(09-12-2024 05:21 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 05:01 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 04:37 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  I'm not sure why some of y'all are skeptical about this. Didn't they feed the questions beforehand to Hillary in 2016? Or, was that Joe in 2020? I forget.

Skeptical of the source, not necessarily the info. I'm sure it's right to some degree. I'm just not buying the source without confirmation.

Well, let's just say if the user doesn't show his affidavit before this weekend as promised, he'll never be taken seriously again.

When it was just one of the mini-news sites,. i was skeptical until this guy claimed he had the affidavit. You don't dare compromise your X account for something like this, unless you really believe you've got something.

That's the way I'm looking at it.

(09-12-2024 04:33 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  This is just as serious. Mark Penn is calling for ABC/Harris to be investigated. It sounds like there is some "there" there.

Yeah, scripted answers because anyone with half a brain knew they were going to ask about the economy, immigration, abortion, Afghanistan, and health care. No real shockers there.

Harris spent 5 days prepping like a professional so she had answers for the hot topics already prepped.

Trump doesn’t have half a brain so from him you got “I have concepts of a plan” and “they are eating the dogs”.

(09-12-2024 05:43 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 04:33 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  This is just as serious. Mark Penn is calling for ABC/Harris to be investigated. It sounds like there is some "there" there.

Yeah, scripted answers because anyone with half a brain knew they were going to ask about the economy, immigration, abortion, Afghanistan, and health care. No real shockers there.

Harris spent 5 days prepping like a professional so she had answers for the hot topics already prepped.

Trump doesn’t have half a brain so from him you got “I have concepts of a plan” and “they are eating the dogs”.

you nailed it ... it has to suck watching the 'Elon Purchases Equivalent of Alaska' in real-binary-time, Ja?!

it has to be that itch ewe'll never scratch, Ja?!

(09-12-2024 04:36 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  They will never release anything because they don’t have anything. Claiming to have seen this proof to get the usual assortment of morons spun up, but much like Trumps healthcare plan it will never be released.

You're right. Nothing will come of this.

Look at Hillary. She cheated too and nothing ever happened to her.

(09-12-2024 05:43 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 04:33 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  This is just as serious. Mark Penn is calling for ABC/Harris to be investigated. It sounds like there is some "there" there.

Yeah, scripted answers because anyone with half a brain knew they were going to ask about the economy, immigration, abortion, Afghanistan, and health care. No real shockers there.

Harris spent 5 days prepping like a professional so she had answers for the hot topics already prepped.

Trump doesn’t have half a brain so from him you got “I have concepts of a plan” and “they are eating the dogs”.

Wharton Grad
Billionaire
President

Yeah no brain. Tell us your creds sub 80

If you think having the questions doesnt matter i cant help you



Vote for the drunk whore idgaf. Youll suffer

(09-12-2024 04:36 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  They will never release anything because they don’t have anything. Claiming to have seen this proof to get the usual assortment of morons spun up, but much like Trumps healthcare plan it will never be released.

So, it's just Russian disinformation then (like Hunter's laptop)?

(09-12-2024 03:20 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Quote:I will be releasing an affidavit from an ABC whistleblower regarding the debate. I have just signed a non-disclosure agreement with the attorney of the whistleblower. The affidavit states how the Harris campaign was given sample question which were essentially the same questions that were given during the debate and separate assurances of fact checking Donald Trump and that she would NOT be fact checked. Accordingly, the affidavit states several other factors that were built into the debate to give Kamala a significant advantage. I have seen and read the affidavit and after the attorney blacks out the name of the whistleblower and other information that could dox the whistleblower, I will release the full affidavit. I will be releasing the affidavit before the weekend is out.

Of course they had the questions. The former head of the DNC, Donna Brazile, still works there. Its not like she wasnt caught doing giving the debate question to a democrat presdiential candidate before. Nothing happend to her that----and nothing will happen to her this time. Its ABC---they quit caring about ethics and journalistic integrity ages ago.

(09-12-2024 05:23 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 05:21 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 05:01 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 04:37 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  I'm not sure why some of y'all are skeptical about this. Didn't they feed the questions beforehand to Hillary in 2016? Or, was that Joe in 2020? I forget.

Skeptical of the source, not necessarily the info. I'm sure it's right to some degree. I'm just not buying the source without confirmation.

Well, let's just say if the user doesn't show his affidavit before this weekend as promised, he'll never be taken seriously again.

When it was just one of the mini-news sites,. i was skeptical until this guy claimed he had the affidavit. You don't dare compromise your X account for something like this, unless you really believe you've got something.

That's the way I'm looking at it.

Dude has about 26K followers, lol.

AC, please don't quote CP's Empire State Building posts. Thanks.

(09-12-2024 06:03 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 05:23 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 05:21 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 05:01 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 04:37 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  I'm not sure why some of y'all are skeptical about this. Didn't they feed the questions beforehand to Hillary in 2016? Or, was that Joe in 2020? I forget.

Skeptical of the source, not necessarily the info. I'm sure it's right to some degree. I'm just not buying the source without confirmation.

Well, let's just say if the user doesn't show his affidavit before this weekend as promised, he'll never be taken seriously again.

When it was just one of the mini-news sites,. i was skeptical until this guy claimed he had the affidavit. You don't dare compromise your X account for something like this, unless you really believe you've got something.

That's the way I'm looking at it.

Dude has about 26K followers, lol.

And that matters how?

(09-12-2024 06:08 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 06:03 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 05:23 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 05:21 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 05:01 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Skeptical of the source, not necessarily the info. I'm sure it's right to some degree. I'm just not buying the source without confirmation.

