January 6th Protest/Stolen Election Thread (Was: Trump Nuts Storm the Capitol)

[necronomous]

Its already been done, in hundreds of cases, by professionals smarter than you.

Goalposts, shifted. Yet another shocking move by the hack.

Oh just say you can't answer. That's easier.

If you want to argue against facts, then you're going to have to try harder. But I don't blame you for losing your nerve.

You've argued no facts at all. Your arguments have been nu uh, look at this pic, and the courts never lie. So, your arguments are shit.

[CHEEZY17]

Its already been done, in hundreds of cases, by professionals smarter than you.

Goalposts, shifted. Yet another shocking move by the hack.

Oh just say you can't answer. That's easier.

If you want to argue against facts, then you're going to have to try harder. But I don't blame you for losing your nerve.

Nope. Your whole argument is "the facts of that day" and "the definition". Both of those things are known and have been evaluated by people smarter than you over hundreds of cases and each and every time they decided insurrection didnt fit. Once again it is YOU that needs to explain why the experts are wrong and you are right. Failing that bud, youre just pissing in the wind. Hey, if thats your thing then so be it but always remember that WE are on the same side as the United States Justice Department and you are not.

[Antknot]

[dot]

You've argued no facts at all. Your arguments have been nu uh, look at this pic, and the courts never lie. So, your arguments are shit.

You're the one who pretended because one picture exists it cancelled out documented violence. Weak af.

Nope. Your whole argument is "the facts of that day" and "the definition".

Which ultimately you can't argue against which is why you have yet to even try. Hack is still a hack.

[necronomous]

You've argued no facts at all. Your arguments have been nu uh, look at this pic, and the courts never lie. So, your arguments are shit.

You're the one who pretended because one picture exists it cancelled out documented violence. Weak af.

Nope. Your whole argument is "the facts of that day" and "the definition".

Which ultimately you can't argue against which is why you have yet to even try. Hack is still a hack.

THAT NO ONE WAS CHARGED WITH. So evidence of what? Not a goddamn thing. They are either negligent in their duties or what they are claiming occurred never did. If they committed treason fucking lock the bastards up. Otherwise, you're full of shit and so are they.

[CHEEZY17]

You've argued no facts at all. Your arguments have been nu uh, look at this pic, and the courts never lie. So, your arguments are shit.

You're the one who pretended because one picture exists it cancelled out documented violence. Weak af.

Nope. Your whole argument is "the facts of that day" and "the definition".

Which ultimately you can't argue against which is why you have yet to even try. Hack is still a hack.

I dont need to try because its already been done by people smarter than you. I am not a lawyer so its better suited to have people who actually know and understand the law argue the "facts of that day". They did that for 3 years and decided in every single case that insurrection didnt fit. Thats the bottom line home school.

[dot]

THAT NO ONE WAS CHARGED WITH. So evidence of what? Not a goddamn thing. They are either negligent in their duties or what they are claiming occurred never did. If they committed treason fucking lock the bastards up. Otherwise, you're full of shit and so are they.

Subpoenas were disobeyed. According to you, that means without charges, that didn't happen. Except we know it happened, therefore your argument is weak and that's why you can't prove it wasn't an insurrection. Otherwise, you'd have done it already.

I dont need to try because its already been done by people smarter than you.

Translation, hack can't back up what he says. Whether that's Joe Biden being corrupt, January 6 not being an insurrection, cultist hack is going to be a cultist hack.

[CHEEZY17]

THAT NO ONE WAS CHARGED WITH. So evidence of what? Not a goddamn thing. They are either negligent in their duties or what they are claiming occurred never did. If they committed treason fucking lock the bastards up. Otherwise, you're full of shit and so are they.

Subpoenas were disobeyed. According to you, that means without charges, that didn't happen. Except we know it happened, therefore your argument is weak and that's why you can't prove it wasn't an insurrection. Otherwise, you'd have done it already.

I dont need to try because its already been done by people smarter than you.

Translation, hack can't back up what he says. Whether that's Joe Biden being corrupt, January 6 not being an insurrection, cultist hack is going to be a cultist hack.

Except it's already "backed up" by the literally hundreds of cases of "not insurrection".

