2894
Comments (86)
sorted by:
98
MythArcana 98 points ago +98 / -0

Can she name one single court challenge that was heard then, or will she have to circle back on that?

41
Kungfumaster69 41 points ago +42 / -1

You guys are burying the damn lead here. This is the first admission that they know their fraud is going to come out and they are trying to cover their bases.

29
Gulleyfoyleismyname 29 points ago +29 / -0

Agreed.

"Our view is" is democrap legalese for "yeah this shits going to court eventually".

It's not a declaration. Not "The election was certified....." but "Our view is the election was certified..."

10
Kungfumaster69 10 points ago +10 / -0

Exactly

7
UnitedStatesofSmash 7 points ago +7 / -0

Unfortunately, I can only updoot you once. Though I'd gladly create a second account to updoot you again.

"Our view" = code for "We don't think we did anything wrong despite the mountains of evidence to the contrary and will continue to deny any wrongdoing until this actually makes it to a court"

2
Knowbody 2 points ago +2 / -0

The "Our view is" language is telling. It's a switch from claiming facts to claiming opinion.

And why would they be claiming opinion? Is it ass-covering in case a court rules against them?

23
JhnBrwnRtrns [S] 23 points ago +23 / -0

Sasquatch v. Pennsylvania, of course.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
65
BanShreddedCheese 65 points ago +65 / -0

"Court challenges were fully heard." Except that they weren't. This is an indisputable fact. She's a liar.

19
ChuckedBeef 19 points ago +19 / -0

Straight up lies to America. This bitch should be in prison.

4
itsdangerous 4 points ago +4 / -0

i believe at this level its treasonous

1
AnointedVisions 1 point ago +1 / -0

Killed by hanging

9
JhnBrwnRtrns [S] 9 points ago +9 / -0

It's the Big Lie, so that would make her a liar.

6
MasklessMarvel 6 points ago +6 / -0

"Court challenges were fully heard."

except for the minor SCOTUS thing

but it's funny that no one was even allowed to talk about the stolen election but now they are defending themselves

has something got them worried?

4
FLIBS 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yeah heard my ass... They were heard just not under oath or in a court.

37
honkpillfarmer 37 points ago +37 / -0

"Our view"

12
basedvirginian 12 points ago +12 / -0

🎶 Soiuz nerushimyj respublik svobodnykh Splotila naveki Velikaia Rus. Da zdravstvuet sozdannyj volej narodov Edinyj, moguchij Sovetskij Soiuz! 🎶

6
Gulleyfoyleismyname 6 points ago +6 / -0

Chinese Anthem more likely.

6
Kekintosh2020 6 points ago +6 / -0

"Choose truth over facts!"

4
brutustyberius 4 points ago +4 / -0

ok, fat.

3
spezisacuckold 3 points ago +3 / -0

“mY tRuTH”

3
Prudentwait 3 points ago +3 / -0

Plausible deniability

1
ouvrez_les_yeux 1 point ago +1 / -0

"Our truth".

30
JoeNotErotic 30 points ago +31 / -1

Well with her red hair we know she’s not any part Korean... she has no Seoul.

15
JiXinping 15 points ago +15 / -0

Get out of here, dad.

13
JoeNotErotic 13 points ago +13 / -0

So a rope walks into a bar, the bartender says “we don’t serve your kind!” So the rope went outside, parted his hair, and twisted himself up. He comes back in the bar and the bartender says “aren’t you the same guy from before?” to which the rope replies...

I’M A FRAYED KNOT.

4
JiXinping 4 points ago +4 / -0

Okay, that's a good one haha

6
Recyclops 6 points ago +6 / -0

"the last time I heard that, I laughed so hard I fell off my dinosaur." - Step Brothers

2
Kekintosh2020 2 points ago +2 / -0

Brennan's reaction to that was so fucking hilarious

2
Recyclops 2 points ago +2 / -0

Like he was gonna cry 😄

2
USMC_Capt 2 points ago +2 / -0

Why are you so sweaty?

2
JoeNotErotic 2 points ago +2 / -0

Intense sobbing

4
MasklessMarvel 4 points ago +4 / -0

She not from Thailand because she doesn't Bangkok

22
Afeazo 22 points ago +22 / -0

The fact that they are addressing this is big lmao

6
BobSux 6 points ago +6 / -0

This. Something must be coming out.

5
ApesInControl 5 points ago +5 / -0

Worms, the lot of em'.

