West Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 (edited) 4 minutes ago, CrakHoBarbie said: If the prosecution proves that Donald and his co-conspirators hatched and implemented the plan to install fraudulent electors, Donald's toast. None of your excuses can help him. Now, keep in mind, the evidence against Donald was compelling enough to indict him. I guess we'll see. What do you mean by "installing fraudulent electors" lol.. the narrative leftists have tried to spin is pathetic.. no wonder the US is so f'd up. Why is "illegal" for a republican to challenge an election but not a Democrat? Your hatred and delusions are getting in the way of reality and common sense. Edited August 22, 2023 by West Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrakHoBarbie Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 1 minute ago, West said: What do you mean by "installing fraudulent electors" lol.. the narrative leftists have tried to spin is pathetic.. no wonder the US is so f'd up. Why is "illegal" for a republican to challenge an election but not a Democrat? Your hatred and delusions are getting in the way of reality and common sense. The fake electors. Are you saying you don't know who I'm talking about? https://www.google.com/url?q=https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-jan-6-investigation-fake-electors-608932d4771f6e2e3c5efb3fdcd8fcce&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwiCzfe8k_GAAxXThu4BHZz3CXAQFnoECAAQAg&usg=AOvVaw0m0xiUDq35Co7ea9VDKiDz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted August 22, 2023 Author Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 2 minutes ago, West said: What do you mean by "installing fraudulent electors" lol.. the narrative leftists have tried to spin is pathetic.. no wonder the US is so f'd up. Why is "illegal" for a republican to challenge an election but not a Democrat? Your hatred and delusions are getting in the way of reality and common sense. It was NOT illegal for Trump to challenge the election IN COURT and HE LOST 60+ cases. Numerous other things HE TRIED were ILLEGAL. Submitting 5 fraudulent slates of electors AFTER the vote count was CERTIFIED was 5 of them. The EVIDENCE SHOWS that was coordinated from the TOP. Duh 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebound Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 (edited) 55 minutes ago, West said: What do you mean by "installing fraudulent electors" lol.. the narrative leftists have tried to spin is pathetic.. no wonder the US is so f'd up. Why is "illegal" for a republican to challenge an election but not a Democrat? Your hatred and delusions are getting in the way of reality and common sense. It’s perfectly legal to challenge an election. There are many legal avenues, such as recounts and court challenges. But you don’t get to create your own list of Presidential electors and create your own electoral college certificates for presentation to Congress. That’s outright fraud. The US Constitution allows a state legislature to pass a state law which decrees that the Presidential Electors will be chosen by a vote of the Legislature, and not by the people. Most state constitutions do not permit this and in the remainder of states, state law (passed by the Legislature) does not permit it. And a legislature cannot pass a retroactive law, effectively nullifying an election and changing the outcome to the will of the Legislature after the fact. Edited August 22, 2023 by Rebound 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 (edited) 21 minutes ago, Rebound said: It’s perfectly legal to challenge an election. There are many legal avenues, such as recounts and court challenges. But you don’t get to create your own list of Presidential electors and create your own electoral college certificates for presentation to Congress. That’s outright fraud. The US Constitution allows a state legislature to pass a state law which decrees that the Presidential Electors will be chosen by a vote of the Legislature, and not by the people. Most state constitutions do not permit this and in the remainder of states, state law (passed by the Legislature) does not permit it. And a legislature cannot pass a retroactive law, effectively nullifying an election and changing the outcome to the will of the Legislature after the fact. ... dual slate electors, as was discussed in 2016 and 1960 by Democrats, being one. Seems a bit disingenuous to now claim it's "illegal" simply cause of your hatred for Donnie. Edited August 22, 2023 by West Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebound Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 10 minutes ago, West said: ... dual slate electors, as was discussed in 2016 and 1960 by Democrats, being one. Seems a bit disingenuous to now claim it's "illegal" simply cause of your hatred for Donnie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted August 22, 2023 Author Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 12 minutes ago, West said: ... dual slate electors, as was discussed in 2016 and 1960 by Democrats, being one. Seems a bit disingenuous to now claim it's "illegal" simply cause of your hatred for Donnie. NOT AFTER the vote count was CERTIFIED. Then it is FRAUD to claim a slate was duly elected when the certified count says they WERE NOT. 2 of the Trump states' declarations covered their ass by including the caveat which provided for success in court cases overturning the certified vote count. But that never happened, it just protected them from FRAUD charges. