Sworn allegations of what? Hearsay? Hearsay isn't admissable as evidence. So far Trump has only produced a handful. Produce them in court. Most of Trump's attorneys have quit because they will not go to court making allegations they can't back up. Even Rudi's comments in court are differnt than his PR press events.Oldbear83 said:Sworn affidavits are evidence.TexasScientist said:So far, there is no real evidence, just allegations that haven't amounted to anything. If there is a legitimate claim, it won't be ignored by the courts. So far its been smoke and mirrors from Trump.Oldbear83 said:If there is evidence, real evidence, that the officials in several states manipulated the outcome ... then I could see the SCOTUS directing the legislatures in those states to choose the electors.Canada2017 said:
Supreme Court will not flip any election ....regardless of irregularities.
As the justices are historically loath to become king makers .
Very, very unlikely. But it's possible and would have the double value that there is historical precedent, and the judges would be able to say that the legislators, not the judges, decided the outcome.
Trump's Last Chance
17,838 Views |
232 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by TexasScientist
Appalling that so many good Americans on this board are OK with Trump trying to subvert the electionr results because you boys think too many black people voted in Michigan, Wisconsin and Ga.
I wonder why that would be? Hmmm.Mothra said:And like yourself.Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:
Romney, like Fox, has turned into a Biden supporter. lol
The media can't shut down anything. Their simply reporting what information is available to the public. The commentators on both sides can do nothing more than speculate on what's been reported. So far Trump's hit a brick wall in court for lack of credible evidence.Oldbear83 said:
Mothra: "I am ready for this to end in the near future. Recount and verify, that is fine, but let it end there"
I strongly disagree. The media has been trying to shut down any investigation, or serious inquiry, of what are clearly serious charges.
We're in a place where we need to look closely at all these affidavits, because only two possibilities exist:
1. Trump's team has suborned perjury, in which case serous charges should result once the truth is proven, or
2. The affidavits demonstrate the existence of a massive conspiracy in multiple states, for which election officials should face serious charges
In either case, the only way to find out the truth is to perform hand audits with ballot verification in the states claimed of this behavior. This can be checked relatively quickly by using sample audits and random spot-checks in counties with the greatest variance from normal behavior, and if problems are demonstrated, continuing with a broader hand audit of those counties and additional spot checks in other counties.
This is an obvious piece of hyperbole.J.B.Katz said:
Appalling that so many good Americans on this board are OK with Trump trying to subvert the electionr results because you boys think too many black people voted in Michigan, Wisconsin and Ga.
People are not concerned that 'too many black people voted'.
People are concerned that fraud was perpetrated,
However no significant evidence for such massive fraud has been provided.
Trump needs to do so immediately or concede.
It wasn't an accusation. Your 'lol' indicated irony, not that you believed itLimited IQ Redneck in PU said:I know that.Osodecentx said:They are calling the balls and strikes. Telling the truth doesn't make a person a Biden supporterLimited IQ Redneck in PU said:
Romney, like Fox, has turned into a Biden supporter. lol
Sorry
Noonan has hated Trump since 2017.
Come on, Sam, this bilge is stale and only makes you look like a Clinton.
Come on, Sam, this bilge is stale and only makes you look like a Clinton.
Media can be biased and influential, and this is the case now.TexasScientist said:The media can't shut down anything. Their simply reporting what information is available to the public. The commentators on both sides can do nothing more than speculate on what's been reported. So far Trump's hit a brick wall in court for lack of credible evidence.Oldbear83 said:
Mothra: "I am ready for this to end in the near future. Recount and verify, that is fine, but let it end there"
I strongly disagree. The media has been trying to shut down any investigation, or serious inquiry, of what are clearly serious charges.
We're in a place where we need to look closely at all these affidavits, because only two possibilities exist:
1. Trump's team has suborned perjury, in which case serous charges should result once the truth is proven, or
2. The affidavits demonstrate the existence of a massive conspiracy in multiple states, for which election officials should face serious charges
In either case, the only way to find out the truth is to perform hand audits with ballot verification in the states claimed of this behavior. This can be checked relatively quickly by using sample audits and random spot-checks in counties with the greatest variance from normal behavior, and if problems are demonstrated, continuing with a broader hand audit of those counties and additional spot checks in other counties.
And you have no idea what's going on with the open cases.
