Will Trump use violence when he loses?

[Into the Night]

Now if one requests “pidgin’s” “proof” of all this “election fraud by Democrats,” you get nothing, nothing, zip, zilch, which he usually doubles down the stupidity of “facts aren’t facts,” or some similar type Rudiism

I've already shown some of the evidence to you. You cannot make it go away, Sock. Argument of the Stone fallacy.

He wants State Legislators, not the voters, nor the electors designated by the parties and chosen by the people, but the State Legislators to select the electors, which currently, and in history, no State has ever done, makes you wonder if he even thinks an election is necessary

Go read Article II of the Constitution of the United States. The State legislatures, and ONLY the State legislatures have the authority to choose their electors for the electoral college. If they hold an advisory vote to give people of their State a voice, they are the ONLY ones that can certify that vote and in so doing choose their electors.

You are just denying the Constitution of the United States again.

Forget Trump talking platform,

No. See Trump's campaign platform here.

all Trump does is personally insult people,

You are describing yourself again, Sock. You cannot project YOUR problem on Trump or anybody else.

cries everyone is persecuting him,

[/QUOTE]
You are describing yourself again.

and regurgitates in one form or another the “Big Lie,”

There is no "Big Lie". Buzzword fallacy.

his rallies want melodrama,

Blatant lie.

clear definitions of good guy/bad guy,

I think it's pretty obvious who is who.

and he delivers, it is schtick

No. DEMOCRATS deliver. Trump just points it out.

The “election will either fault again

My prediction. You losers are already trying it.

or Trump will be elected,

Unknown. I'd say he has a good chance, assuming Democrats don't cause the election to fault again.

"is confirmation of the fact that the cult is not going to accept any results other than Trump can not lose,

Attempted conclusion based on false premise fallacy.

that he already won,

Repetition fallacy.

no need to even have an election,

You are describing yourself again. It is DEMOCRATS saying this.

but they display signs of authoritarianism

Did you know that the President IS an authority?

Above demonstrates perfectly why “pidgin” is a one phrase poster, all he can deliver, all he can rebuttal,

You are describing Democrats again. You cannot project YOUR problems on me or anybody else.

classic exhibit of the Dunning-Kruger

Straw man fallacy. Obviously, you have no idea what Dunning-Kruger is. It is not a proof either.

And now time for the fallacies bullshit

You already made them. They are YOUR fallacies.

 

[LurchAddams]

According to you, so that doesn't count.

Wow! Sick burn, tiger! pffft

 

[Into the Night]

Agreed, but I'm curious what makes them that way. They're paranoid and hateful. They feel weak and scared. It's a pattern, but I'm not sure of the details. They are never wrong and always blame others for their misfortune or their claims about the pending doom of our nation.

You are just describing yourself again, Sock.

 

[LurchAddams]

They didn't have a choice. They were subpoenaed and had to show up. If they, as in any Stalinist show trial, went against the court's notions or the party line it was off to the gulag--in this case a federal indictment--for not giving the correct answers.

Bullshit and you know it.

They could have said, "they can't recall", which is what trump did 100's of times during the Mueller probe. No, they were the opposite of everything any current Republican is: courageous.

 

[Into the Night]

No, I mean like Jan. 6, when Trump organized the violent attack on Capitol.

He didn't. Democrats did. You can't blame YOUR problems on Trump or anybody else.

 

[Into the Night]

If you literally know nothing about that day except for that line, then you know nothing.

Argument of the Stone fallacy. You cannot make the evidence just disappear, Sock.

 

[Into the Night]

^^^
Another desperate beta male driven to lying to cover their fear of losing.

What fear of losing??

 

[Into the Night]

They are not.

Blatant lie.

 

[Into the Night]

Thanks for confessing all the Trumpers lied under oath. It just goes to prove they take their oaths as lightly as you took yours, Terry. LOL

You are hallucinating again, Sock.

 

[Into the Night]

Agreed. Lying under oath is a crime regardless who does it. Of course the MAGAts will say Trump is allowed because he's the President.

You are hallucinating again, Sock.
MAGA isn't a person.

