Correction .. no way influenced me to go against the Rule Of Law, treating people properly and stand for truth.
Correction .. no way influenced me to go against the Rule Of Law, treating people properly and stand for truth.
LIFE IS SHORT - SMILE WHILE YOU STILL HAVE TEETH.
we must all learn to hear what we do not like - the questions is not, "is it pleasant?" but, "is it true?"
artichoke (03-15-2021)
Yeah, you might want to try.
IF my comment was already debunked, WTF is Joe Biden doing in the White House?
What "evidence' has already been provided?
In court?
Well your "evidence" is 1 for 60?
Not very compelling.
Courts, it's where evidence thrives and BS dies.
Just because I SAY my neighbors dog, shit in my yard doesn't make it so.
Dotard lost the popular vote twice, by 3 million in 2016 and by 7 million on 2020.
There's the election fraud.
Yeah, keep embarrassing yourself.
"Let me break out the crayons for you".
In law, standing or locus standi is the ability of a party to demonstrate to the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that party's participation in the case. Standing exists from one of three causes:
The party is directly subject to an adverse effect by the statute or action in question, and the harm suffered will continue unless the court grants relief in the form of damages or a finding that the law either does not apply to the party or that the law is void or can be nullified. This is called the "something to lose" doctrine, in which the party has standing because they will be directly harmed by the conditions for which they are asking the court for relief.
The party is not directly harmed by the conditions by which they are petitioning the court for relief but asks for it because the harm involved has some reasonable relation to their situation, and the continued existence of the harm may affect others who might not be able to ask a court for relief. In the United States, this is the grounds for asking for a law to be struck down as violating the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, because while the plaintiff might not be directly affected, the law might so adversely affect others that one might never know what was not done or created by those who fear they would become subject to the law. This is known as the "chilling effects" doctrine.
The party is granted automatic standing by act of law.
Under some environmental laws in the United States, a party may sue someone causing pollution to certain waterways without a federal permit, even if the party suing is not harmed by the pollution being generated. The law allows the plaintiff to receive attorney's fees if they substantially prevail in the action. In some U.S. states, a person who believes a book, film or other work of art is obscene may sue in their own name to have the work banned directly without having to ask a District Attorney to do so.
In the United States, the current doctrine is that a person cannot bring a suit challenging the constitutionality of a law unless they can demonstrate that they are or will "imminently" be harmed by the law.
Dotard, crazy eyes and the loony woman, claimed Dotard was harmed by election laws,(losing the election) otherwise they wouldn't have appealed to multiple states attorneys to challenge that states election laws, Texas did the same thing.
But they couldn't prove it.
Where do you prove it, just a smidgen of proof? The opening statement.
Otherwise, the court will rule that the plaintiff "lacks standing" to bring the suit, and will dismiss the case without considering the merits of the claim of unconstitutionality.
In United States law, the Supreme Court has stated, "In essence the question of standing is whether the litigant is entitled to have the court decide the merits of the dispute or of particular issues."
Sooo, Dotard, crazy eyes and the loony woman failed to bring enough evidence in their opening arguments for the trial could even proceed, the courts were laughing as they threw cases out.
"Wow. How embarrassingly ignorant of basic facts".
CASPER (03-16-2021)
"The majority of Republicans support President Trump".
"Republican support for Trump to play role in party up 18 points from early January".
Proves how stupid they are, supporting a lying, grifter from NYC.
"And yes, this right-of-center country, President Trump's base, was so electrified in support of him, because he took a CONSERVATIVE stance on almost everything".
"2) Free markets, limited government that lives within its means, and following the Constitution is only "loony" to Marxist loonies".
Teabaggers (www.teaparty.org.) CLAIM to be conservative, it's only a campaign slogan and utilized when democrats are in office as a means for obstructing everything.
"Notice how easily proven wrong everything you say is".
Not in the slightest.
May as well be listening to Rannity, Dotards son, on Dotard TV.
1) "Theft still isn't winning, no matter how many times you repeat it".
Winning isn't theft, no matter how many times you repeat it, 60 court cases proves that.
2) 'Telling your supporters to peacefully resist election theft is NOTHING LIKE the last four years of non-stop Democrat support for insurrection".
January 6 2021
Trump: “If You Don’t Fight Like Hell, You’re Not Going To Have A Country Anymore”.
Crazy eyes: 'So lets have trial by combat".
The rest is a repeat of Rannity, teabagger (www.teapaty.org) BS.
The "I know you are, but what am I" defense? What are you eight years old? [If so, have you been molested by Resident Biden yet?]
patrick star stupid.jpg
Behold, what passes for a serious counterpoint among Democrats.
Being an illegitimate usurper, what else?
And the dishonest fallacy you're relying on this time is the "if some judge doesn't agree with you, then the already proven cheating must not have happened" non-sequiter.
content bs.jpg
What "evidence' has already been provided?
