*Official 2020 Election Thread*

[drobeski 3,061]

2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

It was funny when libtards we’re doing PSA’s in 2016 begging electors to not vote for Trump or not vote at all. Pretty funny if they gets put forward now and to see his they react. 

They are clowns.  

[OldMaid 2,130]

Trump’s not getting another 4 yrs. Book it!

[MDC 7,457]

Lot of double chins a quivering.  

[OldMaid 2,130]

4 minutes ago, MDC said:

Lot of double chins a quivering.  

Suckers, every last one of them.

[Rusty Syringes 478]

45 minutes ago, OldMaid said:

Suckers, every last one of them.

SCOTUS unanimously in one sentence drop kicks the frivolous Pennsylvania challenge, and then you've got the Texas clown with a felony charge bucking for a Clownzo pardon by filing more frivolous legal baloney that will get blown out of the water as well. Our country is standing up against the bully Trumpanzees and beating the crap out of them. I love this country !

[wiffleball 4,790]

3 hours ago, Mookz said:

 

 

Married?

 

Yeah, Mallied!

 

No more yanky the wanky. The Donger need food!

[FlyinHeadlock 459]

Leaning toward the Insurrection Act. I was in the Marines in SoCal for the last one. Not a big deal really. Go in, squash the insurrection, hold military tribunals for judges who refused to uphold the Constitution and that's the end. Anybody else wants to start a problem same goes for them. 

[JustinCharge 2,397]

7 hours ago, Rusty Syringes said:

SCOTUS unanimously in one sentence drop kicks the frivolous Pennsylvania challenge, and then you've got the Texas clown with a felony charge bucking for a Clownzo pardon by filing more frivolous legal baloney that will get blown out of the water as well. Our country is standing up against the bully Trumpanzees and beating the crap out of them. I love this country !

Actually 7 other states joined in on that suit, so it is not just Texas.

[drobeski 3,061]

1 minute ago, JustinCharge said:

Actually 7 other states joined in on that suit, so it is not just Texas.

Shhhhh Jimmy Kimmel and John Oliver didn't cover that. They don't know. 

[JustinCharge 2,397]

https://600wrec.iheart.com/featured/rush-limbaugh/content/2020-12-08-pn-rush-limbaugh-will-the-supreme-court-take-the-texas-case/

Rush Limbaugh transcript on the Texas suit:

 

 

RUSH: Here is Blaine in Toledo, Ohio. Glad you waited. Got a great point I think coming up here. How are you?

CALLER: Hi, Rush. Blessings and thanks for all you do from Toledo.

RUSH: Well, thank you, sir.

CALLER: I spent part of the morning reading partway through the Texas lawsuit, and I think it's a masterpiece, well written, as you would expect, but I think we're gonna know a lot more about where we stand as a country by the end of the --

RUSH: Let me ask you about this to make sure that I know what you're talking about. Is this the lawsuit, State of Texas, they're aiming to help Trump upend the results here. They said yesterday or today, rather, they have filed suit against the states of Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, State of Texas has, at the Supreme Court, calling changes they made to election procedures amid the coronavirus pandemic unlawful. Is that the suit you're talking about?

CALLER: That is precisely the suit, and they have an excellent case. The fact that a state is suing other states means it goes directly to the Supreme Court. They don't have to bother with anybody else. And they also, the suit is not relying on accusing individuals of fraud or cheating. Instead, it's based on uncontested facts, which are these elected officials, usually the governors and their secretaries of state, altered the election laws without referring to states' legislators who have plenary power to determine how elections are run in each state.

RUSH: That's exactly right.

CALLER: In other words, by taking these actions, they all violated the U.S. Constitution. And I don't see how the court can turn this down, because if they turn it down -- today they were asking to sue. Today was a plea for certiorari I think is the legal term, but basically they're saying, "Supreme Court, please let us present this case." If the Supreme Court doesn't take the case, they will be enabling all politicians in all states throughout the United States to meddle with election laws and ruin the country. And I won't make that point any further. We all know that.

RUSH: And so this is why you believe that we're gonna find out very soon how serious the Supreme Court is -- we know that Justice Alito is serious.

