Arizona Election Audit

#1,776
#1,776
BowlBrother85 said:
This has nothing to do with what the United States Treasury Department concluded in their recent announcement of further sanctions against Russia and Konstantin Kolimnik for meddling in the 2016 Presidential Election.


This is pure conjecture on your part, and at the very least, it is also highly debatable. Joe Biden was leading Donald Trump in head to head polls well before the first diagnosed case of the coronavirus in the United States.


It's not evident from this post what "political tactics" you are referring to. The impeachment proceedings were not carried out with the objective of damaging Donald Trump politically. They were about holding Trump accountable for actions which should not be allowed to become established precedent for future administrations to follow. Trump abused the power of his office by withholding aid to the Ukraine in effort to persuade their president to announce an investigation into the Bidens, and Donald Trump was at least partially to blame for the January 6th incursion of the United States Capitol. The rally in front of the White House that day was organized under the falsehood that Donald Trump could still retain power if Mike Pence cast aside electoral college votes in selected states that the Trump Campaign had been contesting. In reality, Pence had no such authority to unilaterally reject votes from electors who had been lawfully chosen.

... and the only thing it took to derail Trump, was Trump's own boorish and unprofessional behavior.
Click to expand...

Lol. Sanctions. I suppose there will be “sanctions” for them shutting down a pipeline the fuels the entire east coast. Lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#1,781
#1,781
C-south said:
Lol. Sanctions. I suppose there will be “sanctions” for them shutting down a pipeline the fuels the entire east coast. Lol
Click to expand...
Not if Trump was still president. Putin would deny that any group inside of Russia was responsible, and Trump would publicly side with that denial, and then accuse democrats and the media of pushing a fake news story just to try and make him look bad.
 
#1,783
#1,783
NCFisher said:
Again: TRUMP made this party.
Cheney wants to drum TRUMP out of the party, move on past him, enough to participate in a 2nd illegitimate attempt to remove him and continue crusading against him.

Republican voters say: To hell with her and her voting record.

Yeah, yeah...and you voted for a guy with half a mind, an unnatural addiction to fondling little girls, whose leftward lurch has the VT commie giddy, and whose raison d'être for entering the race was simply a lie.

And it got worse from there. That's a lot of disturbing anti-American smooching to stomach.
Click to expand...
Trump did not make the Republican Party. That is such a dumb thing to say. When Donald Trump was sworn in as President of the United States on January 20, 2017, the Republican Party had control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. When Trump left office on January 20, 2021, the Republican Party was in control of neither. Under Trump's watch, Republicans lost both chambers of Congress and the White House in one term.
 
#1,784
#1,784
BowlBrother85 said:
Not if Trump was still president. Putin would deny that any group inside of Russia was responsible, and Trump would publicly side with that denial, and then accuse democrats and the media of pushing a fake news story just to try and make him look bad.
Click to expand...

If Trump was Putin's bitch why would they attack us?
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#1,785
#1,785
BowlBrother85 said:
Trump did not make the Republican Party. That is such a dumb thing to say. When Donald Trump was sworn in as President of the United States on January 20, 2017, the Republican Party had control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. When Trump left office on January 20, 2021, the Republican Party was in control of neither. Under Trump's watch, Republicans lost both chambers of Congress and the White House in one term.
Click to expand...

Pandemic.

Too "verbose"?
 
#1,786
#1,786
BowlBrother85 said:
Trump did not make the Republican Party. That is such a dumb thing to say. When Donald Trump was sworn in as President of the United States on January 20, 2017, the Republican Party had control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. When Trump left office on January 20, 2021, the Republican Party was in control of neither. Under Trump's watch, Republicans lost both chambers of Congress and the White House in one term.
Click to expand...

What happens when Biden does the same?
 
#1,787
#1,787
Tastylicks said:
60% IS his base dummy
Click to expand...

You a lawyer? Then you understand intent, I assume? I could be wrong. The intent behind your quote that I posted, in bold, intentionally comes across in a much different context. Those were your words, not the polling manager's. My argument is not the 60% stated by the polling data, but you knew that. Obtuse much? Have a Dwight Gooden.
 