Are you looking for evidence like the hundreds upon hundreds of affidavits sworn out under penalty of perjury by registered Republicans AND Democrats saying they personally witnessed Democrats feeding the same ballots into the machines over and over hundreds of times and filling dumpsters with military ballots?
Or more like the suitcases of fake ballots that were caught on video being wheeled into secure vote counting places while Republicans were not allowed in?
Or more like all the postal workers who signed sworn statements under penalty of perjury stating that they were instructed to fraudulently back-date truckloads of fake votes?
Or more like the literal mathematical impossibility of Biden losing minorities in droves, losing all the counties Obama gained, losing badly in Congress, while also somehow getting more votes than any person in human history (while hiding in his basement and never campaigning)...all at 3:00 in the morning when things shut down only in notorious Democrat-run voter fraud precincts...WHILE there were somehow 20 million more votes than voters?
Which kind of evidence would you like? There are so many kinds. You have to narrow it down to which plethora of proof you require.
Being a dishonest moron 101...
Step 1: Make no demands for proof.
Step 2: Condemn the lack of proof that you never demanded.
Unless it's never considered due to standing. Shall I break out the crayons and explain it a third time or can you grasp it this time around?
Say the only people who would ever need that explained.
You know, the same evidence-impaired gullible morons who fell for:
-the Trump demanded Georgia ballots hoax
-the Russia collusion hoax
-the "Trump told people to drink Lysol" hoax
-the Covington Catholic hoax
-the Charlottesville "very fine people" hoax
-the Roy Moore pedophile hoax
-the Kavanaugh rape gang hoax
-the "repealing Net Neutrality will destroy the Internet" hoax
-the Hydroxchloroquine hoax
-the Jussie Smollett hoax
-the "Investigating Biden's corruption is worse than Biden BEING corrupt" hoax
-the Ukraine transcript hoax
-the Duke Lacrosse team hoax
-the Trayvon Martin hoax
-the "uninsured crisis" hoax
-the multitude of college hate crime hoaxes
-the "deceptively edited video" Planned Parenthood hoax
-the "children in cages" hoax
-the Michael Cohen perjury/contacting the Russians hoaxes
-the SPLC "hate group" hoax
-the "Trump mocking people with disabilities" hoax
-the "you can keep your doctor" hoax
-the "immigrants are rapists, criminals, animals" hoax
-the Kavanaugh "white power symbol" hoax
-the "Trump asked Putin to hack the DNC" hoax
-the polar bear dying from climate change hoax
-the "Trump made it easier for the mentally ill to purchase guns" hoax
-the Scaramucci Russian bankers hoax
-the "Muslim ban" hoax
-the global warming "consensus" hoax
-the "Obama's scandal-free presidency" hoax
-the Trump Jr. WikiLeaks hoax
-the Iran nuclear appeasement hoax
-the "polls show Trump will lose" hoax
-the "Obamacare will never fund abortions or illegal immigrants" hoax
-the "Hillary exonerated" hoax
-the "white privilege" hoax
-the voter suppression hoax
-the "hands up don't shoot" hoax
-the "Trump called soldiers losers" hoax
-the "peaceful protesters" hoax
-the "Trump used a Nazi eagle" hoax
-the "Trump ignored Russia putting bounties on U.S. soldiers" hoax
-the coronavirus hoax
-the "Trump used a Nazi red triangle" hoax
-the "Trump admitted to sexual assault" hoax
-the "penises cause climate change" hoax
-the "Trump denying passports to Latinos" hoax
-the "Mission Accomplished" hoax
Cheating still isn't winning, no matter how many times you repeat it. And how many votes do you think it costs a person to:
-be framed as a secret Russian agent for four years straight,
-be impeached for wanting to investigate Biden's already proven blackmail and bribery of Ukraine,
-have the news media bury massive bombshell scandals against your opponent,
-have Google ban all conservative sites for 90 days leading up to the election so no one can get multiple sides of the story,
-have social media ban everyone to the right of Karl Marx from getting to express opinions in public,
-and have illegal immigrants voting Democrat?
Just think, Biden had ALL THAT RIGGING on his side and STILL had to blatantly steal the presidency in broad daylight. THAT'S what a massive landslide defeat this was for him.
Is anything you say EVER accurate or honest?
Last edited by artichoke; 03-16-2021 at 03:24 AM.
Matt Dillon (03-16-2021)
More accurate and honest than ANY THING you have EVER posted.
You can't prove a word of it.
LIES on top of LIES, then you LIE about LYING.
Typical teabagger (www.teaparty.org)
CASPER (03-16-2021)
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Samuel Johnson, 1775
Religion....is the opiate of the people. Karl Marx, 1848
Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose. Kris Kristofferson, 1969
CASPER (03-16-2021)
1) Covering your ears, closing your eyes, and screaming, "It's lies! All lies, I tell you!" over all the facts already presented in no way refutes what has been claimed. The proof is right there in front of you and you impotently and childishly choose blind denial.
Typical hate-filled Demagogue Party psycho. Learn how to debate and try again.
