Rand Paul sets democrat straight on impeachment/ incitement of violence!

[Poor Richard Saunders]

He was worse and people got shot!

So, where is your evidence of Bernie holding a rally the morning of the shooting?

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Wrong they never had a chance to offer the evidence!

You just keep believing that. It seems to be what you are good at. Believing things that aren't actually true.

If you decide to get over your willful disbelief, I suggest you read some of the court rulings where the courts actually discuss the evidence presented and how it doesn't rise to affecting the outcome or doesn't show any evidence of fraud. Many courts may have thrown out a case because of lack of standing but they still addressed the evidence and state that even if standing occurred the case still would have no merit based on the evidence presented.

[Wolverine]

So, where is your evidence of Bernie holding a rally the morning of the shooting?

He didn't but he incited violence the President told people to protest peacefully!

[LV426]

Wrong they never had a chance to offer the evidence!

Yes, they did. They had over 60 chances to present the evidence and didn't because there is no evidence to present.

If there was, it would have already been presented.

[Poor Richard Saunders]

He didn't but he incited violence the President told people to protest peacefully!

I see. So not talking to a person incites them to violence but talking to a person doesn't. Hmm... Up is down in your world it seems.

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Wrong they never had a chance to offer the evidence!

Just to give you a clue about how wrong you are on this - Read this court ruling -

https://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.go...cument?id=1930

The court allowed testimony by both sides on signatures - The plaintiff's signature expert could not find a single signature that showed evidence of fraud. Nor could the defense expert.
The court allowed the examination of 1,626 ballots that were spoiled and needed to be duplicated. Of those ballots, 9 were found to have an error in duplication which showed that 99.45% of duplicate ballots were correct. The court allowed multiple people to testify about the duplication process but the testimony showed that when errors were pointed out the ballots were corrected. No one alleged fraud but rather the errors were unintentional mistakes.

The errors were not enough to overturn the outcome of the election based on the evidence presented to the court.

[Wolverine]

Yes, they did. They had over 60 chances to present the evidence and didn't because there is no evidence to present.

If there was, it would have already been presented.

Wrong they never had a chance to offer the evidence!

[Wolverine]

I see. So not talking to a person incites them to violence but talking to a person doesn't. Hmm... Up is down in your world it seems.

Bernie's words incited the shooter!

[CharacterAssassin]

Nope.

Paul was among several republican congressmen *who are actual victims* of ‘political assault’ incited by progressive political rhetoric. IOW, they were actually physically assaulted—and nearly killed, by an individual or individuals incited by leftist political rhetoric.

Apart from the abject hypocrisy angle, Democrats should think twice about going down this road or else face the prospect of having the tables turned on them. Which is almost a surety in our present hyper-charged environment.

In fact, how soon is it going to be before a Trump supporter is assaulted or killed by someone who was led to believe ‘they were going after a domestic terrorist’?

Just a matter of time?

He wasn't assaulted because of leftist political rhetoric, chucklefuck. He wasn't assaulted in a dispute between neighbors.

When you sober up, have your parole officer explain 'hypocrisy' to you.

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Bernie's words incited the shooter!

Incitement requires there be a direct correlation between when the words were spoken and when the act occurred. A few hours would likely be the dividing line for what could be considered incitement.
So, when did Bernie speak to the shooter?

[LV426]

Wrong they never had a chance to offer the evidence!

They had 60 chances in court and two full months to produce something, anything, and they couldn't.

They were so desperate that they begged the GA SoS to "find 11,800 votes".

Fact is, you got led around by your nose because they think you're a dog.

They lied to you about the election being stolen, and you believed them.

So that means you're a fucking idiot.

[PostmodernProphet]

No. What I'm saying is that the asshole Republicans won't be able to subvert justice now. "

exclusive realm of Demmycrat power......

[Wolverine]

They had 60 chances in court and two full months to produce something, anything, and they couldn't.

They were so desperate that they begged the GA SoS to "find 11,800 votes".

Fact is, you got led around by your nose because they think you're a dog.

They lied to you about the election being stolen, and you believed them.

So that means you're a fucking idiot.

You are wrong period!

[LV426]

You are wrong period!

I'm not wrong. Nothing was stolen, you just couldn't get enough votes to win.

[Wolverine]

I'm not wrong. Nothing was stolen, you just couldn't get enough votes to win.

I just shared a link on this very subject so you can read for yourself!