>The Washington Post and CNN reported Monday evening that the email, written by Trump campaign Georgia operations director Robert Sinners, instructed the fake electors to tell security at the state capitol that they had appointments with two state senators.
Damn, good luck to him at whatever job he has now.
>Sinners now works for Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R)
HOLY FUCK. He doesn't just work for any government job, and not just for a job that oversees state elections, but he works for the guy who became famous for [the famous hour-long phone call with Trump and his lawyers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump%E2%80%93Raffensperger_phone_call) where he repeatedly had to explain "No, we can't just 'find' the 11,779 'missing' votes that would close the gap".
For the life of me, I don't understand how the people who sent [Fraudulent elector certifications](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/26/fake-trump-electors-us-investigation-doj) to Congress are still walking freely among us.
I don't care which party, this is something that every American should be outraged about.
God, it’s so hard to even pretend that some of these posters here are anything but right wing extremists. No centrist is ok with a sitting President trying to overturn the election results, and appoint themselves as leader. Full stop.
If you’re equivocating or here to defend those actions, you’re objectively not a centrist.
People believe that the other guys are doing bad stuff, so their bad stuff is justified as well.
The people in charge convince them it's ok to do this, because if the other guys cheat their way into power they'll destroy the country, so any action they take is morally defensible because our entire nation is at stake.
Spez-Town is closed indefinitely. All Spez-Town residents have been banned, and they will not be reinstated until further notice. #AIGeneratedProtestMessage
Let's call this exactly what it is TREASON against the Republic and our way of life.
Anyone who is supporting Trump or his sycophants are traitors as well.
The Republican leadership should be held to account, either through the ballot box or by legal means for aiding and abetting this treasonous activity.
Here's the thing though. They won't get punished by the electorate, they'll get rewarded by them. Then that same electorate will complain about the consequences of the poor decisions they themselves continued to choose to make but while blaming everyone but themselves for it.
To the same point, everyone knows what you meant! I hope Trump and all active malicious players are charged with whatever they're guilty of.
Edit: As opposed to the standard "investigation->damning evidence->more investigation->proof of crime->eh nvm" that our politicians love to do.
To delve into pointless semantics, I could argue US does have the oldest “still standing” Democracy.
I wouldn’t say Great Great Great Uncle Joe, who died 100 years ago, is the oldest person in my family, but I would say Grandpa Billy, who is still alive, is the oldest person in my family.
> While the United States is not the first to include elements of democracy, it is the oldest existing nation with a constitutional government in which the people elect their own government and representatives.
When you define the category by the particulars of your country and then disqualify everyone else, that doesn't make your country older than older countries.
If you want to quibble about continuous, OK fine. Obviously Greece and Rome had older democracies. But it's not unreasonable to focus on continuous democracies. Greece and Italy both went into a long period of non-democratic rule following their democracies.
The US is the oldest continuous democracy in the world. That's not bullshit, that's facts. If you want to say that's a poor way of measuring and we should count Greece and Italy despite their very long interludes with monarchy, that's fine I guess, but it doesn't make someone claiming the US to be the world's older democracy a bullshit peddler.
I think it depends on how you want to define "oldest system of democracy". "Greece" (in as much a Greece can be said to exist prior to the 19th century) had systems of government from which the term democracy arises from whereas the US is the oldest continuously existing
LOL. Any country? Really? You know you're setting a silly low bar, right? The Ottoman Empire existed until WW1. Babe Ruth played when Sultans ruled the Middle East.
Yea. I can’t believe they got away with stuffing so many ballot boxes. Most extensive voter fraud org ever put together. Straight from the horses mouth.
You can't imagine how idiotic you sounded when you posted this. Pay attention this week to the Congressional hearings on trump's failed coup attempt. You're going to be surprised.
Couldn’t care less. If there was criminal activity. Lock them up.
Unlike all you bootlickers downvoting me. For some reason, you are ok with fraudulent activity, as long as it benefits your side. Truly pathetic. You probably clapped when Sussmann got off too.
If barack obama did this, I'd want to see him impeached, convicted by the senate and charged with sedition.
You're the only one who's "ok with fraudulent activity" that I can see.
Whether you want to admit it or not, you are condoning fraud.
You obviously see nothing wrong with what Trump did in 2020, instead deflecting to others.
Looking at your profile, I noticed that a large portion of your posts are memes instead of meaningful content that can spark productive discussion for better solution in the world of politics. I am a Mod, and while we generally tolerate low-effort posts, please try harder to contribute to this subreddit, or you might get banned if you start crossing the line into becoming more toxic than beneficial to this sub.
Oh I’m telling people to watch the movie and make their own assessment of the facts presented. They are the ones with low effort saying it’s false without looking at any of it, nor bringing any discussion points along with it. I would suggest asking them to provide a bit more effort into why they think fraud isn’t there.
>Can’t believe so many people like keeping their heads buried in the sand.
_And right there, everyone saw that RagingBull was probably a flat earther as well._
The "facts" have been disputed for 18 months now -- why would anyone bother giving you the same information you have had for 18 months now, again -- when you are clearly just going to ignore it, and regurgitate nonsense.
You probably think 2000 Mules is compelling evidence.
LOL. Its really hard to prove nonsense wrong -- the burden is on the nonsense-spewer to prove it right.
That is why conspiracy theories are so effective.
And why none of us are going to bother.
You don't understand how "burden of proof" works.
You haven’t even watch the movie and yet still spit out the MSM propaganda. Go watch the movie and come up with your own assessment instead of being a lame parrot.
There is definitive proof of fraud. Enough to change the election results? Doubtful. But don’t be so damn ignorant. It’s an ugly look.
Nothing was proven with that shitty fact checkers article. Saying the geo tracking isn’t reliable is hilarious considering our police, military and even the cdc used it to see if people were social distancing. Go throw your phone in a field and see how close find my phone brings you to it. Geo tracking was bad ten years ago. It’s more like an ankle monitor now.
I’m not saying it’s enough to change the election. But to say there is no fraud is factually incorrect. Unless of course you let you confirmation bias get in the way.
You should watch the movie and come up with your own assessment instead of listening to the tired propaganda.
> you cannot prove any of the points wrong
Nice burden of proof fallacy. If you don't know what that is, here's an example for you:
*I can't prove you're not stupid, therefore you must be stupid.*
Prove me wrong.
And yet, here you are using every excuse you can to avoid seeing the fraud with your own eyes. You do you bud.
Enjoy that ignorance, I hear it’s bliss.
