This "Trump will refuse to leave office" thing is complete fear porn.

Once the dust settles he will walk away - he may kick and scream but he will leave if / when Biden is officially anointed.

(11-18-2020 08:59 AM)Eldonabe Wrote:  This "Trump will refuse to leave office" thing is complete fear porn.

Once the dust settles he will walk away - he may kick and scream but he will leave if / when Biden is officially anointed.

It reveals how sick and deranged the Democrats and media are. And based on the last 4 years, it reveals how they would react.

Sounds like the presidents of Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and Google are at it again. Nothing new.

If you have a Kraken, it’s probably time to release it. I mean, if not now—when?

if they have so much evidence of fraud, why are they yet to bring up any evidence in court, and why are his lawyers ok with admitting that there isn't fraud? Wouldn't the court be the place to show the evidence?

(11-19-2020 10:21 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  if they have so much evidence of fraud, why are they yet to bring up any evidence in court, and why are his lawyers ok with admitting that there isn't fraud? Wouldn't the court be the place to show the evidence?

In Texas Hold'em you're dealt two cards. IF you're dealt pocket rockets and on the flop the other two Aces are shown, do you foolishly go all in or do you try to build the pot and hope to sucker in someone who's attempting to bluff?

Me I play conservatively until the river. If someone bets or raises, I call. Then the last round I see how serious they are..

The more I build the better it is in the long run. They're not trying to be half assed and go all in to scare everyone.

(11-19-2020 10:28 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:21 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  if they have so much evidence of fraud, why are they yet to bring up any evidence in court, and why are his lawyers ok with admitting that there isn't fraud? Wouldn't the court be the place to show the evidence?

In Texas Hold'em you're dealt two cards. IF you're dealt pocket rockets and on the flop the other two Aces are shown, do you foolishly go all in or do you try to build the pot and hope to sucker in someone who's attempting to bluff?

Me I play conservatively until the river. If someone bets or raises, I call. Then the last round I see how serious they are..

The more I build the better it is in the long run. They're not trying to be half assed and go all in to scare everyone.

losing 27 out of 28 court cases isn't waiting until the river, it's folding with quads... but that is assuming they have quads. At this point, they are playing like they have deuce/7 offsuit

(11-19-2020 10:28 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:21 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  if they have so much evidence of fraud, why are they yet to bring up any evidence in court, and why are his lawyers ok with admitting that there isn't fraud? Wouldn't the court be the place to show the evidence?

In Texas Hold'em you're dealt two cards. IF you're dealt pocket rockets and on the flop the other two Aces are shown, do you foolishly go all in or do you try to build the pot and hope to sucker in someone who's attempting to bluff?

Me I play conservatively until the river. If someone bets or raises, I call. Then the last round I see how serious they are..

The more I build the better it is in the long run. They're not trying to be half assed and go all in to scare everyone.

in simpler terms, they're not democrats...

(11-19-2020 10:21 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  if they have so much evidence of fraud, why are they yet to bring up any evidence in court, and why are his lawyers ok with admitting that there isn't fraud? Wouldn't the court be the place to show the evidence?

They dont have to prove fraud. Stop believing the facebook and the Twitter.

(11-19-2020 10:30 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:28 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:21 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  if they have so much evidence of fraud, why are they yet to bring up any evidence in court, and why are his lawyers ok with admitting that there isn't fraud? Wouldn't the court be the place to show the evidence?

In Texas Hold'em you're dealt two cards. IF you're dealt pocket rockets and on the flop the other two Aces are shown, do you foolishly go all in or do you try to build the pot and hope to sucker in someone who's attempting to bluff?

Me I play conservatively until the river. If someone bets or raises, I call. Then the last round I see how serious they are..

The more I build the better it is in the long run. They're not trying to be half assed and go all in to scare everyone.

losing 27 out of 28 court cases isn't waiting until the river, it's folding with quads... but that is assuming they have quads. At this point, they are playing like they have deuce/7 offsuit

Are you sure about those numbers? Considering I know Trump himself has won more than 1.

(11-19-2020 10:30 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:28 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:21 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  if they have so much evidence of fraud, why are they yet to bring up any evidence in court, and why are his lawyers ok with admitting that there isn't fraud? Wouldn't the court be the place to show the evidence?

In Texas Hold'em you're dealt two cards. IF you're dealt pocket rockets and on the flop the other two Aces are shown, do you foolishly go all in or do you try to build the pot and hope to sucker in someone who's attempting to bluff?

Me I play conservatively until the river. If someone bets or raises, I call. Then the last round I see how serious they are..

The more I build the better it is in the long run. They're not trying to be half assed and go all in to scare everyone.

losing 27 out of 28 court cases isn't waiting until the river, it's folding with quads... but that is assuming they have quads. At this point, they are playing like they have deuce/7 offsuit

27 out of 28? Do you have a source for that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

(11-19-2020 10:33 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:21 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  if they have so much evidence of fraud, why are they yet to bring up any evidence in court, and why are his lawyers ok with admitting that there isn't fraud? Wouldn't the court be the place to show the evidence?