There are sworn testimony of witnessing crimes. It's not 'hearsay' because it is first-hand witness testimony.TexasScientist said:Sworn allegations of what? Hearsay? Hearsay isn't admissable as evidence. So far Trump has only produced a handful. Produce them in court. Most of Trump's attorneys have quit because they will not go to court making allegations they can't back up. Even Rudi's comments in court are differnt than his PR press events.Oldbear83 said:Sworn affidavits are evidence.TexasScientist said:So far, there is no real evidence, just allegations that haven't amounted to anything. If there is a legitimate claim, it won't be ignored by the courts. So far its been smoke and mirrors from Trump.Oldbear83 said:If there is evidence, real evidence, that the officials in several states manipulated the outcome ... then I could see the SCOTUS directing the legislatures in those states to choose the electors.Canada2017 said:
Supreme Court will not flip any election ....regardless of irregularities.
As the justices are historically loath to become king makers .
Very, very unlikely. But it's possible and would have the double value that there is historical precedent, and the judges would be able to say that the legislators, not the judges, decided the outcome.
So it's either perjury by the affiant, or admissible evidence that the affiant witnessed a crime committed.
AgreeLTbear said:
Trump worshipers: FOX is the only reliable mainstream news, all the others are just a libtard conspiracy
FOX: points out actual facts that don't look good for Trump
Trump worshipers: FOX is just a libtard conspiracy
Pointing out that Texas Tech beat Baylor last weekend doesn't make one a Tech supporter.
Denying that Tech beat Baylor costs credibility of the purveyor of the falsehood.
For news is accurate; their talk shows not so much (e.g. Hannity, Laura, Fox and Friends)
I think an affidavit is evidence, but filing an incorrect affidavit isn't perjury. A correct affidavit may support the cause of action, but prove to be inadequate (e.g. Trump lost by 70,000 votes, affidavits indicate that 20,000 votes were stolen, therefore inadequate to win the day for Trump).Oldbear83 said:There are sworn testimony of witnessing crimes. It's not 'hearsay' because it is first-hand witness testimony.TexasScientist said:Sworn allegations of what? Hearsay? Hearsay isn't admissable as evidence. So far Trump has only produced a handful. Produce them in court. Most of Trump's attorneys have quit because they will not go to court making allegations they can't back up. Even Rudi's comments in court are differnt than his PR press events.Oldbear83 said:Sworn affidavits are evidence.TexasScientist said:So far, there is no real evidence, just allegations that haven't amounted to anything. If there is a legitimate claim, it won't be ignored by the courts. So far its been smoke and mirrors from Trump.Oldbear83 said:If there is evidence, real evidence, that the officials in several states manipulated the outcome ... then I could see the SCOTUS directing the legislatures in those states to choose the electors.Canada2017 said:
Supreme Court will not flip any election ....regardless of irregularities.
As the justices are historically loath to become king makers .
Very, very unlikely. But it's possible and would have the double value that there is historical precedent, and the judges would be able to say that the legislators, not the judges, decided the outcome.
So it's either perjury by the affiant, or admissible evidence that the affiant witnessed a crime committed.
The affidavit may assert what the affiant believes to be true, but is later proved to be incorrect.
Noonan won a Pulitzer for her positive commentary on Trump. She knows the difference between criticism and hate.Oldbear83 said:
Noonan has hated Trump since 2017.
Come on, Sam, this bilge is stale and only makes you look like a Clinton.
The only cases where they are alleging fraud are counties where a disproportionate number of voters are black.Canada2017 said:This is an obvious piece of hyperbole.J.B.Katz said:
Appalling that so many good Americans on this board are OK with Trump trying to subvert the electionr results because you boys think too many black people voted in Michigan, Wisconsin and Ga.
People are not concerned that 'too many black people voted'.
People are concerned that fraud was perpetrated,
However no significant evidence for such massive fraud has been provided.
Trump needs to do so immediately or concede.
The partisan & black/white divide was really apparent in the Michigan battle over certification.
Trump's doing Trump: using lawyers to gum things up long enough so he gets his way. That's worked for him in business but meant the guy I know who did business with him 20 years ago said it was a mistake you only made once and, despite being a lifelong Republican, wouldn't vote for Trump because he was a "crook" and "mean as a snake."
What galls me is that most Republicans are twiddling their thumbs while this plays out. They swear to uphold the constitution. Graham ought to be impeached now based on that alone and him taking that oath again is a damn sacrilege.
Couldn't agree more. Noonan is a great journalist. One of the fairer and more reasonable out there. Her reasonable criticisms of Trump were spot on.Sam Lowry said:Noonan won a Pulitzer for her positive commentary on Trump. She knows the difference between criticism and hate.Oldbear83 said:
Noonan has hated Trump since 2017.