19
davidmode 19 points ago +19 / -0

"our view" as in "our opinion" and therefore completely meaningless.

3
MasklessMarvel 3 points ago +3 / -0

Kayleigh would have said "The President's view"

obviously Psircleback does not to say anything that would make resident Biden accountable

19
datahog1776 19 points ago +19 / -0

Court challenges were fully heard.

KEK <--- This one

KEK

KEK

KEK

KEK

14
Nowsthetime 14 points ago +14 / -0

I’m really intrigued by this tweet. Apart from the fact that the AZ audit is going on really well and potentially producing results, what else could it mean?

15
MAGAforDAYZ 15 points ago +15 / -0

So she tweeted this out of the blue? Liberals who only watch mainstream news are going to be like "I thought we already won a long time ago? why is she bringing this up?" They are getting in front of the true story

10
Nowsthetime 10 points ago +10 / -0

Which is a good thing, right? Because from Nov the 3rd to Jan the 20th, they did not address the election fraud even once, and acted as if it didn’t even exist. I take it as really good news. Or am I wrong?

8
MAGAforDAYZ 8 points ago +8 / -0

I agree! Thats what Im thinking! This has never happened before, has it? Is there a protocol for what to do if you find out the Presidential election has been stolen? (not that government follows proper protocol)

3
Nowsthetime 3 points ago +4 / -1

There’s no protocol. I wonder what will happen. SCOTUS I believe.

2
Thunderbolt45 2 points ago +2 / -0

It will require military intervention. SCOTUS has already proven they won't intervene and we all know the Biden/Harris/Pelosi and Co. aren't going to step aside willingly for Trump to be sworn in.

4
giantrabbit1 4 points ago +7 / -3

I think the press asked her something along the lines of:

"Jen, what do you have to say about Fmr. Pres. Trump's assertion that the election was rigged and Biden did not legitimately win?"

6
MasklessMarvel 6 points ago +6 / -0

remember when people got kicked off social media fro even suggesting the election was not fair?

now they suddenly want to defend themselves?

hmmmm

9
JhnBrwnRtrns [S] 9 points ago +10 / -1

It means they have the goods in MI and now the goods in AZ. It means their position will be that the Constitutional process was followed and all that mattered was certification by state legislations and Electoral College results.

9
President_Elect_Pepe 9 points ago +10 / -1

Whoa there friend.

See. This is WHY she said what she said.

You accepted her premise. That the certification process determines what determines outright LEGALITY.

That is not correct. The process is just a process.

In other words Joe Biden would be elected via violation of law in at least 4 states. His election would be illegal and invalid.

Now I am guessing the only outright constitutional way to remove an illegally elected president is via impeachment.

But that is exactly what we should demand once the evidence is in place.

They are attempting to avoid that by shoving incorrect notions of process and law down the throats of people.

4
JhnBrwnRtrns [S] 4 points ago +4 / -0

Try reading my comment again. I'm stating what the Democrat position will be. I have not accepted any premises. I have only reiterated a premise. I would appreciate your acknowledgement that your comment is inaccurate.

0
President_Elect_Pepe 0 points ago +1 / -1

I did.

I stand by what I said.

That’s not going to be their position and you literally accepted their premise by representing their position in such a way.

Their position is going to be this type of gaslighting through language and we need to be specific about that or we lose.

By even representing their “position” as something which seems to make sense you add legitimacy to it.

Their position is nonsensical and supports an illegal election. It’s important to stress and be specific about that and not push their own purposefully confusing narratives around, especially here where they certainly don’t belong.

1
JhnBrwnRtrns [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Let me make clear to everyone how illogical you are. First you say "that's not going to be their position" even though their position is written clearly in this tweet from Raggedy Ann. Then you say "their position is nonsensical and supports an illegal election" which contradicts the prior statement of "that's not going to be their position". So, either you're a bloviating butthole who just wants people to hear/read you and don't care if you make any sense, or you simply just don't get it. Either way, I can't help you.

1
President_Elect_Pepe 1 point ago +1 / -0

Nope.

The written position is literally language games which I outlined.

The problem is still your own. Sorry that you suck.

1
JhnBrwnRtrns [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

So, they do have a position. I see...And I reiterated that position (language games). Yes, yes...delicious.

3
tombombadil 3 points ago +3 / -0

Is the AZ audit going really well? I haven't heard anything which makes me a bit nervous.

6
1A2A 6 points ago +6 / -0

Somebody on the inside let slip that it’s exactly what we expected.

