MAGA MAN (01-27-2021)
Again Rand Paul sets you straight!
https://trendingpolitics.com/watch-r...r-voter-fraud/
Sen. Rand Paul laid down some smack on ABC’s resident Democratic operative, George Stephanopoulos, on Sunday as he pushed back against another liberal media attempt to legitimize aspects of the 2020 election that very likely cost President Trump a second term.
And in doing so, the Kentucky Republican created a blueprint for other GOP lawmakers and conservative pundits not named Mitt Romney and Ben Sasse to use when disputing the false premise from Democrats and their media allies that during the last election cycle, ‘there is nothing to see here.’
The back and forth culminated with Paul shutting down Stephanopolous by saying: “There are two sides to every story. George, you’re forgetting who you are. You’re forgetting who you are as a journalist if you think there’s only one side.”
For his part, Stephanopoulos led with a false premise no one concerned about election integrity should ever accept: “Senator Paul, let me begin with a threshold question for you. This election was not stolen, do you accept that fact?”
No, Paul responded, he doesn’t accept that.
“Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question. There were several states in which the law was changed by the Secretary of State and not the state legislature.”
“To me, those are clearly unconstitutional, and I think there’s still a chance that those actually do finally work their way up to the Supreme Court. Courts traditionally and historically don’t like to hear election questions. But yes. Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it,” Paul said.
“I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat Secretary of State, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the rolls of illegal voters. We got a Republican Secretary of State and he purged the rolls.”
The Democratic operative jumped in: “I have to stop you there. No election is perfect. But there were 86 challenges filed by President Trump and his allies in court, all were dismissed. Every state certified the results.”
See what he does here? Stephanopoulos expects Paul (and viewers) relies on flawed or incomplete processes in order to make his claim ‘there’s nothing to see here.’
Watch the full segment below:
Most federal courts didn’t even bother to look at the evidence presented by the president’s defense team nor did they even entertain arguments that voting rules were unconstitutionally changes by state executive branch officials.
MAGA MAN (01-27-2021)
This has been explained to you before but your two goddamn stupid to get it. A lawyer has to convince the judge that the hearing needs to take place. When the judge asked the lawyer if there's any proof and the lawyer says no why would the judge waste the Court's time without any proof. This is exactly what happened in over 60 court cases. You're only real option now is to go in your mother's basement and take a nap.
Guno צְבִי (01-27-2021)
Sen. Rand Paul laid down some smack on ABC’s resident Democratic operative, George Stephanopoulos, on Sunday as he pushed back against another liberal media attempt to legitimize aspects of the 2020 election that very likely cost President Trump a second term.
And in doing so, the Kentucky Republican created a blueprint for other GOP lawmakers and conservative pundits not named Mitt Romney and Ben Sasse to use when disputing the false premise from Democrats and their media allies that during the last election cycle, ‘there is nothing to see here.’
The back and forth culminated with Paul shutting down Stephanopolous by saying: “There are two sides to every story. George, you’re forgetting who you are. You’re forgetting who you are as a journalist if you think there’s only one side.”
For his part, Stephanopoulos led with a false premise no one concerned about election integrity should ever accept: “Senator Paul, let me begin with a threshold question for you. This election was not stolen, do you accept that fact?”
No, Paul responded, he doesn’t accept that.
“Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question. There were several states in which the law was changed by the Secretary of State and not the state legislature.”
“To me, those are clearly unconstitutional, and I think there’s still a chance that those actually do finally work their way up to the Supreme Court. Courts traditionally and historically don’t like to hear election questions. But yes. Were there people who voted twice? Were there dead people who voted? Were there illegal aliens who voted? Yes, and we should get to the bottom of it,” Paul said.
“I’ll give you an example. In my state, when we had a Democrat Secretary of State, she refused, even under federal order, to purge the rolls of illegal voters. We got a Republican Secretary of State and he purged the rolls.”
The Democratic operative jumped in: “I have to stop you there. No election is perfect. But there were 86 challenges filed by President Trump and his allies in court, all were dismissed. Every state certified the results.”
See what he does here? Stephanopoulos expects Paul (and viewers) relies on flawed or incomplete processes in order to make his claim ‘there’s nothing to see here.’
Watch the full segment below:
“Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question. There were several states in which the law was changed by the Secretary of State and not the state legislature.”
Most federal courts didn’t even bother to look at the evidence presented by the president’s defense team nor did they even entertain arguments that voting rules were unconstitutionally changes by state executive branch officials.
Since you struggle with understanding English!
It is not the job of journalists to present "both sides", it is the job of journalists to present the truth.
The truth is the election wasn't stolen, but you believe it was because you were tricked into thinking that.
You were tricked because you simply lack intuition and good instincts.
When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist
Well, Rand Paul said it, so, it must be true. Those judges were all lying to us. Thank Goodness we have Super Rand to set the record straight.
Try something besides trending politics. Anyone that uses a single source that much is going to be a brainwashed sap
The source is Rand Paul!
Well, what I would say is that the debate over whether or not there was fraud should occur, we never had any presentation in court where we actually looked at the evidence. Most of the cases were thrown out for lack of standing, which is a procedural way of not actually hearing the question. There were several states in which the law was changed by the Secretary of State and not the state legislature.”
Most federal courts didn’t even bother to look at the evidence presented by the president’s defense team nor did they even entertain arguments that voting rules were unconstitutionally changes by state executive branch officials.
When someone can't come to grips with the truth, i.e. no election fraud, it's due to delusional thinking where the person substitutes his delusions with the truth because the truth is too painful for him to accept.
But, rest assured, 90% of Republicans now believe the election was fair and without fraud and Joe Biden is our legitimate president.
Only 10% of Republicans still believe Trump's vote fraud hoax.
Judge Juan M. Merchan wrote that Trump “appears to take the position that his situation and this case are unique and that the pre-trial publicity will never subside. However, this view does not align with reality.”
katzgar (01-27-2021)
First off, Paul didn't flat out say he thought the election was fraudulent, he deflected at that point, and second, his mistake, and seemingly yours also, is that yes, "there are two sides to every story," but that don't mean both sides are factual or valid
Paul is also wrong, the evidence was examined, election fraud was investigated by the Justice Dept, don't you remember Billy Barr's unprecedented order that his field offices should look into election fraud, and we all know Billy Barr's conclusion based upon his own investigators findings
Paul is just another contestant in Trump's 2024 President Apprentice show, he, along with Cruz, Hawley, and surely some more to jump in, are doing their best to kiss Trump's ass so they don't get thrown off the show in the early rounds
Rand Paul was wrong: https://www.factcheck.org/2021/01/pa...-fraud-debate/
It is easy to check out the Wisconsin law.
Bookmarks