Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options

Rationalizations from Trumptards wanted

124678

Comments

  • Options
    BendintheriverBendintheriver Member Posts: 5,370
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Comment
    AOG said:



    Let's hear it? He's in favor of election security?
    Imagine being stupid enough to post content that has clearly been a cut and paste job by one of the rat media leaders of the "hate Trump and anyone who thinks differently than rats do club".

    You have zero idea of the context yet you stupidly post it as some sort of evidence to support your idiotic point.

    You are not a smart individual, you are just another goose stepping rat moron who does whatever you are told. No one should waste two seconds on garbage like this.
  • Options
    BendintheriverBendintheriver Member Posts: 5,370
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Comment

    Imagine voting for Biden

    81M Americans did. What's your point old man?
    You are a rat and like always you support racist pol's if you think they can win. That's why many can't believe anyone would vote for Biden.

    -"I don't want my kids growing up in a racial jungle".

    — “Well, I tell you what, if you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”

    — “You got the first mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”

    — “Unlike the African-American community, with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community with incredibly diverse attitudes about different things.”

    — “In Delaware, the largest growth in population is Indian-Americans moving from India. You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.”

    Last week, at a convention for Black and Hispanic journalists, a Black reporter asked Joe Biden whether he has taken a cognitive test.

    “No, I haven’t taken a test. Why the hell would I take a test? Come on, man! That’s like saying you, before you got in this program, you’re taking a test whether you’re taking cocaine or not. What do you think, huh? Are you a junkie?”

    Imagine if Trump had compared a cognitive test for himself to a cocaine drug test for a black journalist and then calling the black man a junkie. Biden could have come up with a 1000 different references but that is the first that came to his mind when looking at a black male. Again, can you imagine what would have happened to Trump if he said that?
  • Options
    LoneStarDawgLoneStarDawg Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 13,122
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Founders Club
    I haven’t seen the full audio posted on this thread

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/politics/audio-trumps-full-jan-2-call-with-ga-secretary-of-state/2021/01/03/3f9426f4-7937-4718-8a8e-9d6052001991_video.html

    Imagine getting made to look a fool in a settlement hearing between yourself, the plaintiff, and your legal teams; and your best response is to illegally leak the confidential audio to the WaPo to splice a hit piece together.
  • Options
    BendintheriverBendintheriver Member Posts: 5,370
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes First Comment

    I haven’t seen the full audio posted on this thread

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/politics/audio-trumps-full-jan-2-call-with-ga-secretary-of-state/2021/01/03/3f9426f4-7937-4718-8a8e-9d6052001991_video.html

    Imagine getting made to look a fool in a settlement hearing between yourself, the plaintiff, and your legal teams; and your best response is to illegally leak the confidential audio to the WaPo to splice a hit piece together.

    Mission accomplished I guess. Idiots like AOG and the rest swallowed this cut and paste lie like Jerry Nadler on a cup cake. The dumb continue to attempt to dumb down the rest of society.
  • Options
    DoogieMcDoogersonDoogieMcDoogerson Member Posts: 2,482
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    HHusky said:

    HHusky said:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-corrupts/ar-BB1crvZg?item=flights:prg-enterpriseblended-t,1s-ent-microsoft&ocid=entnewsntp

    A Republican Party based on the idea that power should be wielded whenever possible, and that Congress ought to override the states whenever Congress disagrees, is not in any way a conservative party.

    The Republican Party became a cult of personality by the time Trump won the presidency. Now we’re seeing crystal clear the costs of that transition.

    Uh, a party dedicated to voter fraud is your choice not mine. We are seeing a crystal clear example of this with the dazzer who FEELS that voter ID is racist and so is an honest election.
    Except there isn’t any evidence of voter fraud, Gasbag. None. Whatsoever.
    https://hereistheevidence.com/

    This is the evidence across the US that the media won't cover, the AGs choose to ignore, and the courts don't want to get involved with. You wouldn't know about this because you watch CNN you worthless fuck.
  • Options
    RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 101,562
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam
    Heard some news babe say its only 17 days but Trump should be impeached for this audio
  • Options
    doogiedoogie Member Posts: 15,072
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes First Comment 5 Up Votes
    He will be. Don’t worry.

    First President to work for Free with No pension
  • Options
    PurpleThrobberPurpleThrobber Member Posts: 41,914
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes

    Heard some news babe say its only 17 days but Trump should be impeached for this audio



    Btw, if you haven’t watched the documentary “Hoaxed” on how this all goes down, it’s worth the $4.99 on AppleTV.

  • Options
    AOGAOG Member Posts: 1,482
    5 Awesomes First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes
    OK, so it took you assholes a few hours to recover and rationalize the taped Trump extortion mostly with the usual set of debunked "fraud" charges (none of which actually are much more than half baked distortions omitting some critical considerations). But, you didn't know what to do for a while.
  • Options
    AOGAOG Member Posts: 1,482
    5 Awesomes First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes
    edited January 2021

    AOG said:

    AOG said:

    AOG said:

    The ballot-suitcase video has been debunked for literally months

    Have a link to the investigation report? Trump even asked for it in the phone call...Georgia SOS didn’t know how to respond.

    Liar.
    An investigation report that proves something didn't happen? This is known as:

    Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.

    Example: HoustonHusky is a fag. If I can't prove that false does it mean it's true?
    You beat your wife but ok.

