Remember when DEMOCRATS thought challenging election results was good?

Legion

Oderint dum metuant


Sound familiar?


Far-left Mother Jones: “Recounting the Election: Was Ohio stolen?” https://www.motherjones.com/media/2005/11/recounting-ohio/

Fake News CNN: "DEMOCRATS challenge Ohio electoral votes" https://edition.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/01/06/electoral.vote.1718/

Failing New York Times:“Glitch Found in Ohio Counting” ww.nytimes.com/2004/11/06/politics/campaign/glitch-found-in-ohio-counting.html

Newsweak: "Trump's Electoral College Victory Challenged by DEMOCRATS" https://www.newsweek.com/donald-tru...ocrats-electoral-college-election-2016-539801

The Washington Post: "Was the 2016 U.S. election democratic? Here are 7 serious shortfalls." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ction-democratic-we-see-7-serious-shortfalls/

They even included some way-out voting machine conspiracy theories.

National Election Defense Coalition: “PARTISAN TECHNOLOGY FIRM IS IMPLICATED IN JOHN KERRY’S IMPLAUSIBLE LOSS IN OHIO 2004 https://www.electiondefense.org/how-to-part-ten

NBC News: “Machine Glitch Gave Bush Extra Ohio Votes” https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna6418513


The last three times a Republican was elected president — Trump in 2016 and George W. Bush in both 2000 and 2004 — DEMOCRATS in the House have brought objections to the electoral votes in states the GOP candidate won.

If it weren't for double standards, would DEMOCRATS have any standards at all?
 
Democrats have very short memories.

Rape was bad in 2016, and okay in 2020.

Warmongering was bad in--well, Democrats have always been warmongers.

(As long as a Democrat's in charge.)

Democrats have zero standards.
 


Sound familiar?


Far-left Mother Jones: “Recounting the Election: Was Ohio stolen?” https://www.motherjones.com/media/2005/11/recounting-ohio/

Fake News CNN: "DEMOCRATS challenge Ohio electoral votes" https://edition.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/01/06/electoral.vote.1718/

Failing New York Times:“Glitch Found in Ohio Counting” ww.nytimes.com/2004/11/06/politics/campaign/glitch-found-in-ohio-counting.html

Newsweak: "Trump's Electoral College Victory Challenged by DEMOCRATS" https://www.newsweek.com/donald-tru...ocrats-electoral-college-election-2016-539801

The Washington Post: "Was the 2016 U.S. election democratic? Here are 7 serious shortfalls." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ction-democratic-we-see-7-serious-shortfalls/

They even included some way-out voting machine conspiracy theories.

National Election Defense Coalition: “PARTISAN TECHNOLOGY FIRM IS IMPLICATED IN JOHN KERRY’S IMPLAUSIBLE LOSS IN OHIO 2004 https://www.electiondefense.org/how-to-part-ten

NBC News: “Machine Glitch Gave Bush Extra Ohio Votes” https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna6418513


The last three times a Republican was elected president — Trump in 2016 and George W. Bush in both 2000 and 2004 — DEMOCRATS in the House have brought objections to the electoral votes in states the GOP candidate won.

If it weren't for double standards, would DEMOCRATS have any standards at all?

A handful of Democrats doing something is not the same as the entire Republican Party doing something.
 
avatar7380_1.gif


A handful of Democrats doing something is not the same as the entire Republican Party doing something.

#MISREPRESENTATION

Hardly a "handful" of DEMOCRATS involved in the previous challenge efforts, and the "entire Republican Party" isn't involved in the current one.

Go back and reread.
 
Democrats have very short memories. Rape was bad in 2016, and okay in 2020. Warmongering was bad in--well, Democrats have always been warmongers. (As long as a Democrat's in charge.) Democrats have zero standards.

DEMOCRATS have double standards.

"Believe all women"...except the ones that accuse DEMOCRATS.

image-asset.jpeg
[/B]​



In the midst of the DEMOCRATS’ campaign to deny Brett Kavanaugh confirmation to the Supreme Court, Lawfare’s editor in chief, Benjamin Wittes, took to the pages of The Atlantic to argue that traditional concepts of due process were not applicable under the circumstances. Justice, he wrote, was merely an “optical” consideration, and in this case, “Kavanaugh himself bears the burden of proof.”

