- Status
W
whatistrue
Guest
Perhaps you could use your psychic abilities to actually read and understand what is there. Or perhaps you could realize that I am not beholden to you for how I format my posts. I don’t really see a logical reason for you to be so focused on irrelevant minutia at the expense of substantive response. Is there really anything more to say at this point?
I’m not the one laying claim to information I do not have.
Do we all need to be reminded of your pronouncement over all affidavits?
You said they were all false.
W
whatistrue
Guest
Yes, do please remind us of something that didn’t happen.
W
whatistrue
Guest
How about including more of the relevant information rather than selective editing:
This is growing tiresome. You keep trotting out the same old stuff as if repeating it made it true. Now let me see, where might one see an example of that in a high office?
F
Freddy
Guest
This one is laugh-out-loud material. As if the observers were outside peering in through the windows!vz71:
Prevent being observed by observers or the public?
F
Freddy
Guest
So in answer to a post I made asking for a heads up when actual evidence is presented, you link to a video of two guys complaining about bias. And quite specifically complaining that the judge in the Pennsylvania case was biased.Freddy:
Here are two lawyers discussing the actual merits of the few cases (2 I think) brought by the Trump team and not other parties.po18guy:
You have the tense incorrect. It should be the conditional. As in ‘should be presented in court’. In over thirty cases so far it hasn’t. Or it has been and it’s been rejected
In case I miss it, let me know when it eventually happens. But I’m not holding my breath.
Start at 1:02:38, wherein a number of actual details concerning evidence are spoken about fairly.
Heard of the Federalist Society? From wiki:
The Federalist Society has played a key role in suggesting judicial nominees to President Donald Trump; it vetted President Trump’s list of potential U.S. Supreme Court nominees and, as of March 2020, 43 out of 51 of President Trump’s appellate court nominees were current or former members of the society.[8]
Judge Brann (appointed by Obama wouldn’t you know) is a former Republican Party official and a member of the Federalist Society. Is it possible to be more conservative?
And people seriously want to class him as what? A ‘no Trumper’? A Democratic fifth columninst? Someone who would ignore his oath of office to make sure Biden wins?
Gimme a break…
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Your shallow analysis based on things you find on Wikipedia is empty.
I have followed the “two guys” for weeks and months. The analysis is too detailed for you clearly, but makes a great deal of sense with prolonged exposure to the larger contexts in each jurisdiction they addressed. I trust the “two guys” I know more so than the “one guy” on here that I know nothing about except that he can click on and search Wikipedia to find what he himself knows very little about.
I have followed the “two guys” for weeks and months. The analysis is too detailed for you clearly, but makes a great deal of sense with prolonged exposure to the larger contexts in each jurisdiction they addressed. I trust the “two guys” I know more so than the “one guy” on here that I know nothing about except that he can click on and search Wikipedia to find what he himself knows very little about.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Barnes addresses the Federalist Society in numerous online videos and articles. He has extensive experience appearing before judges of all stripes so he knows more about that Society than your quick click and read that roughly associates vague connections to a point you want to press absent any clear knowledge. Yes we know what you think you know.
H
HarryStotle
Guest
The Lincoln Project is supposedly conservative and Republican but they raised $500, 000 to target and intimidate Trump lawyers. I suppose it is possible to “be more conservative” and still carry biases.
F
Freddy
Guest
My shallow analysis? I didn’t make an analysis. I pointed out that they were discussing bias. I listened for about 15 minutes and that was all there was. And I pointed out that suggesting that the judge was biased was pretty nonsensical when you look at his background.
If he’d been a member of the Democratic Party and a former member of the Socialist League then I might have listened a little longer. But he was a Republican Party official and a Federalist for heaven’s sake. He’s more right wing than Trump…
H
HarryStotle
Guest
So are members of the Lincoln Project. Your point being that right wing means no bias against Trump? Okay then. You may continue holding that strained notion if you want. It just doesn’t hold any water.HarryStotle:
My shallow analysis? I didn’t make an analysis. I pointed out that they were discussing bias. I listened for about 15 minutes and that was all there was. And I pointed out that suggesting that the judge was biased was pretty nonsensical when you look at his background.
If he’d been a member of the Democratic Party and a former member of the Socialist League then I might have listened a little longer. But he was a Republican Party official and a Federalist for heaven’s sake. He’s more right wing than Trump…
But hey, if your noodle is comfortable being enrapt by it, who am I to disagree.
F
Freddy
Guest
The only reason they gave in the video you posted that the judge was biased was…he rejected the case. And tore strips off Trumps legal team (now the Terrific Threesome) in the process for their ineptitude.
