Quote of the day

[Comshaw]

View attachment 2196228

Hmmmmmmm...


Comshaw

 

[HisArpy]

And?

 

[the_single_gal_unconfidential]

uuhhhh isn't that an old quote thing?
I think there was some shit today about the unselect committee etc etc.

 

[Comshaw]

And?

Change the name of the utterer to Joe Biden. What would be your response? The same?

Comshaw

 

[Philthy_Phil]

Only morons still support trump.

I'm looking at you rape wad.

 

[Comshaw]

uuhhhh isn't that an old quote thing?
I think there was some shit today about the unselect committee etc etc.

Old quote? not hardly. If you'll look at the upper right corner you'll see that it was posted to "Truth Social" 1 hour before I took the snap of it, which was 5 minutes before I posted it.
As far as the rest of your post, sour grapes are sour grapes, no matter from whom they come.

Comshaw

 

[lovecraft68]

Change the name of the utterer to Joe Biden. What would be your response? The same?

Comshaw

Mine would be. They're all awful.
I voted for the Libertarian party in 2020. Its what I'll do from now on until one party either grows up, or we get a true independent who'll run on what's best for all people, not their people.

Trump has points but he's also leaving out he's part of the current problem.

 

[HisArpy]

Change the name of the utterer to Joe Biden. What would be your response? The same?

Comshaw

Except that's not the premise of your thread. Is it?

As for my response, Brandon has issues. Not the least of which is that his Presidency will forever be marred by the fact that over half the population believes that some type of trickery was involved in his being elected. Whether there was or wasn't isn't the point; the APPEARANCE that there was is enough to cast doubt on the validity of the results. The court's refusal to examine those results only casts further doubt on the accuracy.

 

[HisArpy]

Mine would be. They're all awful.
I voted for the Libertarian party in 2020. Its what I'll do from now on until one party either grows up, or we get a true independent who'll run on what's best for all people, not their people.

Trump has points but he's also leaving out he's part of the current problem.

The OP can't see that the real problem is his perceptions and biases. It's also well understood by most that Trump being elected was a side effect of the underlying disease and not the disease itself.

 

[ll74]

Except that's not the premise of your thread. Is it?

As for my response, Brandon has issues. Not the least of which is that his Presidency will forever be marred by the fact that over half the population believes that some type of trickery was involved in his being elected. Whether there was or wasn't isn't the point; the APPEARANCE that there was is enough to cast doubt on the validity of the results. The court's refusal to examine those results only casts further doubt on the accuracy.

The courts didn't refuse to examine the results. The courts didn't have a reason to examine the results because there was no evidence suggesting otherwise.

And the half of the population that completely ignores that fact be a use their guy lost are idiots.

 

[the_single_gal_unconfidential]

Old quote? not hardly. If you'll look at the upper right corner you'll see that it was posted to "Truth Social" 1 hour before I took the snap of it, which was 5 minutes before I posted it.
As far as the rest of your post, sour grapes are sour grapes, no matter from whom they come.

Comshaw

something we'll never hear from that shit is - I'm sorry.

 

[phrodeau]

As for my response, Brandon has issues. Not the least of which is that his Presidency will forever be marred by the fact that over half the population believes that some type of trickery was involved in his being elected.

Is “Brandon” a name for Trump now? I ask because Trump is hawking wrapping paper that says, “Let’s Go Brandon.”
https://truthsocial.com/users/RevolverNews/statuses/109513753314727300

 

[Comshaw]

Except that's not the premise of your thread. Is it?

As for my response, Brandon has issues. Not the least of which is that his Presidency will forever be marred by the fact that over half the population believes that some type of trickery was involved in his being elected. Whether there was or wasn't isn't the point; the APPEARANCE that there was is enough to cast doubt on the validity of the results. The court's refusal to examine those results only casts further doubt on the accuracy.

Awww, no. According to all the polls, around 35% of the population still believe the election was stolen. What you are pointing to is that 65% of REPUBLICANS (not the entire population) still believe it. And they do so without one whit of proof. This is another tactic of those who haven't anything solid to stand on, quoting one fact as though it was or meant something entirely different.