CALLER: Yes.

RUSH: He had a December 9th deadline for people to respond to him, which is tomorrow, in Pennsylvania. He did not like what he was seeing happen in Pennsylvania at all with the ballots, with the counting, and how they had mixed the ballots, they had not separated them and had them sequestered. They were all mixed together. He said, "You can't do that. I want those separated. I want them shown which ones are which by December the 9th."

But I gotta tell you, Blaine is exactly right here. The court does not have to take the case. They're not obligated to hear it. But, therefore, this will demonstrate how serious the court is. One state is suing a bunch of other states over the simple fact that its state legislatures who have exclusive power to change election law in the state. It's not the governor. It's not the secretary of state. It's not any other state official. It is the state legislature. And if end runs took place around them, then the court, if they take the case, it's a slam dunk, I would think.

CALLER: I agree. I agree. I woke up this morning, and the only place I saw this was on Breitbart. And then within an hour or two it appeared on Red State, but I checked ABC, NBC. Nobody had anything about it.

RUSH: There isn't any news anymore. This is another great definition of it. There isn't any news. And part of the definition of there's no news is what they don't cover.

CALLER: Right. But reading through this case, it's, to me, I think they have to take it or else they're green lighting all corruption. We're done. We're done. If they do take it, how can they find otherwise? But this is crafted -- the Texas attorney general crafted this to make it as easy as possible for the Supreme Court to grant what they're asking because in each case they're saying that Texas voters were being disenfranchised by corruption -- you know, violations of the Constitution in these other states by officers that weren't qualified --

RUSH: Right.

CALLER: -- to do the actions that they did.

RUSH: That deserves a further explanation, and I have to take a break here because I'm out of time.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: You might be wondering, what does Texas care about Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin? If those four states are allowed to violate election law and if they are able to render state legislators irrelevant in writing election law, then they are being affected in Texas by violation of law, and they don't want that to happen. They're trying to make sure that election law is kept sacrosanct and that the Constitution is not violated. It's a big case.

[Mike Honcho 5,284]

So immediately after Drobe comments about people getting their news from biased sources...JustinCharge posts a Limbaugh transcript.  Crassic!  

[OldMaid 2,130]

7 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

So immediately after Drobe comments about people getting their news from biased sources...JustinCharge posts a Limbaugh transcript.  Crassic!  

You can’t make this sh1t up. If they only knew how stupid they look.

[OldMaid 2,130]

8 hours ago, Rusty Syringes said:

SCOTUS unanimously in one sentence drop kicks the frivolous Pennsylvania challenge, and then you've got the Texas clown with a felony charge bucking for a Clownzo pardon by filing more frivolous legal baloney that will get blown out of the water as well. Our country is standing up against the bully Trumpanzees and beating the crap out of them. I love this country !

SCOTUS WILL SAVE US!!!!

[drobeski 3,061]

8 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

So immediately after Drobe comments about people getting their news from biased sources...JustinCharge posts a Limbaugh transcript.  Crassic!  

So ? Does that mean the supreme court kicked the case ? That those states didn't violate the constitution when governors and secretaries of state changed voting rules ? 

Whats your point...anything on the actual subject matter? Or just deflection?

[drobeski 3,061]

2 minutes ago, OldMaid said:

You can’t make this sh1t up. If they only knew how stupid they look.

Why do you hate the constitution? America ? 

[Utilit99 4,099]

TDS is real and alive in the world. Never seen one person get into and destroy people's minds like Trump did to liberals. It's been freaking outstanding watching them turn psycho and unable to see reality. 

[Rusty Syringes 478]

8 minutes ago, OldMaid said:

You can’t make this sh1t up. If they only knew how stupid they look.

Guess I'll have to rummage around in the Bernie Sanders grab bag to counter balance the playing of that Rush Limbaugh card. 

[drobeski 3,061]

Kameltoe resign yet ?

[Gladiators 1,992]

7 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

TDS is real and alive in the world. Never seen one person get into and destroy people's minds like Trump did to liberals. It's been freaking outstanding watching them turn psycho and unable to see reality. 

