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

[CHEEZY17]

Actual Fascism in the FBI is thwarted.

Ex-Agent Who Criticized F.B.I. to Congress Has Security Clearance Reinstated
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/04/us/p ... jan-6.html

“I was not in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, played no part in the events of Jan. 6, and I condemn all criminal activity that occurred,” he testified. “Instead, it appears that I was retaliated against because I forwarded information to my superiors and others that questioned the official narrative of the events of Jan. 6.”

FBI Whistleblower Marcus Allen Vindicated: Security Clearance Reinstated, Full Back Pay Awarded
https://redstate.com/smoosieq/2024/06/0 ... d-n2175127

[dot]

No one is running.

And not a single thing was refuted. Kinda puts the whole not running thing in doubt if you can't prove your claims.

I will always be right here to counter your bullshit.

Except you didn't counter a single thing. You've in fact refused to do so on multiple occasions.

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.

8 things. And you can't refute a single one. Let's see how many you ignore.

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.

Except that isn't the case, because you continue to ignore how your cultist arguments and Do you know that I'm a fag? True Story!'s excuses have been discredited across the board. Facts 1, 2, 6, 7, 8.

Here, once again, is all of the evidence that the investigative committee has accumulated so far:

And yet again, failure to acknowledge and admit corruption case fell apart before our very eyes, yours included. Facts 3 and 5. Next?

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.

And yet again, failure to acknowledge and admit your bought and paid for pundit said on live television that the evidence did not amount to the proof of corruption that you had been claiming for months that it had been. And now that it has fallen apart thanks to it being based on Russian intelligence fed disinformation, yet another failure to acknowledge your case for corruption fell apart in full view of us all. Fact #4.

Now about growing some balls

Still waiting for you to do that. Lemme know when you can begin to refute any of the items on that list. Hack still does hack things.

[CHEEZY17]

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?
In essence you are saying that you understand the "facts of that day" better than the United States Justice Department.

[dot]

Do you understand that

You will never acknowledge any of those facts that you're terrified of? Cause you just did it again. Yes, I understand that very well, you've made it abundantly clear you will not go near anything that shatters your preconceived conclusion. Hack does hack things.

[CHEEZY17]

Do you understand that

You will never acknowledge any of those facts that you're terrified of? Cause you just did it again. Yes, I understand that very well, you've made it abundantly clear you will not go near anything that shatters your preconceived conclusion. Hack does hack things.

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?
In essence you are saying that you understand the "facts of that day" better than the United States Justice Department.

[dot]

Do you understand that

You will never acknowledge any of those facts that you're terrified of? Cause you just did it again. Yes, I understand that very well, you've made it abundantly clear you will not go near anything that shatters your preconceived conclusion. Hack does hack things.

[CHEEZY17]

Do you understand that

You will never acknowledge any of those facts that you're terrified of? Cause you just did it again. Yes, I understand that very well, you've made it abundantly clear you will not go near anything that shatters your preconceived conclusion. Hack does hack things.

Dodgin' Dot is back!

[dot]

You ran again. Hack did hack things.

[necronomous]

Do you understand that

You will never acknowledge any of those facts that you're terrified of? Cause you just did it again. Yes, I understand that very well, you've made it abundantly clear you will not go near anything that shatters your preconceived conclusion. Hack does hack things.

Dodgin' Dot is back!

No matter how many times we prove him wrong he will never admit it. He knows he's wrong and has no proof. Just trolling for attention. He came back to get another fix.

[CHEEZY17]

You ran again. Hack did hack things.

Since I agree with the United States Justice Department that means they must be hacks too.
For you to be right 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?
In essence you are saying that you understand the "facts of that day" better than the United States Justice Department.
Until you can explain why you are right and the Justice Department is wrong youre just pissing in the wind. Your opinion on the matter means diddly squat. They are legal professionals that examine and evaluate evidence for a living while you are a retard on the interweb. You hate that and deep down you know that your opinion means diddly squat as you also know that the only people that matter have already determined what that day was; and that determination was "not insurrection".
If they agreed with you and thought the "facts of the day" supported your claim they would have proceeded on that route. Unfortunately for you they did not and decided literally hundreds of times that your determination is incorrect. Seethe harder, retard.
Why are they wrong and you are right? Clock is ticking! Tick tock!

