# Trump personally pressured Justice Department officials to declare that the election was corrupt



## notimp (Jul 31, 2021)

> The exchange unfolded during a phone call on Dec. 27 in which Mr. Trump pressed the acting attorney general at the time, Jeffrey A. Rosen, and his deputy, Richard P. Donoghue, on voter fraud claims that the department had disproved. Mr. Donoghue warned that the department had no power to change the outcome of the election. Mr. Trump replied that he did not expect that, according to notes Mr. Donoghue took memorializing the conversation.





> “Just say that the election was corrupt + leave the rest to me” and to congressional allies, Mr. Donoghue wrote in summarizing Mr. Trump’s response.





> Mr. Trump’s conversation with Mr. Rosen and Mr. Donoghue reflected his single-minded focus on overturning the election results. At one point, Mr. Trump claimed voter fraud in Georgia, Michigan, Nevada and Arizona, which he called “corrupted elections.” Mr. Donoghue pushed back.





> “Much of the info you’re getting is false,” Mr. Donoghue said, adding that the department had conducted “dozens of investigations, hundreds of interviews” and not found evidence to support his claims. “We look at allegations but they don’t pan out,” the officials told Mr. Trump, according to the notes.





> The department found that the error rate of ballot counting in Michigan was 0.0063 percent, not the 68 percent that the president asserted; it did not find evidence of a conspiracy theory that an employee in Pennsylvania had tampered with ballots; and after examining video and interviewing witnesses, it did not find evidence of ballot fraud in Fulton County, Ga., according to the notes.





> Mr. Trump, undeterred, brushed off the department’s findings. “Ok fine — but what about the others?” Mr. Donoghue wrote in his notes describing the president’s remarks. Mr. Trump asked Mr. Donoghue to travel to Fulton County to verify signatures on ballots.





> The people “saying that the election isn’t corrupt are corrupt,” Mr. Trump told the officials, adding that they needed to act. “Not much time left.”





> At another point, Mr. Donoghue said that the department could quickly verify or disprove the assertion that more ballots were cast in Pennsylvania than there are voters.





> “Should be able to check on that quickly, but understand that the DOJ can’t and won’t snap it’s fingers and change the outcome of the election, doesn’t work that way,” Mr. Donoghue wrote in his notes.





> The officials also told Mr. Trump that the Justice Department had no evidence to support a lawsuit regarding the election results. “We are not in a position based on the evidence. We can only act on the actual evidence developed,” they said.





> Mr. Trump castigated the officials, saying that “thousands of people called” their local U.S. attorney’s offices to complain about the election and that “nobody trusts the F.B.I.” He said that “people are angry — blaming D.O.J. for inaction.”





> “You guys may not be following the internet the way I do,” Mr. Trump said, according to the document.






> In a moment of foreshadowing, Mr. Trump said, “people tell me Jeff Clark is great, I should put him in,” referring to the acting head of the Justice Department’s civil division, who had also encouraged department officials to intervene in the election. “People want me to replace D.O.J. leadership.”
> “You should have the leadership you want,” Mr. Donoghue replied. But it “won’t change the dept’s position.”



src: https://archive.is/1NIYA#selection-697.0-716.0


----------



## jimbo13 (Jul 31, 2021)

It was corrupt.

No ID, no integrity.


----------



## Xzi (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> It was corrupt.
> 
> No ID, no integrity.


What a different world we might live in if people had the same fervor about the election that GWB _actually_ stole from Gore.  Turns out he won Florida by roughly a hundred and fifty votes.  Whoops.


----------



## jimbo13 (Jul 31, 2021)

Xzi said:


> What a different world we might live in if people had the same fervor about the election that GWB _actually_ stole from Gore.  Turns out he won Florida by roughly a hundred and fifty votes.  Whoops.



Yep he did, but Gore was too much of a Beta pansy to fight for an election he won.


----------



## notimp (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> Yep he did, but Gore was too much of a Beta pansy to fight for an election he won.


Using what meassures? Threats? Pressuring justice department officials? Or arguments like "The people telling me the election wasnt corrupt are corrupt."

No, sorry SIr, we can't do that.
No, sorry Sir, we can't do that.
No, sorry SIr, that won't change the departments position.
No, sorry Sir - Pence also cant do that.
No, sorry Sir, storming the capital with a mob also wont do that.
...

(#fighter)


----------



## The Catboy (Jul 31, 2021)

The “you lost, get over it,” and “fuck your feelings,” crowd sure as fuck aren’t getting over their loss.


----------



## Jayro (Jul 31, 2021)

Lilith Valentine said:


> The “you lost, get over it,” and “fuck your feelings,” crowd sure as fuck aren’t getting over their loss.


They don't understand basic concepts like "Accountability", or "Integrity".


----------



## notimp (Jul 31, 2021)

Jayro said:


> They don't understand basic concepts like "Accountability", or "Integrity".


And neither would anyone with a sense of how societies work - but this is different.

Dont mask it with emotionally charged concepts on your end. Just let them read what the president pushed for, using what means, and what arguments, under what pressures (time), and while exchanging heads of agencies, that didn't succumb to his demands.

That should be enough.

No need to learn accountability or integrity... just look at intent and measures employed.


----------



## jimbo13 (Jul 31, 2021)

Jayro said:


> They don't understand basic concepts like "Accountability", or "Integrity".



We made our feelings known about unaccountable ID'less mail in balloting rolled out essentially nation wide well before the first ballot was cast, if you expected people to accept the result you should paid attention.


----------



## notimp (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> We made our feelings known about unaccountable ID'less mail in balloting rolled out essentially nation wide well before the first ballot was cast, if you expected people to accept the result you should paid attention.


And there I was - thinking, that you (the mob) chanted "hang mike pence".

see also: h**ps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GuCysTdbn94



jimbo13 said:


> We made our feelings known about unaccountable ID'less mail in balloting rolled out essentially nation wide well before the first ballot was cast,[...]


Issue with this is, that _nationwide_ ballets were only sent out to addresses with US citizens, on some sort of district record. As in:

You go to the district government to get ID - they look into their records, then give you your ID card.
and
They look into their records, to see if you are an eligible voter, then send out mail voting ballots, without needing your ID, to your home address. Same difference in terms of voting security.
(Effectively. I'm sure you can come up with scenarios, where the person wasnt living at that address any more or 'ballots could have been stolen from the mailbox' -- but the question in those cases is also "do they scale". So do you have organized crime mobs, going from house to house, stealing mail ballots. Or - are there many people intentioned to "vote twice" if they got the ballot from the previous tenant, which btw. is a crime you go to prison for.)


Now - if you send out mail ballots, on mass, to ANY address in the US, that would be an issue - but thats not what you are criticizing. If mail ballots in significant numbers would have been stolen, and then subverted - that would be an issue, but thats not what you are criticizing. And if ballots ended up in large numbers (large number is important for it to have any statistical impact) in the ditch, that would be an issue, but thats not what you are criticizing.