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 4 minutes ago, robosmith said: NOT AFTER the vote count was CERTIFIED. Then it is FRAUD to claim a slate was duly elected when the certified count says they WERE NOT. 2 of the Trump states' declarations covered their ass by including the caveat which provided for success in court cases overturning the certified vote count. But that never happened, it just protected them from FRAUD charges. Who's giving you this take ?. Why would members of congress be able to object (contest) a count if it's "illegal" lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 20 minutes ago, Rebound said: ?.. Criminalizing a contested election. Only the sick support this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebound Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 (edited) 4 minutes ago, West said: ?.. Criminalizing a contested election. Only the sick support this. You OBVIOUSLY did not read the portion of the indictment I quoted. They didn’t merely create a slate of fake electors; they forged certificates which purported to come from the state and they mailed them to the Congress, the Archivist of the United States, and to other authorities, as if they were the genuine certificates issued by the legislatures. Edited August 22, 2023 by Rebound Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Rebound said: You OBVIOUSLY did not read the portion of the indictment I quoted. Yes I did.. its gibberish nonsense. About as coherent as Schiffs made up version of the Ukrainian phone call which turned our to be unsupported by any facts The real crime being concocted is the stalinist like tactics being used to eliminate a political candidate leading election polls by like 40%. Elections are won at the ballot box, not the prosecutors office. Edited August 22, 2023 by West Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted August 22, 2023 Author Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 4 minutes ago, West said: Who's giving you this take ?. Why would members of congress be able to object (contest) a count if it's "illegal" lol. They WOULD NOT. John Eastman AGREED that sort of claim would be ruled unConstitutional by the SCOTUS. As sworn testimony by WH lawyer Eric Herschmann told to the Jan 6th Select Committee proved. Just now, West said: Yes I did.. its gibberish nonsense. The real crime being concocted is the stalinist like tactics being used to eliminate a political candidate leading election polls by like 40%. Elections are won at the ballot box, not the prosecutors office. They're NOT won in the primaries which is the ONLY poll in which Trump is leading. Duh Besides, POLLS MEAN NOTHING except a prediction of what MIGHT HAPPEN. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebound Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 2 minutes ago, West said: Yes I did.. its gibberish nonsense. The real crime being concocted is the stalinist like tactics being used to eliminate a political candidate leading election polls by like 40%. Elections are won at the ballot box, not the prosecutors office. No, you didn’t read it. I know you didn’t. Trump doesn’t want you to read it. It doesn’t matter whether Trump is running for President or not. He isn’t allowed to commit crimes. You want Biden investigated, don’t you? Should Biden fire the prosecutor, arguing that he’s also running for President and therefore he’s allowed to break as many laws as he wants? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristides Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 Charges have been laid, the trials will happen. Time to just sit back and watch the show. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 18 minutes ago, Rebound said: No, you didn’t read it. I know you didn’t. Trump doesn’t want you to read it. It doesn’t matter whether Trump is running for President or not. He isn’t allowed to commit crimes. You want Biden investigated, don’t you? Should Biden fire the prosecutor, arguing that he’s also running for President and therefore he’s allowed to break as many laws as he wants? What crimes? It's gibberish nonsense trying to intimidate people from speaking out against corruption. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrakHoBarbie Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 45 minutes ago, West said: Who's giving you this take ?. Why would members of congress be able to object (contest) a count if it's "illegal" lol. You may want to read the indictment. Or, do you prefer making a fool of yourself? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hodad Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 13 minutes ago, West said: What crimes? It's gibberish nonsense trying to intimidate people from speaking out against corruption. Gibberish? No, just because something is beyond you dos not mean it is gibberish. