging the integrity of the 2020 election through his exercise of First Amendment-protected free speech, just like what Democrats did in 2000, 2004, and 2016.         

 

The difference is the Dems didn't pressure anyone to "find votes".  They didn't have "fake electors", and they didn't pressure their VP to succumb to the pressure of an insurrection mob.  All quite noticeable, significant differences.  

[Kemp]

33 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

No, this 22nd amendment and "dictator" myth is fear porn out of the left because Biden is so ineffective and unpopular the only way he wins is to scare people into voting for him or cheat or most likely do both.

That said  I continue to believe the DNC leadership are smart people foreseeing a loss of power in 2024 that are working to unload Joe in favor of some "popular" alternative.

 

 

So, you don't believe Trump when he says he will take over the FCC?

[BillsFanNC]

 

15 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

what's your thoughts on that?  the dems tried ousting trump for four years for losing a legit election. 

 

It's thoughts are that he will hand wave, bloviate and puke out all the nuance it needs to explain how that's different. 

 

Just like it always does.

 

Ignore please.

[aristocrat]

14 minutes ago, ChiGoose said:

There’s a difference between being a sore loser and orchestrating a multi-state plot to have fake electors certified by Congress in order to overturn the results. 

you mean like failing to recognize the electoral votes? Organizing mass riots, burning cities, holding government buildings hostage, people being killed investigating a president for four years over a dossier concocted by a dem think tank? Things like that?

[Kemp]

 

[daz28]

8 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

you mean like failing to recognize the electoral votes? Organizing mass riots, burning cities, holding government buildings hostage, people being killed investigating a president for four years over a dossier concocted by a dem think tank? Things like that?

Ok, the Democrats followed the rules, so I guess that matters, right:  

In 2001, House Democrats challenged the certification of electoral votes for then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush, a Republican, but the objection failed because no senator agreed to sign the written objection. 

“The objection is in writing, and I do not care that it is not signed by a member of the Senate,” Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., said during the 2001 joint session of Congress. 

“The chair will advise that the rules do care,” then-Vice President Al Gore, ceremonially presiding over the session, told Waters. Gore was overseeing the very session that would confirm his loss to Bush. 

A similar situation occurred in 2017, when then-Vice President Joe Biden oversaw certification of the electoral votes that handed the presidency to Donald Trump. House Democrats challenged the electoral slate, but to no avail, because they lacked support in the Senate.

“It is over,” Biden told Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., who objected to the election results during the 2017 session. 

The certification challenge in 2005 was the only instance in recent years in which both a senator and a House member signed a formal objection to an electoral slate. Then-Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D-Ohio, and then-Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., together challenged Bush’s victory in Ohio on grounds of alleged voter irregularities. 

The House and Senate adjourned and met separately for no more than two hours, as the Constitution stipulates, but ultimately neither Jones nor Boxer was able to gain enough votes from their respective colleagues to alter Ohio’s electoral slate. 

 

 

The riot nonsense is just that, nonsense.  Poor deflection, and off topic.  For poops and giggles, you should probably be most concerned with Scott Walker's advisors:  During the Madison protests, while 16 people were arrested, none of the arrests were linked to violence or weapons. Madison Police characterized the protesters as assembling “peacefully” and “without violence.”  Wisconsin politicians from both parties were harassed and received threats but were not physically harmed. An uncovered email and a secretly taped phone call showed Gov. Scott Walker had been advised to stage a violent “false flag” event to discredit the protests and considered it, but said he decided against the action.

 

 

Investigating Trump had zero to do with elections.  A non sequitur.  Heck, you guys argue every day that this stuff HELPS his campaign.  The announcement by Comey about Hillary Clinton, on the other hand???  Not so much

[Kemp]

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Trump is deeply unpopular, what makes you think he will win? Look at how the abortion ruling has energized the Dem base 

 

If you don't think it's possible he'll be President again you're kidding yourself, even if it's by illegal means.

[Tiberius]

2 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

If you don't think it's possible he'll be President again you're kidding yourself, even if it's by illegal means.

Oh, I know that, but I was pushing back against the idea he will easily win. Biden may not be popular, but the public will be given a choice--we hope--and Trump has A LOT of baggage. 

 

Trump can win. If there is a terror attack like Israel saw I'm sure Trump would see a bump in support 

[Tommy Callahan]

 

[Kemp]

2 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Oh, I know that, but I was pushing back against the idea he will easily win. Biden may not be popular, but the public will be given a choice--we hope--and Trump has A LOT of baggage. 

 

Trump can win. If there is a terror attack like Israel saw I'm sure Trump would see a bump in support 

 

If there's a major attck on American soil before the election, Trump will win. Since we know that Trump would do anything to win and so would some of his supporters, well you know the rest.

2 hours ago, Tommy Callahan said:

 

 

Good to see you Callahan.

Ready to tell us all who in the media has integrity? 

 

You've been ducking this for quite some time.

[daz28]

4 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

If there's a major attck on American soil before the election, Trump will win. Since we know that Trump would do anything to win and so would some of his supporters, well you know the rest.

 

Good to see you Callahan.