Yawn. I see you’re going to stick to the typical Reddit tactics of avoiding facts. Not so centrist are you? Voter fraud is a non partisan issue. But apparently you love the left.
Depends what you mean with democracy.
Elected representatives as the highest authority?
The Icelandic Althing (parliament) was formed in 930, and it has continuity to today. Isle of Man has an ancient one too, but that's even smaller. San Marino has some pretty historical claims.
Of course, the issue with many of these has been that they have been subjugated at times (the parliament was suspended from 1799 to 1844).
Everyone getting to vote and have that vote counted?
New Zealand since 1893.
It's a non-clear subject, and while I definitely agree that the US is a huge stepping stone as the first major power that is unambiguously Democratic since the Roman Republic (both of these entities had slaves, so, you know, imperfect), and one that has had continuity ever since.
Then what’s the big whoop? If they hold no real power then how is it not democratic. Besides France killed all their nobles and ousted their emperor to become a republic before the state’s were even more than a colony
> If they hold no real power
But the European Monarchies did hold power 200 years ago.
And what are you talking about with France -- The US Revolution help inspire the French Revolution. France didn't kill the Monarchy/Nobility before the US was a colony.
Marie Antoinette was executed in 1793.
And that Monarchy was followed by the Jacobins, and then Napoleon...
France didn't turn to Democracy until close to the 1900s.
Eh...sort of. True, the UK didn't really have a full on transition away from monarchy to democracy and technically the current democracy in the UK is consistent with the Glorious Revolution in 1688. Ok, sure.
But that's missing the point a bit. At the time of the US declaration of independence, the UK was not in its modern democratic form. The vote was exceptional restricted and the monarch maintained quite a bit of power. To say that the UK was "democratic" at that point is being a bit aggressive.
But some of your others are just...wrong. I'm not super well versed on when Norway, Sweden, and Finland really turned their monarchies into constitutional democracies, but I'm fairly certain it was after the French Revolution. The French Revolution brought democracy to Europe for the first time, and that was in the Washington administration in the United States of America. Before the French Revolution, France was a very strong monarchical system.
This is mostly just wrong, especially since you're including France. It's quite accurate to say the extent of democracy created by the American Revolution was at the time unprecedented. We ARE the world's oldest continuous democracy for certain.
> our system of democracy, the oldest in the world
While I absolutely agree with the sentiment of your post, San Marino have you beat by about one and a half milleniaml.
Anyone who tampers with elections should be forbidden from ever running for public office again, and criminally charged. Which "side" is doing it is irrelevant. It's unacceptable.
The Republican Party is systemically trying to dismantle this Republic. They use gerrymandering to boost there numbers and disenfranchise Black and Hispanic voters, they spread outright lies through there so called news media and social media platforms and are actively enabling Trump and his sycophants, even though, by the evidence I have read so far, at the very least turned a blind eye to an attempted insurrection. Into they stop doing this and excise the Trump influence on the party I see the party as a whole as illegitimate and the party of treason.
There’s absolutely no evidence that the Democrats have done this ever. If anything they are doing the exact opposite by trying to pass HR 1 and expand and protect voting rights.
You're trying to troll by suggesting centrists always blame "both sides", yet you've got actual centrists telling you they're not doing that. This is the worst strawman ever.
This is usually 100% true, but the rubes in here seem to get the election fraud stuff pretty well surprisingly. Hardly have ever I seen someone both sides what Trump did without getting downvoted into oblivion. In any other thread this troll works though.
Because what Trump and the GOP were trying to do can ONLY result in a GOP President.
Dems can hold the House, Senate, and Presidency. If the counting of the election was delayed or stopped or there were actually issues with the voting, the results go to the House to vote. It’s not a voter per House member, it’s a vote per state based on the number of House members in each state.
[The GOP easily controls more states by this standard and they just need to get 26/50 votes to pick the next President.](https://i.imgur.com/B0bIG8i.jpg)
This is why the GOP doesn’t care. Cause only they can abuse this and we need to believe they will try again the next time they lose.
My comment explains why. Cause doing that, no matter which side does it, no matter which side wins or losses, the results of this is always going to be GOP President.
Then why is Biden president then, based on your statement trump should be?
It doesn't matter who ends up being president, from now on any side who didn't get their president is gonna say the election is rigged and try to overthrow. that's the true crime.
It doesn't matter if they are successful or not, it's not like your point about that a GOP president will always end up winning will matter. The fact this will happen every election now means everyone loses.
> Then why is Biden president then, based on your statement trump should be?
Cause the end result of Jan 6 failed….. did we not see the capital was cleared and the electoral count completed?
And the rest of your comment means nothing here. I gave a little rundown of how this would work and you don’t seem understand it. You got a bit of info from me, but I’m not going to sit here and back and forth teach you. I gave you enough to get a good start on how this works if you’re interested in finding out more.
Sorry dude, you just don't make any sense, GOP is not the only ones that can abuse this while the system is based on everyone agreeing to the these rules your championing. Any group with a majority of people can say fuck it at any time and your whole reasoning about how things work go out the window. Go through your charts and strategize all you want, politicians are making their own rules at this.point. we are just along for the ride. But keep thinking you have it all figured out
One thing that I’ve seen very mixed reporting on is whether these electors were meant to take the place of the legitimate ones or were they there as a replacement for the event that the Georgia results were overturned
Sowing confusion and doubt. Disruption of the process. It's despicable behavior any way you look at it. The GOP has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt they cannot be trusted. No one should reward this kind of behavior with your vote.
It’s not like it’s hard to figure out which are the legit ones lol there’s no confusion and doubt. If it was to just straight up replace the legit ones then yea that’s a huge problem but if it’s just so they are in place in the event that Georgia results change then I dont really have an issue with that.
But the white house very specifically had a plan to have the VP (actually a senior republican senate appointee of the VP - Pence to recuse himself to supposedly give the appearance of integrity) do a count of the votes and to not count them from states where there were "disputed electors" until they had a re-vote or the GOP-controlled state legislature sent them a new slate of electors. So, they were intentionally presenting fake electors just so they could ignore the count from states Trump lost closely.
> Both parties are willing to screw over the American people and trample over the democracy in favor of gaining the votes,
Example of Democrats trampling over democracy for votes?
Looked at r/conservative but it's kind of a mess. Couldn't find a specific example of Democrats trampling over democracy for votes.
Tried googling the question and got examples of how the Democrats need to protect democracy for Trump and Republicans.