As far as the “appearance” that there was enough nefarious goings-on to cast doubt on the election, again, after all the investigations done, after all the lawsuits filed to challenge the election (which all but one were thrown out for lack of evidence by judges appointed by both parties) it falls back to a BLIND belief. Any thinking person, any person with a bit of gray matter would accept the fact that there was no evidence of a stolen election, or even enough to make it appear as though it was stolen. Believing in something, when it has been investigated multiple times, when NO proof has ever been found to substantiate the accusation, can be equated with mental illness.

As to the premise of my post, it was an accurate, direct quote from the ex-president which I posted to get an opinion from those here. You voiced yours "and?" which shows an apathetic response to his voiced threat, that you really aren't concerned with what he said. When asked how you would respond if the quote was from a politician you disliked, you do a verbal tap dance around it. Why not man up and just answer the question rather than fall back on disproven, erroneous, discredited information? If you are capable of that.

Comshaw

No, most Americans don’t believe the 2020 election was fraudulent

 

[the_single_gal_unconfidential]

let's move on from that tired old stolen shit -

half the country wants to see him in prison - yippie!!

 

[HisArpy]

Is “Brandon” a name for Trump now? I ask because Trump is hawking wrapping paper that says, “Let’s Go Brandon.”
https://truthsocial.com/users/RevolverNews/statuses/109513753314727300

GO FUCK YOURSELF

 

[HisArpy]

Awww, no. According to all the polls, around 35% of the population still believe the election was stolen. What you are pointing to is that 65% of REPUBLICANS (not the entire population) still believe it. And they do so without one whit of proof. This is another tactic of those who haven't anything solid to stand on, quoting one fact as though it was or meant something entirely different.

As far as the “appearance” that there was enough nefarious goings-on to cast doubt on the election, again, after all the investigations done, after all the lawsuits filed to challenge the election (which all but one were thrown out for lack of evidence by judges appointed by both parties) it falls back to a BLIND belief. Any thinking person, any person with a bit of gray matter would accept the fact that there was no evidence of a stolen election, or even enough to make it appear as though it was stolen. Believing in something, when it has been investigated multiple times, when NO proof has ever been found to substantiate the accusation, can be equated with mental illness.

As to the premise of my post, it was an accurate, direct quote from the ex-president which I posted to get an opinion from those here. You voiced yours "and?" which shows an apathetic response to his voiced threat, that you really aren't concerned with what he said. When asked how you would respond if the quote was from a politician you disliked, you do a verbal tap dance around it. Why not man up and just answer the question rather than fall back on disproven, erroneous, discredited information? If you are capable of that.

Comshaw

No, most Americans don’t believe the 2020 election was fraudulent

Which, again, isn't the premise of your thread.

You posted a misleading link which you attempted to use to foster a specific worldview. Then you twisted that even further in order to try and justify your conduct.

It's really very sad to watch you do this to yourself knowing that until you recognize how much hate and loathing you have for yourself you will continue down the path of self destruction which you're on.

 

[HisArpy]

let's move on from that tired old stolen shit -

half the country wants to see him in prison - yippie!!

If the population as a whole was a jury, and Trump on trial for whatever is claimed that he did, there would be no conviction because there wouldn't be unanimity in the verdict.

What the vitriolic don't want to admit is that unless there is unanimity, the accused can't be guilty.

 

[the_single_gal_unconfidential]

well, let's go with you on the jury.

t-shit had top secret docs -
he knew, because it was told to him that those docs were to never leave top secret government storage.
his defense was - because they're mine. uuuuhhh - no they're not, they're not - paid for by the taxpayers of usa etc etc.

what would you vote - g? ng?

 

[HisArpy]

well, let's go with you on the jury.

t-shit had top secret docs -
he knew, because it was told to him that those docs were to never leave top secret government storage.
his defense was - because they're mine. uuuuhhh - no they're not, they're not - paid for by the taxpayers of usa etc etc.

what would you vote - g? ng?

Lots of other things/laws/facts to go along with your simplified version of what happened so what you posted isn't the entire character set.

In the end, it's the jury as a body which determines guilt or not. A guilty verdict is only available if EVERYONE on the jury agrees. If the jury deciding DJT's guilt/innocence is comprised of the entire population of the US, then the verdict isn't unanimous.