This upending of liberal ideals had nothing to do with the veracity of Christine Blasey Ford’s accusations — opaque, decades old, and unprovable — and everything to do with the accused party, upon whom, Wittes noted, we were about to “bestow an immense honor that comes with great power.”

We don’t know if, in 1993, presidential hopeful Joe Biden sexually assaulted a woman named Tara Reade by pressing her up against a wall and digitally penetrating her without her consent.

But under Wittes’s standard, it shouldn’t matter.

Indeed, that we do not know is all that we need to know. No person in America is accorded a more “immense honor” or more “great power” than the president.

Surely, as with Kavanaugh, the existence of the accusation is disqualifying?

Apparently not, for ideals of justice seem to be quite malleable these days. Journalistic norms, too.

The same media that relayed every unsubstantiated and tawdry rumor during the Kavanaugh confirmation, and that happily transmitted the Michael Avenatti–produced gang-rape smear, is treating Reade’s story quite differently.

Why, we might ask, didn’t Reade receive the same coverage as E. Jean Carroll, a woman who accused Donald Trump of assaulting her in 1995 or 1996 at a Bergdorf Goodman store in Manhattan?

Virtually every major news organization let Carroll tell her story.

Reade has been trying to tell hers for decades. Believe women?

Indeed, to understand how to proceed, the media has only to take the advice of Biden, who two years ago argued that society had an obligation to presume that women who come forward with allegations of sexual assault should be believed irrespective of how flimsy that accusations may be: "For a woman to come forward in the glaring lights of focus, nationally, you’ve got to start off with the presumption that at least the essence of what she’s talking about is real, whether or not she forgets facts, whether or not it’s been made worse or better over time".

DEMOCRATS should also be following this advice.

Back in 2018, you will remember hearing the party arguing incessantly that “due process” was only a legal right, and that it was inoperative in Kavanaugh’s case because a Supreme Court hearing was nothing more than a “job interview.”

Well, so is the presidency. A presidential election is just a job interview with the American voter. There are plenty of others, no doubt, willing to take Biden’s place in the race.

During the Kavanaugh hearings, Jeffrey Toobin, CNN’s “chief legal analyst,” noted that “40 percent of the Republican appointees to the Supreme Court have been credibly accused of sexual misconduct.”

Using this standard, if Biden wins in November, we will be able to say that two of the last three DEMOCRATS in office have been “credibly accused of sexual misconduct.”

Like many others, however, Toobin wants to have it both ways.

Simultaneously, he argues that any genuine due process was impossible — and, by the “believe all women” standard, even undesirable — yet also describes Blasey Ford as “credible.”

But if the integrity of the accuser and the plausibility of her claims matter in determining the credibility of her allegations — and I certainly believe they should — then we are in a due-process debate. And we can really only determine the “credibility” of an accuser who offers vague accusations if we question them.

Embarrassingly for Biden, he has argued that such questioning is per se inappropriate: "What should happen is the woman should be given the benefit of the doubt and not be, you know, abused again by the system. I hope that they understand what courage it takes for someone to come forward and relive what they believe happened to them and let them state it, but treat her with respect".

If this is what “should happen,” why don’t DEMOCRATS practice it — and why doesn’t Biden himself step aside in order to live by the standards he championed only two years ago?

We know why.


https://dnyuz.com/2020/03/27/joe-biden-tara-reade-sexual-assault-hypocrisy/
 


Sound familiar?


Far-left Mother Jones: “Recounting the Election: Was Ohio stolen?” https://www.motherjones.com/media/2005/11/recounting-ohio/

Fake News CNN: "DEMOCRATS challenge Ohio electoral votes" https://edition.cnn.com/2005/ALLPOLITICS/01/06/electoral.vote.1718/

Failing New York Times:“Glitch Found in Ohio Counting” ww.nytimes.com/2004/11/06/politics/campaign/glitch-found-in-ohio-counting.html

Newsweak: "Trump's Electoral College Victory Challenged by DEMOCRATS" https://www.newsweek.com/donald-tru...ocrats-electoral-college-election-2016-539801

The Washington Post: "Was the 2016 U.S. election democratic? Here are 7 serious shortfalls." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ction-democratic-we-see-7-serious-shortfalls/

They even included some way-out voting machine conspiracy theories.