[necronomous]

You ran again. Hack did hack things.

Since I agree with the United States Justice Department that means they must be hacks too.
For you to be right 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?
In essence you are saying that you understand the "facts of that day" better than the United States Justice Department.
Until you can explain why you are right and the Justice Department is wrong youre just pissing in the wind. Your opinion on the matter means diddly squat. They are legal professionals that examine and evaluate evidence for a living while you are a retard on the interweb. You hate that and deep down you know that your opinion means diddly squat as you also know that the only people that matter have already determined what that day was; and that determination was "not insurrection".
If they agreed with you and thought the "facts of the day" supported your claim they would have proceeded on that route. Unfortunately for you they did not and decided literally hundreds of times that your determination is incorrect. Seethe harder, retard.
Why are they wrong and you are right? Clock is ticking! Tick tock!

If dot is doing nothing else, he is calling the prosecutors incompetent and traitors for not securing guilty verdicts for people "committed" treason. I guess that's the only other alternative.

[dot]

No matter how many times we prove him wrong he will never admit it. He knows he's wrong and has no proof. Just trolling for attention. He came back to get another fix.

Sorry, but I must've missed where you proved fraud isn't fraud or insurrection isn't insurrection. Since you did neither of those things, looks like you've opted for projection again.

You ran again. Hack did hack things.

If dot is doing nothing else, he is calling the prosecutors incompetent and traitors for not securing guilty verdicts for people "committed" treason. I guess that's the only other alternative.

Says the guy that proclaims fraud isn't fraud but can't prove his claim. Just because you didn't have the courage to prove your assertion that insurrection isn't insurrection doesn't mean I didn't already do my part. You're more than welcome to try but like the hack, you have yet to do so because the only thing any cultist wants to do is move the goalposts and argue anything but what January 6 was. The argument has never changed, despite the cult's many attempts. Not my fault they're unwilling to deal with reality, just like you, Red.

[CHEEZY17]

Even Left Wing rag Daily Beast has to admit the truth

FBI Has Found No Evidence Trump or Allies Organized Capitol Riot, Says Report
‘NO GRAND SCHEME’
https://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-has-f ... ays-report

[necronomous]

No matter how many times we prove him wrong he will never admit it. He knows he's wrong and has no proof. Just trolling for attention. He came back to get another fix.

Sorry, but I must've missed where you proved fraud isn't fraud or insurrection isn't insurrection. Since you did neither of those things, looks like you've opted for projection again.

You ran again. Hack did hack things.

If dot is doing nothing else, he is calling the prosecutors incompetent and traitors for not securing guilty verdicts for people "committed" treason. I guess that's the only other alternative.

Says the guy that proclaims fraud isn't fraud but can't prove his claim. Just because you didn't have the courage to prove your assertion that insurrection isn't insurrection doesn't mean I didn't already do my part. You're more than welcome to try but like the hack, you have yet to do so because the only thing any cultist wants to do is move the goalposts and argue anything but what January 6 was. The argument has never changed, despite the cult's many attempts. Not my fault they're unwilling to deal with reality, just like you, Red.

Fraud is fraud and insurrection is insurrection. No one has denied that. But none of what any of them have done is either of those. And you havent proved they have. You've proves people said they have, and that is useless. Jane goodall can say you blow monkeys. According to you that makes it true.

I won't even say you've moved goalposts. You would actually have to make a valid argument that need the goalposts moved to do that. You're a fucking moron that claims their right with no actual person agreeing with you in any meaningful way except for hopeful wishes.

You also completely dodge the idea that the prosecutors are failing their job for not prosecuting people doing what you say they are doing. If I agreed that people committed treason, not following through and convicting those people, they themselves are committing acts of treason and should also be convicted. You are agreeing that this is fine. So you are agreeing with treasonous assholes.

[dot]

Fraud is fraud and insurrection is insurrection. No one has denied that.

You have. Repeatedly. Bad faith, disingenuous. Not a good start for you, Red.