Ready to tell us all who in the media has integrity? 

 

You've been ducking this for quite some time.

The media has 2 choices: have integrity and go out of business, or sell the crap that the masses want to hear, and make billions.  The media isn't the bad guy.  The bad guy is the left/right voter who lops up the BS they were begging to be served, true or not.  It's a classic case of the, 'you got exactly what you wanted, and now you can't understand why you're not happy'.  Stop lapping up the media's bs, and live in reality with the facts.  I know it may hurt now, but you'll be happy for it in the long run. 

[aristocrat]

49 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

If there's a major attck on American soil before the election, Trump will win. Since we know that Trump would do anything to win and so would some of his supporters, well you know the rest.

 

Good to see you Callahan.

Ready to tell us all who in the media has integrity? 

 

You've been ducking this for quite some time.

Your party supported and planned the blm riots. Have the right come close to that amount of damage in anything? lol you can’t be serious 

4 hours ago, daz28 said:

Ok, the Democrats followed the rules, so I guess that matters, right:  

In 2001, House Democrats challenged the certification of electoral votes for then-Texas Gov. George W. Bush, a Republican, but the objection failed because no senator agreed to sign the written objection. 

“The objection is in writing, and I do not care that it is not signed by a member of the Senate,” Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., said during the 2001 joint session of Congress. 

“The chair will advise that the rules do care,” then-Vice President Al Gore, ceremonially presiding over the session, told Waters. Gore was overseeing the very session that would confirm his loss to Bush. 

A similar situation occurred in 2017, when then-Vice President Joe Biden oversaw certification of the electoral votes that handed the presidency to Donald Trump. House Democrats challenged the electoral slate, but to no avail, because they lacked support in the Senate.

“It is over,” Biden told Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., who objected to the election results during the 2017 session. 

The certification challenge in 2005 was the only instance in recent years in which both a senator and a House member signed a formal objection to an electoral slate. Then-Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D-Ohio, and then-Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., together challenged Bush’s victory in Ohio on grounds of alleged voter irregularities. 

The House and Senate adjourned and met separately for no more than two hours, as the Constitution stipulates, but ultimately neither Jones nor Boxer was able to gain enough votes from their respective colleagues to alter Ohio’s electoral slate. 

 

 

The riot nonsense is just that, nonsense.  Poor deflection, and off topic.  For poops and giggles, you should probably be most concerned with Scott Walker's advisors:  During the Madison protests, while 16 people were arrested, none of the arrests were linked to violence or weapons. Madison Police characterized the protesters as assembling “peacefully” and “without violence.”  Wisconsin politicians from both parties were harassed and received threats but were not physically harmed. An uncovered email and a secretly taped phone call showed Gov. Scott Walker had been advised to stage a violent “false flag” event to discredit the protests and considered it, but said he decided against the action.

 

 

Investigating Trump had zero to do with elections.  A non sequitur.  Heck, you guys argue every day that this stuff HELPS his campaign.  The announcement by Comey about Hillary Clinton, on the other hand???  Not so much

I have not laughed so hard at your follow the rules line. I needed that man. Thank you. Just hilarious 

[daz28]

7 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

Your party supported and planned the blm riots. Have the right come close to that amount of damage in anything? lol you can’t be serious 

I have not laughed so hard at your follow the rules line. I needed that man. Thank you. Just hilarious 

It's funny when a member of a party disagrees with another member of their party, when they're clearly wrong?  Did you even read how Gore and Biden put an end to their own parties electoral count nonsense.  What has me laughing is that every point you tried to make got flushed down the proverbial toilet, and the best you can do to defend it is laugh.  Want to make me laugh some more?  Explain to me how there was no fake electors plot.  How there wasn't an insurrection, and how to find 11,870 votes.  Now THAT'S a party with class, that sure knows how to follow the rules.   🤣

[Doc]

8 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

No, this 22nd amendment and "dictator" myth is fear porn out of the left because Biden is so ineffective and unpopular the only way he wins is to scare people into voting for him or cheat or most likely do both.

That said  I continue to believe the DNC leadership are smart people foreseeing a loss of power in 2024 that are working to unload Joe in favor of some "popular" alternative.

 

It can't be a white guy because then they lose the CBC/POC.  But who else is there?

 

7 hours ago, aristocrat said:

you mean like failing to recognize the electoral votes? Organizing mass riots, burning cities, holding government buildings hostage, people being killed investigating a president for four years over a dossier concocted by a dem think tank? Things like that?

 

That's different.

[L Ron Burgundy]

3 hours ago, Kemp said:

 

If there's a major attck on American soil before the election, Trump will win. Since we know that Trump would do anything to win and so would some of his supporters, well you know the rest.

 

Good to see you Callahan.

Ready to tell us all who in the media has integrity? 

 

You've been ducking this for quite some time.

I've seen him quote pizzagate Poso if I recall so.....yeah worthless.

[daz28]

49 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

 

 

That's different.

It is, and that's why I roasted the hell out of this about 10 posts ago.  He didn't even attempt to counter any of it.

[BillStime]

 

[BillsFanNC]