• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Big D vs Twitter

Dantes lives in the Trump echo chamber that has convinced itself that a few incredible people willing to say "i saw fraud" means that the election should be void. Dantes - surely you acknowledge that there are impartial judges looking at the claims and that they would take them forward it at all credible?
 
Dantes lives in the Trump echo chamber that has convinced itself that a few incredible people willing to say "i saw fraud" means that the election should be void. Dantes - surely you acknowledge that there are impartial judges looking at the claims and that they would take them forward it at all credible?

The people in that echo chamber don't understand the litigation, so attribute it to the crooked judges OAN narrative. The people in your echo chamber don't understand litigation, so attribute it to the no ethidence CNN media narrative. So I could tell the OAN people the judgements were not crooked, they... and then I'd be cut off and called a marxist. I could tell you the judgements were not findings of fact, they were.... and I'd be cut off and called a trumptard. So my choices are then to humiliate you for not understanding what you're talking about, and putting you back in your places far far far below me, it may enlighten you. Or I could just leave you all to it and await the bloodshed. I'm in the latter camp for now.

Either way there's far too many people presuming they're on my level. Y'all must have truly forgot.
 
The people in that echo chamber don't understand the litigation, so attribute it to the crooked judges OAN narrative. The people in your echo chamber don't understand litigation, so attribute it to the no ethidence CNN media narrative. So I could tell the OAN people the judgements were not crooked, they... and then I'd be cut off and called a marxist. I could tell you the judgements were not findings of fact, they were.... and I'd be cut off and called a trumptard. So my choices are then to humiliate you for not understanding what you're talking about, and putting you back in your places far far far below me, it may enlighten you. Or I could just leave you all to it and await the bloodshed. I'm in the latter camp for now.

Either way there's far too many people presuming they're on my level. Y'all must have truly forgot.

I'm not in an echo chamber son, the only commentary I'm following on this topic is this thread. You've had a lot of opportunity to enlighten people, and shared the sort of cheap content GOP bots are churning out. For someone of your intellect & calibre i'd expect more compelling info rather than speculation. Perhaps that is because as Trump's actual legal team are saying - there is no evidence.

Trump isn't conceding because his gullible supporters are funding his case and helping him clear some debts, buying time whilst he pardons his rotten team & family!!
 
I'm not in an echo chamber son, the only commentary I'm following on this topic is this thread. You've had a lot of opportunity to enlighten people, and shared the sort of cheap content GOP bots are churning out. For someone of your intellect & calibre i'd expect more compelling info rather than speculation. Perhaps that is because as Trump's actual legal team are saying - there is no evidence.

Trump isn't conceding because his gullible supporters are funding his case and helping him clear some debts, buying time whilst he pardons his rotten team & family!!

Yes they pleaded words to that effect in a court case. Do you understand why? No, of course you don't. Which is my point. You just understand the plain English words, like the people whose echo chamber you might as well be in, and take it as ethidence that there is no evidence. I have gone to great lengths to elevate some people's understanding from that plain english to the actual legal submissions. It failed. Or like I said, y'all forgot.
 
Dantes isn’t saying it, but he has admiration for the “Help your rightful President fight this injustice!!!! MAGA! ‘Merica, fuck yeah!” dollar drive, and won’t be surprised when Trump only rolls over when the money stream drys up - I reckon he’ll get close to a billion in donations. The problem with this is that it undermines some of the bleating on fairness and cheating.
 
Dantes isn’t saying it, but he has admiration for the “Help your rightful President fight this injustice!!!! MAGA! ‘Merica, fuck yeah!” dollar drive, and won’t be surprised when Trump only rolls over when the money stream drys up - I reckon he’ll get close to a billion in donations. The problem with this is that it undermines some of the bleating on fairness and cheating.

No, you're not listening to what I'm saying. The cheating is an objective fact one way or another. Nothing undermines it. The problem is you are turning it into a subjective debate, then using your feelings to undermine something that you think is up for debate. I despite that way of thinking.

What I admire about the maga lot is their patriotism. But I don't factor in that admiration into the objective consequences of taxes and tariffs. I couldn't give a shit how patriotic they were if the tariffs were net harmful, in that event I'd be telling them get fucked rather than you. The only recent thing that I've come to admire is the us constitution, and the role it plays in assisting capitalism. I assumed it was just another part of the law without really seeing it in action before now. So this is new to me, I admire it, and it makes sense of why the us economy has outperformed other capitalist economies.
 
Presume you weren't as bothered then as you got the result your investment portfolio benefits the most from? Or can you point us to the thread where you endlessly looked for evidence of fraud?
I think it's filed under the same section as voter suppression.
 
Presume you weren't as bothered then as you got the result your investment portfolio benefits the most from? Or can you point us to the thread where you endlessly looked for evidence of fraud?

I was definitely bothered as I'd have made a lot more had I just been long everything, instead of hedging out the election risk. The polls and fake news that had Hilary winning comfortably cost me profits. You're damn right I don't forgive these things.
 
I think it's filed under the same section as voter suppression.

Yes, I laid it out with the crystal maze analogy a few pages back. Alas here we are again pretending y'all forgot and trying to pick fault with my brain as if that could ever work. I'm awaiting Hansern to furnish us with his logical explanation of the fraud video, at least he for one seems to have acknowledged it exists and/or watched it, so progress.
 
Yes, I laid it out with the crystal maze analogy a few pages back. Alas here we are again pretending y'all forgot and trying to pick fault with my brain as if that could ever work. I'm awaiting Hansern to furnish us with his logical explanation of the fraud video, at least he for one seems to have acknowledged it exists and/or watched it, so progress.
Were you crowing about voter suppression before the election?
 
Oooh oooh. I know this one. The answer is “absofuckinglutely not”.

Also Gerrymandering and packing the courts is just the rules of the game
The Gerrymandering in the States is shocking. The Reps and Dems have it rigged so effectively that there's no chance another party can really break in to their system.
 
It's interesting that the huge Biden spike happens immediately after the CCTV video of the boxes of ballots being pulled out behind closed doors.

cnse06gle6361.jpg
 
It's interesting that the huge Biden spike happens immediately after the CCTV video of the boxes of ballots being pulled out behind closed doors.

cnse06gle6361.jpg

Sorry to say that theory has been debunked since I linked the tweets. The right wing media didn't bother to show you the questions which followed, from the only senator in that hearing with critical reasoning skills it seems. You can see the moment the lawyer was left utterly speechless after being caught out on her lies.

 
Did you even check the source of the original story?

Source? It was mentioned on twitter. I went to the live stream of the hearing, skipped to the CCTV part, then watched it. So, my eyes would be the source. Been a couple of years since they were checked.
 
Source? It was mentioned on twitter. I went to the live stream of the hearing, skipped to the CCTV part, then watched it. So, my eyes would be the source. Been a couple of years since they were checked.
Not talking about the hearing.. talking about the original story that was reported on the most upstanding news network of them all. Right behind North Korea state TV and RT.
 
Back
Top Bottom