What Do Americans Think of Socialist Policies?

[Boris Norris]

The fraud issue has not been resolved in Arizona. Far from it.

Yes it has it's just you won't believe it but you will.

How is your buddie Trump going today? All his co conspirators have flipped on him. They're not going to jail for him.

 

[pjmret]

The fraud issue has not been resolved in Arizona. Far from it.

Legally it has been
And with intelligent people

 

[Lagboltz]

Comey did not find the evidence on Wiener's computer, others did, and Comey knew he had better admit the evidence turned up if he did not want fellow FBI agents going all whistleblower on his cheating rear end. He actually sat on the evidence for a long time before he decided he had better come clean.

Afraid of a whistleblower? Balderdash. It was not necessary broadcast to the pubic so near the election and announce that they found more unexamined emails. Your interpretation still doesn't make sense. You are still guessing.

 

[mark francis]

Afraid of a whistleblower? Balderdash. It was not necessary broadcast to the pubic so near the election and announce that they found more unexamined emails. Your interpretation still doesn't make sense. You are still guessing.

Here are incontrovertible facts:

Weiner Timeline: How the FBI Gave Hillary Cover During the Election (breitbart.com)

Some key points mined from the article:

Reportedly, only 3,077 of the more than 300,000 emails found on the Weiner laptop “were directly reviewed for classified or incriminating information. Three FBI officials completed that work in a single 12-hour spurt the day before Comey again cleared Clinton of criminal charges.”

The new emails also show Strzok, Page and other high-ranking FBI officials discussing the “alleged destruction of laptops;” a lengthy discussion about how to respond to a reporter’s inquiry into an alleged quid pro quo related to Hillary Clinton’s emails in which the State Department would create additional FBI overseas positions; and Strzok defending Director James Comey after a former FBI official said Comey had “thrown all the agents under the bus.”

These new records show how Hillary Clinton was protected from investigation over the Weiner laptop by the FBI for a full month during the presidential campaign. And the documents further confirm that Strzok pushed laundered media Russia smears of Trump within the FBI. No wonder the FBI is slow rolling the release of these documents.

 

[Lagboltz]

Here are incontrovertible facts:

Weiner Timeline: How the FBI Gave Hillary Cover During the Election (breitbart.com)

Some key points mined from the article:

Reportedly, only 3,077 of the more than 300,000 emails found on the Weiner laptop “were directly reviewed for classified or incriminating information. Three FBI officials completed that work in a single 12-hour spurt the day before Comey again cleared Clinton of criminal charges.”

The new emails also show Strzok, Page and other high-ranking FBI officials discussing the “alleged destruction of laptops;” a lengthy discussion about how to respond to a reporter’s inquiry into an alleged quid pro quo related to Hillary Clinton’s emails in which the State Department would create additional FBI overseas positions; and Strzok defending Director James Comey after a former FBI official said Comey had “thrown all the agents under the bus.”

These new records show how Hillary Clinton was protected from investigation over the Weiner laptop by the FBI for a full month during the presidential campaign. And the documents further confirm that Strzok pushed laundered media Russia smears of Trump within the FBI. No wonder the FBI is slow rolling the release of these documents.

That came from Breitbart, a very unreliable source of information and opinion. When I want facts I dismiss whacko sources and try to find the ultimate source of the information they publish.

 

[mark francis]

That came from Breitbart, a very unreliable source of information and opinion. When I want facts I dismiss whacko sources and try to find the ultimate source of the information they publish.

You should try to prove the facts in the article wrong, not the publisher you have a political bias against.

 

[pjmret]

You should try to prove the facts in the article wrong, not the publisher you have a political bias against.

nah,that's not how it works *****.
burden of proof is on those making claims. duh

 

[mark francis]

nah,that's not how it works *****.
burden of proof is on those making claims. duh

If you claim the article is misrepresenting facts then the burden is on you to prove your claim.

 

[pjmret]

If you claim the article is misrepresenting facts then the burden is on you to prove your claim.

nope not how it works.
i claim the article has to prove its facts, *****.
god you're stupid. lol

 

[mark francis]

nope not how it works.
i claim the article has to prove its facts, *****.
god you're stupid. lol

Why do leftists claim they do not have to make any effort whatsoever to convince tens of millions of Americans that the evidence that seems to show voter fraud is not really voter fraud at all?

 

[Lagboltz]

Why do leftists claim they do not have to make any effort whatsoever to convince tens of millions of Americans that the evidence that seems to show voter fraud is not really voter fraud at all?

The courts have already made the effort in far more detail than leftists could.

 

[Lagboltz]

You should try to prove the facts in the article wrong, not the publisher you have a political bias against.

You should give better references that make it more worthwhile to look into it.

 

[pjmret]

Why do leftists claim they do not have to make any effort whatsoever to convince tens of millions of Americans that the evidence that seems to show voter fraud is not really voter fraud at all?

because that's how the world works, *****.
people claiming fraud need to prove it

innocent until proven guilty concept, *****.

 

[mark francis]

because that's how the world works, *****.
people claiming fraud need to prove it

innocent until proven guilty concept, *****.

Are you referring to Trump?

 

[mark francis]

nope not how it works.
i claim the article has to prove its facts, *****.
god you're stupid. lol

You will never learn if you continue to believe any old lie you want to believe while claiming nobody has to prove that lie for it to be true.