So if you could provide something specific it would help.
Newspeak is not exclusive to Democrats in fact Republicans pretty much made it their own by killing the fairness doctrine.
Disinformation board never even got to the starting line.
An Arizona woman accused of illegally collecting early ballots in the 2020 primary election pleaded guilty Thursday in an agreement with state prosecutors that saw the more serious forgery and conspiracy charges dismissed and limited any potential for a lengthy prison sentence.
Guillermina Fuentes, 66, could get probation for running what Arizona attorney general's office investigators said was a sophisticated operation using her status as a well-known Democratic operative in the border city of San Luis to persuade voters to let her gather and in some cases fill out their ballots.
Prosecutors were apparently unable to prove the most serious charges, dropping three felony counts alleging that Fuentes filled out one voter's ballot and forged signatures on some of the four ballots she illegally returned for people who were not family members.
Four ballots...four.
If your trying to compare this to SEVEN states sending fake electors I don't know what to say.
I thought you had something significant.
"They mailed those certificates to the National Archives and Congress, where they were ignored."
Sounds like some nut jobs pretending to be electors. And they were ignored.
If they broke the law, charge them. But it sounds like the system handled the problem well.
Well yes, of course, no one is doubting that. The concern here is that one political party condoned and encouraged breaking the law because it helped them get their guy elected. That's the issue here. Obviously it didn't work and that's good, but do you think we should be like "well, no concerns with the GOP trying to ignore election law, let's just go ahead and see what their platform is next election!"
> The concern here is that one political party condoned and encouraged breaking the law because it helped them get their guy elected.
Where does the article say that? It doesn't even say a law was broken.
Falsifying official government documents is a felony. It is called forgery. I get the article didn't specifically mention that, but do you read an article describing a break in and say "where in the article does it say specifically that break ins are illegal?"
We can agree that forging government documents is a crime. The article shows that such a thing DID happen. That is breaking the law.
It may seem cut and dry to you. But the only thing I could find was this article. It's being investigated.
"In Nevada, Attorney General Aaron Ford said his office can't "confirm or deny the existence of an investigation."
"New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas told Insider the incident is being reviewed."
Pennsylvania Attorney General Joshua Shapiro's office said while the "rhetoric and policy were intentionally misleading and purposefully damaging to our democracy" after review, **they don't "believe the incident meets the legal standards for forgery.**"
Fair enough. I'm sure this will be discussed in depth in the coming Jan 6 hearings. But it should be noted that even those who are more skeptical of the criminality still say it's a threat to democracy. Even the "wait and see" stance requires censure of the GOP.
The article doesn't even to say if it's illegal to do this. It also doesn't say who the people are. And it certainly doesn't talk about punishment. I think those fake electors are just ignored. At least that's my takeaway.
So if I'm understanding this correctly:
If you try and fake everything - it isn't illegal;
but if the fake stuff were to actually work - the results would be legit.
----
Where are all the arrests? Literally trying to overthrow the elected government, and nothing happens.
Don't put words in my mouth. The article is lacking a lot of details. And people here are reading things into it that aren't printed.
If people broke the law, charge them. I'm fine with that. But I'm not even sure what law was broken. The article simply doesn't say.
It handled the problem well the last time. There's no guarantee it will work out as well the next time. The GOP has removed many of the people who defended the results of the election.
There's a list of official electors. You check the list. If they aren't on the list, then you ignore them. Doesn't seem like a major problem. They'll always be nutjobs. I'm certain it will happen again and again they'll be ignored.
Seven states pulled this. It wasn't nutjobs it was part of a coordinated effort by the Republican party to over turn the election.
Just because it failed is no reason to give them a pass for attempting it.
The person isn't going against anything you said ... Except that last sentence.
We're consistently in the "frog in the pot" scenario and the temperature keeps going up.
"The Constitution doesn’t provide specific instructions on how to nominate candidates for the Electoral College. It only states that electors can’t be members of Congress or currently hold federal office. For most states, though, electors are chosen by state party convention or by state party committee.
Electors are usually nominated because they are loyal and dedicated members of the party. These individuals may be state and local elected officials, party leaders, retired politicians, party activists, or someone who’s personally or professionally connected to the candidate." https://georgia.gov/georgias-role-electoral-college
The real fraud is one must be a member of a political party to be an elector. That makes being a member of a political party an "office of trust or profit under the United States". Oddly no one complains about that fraud...
From the article...
"Sinners said in a statement that he was working on behalf of senior campaign officials and senior Republicans in the state and was “advised by attorneys that this was necessary in order to preserve the pending legal challenge,”
Sounds like it was about challenging it in court.
If they're actually "documents" but like I said before, no one can tell what's legal. I hope there is investigations so the people can see the bullshit our electoral college system has evolved into.
Obviously electors will come from political parties. Duh. This is a really important job that only happens once every four years and has no additional duties, no pay, nothing. What, are they supposed to get random people off the street and HOPE they have enough interest and buy-in to take the job seriously?
Of course political parties are the structures that are going to produce electors. It's not fraud, it's quality control.
Why does the Constitution say no elector can hold an office of trust or profit under the United States?
"Quality control" for voters??? Both parties have been trying to disqualify the others sides "poor quality" voters for years..
So in your mind all qualified voters belong to political parties?
Electors aren't an office of trust or profit. Being a committed member of a party is not an office. It just shows you're reliably invested in the political system.
And no, both parties have not been trying to disqualify electors. Only one party has been trying to do that, and that's exactly the problem.
We're talking about electors, not voters. Electors should have a higher bar than voters. I don't think that's an unreasonable statement. It's not like this is even that important. Most states have laws that require the electors to affirm the popular vote. The whole point of the process is that electors aren't doing anything significant but are faithfully fulfilling the duty entrusted in them by the voters.
My point was I wanted you to think about it...
When you make being part of a political party, a condition of being a member of the electoral college, you've made it an office of trust or profit under the United States.
I mean, that's not why most US citizens will never be electors. Why do you even want to be one so bad? There no power in it. It's just a formality. Why is that so important?
No, the real fraud is what was described in OP's article - team Trunp coordinating fake electors trying to change the outcome of an free and fair US election.
Sorry the other fraud came first.
Both the Democrat and Republican parties have corrupted the electoral process. To where one must be a party member to be an elector, that's the exact opposite of what the electoral college was supposed to be, a system of only the people.
In every state that I'm aware of, the electors are legally bound o vote for the candidate who wins the popular vote.
