US Army Rejects Using ‘Martial Law’ on Election Fraud

Ahhh, the Russian thing yet again.

 

Again? Lmfao. You think it stopped? That's sweet.

 

That's right. Again. It's public knowledge why Putin prefers Trump.

 

I know the American left never stopped beating that drum but it don't scare anyone anymore.

 

I see

 

It is indeed. They can try again in four years.

If we want a democracy, we're going to have to put up with the "other guy" bring a pain in the arse.

 

I don't think so. Trump's only avenue was through the courts.

 

There have been some huge surprises. Justice Souter is my top wildcard pick in the last few decades.

 

Surprised? Me neither only I think he should've seized the voting machines. All Trump has to do is appoint a special prosecutor for the 2020 election and he got his second term.

 

That's what dictators do.

 

Of course, the real problem is voter suppression.

 

I hope to god the guy walks out.

 

No chance. He's done on January 20. If he doesn't walk out, the Secret Service, or the military if need be, will show him out.

 

You gave me “kudos” for “seeing the light.” Yet, the title of this thread is not “Things we want to know about Bow To The Robots.” NB: I am not the topic of this thread. Your assessment of my enlightenment or other attributes is neither irrelevant nor of any factual value to your argument.

LOL. Denies deployment of the ad hominem fallacy with… wait for it… the ad hominem fallacy!

Fallacy, argumentum ad verecundiam. Especially in light of the mountain of prima facie evidence that various and many states made extrajudicial changes to their election laws.

Please clarify “everything going on.” Vague and lacking context. Thank you.

Yet we had extrajudicial unilateral acts executed by partisan officials not authorized to do so by the Constitution of the United States. And the opinion of the Court? “Move along, ignorant masses, nothing to see here…” I mean it’s not like we’re selecting the most powerful position in the free world or anything like that…

Fair. Difference of opinion.

Unfortunately for your argument, but fortunately for the people, what 80 million people “want” is not what determines the law or what is written in the Constitution. What you are illustrating is a very common argument in favor of the rule of men over the rule of law. It is, in essence, mob rule. And in logic, it is, you guessed it… a fallacy. Argumentum ad populum. Frankly what those 80 million people should “want,” and the 73 million who voted for Trump, and even whomever is left who was eligible to vote but didn’t is a government that plays by the rules, and an impartial referee to call the balls and strikes when that government colors outside the lines. And that’s exactly what happened here, except the umpires went on strike… phoned in a repudiation of the people… and went back to drinking cordials in their vaunted chamber… the USSC got to the Superbowl and refused to suit up. Very likely the most important issue in the history of the republic to come before the court, and they took a knee.

There is already a “uniform procedure.” It has been in place for 231 years. It is known as the “Constitution of The United States.”

Presumed President-Elect Biden has indeed secured more electoral votes. However, given the nefarious machinations and extrajudicial skullduggery through which those votes were secured, no objective observer could rightly call it fair or square. It is about as oblique as it gets.

Reminder: I am not the topic of this thread.

How can you call the result legitimate when all the players didn’t play by the rules? And changed the rules of the game while it was being played... andnot being the people who are the ones who actually get to change the rules... And did in broad daylight… not even trying to hide their mis- and malfeasance… And the umpires looked the other way as the bats were corked and the balls were deflated. Ironic side note: Congress spent vastly more time investigating whether or not a professional athlete cheated in a game than they have on the same topic with regard to the selection of the most powerful position in the free world.

Pure speculation.

Sure. He is a partisan. What do you expect from a partisan other than partisanship? Careful now, you are coming close to moving the goalposts: One person’s act does not invalidate the known facts on the table. What Ken Paxton “wants” is as irrelevant as what your “80 million voters want.”

I’m sorry if refusing to accept fallacies as “arguments” is troubling for you. But I am not the topic of this thread (nor is any other poster), so your multiple references to my attributes (that you have wholly imagined consequently) are nothing more than lowest common denominator middle-school debate tactics, are not factual, and in no way substantiate any argument you are attempting. Hence: I AM NOT THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD. Address my argument. Or if I deploy fallacies, address my tactical shortcomings.

Ad hominem fallacy: I am not the topic of this thread.

Remember the saying: address your opponent’s argument, not your opponent’s person.

 

Maybe he's just dragging it out because.....f*** 'em. I can understand that.

 

That attitude is beneath the importance of the office he holds.

 

No, it's really not. A man does what he can do with the tools at hand.

 

Obviously Trump and his followers have already exceeded their patriotic capabilities.

 

A man doesn't say "fk 'em" because he lost an election. Nothing Trump does indicates honorable male behavior, typically referred to as, "being a man."

 

china sent a virus to aid a mutiny aboard American elections

 

the war powers act is within his rights to redo elections in states with spam ballots.

 

Obvious is it?

Get outa here with that butter won't melt in your mouth stuff. We all watched the last 4 years and the level of respect the left holds for the office of President was demonstrated by Big Nan at the SOTU

 

I would say not..

 

Saw that science fiction movie- Mutiny of the Bounty of Ballots.

 

Invalid metaphors aside, I suggest you read George Washingtons Farewell Address, if you want to know how a patriotic president should act when leaving office like his 44 predecessors.