[dot]

Except it's already "backed up" by the literally hundreds of cases of "not insurrection".

Hack shifting the goalposts to avoid the reality of what was incited, what was committed. Nothing changes, hack can't prove January 6 wasn't an insurrection so he relies on never engaging on the subject. Hack does hack things.

[necronomous]

THAT NO ONE WAS CHARGED WITH. So evidence of what? Not a goddamn thing. They are either negligent in their duties or what they are claiming occurred never did. If they committed treason fucking lock the bastards up. Otherwise, you're full of shit and so are they.

Subpoenas were disobeyed. According to you, that means without charges, that didn't happen. Except we know it happened, therefore your argument is weak and that's why you can't prove it wasn't an insurrection. Otherwise, you'd have done it already.

I dont need to try because its already been done by people smarter than you.

Translation, hack can't back up what he says. Whether that's Joe Biden being corrupt, January 6 not being an insurrection, cultist hack is going to be a cultist hack.

Lol. You can mental gymnastics all you want but the people in jail aren't in jail for treason. And they certainly didn't ignore a subpoena. Again, people are either not doing their job, or there was no treason/insurrection, not both.

[CHEEZY17]

Except it's already "backed up" by the literally hundreds of cases of "not insurrection".

Hack shifting the goalposts to avoid the reality of what was incited, what was committed. Nothing changes, hack can't prove January 6 wasn't an insurrection so he relies on never engaging on the subject. Hack does hack things.

I dont need to "shift the goalposts" as there is literally an entire Government Justice Department tasked with investigating and determining crimes. This department filled with lawyers and legal experts took all of the same evidence (the facts of that day) that YOU claim is undeniable and rock solid and decided insurrection was not the correct fit. Not just once or twice but hundreds of times. The legal professionals that are smarter than you have already made their determination regarding "the facts of that day". Until you can explain WHY your conclusion is right and the conclusions of the legal professionals are wrong you are just pissing in the wind.
Never forget that YOU are on the opposite side of the legal professionals and we are not.

[dot]

Lol. You can mental gymnastics all you want but the people in jail aren't in jail for treason. And they certainly didn't ignore a subpoena. Again, people are either not doing their job, or there was no treason/insurrection, not both.

It's mental gymnastics now to identify actions as defined in the dictionary? Visual evidence to the contrary of your apologist's excuse? Lawful subpoenas were not defied? As proven, your arguments are weak because they're not based on facts. Try harder, Red. Pretend it's a Democrat that did all this instead of a Republican. Maybe then you'll find the motivation you need.

I dont need to "shift the goalposts"

You say that and yet you do, every single time. Like now. Either it was or it was not an insurrection. Definition fits, the actions taken fit, but you expect that to be thrown out because charges were not filed and because you don't like those facts. Well charges weren't filed on those subpoenas either and yet we both know they were still defied. Man up and accept responsibility for what you voted for and will again. Facts don't care about your feelings. Hack does hack things.

[necronomous]

Lol. You can mental gymnastics all you want but the people in jail aren't in jail for treason. And they certainly didn't ignore a subpoena. Again, people are either not doing their job, or there was no treason/insurrection, not both.

It's mental gymnastics now to identify actions as defined in the dictionary? Visual evidence to the contrary of your apologist's excuse? Lawful subpoenas were not defied? As proven, your arguments are weak because they're not based on facts. Try harder, Red. Pretend it's a Democrat that did all this instead of a Republican. Maybe then you'll find the motivation you need.

I dont need to "shift the goalposts"

You say that and yet you do, every single time. Like now. Either it was or it was not an insurrection. Definition fits, the actions taken fit, but you expect that to be thrown out because charges were not filed and because you don't like those facts. Well charges weren't filed on those subpoenas either and yet we both know they were still defied. Man up and accept responsibility for what you voted for and will again. Facts don't care about your feelings. Hack does hack things.

Your Dunning/Kruger effect levels are off the charts

[Animal]

Lol. You can mental gymnastics all you want but the people in jail aren't in jail for treason. And they certainly didn't ignore a subpoena. Again, people are either not doing their job, or there was no treason/insurrection, not both.