Come on, Sam, this bilge is stale and only makes you look like a Clinton.
Being white does not entitle one to commit voter fraud......though it has certainly happened in prior elections.J.B.Katz said:The only cases where they are alleging fraud are counties where a disproportionate number of voters are black.Canada2017 said:This is an obvious piece of hyperbole.J.B.Katz said:
Appalling that so many good Americans on this board are OK with Trump trying to subvert the electionr results because you boys think too many black people voted in Michigan, Wisconsin and Ga.
People are not concerned that 'too many black people voted'.
People are concerned that fraud was perpetrated,
However no significant evidence for such massive fraud has been provided.
Trump needs to do so immediately or concede.
The partisan & black/white divide was really apparent in the Michigan battle over certification.
Trump's doing Trump: using lawyers to gum things up long enough so he gets his way. That's worked for him in business but meant the guy I know who did business with him 20 years ago said it was a mistake you only made once and, despite being a lifelong Republican, wouldn't vote for Trump because he was a "crook" and "mean as a snake."
What galls me is that most Republicans are twiddling their thumbs while this plays out. They swear to uphold the constitution. Graham ought to be impeached now based on that alone and him taking that oath again is a damn sacrilege.
Being black does not entitle one to commit voter fraud...though some ' interesting ' vote counts have certainly occurred in Philly and Detroit in prior elections.
However the burden of proof today is on Trump.......and he has not delivered it .
Trump needs to provide such proof or accept that he lost and get out of the way .
What does this even mean? Sam republished 2 opinion pieces by conservatives. You don't even try to rebut, just ad him.Oldbear83 said:
Sam sure loves him some TDS'ers
You should consider posting less
Noonan has hated Trump for years, and has used a far different standard for Trump's actions than she ever did for, say, W.Sam Lowry said:Noonan won a Pulitzer for her positive commentary on Trump. She knows the difference between criticism and hate.Oldbear83 said:
Noonan has hated Trump since 2017.
Come on, Sam, this bilge is stale and only makes you look like a Clinton.
Sam posted articles by people well-known to hate Trump, pretending they had changed from prior support.Osodecentx said:What does this even mean? Sam republished 2 opinion pieces by conservatives. You don't even try to rebut, just ad him.Oldbear83 said:
Sam sure loves him some TDS'ers
You should consider posting less
It's patently dishonest.
"However the burden of proof today is on Trump.......and he has not delivered it ."
What gets lost is what one of the lawyers said yesterday: This is a long process, one which normally takes months to work through courts. What we have seen so far is the equivalent of opening statements, not the evidence itself, which will take a long time to present and put into context. The court procedures will show that part anyway.
There are between 2 and 6 steps in this process, potentially involving state court and appeals, then the state supreme court, followed by the same at the federal level.
Note also that 14th Amendment complaints would not be addressed at the state level.
Despite what CNN or FOX says, this does not have to be completed until Dec 13. Maybe the plaintiffs have nothing, but it looks like there's a lot to process, evidence that the defense and their supporters want folks to ignore rather than consider.
What gets lost is what one of the lawyers said yesterday: This is a long process, one which normally takes months to work through courts. What we have seen so far is the equivalent of opening statements, not the evidence itself, which will take a long time to present and put into context. The court procedures will show that part anyway.
There are between 2 and 6 steps in this process, potentially involving state court and appeals, then the state supreme court, followed by the same at the federal level.
Note also that 14th Amendment complaints would not be addressed at the state level.
Despite what CNN or FOX says, this does not have to be completed until Dec 13. Maybe the plaintiffs have nothing, but it looks like there's a lot to process, evidence that the defense and their supporters want folks to ignore rather than consider.
Your post is dishonest. Andrew McCarthy wrote some of the best analysis of the Mueller investigation, the Ukraine controversy, and the impeachment, all from a pro-Trump point of view. He critiqued every detail of the Democrats' case without mercy. He endorsed Trump for re-election just a few weeks ago.Oldbear83 said:Sam posted articles by people well-known to hate Trump, pretending they had changed from prior support.Osodecentx said:What does this even mean? Sam republished 2 opinion pieces by conservatives. You don't even try to rebut, just ad him.Oldbear83 said:
Sam sure loves him some TDS'ers
You should consider posting less
It's patently dishonest.
I am not at all dishonest, you simply dislike me calling you out.
