2020 Election Thread

[In2ition]

Hmmm.

https://www.vox.com/2021/2/16/22285460/ ... ment-trial

To be clear, the discrepancies on the tweets are legitimate errors, but they had absolutely no bearing on the actual content of the posts in question or the substance of the House managers’ case. And as an aide to the House managers explained after Schoen made light of these discrepancies, the errors happened because prosecutors had to recreate Trump’s tweets from scratch after his account was permanently suspended.

“The text is entirely unchanged,” the aide told The Hill. “The final graphic accidentally had a blue verification checkmark on it, but the substance of it was entirely accurate. So what is Trump’s attorneys’ point?”

The point, of course, was not to offer a substantive defense of Trump, but to try to discredit Democrats while giving people like van der Veen grist for performative outrage during TV hits. And to that end, mission accomplished.

I saw that article and laughed my @$$ off, as I knew you would cite it. Those wasn't a "legitimate errors". That's completely laughable and if you had the integrity that you claim you do, you would call them and this moronic article's opinion out for it.

[In2ition]

LOL, he cites Newsmax.

Oh please, get off your high horse. Every so called trusted source you post with has put out tons of misinformation and outright lies. I dare you to point to one that has been above board in the past 6 years.

[Indy]

Hmmm.

https://www.vox.com/2021/2/16/22285460/ ... ment-trial

To be clear, the discrepancies on the tweets are legitimate errors, but they had absolutely no bearing on the actual content of the posts in question or the substance of the House managers’ case. And as an aide to the House managers explained after Schoen made light of these discrepancies, the errors happened because prosecutors had to recreate Trump’s tweets from scratch after his account was permanently suspended.

“The text is entirely unchanged,” the aide told The Hill. “The final graphic accidentally had a blue verification checkmark on it, but the substance of it was entirely accurate. So what is Trump’s attorneys’ point?”

The point, of course, was not to offer a substantive defense of Trump, but to try to discredit Democrats while giving people like van der Veen grist for performative outrage during TV hits. And to that end, mission accomplished.

I saw that article and laughed my @$$ off, as I knew you would cite it. Those wasn't a "legitimate errors". That's completely laughable and if you had the integrity that you claim you do, you would call them and this moronic article's opinion out for it.

The items you are citing as "fabrication of evidence" is writing January 2020 in January 2021 (I am sure you never wrote down the previous year just a few days into a new one) and using a twitter template with a verified check. I mean, you know his entire twitter account was deleted because he was seditious, so everyone had to be recreated from screen shots. Neither of those 2 errors change the evidence or the implications of what was said. You keeping carrying a torch for his charlatan.

[In2ition]

Hmmm.

https://www.vox.com/2021/2/16/22285460/ ... ment-trial

To be clear, the discrepancies on the tweets are legitimate errors, but they had absolutely no bearing on the actual content of the posts in question or the substance of the House managers’ case. And as an aide to the House managers explained after Schoen made light of these discrepancies, the errors happened because prosecutors had to recreate Trump’s tweets from scratch after his account was permanently suspended.

“The text is entirely unchanged,” the aide told The Hill. “The final graphic accidentally had a blue verification checkmark on it, but the substance of it was entirely accurate. So what is Trump’s attorneys’ point?”

The point, of course, was not to offer a substantive defense of Trump, but to try to discredit Democrats while giving people like van der Veen grist for performative outrage during TV hits. And to that end, mission accomplished.

I saw that article and laughed my @$$ off, as I knew you would cite it. Those wasn't a "legitimate errors". That's completely laughable and if you had the integrity that you claim you do, you would call them and this moronic article's opinion out for it.

The items you are citing as "fabrication of evidence" is writing January 2020 in January 2021 (I am sure you never wrote down the previous year just a few days into a new one) and using a twitter template with a verified check. I mean, you know his entire twitter account was deleted because he was seditious, so everyone had to be recreated from screen shots. Neither of those 2 errors change the evidence or the implications of what was said. You keeping carrying a torch for his charlatan.

First of all, if you fabricate evidence in a normal court it gets throw out, the case gets dismissed and the lawyers who did it get brought up on judicial review and if it's considered egregious enough, get disbarred.

Second, the account was from Jennifer Lawrence. Not the actress, and she wasn't verified, and wasn't seditious in the least. That's more unnecessary defamation to an innocent and private citizen for your purpose, which is hardly worthy of admiration.

Third, the reason it changed was to put authority to the tweet and make it into something that happened at that moment in that year.

Fourth, the meaning of the tweet that was laughable in implication was the use of the word "Calvary" in the tweet. They tried to say she was bringing an army, when she was speaking a religious location and meaning of Calvary.

Fifth, it didn't need to be "recreated", as they had screen shots of it, which any 3rd grader could blow up for the trial. The whole thing was fabricated and misrepresented, because these people you keep carrying water for are corrupt professional liars.

It just goes back to what I've been saying the whole time and you keep proving that you don't actually have the honor and moral character that you claim to call these POS out. There is a word for someone that does this, but perhaps you were just completely ignorant to the facts, since everything you said was BS. Here's your chance once again to prove your claim and prove me wrong, but I doubt you will and are probably more determined and entrenched into the lies.

[Nodack]

Jamie Raskin, who fabricated evidence in the impeachment trial, and I think did it twice? That Jamie Raskin?

They better hurry up with their sham. They are running out of time.. It's been 6 years of absolute bs, lying and colluding by the Dems and its all going to come home to roost very soon.

