Why are democrats lying about officers being killed on January 6th?

[CrakHoBarbie]

2 minutes ago, taxme said:

 I already pointed out as to where BiDumb has said that the democratic party has the biggest election fraud party going. Did you look it up on the internet like I asked you to do? Why do you keep denying the truth that the last American election was a fraudulent election. 

Trump was leading BiDumb in many states on election day. Many polls were shut down overnight, and low and behold, come that next mornings count BiDumb was leading Trump in the polls. Something happened over night when the polls were closed. It's all there for you to see but you refuse to do so. Your senile hero BiDumb did not win the election. Trump did.  Live with it. 

And AGAIN, youve presented no proof of fraud in the 2020 election widespread enough to of made a difference, and you've failed to show evidence of your claimed fraud viable enough to be substantiated in a court of law. If you can't prove it in court then your contentions are garbage. 

[CrakHoBarbie]

8 minutes ago, West said:

This is observable

Yet you have no viable proof. ... just your worthless speculation. 

[West]

2 hours ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Yet you have no viable proof. ... just your worthless speculation. 

Sure I do.. ballots that should have been DISQUALIFIED were the key reason Joe B won. Trump was up by tens of thousands of votes in some cases before the mail ins were counted. 

And the protesters were RIGHT to protest the election as it was run ILLEGALLY in several states

Edited January 11, 2023 by West

[CrakHoBarbie]

2 hours ago, West said:

Sure I do.. ballots that should have been DISQUALIFIED were the key reason Joe B won. Trump was up by tens of thousands of votes in some cases before the mail ins were counted. 

And the protesters were RIGHT to protest the election as it was run ILLEGALLY in several states

And yet....still... youve presented no proof of fraud in the 2020 election widespread enough to of made a difference, and you've failed to show evidence of your claimed fraud viable enough to be substantiated in a court of law. So you can dish out your moronic assumptions and suppositions all day. But, until you bring me something we can substantiate in court,  it's all just hearsay.

[West]

1 hour ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

And yet....still... youve presented no proof of fraud in the 2020 election widespread enough to of made a difference, and you've failed to show evidence of your claimed fraud viable enough to be substantiated in a court of law. So you can dish out your moronic assumptions and suppositions all day. But, until you bring me something we can substantiate in court,  it's all just hearsay.

So you support illegal activity to interfere in elections. Gotcha

[CrakHoBarbie]

9 hours ago, West said:

So you support illegal activity to interfere in elections. Gotcha

That's not what I said. What I said was youve presented no proof of fraud in the 2020 election widespread enough to of made a difference, and you've failed to show evidence of your claimed fraud viable enough to be substantiated in a court of law. So you can dish out your moronic assumptions and suppositions all day. But, until you bring me something we can substantiate in court,  it's all just hearsay.

[West]

38 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

That's not what I said. What I said was youve presented no proof of fraud in the 2020 election widespread enough to of made a difference, and you've failed to show evidence of your claimed fraud viable enough to be substantiated in a court of law. So you can dish out your moronic assumptions and suppositions all day. But, until you bring me something we can substantiate in court,  it's all just hearsay.

Your opinion is clear. There's no "proof" it impacted the election (also no political will to investigate as mind you) therefore making illegal policy is totally a okay right?

Transparency and legality be dammed.. classic lefty response. And YOU are the problem if you disagree

Edited January 11, 2023 by West

[CrakHoBarbie]

2 hours ago, West said:

Your opinion is clear. There's no "proof" it impacted the election (also no political will to investigate as mind you) therefore making illegal policy is totally a okay right?

Transparency and legality be dammed.. classic lefty response. And YOU are the problem if you disagree

Ok. Even if these changes were later deemed illegal, if you cannot prove they changed the outcome of the election then they were inconsequential. What your trying to accomplish here is manufacturing a theory that this was all done for the specific purpose of stealing the election..... So your manufacturing a conspiracy theory that you have failed to prove. Stop pushing your speculations as if they were valid. They are not.

[West]

1 minute ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Ok. Even if these changes were later deemed illegal, if you cannot prove they changed the outcome of the election then they were inconsequential. What your trying to accomplish here is manufacturing a theory that this was all done for the specific purpose of stealing the election..... So your manufacturing a conspiracy theory that you have failed to prove. Stop pushing your speculations as if they were valid. They are not.

Prove these ILLEGAL policies DID NOT change the outcome of the election..