As I said, anytime someone presents some evidence, be sure to let me know.
F
Freddy
Guest
And while I’m here, here’s a link to a video of Giulianis’ presenting his ‘pathways’ to victory:But hey, if your noodle is comfortable being enrapt by it, who am I to disagree.
I don’t expect anyone to listen to it all. It rambles on for half an hour. He says he’s presenting the case for the biggest event in election history. Which he sums up by effectively saying: Trump was winning in some states…and then he lost.
That’s it. There is nothing more. I mean literally nothing more. I listened to it all so you don’t have to. And how seriously are we to take this presentation? Is it really the most important legal event in Giuliani’s long and (ahem) distinguished career? The most important political event in modern history?
Believe this or not, in this presentation of the biggest story since JFK, he breaks to present an advert for legal advice for home title claims and (you are really not going to believe this) for cigars. Just order yours now with the code Rudy20 and get 10% off! See it at 18:42.
Unbelievable…the man has no shame.
Last edited:
H
HarryStotle
Guest
Where were you when Rudy defeated the mob in NYC?HarryStotle:
And while I’m here, here’s a link to a video of Giulianis’ presenting his ‘pathways’ to victory:But hey, if your noodle is comfortable being enrapt by it, who am I to disagree.
I don’t expect anyone to listen to it all. It rambles on for half an hour. He says he’s presenting the case for the biggest event in election history. Which he sums up by effectively saying: Trump was winning in some states…and then he lost.
That’s it. There is nothing more. I mean literally nothing more. I listened to it all so you don’t have to. And how seriously are we to take this presentation? Is it really the most important legal event in Giuliani’s long and (ahem) distinguished career? The most important political event in modern history?
Believe this or not, in this presentation of the biggest story since JFK, he breaks to present an advert for legal advice for home title claims and (you are really not going to believe this) for cigars. Just order yours now with the code Rudy20 and get 10% off! See it at 18:42.
Unbelievable…the man has no shame.
Advocating on behalf of the mob?
Notice how every response that impugns some individual’s character based on some incidental attribute comes from Democrat supporters or “independents”.
You guys really have to raise the level of your game!
H
HarryStotle
Guest
The discussions of biased judges have come up a number of times in various videos that Robert Barnes addresses the topic. He assumes those who follow him understand his points because he has reiterated them repeatedly. You don’t follow him so you wouldn’t get that. The fact that you punt to what you perceive to be “without evidence” only viewing a small snippit might indicate something.HarryStotle:
The only reason they gave in the video you posted that the judge was biased was…he rejected the case. And tore strips off Trumps legal team (now the Terrific Threesome) in the process for their ineptitude.
As I said, anytime someone presents some evidence, be sure to let me know.
It is discussed here regarding a Michigan ruling…
His points ought to be well-taken, but you won’t. That certainly says nothing about possible bias on your part. [/sarc]
And Pennsylvania…
Quotable Quote: The ballot is the currency of power.
So should we allow individuals to write and cash cheques without authentication or signatures or secure chains of custody?
That is your position, apparently.
Oh, and let’s do away with audits on banks.
And disparage anyone who asks for them.
Last edited:
F
Freddy
Guest
He was outstanding after 9/11. Truly outstanding. Just what the country needed. What the world needed actually. I won’t hear a word against him and what he did at that time.
But truly, a thirty minute video about what he says is the biggest political scandal in modern history and…he breaks for an informercial? He’s selling cigars in the middle of trying to bring down a political party? He’s selling legal advice on home loans whilst trying to overturn a presidential election? Enter the code Rudy20 for 10% off! Buy now while stocks last!
This is utterly bizarre. Beyond bizarre. If you wrote this as political satire it would be rejected as being too fantastic.
Last edited:
F
Freddy
Guest
The woman conceded hours after the election was called. She didn’t like losing but she accepted it graciously. And was thanked by Trump for doing so.
But things roll on whatever Trump thinks. The GSA has just announced that they have determined Biden to be the winner and so the process for the change in government can officially start.
Someone might tell Giuliani and his cohorts that the stable door is swinging freely open right now and the horse he thinks he could reign in has dissappeared over the horizon. Concentrate on your cigar sales, Rudy!
Expect shortly to see posts complaining about fraud gradually morph into complaints about what the new president will be doing. Reality has to settle in at some point…
I’m going to throw a party on Inauguration Day. Fire up the pizza oven, stock up on beer, get the family over and soak it up. I remember Obama’s speech after his inauguration. Outstanding. I might enjoy Joe’s even more.
What are the odds on Trump calling in sick?
Last edited:
- Status