Posted on 02/02/2021 11:25:38 AM PST by Kaslin
That is why I have called them republicants for many years. a disgusting gaggle of blackmailed bastards with daggers for anyone who threatens their eexposure. Prime example, Cocaine Mitch with the most filthy littleman complex
That is the stupidest post I’ve red at FR in a very long time.
Ashes to ashes , dust to dust , show me the lawyer that my President can trust
I would love for Trump to declare residency in PA, spend the next two years cleaning up election laws and then run for Governor or Senator.
Its hard to admit that you were played
But I am sure you can read her book coming out in July about how Trump got hosed.
I wonder what the title will be? Krakens, Hugo Chavez and the Stolen Election by Sydney Powell
Here’s the evidence: https://hereistheevidence.com/
He tried. Even his SCOTUS judges kicked him to the curb.
Have Peter Navarro go up there and lay it out. Leave it at that
“Moot article.”
I agree. I waded through the whole posted summary didn’t see the reason why. The author probably had to write something by his deadline.
I’ve said before that much more time needs to be spend collecting and presenting the evidence of fraud. Waste of time for the Trump team to repeat what we’ve already heard.
This is the last response I will post to filth like you. Piss off, fool.
My corollary question to yours is, given that some went to Trump-appointed-judges, why did they also not hear the evidence, and dismiss the cases on technicalities.
I’ve pondered that a bit, and the best I can come up with so far is the judges, or perhaps the senior judge in each court was talked to, perhaps by SCOTUS/Roberts, to the effect of: “We at SCOTUS will not hear the case; we at SCOTUS strongly suggest you do the same”.
Or some other rationale... of the 60-65 courts, only one heard evidence.
Trump has already quit on the possibilities of challenging the election before the Senate.
Intriguing, but your link is no longer live - 404 error.
Care to expand, or alternatively fr-mail?
They are trying him as if he is a current president. His lawyers (without him present) should defend the same, thus this angle is not viable. Only the election fraud has merit and worth presenting.
Indeed, perhaps we have dueling presidents. One in general has control of the civilian feds - HUD, Transportation plus black hat agencies like FIB and CIA. The other has DOD/FEMA.
If I were to choose, I'd take the latter. But, that's just me.
There are plenty of important irregularities in the election that really do need investigation.
Yellow robes yawn.
Sorry.
This is the link in question.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3931091/posts
Trump’s attorneys answers.
Argue that Election Fraud demonstrates that he is the President, they can only impeach the President, so if you want to impeach me you would need review and overturn the election. Perhaps some Ds might be rethinking whether Biden should be P and Harrass VP.
Won’t happen, but it would be fun to dangle that in front of them.
That’s exactly the approach Trump should have taken.
To argue against impeachment as The Legitimate President.
And that would have allowed him to present all the many many proofs and evidences of election fraud.
Thanks! Great reading... got thru about half so far,
and I just think it fantastic, the references in quotes, “President”.
It aligns with my understanding of the current situation, along with unfortunately too few FR’s IMHO, perfectly. Infact, it appears to me, reading between the lines, that if or when this gets to the “trial”, one can look at your link and fill in blanks as to what facts and evidence the defense will bring up.
Kudos to Trump’s lawyers.
The American people and Trump got snookered by a tired old man hiding out in his basement. Sheesh.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.