Now Johnson wants to indict Democrats

[Ross Dolan]

I have owned and operated a business for 35 years here in America. I have no need for payment from foreign entities as I have done quite well.

Good for you. But, then you should be more protective...and less destructive...of America. Really! You should stop flinging the horse shit you are flinging...and show more gratitude toward the place where you were free to do so well.

So where did the 15 million democrat voters evaporate to between 2020 and 2024?

They did not "disappear." What makes you suggest they have? Are you saying that there were different numbers between two different voting cycles...and that seems strange to you?

THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT NUMBERS IN EVERY VOTING CYCLE. THERE WILL BE DIFFERENT NUMBERS IN THE ELECTION COMING IN 2028.

WHAT ON EARTH MAKES YOU THINK THIS IS SO STRANGE...THAT AN EXPLANATION IS NEEDED?

You people go on and on pretending you haven't been asked a very specific question.

If I were to "ask" you, "Why is the word "the" spelled the way it is?"...and you simply passed it by as a question not worth a response, what would you think if I followed up with a comment like, "You people go on and on pretending you haven't been asked a very specific question?"

The fact that the number of voters for Democrats were different in 2020 and 2024...is not unusual. What would be unusual and would need an explanation is if the number were the same.

Same thing applies to the numbers for the Republicans.

TRULY!

 

[Tobytone]

You never explained anything beyond what you think and they are guilty

And if you had been in the service you’d know you are taught that you do not have obey what you think is an unlawful order

I've explained it to you morons at least four times in detail, lol. You're definitely not any smarter now. Go through my history if you want to learn something. Of course, I already know you're too lazy for that.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I've explained it to you morons at least four times in detail, lol. You're definitely not any smarter now. Go through my history if you want to learn something. Of course, I already know you're too lazy for that.

An honorable man wouldn't be a burden to his family. He'd relieve them of the pain.

 

[Teflon Don]

That is the point, they were not indicted, they were not guilty, and the only one above the law is apparently Trump

I don't think you know what being indicted means.

 

[ULTRA MAGA]

Good for you. But, then you should be more protective...and less destructive...of America. Really! You should stop flinging the horse shit you are flinging...and show more gratitude toward the place where you were free to do so well.


They did not "disappear." What makes you suggest they have? Are you saying that there were different numbers between two different voting cycles...and that seems strange to you?

THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT NUMBERS IN EVERY VOTING CYCLE. THERE WILL BE DIFFERENT NUMBERS IN THE ELECTION COMING IN 2028.

WHAT ON EARTH MAKES YOU THINK THIS IS SO STRANGE...THAT AN EXPLANATION IS NEEDED?

If I were to "ask" you, "Why is the word "the" spelled the way it is?"...and you simply passed it by as a question not worth a response, what would you think if I followed up with a comment like, "You people go on and on pretending you haven't been asked a very specific question?"

The fact that the number of voters for Democrats were different in 2020 and 2024...is not unusual. What would be unusual and would need an explanation is if the number were the same.

Same thing applies to the numbers for the Republicans.

TRULY!

Again you didn't answer the question. Yes there are fluxuations in voter turn out but never has there been anything as mathematically improbable as 15 million voters all from one side staying home in an election as contentious as one Trump is a candidate. It's simply not possible. Voter fraud in 2020 is the only answer. Occom's Razor.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Again you didn't answer the question. Yes there are fluxuations in voter turn out but never has there been anything as mathematically improbable as 15 million voters all from one side staying home in an election as contentious as one Trump is a candidate. It's simply not possible. Voter fraud in 2020 is the only answer. Occom's Razor.

^^^
Typical Sleepy Joe pulling numbers out of his ass without a scintilla of evidence nor corroboration.

Best guess is that dementia and a lifetime of alcoholism has damaged his math skills. Sad.

 

[QP!]

Next up Mike Johnson will call for the plaque at West Point military academy, and any professors instructing to also be indicted.

Plaque: “Should orders and the law ever conflict, our officers must obey the law.”
It speaks to the foundational idea that military officers owe loyalty to the Constitution and the law — not simply to superior orders.

FLOL at how base and stupid magats are and how Trump properly called them out as the 'POORLY EDUCATED" he loves as he knows how easily manipulated they are even by the most stupid things.

 

[archives]

I don't think you know what being indicted means.

Ah, let me guess, if a prosecutor, in this case Pirro, thinks she has enough evidence after investigating that a person has broken the law, she presents her evidence to a Grand Jury to receive permission to charge the person with the relevant crime. If the Grand Jury decides that there isn’t enough evidence, the prosecutor does not receive approval, she can not charge the person, and there is zero proof that any law has been broken

Now, you are going to tell us next that does not mean the person didn’t break the law, that they are innocent, which ultimately means, as is often the “proof” in MAGA logic, they are still guilty by innuendo

 

[Ross Dolan]

Again you didn't answer the question. Yes there are fluxuations in voter turn out but never has there been anything as mathematically improbable as 15 million voters all from one side staying home in an election as contentious as one Trump is a candidate. It's simply not possible. Voter fraud in 2020 is the only answer. Occom's Razor.

