RLLD

That is just the facade put on it, a regurgitation of the political scheming from his ideological masters. Its not a real concerrn.

Oh yes, you all did, but only later when it suits your momentary needs will you pretend it now exists.

I am honestly asserting my observation of liberal behavior. You care or not care purely based on the political value at that time.

Politicians will announce their "moral" position based on the situations context; more pointedly based on the political benefit.....

Of course I did. Liberals continue to pretend fraud never happens....when their preferred candidate wins....which is farcical.

Simply that election fraud always happens, when questioning the 2020 election with regard to voter fraud the response is over the top. The protestation response is so strong that it sorta makes you all look guilty. Instead of accepting there likely was some, you pretend it never happened at all....which is wierd....its too strong a response....does that make sense?

Uh, no...clearly that is not what my point was....but sure, throw a strawman in and see where it goes.....by all means....

Of course it happens. And its not limited to one side. Pretending it never happens is just how Democrats protect the outcome of the 2020 election.

Yeah, your villain is my hero, and my villain is your hero Put simply. You think supporting that POS feeds some moral stance, when in reality you are just setting up people to be criminalized. Not yourself necessarily....oh no...but fock the rest of the people right? Lets get some foreign criminals in here, let them loose on the good people so morons like yourself can hold some faux sense of moral superiority. You are filth

This inclination to pretend we still live in the 1950's baffles me. I think your lack of appreciation for the incredible progress made is sad. Rather than choose the lazy route of ?its just because men are mean", I suggest you delve into it more. Could there be some mean men out there? Sure.... Is that why women are not in the field....absofuckinglutely not....the real influence is far more interesting, and wasting time on 1950's era thinking is less useful

So you.....accuse...then when asked to produce some evidence, you point at me? You DO see how that looks, right?

Well, yeah, evidence was provided, in enough content that we will have a trial...thats how the system works...not sure what you are thinking happens.

Nah, its all good. There are people like you, and fortunately there are still people like me, who will stand up to evil.

No....I am not aware of anything I was incorrect about, I do not accept your accusation.

Uhmm.....can you clue me in to what you are referring?

Fixed

I am not aware of anything on which i was incorrect.

There has been evidence released, it has been shown on TV, but again, I get it that you likely only consume from outlets who are inclined to hide it.

Ouch!

Agree. On the one hand you have legacy media with their absolutely opposition and political bias against Trump, and then on the other hand you have the likes of Fox who support him. All I might note is that if we look back over time, legacy media has been <ahem>,,,"wrong".......more often than Fox.

I think he is based on the reported evidence, but it really does not matter what I think. It only matters what the jury thinks. So we wait. Some of us likely see him as still being innocent, and others as being guilty. Had I not had access to the evidence against him, I am still not sure I would see him as "innocent" since he still broke our laws by entering this nation illegally.

I accept that you may not have seen it. Liberal outlets are avoiding showing it, you can really only see it on Fox or Newsmax, others. They have shown plenty. Now, what "I" think about his guilt is ultimately irrelevant. I have seen enough to understand that beyond being an illegal, he is much more and worse. What matters is what a jury thinks of course.

Your vote for him is welcome. But more impactful and more welcomed....the refusal to accept the truth of people, it is THAT element that I see as far more useful.

Well, see, here again we go....he is being tried and based on the evidence...I think he is likely guilty....now, if YOU dont think he is, that is fine....but then you also disagree with the evidence....and then by extension the prosecution. Your stance, that I should agree with the prosecution, while thinking he is not guilty makes no sense. If I think he is innocent even after reading about the evidence means that I would (A) be a focking moron.... and (B) a hypocrit. So, this entire line makes no sense. I mean, what the fock is wrong with you?