So what are you criticizing? More people getting access to vote, than in previous elections, by making mail voting the default - which statistically does favor democrats. Why? Because access to "quick" voting was reduced by gerrymandering, and then reducing polling stations in voting districts you dont like the outcome of. Because its usually harder for black people to get a free afternoon on a workday (and republicans always insist, that elections need to be held on workdays -). Because "identification" with the political cause, is usually higher with republicans, which is why mobilization historically is more easy for them. (See: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...r-in-voter-turnout-rate-party-identification/ (take the numbers and filter out the gender difference, but look at the "voter groups").

So anything that makes "voting more easy" historically favors democrats. That might change, btw - if reps become the primary party for hispanic voters in certain districts.


----------



## Xzi (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> Yep he did, but Gore was too much of a Beta pansy to fight for an election he won.


SCOTUS wrongfully shut down the final recount, demonstrating that conservatives have always had a habit of not respecting democracy/outcomes of elections.


----------



## Jayro (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> We made our feelings known about unaccountable ID'less mail in balloting rolled out essentially nation wide well before the first ballot was cast, if you expected people to accept the result you should paid attention.


You already have to prove who you are with ID when you register to vote. Not sure why they'd need to check it twice. I'm still me, the last time I checked. I've never needed to show ID to vote when I mail in my ballot every 4 years, that's just absurd.


----------



## jimbo13 (Jul 31, 2021)

Jayro said:


> You already have to prove who you are with ID when you register to vote. Not sure why they'd need to check it twice. I'm still me, the last time I checked. I've never needed to show ID to vote when I mail in my ballot every 4 years, that's just absurd.



Because of ballot harvesting. I don't see why I have to register my car every year but I do, it's already registered.

No ID? No problem.  Every state that has implemented voter ID will let you cast provisionally and waive the fees on IDs if you need one to vote.


----------



## Jayro (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> Because of ballot harvesting. I don't see why I have to register my car every year but I do, it's already registered.
> 
> No ID? No problem.  Every state that has implemented voter ID will let you cast provisionally and waive the fees on IDs if you need one to vote.


No thanks, I'll just keep voting the same honest way by mail that I always have.


----------



## jimbo13 (Jul 31, 2021)

Jayro said:


> No thanks, I'll just keep voting the same honest way by mail that I always have.



Not if your state changes the law because they don't want to have perpetual fraud allegations.


----------



## Valwinz (Jul 31, 2021)

Fake news from a failing administractions


----------



## Jayro (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> Not if your state changes the law because they don't want to have perpetual fraud allegations.


They won't, I'm thankful enough to live in a blue state. Red states are the ones being butthurt little assholes.


----------



## The Catboy (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> Because of ballot harvesting. I don't see why I have to register my car every year but I do, it's already registered.
> 
> No ID? No problem.  Every state that has implemented voter ID will let you cast provisionally and waive the fees on IDs if you need one to vote.


You got any sources to prove this happened on a large enough scale to sway an election?


----------



## Lacius (Jul 31, 2021)

@jimbo13 There is no evidence of widespread fraud in the 2020 election, and mail ballots are a safe and secure method of voting with strategies already in place to mitigate against voter fraud.

I find it interesting that something like 25% of ballots cast in the 2016 election were mail ballots, and the conservatives didn't have anything to say about alleged voter fraud during the 2016 election. I wonder why.


----------



## jimbo13 (Jul 31, 2021)

Lacius said:


> @jimbo13 There is no evidence of widespread fraud in the 2020 election, and mail ballots are a safe and secure method of voting with strategies already in place to mitigate against voter fraud.
> 
> I find it interesting that something like 25% of ballots cast in the 2016 election were mail ballots, and the conservatives didn't have anything to say about alleged voter fraud during the 2016 election. I wonder why.



There is no evidence everyone shares your opinion on subjective terms like "widespread" or mail in ballots are safe.

If mail in ballots are safe and secure so is mail order ammo.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Lilith Valentine said:


> You got any sources to prove this happened on a large enough scale to sway an election?



Do you ever have any metrics that aren't entirely subjective?  Perception is reality, if people don't trust election integrity elections carry no meaning.

Crimes don't need to be widespread to pass laws to prevent them.


----------



## Lacius (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> There is no evidence everyone shares your opinion on subjective terms like "widespread" or mail in ballots are safe.
> 
> If mail in ballots are safe and secure so is mail order ammo.


Why am I not surprised that your response was something other than evidence of widespread voter fraud?

Why am I not surprised that you didn't address at all my point about how conservatives are arbitrarily alleging fraud in the 2020 election while ignoring the 2016 election?


----------



## jimbo13 (Jul 31, 2021)

Lacius said:


> Why am I not surprised that your response was something other than evidence of widespread voter fraud?
> 
> Why am I not surprised that you didn't address at all my point about how conservatives are arbitrarily alleging fraud in the 2020 election while ignoring the 2016 election?



Why am I not surprised you attributing statements I didn't make because I think Voter ID is essential for election integrity and fosters trust in the electoral system.


----------



## Lacius (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> Why am I not surprised you attributing statements I didn't make


You baselessly (and hypocritically) called the 2020 election "corrupt," Jimbo.


----------



## Xzi (Jul 31, 2021)

Lacius said:


> You baselessly (and hypocritically) called the 2020 election "corrupt," Jimbo.


If not for baseless statements, he'd have to stop posting altogether.

I'm a bit surprised Barr didn't go along with the whole thing, but at the same time, he had seen everybody else close to Trump get thrown under the bus already.  I guess they both thought they were using the other for personal gain.


----------



## jimbo13 (Jul 31, 2021)

Lacius said:


> You baselessly (and hypocritically) called the 2020 election "corrupt," Jimbo.



They were corrupt, that doesn't necessitate wide spread voter fraud.

Poll taxes and literacy tests were entirely legal, those elections were corrupt without fraud.  When you change process in the midst of a public health emergency with only partisan approval that is corrupt.

Republicans were very vocal they were not accepting a result that was the outcome of last minute Covid changes to mail in ballots.


----------



## Lacius (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> They were corrupt



Where was the improper conduct in 2020?
Do you acknowledge that President Biden won the election fairly (both the popular vote and the Electoral College) in 2020?
Are you also arguing then that the 2016 election was corrupt?



Xzi said:


> If not for baseless statements, he'd have to stop posting altogether.
> 
> I'm a bit surprised Barr didn't go along with the whole thing, but at the same time, he had seen everybody else close to Trump get thrown under the bus already.  I guess they both thought they were using the other for personal gain.


This news story about Trump explicitly pressuring the Justice Department to overturn the election does solve the mystery of why Barr abruptly resigned.