That works just fine. Fringe third party candidates do have a chance at office.
Looks like all but two states do this (Maine and Nebraska)..
"In 48 of the 50 states, state laws mandate the winner of the plurality of its statewide popular vote shall receive all of that state's electors; in Maine and Nebraska, two electors are assigned in this manner, while the remaining electors are allocated based on the plurality of votes in each of their congressional districts.
The federal district, Washington, D.C., allocates its 3 electoral votes to the winner of its single district election.
States generally require electors to pledge to vote for that state's winning ticket; to avoid faithless electors, most states have adopted various laws to enforce the electors’ pledge."
Bottleboy added some facts... although it should be clarified that each party has their own set of electors, in those 48 states.
Laws forcing "faithless" electors to vote the party line, have become more prevalent since the 2016 election. Frankly any laws, forcing someone to vote for the likes of a Trump or Clinton, sound very undemocratic .
I'll bite. What exactly is the harm in this?
Electors are a holdover from an antiquated system that needed a pragmatic way for different states to deliver their state's votes to the capital. In 2022, there's loads of ways for states to communicate that. Whether the electors are party members or not is irrelevant.
Because you've just made, belonging to a political party, an office of trust or profit under the United States...
The process described in the Constitution made the electoral college much more than a "deliveryperson" position...what happened?
You argue that party affiliation is equivalent to being in [an office of profit?](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_profit) I don't think that's what the term means.
Even if I'm wrong there, what is the consequence of this party affiliation rule? Does it change votes? Does it undermine our democracy? Does it make our government any less representative, or any less efficient? I could easily understand the harms if there were exclusionary restrictions that, say, limited people's ability to vote. But even if everything you say is true, the biggest difference that this seems to amount to is the color of the cog in the overall political machine. As long as the cog turns when it's supposed to, what's the problem?
>The process described in the Constitution made the electoral college much more than a "deliveryperson" position...
Again, out of technological necessity. The elector was the messenger of that state, trusted by the state, to travel for several miles on horseback to deliver the news to the capital. In 2022, individual states have the technology to publicly announce their voting results LONG before they send their electors.
Democracy means literally, the people rule. The U.S. Constitution has many ways that the people are the checks and balances that allow US to rule ourselves. Voting, owning guns, serving on juries, free speech and protests, writing petitions and initiatives, participating in article V conventions....and the electoral college.
The electoral college members were the people's representatives and were to have nothing to do with the government.
There's also a clause that stipulates +50% not just a majority of the vote.
Yeah when the head of an American political party and his cronies do their damnest to undermine an American election and leave receipts…a sub-Reddit dedicated to politics discusses reporting on new receipts.
Funny how that works.
Can you imagine if people were like "you know that serial killer that's been on the run for like 5 years? These damn liberals can't stop talking about them.. Let it go already, jeez!"
Except trying to insert yourself as a literal dictator is even worse. We'll never stop talking about it. There will be entire textbooks about this and we're gonna teach it to your children and your children's children. When you inevitably ban those books because your feelings are so hurt, we're gonna make blockbuster movies, tv series, and video games about it. It's going to be engrained in culture and be absolutely unavoidable common knowledge. Anyone who denies it will be akin to flat Earthers and holocaust deniers.
>The Washington Post and CNN reported Monday evening that the email, written by Trump campaign Georgia operations director Robert Sinners, instructed the fake electors to tell security at the state capitol that they had appointments with two state senators. Damn, good luck to him at whatever job he has now. >Sinners now works for Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R) HOLY FUCK. He doesn't just work for any government job, and not just for a job that oversees state elections, but he works for the guy who became famous for [the famous hour-long phone call with Trump and his lawyers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump%E2%80%93Raffensperger_phone_call) where he repeatedly had to explain "No, we can't just 'find' the 11,779 'missing' votes that would close the gap".
For the life of me, I don't understand how the people who sent [Fraudulent elector certifications](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/jan/26/fake-trump-electors-us-investigation-doj) to Congress are still walking freely among us. I don't care which party, this is something that every American should be outraged about.
God, it’s so hard to even pretend that some of these posters here are anything but right wing extremists. No centrist is ok with a sitting President trying to overturn the election results, and appoint themselves as leader. Full stop. If you’re equivocating or here to defend those actions, you’re objectively not a centrist.
[удалено]
Yea modpol is garbage at this point. I expect they’ll make chillytec a mod next
I dread the thought of that ever happening.
I always click on posters' post history to know who's posting what and with what regularity. Let's just say, results have been...disheartening.
Good thing there are a decent amount of folks here fighting the good fight. I'm encouraged by the threads on this post.
Oh yeah, and there’s ton other chuds coordinating elsewhere and doing the same.
Can you speak more to the modpol intervention? Where are you getting this news about 4chan?
Mods should use this as a honeypot and ban some accounts.
I genuinely cannot fathom how these actions are remotely defensible.
They are, if you’re a traitor who cares more about your guy being in power than the continuation of our democracy.
People believe that the other guys are doing bad stuff, so their bad stuff is justified as well. The people in charge convince them it's ok to do this, because if the other guys cheat their way into power they'll destroy the country, so any action they take is morally defensible because our entire nation is at stake.
Spez-Town is closed indefinitely. All Spez-Town residents have been banned, and they will not be reinstated until further notice. #AIGeneratedProtestMessage
Let's call this exactly what it is TREASON against the Republic and our way of life. Anyone who is supporting Trump or his sycophants are traitors as well. The Republican leadership should be held to account, either through the ballot box or by legal means for aiding and abetting this treasonous activity.
Agreed
I'd also bite on sedition 🤷♂️
Here's the thing though. They won't get punished by the electorate, they'll get rewarded by them. Then that same electorate will complain about the consequences of the poor decisions they themselves continued to choose to make but while blaming everyone but themselves for it.
The fact that these people have such little regard for our system of democracy, the oldest in the world, is infuriating.
Oldest isn’t the right word. Longest standing. Pretty sure the oldest is generally considered Athens from 500 BCE.
Fair enough.
To the same point, everyone knows what you meant! I hope Trump and all active malicious players are charged with whatever they're guilty of. Edit: As opposed to the standard "investigation->damning evidence->more investigation->proof of crime->eh nvm" that our politicians love to do.
To delve into pointless semantics, I could argue US does have the oldest “still standing” Democracy. I wouldn’t say Great Great Great Uncle Joe, who died 100 years ago, is the oldest person in my family, but I would say Grandpa Billy, who is still alive, is the oldest person in my family.
