US Election 2020 - Lame duck days

[CaptainOblivious]

Democratic congressman says he did not share sensitive information with suspected Chinese spy | CNN Politics

Rep. Eric Swalwell told CNN Wednesday that he was "shocked" when the FBI informed him several years ago that he was targeted by a suspected Chinese intelligence operative as part of a broader effort to establish ties with US politicians, reiterating that he immediately cooperated with federal...

edition.cnn.com

Haha, dude is literally in bed with foreign agents after spending years crying about Trump's ineligibiligy because Russia. Good luck digging yourself out of that hole.

 

[buka001]

Democratic congressman says he did not share sensitive information with suspected Chinese spy | CNN Politics

Rep. Eric Swalwell told CNN Wednesday that he was "shocked" when the FBI informed him several years ago that he was targeted by a suspected Chinese intelligence operative as part of a broader effort to establish ties with US politicians, reiterating that he immediately cooperated with federal...

edition.cnn.com

Honeypot.

 

[buka001]

Lol, says the guy who has yet to address the merits. Remember when I asked you to stipulate what sort of evidence would reliably be found in the event that actual voter fraud was committed and you completely failed to give any sort of response, thus exposing your skeptardism for what it really is?


If SCOTUS doesn't provide a ruling on the merits, then I anticipate that there will be blood in the streets, and that will be when "told ya so" will come into play.

That's the point you are blissfully oblivious too.

There are no merits to the cases.

There is nothing to argue about the merits, as there are none.

The courts have made that clear.

The blood on the streets would be on the GOP and Trump's hands. I have warned of it. It will be me saying I told you so, that these BS allegations will lead to violence.

 

[buka001]

 

[Gnarls]

That's the point you are blissfully oblivious too.

There are no merits to the cases.

There is nothing to argue about the merits, as there are none.

The courts have made that clear.

The blood on the streets would be on the GOP and Trump's hands. I have warned of it. It will be me saying I told you so, that these BS allegations will lead to violence.

Aren't you contradicting yourself....again?

 

[cerebus]

What an attitude to have. So a race to the bottom, huh? Is that going to be your approach for the next four years? Any criticism of Biden,... "But Trump..."... lol.

Whoa, were you a witness to the parade of charlatans and outright crooks that made up the Trump administration over the last 4 years? Where was your outrage when literally every person on his campaign team got indicted for one thing or another? Trump took that race straight to the bottom from day one and now you're upset that we aren't more aggrieved that Biden's selections might not all be perfect? Give me a break.

Hunter Biden 'confident' as investigation begins into his tax affairs

News of the investigation comes just over a month before Hunter's father is sworn in as president of the US.

t.co

There will always be a stench of corruption around politicians who have been in the Senate since 1972...

There's no stench of corruption around Biden, apart from the smear attempts that were made against him.

 

[buka001]

Aren't you contradicting yourself....again?

Not this time no.

An example of a court ruling showing that there were just no merits to argue.

"Gossip and innuendo"

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336823023089946629

 

[AfricanTech]

So he's guilty because he's being investigated? If that's how this works?

Look, I'm not sure you got the memo...it's very simple*

Some people (ie those we don't like) - "investigated" = "guilty even if innocent"

Other people (ie those we like) - "investigated" = "innocent even if proven guilty"

 

[Gnarls]

Not this time no.

An example of a court ruling showing that there were just no merits to argue.

"Gossip and innuendo"

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336823023089946629

So you're using a past case to argue that the current case has no merits? Huh?

 

[CaptainOblivious]

Not this time no.

An example of a court ruling showing that there were just no merits to argue.

"Gossip and innuendo"

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336823023089946629

This would actually mean something if you had ever stipulated what evidence of voter fraud is necessarily non-circumstancial in instances where voter fraud actually occurs.

 

[buka001]

So you're using a past case to argue that the current case has no merits? Huh?

No.

I am using past cases to show that those past cases had no merits.

The current Texas SCOTUS case also has no merits. It is a gish gallop of randomness.

It has factually incorrect information.

Some of the problems they allege with electoral rules in other states were done in their own state.

So basically Texas would be arguing to invalidate Texas votes.

Why is it a only a problem in states that Biden won, but not in the very state that is supporting this application?

Does Texas want to establish a precedent where California can sue Texas to make Californians who move to Texas, to pay higher taxes? Or sue Texas to allow California to regulate the Texas oil industry?

SCOTUS heard such a case where one state tried to sue another about their marijuana laws. SCOTUS shot it down.

