And leave him with 20 billion? Crimes against humanity should see him bankrupt. He knows he's peddling lies, and that they're killing people in greater numbers than Covid.
Of all the good he's done, this is really it: the best argument in favor of his presidency. No new wars; troop withdrawals; peace deals.
His redemption arc returns me to Christianity, because I see the truth of it in him. A flawed human being--as we all are--redeemed.
This argument is the equivalent of the rank and file FBI al lbeing "good people". Our primary enemies are domestic.
8-1 - Roberts cucks out. lmao
I get the sense you're grasping at straws, but maybe not, so let's see.
You said:
But the legislative branch of those states is accepting the results!
That is not true at all, I replied, then gave you an example. Then you reply back:
You know that the PA legislature has more than 1 senator, yes?
An asinine response for reasons already explained.
Now you're saying Mastriano isn't in the majority by a long shot. OK, maybe he isn't. So what's the breakdown then? How many for, how many against?
Yes but my fear is that SCOTUS might acknowledge only the rule changes that violated the states' constitutions, and that would not flip the elections.
I'll assume you meant to write "only the rule changes that violated state law." And even still, this doesn't make sense as I already explained: Doing one does the other, too, which is the whole point of the Texas suit.
You know that the PA legislature has more than 1 senator, yes?
The "e.g." in my sentence stands for exemplī grātiā, which means for example. Mastriano is not alone, not by a long shot, in arguing not to accept the results.
However, most of the violations alleged are violations of state law and not violation of state constitutions.
In this instance, the laws that were broke also broke the state's constitution. They aren't mutually exclusive.
The PA legislature, e.g., Senator Doug Mastriano, is accepting the results? Holy shit, what the fuck are you talking about?
And even if they were, they're not allowed to openly greenlight a violation of their state's constitution. In doing so, they disenfranchise voters in other states, which is the entire point of the TX lawsuit!
The PA Supreme Court didn't rule against us. They didn't even take the case. Please don't spread misinformation.
This has to be the correct answer. If they could off him, they would have long ago, but even they don't want to deal with that fall out. After all, the entire point of their movement is to quash populism.
She's a great patriot, but I'm not clicking that link.
Yeah, fair point - sorting may only work for flared posts. The solution then would be for the software to require all posts be flared before they can be posted.
This site already has that feature. Click where it says All Posts and you will see a filter menu.
We can already sort by type of post. The default is All Posts. Click where it says that and you will get a sort menu.
RSBN aired the entire conference. They might have chopped it into segments by now. Though if they didn't, you could always timestamp it yourself.
Something like that. Just like BLM comes and goes like herpes.
We are on the precipice now. Hers are tears of war.
"Revenge" comes in not spilling any more blood on foreign SAND.
I hate this scare-mongering cock-sucker.
That's Brass Balls Bahb to you, Pede.
Might as well. The Dems didn't expect the the doxxing of the member's kids to go viral. At this point, the damage is done anyway. Might as well be ethical.
He's getting out in front of the executions and arrests that conspirators like him will have earned. It's the narrative he needs to push to save his own life, if there's any justice left in this world.
Neither does Washington.
By not defending ourselves we look worse, like a defeated people.