----------



## Xzi (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> They were corrupt, that doesn't necessitate wide spread voter fraud.
> 
> Poll taxes and literacy tests were entirely legal, those elections were corrupt without fraud.  When you change process in the midst of a public health emergency with only partisan approval that is corrupt.


"When more people vote, it's corrupt because I don't like the outcome."


----------



## jimbo13 (Jul 31, 2021)

Lacius said:


> Where was the improper conduct in 2020?
> Do you acknowledge that President Biden won the election fairly (both the popular vote and the Electoral College) in 2020?
> Are you also arguing then that the 2016 election was corrupt?
> This news story about Trump explicitly pressuring the Justice Department to overturn the election does solve the mystery of why Barr abruptly resigned.



If you support a balloting process that only has partisan approval expect nothing more than partisan acceptance of the results.


----------



## Lacius (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> If you support a balloting process that only has partisan approval expect nothing more than partisan acceptance of the results.


I would appreciate direct answers to my questions please. People don't usually have to obfuscate their positions when their positions are defensible. Thank you.


----------



## jimbo13 (Jul 31, 2021)

Lacius said:


> I would appreciate direct answers to my questions please. People don't usually have to obfuscate their positions when their positions are defensible. Thank you.



I would appreciate you don't attribute claims & positions to me I did not make.

My position is very clear, we have a partisan divide in election trust,  Voter ID and strict balloting auditing are measures to address that.


----------



## Xzi (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> If you support a balloting process that only has partisan approval expect nothing more than partisan acceptance of the results.


"Only one of the parties is interested in participating in democracy, so we just shouldn't have democracy any more."


----------



## Lacius (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> I would appreciate you don't attribute claims & positions to me I did not make.
> 
> My position is very clear, we have a partisan divide in election trust,  Voter ID and strict balloting auditing are measures to address that.


I asked three specific questions, and you don't seem to want to answer them.

Where was the improper conduct in 2020?
Do you acknowledge that President Biden won the election fairly (both the popular vote and the Electoral College) in 2020?
Are you also arguing then that the 2016 election was corrupt?


----------



## jimbo13 (Jul 31, 2021)

Lacius said:


> I asked three specific questions, and you don't seem to want to answer them.
> 
> Where was the improper conduct in 2020?
> Do you acknowledge that President Biden won the election fairly (both the popular vote and the Electoral College) in 2020?
> Are you also arguing then that the 2016 election was corrupt?



1. Rushed partisan approvals to allow mail in balloting of varying legality depending on the state.
2. No, the popular vote has no relevancy in our electoral system there is nothing to win.
3. Saying true things about HRC just because her emails were hacked is not corrupt.


----------



## Lacius (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> 1. Rushed partisan approvals to allow mail in balloting of varying legality depending on the state.
> 2. No, the popular vote has no relevancy in our electoral system there is nothing to win.
> 3. Saying true things about HRC just because her emails were hacked is not corrupt.


You don't seem to like answering questions. I'll try again.

What about mail-in voting was improper or corrupt? Do you have any evidence that mail-in voting is/was improper or corrupt?
Do you acknowledge President Biden won the election (the Electoral College) fairly in 2020?
If you are arguing 2020 was a corrupt or improper election, are you also arguing 2016 (which also had a significant number of mail-in ballots) was corrupt in the same way?
As I said earlier, defensible positions don't usually require obfuscation.


----------



## jimbo13 (Jul 31, 2021)

Lacius said:


> You don't seem to like answering questions. I'll try again.
> 
> What about mail-in voting was improper or corrupt? Do you have any evidence that mail-in voting is/was improper or corrupt?
> Do you acknowledge President Biden won the election (the Electoral College) fairly in 2020?
> ...



1.  Changing the balloting process substantively in swing states as late as October in the midst of an emergency is improper. Doing these things with only partisan support amongst the electorate and little to no time for public review is improper and leads to people doubting election integrity.

2. No, I have no faith last minute balloting changes and Covid measures didn't disenfranchise voters or wasn't rife with fraud.

3.  That would require examination of every state that was doing mail in balloting at the time which I am not going to be doing, Generally I don't object to mail in ballots where it has been common place, subject to public review and approval and wasn't implemented in a rush under emergency measures.

Rule changes are done in the off season, not 5 minutes before kick off.


----------



## Lacius (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> 1.  Changing the balloting process substantively in swing states as late as October in the midst of an emergency is improper. Doing these things with only partisan support amongst the electorate and little to no time for public review is improper and leads to people doubting election integrity.



Is there any evidence that mail-in ballots are susceptible to or resulted in significant election fraud?
If not, how is guaranteeing safe and secure access to voting in the middle of a deadly pandemic "improper" or "corrupt" if it's safe and secure?
How is it improper for a state government to respond to the needs inherent to holding an election during a pandemic?
Does something having "partisan support" automatically mean it's improper or corrupt? Couldn't partisan opposition to something be improper or corrupt?



jimbo13 said:


> 2. No, I have no faith last minute balloting changes and Covid measures didn't disenfranchise voters or wasn't rife with fraud.



Do you have any evidence anything about the 2020 election was "rife with fraud"?
Do you have any evidence that mail-in ballots and COVID-19 measures "disenfranchised" voters?
How does expanding access to voting deprive someone of the ability to vote?
If we didn't have mail-in ballots and COVID-19 measures in the middle of a pandemic, wouldn't that be what disenfranchised voters?
How early did the rule changes need to be? Many of the changes occurred in 2020, but many months before the election. Many of the COVID-19 mitigations occurred in time for the presidential primary elections.
Many states merely opened access to mail-in voting system that had already been in place for years. If the system already existed for years or decades prior to the 2020 election, does that mean it isn't improper or corrupt?
Many of the COVID-19 mitigations strategies, like mail-in voting, have been demonstrated to be safe and secure. Is there evidence that these methods aren't safe and secure?



jimbo13 said:


> 3.  That would require examination of every state that was doing mail in balloting at the time which I am not going to be doing, Generally I don't object to mail in ballots where it has been common place, subject to public review and approval and wasn't implemented in a rush under emergency measures.
> 
> Rule changes are done in the off season, not 5 minutes before kick off.



Many states used mail-in voting systems that already existed for years/decades before the 2020 election, including in the 2016 election. Was the 2016 election corrupt or improper?
There were 14 states that had sudden changes relating to voting that didn't exist in a presidential election before the 2016 election. Some of these rule changes occurred the year of the presidential election. 11/14 of these states went for Trump in the 2016 election, and these 14 states included key states like Arizona, Ohio, Texas, Virginia, and Wisconsin. These rules could broadly be described as making it more difficult to vote. Was the 2016 election corrupt?
In 2016, the mail-in votes made up about 25% of all of the votes. In 2020, the mail-in votes made up about 40-50% of the total votes. Both elections broadly used the same mail-in voting systems. Were they both corrupt, or were neither corrupt?


