Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
The Capitol Insurrectionists
The Capitol Insurrectionists
By B.See
25 Oct 2021 4:42 am in No Holds Barred Political Forum
24 Feb 2023 8:09 am
Sure there is - sixty-some lawsuits made claims that there was a fraudulent election, and all lost in court, primarily from a lack of evidence of fraud.GHETTOBLASTER » 14 Jul 2022, 8:54 am » wrote: ↑ There is no legal path to challenge the outcome of a fraudulent election and this is what the protest was about.
What you are wanting is to legalize illegal paths to challenging elections.
24 Feb 2023 8:13 am
Where did that lack of evidence come from? Judge wouldn't allow it be used.Jes' Fuchinwitcha » 24 Feb 2023, 9:09 am » wrote: ↑ Sure there is - sixty-some lawsuits made claims that there was a fraudulent election, and all lost in court, primarily from a lack of evidence of fraud.
What you are wanting is to legalize illegal paths to challenging elections.
24 Feb 2023 8:28 am
You seem to think that evidence was presented with the lawsuits - what was it?Nostradamus'omh » 24 Feb 2023, 9:13 am » wrote: ↑ Where did that lack of evidence come from? Judge wouldn't allow it be used.
24 Feb 2023 8:43 am
The lawsuits were not dismissed for lack of evidence because the judges allowed NONE to be presented. The lawsuit were dismissed based on phony procedural grounds!!!Jes'Fuchinwitcha » 24 Feb 2023, 9:28 am » wrote: ↑ You seem to think that evidence was presented with the lawsuits - what was it?
24 Feb 2023 8:48 am
Wrong.Buffalo » 24 Feb 2023, 9:43 am » wrote: ↑ The lawsuits were not dismissed for lack of evidence because the judges allowed NONE to be presented. The lawsuit were dismissed based on phony procedural grounds!!!
24 Feb 2023 11:17 am
dismissed and not recorded. slick move. shame you created your own slippery slope.Jes' Fuchinwitcha » 24 Feb 2023, 9:28 am » wrote: ↑ You seem to think that evidence was presented with the lawsuits - what was it?
24 Feb 2023 5:34 pm
A few indictments(literally a handful) against the "Proud boys" after YEARS of investigations, ZERO indictments of any elected official, Republican or Trump.Jes'Fuchinwitcha » 24 Feb 2023, 7:39 am » wrote: ↑ Alas, there is scant evidence supporting your claims.
The simple truth is J6 was a protest that either:
A. Was another entrapment scheme which is where the evidence is leaning towards
B. Simply a mostly peaceful protest where a few bad eggs gt violent.
24 Feb 2023 6:35 pm
Wrong. An elected official was indicted and convicted of insurrection against the U.S and removed from office, as well as banned from any elected office in the future.ghostsofSoL » 24 Feb 2023, 6:34 pm » wrote: ↑ ZERO indictments of any elected official, Republican or Trump.
Trump's fate is still in flux, along with many others.
24 Feb 2023 6:37 pm
Nostrils, you don't appear to be very intelligent when you speak coherently. Is that why you invented the incomprehensible jibber jabber?Nostradamus'omh » 24 Feb 2023, 12:17 pm » wrote: ↑ dismissed and not recorded. slick move. shame you created your own slippery slope.
24 Feb 2023 6:42 pm
You apparently do not understand how a civil case proceeds. The person making the complaint is compelled to bring all his evidence to the judge so the judge can decide whether the case has enough merit to be tried. In cases where the judge decided against having the matter tried it doesn't mean there was no evidence it means the evidence if there was any was not convincing.Buffalo » 24 Feb 2023, 9:43 am » wrote: ↑ The lawsuits were not dismissed for lack of evidence because the judges allowed NONE to be presented. The lawsuit were dismissed based on phony procedural grounds!!!
24 Feb 2023 6:44 pm
stop your spread of aids hereslideman » 24 Feb 2023, 7:42 pm » wrote: ↑ You apparently do not understand how a civil case proceeds. The person making the complaint is compelled to bring all his evidence to the judge so the judge can decide whether the case has enough merit to be tried. In cases where the judge decided against having the matter tried it doesn't mean there was no evidence it means the evidence if there was any was not convincing.
24 Feb 2023 6:46 pm
What the **** is your problem bozo
24 Feb 2023 6:48 pm
your aids is the problem stop spreading it
24 Feb 2023 6:50 pm
You think that's clever? It's dumb
24 Feb 2023 6:50 pm
you are dumb with your aids
24 Feb 2023 7:23 pm
Really?Jes'Fuchinwitcha » 24 Feb 2023, 7:35 pm » wrote: ↑ Wrong. An elected official was indicted and convicted of insurrection against the U.S and removed from office, as well as banned from any elected office in the future.
Trump's fate is still in flux, along with many others.
Who?
24 Feb 2023 9:39 pm
Google it, if you know how.
24 Feb 2023 11:46 pm
It mean one insider in a robe can deprive a man of a jury.slideman » 24 Feb 2023, 7:42 pm » wrote: ↑ You apparently do not understand how a civil case proceeds. The person making the complaint is compelled to bring all his evidence to the judge so the judge can decide whether the case has enough merit to be tried. In cases where the judge decided against having the matter tried it doesn't mean there was no evidence it means the evidence if there was any was not convincing.
24 Feb 2023 11:47 pm
Dass what we thought, foo.
Yo mama mah ho. You doan beleedat?
Google it, if you know how.
24 Feb 2023 11:49 pm
Man doan like aids. How you cane git his meanin?
Close ya cheeks, evithang aight.
Who is online
In total there are 3731 users online :: 12 registered, 15 bots, and 3704 guests
Registered users: Blackvegetable, Buck Naked, ROG62, RebelGator, FJB, Beekeeper, PhiloBeddo, SouthernFried, nefarious101, sole, Huey, Fuelman
Bots: Bolt, Not, ADmantX, Baiduspider, DuckDuckBot, Moblie Safari, facebookexternalhit, proximic, YandexBot, CriteoBot, Googlebot, Mediapartners-Google, Applebot, curl/7, bingbot