    Thing is, if I didn’t have a video of you beating your wife me saying so doesn’t mean a whole lot. When I have a video of somebody lying about a leak in the building which records prove didn’t happen to clear the room of observers, and then go on to “count” ballots without observers in any form which is against all election laws, much less counting from unidentifiable boxes not in the standard storage location, that is the equivalent of a video of you hitting your wife and gives the accusation a lot more weight.

    Feel free to try and explain why you were hitting your wife and provide the police report absolving you, but don’t tell me my own eyes are lying to me.

    Liar.
    That's a twist of the facts.... if you can't prove fraud nor disprove fraud nothing happened
    There is a video showing election laws being broken as I previously specified...you didn’t contradict a single thing I said because you can’t.

    You claimed that video has been disproven...I asked for the link to the report explaining/disproving it. You can’t provide that either.

    Because you are a liar.
    what I just said... It's disproven if you can't prove fraud. The reason is that "proof of disproof" doesn't mean it's happened. Think about it. If I say HoustonHusky is a fag, I have no proof. But I can't disprove it (you not being a fag) either. If you 1) can't prove it and 2) can't disprove it, then you aren't a fag. If you can't prove fraud and can't disprove fraud, there was no fraud.
  • Options
    RaceBannonRaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 101,562
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    Swaye's Wigwam
  • Options
    HoustonHuskyHoustonHusky Member Posts: 5,954
    First Anniversary First Comment Photogenic 5 Awesomes
    AOG said:

    AOG said:

    AOG said:

    AOG said:

    The ballot-suitcase video has been debunked for literally months

    Have a link to the investigation report? Trump even asked for it in the phone call...Georgia SOS didn’t know how to respond.

    Liar.
    An investigation report that proves something didn't happen? This is known as:

    Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.

    Example: HoustonHusky is a fag. If I can't prove that false does it mean it's true?
    You beat your wife but ok.

    Thing is, if I didn’t have a video of you beating your wife me saying so doesn’t mean a whole lot. When I have a video of somebody lying about a leak in the building which records prove didn’t happen to clear the room of observers, and then go on to “count” ballots without observers in any form which is against all election laws, much less counting from unidentifiable boxes not in the standard storage location, that is the equivalent of a video of you hitting your wife and gives the accusation a lot more weight.

    Feel free to try and explain why you were hitting your wife and provide the police report absolving you, but don’t tell me my own eyes are lying to me.

    Liar.
    That's a twist of the facts.... if you can't prove fraud nor disprove fraud nothing happened
    There is a video showing election laws being broken as I previously specified...you didn’t contradict a single thing I said because you can’t.

    You claimed that video has been disproven...I asked for the link to the report explaining/disproving it. You can’t provide that either.

    Because you are a liar.
    what I just said... It's disproven if you can't prove fraud. The reason is that "proof of disproof" doesn't mean it's happened. Think about it. If I say HoustonHusky is a fag, I have no proof. But I can't disprove it (you not being a fag) either. If you 1) can't prove it and 2) can't disprove it, then you aren't a fag. If you can't prove fraud and can't disprove fraud, there was no fraud.
    Hey look...another poast from a proven liar who can't refute a single thing I said about the video.

    What was this, round 3?

    Keep lying.
  • Options
    DoogieMcDoogersonDoogieMcDoogerson Member Posts: 2,482
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    AOG said:

    AOG said:

    AOG said:

    AOG said:

    The ballot-suitcase video has been debunked for literally months

    Have a link to the investigation report? Trump even asked for it in the phone call...Georgia SOS didn’t know how to respond.

    Liar.
    An investigation report that proves something didn't happen? This is known as:

    Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence"), is a fallacy in informal logic. It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true.

    Example: HoustonHusky is a fag. If I can't prove that false does it mean it's true?
    You beat your wife but ok.

    Thing is, if I didn’t have a video of you beating your wife me saying so doesn’t mean a whole lot. When I have a video of somebody lying about a leak in the building which records prove didn’t happen to clear the room of observers, and then go on to “count” ballots without observers in any form which is against all election laws, much less counting from unidentifiable boxes not in the standard storage location, that is the equivalent of a video of you hitting your wife and gives the accusation a lot more weight.

    Feel free to try and explain why you were hitting your wife and provide the police report absolving you, but don’t tell me my own eyes are lying to me.

    Liar.
    That's a twist of the facts.... if you can't prove fraud nor disprove fraud nothing happened
    There is a video showing election laws being broken as I previously specified...you didn’t contradict a single thing I said because you can’t.

    You claimed that video has been disproven...I asked for the link to the report explaining/disproving it. You can’t provide that either.

    Because you are a liar.
    what I just said... It's disproven if you can't prove fraud. The reason is that "proof of disproof" doesn't mean it's happened. Think about it. If I say HoustonHusky is a fag, I have no proof. But I can't disprove it (you not being a fag) either. If you 1) can't prove it and 2) can't disprove it, then you aren't a fag. If you can't prove fraud and can't disprove fraud, there was no fraud.
    Fantastic logic. Actually, fantasy-logic. You probably aren't a lawyer, are you?
  • Options
    AOGAOG Member Posts: 1,482
    5 Awesomes First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes
    edited January 2021
    No but it is called the "burden of proof." You have to prove something happened. Proving it didn't happen is not necessary. So no "disproof" is ever required.
Sign In or Register to comment.