But none of what any of them have done is either of those.

Verdicts and rulings would prove you wrong.

And you havent proved they have.

Fraud was proven for me by New York, multiple times over in the span of several years in multiple cases. Insurrection more recent, by my reasoning and court decisions. Next?

You've proves people said they have, and that is useless. Jane goodall can say you blow monkeys. According to you that makes it true.

Verdicts, judicial decisions, investigations, fact finding, the dictionary. Meanwhile, you have... nothing. Because when challenged, you couldn't even man up and prove your assertion on either front. So if anyone's blowing monkeys, it's you. Weird fetish, Red.

I won't even say you've moved goalposts. You would actually have to make a valid argument that need the goalposts moved to do that. You're a fucking moron that claims their right with no actual person agreeing with you in any meaningful way except for hopeful wishes.

Because I haven't moved any goalposts. I'm still where I started months ago. It's you guys that won't argue those facts because they aren't on your side, and worst part for you is, you know it.

You also completely dodge the

Goalpost moving? Yes, that's the point. Anytime y'all want to change the argument, I'm going to discard it. The argument at hand on January 6 is for y'all to prove it was not an insurrection, or that the word insurrection is incorrectly defined. Additional outstanding arguments for you is proving your assertion no fraud took place in New York for the usual suspects, your work is cut out for you there since you have guilty verdicts on that too.

[CHEEZY17]

I'll just keep misrepresenting, ignoring and deleting any points I dont like while simultaneously claiming no points have been made.

Yes, you prove that Every. Single. Time.

[dot]

Yes, you prove that Every. Single. Time.

Ignoring the facts, truth, reality of what you pushed and what got revealed counter to your claim is not going to change, hack. Your house of cards already collapsed, you pretending it didn't is just icing on the amusement cake to the rest of us now.

[necronomous]

Fraud is fraud and insurrection is insurrection. No one has denied that.

You have. Repeatedly. Bad faith, disingenuous. Not a good start for you, Red.

But none of what any of them have done is either of those.

Verdicts and rulings would prove you wrong.

And you havent proved they have.

Fraud was proven for me by New York, multiple times over in the span of several years in multiple cases. Insurrection more recent, by my reasoning and court decisions. Next?

You've proves people said they have, and that is useless. Jane goodall can say you blow monkeys. According to you that makes it true.

Verdicts, judicial decisions, investigations, fact finding, the dictionary. Meanwhile, you have... nothing. Because when challenged, you couldn't even man up and prove your assertion on either front. So if anyone's blowing monkeys, it's you. Weird fetish, Red.

I won't even say you've moved goalposts. You would actually have to make a valid argument that need the goalposts moved to do that. You're a fucking moron that claims their right with no actual person agreeing with you in any meaningful way except for hopeful wishes.

Because I haven't moved any goalposts. I'm still where I started months ago. It's you guys that won't argue those facts because they aren't on your side, and worst part for you is, you know it.

You also completely dodge the

Goalpost moving? Yes, that's the point. Anytime y'all want to change the argument, I'm going to discard it. The argument at hand on January 6 is for y'all to prove it was not an insurrection, or that the word insurrection is incorrectly defined. Additional outstanding arguments for you is proving your assertion no fraud took place in New York for the usual suspects, your work is cut out for you there since you have guilty verdicts on that too.

Holy dumpster fire you are. You've proved nothing. No one is convicted of anything you've stated. You want people to prove negatives which is impossible. Sad. Like I said, circles. I'm not going to change your mind because you're a delusional troll that knows they are wrong but would never admit it even with the tons of evidence proving you wrong. And I'm not going to change my mind because I'm not wrong, and I have logic. Have a good one.

[CHEEZY17]

Yes, you prove that Every. Single. Time.

Ignoring the facts, truth, reality of what you pushed and what got revealed counter to your claim is not going to change, hack. Your house of cards already collapsed, you pretending it didn't is just icing on the amusement cake to the rest of us now.