TDS can be anti-Democrat, and occasionally giving the President his due credit does not mean McCarthy did not attack him w/o cause at other times.
And Noonan, whew. I notice you did not even try to pretend she ever gave Trump credit for anything.
TDS can be anti-Democrat, and occasionally giving the President his due credit does not mean McCarthy did not attack him w/o cause at other times.
And Noonan, whew. I notice you did not even try to pretend she ever gave Trump credit for anything.
You don't rebut him, you make what you think is a witty quip (they aren't).Oldbear83 said:Sam posted articles by people well-known to hate Trump, pretending they had changed from prior support.Osodecentx said:What does this even mean? Sam republished 2 opinion pieces by conservatives. You don't even try to rebut, just ad him.Oldbear83 said:
Sam sure loves him some TDS'ers
You should consider posting less
It's patently dishonest.
Noonan doesn't hate Trump. Opposition to Trump policies or manners isn't hate. It is disagreement
In recent weeks you made cogent arguments based on logic and facts. In recent days you've retreated into stupid quips and name calling.
I think you miss some of what I post.Osodecentx said:You don't rebut him, you make what you think is a witty quip (they aren't).Oldbear83 said:Sam posted articles by people well-known to hate Trump, pretending they had changed from prior support.Osodecentx said:What does this even mean? Sam republished 2 opinion pieces by conservatives. You don't even try to rebut, just ad him.Oldbear83 said:
Sam sure loves him some TDS'ers
You should consider posting less
It's patently dishonest.
Noonan doesn't hate Trump. Opposition to Trump policies or manners isn't hate. It is disagreement
In recent weeks you made cogent arguments based on logic and facts. In recent days you've retreated into stupid quips and name calling.
There is a contingent among Republicans who hate Trump, for a variety of reasons but the bias is clear. As I wrote just now, McCarthy is able to attack Democrats for their hypocrisy and dishonesty while still demonstrating bias against Trump.
Others, like Noonan, don't even hide their disgust regarding the President. When someone attacks someone on the basis of personality or style, that is not disagreement with their policies. and mischaracterization of a decision or action is is bias on its face, as we saw during the trade dispute with China.
The big problem is that Democrats use that division to convince Republicans to damage their own position by statement/actions against the President. This was apparent in Romney's decision to vote to convict the President in the Impeachment trial, or demands by anti-Trump Republicans that the President concede while issues of ballot legitimacy are still being worked out in the courts.
Finally, I appreciate you calling my attention to manners and civility. I observe that you have not said a word to Sam about some of his unworthy posts. Not trying to be snide, but you might want to reconsider whether you are using a double standard yourself, Osodecentx.
Thanks again for your comments.
Of course she's given him credit. Since you mentioned 2017, the link below is a good summary of Noonan's attitude. She praises Trump profusely, while wishing he and his supporters would rein in enough of the craziness to help him succeed. It's the message some of you just didn't want to hear.Oldbear83 said:
I am not at all dishonest, you simply dislike me calling you out.
TDS can be anti-Democrat, and occasionally giving the President his due credit does not mean McCarthy did not attack him w/o cause at other times.
And Noonan, whew. I notice you did not even try to pretend she ever gave Trump credit for anything.
https://peggynoonan.com/trump-gets-blunt-at-the-united-nations/
You obviously didn't read much of McCarthy's stuff.Oldbear83 said:I think you miss some of what I post.Osodecentx said:You don't rebut him, you make what you think is a witty quip (they aren't).Oldbear83 said:Sam posted articles by people well-known to hate Trump, pretending they had changed from prior support.Osodecentx said:What does this even mean? Sam republished 2 opinion pieces by conservatives. You don't even try to rebut, just ad him.Oldbear83 said:
Sam sure loves him some TDS'ers
You should consider posting less
It's patently dishonest.
Noonan doesn't hate Trump. Opposition to Trump policies or manners isn't hate. It is disagreement
In recent weeks you made cogent arguments based on logic and facts. In recent days you've retreated into stupid quips and name calling.
There is a contingent among Republicans who hate Trump, for a variety of reasons but the bias is clear. As I wrote just now, McCarthy is able to attack Democrats for their hypocrisy and dishonesty while still demonstrating bias against Trump.
Others, like Noonan, don't even hide their disgust regarding the President. When someone attacks someone on the basis of personality or style, that is not disagreement with their policies. and mischaracterization of a decision or action is is bias on its face, as we saw during the trade dispute with China.
