BREAKING: Trump Sets The Record Straight After Leftists Accuse Him Of Wanting To “Terminate” The Con

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by XXJefferson#51, Dec 5, 2022.

  1. ricmortis

    ricmortis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2018
    Messages:
    3,679
    Likes Received:
    2,252
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If you actually read it, he does not attack the constitution but implies that the Democrats possible Fraud allows for the termination of the constitution.

    Basically, for those who are so blind with hatred that they cannot see the truth, he is stating that the Democrats are terminating the rules and regulations of the constitution with "what he thinks" via Fraud.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2022
  2. Bullseye

    Bullseye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2021
    Messages:
    11,853
    Likes Received:
    10,260
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not even close.
     
  3. yardmeat

    yardmeat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Messages:
    56,117
    Likes Received:
    30,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's literally an attack on the Constitution. He suggests two remedies for himself . . . both of which violate the Constitution.

    He literally suggested two options that both would violate the Constitution. All based on conspiracy theories that not even a lobotomized pet rock would be dumb enough to buy. HIS ****ING SUGGESTIONS would violate the Constitution. Please read it. I realize the Dear Leader can't be bothered to do something like read words, but that's no excuse for his anti-Constitutional defenders.
     
    Quantum Nerd likes this.
  4. yardmeat

    yardmeat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Messages:
    56,117
    Likes Received:
    30,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Unless you read them. But I guess there's never a danger that Trump or his supporters would actually read the ****ing thing.
     
  5. Bullseye

    Bullseye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2021
    Messages:
    11,853
    Likes Received:
    10,260
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I've read them several times - I used my regular glasses; apparently you continue to use your Trump Derangement lens.
     
  6. yardmeat

    yardmeat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Messages:
    56,117
    Likes Received:
    30,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Tell me, what does the Constitution say about how the President should be decided? How does the Constitution say that elections should be determined? Try reading. Your Dear Leader is too fascist and corrupt to do that, but you should be able to do it anyway.
     
  7. ricmortis

    ricmortis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2018
    Messages:
    3,679
    Likes Received:
    2,252
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That in no way or form attacks the constitution. He is attacking the Democrats who he thinks committed Fraud that terminates the Rules and Regulations of the Constitution.

    I swear the blind hatred has clouded your mind past any reasonable doubt.

    Pretend Hillary said this and reread it.

    I will never support Trump. I support the rule of law of which he said nothing wrong, but implied there is Fraud that circumvents the constitution. Anyone with a clear mind can see that.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2022
  8. Bullseye

    Bullseye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2021
    Messages:
    11,853
    Likes Received:
    10,260
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You're still spewing Trump derangement nonsense. Oh, and don't forget the Constitution assumes the elections are conducted fairly and honestly - that's an open question in 2020 with more and more shadiness coming to light.
     
  9. yardmeat

    yardmeat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Messages:
    56,117
    Likes Received:
    30,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Constitution defines how Presidential elections are determined. Overthrowing said elections to install someone else or having a "do over" are unconstitutional. Please read the damn thing, no matter how much your Dear Leader cries when asked to do so.
     
  10. popscott

    popscott Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2021
    Messages:
    17,744
    Likes Received:
    11,868
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Following the laws on the books is Constitutional..... Electoral Count Act of 1887.... a 135 year old active law..... educate yourself and get back to us...
     
  11. yardmeat

    yardmeat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Messages:
    56,117
    Likes Received:
    30,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    His proposed solutions would outright terminate the Constitution's regulations for elections. Period. You'd know that if you, unlike the Dear Leader, had even tried reading iit.

    I'm sorry that you believe that anyone who has read the Constitution and takes it seriously somehow automatically hates Trump.

    Just did. Still fascism.

    Yet you support his attacks on the Constitution.

    Bull ****. You explicitly supported his attack on the rule of law. Explicitly.

     
  12. yardmeat

    yardmeat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Messages:
    56,117
    Likes Received:
    30,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The ECA doesn't say anything about this. Meanwhile, Trump and his lawyers EXPLICITLY AND BY THEIR OWN ****ING ADMISSION TRIED TO CIRCUMVENT THE ECA, which Trump supporters are lying when they say they care about. Educate yourself and get back.
     
  13. Bullseye

    Bullseye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2021
    Messages:
    11,853
    Likes Received:
    10,260
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I already covered that. The Constitution presumes fair and patriotic participation from all parties - It's abundantly clear that the Dems and their useful idiots didn't follow that recipe.
     
  14. yardmeat

    yardmeat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Messages:
    56,117
    Likes Received:
    30,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Constitution presumes that Constitutional rules will be applied to the election . . . rules that you and Trump are adamantly arguing should be done away with. You and Trump clearly hate the "recipe" far more than any Dem does, buddy.
     