#1,788
#1,788
NCFisher said:
Pandemic.

Too "verbose"?
Click to expand...
Pandemic? Even more dumb. Republicans lost control of the House of Representatives in 2018... over a year before the pandemic. And Trump didn't lose the election because of the pandemic. He lost the election because of his own stupid behavior.
 
#1,790
#1,790
Vol737 said:
You a lawyer? Then you understand intent, I assume? I could be wrong. The intent behind your quote that I posted, in bold, intentionally comes across in a much different context. Those were your words, not the polling manager's. My argument is not the 60% stated by the polling data, but you knew that. Obtuse much? Have a Dwight Gooden.
Click to expand...

you coulda just kept your post "I could be wrong"
 
#1,791
#1,791
BowlBrother85 said:
Pandemic? Even more dumb. Republicans lost control of the House of Representatives in 2018... over a year before the pandemic. And Trump didn't lose the election because of the pandemic. He lost the election because of his own stupid behavior.
Click to expand...

corona would still only be thought of as a beer in this country if it wasn't for trump's incompetence
 
#1,792
#1,792
BowlBrother85 said:
Trump did not make the Republican Party. That is such a dumb thing to say. When Donald Trump was sworn in as President of the United States on January 20, 2017, the Republican Party had control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. When Trump left office on January 20, 2021, the Republican Party was in control of neither. Under Trump's watch, Republicans lost both chambers of Congress and the White House in one term.
Click to expand...

It was an epic disaster. Republicans lost everything, trump was impeached twice and the economy crashed. Not to mention they lost some decent republicans in their party just because they dared criticize him.

truly, truly hard to be THAT terrible at the job of president
 
#1,794
#1,794
BowlBrother85 said:
Pandemic? Even more dumb. Republicans lost control of the House of Representatives in 2018... over a year before the pandemic. And Trump didn't lose the election because of the pandemic. He lost the election because of his own stupid behavior.
Click to expand...

You calling ANYone dumb is the height of dumb unawareness.

As to Trump losing, I'll add media blackout instead of doing their alleged jobs since surveys show up to 21% of swing Dem voters would not have voted for Joe depending upon state and issue.

Never Trumper Repubs and Mueller illegitimate probe factored into 2018, aside from leadership dysfunction.
I don't care whether you accept or not - really - but Trump built the current GOP.
 
#1,796
#1,796
NCFisher said:
As Barr stated, and two IG reports show us, the dossier was the basis for the internal FBI approval to seek FISA after being denied multiple times, and the FBI knew in Jan 2017 it was BS. The comments by both McCabe and Strozk were not errant comments.

At every turn with Page, Pappadopoulos, and Flynn, FBI excluded exculpatory evidence even to the point of fabricating evidence outright and by omission, and by ignoring CIA telling them - at least twice - Page was a resource. Hell, he worked with FBI in 2015 to prosecute Russians seeking political influence. We also know the political and politicized IC report was not a "consensus of 17 intel agencies" but just two. And even then, there was dissent and Brennan may have isolated it. How many ways does IG Horowitz have to tell us these numerous violations of protocol and propriety at every turn were inexplicable considering these were hand-picked teams to pursue the highest profile target, a candidate and then sitting president? How many former AGs have to tell us - since Barr, Rosenstein, and Yates aren't enough - they would NOT have authorized those investigations if the facts had been truthfully presented by the FBI?

I contend there was no basis for a special counsel, Mueller or not. They knew it was junk four months before Mueller's May '17 appointment.
Click to expand...

Except you’re raising issues with the prior counterintelligence investigation that don’t do anything to undermine the objective facts that were known by Rosenstein when he appointed Mueller. So all of the “support” you’ve just given for your conclusion can be true and there can still be a basis for the appointment of a special counsel and a full investigation.

The known objective facts did create a basis to appoint a special counsel. That basis is mostly publicly known. It has been known for years. It’s not hard to find out what it was.

Sure, I could go to all the trouble of attempting to cut through the endless, well-rehearsed ejaculation of chaff with links to things like Rod Rosenstein’s congressional testimony where he said that the appointment of a special counsel was justified and that he would do it again, or a list of the facts that make him correct. But under these conditions, given the publicity and the amount of time the information has been available, not knowing any better and being a crank who has to eschew reality to try to reframe an opinion as an objective fact are pretty equally discrediting. So nothing else really needs to be said.
 
