WILL AMERICANS STAND BY AND LET THEIR DEMOCRACY BE STOLEN?

in #politics4 years ago

image.png

SO, THE USA NO LONGER HAS A FUNCTIONING DEMOCRACY AND WE'RE ALL SUPPOSED TO CARRY ON AS NORMAL, RIGHT?


DO AMERICANS JUST SIMPLY ALLOW WHOLESALE ABUSE OF THEIR ELECTORAL SYSTEM AND OUTRIGHT FRAUD TO WIN THROUGH? I SINCERELY HOPE NOT.


IF TRUMP REALLY IS GOING TO WALK AWAY AND WALK AWAY FROM POLITICS ENTIRELY THEN THE ONLY PEOPLE WHO CAN SORT THIS MESS OUT AND RESTORE DEMOCRACY ARE THE PEOPLE.


WHAT THE HELL WAS THE US SUPREME COURT THINKING BY NOT WANTING TO HEAR THE CASE? WHAT HAPPENED TO THE STATES WHO FAILED TO INVESTIGATE PROPERLY AND DISMISSED ALL THE EVIDENCE? WHAT HAPPENED TO VP MIKE PENCE WHO COULD HAVE REFUSED TO CERTIFY THE RESULT AND INSTEAD SENT IT BACK TO THE STATES FOR RECERTIFICATION?


ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING IN THE SYSTEM TO EXPOSE WRONG DOING AND RECTIFY IT HAS COMPLETELY FAILED. AMERICANS OF ALL POLITICAL PERSUASIONS SHOULD BE HORRIFIED THAT THEIR DEMOCRACY HAS BEEN STOLEN.


ONLY AMERICANS WHO ARE BRAVE ENOUGH TO DEMAND THE TRUTH CAN SAVE AMERICA NOW.

Sort:  

It hasn't been a democracy since the 1800's imo. Funny that they didn't want to hear the case though, makes you wonder who put what in their cups.

This time the fraud is so blatant though. So many anomalies and discrepancies it defies belief that not a thorough investigation has been done into all of this. I hope that some judicial led investigation or other type of forensic exploration of what happened is done because it needs to happen. Yes it's very odd that SCOTUS washed their hands of this event and didn't want to get involved.

Decide what to do on the 21st, before then is wait and see time. This shit is madcore today.

Yes @frot totally. Let's wait and see and take it from there. You never know Trump could have a nice surprise in store but it's looking less and less likely.

Oddly, Trump’s lawyers kept asserting fraud but failing to produce actual evidence of fraud. Go figure.

Oddly I think you should evaluate the hundreds/thousands of affidavits from witnesses, all of the sworn statements and all of the video testimony in the committees. You could also speak to all of the observers who were obstructed from what they were supposed to be doing - observing counting and ensuring fairness. You could also investigate why thousands of excess ballot papers were in circulation, delivered to peoples' homes whose occupants didn't ask for a postal ballot but received more than 5 per person! You might want to ask yourself how thousands of illegitimate voters, many of whom aren't even alive, managed to vote not once but several times. However, I would imagine you're not interested in doing any of these things nor discovering the truth, and I would also imagine you're not interested if the USA is a democracy or not because you are simply motivated by political concerns only, and those concerns are clearly anti-Trump.

This "evidence" is a phantom. Judges repeatedly dismissed it as bogus. Sure, plenty of pro-Trump sites tout it. Doesn't mean it's valid. Even Trump-appointed judges ruled against him. He's a very skilled liar, but that's not enough to create reality.

I would also imagine you're not interested if the USA is a democracy or not

A vivid imagination can create its own reality.

Ah yes all those mostly Democrat judges ruling that there's nothing to see here, fancy that. And then SCOTUS not even prepared to evaluate the case or the evidence, I suppose that's real justice.

You do understand that judges appointed by Trump and other Republicans ruled against him again and again and again? Is that a Democratic conspiracy?

SCOTUS has a long history of refusing to hear particularly weak cases. Is it their fault that Trump hired incompetent lawyers?

Trump did not appoint judges on the basis of their potential loyalty to him nor should he have done. He did not install his cronies on the Supreme Court bench unlike plenty of other presidents would. The judiciary are a very well established branch of government that has no time for rebels or anti-establishment sentiment. Trump was never in favour with the judiciary. Furthermore, the Supreme Court never stated the Texas case had no merit but no standing, i.e Trump did not have enough legal stake in the Texas claim for it to be heard, it was down to more procedural issues as far as I can tell.

However, the Supreme Court were very stupid not to hear the case. They were incredibly stupid not to give Trump his day in court, in a SCOTUS showdown with a judgement from the highest court in the land. The Supreme Court has merely fanned the flames of a fire that will burn for a very, very long time.

Trump did not appoint judges on the basis of their potential loyalty to him

Oh, please. That’s exactly why he appointed Amy Coney Barrett.

And the Texas case was a bad joke. It was widely seen as Paxton’s application for a Presidential pardon. Competent lawyers would not have bothered to file it. Competent lawyers factor in standing before filing suit.

A vivid imagination can create its own reality.

You certainly can.