It's mental gymnastics now to identify actions as defined in the dictionary? Visual evidence to the contrary of your apologist's excuse? Lawful subpoenas were not defied? As proven, your arguments are weak because they're not based on facts. Try harder, Red. Pretend it's a Democrat that did all this instead of a Republican. Maybe then you'll find the motivation you need.

I dont need to "shift the goalposts"

You say that and yet you do, every single time. Like now. Either it was or it was not an insurrection. Definition fits, the actions taken fit, but you expect that to be thrown out because charges were not filed and because you don't like those facts. Well charges weren't filed on those subpoenas either and yet we both know they were still defied. Man up and accept responsibility for what you voted for and will again. Facts don't care about your feelings. Hack does hack things.

We know that Hillary paid for the Russian dossier and no charges were filed. Can we count that too?

[dot]

Your Dunning/Kruger effect levels are off the charts

Is this your way of sidestepping the fact that you can't prove your claims? Too difficult for ya? And to think, you had a lot of time to try and do the work but still rely on your shtick to get by.

We know that Hillary paid for the Russian dossier and no charges were filed. Can we count that too?

Deflection and refusal to prove the apologist's claim is noted. You can still try, but it's pretty clear you won't ever come that close again to putting in effort.

[necronomous]

Your Dunning/Kruger effect levels are off the charts

Is this your way of sidestepping the fact that you can't prove your claims? Too difficult for ya? And to think, you had a lot of time to try and do the work but still rely on your shtick to get by.

We know that Hillary paid for the Russian dossier and no charges were filed. Can we count that too?

Deflection and refusal to prove the apologist's claim is noted. You can still try, but it's pretty clear you won't ever come that close again to putting in effort.

No I have already proven my point and you can't understand it so you're stupid and this is the outcome of that.

[dot]

No I have already proven my point and you can't understand it so you're stupid and this is the outcome of that.

If your point is that there was no insurrection despite investigations, fact finding, court decisions, the dictionary itself all proving the counter to your claim, then it's clear that you're the one too stupid to accept reality. Which kinda holds true since that's exactly what a red cultist would think. Carry on making a fool of yourself.

[necronomous]

No I have already proven my point and you can't understand it so you're stupid and this is the outcome of that.

If your point is that there was no insurrection despite investigations, fact finding, court decisions, the dictionary itself all proving the counter to your claim, then it's clear that you're the one too stupid to accept reality. Which kinda holds true since that's exactly what a red cultist would think. Carry on making a fool of yourself.

Except no one found guilty of it. Neat.

[Animal]

We know that Hillary paid for the Russian dossier and no charges were filed. Can we count that too?

Deflection and refusal to prove the apologist's claim is noted. You can still try, but it's pretty clear you won't ever come that close again to putting in effort.

So, if Hillary paid for the Russian dossier that tried to tie Trump to the Russians and she labeled those payments as "campaign legal fees", which she has admitted to when she agreed to pay the fine to the Federal Election Committee, then aren't those pretty much the exact same type of charges and crimes that they just prosecuted Trump over? I mean, wanting to keep a prostitutes mouth shut seems much less invasive to influencing voters than attempting to make a candidate look like he was in bed with the Russians.

Wouldn't you agree?

[CHEEZY17]

Lol. You can mental gymnastics all you want but the people in jail aren't in jail for treason. And they certainly didn't ignore a subpoena. Again, people are either not doing their job, or there was no treason/insurrection, not both.

It's mental gymnastics now to identify actions as defined in the dictionary? Visual evidence to the contrary of your apologist's excuse? Lawful subpoenas were not defied? As proven, your arguments are weak because they're not based on facts. Try harder, Red. Pretend it's a Democrat that did all this instead of a Republican. Maybe then you'll find the motivation you need.

I dont need to "shift the goalposts"

You say that and yet you do, every single time. Like now. Either it was or it was not an insurrection. Definition fits, the actions taken fit, but you expect that to be thrown out because charges were not filed and because you don't like those facts. Well charges weren't filed on those subpoenas either and yet we both know they were still defied. Man up and accept responsibility for what you voted for and will again. Facts don't care about your feelings. Hack does hack things.

Until you can explain WHY you are right and the experts are wrong youre just pissing in the wind. Never forget that it is YOU that is on the opposite side of the legal experts here.