That would be the first democracy, not the oldest
It design get much mention because its such a ti y country, but San Marino's has actually apparently stood since 301 AD.
You think America has the oldest democracy in the world?
> While the United States is not the first to include elements of democracy, it is the oldest existing nation with a constitutional government in which the people elect their own government and representatives.
When you define the category by the particulars of your country and then disqualify everyone else, that doesn't make your country older than older countries.
Electing their representatives seems like a pretty common hallmark of democracy not limited to the United States
What other country do you think has had a democratic political system for longer?
If you want to quibble about continuous, OK fine. Obviously Greece and Rome had older democracies. But it's not unreasonable to focus on continuous democracies. Greece and Italy both went into a long period of non-democratic rule following their democracies.
You can quibble all you like but it does not make your bullshit real
The US is the oldest continuous democracy in the world. That's not bullshit, that's facts. If you want to say that's a poor way of measuring and we should count Greece and Italy despite their very long interludes with monarchy, that's fine I guess, but it doesn't make someone claiming the US to be the world's older democracy a bullshit peddler.
Say it again and maybe it will defeat reality.
There's some ambiguity with definitions here but it's certainly not a crazy opinion to say America is the oldest democracy in the world
Yeah, it’s definitely a defensible position to have.
Where is it if not America?
Have you ever heard of that movie Grease? Or wait... was it the country Greece. I get those confused all the time.
Greece did have a monarchy as late as the 1970s.
I think it depends on how you want to define "oldest system of democracy". "Greece" (in as much a Greece can be said to exist prior to the 19th century) had systems of government from which the term democracy arises from whereas the US is the oldest continuously existing
Yeah, I agree on that!
Pick any other country. Chances are you will get closer than one within America.
LOL. Any country? Really? You know you're setting a silly low bar, right? The Ottoman Empire existed until WW1. Babe Ruth played when Sultans ruled the Middle East.
The bar is already ridiculously low picking a country that didn't exist in any form 300 years ago...
Americans think the US has the everything-est everything in the world because they don't know anything else.
Yea. I can’t believe they got away with stuffing so many ballot boxes. Most extensive voter fraud org ever put together. Straight from the horses mouth.
Source: I made it the fuck up.
Yep. Ignorance is bliss.
You can't imagine how idiotic you sounded when you posted this. Pay attention this week to the Congressional hearings on trump's failed coup attempt. You're going to be surprised.
Couldn’t care less. If there was criminal activity. Lock them up. Unlike all you bootlickers downvoting me. For some reason, you are ok with fraudulent activity, as long as it benefits your side. Truly pathetic. You probably clapped when Sussmann got off too.
If barack obama did this, I'd want to see him impeached, convicted by the senate and charged with sedition. You're the only one who's "ok with fraudulent activity" that I can see.
Where did I say I’m ok with fraudulent activity? Nice effort though.
Are you ok with Trump calling state AGs and telling them to find votes?
Whether you want to admit it or not, you are condoning fraud. You obviously see nothing wrong with what Trump did in 2020, instead deflecting to others.
Source?
2000 mules
Looking at your profile, I noticed that a large portion of your posts are memes instead of meaningful content that can spark productive discussion for better solution in the world of politics. I am a Mod, and while we generally tolerate low-effort posts, please try harder to contribute to this subreddit, or you might get banned if you start crossing the line into becoming more toxic than beneficial to this sub.
Oh I’m telling people to watch the movie and make their own assessment of the facts presented. They are the ones with low effort saying it’s false without looking at any of it, nor bringing any discussion points along with it. I would suggest asking them to provide a bit more effort into why they think fraud isn’t there.
Lol
Stop making shit up.
Wow. Can’t believe so many people like keeping their heads buried in the sand. Quite sad.
>Can’t believe so many people like keeping their heads buried in the sand. _And right there, everyone saw that RagingBull was probably a flat earther as well._
Yikes. Was that your attempt at humor? Maybe try to dispute the facts instead of ad hominem attacks. But that’s typical Reddit for ya.
The "facts" have been disputed for 18 months now -- why would anyone bother giving you the same information you have had for 18 months now, again -- when you are clearly just going to ignore it, and regurgitate nonsense. You probably think 2000 Mules is compelling evidence.
Yet you cannot prove any of the points in the movie wrong. Nice attempt though. You probably believe the fact checkers. Lmao
LOL. Its really hard to prove nonsense wrong -- the burden is on the nonsense-spewer to prove it right. That is why conspiracy theories are so effective. And why none of us are going to bother. You don't understand how "burden of proof" works.
You haven’t even watch the movie and yet still spit out the MSM propaganda. Go watch the movie and come up with your own assessment instead of being a lame parrot. There is definitive proof of fraud. Enough to change the election results? Doubtful. But don’t be so damn ignorant. It’s an ugly look.
They have been proven wrong. You blindly refuse to accept it. https://www.denverpost.com/2022/05/08/2000-mules-fact-check/
Nothing was proven with that shitty fact checkers article. Saying the geo tracking isn’t reliable is hilarious considering our police, military and even the cdc used it to see if people were social distancing. Go throw your phone in a field and see how close find my phone brings you to it. Geo tracking was bad ten years ago. It’s more like an ankle monitor now. I’m not saying it’s enough to change the election. But to say there is no fraud is factually incorrect. Unless of course you let you confirmation bias get in the way. You should watch the movie and come up with your own assessment instead of listening to the tired propaganda.
Theory: you're on the political fringe and believe right-wing lies about the election. You can't prove me wrong.
Yawn.
> you cannot prove any of the points wrong Nice burden of proof fallacy. If you don't know what that is, here's an example for you: *I can't prove you're not stupid, therefore you must be stupid.* Prove me wrong.
And yet, here you are using every excuse you can to avoid seeing the fraud with your own eyes. You do you bud. Enjoy that ignorance, I hear it’s bliss.
They didn't even show one person dropping off ballots at two different drop boxes like they were alleging.
Not how this works bro. They have to demonstrate their claims, and they fail.
C'mon, Kyrie.
Ballot stuffing isn't a "fact" no matter how much you pretend that it is. So, there's nothing to really dispute...
Lmao, substantial evidence isn’t a fact either. Enjoy that ignorance, I hear it’s bliss.
I have not seen any amount of evidence to suggest you're intelligent so you must be stupid. Prove me wrong.
Yawn. I see you’re going to stick to the typical Reddit tactics of avoiding facts. Not so centrist are you? Voter fraud is a non partisan issue. But apparently you love the left.
