Jump to content

Mr Trump - All discussion here


Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

He is not a Supreme Court judge- you invented that.

He is a Republican Party member.

He is being paid by the Republican Party to write the report.

It is written by a Republican Party member.

He was once elected in a small state as a Republican into the job of judge.

He employs Trump workers to do the digging.

He threatens elected officials.

With $millions spent he finds 8 voters who he cannot prove not to have the capacity.

Desperate to keep his job

You then create 10 000 more similar voters in the state.

And Trump keeps gathering in the money and sitting on $128 million.

 

 

That's just noise.

 

Did you watch the video and do you think she knew she'd voted?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The votes in Wisconsin have been checked and checked again. They have found no evidence of fraud.  Trump lost and he's a saw loser. If he had just excepted defeat gracefully you wouldn't be posting about election fraud. But he made some ridiculous claims and managed to convince his followers.  Trump says jump you say how high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, SheffieldBricky said:

That's just noise.

 

Did you watch the video and do you think she knew she'd voted?

I have absolutely no intention on watching your far-right sideshow.

I am rather sickened that the far-right would use disabled people this way.

You have already misled us by saying that Gableman was a "... Supreme Court judge...".

You have already misled us by claiming that a Republican Party report, paid for by Republicans, produced by Trump workers and authored by a Republican is not a Republican report.

 

Clearly the far-right media are desperate to deflect attention from Trump and his pal Putin.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

I have absolutely no intention on watching your far-right sideshow.

I am rather sickened that the far-right would use disabled people this way.

You have already misled us by saying that Gableman was a "... Supreme Court judge...".

You have already misled us by claiming that a Republican Party report, paid for by Republicans, produced by Trump workers and authored by a Republican is not a Republican report.

 

Clearly the far-right media are desperate to deflect attention from Trump and his pal Putin.

 

 

That all just show bias, and a little bit of a dubious character. If you dismiss relatives complaining about their dementia ridden relatives having their votes stolen then I'm afraid you're corrupt.

 

The judge was a supreme court judge. Even if he's retired he's still referred to as a judge. It's not a republican report. It's about election fraud, that effects everyone. 

 

You're corrupted by Trump Derangement Syndrome and unfortunately it's uncurable, even when faced with ill elderly victims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, SheffieldBricky said:

That all just show bias, and a little bit of a dubious character. If you dismiss relatives complaining about their dementia ridden relatives having their votes stolen then I'm afraid you're corrupt.

Is equally likely any "dementia ridden" voters voted for Trump...

 

...regardless, there is no law preventing anyone with dementia casting a vote. :?

 

59 minutes ago, SheffieldBricky said:

The judge was a supreme court judge. Even if he's retired he's still referred to as a judge.

A state level "supreme court" judge, not a member of the SCOTUS.

 

59 minutes ago, SheffieldBricky said:

It's not a republican report. It's about election fraud, that effects everyone. 

It *is* a republican report, by a republican, commissioned by a republican.

 

The bi-partisan election report was carried out by someone else... it found negligible fraud and made some recommendations to make elections even more secure in the future...

 

...all of which were rejected, by republicans. :?

 

The Republican Assembly Majority Leader rejected Gablemans report, because it's basically nothing more than a load of conjecture, zero evidence whatsoever beyond "I have a funny feeling"!

 

A complete joke!

 

Federal and state courts have already rejected lawsuits challenging the legality of the Zuckerberg grants, they were perfectly legal. :?

 

You maintain your "suckered" status for another day :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SheffieldBricky said:

That all just show bias, and a little bit of a dubious character. If you dismiss relatives complaining about their dementia ridden relatives having their votes stolen then I'm afraid you're corrupt.

 

The judge was a supreme court judge. Even if he's retired he's still referred to as a judge. It's not a republican report. It's about election fraud, that effects everyone. 

 

You're corrupted by Trump Derangement Syndrome and unfortunately it's uncurable, even when faced with ill elderly victims.

And you're corrupted by Trump. He says jump, you say how high.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.