They dont have to prove fraud. Stop believing the facebook and the Twitter.

except Trump's own lawyers have said that these cases aren't about fraud. If it isn't about fraud, what is it about?

(11-19-2020 10:36 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:33 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:21 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  if they have so much evidence of fraud, why are they yet to bring up any evidence in court, and why are his lawyers ok with admitting that there isn't fraud? Wouldn't the court be the place to show the evidence?

They dont have to prove fraud. Stop believing the facebook and the Twitter.

except Trump's own lawyers have said that these cases aren't about fraud. If it isn't about fraud, what is it about?

I hope to god you arent an attorney.

(11-19-2020 10:36 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:33 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:21 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  if they have so much evidence of fraud, why are they yet to bring up any evidence in court, and why are his lawyers ok with admitting that there isn't fraud? Wouldn't the court be the place to show the evidence?

They dont have to prove fraud. Stop believing the facebook and the Twitter.

except Trump's own lawyers have said that these cases aren't about fraud. If it isn't about fraud, what is it about?

raising money for the new Trump TV.

(11-19-2020 10:36 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:30 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:28 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:21 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  if they have so much evidence of fraud, why are they yet to bring up any evidence in court, and why are his lawyers ok with admitting that there isn't fraud? Wouldn't the court be the place to show the evidence?

In Texas Hold'em you're dealt two cards. IF you're dealt pocket rockets and on the flop the other two Aces are shown, do you foolishly go all in or do you try to build the pot and hope to sucker in someone who's attempting to bluff?

Me I play conservatively until the river. If someone bets or raises, I call. Then the last round I see how serious they are..

The more I build the better it is in the long run. They're not trying to be half assed and go all in to scare everyone.

losing 27 out of 28 court cases isn't waiting until the river, it's folding with quads... but that is assuming they have quads. At this point, they are playing like they have deuce/7 offsuit

27 out of 28? Do you have a source for that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Sure..

Facebook
Twitter
Mother Jones
CSNBBS

(11-19-2020 10:36 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:30 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:28 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:21 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  if they have so much evidence of fraud, why are they yet to bring up any evidence in court, and why are his lawyers ok with admitting that there isn't fraud? Wouldn't the court be the place to show the evidence?

In Texas Hold'em you're dealt two cards. IF you're dealt pocket rockets and on the flop the other two Aces are shown, do you foolishly go all in or do you try to build the pot and hope to sucker in someone who's attempting to bluff?

Me I play conservatively until the river. If someone bets or raises, I call. Then the last round I see how serious they are..

The more I build the better it is in the long run. They're not trying to be half assed and go all in to scare everyone.

losing 27 out of 28 court cases isn't waiting until the river, it's folding with quads... but that is assuming they have quads. At this point, they are playing like they have deuce/7 offsuit

27 out of 28? Do you have a source for that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

any news source tracking his legal cases. He's only won 1 case so far, with every single other one being tossed. It might not be exactly 27 or 28, but as of a couple days ago he was 1 for 25

(11-19-2020 10:37 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:36 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:33 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:21 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  if they have so much evidence of fraud, why are they yet to bring up any evidence in court, and why are his lawyers ok with admitting that there isn't fraud? Wouldn't the court be the place to show the evidence?

They dont have to prove fraud. Stop believing the facebook and the Twitter.

except Trump's own lawyers have said that these cases aren't about fraud. If it isn't about fraud, what is it about?

I hope to god you arent an attorney.

so it isn't about fraud? it isn't about him being "cheated" out of the election?

(11-19-2020 10:36 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:33 AM)shere khan Wrote:  

(11-19-2020 10:21 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  if they have so much evidence of fraud, why are they yet to bring up any evidence in court, and why are his lawyers ok with admitting that there isn't fraud? Wouldn't the court be the place to show the evidence?

They dont have to prove fraud. Stop believing the facebook and the Twitter.

except Trump's own lawyers have said that these cases aren't about fraud. If it isn't about fraud, what is it about?

Some cases are about fraud. Most are about adherence to the law. It’s much easier to prove the law wasn’t followed than it is to build a fraud case. I mean think about it. Let’s say you are a police unit and you are told to begin building a case for wide spread fraud and be ready to go to court in a week. Good luck. Even if you assume there is widespread fraud that was sufficient to alter the election—building a case ready for court in a week or two is impossible unless a bunch of participants simply roll over and admit it.

There really isn’t time to track down and build a sufficient fraud case even if wide spread fraud exists. The most likely place for fraud is ballot harvesting. To find that, you’d have to verify every individual mail in ballot. That is slow, laborious, time consuming work—for which there simply isn’t time.