----------



## jimbo13 (Jul 31, 2021)

Lacius said:


> Is there any evidence that mail-in ballots are susceptible to or resulted in significant election fraud?
> If not, how is guaranteeing safe and secure access to voting in the middle of a deadly pandemic "improper" or "corrupt" if it's safe and secure?
> How is it improper for a state government to respond to the needs inherent to holding an election during a pandemic?
> Does something having "partisan support" automatically mean it's improper or corrupt? Couldn't partisan opposition to something be improper or corrupt?
> ...




I am not writing you an essay, if you make partisan rule changes your only going to have partisan acceptance of the result.  That's not a complicated stance.  No one is making you agree with it.


----------



## Lacius (Jul 31, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> I am not writing you an essay, if you make partisan rule changes your only going to have partisan acceptance of the result.  That's not a complicated stance.  No one is making you agree with it.


That's fine that you don't want to answer each question. In fairness, it was a lot. Feel free to respond to whatever you want to respond to. As my previous post shows though, your answers were insufficient.

You keep throwing around "partisan rule changes," but it goes both ways. Just because a position is "partisan" doesn't mean it's the wrong position or that it's improper. Partisan opposition to mail-in voting, etc. is just as partisan.

In other words, telling me something was partisan doesn't demonstrate anything to be corrupt, improper, fraudulent, etc.


----------



## KingVamp (Jul 31, 2021)

There's no bipartisan support for all the changes he want and yet he fine with all of them.


----------



## jimbo13 (Jul 31, 2021)

Lacius said:


> That's fine that you don't want to answer each question. In fairness, it was a lot. Feel free to respond to whatever you want to respond to. As my previous post shows though, your answers were insufficient.
> 
> You keep throwing around "partisan rule changes," but it goes both ways. Just because a position is "partisan" doesn't mean it's the wrong position or that it's improper. Partisan opposition to mail-in voting, etc. is just as partisan.
> 
> In other words, telling me something was partisan doesn't demonstrate anything to be corrupt, improper, fraudulent, etc.



I don't object to in mail in balloting in general, I object to it being tacked on last minute in the midst of of an emergency and relaxing measures surrounding it.

Just because a rule makes sense doesn't make it proper to tack it on at the last minute over the objections of the other participants. Election process can't be partisan and maintain a functional system.

Just because you can, doesn't mean it people are going to accept it.  And the right  was very vocal, "if this change is made do not expect acceptance or cooperation."



KingVamp said:


> There's no bipartisan support for all the changes he want and yet he fine with all of them.



Fair and accurate, when a society can't agree on what constitutes a fair election anymore they probably shouldn't share a government.  Make States, States again.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> Make States, States again.


What the hell is this supposed to mean?  If we didn't have state governments, we wouldn't have legal weed anywhere.  People wouldn't be able to add Medicare-for-all as a ballot measure despite the bourgeoisie rejecting it on the federal level.  States have the same power they always did, that doesn't mean it should be legal to suppress voting rights and restrict access to voting.  Which is really what you're angry about here: that people who normally wouldn't have the time or means to vote in previous elections were given that access via mail-in ballots in 2020.  They still had to be registered (for several months prior), and have a valid mailing address.  Cases of fraud in review barely numbered double digits, and came mostly from Trump voters.


----------



## Lacius (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> I don't object to in mail in balloting in general, I object to it being tacked on last minute in the midst of of an emergency and relaxing measures surrounding it.
> 
> Just because a rule makes sense doesn't make it proper to tack it on at the last minute over the objections of the other participants. Election process can't be partisan and maintain a functional system.
> 
> ...


Let me know when you find a problem with the mail-in voting systems or any other aspect of the 2020 election. Until then, it's premature and hypocritical to call the 2020 election corrupt or fraudulent.


----------



## jimbo13 (Aug 1, 2021)

Lacius said:


> Let me know when you find a problem with the mail-in voting systems or any other aspect of the 2020 election. Until then, it's premature and hypocritical to call the 2020 election corrupt or fraudulent.



It was a deliberate fraud to use Covid to institute last minute procedural changes that were known to benefit Biden.  If you don't like people saying it was corrupt, fraudulent and that Biden is illegitimate it's hypocritical to support those rule changes over the objections of the other participants.


----------



## Lacius (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> It was a deliberate fraud to use Covid to institute last minute procedural changes that were known to benefit Biden.


"Fraud" is a very specific claim. What was fraudulent about expanding pre-existing mail voting during a pandemic, and can you demonstrate the fraud?



jimbo13 said:


> it's hypocritical to support those rule changes over the objections of the other participants.


I don't like people saying an election was corrupt and fraudulent when they can't demonstrate their claims. Claims made without evidence can be easily dismissed as nonsense.



jimbo13 said:


> it's hypocritical to support those rule changes over the objections of the other participants.


How is this hypocritical?


----------



## Sicklyboy (Aug 1, 2021)

I'm pretty sure I asked jimbo for proof of the election fraud back in like... January? December?

To nobody's surprise, 8 months later he still can't do anything except flail his arms and screech "fraud! fraud!"


----------



## seany1990 (Aug 1, 2021)

Massive dumps


----------



## KingVamp (Aug 1, 2021)

Sicklyboy said:


> I'm pretty sure I asked jimbo for proof of the election fraud back in like... January? December?
> 
> To nobody's surprise, 8 months later he still can't do anything except flail his arms and screech "fraud! fraud!"


Did you know? Anything he doesn't like, is fraud.


----------



## jimbo13 (Aug 1, 2021)

Lacius said:


> "Fraud" is a very specific claim. What was fraudulent about expanding pre-existing mail voting during a pandemic, and can you demonstrate the fraud?
> 
> 
> I don't like people saying an election was corrupt and fraudulent when they can't demonstrate their claims. Claims made without evidence can be easily dismissed as nonsense.
> ...



Your not disputing my material claims, which are last minute changes ballot process's were instituted.

If participants enter a contest under a certain set of rules and you change the rules near the commencement of the event, under duress, protest and objection of the participants I consider that a fraud, you are welcome to disagree but there is nothing unreasonable about that stance you aren't debunking anything.

Your position is " I think it's fair and reasonable to use pandemic hysteria to institute rule changes that benefit my Candidate" and your welcome to it, but others are going to continue to call that behavior fraudulent and corrupt.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> institute rule changes that benefit my Candidate



Trump spends a year telling his fan base that mail in votes are fraudulent.
Trump's fan base doesn't use mail in votes because he spent a year telling them they'd be fraudulent.

Now, I may not be the best at math, but I know what you get when you put two and two together.


----------



## jimbo13 (Aug 1, 2021)

Sicklyboy said:


> I'm pretty sure I asked jimbo for proof of the election fraud back in like... January? December?
> 
> To nobody's surprise, 8 months later he still can't do anything except flail his arms and screech "fraud! fraud!"



