Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Like we say, No
Comments
-
Your basic premise is the law enforcement agencies are carrying out their duties in the first place.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Man, some of yous have really low expectations of Trump. If the sitting president can produce the goods on election fraud but cannot enforce law through conventional means, that's disqualifying right there.WestlinnDuck said:
But the dems don't want civil law enforcement and we aren't going to get it. The usual remedy would be an honest election. Like the dems want that.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Civil law enforcement.PurpleThrobber said:
Then what is the proper remediation for lawlessness and insurrection?GrundleStiltzkin said:Suggesting martial law is over the line for me. Sorry.
And my initial disagreement with you OP was restriction of 1A rights. If martial law is their only foreseeable course of action (see flawed premise above), then they most certainly should say it.
-
No fraud is the wrong question. Of course there was some level, always is, the country is a big place. Materially impactful fraud, I really don't know. By the end of the first week after the election, I decided I couldn't trust most things coming from either mainstream or partisan media.RoadTrip said:
So your opinion is there is no fraud? Look, I think there's a ton of data analysis which shows something is askew but whether it can be proven is another story. What I do know is we absolutely have the technology to ensure free and accurate elections. Why is it that Democrats never want this to happen?GrundleStiltzkin said:
Man, some of yous have really low expectations of Trump. If the sitting president can produce the goods on election fraud but cannot enforce law through conventional means, that's disqualifying right there.WestlinnDuck said:
But the dems don't want civil law enforcement and we aren't going to get it. The usual remedy would be an honest election. Like the dems want that.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Civil law enforcement.PurpleThrobber said:
Then what is the proper remediation for lawlessness and insurrection?GrundleStiltzkin said:Suggesting martial law is over the line for me. Sorry.
These Dominion machines are a problem, in my opinion, based on that NBC story from January. I feel like I can trust that one because it was written out-of-the-moment. Serious security issues that must be addressed. -
Honest question, what are the 1A infringements you're seeing in regards to this mess?PurpleThrobber said:
Your basic premise is the law enforcement agencies are carrying out their duties in the first place.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Man, some of yous have really low expectations of Trump. If the sitting president can produce the goods on election fraud but cannot enforce law through conventional means, that's disqualifying right there.WestlinnDuck said:
But the dems don't want civil law enforcement and we aren't going to get it. The usual remedy would be an honest election. Like the dems want that.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Civil law enforcement.PurpleThrobber said:
Then what is the proper remediation for lawlessness and insurrection?GrundleStiltzkin said:Suggesting martial law is over the line for me. Sorry.
And my initial disagreement with you OP was restriction of 1A rights. If martial law is their only foreseeable course of action (see flawed premise above), then they most certainly should say it. -
https://youtu.be/QfC2T7UpxkI If y’all have 4 hours to kill, time from 1:04-6:30 is some serious shit from legit experts.
I refuse to get overly invested but this was an interesting session. Unbelievable how much this is getting suppressed. -
People can say whatever the fuck they want whether it makes sense or not. @dflea does it all the time.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Honest question, what are the 1A infringements you're seeing in regards to this mess?PurpleThrobber said:
Your basic premise is the law enforcement agencies are carrying out their duties in the first place.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Man, some of yous have really low expectations of Trump. If the sitting president can produce the goods on election fraud but cannot enforce law through conventional means, that's disqualifying right there.WestlinnDuck said:
But the dems don't want civil law enforcement and we aren't going to get it. The usual remedy would be an honest election. Like the dems want that.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Civil law enforcement.PurpleThrobber said:
Then what is the proper remediation for lawlessness and insurrection?GrundleStiltzkin said:Suggesting martial law is over the line for me. Sorry.
And my initial disagreement with you OP was restriction of 1A rights. If martial law is their only foreseeable course of action (see flawed premise above), then they most certainly should say it.
And, yes, I have used the STFU option on occasion - but I'm an intellectually honest hypocrite that way. -
Thank you and I'd gladly take 4 years of Biden corruption if it meant we'd finally do something about demanding free and fair elections but you and I both know that Democrats will never allow that to happen and we both know why.GrundleStiltzkin said:
No fraud is the wrong question. Of course there was some level, always is, the country is a big place. Materially impactful fraud, I really don't know. By the end of the first week after the election, I decided I couldn't trust most things coming from either mainstream or partisan media.RoadTrip said:
So your opinion is there is no fraud? Look, I think there's a ton of data analysis which shows something is askew but whether it can be proven is another story. What I do know is we absolutely have the technology to ensure free and accurate elections. Why is it that Democrats never want this to happen?GrundleStiltzkin said:
Man, some of yous have really low expectations of Trump. If the sitting president can produce the goods on election fraud but cannot enforce law through conventional means, that's disqualifying right there.WestlinnDuck said:
But the dems don't want civil law enforcement and we aren't going to get it. The usual remedy would be an honest election. Like the dems want that.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Civil law enforcement.PurpleThrobber said:
Then what is the proper remediation for lawlessness and insurrection?GrundleStiltzkin said:Suggesting martial law is over the line for me. Sorry.
These Dominion machines are a problem, in my opinion, based on that NBC story from January. I feel like I can trust that one because it was written out-of-the-moment. Serious security issues that must be addressed. -
I'll listen to the point in time you suggested later tonight.LoneStarDawg said:https://youtu.be/QfC2T7UpxkI If y’all have 4 hours to kill, time from 1:04-6:30 is some serious shit from legit experts.
I refuse to get overly invested but this was an interesting session. Unbelievable how much this is getting suppressed. -
Since y’all are lazy fucksLoneStarDawg said:https://youtu.be/QfC2T7UpxkI If y’all have 4 hours to kill, time from 1:04-6:30 is some serious shit from legit experts.
I refuse to get overly invested but this was an interesting session. Unbelievable how much this is getting suppressed.
-
Or are wanting full blown communism and gulags. They are all in by any means necessary as we see with the election fraud.RoadTrip said:
IMO It wouldn't matter if they had this proof, they wouldn't act on it because they are the GOP; they just want to be invited to the cocktail parties and avoid being called mean names by mean people. Effectively, nobody gives a shit about the corruption in this country as long as they have a relatively comfortable life.LoneStarDawg said:Real talk, if key state republican legislators have unquestionable proof to go off script and elect their own electoral college or it goes to a house session to decide and the GOP flexes muscles. Will we not end up in a conflict?
-
Doesn't fit here, but still.
