Big D vs Twitter
- Thread starter Mors
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
If he is inciting violence it's a crime, and if he is doing it across multiple states it's a federal crime. The question is why doesn't he make a complaint to ensure that it stops? That's what I would do, instead of whining like a bitch for someone to please think of the children.
Do you have any actual evidence that proves there is no evidence of voter fraud?
I have no evidence you’re not Greta Thunberg or that your actual vocation in life doesn’t involve dressing as a clown and making balloon animals and braiding children’s hair at parties.
I’m happy to sign an affidavit that I saw you perfect a balloon sausage dog at a 5 year olds birthday party last year.
I’m pretty sure if I ask around - there’ll be a few people in this thread that could attest to your hair-platting skills.
From now on we can call you “Dantes The Clown” until such point as you can categorically prove you have never appeared in costume and entertained at a children’s party.
Or that your not a 16yo female climate warrior from Sweden.
A simple 'no' would have sufficed.
Which side is winning in the “whining like a bitch” stakes?
Trump said there was fraud, he's then gathered witnesses, gathered data, employed lawyers and analysts, and whistleblowers, court cases, hearings before senators, statistical anomalies, paper trails. That's no longer whining, he's gone and done something about it. The other side are repeatedly saying to stop it, stop doing that, stop, think of the children, we need unity wah wah wah. That's whining. If Trump was a dick, he could just say "go on then, make me..." and there'd be zero action to make him stop. So it's pure whining.
Wait.... you didn’t deny that you are Greta or are a professional hair braider????
The plot thickens......
Neither did I confirm it. The plot thins...
Ok lads... the way forward is clear :
Sign up if you “believe” Dantes is a professional hair braider and balloon animal artist.
Let’s see if he whines against our whistleblowing analysis - chuck Ross a few chicken nuggies... as long as he gets paid he’ll be our lawyer.
Pretty soon we’ll have access to Dantes complete records- we’ll find some evidence of an ofense of some sort... probably in his dungeon...
What else can we say... yesterday I’m certain I saw Dantes weaving a vegan-friendly, hessian Free Trade avocado holder bag - to sell to support his transgender Marxist badger support group (Membership : 1 - Mr D T Clown) using materials stolen from a publicly funded aged care craft project.
“Dantes the Clown” is stealing your taxes to personally financially benefit him and his Marxist revolutionary fundamentalists!!!!
Rabble.... rabble.... rabble... rabble!!!!
If it doesn’t work out... someone stick it on Qanon... give Woland some... uuuummmm... stimulants... and let him loose on Twitter... Ross will be starting threads on it in no time.
Boom... job done.
Hopefully Dantes will represent himself in court.... he’ll either be committed on his first appearance or our grand children might see the end of the case.
But I have ethidence!!!
*waves piece of paper”.
Affidavit stating someone saw you braiding hair.
Incontrovertible evidence... who knows what other crimes you’ve committed.... but let’s get access to everything... we’ll find something.
Certainly hope the court doesn’t say the claim has no merit... not that that matters or proves and disproves anything.
Their claim is for an injunction to stop the certification. Let's use something you'll understand better, like rape. When an underage girl is raped by a footballer, that footballer applies for an injunction to stop his name coming out. To win that claim, he needs to prove up front the irreparable damage it will do to him, and the court grants it. That has nothing to do with the rape being proven or not proven. So in this case, they are applying for injunctions to stop the election being certified, this is extremely hard to do because the court can't grant it to protect the irreparable harm to trump, without at the same time doing irreparable harm to biden. Therefore, to win this injunction claim, you need to basically prove fraud before having had the chance to investigate it. It'd be like the footballer having to prove he didn't rape the underage girl to get his injunction. You just don't get this because instead of listening to me, you listen to the news.
So trump will suffer irreparable harm. And like I was saying the other week, that harm will be litigated and paid for with financial compensation between one to four years from now, whenever their statute of limitations lasts until. Meanwhile the news are busy trying to jedi mind trick you into thinking it's nothing but whining. The rape analogy works here too. Imagine the girl goes to the station to say she has been raped. Imagine the officer then says "you have no ethidence you were raped, shut up, prove it, stop whining, where is your proof? If you were raped you'd have proof, there is no ethidence, you were not raped, get the fuck out of here". That's essentially the argument you are making when trump claims fraud.
My case for you being Greta is better than Trump’s for there being wide scale electoral fraud.
No, he's building a pretty decent case from my standpoint. Ultimately the raw data will settle the case the way DNA settles a rape case. So it doesn't matter how magnificent or how retarded the case he is building is, it will be totally meaningless and pale into obscurity when compared to the analysis of the voting data, which the news is calling a "full audit" probably in order to make it sound equivalent to a recount instead of equivalent to a DNA match.
Oh man.... read through what you’ve written - is that really where you’re at?
You should stick to graphs.
I didn't say anything about where I'm at. I was correcting your misconception about the court cases, and it appears it failed.
Your comprehension skills are lacking.
"to date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election."
There's a couple of important qualifiers in there.
1. He didn't say there was no fraud - just that the fraud they've already uncovered wouldn't change the election result.
2. Yet.
So to jump up and down and say there's no evidence of fraud you're either brainwashed or dumb.
There’s no misconception and your analogies (at best) as usual don’t stack up.
It’s a fishing exercise based on nonsense.
The AG Barr statement you linked above admits there was fraud, is that now nonsense?
To date we have not seen proof that the Loch Ness Monster does not exist!!!!
There’s where you are Ross.
For a supposedly smart guy - you’re not being particularly bright - and I’m increasingly worried about your mental health.
Ok Dantes you’re right - let’s stick with “we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election”.
You happy with that?
So with that full statement, is where you are at "stop it, think of the children, and just stop now for the love of god, stop looking for and talking about fraud" or is it "hmm let me wait until the vote data is analysed, and in the meantime I'll pay more attention to the analysis of the publicly available vote data which the autistics scraped off websites".
Similar threads