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebound Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 17 minutes ago, West said: What crimes? It's gibberish nonsense trying to intimidate people from speaking out against corruption. If it is gibberish then the judge will dismiss, right? A charge has to pertain to a law which exists, and it must state the probable cause for which the charge can be filed. Without probable cause, a judge will not accept the charge, right? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 (edited) 1 minute ago, Rebound said: If it is gibberish then the judge will dismiss, right? A charge has to pertain to a law which exists, and it must state the probable cause for which the charge can be filed. Without probable cause, a judge will not accept the charge, right? Not if the judge is a partisan like this prosecutor. And as Allan Dershowitz says you can indict a ham sandwich in the US. They are using the lengthy judicial process where folks basically have to remortgage their homes as a punishment for not supporting the right political candidate, hoping for a plea bargain to make it go away so they can justify stalinism The left have basically ramped up the temperature in the US through their bullshit then wondered why people went off the edge. Edited August 22, 2023 by West Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 (edited) On 8/14/2023 at 10:42 PM, robosmith said: You would never admit there was crime no matter WHO was prosecuting and you know it. LMAO You never stopped saying there was a crime no matter who investigated it and said otherwise Pot meet kettle. When he gets convicted of something that'll be worth talking about but your side has been promising that for the better part of a decade and so far nothing. Edited August 22, 2023 by CdnFox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 6 minutes ago, West said: Not if the judge is a partisan like this prosecutor. And as Allan Dershowitz says you can indict a ham sandwich in the US. They are using the lengthy judicial process where folks basically have to remortgage their homes as a punishment for not supporting the right political candidate, hoping for a plea bargain to make it go away so they can justify stalinism The left have basically ramped up the temperature in the US through their bullshit then wondered why people went off the edge. And it's going to be a problem. There is a very real chance trump becomes president again - and it's a safe bet at this point that the gloves will be off and he'll be looking at 'trumping up' charges (snicker) against all of HIS opponents just as they did against him. And then it's punishment by process - which is exactly what the system tried to avoid before the dems decided to go after trump starting with the steele dossier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebound Posted August 22, 2023 Report Share Posted August 22, 2023 2 minutes ago, CdnFox said: You never stopped saying there was a crime no matter who investigated it and said otherwise Pot meet kettle. When he gets convicted of something that'll be worth talking about but your side has been promising that for the better part of a decade and so far nothing. Nothing? $25 million fraud judgement Isn’t ‘nothing” $5 million rape/defamation judgement isn’t “nothing.” 91 felony charges in two states plus federally isn’t “nothing” 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrakHoBarbie Posted August 23, 2023 Report Share Posted August 23, 2023 1 hour ago, West said: Not if the judge is a partisan like this prosecutor. And now you resort to a conspiracy theory. Yes.... Donald didn't do anything. What a comical buffoon you are. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted August 23, 2023 Report Share Posted August 23, 2023 1 hour ago, CdnFox said: And it's going to be a problem. There is a very real chance trump becomes president again - and it's a safe bet at this point that the gloves will be off and he'll be looking at 'trumping up' charges (snicker) against all of HIS opponents just as they did against him. And then it's punishment by process - which is exactly what the system tried to avoid before the dems decided to go after trump starting with the steele dossier. What's even more disgraceful behavior from the stalinists is the targeting of lawyers for representing their clients. What kind of country tolerates the intimidation of lawyers? What a corrupt country. Just now, CrakHoBarbie said: And now you resort to a conspiracy theory. Yes.... Donald didn't do anything. What a comical buffoon you are. The prosecutor ran on a platform of getting Donnie. No conspiracy theory at all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrakHoBarbie Posted August 23, 2023 Report Share Posted August 23, 2023 (edited) 6 minutes ago, West said: The prosecutor ran on a platform of getting Donnie. No conspiracy theory at all Donald was indicted by a grand jury, pinhead. That means there's a butt load of evidence against your demigod. One of the most damning being he and his co-conspirators hatched and implemented a plan to install fraudulent electors. You can't excuse nor walk back that fact. Edited August 23, 2023 by CrakHoBarbie 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.