2020 US Election (Part 3)

[Bamspeedy]

It's related to the undercount, which means the ballots with votes for President and nothing else, ie not the undercard. They are unusual and there are suspicious numbers of them.

What's 'suspicious'? How many would it take to be 'suspicious'? Trump just wants to find a few so he can throw out tens of thousands of them.

I know someone who voted for president and nothing else. It's not surprising really. There are lots of people who don't normally vote, but did vote this year. They voted because they wanted Trump gone. Trump was the only reason they voted. They didn't care to vote for the other races, whether it was being uninformed of the differences between the candidates of those lesser contests, or just not caring, they just wanted the Supreme Idiot gone.

 

[Birdjaguar]

The better question is, "Can the U.S. CREATE a Rule of Law and an actual existence of justice as an institution without prosecuting their whole Federal political power class - of both Duopoly parties, serving and retired - and most senior military heads and big corporate plutocrats and every single member of the absolutely horrid, secretive, and unaccountable, "alphabet soup," agencies?"

Well, no. The article was about a particular topic. If you don't like that topic, I'm sorry. Your topic isn't relevant to what is happening now and in the near future. The NYT article is. I posted the article because it is a good one on a topic lots of people are thinking about. Have you read the article? If so, please comment on its contents.

 

[Patine]

Well, no. The article was about a particular topic. If you don't like that topic, I'm sorry. Your topic isn't relevant to what is happening now and in the near future. The NYT article is. I posted the article because it is a good one on a topic lots of people are thinking about. Have you read the article? If so, please comment on its contents.

Who made you the "Speaker of the House," in this thread, if I may ask?

 

[Gori the Grey]

Biden should say, "Of course the American people expect that anyone who has broken the law will be tried, and if found guilty, punished."

Well, I voted for him, Patine.

 

[Patine]

Biden should say, "Of course the American people expect that anyone who has broken the law will be tried, and if found guilty, punished."

But he won't. He'd have to hold out his hands in "going peacefully after turning oneself in and waiting for handcuffs," posture right after...

 

[Birdjaguar]

Who made you the "Speaker of the House," in this thread, if I may ask?

You quoted my post and and dismissed it to support your one trick pony thinking. I responded

 

[Gori the Grey]

But he won't. He'd have to hold out his hands in "going peacefully after turning oneself in and waiting for handcuffs," posture right after...

What crime is Biden guilty of, Patine?

 

[Patine]

You quoted my post and and dismissed it to support your one trick pony thinking. I responded

One trick pony? So that's how you consider the concept of REAL justice, and JUSTICE FOR ALL, is it? Good to know.

 

[Gori the Grey]

No, that's how he considers the topic of BSAB, AEB.

 

[Birdjaguar]

What crime is Biden guilty of, Patine?

Guilty? I didn't know he had even been indicted. I must have missed that.

 

[Patine]

What crime is Biden guilty of, Patine?

Aiding and abetting mass murder, illegal wars, and gross violations of the U.S . Constitution and the guaranteed rights of American citizens. And those are among the publicly known ones. If the ones obstructed from justice were cracked out (you know, the seditious secrets "classified for national security purposes," I'm sure we'd find more horrific offences).

 

[Birdjaguar]

One trick pony? So that's how you consider the concept of REAL justice, and JUSTICE FOR ALL, is it? Good to know.

It is how I regard your posting. You should start a thread about it and keep it all in one place if you think it is so important. If you handled it well, you might even get a nice discussion about it.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Those aren't crimes, Patine. Maybe you'll say they should be. But they're not.

 

[Patine]

Guilty? I didn't know he had even been indicted. I must have missed that.

He hasn't. No one on the above list of people who should face trial have, except in a very few and rare cases. But that's not because of a lack of committing such crimes, or a lack of evidence, but because the U.S. Federal Government abuses it's power and authority to put almost all such people in a position where they can freely ignore, and have full immunity, to criminal justice by the EXACT same fiat used by Third World despots, and subject to different laws as though in a Feudal system and completely in violation of the principal of a Republic.

 

[Patine]

Those aren't crimes, Patine. Maybe you'll say they should be. But they're not.

Sorry, I don't believe I read that right. At least I HOPE I didn't...

 

[Zardnaar]

He hasn't. No one on the above list of people who should face trial have, except in a very few and rare cases. But that's not because of a lack of committing such crimes, or a lack of evidence, but because the U.S. Federal Government abuses it's power and authority to put almost all such people in a position where they can freely ignore, and have full immunity, to criminal justice by the EXACT same fiat used by Third World despots, and subject to different laws as though in a Feudal system and completely in violation of the principal of a Republic.

World's not ideal get used to that concept.

Obtion B was Trump.

Electoral reform is impossible atm or anytime soon.

And as much talk about revolutions it hasn't got to that point and is unlikely to succeed in any event.

 

[Patine]

World's not ideal get used to that concept.

Obtion B was Trump.

Electoral reform is impossible atm or anytime soon.

And as much talk about revolutions it hasn't got to that point and is unlikely to succeed in any event.

You've gone back to bleak fatalist mode, there, I see...

 

[Zardnaar]

You've gone back to bleak fatalist mode, there, I see...

It's called reality.

 

[Patine]

It's called reality.

I think you're conflating legal and constitutional issues with laws of physics in terms of immutability. Also, telling someone that something not outright fantastical or impossible WILL not happen because, "it's reality," and no other qualifiers or statement, DOES show a bleak, defeatist, resigned, fatalisitic, or even apathetic viewpoint, and an attempt to spread such thinking to others in a "crab trap," mentality.

 

[Zardnaar]

I think you're conflating legal and constitutional issues with laws of physics in terms of immutability. Also, telling someone that something not outright fantastical or impossible WILL not happen because, "it's reality," and no other qualifiers or statement, DOES show a bleak, defeatist, resigned, fatalisitic, or even apathetic viewpoint, and an attempt to spread such thinking to others in a "crab trap," mentality.

Basically I believe in incremental change.

Has to be organic. You can force it occasionally but it's a crapshoot on the success rate, blowback and effectiveness