Well, let's just say if the user doesn't show his affidavit before this weekend as promised, he'll never be taken seriously again.

When it was just one of the mini-news sites,. i was skeptical until this guy claimed he had the affidavit. You don't dare compromise your X account for something like this, unless you really believe you've got something.

That's the way I'm looking at it.

Dude has about 26K followers, lol.

And that matters how?

Makes me more skeptical b/c he's not well established with a long track record endorsed by large numbers of followers.

Not the only criteria, but I'm always more skeptical of info coming from somebody like this, as opposed to somebody like Joe Rogan or Dan Bongino.

That doesn't mean he is wrong. I tend to think he is likely correct. But I'm skeptical until I see more proof. All we have for now is a tweet.

He has nearly 100k followers.

(09-12-2024 06:21 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 06:08 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 06:03 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 05:23 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 05:21 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  Well, let's just say if the user doesn't show his affidavit before this weekend as promised, he'll never be taken seriously again.

When it was just one of the mini-news sites,. i was skeptical until this guy claimed he had the affidavit. You don't dare compromise your X account for something like this, unless you really believe you've got something.

That's the way I'm looking at it.

Dude has about 26K followers, lol.

And that matters how?

Makes me more skeptical b/c he's not well established with a long track record endorsed by large numbers of followers.

Not the only criteria, but I'm always more skeptical of info coming from somebody like this, as opposed to somebody like Joe Rogan or Dan Bongino.

That doesn't mean he is wrong. I tend to think he is likely correct. But I'm skeptical until I see more proof. All we have for now is a tweet.

That's about what I said. Until I see more proof. There's a lot going on right now, it's just something else to keep up with.

(09-12-2024 06:24 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  He has nearly 100k followers.

So what? Still small. I said somebody like Rogan and Bongino, I would believe it on their word. Not this dude at 26K or 100K.

But look at this link to his home page and tell me how many followers it says. Did I miss something? Like I said, either way, it's the same to me.

https://x.com/TexicanTrumpian?ref_src=tw...id19741900

I can't believe you guys are getting all twisted up about this. All I said was I believe he's right, but I'm skeptical without proof.

I have my opinion, you have yours. You don't speak for me, any more than the peeps on the left in here do.

(09-12-2024 06:32 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 06:24 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  He has nearly 100k followers.

So what? Still small. I said somebody like Rogan and Bongino, I would believe it on their word. Not this dude at 26K or 100K.

But look at this link to his home page and tell me how many followers it says. Did I miss something? Like I said, either way, it's the same to me.

https://x.com/TexicanTrumpian?ref_src=tw...id19741900

I can't believe you guys are getting all twisted up about this. All I said was I believe he's right, but I'm skeptical without proof.

I have my opinion, you have yours. You don't speak for me, any more than the peeps on the left in here do.

He didn't post it. Black Insurrectionist posted it.

(09-12-2024 06:36 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 06:32 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 06:24 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  He has nearly 100k followers.

So what? Still small. I said somebody like Rogan and Bongino, I would believe it on their word. Not this dude at 26K or 100K.

But look at this link to his home page and tell me how many followers it says. Did I miss something? Like I said, either way, it's the same to me.

https://x.com/TexicanTrumpian?ref_src=tw...id19741900

I can't believe you guys are getting all twisted up about this. All I said was I believe he's right, but I'm skeptical without proof.

I have my opinion, you have yours. You don't speak for me, any more than the peeps on the left in here do.

He didn't post it. Black Insurrectionist posted it.

Okay. Same answer.

(09-12-2024 06:28 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 06:21 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 06:08 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 06:03 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 05:23 PM)Redbanksdog Wrote:  That's the way I'm looking at it.

Dude has about 26K followers, lol.

And that matters how?

Makes me more skeptical b/c he's not well established with a long track record endorsed by large numbers of followers.

Not the only criteria, but I'm always more skeptical of info coming from somebody like this, as opposed to somebody like Joe Rogan or Dan Bongino.

That doesn't mean he is wrong. I tend to think he is likely correct. But I'm skeptical until I see more proof. All we have for now is a tweet.

That's about what I said. Until I see more proof. There's a lot going on right now, it's just something else to keep up with.

I'm right there with you. I mean I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if this actually happened. But until we actually get confirmation from a credible source, it's all speculation and hearsay.

Dont be naive.

She had the questions. Id be shocked if she didnt

How stupid are people

Come on




https://nypost.com/2024/09/12/us-news/ab...la-harris/

(09-12-2024 07:00 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

Dont be naive.

She had the questions. Id be shocked if she didnt

How stupid are people

Come on




https://nypost.com/2024/09/12/us-news/ab...la-harris/

Of course she got the questions. That's not what we're debating.

Click through on the original tweet. I know you didn't do that.

He also claims separate assurances ahead of time that Trump would be fact checked and that she would not be. He also claims there were several other factors built into the debate, but he doesn't name any of them.

Probably ALL that is true, but I want to see better proof before I accept all those details.

(09-12-2024 07:14 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(09-12-2024 07:00 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

Dont be naive.

She had the questions. Id be shocked if she didnt

How stupid are people

Come on




https://nypost.com/2024/09/12/us-news/ab...la-harris/

Of course she got the questions. That's not what we're debating.

Click through on the original tweet. I know you didn't do that.

He also claims separate assurances ahead of time that Trump would be fact checked and that she would not be. He also claims there were several other factors built into the debate.

Probably ALL that is true, but I want to see better proof before I accept all those details.

That's my thought process as well. We need an independent source to corroborate the guy's claims.