It's funny how worked up the TDS crowd gets when a few people on here post updates about what's going on.  I'm looking forward to reminding them about their Biden vote over the next 4 years.

[Hawkeye21 2,399]

32 minutes ago, drobeski said:

Or just deflection?

 

31 minutes ago, drobeski said:

Why do you hate the constitution? America ? 

What's that? 

[drobeski 3,061]

11 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

 

What's that? 

Snuff, don't you have 21 year old kids to watch ?

[JustinCharge 2,397]

I should post more Rush transcripts if its gonna make the liberals bounce off the padded walls like that. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,461]

Still not getting it. Why are the sky screamers here all worked up and angry? You can just feel the bitterness and bile in their posts. It’s not how someone who is happy they won would act. Reminds me of when the Patriots won their first Super Bowl and at the parade they were chanting “Yankees Suck”. Theres a lot of hurt coming to the surface when you should be overjoyed. Why so angry? The wounds are deep I guess. 

[JustinCharge 2,397]

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/trump-texas-lawsuit-election/2020/12/09/id/1000698/

Trump Vows to Intervene in Texas Election Case Before Supreme Court

By Newsmax Wires    |   Wednesday, 09 December 2020 09:10 AM

President Donald Trump on Wednesday vowed to intervene in a case brought by the state of Texas before the U.S. Supreme Court to throw out the voting results in four other states.

Trump, writing on Twitter, said: "We will be INTERVENING in the Texas (plus many other states) case. This is the big one. Our Country needs a victory!"

He did not specify whether it would be his presidential campaign or the Justice Department that would intervene.

He also played down, in a separate tweet, a case filed against Pennsylvania's election results in which the Supreme Court rejected a emergency action:

"This was not my case as has been so incorrectly reported. The case that everyone has been waiting for is the State’s case with Texas and numerous others joining. It is very strong, ALL CRITERIA MET. How can you have a presidency when a vast majority think the election was RIGGED?"

This report contains material from Reuters.

[JustinCharge 2,397]

7 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Still not getting it. Why are the sky screamers here all worked up and angry? You can just feel the bitterness and bile in their posts. It’s not how someone who is happy they won would act. Reminds me of when the Patriots won their first Super Bowl and at the parade they were chanting “Yankees Suck”. Theres a lot of hurt coming to the surface when you should be overjoyed. Why so angry? The wounds are deep I guess. 

From what I've seen on other forums, they are getting their news from CNN, etc., which is outright lying to them and trying to incite rage.  CNN refuses to cover the story of Texas suing 5 states and 7 other states joining in.  Its like the story doesn't exist.  Instead, CNN publishes stories that make fun of Trump.  Not hard to see where the rage comes from.  CNN promotes leftist rage.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,461]

2 minutes ago, JustinCharge said:

From what I've seen on other forums, they are getting their news from CNN, etc., which is outright lying to them and trying to incite rage.  CNN refuses to cover the story of Texas suing 5 states and 7 other states joining in.  Its like the story doesn't exist.  Instead, CNN publishes stories that make fun of Trump.  Not hard to see where the rage comes from.  CNN promotes leftist rage.

None of them reported on the tape of that Chinese professor/economist stating that the Chinese owned American politicians, and then right after that the story breaks about Swalwell having an affair with a Chinese spy. If a tree falls...  But they obviously love being in the dark. 

[JustinCharge 2,397]

I'm wonder what CNNs plan is if the SC rules in favor of Trump all the way.  I'm assuming CNN will declare that the US Supreme Court just destroyed the country, the Constitution, the rule of law, and are totally evil.  We will be hearing posters here suddenly calling Alito delusional, how they all fell for bogus evidence, etc. But we'll see.

[Hawkeye21 2,399]

23 minutes ago, drobeski said:

Snuff, don't you have 21 year old kids to watch ?

What is the context to this post?

[Hardcore troubadour 15,461]

3 minutes ago, JustinCharge said:

I'm wonder what CNNs plan is if the SC rules in favor of Trump all the way.  I'm assuming CNN will declare that the US Supreme Court just destroyed the country, the Constitution, the rule of law, and are totally evil.  We will be hearing posters here suddenly calling Alito delusional, how they all fell for bogus evidence, etc. But we'll see.

