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

[dot]

Its so obvious literally hundreds of people involved in January 6th have been prosecuted for "not insurrection"!
The only legal experts that matter dont agree with you retard.

And yet, you still cannot prove your Do you know that I'm a fag? True Story!'s claim that what happened was not an insurrection. This is what being the disingenuous hack you are has reduced you to, ignoring facts because your snowflake feelings are hurt being wrong time after time.

they admitted that they called the payments "legal fees". same thing, dumbass. If that was falsification for Trump, then its falsification for Hillary. You must agree, right?

Except you're still missing the parallel of falsification of business records in the first degree. See what I mean when I said you'd need to do your homework? Thanks for not disappointing.

.

[necronomous]

Except no one found guilty of it. Neat.

The investigations verdicts judgements and the dictionary, you know the things you ignored, prove you wrong. Try harder, you're still embarrassing yourself.

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.

Try again. Or are you still thinking you can Jedi mind trick away the insurrection existing with a picture?

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?

Bad faith arguments to avoid admitting the fact that your candidate is a convicted felon? Why am I not surprised? 34 counts of falsification of business records in the first degree, which is a felony in New York. Let me know when you can successfully make a case like that over Clinton. Hope you're ready to do homework for once.

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.

That's the thing, the experts judges and scholars are on my side. You got investigations and fact finding proving it was an insurrection, judges making that determination based on facts and evidence, and language scholars showing how January 6 is the literal definition of insurrection. So while you would like to pretend you have a leg to stand on, you forget that you literally can't prove your Do you know that I'm a fag? True Story!'s claim because the facts are not and have never been on your side to say nothing of the fact you're too much of a coward to even try. Now clean your pants, hack. You're covered in your own piss.

Oh so someone has been charged with insurrection/treason. Could you tell me who then.

[dot]

Oh so someone has been charged with insurrection/treason. Could you tell me who then.

And what we see here is yet another move to shift the argument. It's very telling when you can't argue the facts before you so you have to argue something else.

Either January 6 was or was not an insurrection. You have the definitions, the visual evidence, the investigations, the judicial decisions, the testimony, all of this is before you. At what point are you going to man up and accept reality that you chose to defend the indefensible?

[necronomous]

Oh so someone has been charged with insurrection/treason. Could you tell me who then.

And what we see here is yet another move to shift the argument. It's very telling when you can't argue the facts before you so you have to argue something else.

Either January 6 was or was not an insurrection. You have the definitions, the visual evidence, the investigations, the judicial decisions, the testimony, all of this is before you. At what point are you going to man up and accept reality that you chose to defend the indefensible?

What we have here is a failure to see the irony in their statement and a refusal to see that I agree with their statement. Either we do or we don't. And either we prosecute those traitors or the people who are suppose to prosecute are not doing their jobs......

Or there was no insurrection.

You're fucking stupid.

[dot]

What we have here is a failure to see the irony in their statement and a refusal to see that I agree with their statement. Either we do or we don't. And either we prosecute those traitors or the people who are suppose to prosecute are not doing their jobs......

Or there was no insurrection.

You're fucking stupid.

Says the guy refusing to accept the facts of what took place. Is there a reason you won't do the work of proving an insurrection did not take place? Is it because the definition of the word does not fit? Is it because you object to the facts as discovered by the investigators? It's real simple, charges filed is not the same as committing the crime. If you can't bring yourself to acknowledge the event as it happened, then it's clear you have no good faith participation the same as any other red cultist does. Can't say I'm surprised, your shtick was always very transparently fake.

[CHEEZY17]

Its so obvious literally hundreds of people involved in January 6th have been prosecuted for "not insurrection"!
The only legal experts that matter dont agree with you retard.

And yet, you still cannot prove your Do you know that I'm a fag? True Story!'s claim that what happened was not an insurrection. This is what being the disingenuous hack you are has reduced you to, ignoring facts because your snowflake feelings are hurt being wrong time after time.

they admitted that they called the payments "legal fees". same thing, dumbass. If that was falsification for Trump, then its falsification for Hillary. You must agree, right?

