Let’s wait and see what SCOTUS has to say about this latest Trump attempt to overthrow democracy in our country.

I’m curious how you think that the lawsuit filed by Texas on behalf of the citizens of Texas is “Trump’s attempt to overthrow democracy in our country”? And I am also curious how you think that following the law of the constitution is overthrowing democracy?

I posted in another thread but radio station 95.9 was talking about the testimonies and played some as well.  It's refreshing to have a station give information that doesn't lean left.  I know Perry from KSSK talks some legit info as well from time to time.  Compared to 88.9 that is super TDS/ Maddow type broadcasting.

It's all in our constitution and laws to read. No law degree required. I thought we live in a representative republic. But what do I know.

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

You are correct. This is a constitutional issue involving the Democrats and RINOs in the 4 states trying to overthrow democracy in our election system by illegally changing the voting laws in order to manipulate the votes and ultimately the election results.

Trump counsel of record John Eastman interviewed by Steve Bannon re the Texas lawsuit at SCOTUS. Skip the commercial mid-interview unless you need "35 Below thermal socks".

https://youtu.be/D9NtrKf58hA?t=349

Here's Priebus last night on Hannity explaining one state situation. From a Hannity appearance, which has been banned from YouTube. Thus here is appears from Steve Bannon's War Room.

https://youtu.be/D9NtrKf58hA?t=2139

If everything is all hunky dory (aka "legitimate") why would the Georgia Secretary of State refuse to testify today before the Georgia House committee investigating charges of "irregularities"? Asking for a friend.

If everything is all hunky dory (aka "legitimate") why would the Georgia Secretary of State refuse to testify today before the Georgia House committee investigating charges of "irregularities"? Asking for a friend.

Listen to that Dan Bongino podcast. Puts it in a different perspective. Not refined as Inspector said, but I like his style pull no punches.

Sent from my SM-A102U using Tapatalk

@inspector,

AZ joins TX's lawsuit.

From aletheuo

“It maybe true but you and I don't get to decide that. Last I checked, don't have a law degree, do you?”

Yes you are correct.  I do not have a law degree.  Apparently you don’t either. Let’s wait and see what SCOTUS has to say about this latest Trump attempt to overthrow democracy in our country.

How is Trump not conceding & challenging the election results an "attempt to overthrow democracy?"

He's following the constitution rules.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/12/10/politics/fact-check-trump-supreme-court-brief-texas-lawsuit/index.html

I'm unsure how this Texas suit will charge things.   I guess it's up to the Supreme Court if they will even hear the case or rule on it.   I think next week the electors vote.  All 50 states ratified results already. 

How is Trump not conceding & challenging the election results an "attempt to overthrow democracy?"

He's following the constitution rules.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I belive it's because he is casting doubt on a system of democracy with almost no real evidence (to be determined).  He can challenge it but what is he is doing is saying as if it was fact it was fraudulent without any court case backing.  Accusing of a crime with no conviction.   He says words like there is fraud not there might be fraud.

He is trying to win no matter what even if it throws out peoples votes which is not democratic. 

@inspector,

AZ joins TX's lawsuit.

Great news! Thanks!

Correct me if I'm wrong but I belive it's because he is casting doubt on a system of democracy with almost no real evidence (to be determined).  He can challenge it but what is he is doing is saying as if it was fact it was fraudulent without any court case backing.  Accusing of a crime with no conviction.   He says words like there is fraud not there might be fraud.

He is trying to win no matter what even if it throws out peoples votes which is not democratic.

What is court case backing?

And your saying because his evidence hasn't been presented & analyzed in court (to be determined), that's casting doubt on democracy?

Correct me if I'm wrong but I belive it's because he is casting doubt on a system of democracy with almost no real evidence (to be determined).  He can challenge it but what is he is doing is saying as if it was fact it was fraudulent without any court case backing.  Accusing of a crime with no conviction.   He says words like there is fraud not there might be fraud.

He is trying to win no matter what even if it throws out peoples votes which is not democratic.

Interesting that following the Democratic process casts doubt on the Democratic process

Still Too STUPID to get it...

🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️

Correct me if I'm wrong but I belive it's because he is casting doubt on a system of democracy with almost no real evidence (to be determined).  He can challenge it but what is he is doing is saying as if it was fact it was fraudulent without any court case backing.  Accusing of a crime with no conviction.   He says words like there is fraud not there might be fraud.

He is trying to win no matter what even if it throws out peoples votes which is not democratic.

Your word salads are getting worse.

Accusing of a crime with no conviction.    That's what the court is for. The Trump legal team presented its case accusing the defendants of a crime and they presented the evidence of said crime. Then the courts will execute its process to either get a conviction or not.

I think omnigun is trying so hard to be a troll he is not under a bridge but under a manhole in the construction yard waiting to be installed.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I belive it's because he is casting doubt on a system of democracy with almost no real evidence (to be determined).  He can challenge it but what is he is doing is saying as if it was fact it was fraudulent without any court case backing.  Accusing of a crime with no conviction.   He says words like there is fraud not there might be fraud.

He is trying to win no matter what even if it throws out peoples votes which is not democratic.

I'll correct you, you're wrong.

Casting doubt on a system does not mean an overthrow attempt.  Are the people supposed to believe without question the way voting systems are run?  Sounds like communism to me.

"Almost no real evidence".  I guess unless you saw a video of a ballot counter taking say 10,000 ballots marked for Trump and the vid shows that person burning all 10,000, would that be the type of real evidence you're looking for?  Or is there doubt because those ballots being burnt could have been received after the deadline, so it wont' matter anyways right?

You need to remove the court system conviction thing a little bit.  Here's 1 example of why: Hillary Clinton was a defense attorney and got her rapist client off  the hook.  Her words were " I knew he did it, but I got the evidence thrown out. Haha".

Courts are not objective like how they should be.  Politics are often involved with big decisions.

What is court case backing?

And your saying because his evidence hasn't been presented & analyzed in court (to be determined), that's casting doubt on democracy?

Court backing is the case tried in court and a conclusion reached.  Everything else is just conjecture and not reliable. This is the country founded on innocent till proven guilty. Trump saying a crime has been committed without any irrefutable (court) evidence is irresponsible and chips away at democracy.  Democracy only works if the people believe in the process.  If the process is corrupt prove it in court before you make claims.  That's like saying someone is guilty of a crime pre trail.

I think omnigun is trying so hard to be a troll he is not under a bridge but under a manhole in the construction yard waiting to be installed.

I think OG should stop posting in this thread. His lack of knowledge of the constitution and law and the inability to see the bigger picture is just an embarrassment for him at this point. He doesn’t see that as a problem either. He thinks it is because he has an opposite opinion. But that is not at issue here at all. He just cannot grasp the reality of what is truly going on.   

At this point he is completely clueless.