 

[Into the Night]

A subpoena applies to everyone. Your fascism is despised by most Americans.

Congress has no power of subpoena. No such power was granted by the Constitution.
Not fascism. Buzzword fallacy.
You are describing yourself again, fascist Sock. You WANT fascism.

 

[Into the Night]

go kill yourself you piece of garbage

How childish.

 

[Into the Night]

If true, then you are claiming the House of Trump, led by Gym Jordan and other TDSers, are criminals for investigating Hunter? Please clarify, Terry.

You are hallucinating again, Sock.

 

[Into the Night]

That's a Rule 16 violation, Terry.

No, it is not. The complete post was still there, Sock.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

No shit, ex-Chief Terry, but that isn't all you posted. You also stated "Congress has no explicit constitutional power to conduct investigations". I asked you to clarify about Hunter and you, as usual began venting insults and half-truths.

I didn't, the site cited did.

 

[Into the Night]

No, the whole quote is there, and the changes made are obvious. I made no changes to the original quote that cannot be seen. Rule 16 is about changing quotes where what is quoted is not the whole of the original. That is, quotation in part or changing the original in a manner that makes it appear the changed quote is original.

But, just to make you happy, I'll go back and add a disclaimer to that post as well.

Rule 16 is also known as the Doc rule, since Doc (the Sock) abused this most of all!

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Let me help you with the rule, son:

16. Quote Box Altering:

One can alter a quote box by removing some of a wall of text to expose the specific part you are responding to, or splitting it apart so you can respond to each item one at a time. However, altering the words posted and changing the meaning of what they said for whatever reason (a joke for instance) is not allowed unless you change the "quoted by" portion of the quote to make it clear that the original poster did not post what you are "making" them say. We will begin by deleting these posts, and if it continues we will get into banning. I will update this rule with changes until it settles in.


Now please prove to me you really understand what you did wrong and are not just a crazy, old man who only sees what he wants to see.

A disclaimer doesn't cut it, son. Again, read the rule. You have to make it clear that the post was not made by the person you quoted. Damo even included examples for those sane and intelligent enough to read them.

What I'm really curious about is whether you are honest and sane enough to see your violation, fix the violation and apologize for the violation.

When a moderator says something about it, you might have something. Until then, you're full of shit.

 

[Into the Night]

No shit, ex-Chief Terry, but that isn't all you posted. You also stated "Congress has no explicit constitutional power to conduct investigations". I asked you to clarify about Hunter and you, as usual began venting insults and half-truths.

Compositional error fallacy, Sock. Though Congress has no explicit constitution power to conduct investigations (so what T. A. Gardner said is true), they can conduct any 'investigation' they wish, but it carries no force of law and Congress has no subpoena authority.

 

[Nordberg]

A subpoena applies to everyone. Your fascism is despised by most Americans.

Not anymore. The Repubs ignored them during the 1- 6 investigations. Then they dared to threaten Dems and Hunter if they defied them. That is just how Trumpys see the law. It applies to you, not them.

 

[Into the Night]

Let me help you with the rule, son:

16. Quote Box Altering:

One can alter a quote box by removing some of a wall of text to expose the specific part you are responding to, or splitting it apart so you can respond to each item one at a time. However, altering the words posted and changing the meaning of what they said for whatever reason (a joke for instance) is not allowed unless you change the "quoted by" portion of the quote to make it clear that the original poster did not post what you are "making" them say. We will begin by deleting these posts, and if it continues we will get into banning. I will update this rule with changes until it settles in.


Now please prove to me you really understand what you did wrong and are not just a crazy, old man who only sees what he wants to see.

A disclaimer doesn't cut it, son. Again, read the rule. You have to make it clear that the post was not made by the person you quoted. Damo even included examples for those sane and intelligent enough to read them.

What I'm really curious about is whether you are honest and sane enough to see your violation, fix the violation and apologize for the violation.

You are describing yourself again, Sock. Rule 16 was created because of YOUR abuse.

He did not violate Rule 16. The entire quote was there including the original context and meaning.

YOU were the one changing context and meaning and even synthesizing meaning and word stuffing by abusing the quoting system. It is because of YOU that Rule 16 was created!