2020 Presidential Race

[Orange_Crush]

There is a website tracking all the court filings and posting them along with any additional court information that comes along. It's all out there to read. Including all the Trump appointed judges dunking on his ridiculous lawsuits and clownshoe lawyers.

Does that negate the links i posted to evidence submitted?

 

[Orange_Crush]

They are not alleging fraud in court. Did you read the article? They are alleging much more focused claims on things like mail in ballots, but it’s not even enough votes to change anything.

I and others have linked to affidavits that allege fraud. One is an affidavit by a security expert with experience with CIA, NSA, etc, who specifically asserts massive fraud.

Again, you're swimming in a pond and making ignorant claims about the ocean.

 

[lostsheep]

It's brilliant to watch folks lambast others for reading news from non-MSM, and then show themselves to be severely un-and-mis-informed on what's going on right now. It would appear that the MSM is letting people down.

So by your logic the only way for people to be informed is by reading the non-msm? Makes perfect sense to me.
Just curious...do you preach from the apocryphal books rev?

 

[TennesseeTopHat]

I and others have linked to affidavits that allege fraud. One is an affidavit by a security expert with experience with CIA, NSA, etc, who specifically asserts massive fraud.

Again, you're swimming in a pond and making ignorant claims about the ocean.

Post the link, I didn’t see it

 

[Orange_Crush]

So by your logic the only way for people to be informed is by reading the non-msm? Makes perfect sense to me.
Just curious...do you preach from the apocryphal books rev?

What's interesting is that you're one of the biggest "True Scot" offenders in here, and you're the bitten dog that yelps at the point.

To answer your most recent failed attempt at logic, I haven't claimed any singular way be informed. I have pointed out that using only MSM doesn't seem to be serving many of the True Scots very well.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Post the link, I didn’t see it

There were several. Search my history if you actually care.

What I find incredible is that I've explained the breakdown in your logic and you still fail to see it. I specifically stated that suits other than Trump's have submitted evidence for fraud, and your continual reply has been to claim that none of Trump's suits have claimed fraud.

Is that for lack of reading my responses, or just a lack of desire to process them? Serious question.

 

[lostsheep]

What's interesting is that you're one of the biggest "True Scot" offenders in here, and you're the bitten dog that yelps at the point.

To answer your most recent failed attempt at logic, I haven't claimed any singular way be informed. I have pointed out that using only MSM doesn't seem to be serving many of the True Scots very well.

Interesting. So you do preach from the apocrypha?

 

[lostsheep]

What's interesting is that you're one of the biggest "True Scot" offenders in here, and you're the bitten dog that yelps at the point.

To answer your most recent failed attempt at logic, I haven't claimed any singular way be informed. I have pointed out that using only MSM doesn't seem to be serving many of the True Scots very well.

One other question: Did you do similar data dumps and searching of non-msm after the 2016 election? How about after the 2008 election??

 

[Orange_Crush]

Interesting. So you do preach from the apocrypha?

No. I don't. I've refused to answer so far because it's a red herring that you try any time you've been made to look ridiculous. It's blatant hand waving misdirection.

If you have a point, attempt to make it. I'll deal with it, and we'll move on.

 

[OldVolMan]

There is a website tracking all the court filings and posting them along with any additional court information that comes along. It's all out there to read. Including all the Trump appointed judges dunking on his ridiculous lawsuits and clownshoe lawyers.

 

[lostsheep]

No. I don't. I've refused to answer so far because it's a red herring that you try any time you've been made to look ridiculous. It's blatant hand waving misdirection.

If you have a point, attempt to make it. I'll deal with it, and we'll move on.

Interesting.
So please explain why you wouldn’t preach from the apocrypha.

 

[PointGuard]

Big of you.

Let's make it 41 points and really put the stress on you. I'll laugh while you are gasping for enough air to say "uncle." Maybe you shouldn't try and relive your "Glory Days". They are boring stories and the older you get the better you were.

Anyone who lives in the Sierras knows that snow can happen any time from the end of August (if not before) and there are lots of signs and warnings what's coming, if you pay attention, but that's not your strong suit is it?

Reading comprehension remains one of your shortcomings. Never said I lived there. Used as an example of sole incidence of when my motorhome was in snow.

Next you continue to move the goal posts. I said horse to limited points. You countered with full court to 21 points. I said conditional on your age. You reply with now 41 points.

You know what? You've made a piss poor attempt to get out of it. You need an ass kicking. First to 41 or a 7 point spread wins. Last and final. Accept?

 

[TNVOLNAVY]

Per Business Insider, Trump wants to hold a 2024 campaign rally during Biden's inauguration on January 20th. There is no level of childish pettiness and egotistical behavior to which Trump won't sink.