I am pretty sure I avoid engaging you, because you antagonize conservatives then use moderation when your losing.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> I am pretty sure I avoid engaging you, because you antagonize conservatives then use moderation when your losing.



Sorry that you can't handle being proven wrong.

Edit - actually, when has that happened? None of your warnings are even from me.


----------



## Lacius (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> Your not disputing my material claims, which are last minute changes ballot process's were instituted.
> 
> If participants enter a contest under a certain set of rules and you change the rules near the commencement of the event, under duress, protest and objection of the participants I consider that a fraud, you are welcome to disagree but there is nothing unreasonable about that stance you aren't debunking anything.
> 
> Your position is " I think it's fair and reasonable to use pandemic hysteria to institute rule changes that benefit my Candidate" and your welcome to it, but others are going to continue to call that behavior fraudulent and corrupt.



If you are going to argue that rules were changed with the purpose of benefiting Biden, using COVID-19 as a pretense, you have to demonstrate that. That's going to be difficult to do, considering how many GOP-controlled states instituted mail voting.
Even if rules were changed to broaden access to voting with the purpose of helping Biden win (this is not what happened), it wouldn't make the election fraudulent, corrupt, etc. It's the Republicans' problem if they can't compete in democratic elections.
The "rules" of the election were not changed. It's not like electoral vote counts per state were changed in October. Access to voting was merely broadened. The candidates were still playing by the same rules. Generally speaking, if a candidate gets more votes in a state, that candidate gets those electoral votes.
When you remove COVID-19 from the equation, there's no data that supports the claim that mail voting benefits Democratic candidates. The only reason that argument can be made is because of how COVID-19 was politicized and downplayed by one side.
If mitigations hadn't been applied to the election, you would have had a lot of likely Democratic voters stay at home rather than vote and potentially contract COVID-19. I say they are likely Democratic voters because they are the ones who were more likely to take the pandemic seriously. That would have been the real disenfranchisement of voters.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> There is no evidence everyone shares your opinion on subjective terms like "widespread" or mail in ballots are safe.
> 
> If mail in ballots are safe and secure so is mail order ammo.
> 
> ...


That doesn’t look like any sources. You should be able to provide sources to back up your claims.


Sicklyboy said:


> Sorry that you can't handle being proven wrong.
> 
> Edit - actually, when has that happened? None of your warnings are even from me.


Jimbo just like to make stuff up to get mad about it later.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Aug 1, 2021)

Lilith Valentine said:


> That doesn’t look like any sources. You should be able to provide sources to back up your claims.
> 
> Jimbo just like to make stuff up to get mad about it later.



Lol I didn't even read that post. He's really suggesting we should be able to mail explosives. The mind boggles.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

Sicklyboy said:


> Lol I didn't even read that post. He's really suggesting we should be able to mail explosives. The mind boggles.


I didn’t either, lol. I just look to see if he actually posted a link, fully knowing it just going to be some self-righteous rant about how right he is or some other excuse to not provide a single source


----------



## jimbo13 (Aug 1, 2021)

Sicklyboy said:


> Lol I didn't even read that post. He's really suggesting we should be able to mail explosives. The mind boggles.



We already send all manner of "explosives" thru the mail, you can get black powder thru the mail.

Same with gun powder construction fasteners that use the same amount of "explosive" material as a firearm round.

I can get 0.22 single shot construction bullets that will load in my rifle off Amazon right now.
https://www.amazon.com/Caliber-Yell...d=1&keywords=gun+powder&qid=1627779329&sr=8-8


Mail order firearm restrictions have nothing to with this spontaneous discharge delusion you have.

I support synergy between firearm and ballot registration, owning a fire arm is a right, voting is a right.

If you wouldn't give someone a gun without ID or mail it to them without  any manner or control of verification involved, you shouldn't support giving them a ballot.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> We already send all manner of "explosives" thru the mail, you can get black powder thru the mail.
> 
> Same with gun powder construction fasteners that use the same amount of "explosive" material as a firearm round.
> 
> ...



I mean those aren't bullets, those are cartridges without a bullet, and they're for tools, not guns (...technically), but TIL you could buy those online. Had no idea.



jimbo13 said:


> I support synergy between firearm and ballot registration, owning a fire arm is a right, voting is a right



So is abortion but conservatives have no problem trying to take those rights away, so maybe sit down for a second.



jimbo13 said:


> If you wouldn't give someone a gun without ID or mail it to them without verification any manner or control of verification involved, you shouldn't support giving them a ballot.



When did the goalposts get moved? I thought we were talking about mail in ballots and ammunition, not mail in ballots and guns.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> We already send all manner of "explosives" thru the mail, you can get black powder thru the mail.
> 
> Same with gun powder construction fasteners that use the same amount of "explosive" material as a firearm round.
> 
> ...


That’s a lot of words with no evidence for widespread election fraud


----------



## jimbo13 (Aug 1, 2021)

Sicklyboy said:


> I mean those aren't bullets, those are cartridges without a bullet, and they're for tools, not guns (...technically), but TIL you could buy those online. Had no idea.
> 
> When did the goalposts get moved? I thought we were talking about mail in ballots and ammunition, not mail in ballots and guns.




My point was guns and ammo are transported in planes & on trucks via fedex, UPS, USPS all the same they go make you pick them up in person in a gun shop  so they can *CHECK YOUR ID AND MAKE SURE YOU ARE LEGALLY ELIGIBLE TO PARTICIPATE.
*
It should be the same rules for voting.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> My point was guns and ammo are transported in planes & on trucks via fedex, UPS, USPS all the same they go make you pick them up in person in a gun shop  so they can *CHECK YOUR ID AND MAKE SURE YOU ARE LEGALLY ELIGIBLE TO PARTICIPATE.
> *
> It should be the same rules for voting.



That's a 100% valid opinion to hold, and with some nuance, not one I entirely disagree with.

That doesn't mean that mail in votes are fraudulent though.

Side note, always makes me chuckle how the so called party of small government actively wants the government to impose itself more and more on people's business and rights. So weird, isn't it?


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> My point was guns and ammo are transported in planes & on trucks via fedex, UPS, USPS all the same they go make you pick them up in person in a gun shop  so they can *CHECK YOUR ID AND MAKE SURE YOU ARE LEGALLY ELIGIBLE TO PARTICIPATE.
> *
> It should be the same rules for voting.


And you need an ID for mail-in votes, that’s been explained to you in this thread. Also, this still isn’t evidence for widespread voter fraud, why haven’t provided any evidence?


Sicklyboy said:


> Side note, always makes me chuckle how the so called party of small government actively wants the government to impose itself more and more on people's business and rights. So weird, isn't it?