 

[buka001]

This would actually mean something if you had ever stipulated what evidence of voter fraud is necessarily non-circumstancial in instances where voter fraud actually occurs.

The judiciary in the USA is well placed to establish what constitutes evidence of voter fraud.

I rely on their judgement to see if any proper evidence of voter fraud has been brought to light

 

[vigras rojara]

This would actually mean something if you had ever stipulated what evidence of voter fraud is necessarily non-circumstancial in instances where voter fraud actually occurs.

The idiot lost. Can you contemplate a scenario where he actually lost, like numerous people have over the last God knows how many US elections over how many years?

But this time it's different. How could a useless grifter actually have lost, OMG. Feels over reals. You're the ultimate NRW.

New term by the way "No Reason Warrior".

 

[CaptainOblivious]

The judiciary in the USA is well placed to establish what constitutes evidence of voter fraud.

I rely on their judgement to see if any proper evidence of voter fraud has been brought to light

This is just more skeptardery. Since you don't have any of your own opinions to put forward, discussing the matter with you is a waste of time.

 

[CaptainOblivious]

The idiot lost. Can you contemplate a scenario where he actually lost, like numerous people have over the last God knows how many US elections over how many years?

But this time it's different. How could a useless grifter actually have lost, OMG. Feels over reals. You're the ultimate NRW.

New term by the way "No Reason Warrior".

Oh, I wouldn't be all that surprised if an outsider like Trump lost an election when the entire establishment ganged up on him. That doesn't change the fact of the matter that there's lots of evidence that supports the claim that election fraud happened on a significant scale, and as far as I'm concerned, it's convincing.

And last I checked, the "feels over reals" that you're talking about is actually translating into court cases going to the supreme court, backed by the AGs of several states, and who knows how much further it may end up going.

And just btw, Murphy's law of combat no. 73 happens to be the NRW motto: If it's stupid, but it works, it isn't stupid.

 

[cerebus]

So here's the sad thing, one of my extended family members suffers from the same affliction - completely delusional and believes her own delusions.

It's difficult...

Yeah my brother is pretty deep. He's got a series of bets going that Trump is going to end up as the president (I guess over $3000). Watching him get sucked into the cult was the main reason I started following Trump.

 

[RedViking]

Fact.

 

[buka001]

This is just more skeptardery. Since you don't have any of your own opinions to put forward, discussing the matter with you is a waste of time.

Lol, if you choose to Dunning-Kruger yourself into oblivion, it is all the more fun for me.

TIL it is retarded to wait for expert and factual opinion on matters, especially from those who are actually conducting the matter. You know, like the judge who rules on a case and says there are no merits to discuss.

 

[CaptainOblivious]

Lol, if you choose to Dunning-Kruger yourself into oblivion, it is all the more fun for me.

TIL it is retarded to wait for expert and factual opinion on matters, especially from those who are actually conducting the matter. You know, like the judge who rules on a case and says there are no merits to discuss.

Except that's not what you're doing. You're shooting your mouth off after admitting that you're too ignorant to justify your own opinions. I wouldn't go about name-dropping Dunning-Kruger right now if I were you.

And also, skeptardery doesn't imply retardedness.

Urban Dictionary: Skeptard

Any one who is blindly skeptical to the evidence around them, regardless of research done on any given topic, in addition to any one who refuses to do the research necessary, before jumping to conclusions.

www.urbandictionary.com

Any one who is blindly skeptical to the evidence around them, regardless of research done on any given topic, in addition to any one who refuses to do the research necessary, before jumping to conclusions.
Brian: Hey Jeff, you realize that the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations ruled JFK's assassination the result of a conspiracy right?

Jeff: Oh you kooks.

Brian: Us kooks? No, it's you Skeptards that refuse to go and fact check for yourself.

Your behaviour right now is basically the textbook form of it.

 

[vigras rojara]

Oh, I wouldn't be all that surprised if an outsider like Trump lost an election when the entire establishment ganged up on him. That doesn't change the fact of the matter that there's lots of evidence that supports the claim that election fraud happened on a significant scale, and as far as I'm concerned, it's convincing.

And last I checked, the "feels over reals" that you're talking about is actually translating into court cases going to the supreme court, backed by the AGs of several states, and who knows how much further it may end up going.

And just btw, Murphy's law of combat no. 73 happens to be the NRW motto: If it's stupid, but it works, it isn't stupid.

Get some sleep. The reee-ing must be exhausting.