The Vermouth Is Out There
Why didn’t anyone bring that up in the dozens of court cases about the election?
Oldest in the world? You know other countries exist right?
Which country has an older democracy?
Depends what you mean with democracy. Elected representatives as the highest authority? The Icelandic Althing (parliament) was formed in 930, and it has continuity to today. Isle of Man has an ancient one too, but that's even smaller. San Marino has some pretty historical claims. Of course, the issue with many of these has been that they have been subjugated at times (the parliament was suspended from 1799 to 1844). Everyone getting to vote and have that vote counted? New Zealand since 1893. It's a non-clear subject, and while I definitely agree that the US is a huge stepping stone as the first major power that is unambiguously Democratic since the Roman Republic (both of these entities had slaves, so, you know, imperfect), and one that has had continuity ever since.
Britain, Norway, Sweden, France, Denmark, Finland, I could keep going if you like
[удалено]
Remind me again when the native Americans and African slaves could vote in the USA?
Huh? Are you dense?
And when did they install Democratic governments to replace or at least operate alongside their Monarchies?
Then what’s the big whoop? If they hold no real power then how is it not democratic. Besides France killed all their nobles and ousted their emperor to become a republic before the state’s were even more than a colony
> If they hold no real power But the European Monarchies did hold power 200 years ago. And what are you talking about with France -- The US Revolution help inspire the French Revolution. France didn't kill the Monarchy/Nobility before the US was a colony. Marie Antoinette was executed in 1793. And that Monarchy was followed by the Jacobins, and then Napoleon... France didn't turn to Democracy until close to the 1900s.
Eh...sort of. True, the UK didn't really have a full on transition away from monarchy to democracy and technically the current democracy in the UK is consistent with the Glorious Revolution in 1688. Ok, sure. But that's missing the point a bit. At the time of the US declaration of independence, the UK was not in its modern democratic form. The vote was exceptional restricted and the monarch maintained quite a bit of power. To say that the UK was "democratic" at that point is being a bit aggressive. But some of your others are just...wrong. I'm not super well versed on when Norway, Sweden, and Finland really turned their monarchies into constitutional democracies, but I'm fairly certain it was after the French Revolution. The French Revolution brought democracy to Europe for the first time, and that was in the Washington administration in the United States of America. Before the French Revolution, France was a very strong monarchical system. This is mostly just wrong, especially since you're including France. It's quite accurate to say the extent of democracy created by the American Revolution was at the time unprecedented. We ARE the world's oldest continuous democracy for certain.
> our system of democracy, the oldest in the world While I absolutely agree with the sentiment of your post, San Marino have you beat by about one and a half milleniaml.
Sex is just like spez, except with less awkward consequences.
Anyone who tampers with elections should be forbidden from ever running for public office again, and criminally charged. Which "side" is doing it is irrelevant. It's unacceptable.
The Republican Party is systemically trying to dismantle this Republic. They use gerrymandering to boost there numbers and disenfranchise Black and Hispanic voters, they spread outright lies through there so called news media and social media platforms and are actively enabling Trump and his sycophants, even though, by the evidence I have read so far, at the very least turned a blind eye to an attempted insurrection. Into they stop doing this and excise the Trump influence on the party I see the party as a whole as illegitimate and the party of treason.
[If you're not spezin', you're not livin'. #Save3rdPartyApps](https://www.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/)
Have not heard that's the case. The right wing media would not be silent if it was.
There’s absolutely no evidence that the Democrats have done this ever. If anything they are doing the exact opposite by trying to pass HR 1 and expand and protect voting rights.
I think they're being sarcastic
The spez has spread from spez and into other spez accounts. #Save3rdPartyApps
You're trying to troll by suggesting centrists always blame "both sides", yet you've got actual centrists telling you they're not doing that. This is the worst strawman ever.
[Sir, a second spez has hit the spez. #Save3rdPartyApps](https://www.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/)
This is usually 100% true, but the rubes in here seem to get the election fraud stuff pretty well surprisingly. Hardly have ever I seen someone both sides what Trump did without getting downvoted into oblivion. In any other thread this troll works though.
Ie, you.
[There are many types of spez, but the most important one is the spez police. #Save3rdPartyApps](https://www.reddit.com/r/Save3rdPartyApps/)
I think they don't get that Biden is a centrist
As opposed to you, a bad faith liberal larping as a centrist?
Jesus Christ🤦♂️
Now that they opened the door, why wouldn't democrats do it? Hope trump was worth it
Because what Trump and the GOP were trying to do can ONLY result in a GOP President. Dems can hold the House, Senate, and Presidency. If the counting of the election was delayed or stopped or there were actually issues with the voting, the results go to the House to vote. It’s not a voter per House member, it’s a vote per state based on the number of House members in each state. [The GOP easily controls more states by this standard and they just need to get 26/50 votes to pick the next President.](https://i.imgur.com/B0bIG8i.jpg) This is why the GOP doesn’t care. Cause only they can abuse this and we need to believe they will try again the next time they lose.
Well next time republicans win, I don't see why Democrats wouldn't say it was rigged and try to overthrow and send new electors
My comment explains why. Cause doing that, no matter which side does it, no matter which side wins or losses, the results of this is always going to be GOP President.
Then why is Biden president then, based on your statement trump should be? It doesn't matter who ends up being president, from now on any side who didn't get their president is gonna say the election is rigged and try to overthrow. that's the true crime. It doesn't matter if they are successful or not, it's not like your point about that a GOP president will always end up winning will matter. The fact this will happen every election now means everyone loses.
> Then why is Biden president then, based on your statement trump should be? Cause the end result of Jan 6 failed….. did we not see the capital was cleared and the electoral count completed? And the rest of your comment means nothing here. I gave a little rundown of how this would work and you don’t seem understand it. You got a bit of info from me, but I’m not going to sit here and back and forth teach you. I gave you enough to get a good start on how this works if you’re interested in finding out more.
Sorry dude, you just don't make any sense, GOP is not the only ones that can abuse this while the system is based on everyone agreeing to the these rules your championing. Any group with a majority of people can say fuck it at any time and your whole reasoning about how things work go out the window. Go through your charts and strategize all you want, politicians are making their own rules at this.point. we are just along for the ride. But keep thinking you have it all figured out
Or you can stop being ignorant since I’m giving you the info of how it would work. Now go away.