The case is so cut and dry that I think it has no chance. Did the state legislature change the rules as the constitution calls for? Nope. But John Roberts is the one who completely changed the Obamacare lawsuit to make it constitutional, deeming it a tax. You can count on the same type of twist in this case. Don’t get your hopes up. 

[Hawkeye21 2,399]

Was there cheating in any of the states that Trump won?

[JustinCharge 2,397]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Was there cheating in any of the states that Trump won?

Doesn't matter.  You could erase ALL of Trump electoral votes with charges of cheating in every state he won.  Trump doesn't need a single EV.  He just needs to drop Biden under 270.

[MDC 7,457]

Just now, JustinCharge said:

Doesn't matter.  You could erase ALL of Trump electoral votes with charges of cheating in every state he won.  Trump doesn't need a single EV.  He just needs to drop Biden under 270.

Will this happen before or after the Civil War?  

[Mike Honcho 5,284]

11 minutes ago, JustinCharge said:

I'm wonder what CNNs plan is if the SC rules in favor of Trump all the way.  I'm assuming CNN will declare that the US Supreme Court just destroyed the country, the Constitution, the rule of law, and are totally evil.  We will be hearing posters here suddenly calling Alito delusional, how they all fell for bogus evidence, etc. But we'll see.

From what I read of the lawsuit, you need not wonder about that at all.  HTH.

[Mike Honcho 5,284]

3 minutes ago, JustinCharge said:

Doesn't matter.  You could erase ALL of Trump electoral votes with charges of cheating in every state he won.  Trump doesn't need a single EV.  He just needs to drop Biden under 270.

The electoral college works on a simple majority, if you don't count the electoral votes of 5 states, all that does is change threshold Biden needs to win. That's why POTUS wants those states to overturn the results and not just throw everything out.

[Hawkeye21 2,399]

3 minutes ago, JustinCharge said:

Doesn't matter.  You could erase ALL of Trump electoral votes with charges of cheating in every state he won.  Trump doesn't need a single EV.  He just needs to drop Biden under 270.

I thought is was all about ending fraud and not about Trump winning?  Shouldn't every state be looked at?

[JustinCharge 2,397]

1 minute ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I thought is was all about ending fraud and not about Trump winning?  Shouldn't every state be looked at?

the democrats are free to look at fraud in trump states.  they wont waste their time tho because it wouldnt stop trump from winning.  all it would do is bolster trumps argument that congress should pick the president.

[Hawkeye21 2,399]

Just now, JustinCharge said:

the democrats are free to look at fraud in trump states.  they wont waste their time tho because it wouldnt stop trump from winning.

I was told by members on here that it was no longer about who wins but about exposing all the fraud.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,461]

Prediction : The court will rule that while the governors and Secretary of State did not go through the state legislature as called for in the constitution, due to a declared public health crisis and in the interest of assuring people could vote in a safe manner , they were right in instituting the changes so everyone could vote. A persons right to vote takes precedence over what the constitution calls for,  in a time of crisis. John Roberts was not picked because he was a “conservative “. He was picked by the establishment to serve the establishment. It will echo what he did with Obamacare. Thank Bush, Cheney and the rest of the neocons. And sorry to say, thank people who only care about the 2a above all else when it comes to the judiciary.  

[Mike Honcho 5,284]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

Prediction : The court will rule that while the governors and Secretary of State did not go through the state legislature as faked for in the constitution, due to a declared public health crisis and in the interest of assuring people could vote in a safe manner , they were right in instituting the changes so everyone could vote. A people’s right to vote takes precedence over what the constitution calls for in a time of crisis. John Roberts was not picked because he was a “conservative “. He was picked by the establishment to serve the establishment. It will echo what he did with Obamacare. Thank Bush, Cheney and the rest of the neocons. And sorry to say, thank people who only care about the 2a above all else when it comes to the judiciary.     They don't hear the case because Texas has no standing

Fixed.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,461]

Just now, Mike Honcho said:

Fixed.

Maybe. This is a Hail Mary no doubt.