Thanks for posting this, Lurker17, you're a bro.
Thanks for posting this, Lurker17, you're a bro.
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) ABSOLUTELY DESTROYED liberal crank George Stephanopoulos on ABC on Sunday morning.
Liberal cranks are working overtime to defend the BIG LIE — that there was no fraud in the 2020 presidential election. This is completely untrue on numerous levels and in an unprecedented number of incidents.
George Stephanopoulos demanded that Senator Paul say there was no fraud in the 2020 election. He wouldn’t
George Stephanopoulos insisted that President Trump and his supporters who believed there was fraud are liars. They’re not.
Rand Paul delivered a much needed beatdown to the ABC hack.
This was incredible!
https://mobile.twitter.com/robbystarbuck/status/1353475403126611969
fini
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) ABSOLUTELY DESTROYED liberal crank George Stephanopoulos on ABC on Sunday morning.
Liberal cranks are working overtime to defend the BIG LIE — that there was no fraud in the 2020 presidential election. This is completely untrue on numerous levels and in an unprecedented number of incidents.
George Stephanopoulos demanded that Senator Paul say there was no fraud in the 2020 election. He wouldn’t
George Stephanopoulos insisted that President Trump and his supporters who believed there was fraud are liars. They’re not.
Rand Paul delivered a much needed beatdown to the ABC hack.
This was incredible!
>https://mobile.twitter.com/robbystarbuck/status/1353475403126611969
fini
Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are the only Politicians worth a shit anymore. Ron Paul should be running this country. Trump wishes he had the integrity of Dr Ron Paul
Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are the only Politicians worth a shit anymore. Ron Paul should be running this country. Trump wishes he had the integrity of Dr Ron Paul
I haven't watched it yet. I will in a minute. I wanted to say first, did Rand tell him he was full of shit? Did he call him a complete dumbass? Because if he didn't tell him he was full of shit or that he was a dumbass then he did not give him a beat down!
I watched it. I suppose you could say he did as good of a job as your ever going to get out of a damn politician.
I haven't watched it yet. I will in a minute. I wanted to say first, did Rand tell him he was full of shit? Did he call him a complete dumbass? Because if he didn't tell him he was full of shit or that he was a dumbass then he did not give him a beat down!
I watched it. I suppose you could say he did as good of a job as your ever going to get out of a damn politician.
Well, Dumboinion, Leonardo.
Well, Dumboinion, Leonardo.
I'm glad Rand explained why he voted they way he did (he felt it would be wrong for Congress to overturn it), but unless I'm missing something, I think he is the one who didn't understand of what was being asked, that is to turn the power back to the state legislatures, which is where the constitutional authority resides. He was about the only one other than Trump who I trusted (probably not the best word) in the whole of government, and his vote really turned me off since. As for Snuffleupagus, what a demonic idiot like the rest of them.
I'm glad Rand explained why he voted they way he did (he felt it would be wrong for Congress to overturn it), but unless I'm missing something, I think he is the one who didn't understand of what was being asked, that is to turn the power back to the state legislatures, which is where the constitutional authority resides. He was about the only one other than Trump who I trusted (probably not the best word) in the whole of government, and his vote really turned me off since. As for Snuffleupagus, what a demonic idiot like the rest of them.
People are angry and should be angry but the truth of the matter is Trump’s team and his allies in the house and senate did a terrible job presenting their case. Except for Cruz.
When he spoke even Democrats reacted positively. He should’ve been the lead man on this.
Anyway, even many staunch Trump supporters I know in the legal field have told me they would have been reluctant to pull the trigger as well. The case was never made very well, and there is the damnation of precedent.
Take a look at Mike Pence, for example. He might have felt that if he had done what he “should have“ done, what would prevent any future election from being determined the same way? Let’s say, in four years, Democrats get their asses handed to them, make up a bunch of fake cheating evidence, and the Democrat vice president decides to completely undo the will of the people, and either refuses to certify or sent it back to the legislature that is dominated by Democrats? Once you open that door, it’s not closing again.
Look, expensive than the right thing, the very next time Democrats were in the position to steal an election this way, they would twist what was that pensive done, the circumstances surrounding it, invented cheating evidence that didn’t exist, and under the coverage of a biased press and with the help uniparty sycophants, just reach out and take any election they want by faking a fraud case.
They would lie and draw equivalencies to what Pence had done.
It would have been a lot easier if the good guys had made a decent case, at all. They didn’t. I have no idea how to communicate, no idea how to present facts, none. Everyone thinks the truth should speak for itself, but there a PR consultants for a reason. They lock people in rooms for hours and train them on how to speak, for a reason. The boil everything down to pat catchphrases for a reason.
People are angry and should be angry but the truth of the matter is Trump’s team and his allies in the house and senate did a terrible job presenting their case. Except for Cruz.