“Small government” from the same party that wants to limit rights for women, LGBT+, mail-in votes, disabled people, POC, non-Christian, etc.


----------



## Goku1992A (Aug 1, 2021)

Yes I voted fro Trump but he really need to let it go


----------



## jimbo13 (Aug 1, 2021)

Sicklyboy said:


> That's a 100% valid opinion to hold, and with some nuance, not one I entirely disagree with.
> 
> That doesn't mean that mail in votes are fraudulent though.
> 
> Side note, always makes me chuckle how the so called party of small government actively wants the government to impose itself more and more on people's business and rights. So weird, isn't it?



I think synergy between gun laws and voting laws demonstrates a non-partisan fairness and makes things consistent.

How easy does it need to be for someone to exercise a right, 
Do they need to be 18? 
Do they need to be free of felony convictions? 
Do they need to present ID?
Do they need to go in person?

Real tolerant of the minutia there when someones being honest and consistent and it is an easy way to tell.

I don't have much of an issue with mail-in ballots, plenty of states have done it reasonably and it can be done securely.

I object to the time and manner it was implemented in 2020 in the midst of a pandemic, in some cases outside of normal procedures and lacking the typical public examination and consider it fraudulent.

I am sports better, when I bet on a fight if there is the smallest change in the rules between the time I place my bet and the commencement of the fight the bet is voided and refunded.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> I think synergy between gun laws and voting laws demonstrates a non-partisan fairness and makes things consistent.
> 
> How easy does it need to be for someone to exercise a right,
> Do they need to be 18?
> ...


I think there’s synergy between you and the lack of sources for widespread voter fraud


----------



## jimbo13 (Aug 1, 2021)

Lilith Valentine said:


> I think there’s synergy between you and the lack of sources for widespread voter fraud



I've never used the qualifier your projecting, crimes don't need to be wide spread to pass laws to discourage and prevent them.


----------



## Lacius (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> I've never used the qualifier your projecting, crimes don't need to be wide spread to pass laws to discourage and prevent them.


Isn't it more important for it to be easier to vote than for it to be harder to vote in order to curb imaginary voter fraud?


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> I've never used the qualifier your projecting, crimes don't need to be wide spread to pass laws to discourage and prevent them.


Don't move the goalpost. You made claims of widespread voter fraud and have yet to provide proof of widespread voter fraud. Why make laws for a problem that you can't even prove exists in the first place?


----------



## Sicklyboy (Aug 1, 2021)

Lilith Valentine said:


> Don't move the goalpost. You made claims of widespread voter fraud and have yet to provide proof of widespread voter fraud. Why make laws for a problem that you can't even prove exists in the first place?



Right? Since it seems to be such a major issue, there must be credible, verifiable, tangible documentation of such a thing happening. Crazy how I can't seem to find anything that fits that bill 



jimbo13 said:


> I've never used the qualifier your projecting, crimes don't need to be wide spread to pass laws to discourage and prevent them.



Wait, so there was no widespread voter fraud?


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

Sicklyboy said:


> Right? Since it seems to be such a major issue, there must be credible, verifiable, tangible documentation of such a thing happening. Crazy how I can't seem to find anything that fits that bill


It's weird how there was an apparent nationwide conspiracy to overthrow an election through mass voter fraud and yet no evidence? It's weird how such a massive conspiracy is so well organized and yet has no trace of it happening. It's almost like mass conspiracies like this simply can't exist in the real world because the evidence would be overwhelming if it did and the reality is, it never happened


----------



## SG854 (Aug 1, 2021)

This is all the evidence for wide spread voter fraud






























.


----------



## KingVamp (Aug 1, 2021)

Well, it is August. Who's ready to see Trump not become president again?


----------



## jimbo13 (Aug 1, 2021)

Lilith Valentine said:


> “Small government” from the same party that wants to limit rights for women, LGBT+, mail-in votes, disabled people, POC, non-Christian, etc.



Where's your sources?


----------



## Lacius (Aug 1, 2021)

KingVamp said:


> Well, it is August. Who's ready to see Trump not become president again?


Considering his electoral loss, his lawsuit losses, etc., I didn't think it was possible to see one loser lose so much.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



jimbo13 said:


> Where's your sources?


The Republican Party broadly favors everything @Lilith Valentine mentioned, and most if not all of what was mentioned is in their party platform.


----------



## JonhathonBaxster (Aug 1, 2021)

The question should be "Why wouldn't Trump personally pressure the Justice Department".


----------



## jimbo13 (Aug 1, 2021)

Sicklyboy said:


> Right? Since it seems to be such a major issue, there must be credible, verifiable, tangible documentation of such a thing happening. Crazy how I can't seem to find anything that fits that bill
> 
> 
> 
> Wait, so there was no widespread voter fraud?




Does it need to be widespread to tilt an election?




Lacius said:


> The Republican Party broadly favors everything  mentioned, and most if not all of what was mentioned is in their party platform.



No it doesn't, it's late and you need a nappy.


----------



## Lacius (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> Does it need to be widespread to tilt an election?


Generally speaking, yes. By some definitions, that's what it means to be widespread.



jimbo13 said:


> No it doesn't


Yes, it does. As one example, the Republican Party platform condemns marriage equality, it condemns anti-discrimination policies protecting LGBT people, and it endorses the trans military ban.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> Where's your sources?


LGBT+, refer to the multiple anti-LGBT+ laws started, backed, and signed by mostly Republicans
https://www.aclu.org/legislation-affecting-lgbt-rights-across-country
Women’s rights, refer to multiple anti-abortion bills specifically targeting women and never men
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_United_States_by_state
Mail-in votes, this thread
Disabled people, Republican platform is against “government handouts,” which greatly effects disabled people
POC, Republicans are very much against CRT
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1267161
https://www.wpr.org/republican-bills-would-limit-how-race-racism-are-taught-wisconsin
There’s also the massive anti-Asian campaign primarily pushed by Trump and followed by most of his followers. Source, the rising anti-Asian hate crimes
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1260264
Non-Christians, the vast majority of Republicans are literally pushing for Christian laws and are Evangelicals or appease the Evangelicals. The vast majority of the anti-LGBT laws are either done for Evangelicals or backed by them.
I actually provide sources because I am not some egotist. The links provided do provide additional resources and references. And now I wait for you to move the goalpost and pretend you are right and know everything, while providing no sources to disprove what I’ve posted.


----------



## jimbo13 (Aug 1, 2021)

Considering his electoral loss, his lawsuit losses, etc., I didn't think it was possible to see one loser lose so much.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------


The Republican Party broadly favors everything @Lilith Valentine mentioned, and most if not all of what was mentioned is in their party platform.[/QUOTE]


Lacius said:


> Generally speaking, yes. By some definitions, that's what it means to be widespread.
> 
> 
> Yes, it does. As one example, the Republican Party platform condemns marriage equality, it condemns anti-discrimination policies protecting LGBT people, and it endorses the trans military ban.




