We brought Black Africans here slaves, against their will and forced them to to do our work, unpaid for 280 years. They were made to take part in the building of America's greatness. It's now 155 years since emancipation. Yet they are still belittled and humiliated as inferiors. And yes, often killed unujustifiably officers who are supposed to be fairly enforcing the law. his country owes them help for a period of time, at least as long as they were enslaved .... Another 125 years.Cannonpointer » 27 Oct 2020, 6:44 pm » wrote: ↑
You can't have it both ways. If ****** are, as you insist, still beset IN SPITE OF generations of welfare money, section 8 rent money, food money, set asides, unearned positions in universities as "prefessors" and as "students," un-merited employment, etc., than they are some sorry, helpless, ineffective, substandard sons of *******.
We've had GENERATI0NS of giving them **** - and they've used the social safety net not as a springboard, but as a hammock. AND I DON'T BLAME THEM. People take what they're given in this life. But let's not be hypocrites and try to pretend that except in rare cases, the black race contributes anything more than crime and STDs to our society.
YOU YOURSELF treat them as the white man's burden, do you not?
Bobulinski IS the source, and he's provided mountains of evidence in the form of certified authentic documents, emails FROM HUNTER, text messages FROM HUNTER, the actual phones with the texts and emails FROM HUNTER, and SWORN TESTIMONY in the investigation. And at the same time you have the entire Biden campaign refusing to explain it. It's NOT sufficient to simply state that it's a "Russian distraction". Tell us how those conversations were placed on BOTH Hunter's laptop AS WELL AS on Bobulinski's phone, let's hear him deny those authenticated documents are really forgeries, challenge Bobulinski to take a lie detector test since they claim he's lying, and force Hunter to turn over all bank statements showing when and from where those huge payoffs took place and drag his druggie *** before a grand jury.
Every election for at least the past 16 years has been "the most important election in history" where we've been "one election away from losing the country."omh » 06 Nov 2020, 8:46 am » wrote: ↑ha ha ha ha ha so you are other peoples' scripted character serving humanity until extinction rather than spending your time being honest about limited to occupying space as mutually timed apart now since conceived to decomposed corpse?
Corrupted after birth corrupting your children after becoming 1 of 2 parents, 1 of 4 grandparents, 1 of 8 great grandparents expecting reality to change next generation of your great great grandchildren sustaining the populaiton from there forward mutually evolving now..
bludog » 07 Nov 2020, 2:16 am » wrote: ↑
As a result of a second Trump term, more people will die than under Stalin and Hitler combined. Global Heating and a buildup of toxic air, land and water cannot be allowed to drastically increase.
Yesterday, Trump uttered the clearest measure of his insanity yet:--- He threatened that should he win, he would prosecute Biden and Obama as criminals, and they would end up in jail.
Older Guy Nov 06, 2020
Go to original post on Nov 01, 2020 10:37am
Termin8tor » 07 Nov 2020, 7:15 am » wrote: ↑
And Republicans did broadly very well, not losing one single state legislature and taking complete or partial control of a couple.
And likely picking up as many as 15 House seats, assuming some aren't stolen.
But amazingly, only Trump "lost."
But it ain't over til it's over.
Well, they certainly picked this one! Their hatred for Trump and their unified support of Biden that prevented them from doing their damn job and exposing Biden's criminal history, his lies, his racist history, the influence peddling, his obvious dementia, and his refusal to answer questions by locking himself in his basement for most of the campaign, all contributed to what is likely a razor thin victory. You can't tell me they would have permitted a Republican nominee, be it Trump or anyone else, to get away with all that without attacking him on so many of those issues. The question now is whether they will begin to do their job now that they've succeeded in getting rid of Trump.