Except you're still missing the parallel of falsification of business records in the first degree. See what I mean when I said you'd need to do your homework? Thanks for not disappointing.

.

And once again: Until you can prove that your evaluation of "the facts of that day" are right and the only legal professionals opinions that matter are wrong, you are pissing in the wind. Either you are right and they are wrong or they are right and you are wrong: it cannot be both. Which is it? I'll side with the United States Justice Department and their determination. Never forget, retard, that YOU are on the opposite side of the only legal professionals that matter.

[dot]

And once again: Until you can prove that your evaluation of "the facts of that day" are right and the only legal professionals opinions that matter are wrong, you are pissing in the wind. Either you are right and they are wrong or they are right and you are wrong: it cannot be both. Which is it? I'll side with the United States Justice Department and their determination. Never forget, retard, that YOU are on the opposite side of the only legal professionals that matter.

That's the thing, the experts judges and scholars are on my side. You got investigations and fact finding proving it was an insurrection, judges making that determination based on facts and evidence, and language scholars showing how January 6 is the literal definition of insurrection. So while you would like to pretend you have a leg to stand on, you forget that you literally can't prove your Do you know that I'm a fag? True Story!'s claim because the facts are not and have never been on your side to say nothing of the fact you're too much of a coward to even try. Now clean your pants, hack. You're covered in your own piss.

[necronomous]

What we have here is a failure to see the irony in their statement and a refusal to see that I agree with their statement. Either we do or we don't. And either we prosecute those traitors or the people who are suppose to prosecute are not doing their jobs......

Or there was no insurrection.

You're fucking stupid.

Says the guy refusing to accept the facts of what took place. Is there a reason you won't do the work of proving an insurrection did not take place? Is it because the definition of the word does not fit? Is it because you object to the facts as discovered by the investigators? It's real simple, charges filed is not the same as committing the crime. If you can't bring yourself to acknowledge the event as it happened, then it's clear you have no good faith participation the same as any other red cultist does. Can't say I'm surprised, your shtick was always very transparently fake.

So the fact NO ONE is convicted of insurrection is not of consequence to you. Interesting that you don't want to hold anyone accountable. Ok

[dot]

So the fact NO ONE is convicted of insurrection is not of consequence to you. Interesting that you don't want to hold anyone accountable. Ok

The argument is whether January 6 was or was not an insurrection. Charges has not and will never change what occurred, see subpoenas defied. Red gonna tackle the question yet or still not brave enough?

[necronomous]

So the fact NO ONE is convicted of insurrection is not of consequence to you. Interesting that you don't want to hold anyone accountable. Ok

The argument is whether January 6 was or was not an insurrection. Charges has not and will never change what occurred, see subpoenas defied. Red gonna tackle the question yet or still not brave enough?

So all the people in jail that could be convicted are defying subpoenas?

[dot]

So all the people in jail that could be convicted are defying subpoenas?

Are you refusing to acknowledge that the people in Congress that defied subpoenas defied the subpoenas? Thanks for proving me right that you're being intentionally stupid.

[CHEEZY17]

And once again: Until you can prove that your evaluation of "the facts of that day" are right and the only legal professionals opinions that matter are wrong, you are pissing in the wind. Either you are right and they are wrong or they are right and you are wrong: it cannot be both. Which is it? I'll side with the United States Justice Department and their determination. Never forget, retard, that YOU are on the opposite side of the only legal professionals that matter.

That's the thing, the experts judges and scholars are on my side. You got investigations and fact finding proving it was an insurrection, judges making that determination based on facts and evidence, and language scholars showing how January 6 is the literal definition of insurrection. So while you would like to pretend you have a leg to stand on, you forget that you literally can't prove your Do you know that I'm a fag? True Story!'s claim because the facts are not and have never been on your side to say nothing of the fact you're too much of a coward to even try. Now clean your pants, hack. You're covered in your own piss.