Unfortunately your correct about marriage equality in the platform, don't support it and neither did Trump.

Forcing someone to bake you cake is not a right and the Military has numerous medical conditions that disqualify you from service.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

jimbo13 said:


> Forcing someone to bake you cake is not a right and the Military has numerous medical conditions that disqualify you from service.


I find it interesting that you always try to find find different ways to control the conversation instead of providing evidence for your claims. You still haven’t provided any evidence to back up your previous claims of mass voter fraud.


JonhathonBaxster said:


> The question should be "Why wouldn't Trump personally pressure the Justice Department".


Why would Trump need to? He’s already making a bigger ass of himself by trying to continue this moronic campaign around his own conspiracy of “mass voter fraud.” He and everyone who believes in the “mass voter fraud” conspiracy, have yet to provide legitimate proof of it ever happening.


----------



## JayPea (Aug 1, 2021)

@jimbo13 Would you like to buy some magic beans?


----------



## SG854 (Aug 1, 2021)

JayPea said:


> @jimbo13 Would you like to buy some magic beans?


Can I buy two? There's a heart container that's out of reach.


----------



## trained-dog (Aug 1, 2021)

Biggest FRAUD was electing Bubbling Biden in office. Look what he done. Closed down the pipeline. open up the border.
You going to have the biggest tax hike in forty years. hiding the fact summer of love, that killing anyone. didn't exist what more do you want, plus defunding the police. Plus letting criminals goes free. If you steal anything under $950 dollars you want be charge of a crime and I am not even american. Plus their trying to bring this too britain I feel sorry for everyone.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

trained-dog said:


> Biggest FRAUD was electing Bubbling Biden in office. Look what he done. Closed down the pipeline. open up the border.
> You going to have the biggest tax hike in forty years. hiding the fact summer of love, that killing anyone. didn't exist what more do you want, plus defunding the police. Plus letting criminals goes free. If you steal anything under $950 dollars you want be charge of a crime and I am not even american. Plus their trying to bring this too britain I feel sorry for everyone.


Outside of the pipeline statement, what are your sources for the rest?


----------



## seany1990 (Aug 1, 2021)

trained-dog said:


> hiding the fact summer of love, that killing anyone.


What?


----------



## trained-dog (Aug 1, 2021)

Lilith Valentine said:


> Outside of the pipeline statement, what are your sources for the rest?


Have you seen the news. About children crossing the border. video seen a man dumping two children over the border wall.
In some news when the border was open where children in held in the camps before they fly them to other states.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



seany1990 said:


> What?


Autonomous Zone - or Chaz where the police cannot go in save people that was shot.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

trained-dog said:


> Have you seen the news. About children crossing the border. video seen a man dumping two children over the border wall.
> In some news when the border was open where children in held in the camps before they fly them to other states.


Have you heard of posting sources? That’s also just one claim, you made 5 additional claims that you haven’t addressed.


trained-dog said:


> open up the border.





trained-dog said:


> You going to have the biggest tax hike in forty years.





trained-dog said:


> plus defunding the police.





trained-dog said:


> Plus letting criminals goes free.





trained-dog said:


> If you steal anything under $950 dollars you want be charge of a crime and I am not even American.





trained-dog said:


> Plus their trying to bring this too britain I feel sorry for everyone.


----------



## trained-dog (Aug 1, 2021)

Lilith Valentine said:


> Have you heard of posting sources? That’s also just one claim, you made 5 additional claims that you haven’t addressed.


I watch fox news. been watching cnn. when it was hurting the democrats in the poles. Don lemon and chris cuomo was saying about it. you just got to look around the internet. instead of listening to pbs, cnn all the left side news. You can tell me about hunter biden laptop that the FBI had from november 2019.

Biden big spending plans. you either put up taxes or inflation take you pick. The goverment got to their money Back, Its not free.

$950 stealing got in from  criminaldefenselawyer.com


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

trained-dog said:


> I watch fox news. been watching cnn. when it was hurting the democrats in the poles. Don lemon and chris cuomo was saying about it. you just got to look around the internet. instead of listening to pbs, cnn all the left side news. You can tell me about hunter biden laptop that the FBI had from november 2019.
> 
> Biden big spending plans. you either put up taxes or inflation take you pick. The goverment got to their money Back, Its not free.


I am confused as to why you made these claims and are now refusing to provide sources to them. You made several claims, you should be able to provide several sources to back them up. Telling me that you watched the news is not a source, can you at least provide the links to the news sources about your claims?


trained-dog said:


> $950 stealing got in from  criminaldefenselawyer.com


Ok, but how is that any different from before? Wasn't stealing $950 a crime before Biden took office? Unless you mean "won't" and if that's the case, where does it say stealing under $950 wouldn't be charged as a crime?
Unless you are referring to this, which has been proven to be false
https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-160551360299


----------



## SG854 (Aug 1, 2021)

trained-dog said:


> I watch fox news. been watching cnn. when it was hurting the democrats in the poles. Don lemon and chris cuomo was saying about it. you just got to look around the internet. instead of listening to pbs, cnn all the left side news. You can tell me about hunter biden laptop that the FBI had from november 2019.
> 
> Biden big spending plans. you either put up taxes or inflation take you pick. The goverment got to their money Back, Its not free.
> 
> $950 stealing got in from  criminaldefenselawyer.com


I do watch Fox News whenever I want information. Their news anchors are some of the most respected researchers in the United States.


----------



## trained-dog (Aug 1, 2021)

Lilith Valentine said:


> I am confused as to why you made these claims and are now refusing to provide sources to them. You made several claims, you should be able to provide several sources to back them up. Telling me that you watched the news is not a source, can you at least provide the links to the news sources about your claims?


so where you you get your information then.
here one about https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53218448


Lilith Valentine said:


> I am confused as to why you made these claims and are now refusing to provide sources to them. You made several claims, you should be able to provide several sources to back them up. Telling me that you watched the news is not a source, can you at least provide the links to the news sources about your claims?
> 
> Ok, but how is that any different from before? Wasn't stealing $950 a crime before Biden took office? Unless you mean "won't" and if that's the case, where does it say stealing under $950 wouldn't be charged as a crime?
> Unless you are referring to this, which has been proven to be false
> https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-160551360299


Did trump let the border open or did he tried to build the wall. Did biden stop the wall. answer me that. that's on all news networks.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

trained-dog said:


> open up the border.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewal...en-despite-surge-in-migrants/?sh=6409b0284daf


trained-dog said:


> You going to have the biggest tax hike in forty years.


https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-...-not-the-largest-in-u-s-history-idUSKBN2772UL
https://taxfoundation.org/joe-biden-tax-increases-historical-context/


trained-dog said:


> Autonomous Zone - or Chaz where the police cannot go in save people that was shot.