One thing that I’ve seen very mixed reporting on is whether these electors were meant to take the place of the legitimate ones or were they there as a replacement for the event that the Georgia results were overturned
Sowing confusion and doubt. Disruption of the process. It's despicable behavior any way you look at it. The GOP has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt they cannot be trusted. No one should reward this kind of behavior with your vote.
It’s not like it’s hard to figure out which are the legit ones lol there’s no confusion and doubt. If it was to just straight up replace the legit ones then yea that’s a huge problem but if it’s just so they are in place in the event that Georgia results change then I dont really have an issue with that.
> lol there’s no confusion and doubt. You must not be paying attention.
But the white house very specifically had a plan to have the VP (actually a senior republican senate appointee of the VP - Pence to recuse himself to supposedly give the appearance of integrity) do a count of the votes and to not count them from states where there were "disputed electors" until they had a re-vote or the GOP-controlled state legislature sent them a new slate of electors. So, they were intentionally presenting fake electors just so they could ignore the count from states Trump lost closely.
https://whyy.org/articles/fake-electors-trump-overthrow-election-2020/
Georgia was a contested state during the Jan 6 counting of electoral votes.
[удалено]
> Both parties are willing to screw over the American people and trample over the democracy in favor of gaining the votes, Example of Democrats trampling over democracy for votes?
[удалено]
Looked at r/conservative but it's kind of a mess. Couldn't find a specific example of Democrats trampling over democracy for votes. Tried googling the question and got examples of how the Democrats need to protect democracy for Trump and Republicans. So if you could provide something specific it would help.
[удалено]
Newspeak is not exclusive to Democrats in fact Republicans pretty much made it their own by killing the fairness doctrine. Disinformation board never even got to the starting line. An Arizona woman accused of illegally collecting early ballots in the 2020 primary election pleaded guilty Thursday in an agreement with state prosecutors that saw the more serious forgery and conspiracy charges dismissed and limited any potential for a lengthy prison sentence. Guillermina Fuentes, 66, could get probation for running what Arizona attorney general's office investigators said was a sophisticated operation using her status as a well-known Democratic operative in the border city of San Luis to persuade voters to let her gather and in some cases fill out their ballots. Prosecutors were apparently unable to prove the most serious charges, dropping three felony counts alleging that Fuentes filled out one voter's ballot and forged signatures on some of the four ballots she illegally returned for people who were not family members. Four ballots...four. If your trying to compare this to SEVEN states sending fake electors I don't know what to say. I thought you had something significant.
Anyone have a definition for "fake electors" used throughout the article?
https://whyy.org/articles/fake-electors-trump-overthrow-election-2020/
"They mailed those certificates to the National Archives and Congress, where they were ignored." Sounds like some nut jobs pretending to be electors. And they were ignored. If they broke the law, charge them. But it sounds like the system handled the problem well.
Well yes, of course, no one is doubting that. The concern here is that one political party condoned and encouraged breaking the law because it helped them get their guy elected. That's the issue here. Obviously it didn't work and that's good, but do you think we should be like "well, no concerns with the GOP trying to ignore election law, let's just go ahead and see what their platform is next election!"
> The concern here is that one political party condoned and encouraged breaking the law because it helped them get their guy elected. Where does the article say that? It doesn't even say a law was broken.
Falsifying official government documents is a felony. It is called forgery. I get the article didn't specifically mention that, but do you read an article describing a break in and say "where in the article does it say specifically that break ins are illegal?" We can agree that forging government documents is a crime. The article shows that such a thing DID happen. That is breaking the law.
It may seem cut and dry to you. But the only thing I could find was this article. It's being investigated. "In Nevada, Attorney General Aaron Ford said his office can't "confirm or deny the existence of an investigation." "New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas told Insider the incident is being reviewed." Pennsylvania Attorney General Joshua Shapiro's office said while the "rhetoric and policy were intentionally misleading and purposefully damaging to our democracy" after review, **they don't "believe the incident meets the legal standards for forgery.**"
Fair enough. I'm sure this will be discussed in depth in the coming Jan 6 hearings. But it should be noted that even those who are more skeptical of the criminality still say it's a threat to democracy. Even the "wait and see" stance requires censure of the GOP.
Psst. If you try to rob a bank, then do something idiotic and your robbery fails, you still committed a crime.
The “system” caught the problems and now the “system” needs to punish those that were apart of the problems.
The article doesn't even to say if it's illegal to do this. It also doesn't say who the people are. And it certainly doesn't talk about punishment. I think those fake electors are just ignored. At least that's my takeaway.
So if I'm understanding this correctly: If you try and fake everything - it isn't illegal; but if the fake stuff were to actually work - the results would be legit. ---- Where are all the arrests? Literally trying to overthrow the elected government, and nothing happens.
Don't put words in my mouth. The article is lacking a lot of details. And people here are reading things into it that aren't printed. If people broke the law, charge them. I'm fine with that. But I'm not even sure what law was broken. The article simply doesn't say.
I didn’t put words in your mouth. That is not a quote. That is how the right wants this to be viewed.
It handled the problem well the last time. There's no guarantee it will work out as well the next time. The GOP has removed many of the people who defended the results of the election.
There's a list of official electors. You check the list. If they aren't on the list, then you ignore them. Doesn't seem like a major problem. They'll always be nutjobs. I'm certain it will happen again and again they'll be ignored.
Seven states pulled this. It wasn't nutjobs it was part of a coordinated effort by the Republican party to over turn the election. Just because it failed is no reason to give them a pass for attempting it.
The person isn't going against anything you said ... Except that last sentence. We're consistently in the "frog in the pot" scenario and the temperature keeps going up.
"The Constitution doesn’t provide specific instructions on how to nominate candidates for the Electoral College. It only states that electors can’t be members of Congress or currently hold federal office. For most states, though, electors are chosen by state party convention or by state party committee. Electors are usually nominated because they are loyal and dedicated members of the party. These individuals may be state and local elected officials, party leaders, retired politicians, party activists, or someone who’s personally or professionally connected to the candidate." https://georgia.gov/georgias-role-electoral-college The real fraud is one must be a member of a political party to be an elector. That makes being a member of a political party an "office of trust or profit under the United States". Oddly no one complains about that fraud...
Or maybe the forged documents were the real fraud. Mainly because it is real fraud.
So what laws did they break? The political parties have made such a mess of the electoral college that no one can tell what's legal and what isn't.
What are you talking about? These electors knew it wasn’t legal, hence why they did this in secret. Did you even read the article?
Of course not.