Any other decision is you putting your choice ahead of the other jury members and telling them that's the verdict. And that's not how it works.

Juries don't "get it wrong." It's you who gets it wrong when you don't agree with the jury.

 

[the_single_gal_unconfidential]

a simple question - well two.

there really is no gray area - it's fucking illegal to do what he did.

so - if Hillary had taken top secret docs home - g? or ng.

t-shit -g? or ng.

 

[Lazaran]

“Juries don’t get it wrong”

Harpy

 

[Bray123]

The idiot who chanted 'Lock her up' is whining about a weaponized justice system. The same idiot who couldn't release his tax returns because of a non-existent audit.

 

[Comshaw]

Which, again, isn't the premise of your thread.

You posted a misleading link which you attempted to use to foster a specific worldview. Then you twisted that even further in order to try and justify your conduct.

It's really very sad to watch you do this to yourself knowing that until you recognize how much hate and loathing you have for yourself you will continue down the path of self destruction which you're on.

So please explain to me how it was misleading? It was a DIRECT UNEDITED quote from the FPOTUS. I made no comment other than a reflective Hmmmm....
The premise was to get the reaction of others to what Trump said. Nothing more, nothing less. your's by the way I could have quoted word for word BEFORE you ever posted. You are that predictable.

Rather than tossing out unsubstantiated accusations, please explain to those of us (99%) who read your above post how it is possible that I posted a misleading link. Or are you saying what the FPOTUS said (and says) is misleading?

Justify my conduct? You mean for posting truthful, accurate facts, as in the % of people who believe in a “stolen” election? Or that I put voice to those facts? If it's the former, truthful facts speak for themselves. If it's the latter, aren't you part of the party that is continuously yelping about limiting free speech? Why would you try to limit the dissemination of accurate facts, or an opinion for that matter, a thing that you insist we are ALL entitled to? Is it a one way street, good for you and your ilk, but not for anyone else? Curious.

I do believe you should explain, if you can. If you can't then you can always fall back on the tried and true bastion of those who have no other defense, deflection, prevarication and play ground insults.

So what say you? You gunna adult or revert to the 8 year old's game. Choose wisely.

Comshaw

 

[Lazaran]

So please explain to me how it was misleading? It was a DIRECT UNEDITED quote from the FPOTUS. I made no comment other than a reflective Hmmmm....
The premise was to get the reaction of others to what Trump said. Nothing more, nothing less. your's by the way I could have quoted word for word BEFORE you ever posted. You are that predictable.

Rather than tossing out unsubstantiated accusations, please explain to those of us (99%) who read your above post how it is possible that I posted a misleading link. Or are you saying what the FPOTUS said (and says) is misleading?

Justify my conduct? You mean for posting truthful, accurate facts, as in the % of people who believe in a “stolen” election? Or that I put voice to those facts? If it's the former, truthful facts speak for themselves. If it's the latter, aren't you part of the party that is continuously yelping about limiting free speech? Why would you try to limit the dissemination of accurate facts, or an opinion for that matter, a thing that you insist we are ALL entitled to? Is it a one way street, good for you and your ilk, but not for anyone else? Curious.

I do believe you should explain, if you can. If you can't then you can always fall back on the tried and true bastion of those who have no other defense, deflection, prevarication and play ground insults.

So what say you? You gunna adult or revert to the 8 year old's game. Choose wisely.

Comshaw

You have to make allowances for derp.

Harpy’s natural response is to go straight into meltdown mode and start spewing histrionic and hyperbolic rhetoric if they even suspect their sacred orange cow’s name has been taken in vain.

Harpy

 

[Comshaw]

You have to make allowances for derp.

Harpy’s natural response is to go straight into meltdown mode and start spewing histrionic and hyperbolic rhetoric if they even suspect their sacred orange cow’s name has been taken in vain.

Harpy

You know I never thought of it until tonight when I was reading an article about the Dominion lawsuit, but I think we have a celebrity among us. 'harpy's Trump/MAGA defense is eerily similar to another who's rantings I've read: Mike Lindell. Me thinks that 'harpy = Lindell.

Comshaw