"The truth" is that people that are smarter than you have evaluated the exact same "facts of that day" that you have (and even more) and they came to the opposite conclusion that you did. That is factual and undeniable. Its the simple truth that you hate. That is why you continually delete and dodge this EVERY. SINGLE. TIME:
Why are they wrong and you are right?
You delete and dodge because you cant answer that question while every one of your supposed "points" has been addressed either by me or someone else ad nauseam.
Now, you'll delete and ignore the first part and only respond to the second part with your usual bullshit lie of "but you havent".
Your schtick is tired and worn.

[dot]

Holy dumpster fire you are. You've proved nothing. No one is convicted of anything you've stated.

Fraudster is convicted of fraud. You said he didn't commit any, you were wrong, proven so by multiple verdicts now. Projection yet again. Let's see what else you managed to bleat in complaint.

You want people to prove negatives which is impossible.

Wrong. I want people to prove their claims. With the hack, it was what's Joe Biden's crime and where is the evidence? He could provide neither but a predetermined conclusion, and then his hired pundit discredited his claims of evidence on live television. After that, the FBI revealed the source of his claims was a plant by foreign disinformation, which was so embarrassing for him that he can't even admit it. As for you, you've claimed multiple times that fraud isn't fraud and insurrection isn't insurrection. Despite your claims, you will do neither. It's not that proving negatives is impossible, it's that proving your claims was impossible which is why you gave up with a whimper.

Sad. Like I said, circles.

Projection, you did nothing but complain rather than prove your case. You've had ample time. The courage? Guess you're lacking. Good luck arguing against verdicts, Red.

"The truth" is that

You still won't acknowledge any of the reality and truth that shattered your talking points because your conclusion was determined before the facts were even known. You got duped by false information, and here you sit. Hack did hack things, deflection discarded.

[CHEEZY17]

All of the evidence accumulated so far is located right here:
https://oversight.house.gov/landing/bid ... stigation/

You can deny it all you want, retard, but that doesnt make it go away. Your false claims are false. The evidence still exists and despite your claim that it "all fell apart" its still very much together.
You act like because one lead didnt work out everything else disappeared. Sorry, retard but all of the other stuff is still there.
Even after you have been proven wrong multiple times about what Turley said you still keep claiming the same fucking thing. Because thats what retards do.
Here it is again:
"...Rep. Raskin (D., Md.) just stated that that I testified with other witnesses that "nothing would approach" an impeachable offense in this inquiry. That again is not true. I said the opposite. I stated that there was ample evidence for the inquiry and, if proven, the allegations would amount to impeachable offenses."
Seethe harder, retard.
Now, back to yet another question Dodgin' Dot refuses [cant] answer!
Why are the Justice Departments conclusion(s) regarding the evidence and "facts of that day" wrong and your conclusion is right?

[necronomous]

Holy dumpster fire you are. You've proved nothing. No one is convicted of anything you've stated.

Fraudster is convicted of fraud. You said he didn't commit any, you were wrong, proven so by multiple verdicts now. Projection yet again. Let's see what else you managed to bleat in complaint.

You want people to prove negatives which is impossible.

Wrong. I want people to prove their claims. With the hack, it was what's Joe Biden's crime and where is the evidence? He could provide neither but a predetermined conclusion, and then his hired pundit discredited his claims of evidence on live television. After that, the FBI revealed the source of his claims was a plant by foreign disinformation, which was so embarrassing for him that he can't even admit it. As for you, you've claimed multiple times that fraud isn't fraud and insurrection isn't insurrection. Despite your claims, you will do neither. It's not that proving negatives is impossible, it's that proving your claims was impossible which is why you gave up with a whimper.

Sad. Like I said, circles.

Projection, you did nothing but complain rather than prove your case. You've had ample time. The courage? Guess you're lacking. Good luck arguing against verdicts, Red.

"The truth" is that

You still won't acknowledge any of the reality and truth that shattered your talking points because your conclusion was determined before the facts were even known. You got duped by false information, and here you sit. Hack did hack things, deflection discarded.

You're wrong. There I proved it. That's all you're doing and all your evidence is. So apparently that's enough for you. You're wrong.

[CHEEZY17]

Holy dumpster fire you are. You've proved nothing. No one is convicted of anything you've stated.