Yesiree it sure is refreshing to finally have someone on the (R) side that is not a quitter, nor an appeaser, nor an apologist and certainly not going to tuck tail and run. A down and dirty street fighter who is willing to get in the slop and wrestle with all the leftist filth.

 

[Orange_Crush]

One other question: Did you do similar data dumps and searching of non-msm after the 2016 election? How about after the 2008 election??

No. Should that invalidate the due dilligence I've done this time? I'm trying to follow your logic, and why it should follow as a response to having your fallacies exposed.

 

[TennesseeTopHat]

There were several. Search my history if you actually care.

What I find incredible is that I've explained the breakdown in your logic and you still fail to see it. I specifically stated that suits other than Trump's have submitted evidence for fraud, and your continual reply has been to claim that none of Trump's suits have claimed fraud.

Is that for lack of reading my responses, or just a lack of desire to process them? Serious question.

Post them then

 

[lostsheep]

No. Should that invalidate the due dilligence I've done this time? I'm trying to follow your logic, and why it should follow as a response to having your fallacies exposed.

Interesting.
So...historically you have never been concerned about the integrity of the election.

All the sudden you become concerned about it in 2020.

Care to explain why?

 

[Orange_Crush]

Interesting.
So please explain why you wouldn’t preach from the apocrypha.

No. I don't think I will. This isn't the place for a Bible history lesson. You aren't the audience. And the question itself, as mentioned, is blatant hand waving misdirection.

If you have a point, make it. I'll deal with it. We'll move on.

Otherwise, this is an unbecoming way to try to turn the discussion. If you have a response to the noted true scot fallacy, this would be the time to do it.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Post them then

Here's one example.

2020 Presidential Race

 

[lostsheep]

No. I don't think I will. This isn't the place for a Bible history lesson. You aren't the audience. And the question itself, as mentioned, is blatant hand waving misdirection.

If you have a point, make it. I'll deal with it. We'll move on.

Otherwise, this is an unbecoming way to try to turn the discussion. If you have a response to the noted true scot fallacy, this would be the time to do it.

I see.

You know exactly where I was going, rev, which is why you posted a non-answer.

And I’m the “idiot” in the room...interesting.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Interesting.
So...historically you have never been concerned about the integrity of the election.

All the sudden you become concerned about it in 2020.

Care to explain why?

Not really.

I never worried about house fires until I smelled smoke. Are you saying that I shouldn't worry about smoke if my house has never burned down?

Do you have a point that you'd like to make? Or do you just want to hand wave attention away from your lack of critical thinking skills, by displaying a lack of critical thinking skills?

 

[Orange_Crush]

I see.

You know exactly where I was going, rev, which is why you posted a non-answer.

And I’m the “idiot” in the room...interesting.

Make the point. Are you claiming that my refusal to see some sources as divinely inspired is an example of the True Scots fallacy? That would be incorrect.

No true Scotsman - Wikipedia

I'll let you figure out why it's not. The definition of what is scripture was defined long ago by judgments that were not ad hoc, and remain unchanging.

You're reaching.

Would it make you feel better to know that your arguments per media have also been ad hominems? If you're too uncomfortable with True Scots, we could just say that instead of debating the substance of the claims, you short-circuit rational debate by attacking the messenger.

Would that make it easier for you?

 

[lostsheep]

Not really.

I never worried about house fires until I smelled smoke. Are you saying that I shouldn't worry about smoke if my house has never burned down?

Do you have a point that you'd like to make? Or do you just want to hand wave attention away from your lack of critical thinking skills, by displaying a lack of critical thinking skills?

So you started smelling smoke all the sudden in 2020? What set off your smoke alarms, rev?

 

[lostsheep]

Make the point. Are you claiming that my refusal to see some sources as divinely inspired is an example of the True Scots fallacy? That would be incorrect.

No true Scotsman - Wikipedia

I'll let you figure out why it's not. The definition of what is scripture was defined long ago by judgments that were not ad hoc, and remain unchanging.

You're reaching.

Shoot. And I thought for a sec you were following along. Oh well, can lead a horse to water...

 

[PointGuard]

You are either stupid or something more than simply delusional. Trump's legal team has been laughed out of every court in which they have appeared.

People who hate MSM won't watch/read/listen to MSM.. They prefer the likes of GAB (Christ is King driven) Breitbart and the like who never get around to reporting that. Fox News does half-report it but their opinion staters cushion the blow by expressing that the dream team will take it to SCOTUS hope it may change at the Supreme Court without giving any realistic odds the SCOTUS will opt not to hear.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Shoot. And I thought for a sec you were following along. Oh well, can lead a horse to water...

Uh huh.