Sorry, retard. Talking heads, Partisan Democrats and pundits dont count. The only people that have an opinion that actually matters on the subject is the United States Department of Justice and they decided, hundreds of times, that insurrection was not the right call. Either you are right and they are wrong or they are right and you are wrong: it cannot be both. Which is it? I'll side with the United States Justice Department and their determination. Never forget, retard, that YOU are on the opposite side of the only legal professionals that matter.

[necronomous]

So all the people in jail that could be convicted are defying subpoenas?

Are you refusing to acknowledge that the people in Congress that defied subpoenas defied the subpoenas? Thanks for proving me right that you're being intentionally stupid.

Are you saying that the people in jail that could be prosecuted for insurrection with all this so called proof you have but the people who should prosecute are in cahoots with the inserrectionists. Therefore, all the democrats with all this proof that refuse to convict anyone on the thing you say absolutely occurred with tons of evidence actually wanted the insurrection and they aren't prosecuting because it will lead back to them. That's an interesting take you have there.

[dot]

Sorry, retard. Talking heads, Partisan Democrats and pundits dont count.

Says the delusional disingenuous functionally retarded intellectually dishonest partisan hack Republican dupe, so you and your opinions are out. That's why I rely on facts.

Fact: You can't prove the insurrection was not an insurrection as you claimed, whether that's by facts on the ground or out of cowardice to even try.
Fact: You can't admit your boy's scheme to throw out over half the country's votes for his opponent and seize power illegally over an election he lost.
Fact: You can't prove Joe Biden is guilty of corruption despite months now years of insisting he is and claiming to have the proof of it.
Fact: You can't admit your bought and paid for legal pundit shot your corruption claim to pieces on live television.
Fact: You can't admit your case for corruption fell apart due to lack of evidence and foreign supplied disinformation.
Fact: You can't admit your criminal idol is guilty of 34 felonies for falsifying business records.
Fact: You can't admit he raped a woman and was found liable for that attack and defamation of his victim. Twice.
Fact: You can't admit he committed massive financial fraud to the tune of millions of dollars.

Let me know when you grow some balls and tackle just one of these things you continue to ignore. For the purposes of this thread, you're welcome to keep it to the insurrection, but I won't be surprised when you chicken out yet again.

Are you saying that the people in jail that could be prosecuted for insurrection with all this so called proof you have but the people who should prosecute are in cahoots with the inserrectionists.

Zero good faith, zero acknowledgement of reality. Your mask is slipping, Red.

[necronomous]

Sorry, retard. Talking heads, Partisan Democrats and pundits dont count.

Says the delusional disingenuous functionally retarded intellectually dishonest partisan hack Republican dupe, so you and your opinions are out. That's why I rely on facts.

Fact: You can't prove the insurrection was not an insurrection as you claimed, whether that's by facts on the ground or out of cowardice to even try.
Fact: You can't admit your boy's scheme to throw out over half the country's votes for his opponent and seize power illegally over an election he lost.
Fact: You can't prove Joe Biden is guilty of corruption despite months now years of insisting he is and claiming to have the proof of it.
Fact: You can't admit your bought and paid for legal pundit shot your corruption claim to pieces on live television.
Fact: You can't admit your case for corruption fell apart due to lack of evidence and foreign supplied disinformation.
Fact: You can't admit your criminal idol is guilty of 34 felonies for falsifying business records.
Fact: You can't admit he raped a woman and was found liable for that attack and defamation of his victim. Twice.
Fact: You can't admit he committed massive financial fraud to the tune of millions of dollars.

Let me know when you grow some balls and tackle just one of these things you continue to ignore. For the purposes of this thread, you're welcome to keep it to the insurrection, but I won't be surprised when you chicken out yet again.

Are you saying that the people in jail that could be prosecuted for insurrection with all this so called proof you have but the people who should prosecute are in cahoots with the inserrectionists.

Zero good faith, zero acknowledgement of reality. Your mask is slipping, Red.

I'm working with the logic you're giving me. Your logic then is not in good faith, because it's yours.

[dot]

I'm working with the logic you're giving me. Your logic then is not in good faith, because it's yours.

Except you're not, demonstrated several times alone today. Projection from ye, yet again.