#1,797
#1,797
NCFisher said:
You calling ANYone dumb is the height of dumb unawareness.

As to Trump losing, I'll add media blackout instead of doing their alleged jobs since surveys show up to 21% of swing Dem voters would not have voted for Joe depending upon state and issue.

Never Trumper Repubs and Mueller illegitimate probe factored into 2018, aside from leadership dysfunction.
I don't care whether you accept or not - really - but Trump built the current GOP.
Click to expand...
The current GOP which lost the White House and both chambers of Congress in one term? Yes. Trump was the architect of those failures. He did not build anything successful, is what I meant. Blaming the media is just a lame excuse.
 
#1,799
#1,799
NCFisher said:
As Barr stated, and two IG reports show us, the dossier was the basis for the internal FBI approval to seek FISA after being denied multiple times, and the FBI knew in Jan 2017 it was BS. The comments by both McCabe and Strozk were not errant comments.

At every turn with Page, Pappadopoulos, and Flynn, FBI excluded exculpatory evidence even to the point of fabricating evidence outright and by omission, and by ignoring CIA telling them - at least twice - Page was a resource. Hell, he worked with FBI in 2015 to prosecute Russians seeking political influence. We also know the political and politicized IC report was not a "consensus of 17 intel agencies" but just two. And even then, there was dissent and Brennan may have isolated it. How many ways does IG Horowitz have to tell us these numerous violations of protocol and propriety at every turn were inexplicable considering these were hand-picked teams to pursue the highest profile target, a candidate and then sitting president? How many former AGs have to tell us - since Barr, Rosenstein, and Yates aren't enough - they would NOT have authorized those investigations if the facts had been truthfully presented by the FBI?

I contend there was no basis for a special counsel, Mueller or not. They knew it was junk four months before Mueller's May '17 appointment.
Click to expand...
You are more patient that I am. It’s not worth the time to explain it to him because he dodges, ducks, dips, dives, and dodges until he claims he “won” whatever the hell that means.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#1,800
#1,800
RockyTop85 said:
Except you’re raising issues with the prior counterintelligence investigation that don’t do anything to undermine the objective facts that were known by Rosenstein when he appointed Mueller. So all of the “support” you’ve just given for your conclusion can be true and there can still be a basis for the appointment of a special counsel and a full investigation.

The known objective facts did create a basis to appoint a special counsel. That basis is mostly publicly known. It has been known for years. It’s not hard to find out what it was.

Sure, I could go to all the trouble of attempting to cut through the endless, well-rehearsed ejaculation of chaff with links to things like Rod Rosenstein’s congressional testimony where he said that the appointment of a special counsel was justified and that he would do it again, or a list of the facts that make him correct. But under these conditions, given the publicity and the amount of time the information has been available, not knowing any better and being a crank who has to eschew reality to try to reframe an opinion as an objective fact are pretty equally discrediting. So nothing else really needs to be said.
Click to expand...

Pretend the narrative of Russian collusion with the Trump Campaign did not exist, but just Russian interference. That investigation would fall to the FBI's Foreign Influence Task Force (FITF). There would be no special counsel, whose reason for existence is to investigate government officials and (broadly) their potential conflict of interest or abuse of power.

Without the hoax specter of Russian collusion, there is no special counsel. The two are inseparable and the special counsel investigation was a Trump investigation first and foremost.

The June hearings you refer to have Rosenstein stating appointing a SC was necessary because Comey was compromised. Rosenstein's weak defense of the actual appointment is overshadowed by the FBI's abusive corruption that predated it, as he acknowledges.

Further, Rosenstein states that by August just three months after the appointment, there was nothing to support collusion. The obvious question is what the hell was Mueller doing for two years and why was it - collusion probe - allowed to continue? In fact, with no collusion there was no crime, no justice to obstruct, Mueller should have been yanked and the meddling investigation turned over to FITF. It was continued politically.

It's a circular argument to say something should have happened because it happened.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top