Truth
impeachment redux. pure fiction.
She voted with Trump on almost every vote until he lost the election and lied about it.
1 Like
Nonsense, but I understand there is no convincing you.
Good post.
1 Like
Trump making it about Trump.
You talking about the 2nd impeachment? There were far more grounds in the 2nd than the 1st in my opinion.
when did i say anything about every vote?
there were in neither. iâm sorry, but âpeacefully and patriotically make your voices heardâ does not equal âriot at the capitolâ.
right, because he chose to impeach himself.
not even close
Itâs not a court of law.
In the 2nd one he most assuredly did. The rally was all about him.
matters not, you just canât make one mean the other unless you choose to ignore the words and judge the man. she made it about trump the person, not about any âfactsâ.
the rally was not the riot. they werenât even in the same place. âpeacefully and patriotically make your voices heardâ is not incitement to riot.
Organic intellectual? 
You Still donât get that phraseâŚdecent post otherwise.
1 Like
It matters a great deal. The âstop the stealâ was a hoax, there was no steal. He lost. And to have a ârallyâ at that time and place had one purpose - to change the result, somehow.
You add everything else he tried, it leads to one conclusion.
Now, I liked his policies. I definitely think he is the better choice for the good of this country. But he lost.
He doesnât get to change that by hook or crook.
2 Likes
The rally turned into the riot⌠why are we still denying this?
I understand. The riot was also about him.
This is where I am too, not only what I highlighted, but the entirety of what I quoted.
As for the highlighted part, as long as Trump (and others) make it about him, there will be no substantive examination of fraud claims, nor any attempt to change what enabled the fraud. The aim of investigation should be about the voting process, not about changing the result of the election. (If the investigation happens to turn up enough evidence that the outcome was questionable, then we can cross that bridge if we get to it.)
2 Likes
You said her vote was based on ânothing about anything but being against trump.â But that doesnât make sense considering her extensive history of voting WITH Trump. She crossed Trump on time and the GOP is trying to destroy her for it.
he believed it, still does. thats not a âhoaxâ. it may be a delusion based on selective acceptance of âevidenceâ. everything else he tried is perfectly within his rights, as was asking people to peacefully and patriotically make their voices heard.
