why would he lose?
Because he’s Trump.
my goodness it’s like it’s 2015 again
A lot of things have changed.
right. Like the “election” process
It’s not truth though. You keep claiming “voter fraud” but yet some how hero Trump was unable to prove any of it. With all this readily available evidence, why isn’t Trump still president? Is he just that incompetent he couldn’t prove his case?
1 Like
i dont keep claiming “fraud” and didnt in that post
see the games you play?
there were numerous anomalies, irregularities, last minute unconstitutional changes by leftist courts, questionable ballot dumps, deliveries. counting errors. witness accounts, video footage, statistical analyses…
despite it being made taboo to even mention it,
people know. so sorry the narrative was not perfectly effective. not everyone is as stupid as the media expects them to be
1 Like
The courts wouldn’t even hear the evidence. Some were partisan courts and the SC court allowed themselves to be intimidated IMO.
1 Like
none of them were fairly evidentiary. good point
They didn’t have any to hear.
It was a shadow effort.
Legal enough to pass scrutiny.
1 Like
If he is in gaol, is he even allowed to vote?
To speak of a conviction in the context of an extra-legal spite-fest is a farce. Like saying my wife was convicted by the family of being too noisy drying her hair.
Disqualifying from holding public office is constitutional.
The senate ruled it constitutional. They are in charge of impeachments.
Allan
Trump does not have the capacity to get to the data that would prove voter fraud. It has to come from a court or exposed from with in. Neither one helped, except one judge in Michigan. He ordered a forensic analysis of a Dominion machine. Guess what the report said? Now guess what happened? The state of Michigan jumped in very quickly, denied all of it and took over everything with the judge’s consent…and there ya have it.
When a Democrat escapes a court appearance and so isn’t convicted by a court, the charges are assumed bogus. When Trump isn’t convicted after being dragged to court, the case was rigged and he’s still assumed guilty. When the MAGA team can’t get a judge to hear their evidence, their evidence is bogus. When the Dems and RINOs can’t get a SC judge to hear their evidence, they install one of themselves to fill in for the judge.
Different standards apply.
2 Likes
Despite the Senate self proclaiming it had jurisdiction here and even if conviction had occurred at a minimum the entire Article 2, Section 4 and the 3rd sentence of Article 1, Section 3, Clause 6 would be brought into view of broader Constitutional merits via the SCOTUS.
Please reply only if and why you disagree.
And here below are the two parts cited:
“Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”
3rd Sentence of Clause 6: “When the President of the United is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two thirds of the members present.”
Don’t worry.
It’ll all come out in the end.
I guarantee it.
…if they don’t mind getting censured that is…
1 Like
You went from claiming to vote for trump not because he was a conservative but because you wanted him to burn it all down, to believing the lies he fed you with a spoon.
Sad.
1 Like