I have answered the question...but you do not like the answer.

"Voter fraud" may be, in your imagination. "the only answer," BUT the Trump people have brought 62 suits in federal courts claiming fraud...and lost 61 of them. (Most were thrown out as simply being absurd by federal judges, many of whom were appointed by Republican presidents, including Trump himself.) The lone win, in Pennsylvania, did not change the Pennsylvania vote by even l vote.

So, either the Democrats are astronomically better at cheating than the Republicans (which might be a huge positive in asking that they be elected rather than Republicans)...or the entire cheating/fraud stuff is nothing but bullshit, instigated by the Bullshitter-in-Chief.

Which do you suppose it is?

 

[ULTRA MAGA]

I have answered the question...but you do not like the answer.

"Voter fraud" may be, in your imagination. "the only answer," BUT the Trump people have brought 62 suits in federal courts claiming fraud...and lost 61 of them. (Most were thrown out as simply being absurd by federal judges, many of whom were appointed by Republican presidents, including Trump himself.) The lone win, in Pennsylvania, did not change the Pennsylvania vote by even l vote.

So, either the Democrats are astronomically better at cheating than the Republicans (which might be a huge positive in asking that they be elected rather than Republicans)...or the entire cheating/fraud stuff is nothing but bullshit, instigated by the Bullshitter-in-Chief.

Which do you suppose it is?

The cases were mostly dismissed claiming lack of standing to bring them. None were ever adjudicated.

 

[QP!]

The cases were mostly dismissed claiming lack of standing to bring them. None were ever adjudicated.

• Substantial Lack of Evidence (Merits): the most significant number of cases were dismissed because the plaintiffs failed to provide proof of fraud. In a study of 64 court challenges, 30 cases reached hearings on their merits, and judges (including those appointed by Trump) consistently found the claims to be based on "speculation, rumors, or hearsay" rather than admissible evidence. In many of these instances the Lawyers filing the claims entered the courts and immediately told the judges they had no evidence to present, which then lead to the dismissal.

While Donald Trump and his surrogates made sweeping allegations of widespread voter fraud in public statements, their lawyers often explicitly declined to allege fraud when appearing before judges under oath. In several key battleground states, Trump's attorneys admitted in court that they were not presenting evidence of fraud or "stealing" the election, often citing the lack of available proof and the legal consequences of lying to a judge.

 

[ULTRA MAGA]

• Substantial Lack of Evidence (Merits): the most significant number of cases were dismissed because the plaintiffs failed to provide proof of fraud. In a study of 64 court challenges, 30 cases reached hearings on their merits, and judges (including those appointed by Trump) consistently found the claims to be based on "speculation, rumors, or hearsay" rather than admissible evidence. In many of these instances the Lawyers filing the claims entered the courts and immediately told the judges they had no evidence to present, which then lead to the dismissal.

While Donald Trump and his surrogates made sweeping allegations of widespread voter fraud in public statements, their lawyers often explicitly declined to allege fraud when appearing before judges under oath. In several key battleground states, Trump's attorneys admitted in court that they were not presenting evidence of fraud or "stealing" the election, often citing the lack of available proof and the legal consequences of lying to a judge.

Lawyers are not under oath. And your entire post is horse shit.

 

[QP!]

Lawyers are not under oath. And your entire post is horse shit.

Facts do not care about your feelings or tears sweetheart...

Lawyers can be sanctioned by the Judge and disbarred by States if they lie or give misrepresentations in court which is why what i posted is 100% accurate and in the bulk of cases which Trump lawyers presented in court they would NOT say there was any fraud even when directly asked by the judges. Many judges were left confounded as to what they were alledging as they could not explain why they were in court, which lead to dismissal.

just a small sample and there are a TON more...

- Donald Trump And His Lawyers Are Making Sweeping Allegations of Voter Fraud In Public. In Court, They Say No Such Thing​

- Trump Campaign Lawyer Contradicts President in Court, Says, ‘We Are Not Alleging Fraud’​

- Results of Lawsuits Regarding the 2020 Elections​

The various claims of evidence alleging a stolen 2020 election have been exhaustively investigated and litigated. Judges heard claims of illegal voting and found they were without merit.

.... "There were over 60 court cases where judges, including judges appointed by President Trump and other Republican presidents, looked at the evidence in many cases and said there is not widespread fraud."...

 

[QP!]

Why Lawyers Don't Lie in Court

• Officers of the Court: Upon being admitted to the bar, every lawyer takes a solemn oath to uphold the law and maintain the integrity of the legal profession. This "standing oath" applies to every appearance they make throughout their career.

 

[Ross Dolan]

The cases were mostly dismissed claiming lack of standing to bring them. None were ever adjudicated.

The cases were NOT WON...and that is telling, except to MAGA, who refuse to see anything that tend to show claims of "voter fraud" to be bullshit, UM.

The reason they were NOT WON...is that "voter fraud", for the most part, is nothing but a MAGA way of saying, "We lost."

But if your defense of this kind of nonsense is, "We MAGA were not intelligent enough to bring a sustainable case of "voter fraud"...I acknowledge I would have a hard time disputing you.