This has nothing to do with the Biden Adminsaterion and it's a massive stretch to connect it to Biden.



trained-dog said:


> plus defunding the police.


Biden is against defunding the police
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/17/politics/defunding-police-biden-town-hall-trnd/index.html
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-...defund-the-police-is-misleading-idUSKCN252248


trained-dog said:


> Plus letting criminals goes free.


Can you point to any examples of this happening? Because I can't find any example of him doing this


trained-dog said:


> If you steal anything under $950 dollars you want be charge of a crime and I am not even American.


https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-160551360299


trained-dog said:


> Plus their trying to bring this too britain I feel sorry for everyone.


I don't know enough about the UK to talk about this but I do know the UK has it's own problems to deal with.


trained-dog said:


> so where you you get your information then.
> here one about https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53218448
> 
> Did trump let the border open or did he tried to build the wall. Did biden stop the wall. answer me that. that's on all news networks.


1, the wall was a stupid idea and 2
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewal...en-despite-surge-in-migrants/?sh=1f1b6cdf4daf
3, please provide sources for the rest of your claims.

I am starting to feel like your sources are just memes you read on social media.


trained-dog said:


> so where you you get your information then.
> here one about https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-53218448


This was under Trump's Administration, how is this connected to Biden in any way?


trained-dog said:


> so where you you get your information then.


You are the one required to answer this question when making claims. You made the claims, you provide the sources.


----------



## trained-dog (Aug 1, 2021)

Lilith Valentine said:


> https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewal...en-despite-surge-in-migrants/?sh=6409b0284daf
> 
> https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-...-not-the-largest-in-u-s-history-idUSKBN2772UL
> https://taxfoundation.org/joe-biden-tax-increases-historical-context/
> ...


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

trained-dog said:


> it’s just my post


That’s my post, what of it?


----------



## trained-dog (Aug 1, 2021)

Lilith Valentine said:


> That’s my post, what of it?



here a couple.
Thief Steals Openly | Petty Theft Decriminalized in San Francisco


Thieves ransack California Ulta Beauty stores


American Dystopia, Part 2: San Francisco small business owner struggles with theft


LOOTERS RAID WALGREENS | RAW Police looting video | Alameda shoplifters ransack walgreens


https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/...ocratic-leaders-riots-out-context/6588222002/

just look around you see.


----------



## Sicklyboy (Aug 1, 2021)

trained-dog said:


> I watch fox news.



That much is obvious.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

trained-dog said:


> here a couple.
> Thief Steals Openly | Petty Theft Decriminalized in San Francisco
> 
> 
> ...



None of these have any direct connection to the Biden Administration and you are still missing other sources. Please provide sources as to how these are related to Biden and to your other claims.


----------



## trained-dog (Aug 1, 2021)

Lilith Valentine said:


> None of these have any direct connection to the Biden Administration and you are still missing other sources.[/QUOTE
> You see your way the left that is. just like you live in antarctica.
> Hope it nice an warm there.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

trained-dog said:


> You see your way the left that is. just like you live in antarctica.
> Hope it nice an warm there.


It’s rather cold ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 
That aside, why can’t you provide any sources? You made claims, where are the sources? You can’t just quote unrelated topics and act like those are sources.


----------



## Ibcap (Aug 1, 2021)

trained-dog said:


> You see your way the left that is. just like you live in antarctica.
> Hope it nice an warm there.


You do understand Biden doesnt make California state law, right? Im still skeptical your claim is true to begin with, but even if it is true it would still have shit to do with Biden, who last I checked is not the governor of Cali.


----------



## chrisrlink (Aug 1, 2021)

@trained-dog everytime you open your mouth whatever you say has been disproven your sources are probably some unheard of extreme right wing propaganda machine


----------



## trained-dog (Aug 1, 2021)

Lilith Valentine said:


> It’s rather cold ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
> That aside, why can’t you provide any sources? You made claims, where are the sources? You can’t just quote unrelated topics and act like those are sources.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 1, 2021)

trained-dog said:


>



This isn't a source, it's part of the conversation but it's not a source. Once again, you've avoided addressing the requests as a whole. I spelled out a list of your claims, why isn't possible for you to go through that list and specifically post the sources to each claim? I was able to go through them and debunk your claims, you should be able to prove me wrong.


----------



## KingVamp (Aug 14, 2021)

KingVamp said:


> Well, it is August. Who's ready to see Trump not become president again?


Well, it happened. He is once again not president. Luck wasn't on his side.


----------



## The Catboy (Aug 20, 2021)

KingVamp said:


> Well, it happened. He is once again not president. Luck wasn't on his side.


Better luck next month.


----------



## cracker (Aug 20, 2021)

SG854 said:


> I do watch Fox News whenever I want information. Their news anchors are some of the most respected researchers in the United States.



 Thanks for that.


----------



## chrisrlink (Aug 20, 2021)

SG854 said:


> I do watch Fox News whenever I want information. Their news anchors are some of the most respected researchers in the United States.


their "news" is ****ing hot garbage they spew out the big lie whenever possiable


----------



## subcon959 (Aug 31, 2021)

chrisrlink said:


> their "news" is ****ing hot garbage they spew out the big lie whenever possiable


Is there even such a thing as an unbiased mainstream news channel? Everything seems to be spun at 1500rpm before broadcast.


----------



## Ibcap (Aug 31, 2021)

subcon959 said:


> Is there even such a thing as an unbiased mainstream news channel? Everything seems to be spun at 1500rpm before broadcast.


There is no such thing as unbiased reporting, period, because humans by definition have a bias.


----------



## subcon959 (Aug 31, 2021)

Ibcap said:


> There is no such thing as unbiased reporting, period, because humans by definition have a bias.


Not very PC, but I feel as though I know quite a few people who would make excellent unbiased reporters due to certain traits.


----------



## Ibcap (Aug 31, 2021)

subcon959 said:


> Not very PC, but I feel as though I know quite a few people who would make excellent unbiased reporters due to certain traits.


They must be robots then. Humans cannot be unbiased because experience by definition gives bias. That doesnt mean these reporters are _bad, _bias doesnt have to mean youre fox news and spread misinformation, just that you are inclined towards specific opinions.


----------



## subcon959 (Aug 31, 2021)

Ibcap said:


> They must be robots then. Humans cannot be unbiased because experience by definition gives bias. That doesnt mean these reporters are _bad, _bias doesnt have to mean youre fox news and spread misinformation, just that you are inclined towards specific opinions.


Right, I'm talking about Autism if it wasn't clear, but it was a somewhat tongue-in-cheek statement anyway. There is an interesting study called "Autistics Don't Do Heuristics" where they find a general lack of framing and cognitive bias in certain people. Anyway, I think this is probably way off topic.


----------

