Infidel Dog

Kari calls what they tried to pass off as an "election" a "selection."

Actually what she said when asked if she would recognize the results if they didn't say she won was "We will win." She could be right yet. She still sounds optimistic at the conclusion of the trial. Not sure if I am. Malice is tough to prove. Whether she proves malice or not though, she has proved that election was shady as Hell.

What on earth are you talking about, R&R? What facts don't fit the narrative?

Tucker has a good take on this one. He ties it into the Biden claim there was no recession and dares to notice this is another one that could have influenced the midterm elections. So if the Bureau of Labor Statistics knew they were lying that's election interference.

Kind of like the Democrats and a couple of RINOs tried to infect Arizona with.

Florida isn't. Texas isn't. South Dakota under Kristi Noem isn't. And when Kari Lake becomes Governor of Arizona it won't be either. You might be right about Democrat hellholes like San Francisco, Portland, Chicago, St. Louis, Detroit, Baltimore and New York City though. I'll give you points for recognizing that more and more American elections are being run like a banana republic's too.

Many? Careful, I might ask you to prove that. First tell me what constitutes "many" in your mind. John Roberts is a Republican judge. Also a backstabbing weasel. Speaking of Weasel Republicans. Have you heard about those two Republicans who were in charge of counting the vote in Arizona? One said, well before the count that the best thing for the party might be to lose. The other "Republican" created a PAC to see Kari Lake and other America Firsters didn't get elected. Gates and Richer. Oh and here's another one. Even looks like a weasel. Ratburger Ratzensperger, the guy that manages elections in Georgia. Also claims to be a "Republican." Hell, McConnell pulled the funding from the Arizona Senate candidate. He then funneled it to Liza Murkowski in Alaska, who might as well be running as a Democrat. So don't waste my time telling me "he's one of yours therefore you can't accuse him backstabbing you." They do it all the time. In any case, that wasn't my point. If you'll recall my claim was those judges lacked integrity or a nutsack. For those "many" Trump appointees (which I think might have been two) I was stressing the latter.

This guy does the best Trump imitation around and he's hilarious. Here he does Trump "singing" a Christmas Carol on the story of Hunter's laptop:

You don't know what I did. Stop pretending you know stuff. It's getting pretty obvious you don't know much. Tell you what though. I'll show you what I agree with. This guy: " This week the January 6th Committee voted to make criminal referrals to the Justice Department, including the proposed indictment of former President Donald Trump. However, the Committee’s splashy finale lacked any substantial new evidence to make a compelling criminal case against former President Donald Trump. The Committee repackaged largely the same evidence that it has previously put forward over the past year. That is not enough. Indeed, the reliance on a new videotape of former Trump aide Hope Hicks seems a case of putting “hope over experience” in the criminal Justice system. While still based largely on the failure to act, Rep. Adam Schiff (D., Cal.) insisted that “if that’s not criminal, nothing is.” The opposite may be true from a First Amendment perspective. If the failure to act is criminal, it is hard to see what would not be criminal under this standard. After members like Schiff, again, promised new evidence to support criminal charges, the Committee continued its pattern of rehashing previously known evidence with network-quality videotapes. The failure of the Committee to offer any new and direct evidence of criminal conduct was obvious at the outset. Vice Chair Liz Cheney began her remarks by again detailing what Trump failed to do. It was a repeat of the prior hearings and for some likely left the impression of actors who are refusing to leave the stage long after the audience departed... https://jonathanturley.org/2022/12/20/a-case-of-hope-over-experience-the-j6-criminal-referral-falls-short-of-a-credible-criminal-case-against-trump/ There's more there. You should check it out. See what your masters aren't telling you.

But you seemed to think you knew about all this evidence you say there is right now. I called you on it and it turned out you didn't. Stop whining about it. But yeah, put on your big boy pants and come see me when you've actually got something. I'll check it out.

Or just stroking each other.

I gave you one example just to show you I was paying attention. Your turn Evidence Man. How about Ray Epps. Can you show me some Ray Epps evidence? No? Why not? How about those hundreds of hours of video evidence they have but won't show anybody. Prove me wrong. Show me that. No? What can you show me. Nothing, right? Figures. Lots of claims of evidence but no actual evidence. You sure you're not Adam Shifty Schiff?

What? You mean like Cassidy (heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend who...) Hutchinson?

I don't know. The first one maybe but proving intentional malice. That one's tough. They'll just lie, of course.

Hang on... This just in. Looks like Kari wins the first round: Kari Lake BREAKING: Our Election Case is going to trial. Katie Hobbs attempt to have our case thrown out FAILED. She will have to take the stand & testify. Buckle up, America. This is far from over. 7:03 PM · Dec 19, 2022 https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/12/breaking-big-kari-lake-wins-right-bring-election-fraud-case-trial-judge-denies-motion-dismiss-katie-hobbs-trial-proceed-wednesday-thursday/

Like I said, depends on the judge. If this one lacks integrity or a nut sack like the 2020 judges, then yeah it might suffer the same fate as those cases and never get to trial.

None then. No evidence of an actual crime. No sense in trying to BS me. I speak Prog. Doesn't matter anyway. No Republican can get a fair trial in Washington DC.

Of what? Show us.

Gee how did the United Spot get into a time machine and get video of the hearing they want:

I'm watching the Kari Lake lawsuit hearing against the legality of the election right now: https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/kari-lake-hearing-happening-live-right-now/ Interesting the Prog lawyers are trying to make it all about the feels. It's like...did you ever watch the old lawyer show, Boston Legal? Remember how all the facts would seem to condemn the case then Allan Shore (I think his name was) would get up and deliver this impassioned speech that told you if you wanted to think of yourself as a good person you had to change your mind and ignore the facts? Then he'd win. The lawyers representing the rigging of the Arizona election think they're Allan Shore. Might work. Depends on the judge.

Guys shouldn't be punching out girls in bathrooms or anywhere else. I don't care what they're calling themselves.

They were going up with or without it. I think I heard a 3% number from somebody as to how much they affected American gas prices though. My personal best estimate would be, 'who knows?'

Hey... The British have an expression - goes somethin like 'taking the p1ss out of.' You should look it up because you just got it. Except I'm lost now. Where do I go from here? What do I do now to be one of you? Do I go take out an account on Instagram or Tik Tok or something them make some friends and we all dox you and we get you cancelled somehow or something like that? Is that the way it works, you racist?

"Having a chicken?" What's that? Like having a baby boy? Why? Who had a chicken? If you mean why is the title racist. I explained that. Why? Are we going to be pretending you don't understand now?