The big problem is that Democrats use that division to convince Republicans to damage their own position by statement/actions against the President. This was apparent in Romney's decision to vote to convict the President in the Impeachment trial, or demands by anti-Trump Republicans that the President concede while issues of ballot legitimacy are still being worked out in the courts.
Finally, I appreciate you calling my attention to manners and civility. I observe that you have not said a word to Sam about some of his unworthy posts. Not trying to be snide, but you might want to reconsider whether you are using a double standard yourself, Osodecentx.
Thanks again for your comments.
Criticizing personality and style can be constructive, especially when personality and style stand in the way of shared goals.
Sam and I disagree on some things. When I do, I try to rebut his arguments with another, better argument. I don't call him sad or some other names. That is weak and unworthy.Oldbear83 said:Finally, I appreciate you calling my attention to manners and civility. I observe that you have not said a word to Sam about some of his unworthy posts. Not trying to be snide, but you might want to reconsider whether you are using a double standard yourself, Osodecentx.Osodecentx said:You don't rebut him, you make what you think is a witty quip (they aren't).Oldbear83 said:Sam posted articles by people well-known to hate Trump, pretending they had changed from prior support.Osodecentx said:What does this even mean? Sam republished 2 opinion pieces by conservatives. You don't even try to rebut, just ad him.Oldbear83 said:
Sam sure loves him some TDS'ers
You should consider posting less
It's patently dishonest.
Noonan doesn't hate Trump. Opposition to Trump policies or manners isn't hate. It is disagreement
In recent weeks you made cogent arguments based on logic and facts. In recent days you've retreated into stupid quips and name calling.
What is an example of an "unworthy" post of Sam? Disagreements aren't hate or sad.
McCarthy and Noonan don't hate Trump. Criticizing Trump isn't hate. I voted for Trump and I agree with most of Noonan's op-eds concerning Trump.
My point stands. Sam does things and you let them slide, but you fire off at me.Osodecentx said:Sam and I disagree on some things. When I do, I try to rebut his arguments with another, better argument. I don't call him sad or some other names. That is weak and unworthy.Oldbear83 said:Finally, I appreciate you calling my attention to manners and civility. I observe that you have not said a word to Sam about some of his unworthy posts. Not trying to be snide, but you might want to reconsider whether you are using a double standard yourself, Osodecentx.Osodecentx said:You don't rebut him, you make what you think is a witty quip (they aren't).Oldbear83 said:Sam posted articles by people well-known to hate Trump, pretending they had changed from prior support.Osodecentx said:What does this even mean? Sam republished 2 opinion pieces by conservatives. You don't even try to rebut, just ad him.Oldbear83 said:
Sam sure loves him some TDS'ers
You should consider posting less
It's patently dishonest.
Noonan doesn't hate Trump. Opposition to Trump policies or manners isn't hate. It is disagreement
In recent weeks you made cogent arguments based on logic and facts. In recent days you've retreated into stupid quips and name calling.
What is an example of an "unworthy" post of Sam? Disagreements aren't hate or sad.
McCarthy and Noonan don't hate Trump. Criticizing Trump isn't hate. I voted for Trump and I agree with most of Noonan's op-eds concerning Trump.
2 standards.
Got it.
Never hurts to hear what people are telling you.Oldbear83 said:My point stands. Sam does things and you let them slide, but you fire off at me.Osodecentx said:Sam and I disagree on some things. When I do, I try to rebut his arguments with another, better argument. I don't call him sad or some other names. That is weak and unworthy.Oldbear83 said:Finally, I appreciate you calling my attention to manners and civility. I observe that you have not said a word to Sam about some of his unworthy posts. Not trying to be snide, but you might want to reconsider whether you are using a double standard yourself, Osodecentx.Osodecentx said:You don't rebut him, you make what you think is a witty quip (they aren't).Oldbear83 said:Sam posted articles by people well-known to hate Trump, pretending they had changed from prior support.Osodecentx said:What does this even mean? Sam republished 2 opinion pieces by conservatives. You don't even try to rebut, just ad him.Oldbear83 said:
Sam sure loves him some TDS'ers
You should consider posting less
It's patently dishonest.
Noonan doesn't hate Trump. Opposition to Trump policies or manners isn't hate. It is disagreement
In recent weeks you made cogent arguments based on logic and facts. In recent days you've retreated into stupid quips and name calling.
What is an example of an "unworthy" post of Sam? Disagreements aren't hate or sad.