2) And again, Democrats are the only ones here with an established record of incessant pathological lying.
Hence:
-the Trump demanded Georgia ballots hoax
-the Russia collusion hoax
-the "Trump told people to drink Lysol" hoax
-the Covington Catholic hoax
-the Charlottesville "very fine people" hoax
-the Roy Moore pedophile hoax
-the Kavanaugh rape gang hoax
-the "repealing Net Neutrality will destroy the Internet" hoax
-the Hydroxchloroquine hoax
-the Jussie Smollett hoax
-the "Investigating Biden's corruption is worse than Biden BEING corrupt" hoax
-the Ukraine transcript hoax
-the Duke Lacrosse team hoax
-the Trayvon Martin hoax
-the "uninsured crisis" hoax
-the multitude of college hate crime hoaxes
-the "deceptively edited video" Planned Parenthood hoax
-the "children in cages" hoax
-the Michael Cohen perjury/contacting the Russians hoaxes
-the SPLC "hate group" hoax
-the "Trump mocking people with disabilities" hoax
-the "you can keep your doctor" hoax
-the "immigrants are rapists, criminals, animals" hoax
-the Kavanaugh "white power symbol" hoax
-the "Trump asked Putin to hack the DNC" hoax
-the polar bear dying from climate change hoax
-the "Trump made it easier for the mentally ill to purchase guns" hoax
-the Scaramucci Russian bankers hoax
-the "Muslim ban" hoax
-the global warming "consensus" hoax
-the "Obama's scandal-free presidency" hoax
-the Trump Jr. WikiLeaks hoax
-the Iran nuclear appeasement hoax
-the "polls show Trump will lose" hoax
-the "Obamacare will never fund abortions or illegal immigrants" hoax
-the "Hillary exonerated" hoax
-the "white privilege" hoax
-the voter suppression hoax
-the "hands up don't shoot" hoax
-the "Trump called soldiers losers" hoax
-the "peaceful protesters" hoax
-the "Trump used a Nazi eagle" hoax
-the "Trump ignored Russia putting bounties on U.S. soldiers" hoax
-the coronavirus hoax
-the "Trump used a Nazi red triangle" hoax
-the "Trump admitted to sexual assault" hoax
-the "penises cause climate change" hoax
-the "Trump denying passports to Latinos" hoax
-the "Mission Accomplished" hoax
TRUMP WILL TAKE FORTY STATES...UNLESS THE SAME IDIOTS WHO BROUGHT US THE 2020 DUNCE-O-CRAT IOWA CLUSTERFUCK CONTINUE THEIR SEDITIOUS ACTIVITIES...THEN HE WILL WIN EVEN MORE ..UNLESS THE RED CHINESE AND DNC COLLUDE, USE A PANDEMIC, AND THEN THE DEMOCRATS VIOLATE ARTICLE II OF THE CONSTITUTION, TO FACILLITATE MILLIONS OF ILLEGAL, UNVETTED, MAIL IN BALLOTS IN THE DARK OF NIGHT..
De Oppresso Liber
Behold, the party of "diversity," "tolerance," and "civility" spewing blind, aimless partisan hatred at anyone who isn't exactly like them.
Except for the fact that they are anti-democracy in every conceivable way, hence the refusal of sane, thinking adults to ever refer to them as "democrat-IC."
Then you should have no problem refuting them.
go ahead wait.jpg
Last edited by artichoke; 05-09-2021 at 12:19 AM.
In your case, its a shame to be a fool one time but to be a Putin puppet and tRump ass kisser of a fool two times, with three times making more of a fool out of yourself seriously goes against the nature of having some type of intellectual competence. Now consider the facts versus your trolling fiction:
Prosecutors: There's ‘Clear, Overwhelming’ Evidence Trump Incited Insurrection
WASHINGTON - Impeachment prosecutors contended Thursday that there was “clear and overwhelming” evidence that former President Donald Trump incited insurrection by sending a mob of his supporters to the U.S. Capitol last month to confront lawmakers as they were certifying that he had lost the November election to Democrat Joe Biden.
In closing arguments, the lead impeachment manager, Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland, told the 100 senators acting as jurors at Trump’s impeachment trial that they should use “common sense on what happened here.”
“It is a bedrock principle that no one can incite a riot” in the American democracy, Raskin said.
But he argued that Trump urged hundreds of his supporters to march to the Capitol on January 6 and then — when they stormed the building, smashed windows, ransacked offices and scuffled with police — “did nothing for at least two hours” to end the mayhem that left five people dead, including a Capitol Police officer.
“He betrayed us,” Raskin said of the former U.S. leader, whose four-year term ended January 20 as Biden was inaugurated as the country’s 46th president. “He incited a violent insurrection against our government. He must be convicted.”
Raskin and eight other impeachment managers, all Democrats in the House of Representatives, concluded their case after about 12 hours spread over two days of presenting arguments and evidence against Trump."
https://www.voanews.com/usa/us-polit...d-insurrection
Bookmarks