Zero good faith, zero acknowledgement of reality. Your mask is slipping, Red.

[necronomous]

I'm working with the logic you're giving me. Your logic then is not in good faith, because it's yours.

Except you're not, demonstrated several times alone today. Projection from ye, yet again.

Zero good faith, zero acknowledgement of reality. Your mask is slipping, Red.

So you can't prove why they haven't yet. Got it.

[dot]

So you can't prove why they haven't yet. Got it.

My argument isn't about charges, it's about what was committed on that day. My premise is proven, your many Do you know that I'm a fag? True Story!'s claims remain unproven. Better get to work, Red.

[necronomous]

So you can't prove why they haven't yet. Got it.

My argument isn't about charges, it's about what was committed on that day. My premise is proven, your many Do you know that I'm a fag? True Story!'s claims remain unproven. Better get to work, Red.

Circles

[dot]

[CHEEZY17]

Sorry, retard. Talking heads, Partisan Democrats and pundits dont count.

Says the delusional disingenuous functionally retarded intellectually dishonest partisan hack Republican dupe, so you and your opinions are out. That's why I rely on facts.

Fact: You can't prove the insurrection was not an insurrection as you claimed, whether that's by facts on the ground or out of cowardice to even try.
Fact: You can't admit your boy's scheme to throw out over half the country's votes for his opponent and seize power illegally over an election he lost.
Fact: You can't prove Joe Biden is guilty of corruption despite months now years of insisting he is and claiming to have the proof of it.
Fact: You can't admit your bought and paid for legal pundit shot your corruption claim to pieces on live television.
Fact: You can't admit your case for corruption fell apart due to lack of evidence and foreign supplied disinformation.
Fact: You can't admit your criminal idol is guilty of 34 felonies for falsifying business records.
Fact: You can't admit he raped a woman and was found liable for that attack and defamation of his victim. Twice.
Fact: You can't admit he committed massive financial fraud to the tune of millions of dollars.

Let me know when you grow some balls and tackle just one of these things you continue to ignore. For the purposes of this thread, you're welcome to keep it to the insurrection, but I won't be surprised when you chicken out yet again.

Are you saying that the people in jail that could be prosecuted for insurrection with all this so called proof you have but the people who should prosecute are in cahoots with the inserrectionists.

Zero good faith, zero acknowledgement of reality. Your mask is slipping, Red.

The fact is that people smarter than you (the entire United States Justice Department) have literally evaluated the "facts of that day" or the "Facts on the ground" hundreds of times and concluded "Insurrection" didnt fit every single time. Either you are right and they are wrong or they are right and you are wrong: it cannot be both. Which is it? I'll side with the United States Justice Department and their determination. Never forget, retard, that YOU are on the opposite side of the only legal professionals that matter.
Which is it Dodgin' Dot?
I'll be happy to post all of the evidence against the Biden family again
https://oversight.house.gov/landing/bid ... stigation/

You dont like it but that wont make it go away.
Turley said the evidence warrants the continuation of the investigation. Why do you keep denying this?

So you have court documents or an official judgement of rape?
Seethe harder, retard.

[dot]

The fact is that

You will never admit that you can't argue against any of the things I just listed which is why you will always shift the goalposts to something else. Whether that's Turley's admission you got nothin', that you can't prove January 6 wasn't an insurrection, that you can't even admit the fake elector scheme to steal the election for your boy who lost. Hack does hack things.

[CHEEZY17]

The fact is that

You will never admit that you can't argue against any of the things I just listed which is why you will always shift the goalposts to something else. Whether that's Turley's admission you got nothin', that you can't prove January 6 wasn't an insurrection, that you can't even admit the fake elector scheme to steal the election for your boy who lost. Hack does hack things.

Either you are right and they are wrong or they are right and you are wrong: it cannot be both. Which is it? I'll side with the legal experts of the United States Justice Department and their determination. Never forget, retard, that YOU are on the opposite side of the only legal professionals that matter.