They have to wait until full completion to release results, per the contract.

0
JhnBrwnRtrns [S] 0 points ago +1 / -1

That's not exactly what they said. They said something to the effect of, "we found what we were looking for." Not sure what that portends, but I don't think it was an expectation fulfilled.

1
RiMjObZ4dAyZ 1 point ago +1 / -0

Did you even read what you typed?

0
JhnBrwnRtrns [S] 0 points ago +1 / -1

Expectation is not the same thing as something being sought. I'll explain. They were looking for ballots, software images, etc. They were expecting to find fraud. I was looking for my car in the parking lot, and I found it. But I didn't expect it to have been broken into.

The person responding in the exchange referenced said enough to get us interested but in a way in which they could correctly state that they didn't admit to anything untoward. In other words, don't get your hopes up based on that particular exchange.

13
RumDrummer 13 points ago +13 / -0

Who the hell asked her anyways? We don't believe them in the first place, hence the audit.

10
WeaponizedSmirk 10 points ago +10 / -0

Court challenges were NOT fully fucking heard and that's part of the fucking problem, you vapid cunt.

9
mrh218 9 points ago +10 / -1

Courts that did fully hear the challenges ruled in Trumps favor most of the time. That's why upper courts stuck their fingers in their ears and sung "La la la la la!"

3
anon1011101 3 points ago +3 / -0

As I recall 2/3 of election lawsuits on behalf of Trump (that were actually heard by a judge) were successful

5
Americanapplepie 5 points ago +5 / -0

Court challenges were not heard, they had no standing or were moot. Can’t hear what was never presented. FOH

4
FORMERCHILDSTAR 4 points ago +4 / -0

Gosh, I don't remember any Democrat election officials (not a single one) willing to go under oath, or submit affidavits testifying that they ran a perfectly legit election in their jurisdictions, but I remember hundreds and hundreds of Trump voters that were willing to testify to fraud from personal experience. No court heard sworn witness testimony. We were cheated and ignored, but we'll have the last word...BELIEVE THAT!!!

4
brutustyberius 4 points ago +4 / -0

If this was a clean election and knew confidently Joe won, she would never say this. It's an admission of guilt.

4
foreach 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man...

4
ApesInControl 4 points ago +4 / -0

plz tweet this back at her

3
JhnBrwnRtrns [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

I don't have the Twatter. But that's a great idea!

4
TenFeetHigher 4 points ago +4 / -0

"our view..."

That they needed to begin their statement with such words about something that should be a fact and not even open to interpretation should be enough to set off alarm bells.

3
Spawnlingman 3 points ago +3 / -0

The democrats have successfully created a world where information is in abundance, knowledges is at your fingertips, and the truth is within seconds of you actually wanting to find it, and yet they can STILL spew shit like that from a government official channel and she will never be called out on the blatant lie that it is.

3
fponick 3 points ago +3 / -0

Views are opinions, and opinions aren’t facts.

3
Gulleyfoyleismyname 3 points ago +3 / -0

"Our view is" is democrap legalese for "yeah this shits going to court eventually".

It's not a declaration. Not "The election was certified....." but "Our view is the election was certified..."

3
Keiichi81 3 points ago +3 / -0

It throws me for a loop that these duplicitous fuckers have the gall to claim that election challenges were "fully heard" when everyone knows the major challenges were all ignored for "lack of standing" and being "moot".

3
Tookens 3 points ago +3 / -0

The spokesidiot has a very lawyerly way of phrasing that.

3
itsdangerous 3 points ago +3 / -0

its afraid again

2
TrumpChampBelt 2 points ago +2 / -0

1:11am huh lol

2
Persuasion 2 points ago +2 / -0

We're going to have to build more prisons.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
IG_Farben 2 points ago +2 / -0

You would only say that if you knew the election was a fraud. Think about it 🧐

2
JoeFromHR 2 points ago +2 / -0

Circle back bitch can fuck right off. She makes my skin crawl.

2
BaconRingBandit 2 points ago +2 / -0

"Our view" - sincerely THE LIBERAL COMMUNISTS!

2
phresh20 2 points ago +2 / -0

still not denying it though

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
harlanhubbard 1 point ago +1 / -0

That’s reads like a playing dumb statement. To me it’s very docile not to provoke more than they already have.

THEY KNOW WHAT THEY DID!!

1
BestTimeToBAlive 1 point ago +1 / -0

FULLY HEARD?????

FUCK YOU, YOU LYING UGLY COMMUNIST BITCH