When he spoke even Democrats reacted positively. He should’ve been the lead man on this.
Anyway, even many staunch Trump supporters I know in the legal field have told me they would have been reluctant to pull the trigger as well. The case was never made very well, and there is the damnation of precedent.
Take a look at Mike Pence, for example. He might have felt that if he had done what he “should have“ done, what would prevent any future election from being determined the same way? Let’s say, in four years, Democrats get their asses handed to them, make up a bunch of fake cheating evidence, and the Democrat vice president decides to completely undo the will of the people, and either refuses to certify or sent it back to the legislature that is dominated by Democrats? Once you open that door, it’s not closing again.
Look, expensive than the right thing, the very next time Democrats were in the position to steal an election this way, they would twist what was that pensive done, the circumstances surrounding it, invented cheating evidence that didn’t exist, and under the coverage of a biased press and with the help uniparty sycophants, just reach out and take any election they want by faking a fraud case.
They would lie and draw equivalencies to what Pence had done.
It would have been a lot easier if the good guys had made a decent case, at all. They didn’t. I have no idea how to communicate, no idea how to present facts, none. Everyone thinks the truth should speak for itself, but there a PR consultants for a reason. They lock people in rooms for hours and train them on how to speak, for a reason. The boil everything down to pat catchphrases for a reason.
George, you are a known and evidenced leftist hack. Anything, and everything that opposes your bias narrative is always called a lie, or is said to have been debunked. The issue hasn't even been examined in a court of law- and can you show me verifiable proof of how you debunked these allegations of election fraud? That was what I wanted Rand to say... besides, "Eat shit and die, George!".
George, you are a known and evidenced leftist hack. Anything, and everything that opposes your bias narrative is always called a lie, or is said to have been debunked. The issue hasn't even been examined in a court of law- and can you show me verifiable proof of how you debunked these allegations of election fraud? That was what I wanted Rand to say... besides, "Eat shit and die, George!".
Thanks for the post. Is there a link that would bring us to a collection of links to the actual court cases? If not, will someone who knows how to access those please compile them...or teach me how?
I like to send documents, instead of opinions to my brainwashed liberal friends. A collection like this would be handy...with a simple comment of, "Rather than resting your belief on the fact that all the cases were dismissed, it is even more telling that the evidence was never once allowed to be heard. Please read these court cases for yourself."
Thanks for the post. Is there a link that would bring us to a collection of links to the actual court cases? If not, will someone who knows how to access those please compile them...or teach me how?
I like to send documents, instead of opinions to my brainwashed liberal friends. A collection like this would be handy...with a simple comment of, "Rather than resting your belief on the fact that all the cases were dismissed, it is even more telling that the evidence was never once allowed to be heard. Please read these court cases for yourself."
Thanks for the summary Lurker.
Thanks for the summary Lurker.
There were hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of votes that were stolen, and Paul never brought that up. He left way too much on the table and was too reserved.
He talked about some of the smaller batches, this isn’t a beat down. If he had brought up better examples, the ones with much bigger numbers, and had brought up the specific and direct ways in which the Democrats disrupted any real investigation, that would’ve been much, much more powerful.
He did a decent job, but he kept going back to the most boring of examples. There was massive widespread evidence of voter fraud and Paul barely touched on the examples. He kept going back to how George Stephanopoulos was calling him a liar, let that go, no one gives a shit, talk about the evidence. Bring it up. More examples. Use facts. Overwhelm him with the facts. See this is where we need Ted Cruz. He is much, much better at this.
I mean, talking about a few thousand votes here and there really isn’t convincing. This is very far from a beat down.
Stephanopoulos was even able to say repeatedly that the fraud they found wasn’t enough to overturn any of the states and that’s simply not true and Paul never challenged that. George Stephanopoulos said a few things that were completely untrue that were not challenged.
There were hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of votes that were stolen, and Paul never brought that up. He left way too much on the table and was too reserved.
He talked about some of the smaller batches, this isn’t a beat down. If he had brought up better examples, the ones with much bigger numbers, and had brought up the specific and direct ways in which the Democrats disrupted any real investigation, that would’ve been much, much more powerful.
He did a decent job, but he kept going back to the most boring of examples. There was massive widespread evidence of voter fraud and Paul barely touched on the examples. He kept going back to how George Stephanopoulos was calling him a liar, let that go, no one gives a shit, talk about the evidence. Bring it up. More examples. Use facts. Overwhelm him with the facts. See this is where we need Ted Cruz. He is much, much better at this.
I mean, talking about a few thousand votes here and there really isn’t convincing. This is very far from a beat down.
Stephanopoulos was even able to say repeatedly that the fraud they found wasn’t enough to overturn any of the states and that’s simply not true and Paul never challenged that. George Stephanopoulos said a few things that were completely untrue that were not challenged.
(post is archived)