I don’t need an investigation to tell me what happened on Jan 6th. I saw it unfold in real time. We have seen all the comments by prominent Republicans crucifying Trump for instigating Jan 6th and we got to see them all walk back their comments a week later right on cue. I am sure In2ition that you think Trump had absolutely nothing to do with anything that happened on Jan 6th and that despite the mountains of evidence that Trump made up all of his stolen election crap. You can claim that some inaccurate Tweet by some Dem totally let’s Trump off the hook. It’s all BS to me. You I and everyone on planet earth knows what happened on Jan 6th. It was BLM. It was Intifada. It was Pelosi. It was the police. It was the FBI. They were invited. Anything but what actually x happened.

[In2ition]

Jamie Raskin, who fabricated evidence in the impeachment trial, and I think did it twice? That Jamie Raskin?

They better hurry up with their sham. They are running out of time.. It's been 6 years of absolute bs, lying and colluding by the Dems and its all going to come home to roost very soon.

I don’t need an investigation to tell me what happened on Jan 6th. I saw it unfold in real time. We have seen all the comments by prominent Republicans crucifying Trump for instigating Jan 6th and we got to see them all walk back their comments a week later right on cue.

Right, Nodack has ALL the information and knows everything that happened. I forgot that you know all, and saw all both on that day, days leading up and afterwards.

I am sure In2ition that you think Trump had absolutely nothing to do with anything that happened on Jan 6th and that despite the mountains of evidence that Trump made up all of his stolen election crap. You can claim that some inaccurate Tweet by some Dem totally let’s Trump off the hook. It’s all BS to me.

Once again, this is a laughable claim, "mountains of evidence". If they had actual mountains of evidence, he was have been found clearly guilty by the Senate and the Dems wouldn't have needed to fabricate tweets, suppress video evidence or deceptively edit his speech.

Also, I didn't claim it left Trump off the hook, that's you misunderstanding and reading something into my post that was never there. My claim is that the Dems blatantly lied on purpose, because that's who they are and Indy wouldn't call them out for it like he claims he would. I don't need to call you out. You are an unabashed Dem shill. You've never claimed to look at anything impartially or all sides of the story. In fact you flatly refuse to look at anything that may go against your already entrenched belief. That is actually more admirable to me, because you aren't a hypocrit claiming to want to know the truth. You just KNOW your truth.

You I and everyone on planet earth knows what happened on Jan 6th. It was BLM. It was Intifada. It was Pelosi. It was the police. It was the FBI. They were invited. Anything but what actually x happened.

Did you know that the FBI admitted in court recently that they had at least 20 assets in the Capitol on Jan 6th?

It's hard to argue what actually happened, because you know for a certainty and wouldn't listen to anything that disputed that anyway.

[Nodack]

You are right Ib2. There was not a single Trump supporter anywhere near the Capital on Jan 6th. It was everyone but Trump supporters. All those people arrested were framed by the evil deep state.

[Indy]

Qanon rots people's brains by convincing them there are people playing 4-d chess making their lives miserable, when in reality it is simply checkers, and the people doing the convincing are fucking them over every chance they get.

[Mori Chu]

Hey, who are you going to believe? My obviously correct valued source @maga_4eva_3209582, or the entire mainstream media and your own lying eyes?

[In2ition]

You are right Ib2. There was not a single Trump supporter anywhere near the Capital on Jan 6th. It was everyone but Trump supporters. All those people arrested were framed by the evil deep state.

See Indy? This right here is a Strawman argument. I never said that, or made that argument in any way. There were obviously Trump supporters there. Nodack, you really need to stop doing this, as this is a common tactic of yours.

[In2ition]

Qanon rots people's brains by convincing them there are people playing 4-d chess making their lives miserable, when in reality it is simply checkers, and the people doing the convincing are fucking them over every chance they get.

Lol

[In2ition]

Hey, who are you going to believe? My obviously correct valued source @maga_4eva_3209582, or the entire mainstream media and your own lying eyes?

When you don't have an argument, you default to insults. Good job, buddy. Pathetic.

[Nodack]

You are right Ib2. There was not a single Trump supporter anywhere near the Capital on Jan 6th. It was everyone but Trump supporters. All those people arrested were framed by the evil deep state.

See Indy? This right here is a Strawman argument. I never said that, or made that argument in any way. There were obviously Trump supporters there. Nodack, you really need to stop doing this, as this is a common tactic of yours.

You call everything a straw man argument. It’s a common tactic of yours. There were obviously Trump supporters there? You would never know it by how many times you have tried to claim it was everyone else but Trump supporters.

[Indy]

how is it an insult to quote your source? I don't get that.

[In2ition]

You are right Ib2. There was not a single Trump supporter anywhere near the Capital on Jan 6th. It was everyone but Trump supporters. All those people arrested were framed by the evil deep state.

See Indy? This right here is a Strawman argument. I never said that, or made that argument in any way. There were obviously Trump supporters there. Nodack, you really need to stop doing this, as this is a common tactic of yours.

You call everything a straw man argument. It’s a common tactic of yours. There were obviously Trump supporters there? You would never know it by how many times you have tried to claim it was everyone else but Trump supporters.

When you make Strawman arguments consistently, I will continue to call them out. Stop doing it and I won't call it out. See how that works?

[Nodack]

I will continue to call it like I see it and you can continue to call everything a straw man argument. I don’t care.

[In2ition]

how is it an insult to quote your source? I don't get that.

He never said "to quote your source". He was trying to throw a funny insult in a passive aggressive way, saying that my sources generally are some random dude on Twitter.

You used to make much smarter arguments, what happened? Have you gotten checked out for cognitive degeneration recently?

[Nodack]

Most of your arguments are random dudes on Twitter since you obviously can’t use any mainstream media sources.

[In2ition]

I will continue to call it like I see it and you can continue to call everything a straw man argument. I don’t care.

You can call me out, that's fine. Just don't try to put words in my mouth or make a point to argue that I never made.

[In2ition]

Most of your arguments are random dudes on Twitter since you obviously can’t use any mainstream media sources.

Lol, whatever.