Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
36 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Is ^this the same guy who defends all of Trump's crimes including FELONY CONVICTIONS?

Why yes it IS.

Your denial of the EVIDENCE that the Trump campaign (manager Manafort) colluded with Russia does NOT make that EVIDENCE go away. Duh

No, it doesn't. YOU have ZERO EVIDENCE of fake DL being used to vote.

Zero evidence? There is an eye witness testimony and an interception of some of the IDs. That's evidence. 

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
3 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Zero evidence? There is an eye witness testimony and an interception of some of the IDs. That's evidence. 

ALL of the ID's were intercepted. AKA none USED for anything.

You have ZERO EVIDENCE there were more, nor that they were USED to cast fraudulent votes.

Posted
26 minutes ago, robosmith said:

ALL of the ID's were intercepted. AKA none USED for anything.

You have ZERO EVIDENCE there were more, nor that they were USED to cast fraudulent votes.

The witness says there were more IDs. You just wish what you are saying was true. 

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
10 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

The witness says there were more IDs. You just wish what you are saying was true. 

Quote that HERE. Until you do, you have ZERO EVIDENCE.

Who is the "witness" and how does he KNOW?

Posted
30 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Quote that HERE. Until you do, you have ZERO EVIDENCE.

Who is the "witness" and how does he KNOW?

...and instead was just dismissed even though there was evidence of the fake licenses. 

Officials who have seen the documents told Just the News the FBI had a relatively new confidential source who provided information in summer 2020 that the Chinese government was manufacturing and exporting fake U.S. driver's licenses as part of a plot to create voter identities for Chinese residents living in the United States so they could vote with fake mail-in ballots.

The intelligence source claimed the plot was specifically designed to benefit Biden, officials said.

But, in fact, another agency, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, had intercepted nearly 20,000 fake licenses around the time the intelligence came in a possible corroboration of the report, officials said.

------------------------

First, nothing in the article claims that the IDs were imitation to the 20,000 that had been caught.

Second, it is strongly suggested that the plot was.ongoing and not a one time thing. Thus the use of words like "manufacturing" and "exporting." Those are active verbs that are written in the present. If it was a one time shipment  it would have been "manufactured" made "exported". 

This isn't the first time China did thie either. Do a web search and educate yourself. Grassley has abolished China for sending fake IDs as far back as 2012. Weird how that was an election year as well. 🤔

 

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

...and instead was just dismissed even though there was evidence of the fake licenses. 

Officials who have seen the documents told Just the News the FBI had a relatively new confidential source who provided information in summer 2020 that the Chinese government was manufacturing and exporting fake U.S. driver's licenses as part of a plot to create voter identities for Chinese residents living in the United States so they could vote with fake mail-in ballots.

The intelligence source claimed the plot was specifically designed to benefit Biden, officials said.

But, in fact, another agency, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, had intercepted nearly 20,000 fake licenses around the time the intelligence came in a possible corroboration of the report, officials said.

------------------------

First, nothing in the article claims that the IDs were imitation to the 20,000 that had been caught.

Second, it is strongly suggested that the plot was.ongoing and not a one time thing. Thus the use of words like "manufacturing" and "exporting." Those are active verbs that are written in the present. If it was a one time shipment  it would have been "manufactured" made "exported". 

This isn't the first time China did thie either. Do a web search and educate yourself. Grassley has abolished China for sending fake IDs as far back as 2012. Weird how that was an election year as well. 🤔

 

Do you know how many "confidential sources" that the House RepubliCONS CLAIMED to have damning Joe Biden during the last term, which completely fell apart because they were crooks looking to be absolved for their crimes?

And now Patel is a bigger clown than Comer.... LMAO

Posted
3 hours ago, robosmith said:

Is ^this the same guy who defends all of Trump's crimes including FELONY CONVICTIONS?

Why yes it IS.

Your denial of the EVIDENCE that the Trump campaign (manager Manafort) colluded with Russia does NOT make that EVIDENCE go away. Duh

No, it doesn't. YOU have ZERO EVIDENCE of fake DL being used to vote.

Convictions that are chickenshit and will be overturned.

@gatomontes99, this is why these snot-nosed little Libbies deserve everything they get. Crooked judges, cheating, lying and anything else they can do. Their hatred knows no bounds. They have become traitors to their own country...for hate's sake.

Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.

Posted
1 minute ago, Nationalist said:

Convictions that are chickenshit and will be overturned.

Thank you Mr. FAKE LEGAL AUTHORITY. LMAO

1 minute ago, Nationalist said:

@gatomontes99, this is why these snot-nosed little Libbies deserve everything they get. Crooked judges, cheating, lying and anything else they can do. Their hatred knows no bounds. They have become traitors to their own country...for hate's sake.

You don't have the vaguest idea what you're talking about; AKA just FANTASIES.

Posted
41 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Do you know how many "confidential sources" that the House RepubliCONS CLAIMED to have damning Joe Biden during the last term, which completely fell apart because they were crooks looking to be absolved for their crimes?

And now Patel is a bigger clown than Comer.... LMAO

So now you agree that the evidence exists but you want to disparage the witness with no legitimate reason. 

I don't know why you think the case against Joe fell apart. The case was solid. The politics were not. They couldn't get your kind to see reality for reality so they didn't act. In part, because they didn't want to make Joe a martyr. That doesn't mean the facts aren't there. They are. But your side is so delusional that you'd have an easier time teaching a chicken to play "Camptown Races" on the banjo than getting the left to come back to reality. 

  • Like 1

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
37 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Thank you Mr. FAKE LEGAL AUTHORITY. LMAO

You don't have the vaguest idea what you're talking about; AKA just FANTASIES.

Just wait...time is not your friend.

Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.

Posted
2 hours ago, robosmith said:

I'll wait for you to get your law degree and practice law in NY State. LMAO

Ok wait right there.

  • Haha 1

Its so lonely in m'saddle since m'horse died.

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...