McCarthy and Noonan don't hate Trump. Criticizing Trump isn't hate. I voted for Trump and I agree with most of Noonan's op-eds concerning Trump.
2 standards.
Got it.
True. You should try it too, Sam.Sam Lowry said:Never hurts to hear what people are telling you.Oldbear83 said:My point stands. Sam does things and you let them slide, but you fire off at me.Osodecentx said:Sam and I disagree on some things. When I do, I try to rebut his arguments with another, better argument. I don't call him sad or some other names. That is weak and unworthy.Oldbear83 said:Finally, I appreciate you calling my attention to manners and civility. I observe that you have not said a word to Sam about some of his unworthy posts. Not trying to be snide, but you might want to reconsider whether you are using a double standard yourself, Osodecentx.Osodecentx said:You don't rebut him, you make what you think is a witty quip (they aren't).Oldbear83 said:Sam posted articles by people well-known to hate Trump, pretending they had changed from prior support.Osodecentx said:What does this even mean? Sam republished 2 opinion pieces by conservatives. You don't even try to rebut, just ad him.Oldbear83 said:
Sam sure loves him some TDS'ers
You should consider posting less
It's patently dishonest.
Noonan doesn't hate Trump. Opposition to Trump policies or manners isn't hate. It is disagreement
In recent weeks you made cogent arguments based on logic and facts. In recent days you've retreated into stupid quips and name calling.
What is an example of an "unworthy" post of Sam? Disagreements aren't hate or sad.
McCarthy and Noonan don't hate Trump. Criticizing Trump isn't hate. I voted for Trump and I agree with most of Noonan's op-eds concerning Trump.
2 standards.
Got it.
Sam and I disagree occasionally.
However he is always informative, courteous and patient .
Most amazing of all...sometimes I actually learn something .
Same with Forrest .
However he is always informative, courteous and patient .
Most amazing of all...sometimes I actually learn something .
Same with Forrest .
I used to find Sam reasonable in all things.Canada2017 said:
Sam and I disagree occasionally.
However he is always informative, courteous and patient .
Most amazing of all...sometimes I actually learn something .
Same with Forrest .
But with regard to the President, he has adopted contempt and derision, albeit mild levels, in his posts.
He will not hear reason when it means respecting President Trump, and he sometimes resorts to unworthy posts.
You may not see it, because it is not directed at you.
I try to be even-handed. I have criticized Florda for his tone at times, as well as Bearrito. I try to respect opinions with which I disagree, so long as they do not devolve into personal attacks.
It is unfortunate to see someone devolve in character over time. And it seems it is wasted effort to tell some they are on the wrong road. I respect Oso when he tries to remind me of my backsliding, but I wish he would do so with people on the other side, who find mockery and derision acceptable as long as they are attacking a Trump supporter.
Trump suffers twin defeats in his effort to overturn Biden's victory in key states
https://www.thehour.com/news/article/Michigan-lawmakers-arrive-at-the-White-House-amid-15743537.php#item-85307-tbla-1
Trump's latest attempt to steal the election by coercing Michigan Republican Senate and House leaders has failed. Patriotism still remains with some Republicans.
good for them! Hey, Trumps.....Move the ef along and be a statesman. It is you last opportunity to help your legacy which at this point, history will not treat well.TexasScientist said:
Trump suffers twin defeats in his effort to overturn Biden's victory in key states
https://www.thehour.com/news/article/Michigan-lawmakers-arrive-at-the-White-House-amid-15743537.php#item-85307-tbla-1
Trump's latest attempt to steal the election by coercing Michigan Republican Senate and House leaders has failed. Patriotism still remains with some Republicans.
I think it's a mistake to believe that vague statement by the Michigan GOP leaders means anything, positive or negative. I still think they will use any fig leaf of cover they can find to strategically string things out just like Trump wants them to.
Why the hell should we care about a "legacy"? Once again you accuse conservatives of doing the very thing you've already done. The entire board is a garbage can of people accusing us of doing the very thing you have already done.J.R. said:good for them! Hey, Trumps.....Move the ef along and be a statesman. It is you last opportunity to help your legacy which at this point, history will not treat well.TexasScientist said:
Trump suffers twin defeats in his effort to overturn Biden's victory in key states
https://www.thehour.com/news/article/Michigan-lawmakers-arrive-at-the-White-House-amid-15743537.php#item-85307-tbla-1
Trump's latest attempt to steal the election by coercing Michigan Republican Senate and House leaders has failed. Patriotism still remains with some Republicans.