  15. ricmortis

    ricmortis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2018
    Messages:
    3,679
    Likes Received:
    2,252
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I see your blind hatred is so profound that you cannot think clearly. He did not propose solutions but exclaimed that Democrats supposed fraud terminates the constitutional rules and regulations.

    In no way or form could your fictional hypothesis hold in a court of law. Mine would win 10 times out of 10.
     
  16. Bullseye

    Bullseye Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2021
    Messages:
    11,853
    Likes Received:
    10,260
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Basically a bold-faced lie. The idiocy of the left never fails to amaze me. Where in the Constitution does it say that a political party can conspire with a social media site to actively suppression information that could have a huge impact on the election. Where does it say states can ignore their own rules to influence the ballot count. Where in the Constitution does it say the a single individual can spend $400,000,000 to direct influence election administration and ballot counting?
     
  17. yardmeat

    yardmeat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Messages:
    56,117
    Likes Received:
    30,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He proposed two solutions, and it isn't the first time he's proposed them and they were not the first ones he's proposed. Speaking of courts those, there are at least two ongoing criminal investigations into his fake elector plot.

    No, the fake elector plot will not "win 10 times out of 10."
    No, the "just declare me the winner because of fraud and install me as the President anyway" plot will not "win 10 times out of 10."
    No, the "*WWWWWAAAHHH* *WAAAAAH* I WANNA DO-OVER" plot will not "win 10 times out of 10."

    Meanwhile, your claim that the ACTUAL Constitutional election process would never hold up in a court of law is also looney nonsense.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2022
  18. yardmeat

    yardmeat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Messages:
    56,117
    Likes Received:
    30,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Where does the Constitution say that rubbing elbows with social media totally overturns the entire Constitutional election process and that a non-Constitution process must be instituted instead? But let's make a bet. You say your position will win 10 times out of 10, right, like @ricmortis does? So, how about the three of us make a friendly wager. Shouldn't be a big risk if your position is going to win 10 times out of 10! If Trump is given the Presidency again before the 2024 election (you guys say this will win 10 times out of 10), I'll donate $1,000 to your favorite charity. Each. But if he isn't, then you each donate $10 to the charity of my choice. Deal?
     
  19. ricmortis

    ricmortis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2018
    Messages:
    3,679
    Likes Received:
    2,252
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I don't want Trump as president ever again and also want Biden nowhere near a white house ever again after his term is up. They are both as corrupt and bullshytters as there ever was in the white house.

    As far as what Trump said being held up in a court of law, he would win 10 times out of 10 being a Judge would determine that he did not attack the constitution directly, but implied the Democrats supposed Fraud as an attack on the constitution.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2022
  20. yardmeat

    yardmeat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Messages:
    56,117
    Likes Received:
    30,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump argued that he should simply be declared the winner and installed, due to his fake fraud claims. This would not win 10 times out of 10.
    Trump's desires for a "re-do" would not win 10 times out of 10. Trump's fake elector scheme likewise would not win 10 out of 10 and is being criminally investigated. Fake fraud claims don't justify overthrowing the Constitution, which is what he has suggested. Explicitly.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2022
  21. ricmortis

    ricmortis Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2018
    Messages:
    3,679
    Likes Received:
    2,252
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So, he is not entitled to his opinion? Hillary thought she won as well and still complains about it in speeches.

    These are both not criminal offenses and does not terminate the constitution or calls for the termination of the constitution. They are both exercising their right to voice an opposing opinion.

    Seems to me some people take things too personally to allow anyone to express an opposing opinion. Does this mean you are too woke?
     
  22. yardmeat

    yardmeat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2010
    Messages:
    56,117
    Likes Received:
    30,612
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No one said that. Try reading.

    Yet she still conceded and, unlike Trump, didn't actually try to steal the election.

    Trump did more than complain.

    No, it just means you are too unwilling to read and would rather make up blatant bull **** than actually read what people have posted. Sad.
     
  23. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    42,498
    Likes Received:
    18,630
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have no interest in election denialism conspiracy theories.

    But you DON'T take out "termination" out. He said it. And he meant it! So your "make believe as if he didn't say it" tactic does not work with anybody who lives in the REAL world.

    I'd say this Hillary person (whoever that is) has gone crazy and should be locked up in an asylum for lunatics. Or, at a minimum, never be allowed to run for President.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2022
  24. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    42,498
    Likes Received:
    18,630
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes. I have read it! And the point I am addressing is the one about terminating the laws and the Constitution. Anything else is irrelevant. Even if there WERE fraud (which there wasn't, but that's irrelevant), the laws and the Constitution comes FIRST. BEFORE the aspirations of any criminal game-show host that you happen to bow down to these days.
     
    Last edited: Dec 7, 2022
    yardmeat likes this.
  25. 19Crib

    19Crib Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2021
    Messages:
    5,643
    Likes Received:
    5,525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I give up.
     

Share This Page