They were asked by whom?  Show me the details, not just your biased, uninformed opinion.

Giuliani already admitted that he lied in court so it's over. Now Trump is hanging out with Nazis. Conservative values.

Giuliani already admitted that he lied in court so it's over. Now Trump is hanging out with Nazis.

When you post Nazi nonsense, you've lost any ounce of credibility and truthfulness you might have had.

Get a life.

When you post Nazi nonsense, you've lost any ounce of credibility and truthfulness you might have had.

Get a life.

People on this board and Trump are still promoting the cat eating Haitian lie that was started by the following Neo Nazi group. This is who you believe?

those are feds...

Giuliani already admitted that he lied in court so it's over. Now Trump is hanging out with Nazis. Conservative values.

They were asked to produce evidence and they had nothing.

He has no case and over 60 judges said so. Even Judges that he appointed ruled that he had no evidence and no standing. They have never provided any evidence of election fraud and never will. Anomalies are not evidence. They already tried that fishing expedition in AZ and came up with nothing.

They were asked by whom?  Show me the details, not just your biased, uninformed opinion.

Answer Flapp's question.  They were asked by whom?  Answer the question.

Because I'd like to know too.

Answer Flapp's question.  They were asked by whom?  Answer the question.

Because I'd like to know too.

Xhe doesn't answer questions asked. Xhe instead deflects or post no reply. There are a lot of post asking for good evidence and no replies.

only time I heard xhe answer questions was when xhe crossed the yellow line during a cease fire.

Yeah, people that start their statement with "honestly", are not, well, honest.

Non-sequitur you missed the meaning of the word in that context. It is not about my truthfulness rather it is a phrase that takes the edge off of the sentence to follow that someone might not like. In other words I am about to point out a flaw in the reasoning but I don't want it to sound rude. If you are familiar with the bible you will see times where Jesus said "truly I tell you..." It doesn't mean Jesus was lying all the other times.

Have you never worn an ear device?  Even the "covert" ones are visible to someone looking for one.  Their best option was to use rings with a speaker.  What they didn't factor in was the power of using the internet to find the truth. This is something their campaign and admin haven't understood yet.  Instead, they rely on controlling the flow of information.

You are entitled to your suspicions. As I indicated, it is not impossible, I just think it unlikely.

People on this board and Trump are still promoting the cat eating Haitian lie that was started by the following Neo Nazi group. This is who you believe?

So because Trump repeated a story that a Nazi group also repeated that means they are hanging out?

BTW, there was a clip of what sounded like a black man speaking at some sort of meeting and he said they were eating pets so it's not like some nazi conspriacy.

Anyone with an SDR tuned to those ISM freqs can figure out if the hyena was wearing a wireless receiver.

How would you filter it out from the noise from all the other Bluetooth devices in the room?

How would you filter it out from the noise from all the other Bluetooth devices in the room?

you learn

you learn

I'll take your word for it. Sounds like the best option would be to take a jammer in with you to stop Harris from cheating if she was. Might be breaking some laws though...

Non-sequitur you missed the meaning of the word in that context. It is not about my truthfulness rather it is a phrase that takes the edge off of the sentence to follow that someone might not like. In other words I am about to point out a flaw in the reasoning but I don't want it to sound rude. If you are familiar with the bible you will see times where Jesus said "truly I tell you..." It doesn't mean Jesus was lying all the other times.

Honest wasn't a word back then?  To me "truly" and "honesty" is different.

I'll take your word for it. Sounds like the best option would be to take a jammer in with you to stop Harris from cheating if she was. Might be breaking some laws though...

Hey slick. You mentioned the illegal jammer not me. I did not mention anything about emitting RF.

Non-sequitur you missed the meaning of the word in that context. It is not about my truthfulness rather it is a phrase that takes the edge off of the sentence to follow that someone might not like. In other words I am about to point out a flaw in the reasoning but I don't want it to sound rude. If you are familiar with the bible you will see times where Jesus said "truly I tell you..." It doesn't mean Jesus was lying all the other times.

When i was growing  up, a sentence that started with "honestly" meant the entire sentence was going to be one of exasperation.

"Honestly, I don't know why you can't understand how ignorant you sound!"

So, keep your little grammar lectures to yourself unless you're going to present all possible uses of the terms.  All you're doing is microfocusing on one word because you don't see the witticism implied by others.

Honestly!!   

You are entitled to your suspicions. As I indicated, it is not impossible, I just think it unlikely.

Sounds like you've jumped to a conclusion unsupported by any facts.

A wise person withholds their opinion until they can state it beyond the level of "unlikely."

I can just as easily say it's unlikely that Harris would reject the offer to cheat given her debate performance of the past.  Also it's a given that in 2016, the DNC co-chair, Donna Brazile, cheated by sending advance copies of CNN-sponsored candidate events to her friends working on the Hillary Clinton campaign. 

So, is it really unlikely a Democrat would once again cheat given their history and the current "win at all costs" attitude of the Democrats?

I'm not jumping to a conclusion.  I'm basing mine on experience and probabilities.  You seem to be straddling the fence and refusing to look at anything that doesn't rise to the level of direct, incontrovertible evidence. 

Don't be ashamed if you can't yet form an opinion either way.  You have set an extremely high a bar for yourself.  But holding others to that standard doesn't do anything to promote discussion.  It's just argumentative.

Maybe you should wait to post your actual opinion instead of constantly shooting others' opinions down with words like "unlikely" -- an comment unsupported by any real evidence.  It just makes you sound desperate for attention.

How would you filter it out from the noise from all the other Bluetooth devices in the room?

One way is to examine the specs of the device she's being suspected of using.  Bluetooth technology uses the 2.4 GHz ISM spectrum band (2400 to 2483.5 MHz).  WiFi uses 2.4, 5.0 and 6.0 GHz spectrum bands.

WiFi is not often point-to-point, meaning it needs a device between devices to connect them, such as a WiFi access point and router.  BT, however, is point-to-point between paired devices.

It's just science.  I can isolate every device on my WiFi network with an Android app:  WiFiman.  Each device reports its individual IP address, network connection (SSID), and band being used.

BlueTooth is easier.  BT devices have a shorter range, so anyone in the studio using it could be identified by signal strength. 

Most importantly, this was a closed set without an audience.  Everyone there could be told to turn off all cellphone or other wireless devices.

Simple.

The Project2025 is still a disaster endorsed by JD Vance and written by past members of the Trump administration. It's so horrible he denies it. Yet still he supports a 6 week abortion ban in Florida and is willing to sign a nationwide abortion ban.

When you have Trump lying about people eating cats, and crowd sizes fetishes on a national debate, it is so bizarro and tends to float to the topic of the day.

Why you want to be led by a liar and a loser that only cares about himself continues to intrigue me.   She destroyed him because he has no self control, you want someone without self control to have the nuclear codes?

The same could be said about Rules for radicals, except no one has implemented anything from project 2025, where the democrats have been using Rules for Radicals as a playbook for years.