National Election Defense Coalition: “PARTISAN TECHNOLOGY FIRM IS IMPLICATED IN JOHN KERRY’S IMPLAUSIBLE LOSS IN OHIO 2004 https://www.electiondefense.org/how-to-part-ten

NBC News: “Machine Glitch Gave Bush Extra Ohio Votes” https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna6418513


The last three times a Republican was elected president — Trump in 2016 and George W. Bush in both 2000 and 2004 — DEMOCRATS in the House have brought objections to the electoral votes in states the GOP candidate won.

If it weren't for double standards, would DEMOCRATS have any standards at all?

Are you really that drunk on the kool aid

Yes, several Democrat Congresspersons raised objections, note several, couple two three, nothing close to a hundred plus due this January 6th, and none of the objections ever made it to the debate level largely because zero Senators concurred

And why we are on the topic, Hillary conceded the election the day after the election, and Gore, went on TV declaring the election over the day after the Supreme Court reached their decision. In both cases, as it was in both Bush elections, the election was long over leading into Congress accepting the electoral votes in early January
 
Are you really that drunk on the kool aid Yes, several Democrat Congresspersons raised objections, note several, couple two three, nothing close to a hundred plus due this January 6th, and none of the objections ever made it to the debate level largely because zero Senators concurred And why we are on the topic, Hillary conceded the election the day after the election, and Gore, went on TV declaring the election over the day after the Supreme Court reached their decision. In both cases, as it was in both Bush elections, the election was long over leading into Congress accepting the electoral votes in early January

DEMOCRATS are hypocrites.

Turban Durbin today:

“The political equivalent of barking at the moon,” Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said of Hawley joining the challenge to electoral slates. “This won’t be taken seriously, nor should it be. The American people made a decision on Nov. 3rd and that decision must and will be honored and protected by the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.”

Turban Durbin then:

“Some may criticize our colleague from California for bringing us here for this brief debate,” Durbin said on the Senate floor following Boxer’s objection, while noting that he would vote to certify the Ohio electoral votes for Bush. “I thank her for doing that because it gives members an opportunity once again on a bipartisan basis to look at a challenge that we face not just in the last election in one State but in many States.”

Biden actually had to tell his fellow DEMOCRATS to stop whining in 2017.

https://www.npr.org/2017/01/06/508562183/biden-to-democrats-objecting-to-electoral-college-results-it-is-over
 
DEMOCRATS are hypocrites.

Turban Durbin today:

“The political equivalent of barking at the moon,” Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said of Hawley joining the challenge to electoral slates. “This won’t be taken seriously, nor should it be. The American people made a decision on Nov. 3rd and that decision must and will be honored and protected by the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.”

Turban Durbin then:

“Some may criticize our colleague from California for bringing us here for this brief debate,” Durbin said on the Senate floor following Boxer’s objection, while noting that he would vote to certify the Ohio electoral votes for Bush. “I thank her for doing that because it gives members an opportunity once again on a bipartisan basis to look at a challenge that we face not just in the last election in one State but in many States.”

Biden actually had to tell his fellow DEMOCRATS to stop whining in 2017.

https://www.npr.org/2017/01/06/508562183/biden-to-democrats-objecting-to-electoral-college-results-it-is-over

Look here, "copy and paste" bailing on his own thread, deflecting with the usual "whataboutism," not surprising, it was inane from the jump, point being, Democrat objections in the prior elections are pale to almost nonexistent in comparison to the GOP's efforts in this election
 
Look here, "copy and paste" bailing on his own thread, deflecting with the usual "whataboutism," not surprising, it was inane from the jump, point being, Democrat objections in the prior elections are pale to almost nonexistent in comparison to the GOP's efforts in this election

Non sequitur.
 
Yeah, uh huh, except for the chick that accused Biden.

Really?

Whatever happened to Tara Reade?

She was heard and found to be lying.

Oh' yeah, her attorney quit because of her LYING, maybe she can get the loony, Q NUT "lawyer" to represent her.
 
Back
Top