[dot]

Either you are right

Since you won't actually address things and continue to shift your goalposts:

You will never admit that you can't argue against any of the things I just listed which is why you will always shift the goalposts to something else. Whether that's Turley's admission you got nothin', that you can't prove January 6 wasn't an insurrection, that you can't even admit the fake elector scheme to steal the election for your boy who lost. Hack does hack things.

Says the delusional disingenuous functionally retarded intellectually dishonest partisan hack Republican dupe, so you and your opinions are out. That's why I rely on facts.

Fact: You can't prove the insurrection was not an insurrection as you claimed, whether that's by facts on the ground or out of cowardice to even try.
Fact: You can't admit your boy's scheme to throw out over half the country's votes for his opponent and seize power illegally over an election he lost.
Fact: You can't prove Joe Biden is guilty of corruption despite months now years of insisting he is and claiming to have the proof of it.
Fact: You can't admit your bought and paid for legal pundit shot your corruption claim to pieces on live television.
Fact: You can't admit your case for corruption fell apart due to lack of evidence and foreign supplied disinformation.
Fact: You can't admit your criminal idol is guilty of 34 felonies for falsifying business records.
Fact: You can't admit he raped a woman and was found liable for that attack and defamation of his victim. Twice.
Fact: You can't admit he committed massive financial fraud to the tune of millions of dollars.

Let me know when you grow some balls and tackle just one of these things you continue to ignore. For the purposes of this thread, you're welcome to keep it to the insurrection, but I won't be surprised when you chicken out yet again.

Keep runnin', hack.

[CHEEZY17]

Either you are right

Since you won't actually address things and continue to shift your goalposts:

You will never admit that you can't argue against any of the things I just listed which is why you will always shift the goalposts to something else. Whether that's Turley's admission you got nothin', that you can't prove January 6 wasn't an insurrection, that you can't even admit the fake elector scheme to steal the election for your boy who lost. Hack does hack things.

Says the delusional disingenuous functionally retarded intellectually dishonest partisan hack Republican dupe, so you and your opinions are out. That's why I rely on facts.

Fact: You can't prove the insurrection was not an insurrection as you claimed, whether that's by facts on the ground or out of cowardice to even try.
Fact: You can't admit your boy's scheme to throw out over half the country's votes for his opponent and seize power illegally over an election he lost.
Fact: You can't prove Joe Biden is guilty of corruption despite months now years of insisting he is and claiming to have the proof of it.
Fact: You can't admit your bought and paid for legal pundit shot your corruption claim to pieces on live television.
Fact: You can't admit your case for corruption fell apart due to lack of evidence and foreign supplied disinformation.
Fact: You can't admit your criminal idol is guilty of 34 felonies for falsifying business records.
Fact: You can't admit he raped a woman and was found liable for that attack and defamation of his victim. Twice.
Fact: You can't admit he committed massive financial fraud to the tune of millions of dollars.

Let me know when you grow some balls and tackle just one of these things you continue to ignore. For the purposes of this thread, you're welcome to keep it to the insurrection, but I won't be surprised when you chicken out yet again.

Keep runnin', hack.

No one is running. I will always be right here to counter your bullshit. Everything that you claim hasnt been "tackled" has basically been addressed multiple times (by numerous people) over the weeks and months; you just like to ignore or delete the responses because you dont like them and then claim, as you are right now, that they havent been addressed.
Here, once again, is all of the evidence that the investigative committee has accumulated so far:
https://oversight.house.gov/landing/bid ... stigation/
This accumulation includes even more evidence that has been obtained since legal scholar Jonathan Turley stated that there already was enough evidence to warrant the investigation months ago.
Now about growing some balls...do you have enough to answer the question presented to you multiple times already or are you just going to delete and ignore it yet again: Either you are right and they are wrong or they are right and you are wrong: it cannot be both. Which is it? I'll side with the United States Justice Department and their determination. Never forget, retard, that YOU are on the opposite side of the only legal professionals that matter. Do you understand that for you to be right that it means the United States Justice Department must be wrong? There is no other option as this is a completely binary scenario. If one of you is right; the other must be wrong.
Which is it Dodgin' Dot?