Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
“Yes, I think I would say that the election was not fraudulent,” said Cawthorn. “You know, the Constitution allowed for us to be able to push back as much as we could and I did that to the amount of the constitutional limits that I had at my disposal. So now I would say that Joseph R. Biden is our president.”
Another conservative Republican who is admitting there was no evidence of fraud, they were just trying to use whatever they thought they could to change the outcome.
They knowingly misled the American people, created hostility, doubt, etc......because they didn't want to lose.
And it is sad that their supporters are having to find out now had they used them, lied to them...and risked the lives of human beings based on lies.
I think that Rand knows the election fraud stuff was BS. He's just trying to kowtow to the Trump base in order to gain their support for a potential 2024 presidential run. The populist wing of the GOP is not going to migrate to the libertarians. Their view on open borders is a non-starter for them, and they are late 19th century Republican/mid-20th century Democrat on trade policies.
Libertarians do a poor job of communicating that there’s a bit of a spectrum on some issues, and borders are one of the better examples of that. While a fair number of libertarians do believe in actual open borders, for most it’s more a goal to work towards, eventually, some time in the future, when we achieve some sort of more perfect world. Most who I know would say that humans aren’t ready for open borders, and instead advocate something more lax than rank-and-file republicans would want, but still controlled and with legal processes in place to enter the country. That’s closer to the way Democrat’s would like to run the border, and it’s certainly not any kind of actual open border policy.
"...In a contentious exchange on ABC News’ “This Week With George Stephanopolous,” Paul called the host “a fool.”
“You're forgetting who you are as a journalist if you think there's only one side," he scolded.
“You're inserting yourself into the story," he said, adding: "I want to look at secretaries of state who changed the law — it happened. You can't just sweep it under the rug. Nothing to see here. You're a fool to bring this up. A journalist would hear both sides....""
Paul told 100% of the truth. Stephanopolous is a lying, unethical propaganda artist.
The courts have to dismiss every challenge, because no judge wants to be known for overturning an election result, no matter what the evidence.
Barr knew this too.
The “no matter what the evidence” is hot air! If you think so, please start a movement to shut down the entire US legal system. Saying that means no court decision has any validity....
People like you have no idea how damaging these words are! It goes far beyond Trump. When any future republican president will be elected, it will be said it’s illegal and courts “ignore evidence”. So forget about any election. No election will ever be valid, if all I need to claim is that there was fraud but ALL courts refuse to accept the evidence.
The proof is that Trump said so and QAnon also circulate this conspiracy. That’s all they need. Gone are the days when things were decided in court. Now the courts don’t want to accept “evidence”. All of them.
Bottom line: all we need is to repeat it and it becomes fact overnight.
The “no matter what the evidence” is hot air! If you think so, please start a movement to shut down the entire US legal system. Saying that means no court decision has any validity....
People like you have no idea how damaging these words are! It goes far beyond Trump. When any future republican president will be elected, it will be said it’s illegal and courts “ignore evidence”. So forget about any election. No election will ever be valid, if all I need to claim is that there was fraud but ALL courts refuse to accept the evidence.
Blindly repeating talking points. Another NPC.
There's a difference between showing violation of laws and fraud and proving who it benefitted. If you listened to someone other than the MSM, someone like Rand Paul or Ted Cruz, you might understand.
There's a difference between showing violation of laws and fraud and proving who it benefitted. If you listened to someone other than the MSM, someone like Rand Paul or Ted Cruz, you might understand.
I already understood. Rand Paul is a liar and deceiver well beyond this case. He advocated “libertarian” principles and was ready to die (politically) fighting for them (as long as Obama was president). With Trump’s arrival the “libertarian principles” were out and a crusade to support Trumps was in. Where was libertarianism when Trump imposed tariffs on imports and attacked free trade?
As for Ted Cruz, I only remember what HE had to say about Trump in 2016, not to MSN. Maybe you should also listen to Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham...
There's a difference between showing violation of laws and fraud and proving who it benefitted. If you listened to someone other than the MSM, someone like Rand Paul or Ted Cruz, you might understand.
I think OP learned a new word today and is going to start as many threads as possible using it!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