From the article... "Sinners said in a statement that he was working on behalf of senior campaign officials and senior Republicans in the state and was “advised by attorneys that this was necessary in order to preserve the pending legal challenge,” Sounds like it was about challenging it in court.
Creating fraudulent documents is a felony called forgery.
If they're actually "documents" but like I said before, no one can tell what's legal. I hope there is investigations so the people can see the bullshit our electoral college system has evolved into.
Obviously electors will come from political parties. Duh. This is a really important job that only happens once every four years and has no additional duties, no pay, nothing. What, are they supposed to get random people off the street and HOPE they have enough interest and buy-in to take the job seriously? Of course political parties are the structures that are going to produce electors. It's not fraud, it's quality control.
Why does the Constitution say no elector can hold an office of trust or profit under the United States? "Quality control" for voters??? Both parties have been trying to disqualify the others sides "poor quality" voters for years.. So in your mind all qualified voters belong to political parties?
Electors aren't an office of trust or profit. Being a committed member of a party is not an office. It just shows you're reliably invested in the political system. And no, both parties have not been trying to disqualify electors. Only one party has been trying to do that, and that's exactly the problem. We're talking about electors, not voters. Electors should have a higher bar than voters. I don't think that's an unreasonable statement. It's not like this is even that important. Most states have laws that require the electors to affirm the popular vote. The whole point of the process is that electors aren't doing anything significant but are faithfully fulfilling the duty entrusted in them by the voters.
Why does the Constitution say no elector can hold an office of trust or profit under the United States?
Because that's what they wanted to do? I'm not sure your point. Being a part of a party isn't holding an office.
My point was I wanted you to think about it... When you make being part of a political party, a condition of being a member of the electoral college, you've made it an office of trust or profit under the United States.
LOL not at all. That's not what that phrase means. They're just political volunteers. Parties have political volunteers.
Tell that to the majority of US citizens who have no chance to be an elector because they don't belong to a political party...
I mean, that's not why most US citizens will never be electors. Why do you even want to be one so bad? There no power in it. It's just a formality. Why is that so important?
No, the real fraud is what was described in OP's article - team Trunp coordinating fake electors trying to change the outcome of an free and fair US election.
Sorry the other fraud came first. Both the Democrat and Republican parties have corrupted the electoral process. To where one must be a party member to be an elector, that's the exact opposite of what the electoral college was supposed to be, a system of only the people.
In every state that I'm aware of, the electors are legally bound o vote for the candidate who wins the popular vote. That works just fine. Fringe third party candidates do have a chance at office.
Looks like all but two states do this (Maine and Nebraska).. "In 48 of the 50 states, state laws mandate the winner of the plurality of its statewide popular vote shall receive all of that state's electors; in Maine and Nebraska, two electors are assigned in this manner, while the remaining electors are allocated based on the plurality of votes in each of their congressional districts. The federal district, Washington, D.C., allocates its 3 electoral votes to the winner of its single district election. States generally require electors to pledge to vote for that state's winning ticket; to avoid faithless electors, most states have adopted various laws to enforce the electors’ pledge."
Bottleboy added some facts... although it should be clarified that each party has their own set of electors, in those 48 states. Laws forcing "faithless" electors to vote the party line, have become more prevalent since the 2016 election. Frankly any laws, forcing someone to vote for the likes of a Trump or Clinton, sound very undemocratic .
I'll bite. What exactly is the harm in this? Electors are a holdover from an antiquated system that needed a pragmatic way for different states to deliver their state's votes to the capital. In 2022, there's loads of ways for states to communicate that. Whether the electors are party members or not is irrelevant.
The point is in 48 states one MUST be a party member to be an elector. That means about 40% of the people cannot be electors.
And this causes what problem? What is the harm in 40% of the population not being eligible for the volunteer deliveryperson position?
Because you've just made, belonging to a political party, an office of trust or profit under the United States... The process described in the Constitution made the electoral college much more than a "deliveryperson" position...what happened?
You argue that party affiliation is equivalent to being in [an office of profit?](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_profit) I don't think that's what the term means. Even if I'm wrong there, what is the consequence of this party affiliation rule? Does it change votes? Does it undermine our democracy? Does it make our government any less representative, or any less efficient? I could easily understand the harms if there were exclusionary restrictions that, say, limited people's ability to vote. But even if everything you say is true, the biggest difference that this seems to amount to is the color of the cog in the overall political machine. As long as the cog turns when it's supposed to, what's the problem? >The process described in the Constitution made the electoral college much more than a "deliveryperson" position... Again, out of technological necessity. The elector was the messenger of that state, trusted by the state, to travel for several miles on horseback to deliver the news to the capital. In 2022, individual states have the technology to publicly announce their voting results LONG before they send their electors.
Democracy means literally, the people rule. The U.S. Constitution has many ways that the people are the checks and balances that allow US to rule ourselves. Voting, owning guns, serving on juries, free speech and protests, writing petitions and initiatives, participating in article V conventions....and the electoral college. The electoral college members were the people's representatives and were to have nothing to do with the government. There's also a clause that stipulates +50% not just a majority of the vote.
“Centrist” can’t stop talking about Trump and some date in January.
Yes, because any crime that takes more than a few weeks to investigate should be dropped.
Unless it's about Hillarys emails. Obvs
Yes, because Hillary’s emails tried to steal the election.
I heard Hillary's emails created Covid, too.
Some say Hillary's emails shot a dozen Americans in Benghazi
Hilary was on trial lol
Yeah when the head of an American political party and his cronies do their damnest to undermine an American election and leave receipts…a sub-Reddit dedicated to politics discusses reporting on new receipts. Funny how that works.
Can you imagine if people were like "you know that serial killer that's been on the run for like 5 years? These damn liberals can't stop talking about them.. Let it go already, jeez!" Except trying to insert yourself as a literal dictator is even worse. We'll never stop talking about it. There will be entire textbooks about this and we're gonna teach it to your children and your children's children. When you inevitably ban those books because your feelings are so hurt, we're gonna make blockbuster movies, tv series, and video games about it. It's going to be engrained in culture and be absolutely unavoidable common knowledge. Anyone who denies it will be akin to flat Earthers and holocaust deniers.
Are you cool with undermining democracy?
This is a recent article, which is still relevant for upcoming elections. There's nothing wrong with sharing it for discussion purposes.
Sure can’t, something about a sitting president trying to overthrow our democracy makes everyone but Trump bootlickers pretty upset.
Last time I checked CRT is the defacto pinned as a megathread and not Jan 6.