Fraudster is convicted of fraud. You said he didn't commit any, you were wrong, proven so by multiple verdicts now. Projection yet again. Let's see what else you managed to bleat in complaint.

You want people to prove negatives which is impossible.

Wrong. I want people to prove their claims. With the hack, it was what's Joe Biden's crime and where is the evidence? He could provide neither but a predetermined conclusion, and then his hired pundit discredited his claims of evidence on live television. After that, the FBI revealed the source of his claims was a plant by foreign disinformation, which was so embarrassing for him that he can't even admit it. As for you, you've claimed multiple times that fraud isn't fraud and insurrection isn't insurrection. Despite your claims, you will do neither. It's not that proving negatives is impossible, it's that proving your claims was impossible which is why you gave up with a whimper.

Sad. Like I said, circles.

Projection, you did nothing but complain rather than prove your case. You've had ample time. The courage? Guess you're lacking. Good luck arguing against verdicts, Red.

"The truth" is that

You still won't acknowledge any of the reality and truth that shattered your talking points because your conclusion was determined before the facts were even known. You got duped by false information, and here you sit. Hack did hack things, deflection discarded.

You're wrong. There I proved it. That's all you're doing and all your evidence is. So apparently that's enough for you. You're wrong.

They're exactly the same! You know except for the part where the DOJ and FBI agree with us and disagree with Dodgin' Dot.

[necronomous]

Holy dumpster fire you are. You've proved nothing. No one is convicted of anything you've stated.

Fraudster is convicted of fraud. You said he didn't commit any, you were wrong, proven so by multiple verdicts now. Projection yet again. Let's see what else you managed to bleat in complaint.

You want people to prove negatives which is impossible.

Wrong. I want people to prove their claims. With the hack, it was what's Joe Biden's crime and where is the evidence? He could provide neither but a predetermined conclusion, and then his hired pundit discredited his claims of evidence on live television. After that, the FBI revealed the source of his claims was a plant by foreign disinformation, which was so embarrassing for him that he can't even admit it. As for you, you've claimed multiple times that fraud isn't fraud and insurrection isn't insurrection. Despite your claims, you will do neither. It's not that proving negatives is impossible, it's that proving your claims was impossible which is why you gave up with a whimper.

Sad. Like I said, circles.

Projection, you did nothing but complain rather than prove your case. You've had ample time. The courage? Guess you're lacking. Good luck arguing against verdicts, Red.

"The truth" is that

You still won't acknowledge any of the reality and truth that shattered your talking points because your conclusion was determined before the facts were even known. You got duped by false information, and here you sit. Hack did hack things, deflection discarded.

You're wrong. There I proved it. That's all you're doing and all your evidence is. So apparently that's enough for you. You're wrong.

They're exactly the same! You know except for the part where the DOJ and FBI agree with us and disagree with Dodgin' Dot.

Well pointing at the evidence does nothing

[dot]

All of the evidence

Zero acknowledgement of case being debunked, yet another line item you can't admit. Deflection discarded.

You're wrong. There I proved it. That's all you're doing and all your evidence is. So apparently that's enough for you. You're wrong.

Except my posts and proof are on the record here, which leaves you the one that has to prove your claim asserting fraud isn't fraud or insurrection isn't insurrection because you haven't done either of those yet. Try again, Red.

They're exactly the same! You know except for the part where the DOJ and FBI agree with us and disagree with Dodgin' Dot.

Charges filed will never be the argument, no matter how much you need to shift it to that, hack. Yet another line item you can't admit. Deflection discarded.

Well pointing at the evidence does nothing

You could start there, but neither of you have shown the balls to do that. Pick your subject, you have no shortage of claims to prove. Whether that's hack's claim of Joe Biden's corruption now debunked, or Red's claim that fraud isn't fraud. This back and forth clearly shows you won't go there on your apologist's claim about insurrection, but you also aren't keen on tackling the subjects where you have guilty verdicts to disprove too. Wouldn't want to be in either of your shoes given the side you chose to defend. Hack does hack things, and Both Sides™ doesn't apply where only one side is actively trying to usurp power over an election they lost leaving them to defend the convicted felon adjudicated rapist serial fraudster of a candidate they chose to blindly support.