You basically called us liars for two years even as we KNEW what these lefties did was illegal. 

[CrakHoBarbie]

Just now, West said:

Prove these ILLEGAL policies DID NOT change the outcome of the election..

You basically called us liars for two years even as we KNEW what these lefties did was illegal. 

You are the one claiming they did, so the burden of proof is on you. Prove your claim or admit your wrong.

[CrakHoBarbie]

1 minute ago, West said:

 

You basically called us liars for two years even as we KNEW what these lefties did was illegal. 

You knew? What garbage. What proof did you use to convince yourself that your moronic speculations were valid?

[West]

6 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

You knew? What garbage. What proof did you use to convince yourself that your moronic speculations were valid?

Had you actually listened to Trump's lawyers, you would know they were challenging the LEGALITY of the changes to voting procedures. Now we know they were right.. they were, in fact, ILLEGAL and Pence would have been well within his power and responsibility to return the electoral college votes BACK TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE where they would've had to determine their course of action.. 

This was NOT a "conspiracy theory" it was in fact FACTUAL that these states acted illegally. It FACTUAL that the votes could have been  rejected and not certified thus returning back to the states... that's the whole point of certification 

 

Edited January 11, 2023 by West

[West]

5 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

You are the one claiming they did, so the burden of proof is on you. Prove your claim or admit your wrong.

I didn't claim they did.. you assume that. 

I'm claiming what we already know.. that the voting procedures implemented were ILLEGAL. The process was illegitimate..

[CrakHoBarbie]

1 minute ago, West said:

Had you actually listened to Trump's lawyers, you would know they were challenging the LEGALITY of the changes to voting procedures. Now we know they were right.. they were, in fact, ILLEGAL and Pence would have been well within his power and responsibility to return the electoral college votes BACK TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE where they would've had to determine their course of action.. 

This was NOT a "conspiracy theory" it was in fact FACTUAL that these states acted illegally. 

 

You are still speculating that these changes had any affect on the election. I guess your obstinance isn't allowing you to think clearly 

[CrakHoBarbie]

1 minute ago, West said:

I didn't claim they did.. you assume that. 

I'm claiming what we already know.. that the voting procedures implemented were ILLEGAL. The process was illegitimate..

And what does it matter if it had no affect on the outcome of the election?

[West]

1 minute ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

You are still speculating that these changes had any affect on the election. I guess your obstinance isn't allowing you to think clearly 

You are still speculating that they had to accept illegitimate votes... 

[CrakHoBarbie]

1 minute ago, West said:

You are still speculating that they had to accept illegitimate votes... 

Prove that had an affect on the outcome of the election 

[West]

2 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

And what does it matter if it had no affect on the outcome of the election?

I dont have to prove whether or not it did.. just that the mail in votes should have been DISQUALIFIED

[CrakHoBarbie]

1 minute ago, West said:

I dont have to prove whether or not it did.. just that the mail in votes should have been DISQUALIFIED

Mail in voting has been used for decades. Are you suggesting that we go back decades and disqualify all those votes?

[West]

Just now, CrakHoBarbie said:

Mail in voting has been used for decades. Are you suggesting that we go back decades and disqualify all those votes?

I'm just suggesting you folks should follow the law, hun

[CrakHoBarbie]

1 minute ago, West said:

I'm just suggesting you folks should follow the law, hun

Answer the question boy. Mail in voting has been used for decades. Are you suggesting that we go back decades and disqualify all those votes?

[West]

6 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

Answer the question boy. Mail in voting has been used for decades. Are you suggesting that we go back decades and disqualify all those votes?

You are the one setting up the strawman here, hun. 

What does it matter? I don't believe the votes cast via the illegal rule changes are legitimate. So YES it would've impacted the election result hun as Trump was up by tens of thousands of votes until they included all the illegitimate ballots.

[CrakHoBarbie]

11 minutes ago, West said:

 Trump was up by tens of thousands of votes until they included all the illegitimate ballots.

This is your opinion. It has no basis in reality until you can prove it.

[West]

23 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said:

This is your opinion. It has no basis in reality until you can prove it.

It's not my opinion at all. This is the FACTUAL timeline of election night 2020. 

[CrakHoBarbie]

20 minutes ago, West said:

It's not my opinion at all. This is the FACTUAL timeline of election night 2020. 

That you've speculated had something to do with illegitimate mail in ballots