After that “nonzero” answer, Diamond pressed the Trump campaign lawyer to be more explicit — and he suggestively invoked their standing with the bar: “I’m asking you as a member of the bar of this court: Are people representing the plaintiffs in the room?” The lawyer responded more directly: “Yes.” By the end of the hearing, Diamond invoked his right to make sure lawyers in his courtroom acted in good faith.Another Trump lawyer, Jonathan S. Goldstein, was also grilled by a Pennsylvania judge this week. Under questioning, he acknowledged that, contrary to Trump’s claims about rampant voter fraud, he wasn’t alleging fraud in the 592 ballots he sought to disqualify in Montgomery County, Pa.Again, Trump’s lawyer strained to avoid directly answering the question but was ultimately forced to acknowledge it:.At the city’s federal courthouse on Thursday evening, attorneys for Trump asked a judge to issue an emergency order to stop the count, alleging that all Republican observers had been barred.Under sharp questioning from Judge Paul S. Diamond, however, they conceded that Trump in fact had “a nonzero number of people in the room,” leaving Diamond audibly exasperated.“I’m sorry, then what’s your problem?” asked Diamond, who was appointed to the federal bench by President George W. Bush. Denying Trump’s request, Diamond struck a deal for 60 observers from each party to be allowed inside.At one point on Friday afternoon, 12 Republican observers and five Democrats were watching the count, according to a ballot counter who was working.
The Trump campaign also sought to temporarily stop counting some ballots in Detroit. It cited a GOP poll watcher who had said she had been told by an unidentified person that late mail ballots were being predated to before Election Day, so they would be considered valid.The judge repeatedly asserted this was hearsay, but Trump campaign lawyer Thor Hearne sought to argue that it wasn’t — despite it having been someone who said they heard about something they weren’t personally involved in. He pointed to a vague note the poll watcher produced — which said “entered receive date as 11/2/20 on 11/4/20” — as evidence:THE COURT: In your petition, which is right before me — and I read it several times — you don’t claim that any electors or the Board of the County were guilty of fraud, correct? That’s correct?GOLDSTEIN: Your Honor, accusing people of fraud is a pretty big step. And it is rare that I call somebody a liar, and I am not calling the Board of the [Democratic National Committee] or anybody else involved in this a liar. Everybody is coming to this with good faith. The DNC is coming with good faith. We’re all just trying to get an election done. We think these were a mistake, but we think they are a fatal mistake, and these ballots ought not be counted.THE COURT: I understand. I am asking you a specific question, and I am looking for a specific answer. Are you claiming that there is any fraud in connection with these 592 disputed ballots?GOLDSTEIN: To my knowledge at present, no.THE COURT: Are you claiming that there is any undue or improper influence upon the elector with respect to these 592 ballots?GOLDSTEIN: To my knowledge at present, no.
The two later returned to the point, after Stephens reviewed the note, and Stephens echoed Judge Diamond’s exasperation:TEPHENS: I’m still trying to understand why this isn’t hearsay.HEARNE: Well, it’s, it, I –STEPHENS: I absolutely understand what the affiant says she heard someone say to her. But the truth of the matter … that you’re going for was that there was an illegal act occurring. Because other than that I don’t know what its relevancy is.HEARNE: Right. I would say, Your Honor, in terms of the hearsay point, this is a firsthand factual statement made by Ms. Connarn, and she has made that statement based on her own firsthand physical evidence and knowledge --STEPHENS: “I heard somebody else say something.” Tell me why that’s not hearsay. Come on, now.HEARNE: Well it’s a firsthand statement of her physical –STEPHENS: It’s an out-of-court statement offered where the truth of the matter is [at-issue], right?STEPHENS: So I want to make sure I understand you. The affiant is not the person who had knowledge of this. Is that correct?HEARNE: The affiant had direct firsthand knowledge of the communication with the elections inspector and the document they provided them.STEPHENS: Okay, which is generally known as hearsay, right?HEARNE: I would not think that’s hearsay, Your Honor. That’s firsthand personal knowledge by the affiant of what she physically observed. And we included an exhibit which is a physical copy of the note that she was provided.
All over this forum Trump followers are whining about how the media doesn't get to call races.Termin8tor » 12 Nov 2020, 1:52 pm » wrote: ↑You're equating calling a state won by 2:1 with calling an entire country stolen from Trump?
Users browsing this forum: Buffalo, ConsRule, d1063n35, DeplorablePatriot, FOS, freeman, Goodgrief, Google Adsense [Bot], Google Feedfetcher, Ike Bana, Independent, jack, Jantje_Smit, jefftec, Jinn Martini, Makallbuks, Monderegal, Mrkelly, nefarious101, NEILCAR, Neo, Nostradamus' omh, PaperLi [Bot], roadkill, Semrush [Bot], SJConspirator, Steve Jobs [Bot], supraTruth4, Twitter [Bot], Vegas, walkingstick, Warcok, Xavier_Onassis, Yandex [Bot], Zeets2 and 1 guest