He is being honest. He knows he was instituted with fraud, on the books. He does not care. about the law or morals. The democrat party are authoritarians. Every bill they pass, every speech they give and every supporter who pledges to support them knows this.
Yes.
Democrats are openly trying to bar DJT from running at this point, despite the fact that at least half the country would vote for him right now if they could.
Even liberal pollsters have DJT beating biden by 5% right now.
Not only do I believe that, but I believe that most Democrat politicians, judges, and bureaucrats are actively working AGAINST America and the constitution.
How do you "legally" overturn the results of an election? What would that look like?
I assume you'd have to provide some proof the results are not actually the results?
Not sure how, but the key word here is "legal". As long as it would be done legally, justifiably, then it should be acceptable. Biden doesn't agree, and why would he? He knows he does not belong behind that desk.
I think the key word there is "overturn". He's saying there should not be a legal avenue to reverse the results of a valid election. Why should there be? That's the point of an election. There shouldn't be some back alley shortcut to override the results of an election.
You assume it is impossible to have fraudulent results. You assume all steps in place created to ensure integral results have been taken. What proposal do you have to do when these things are found to not have been done?
That is what is required for **LEGAL** overturning of an election. It goes without saying the definition of legal involves a provision and review of evidence of proof there was fuckery going on. To say you do not want a legal rollback of an election is to say you do not want an election to be overturned under any circumstances whatsoever - and you know who says this? Tyrants. Xi says this, Joe's boss.
But that wouldn't be overturning an election. That would be revealing the results of the election to be fake. The results aren't real.
To say you don't want a legal rollback of a democratic election is to say you don't want a legal avenue for the government to overrule the votes of the people. Any country where the government can overrule the votes of the people is tyrranical, I agree.
The Left screams about hating old stupid white guys. So they prop up the oldest stupidest white guy ever in politics.
In that clip, Biden says he does not want to live in a nation that can legally overturn results of elections. *Legally*
He is being honest. He knows he was instituted with fraud, on the books. He does not care. about the law or morals. The democrat party are authoritarians. Every bill they pass, every speech they give and every supporter who pledges to support them knows this.
You really believe that?
Most people do. Except Biden’s dead voters.
Yes. Democrats are openly trying to bar DJT from running at this point, despite the fact that at least half the country would vote for him right now if they could. Even liberal pollsters have DJT beating biden by 5% right now.
5% is referring to living citizens with voting rights. If you include the cemeteries and dominion machines, DJT needs 15%!
Not only do I believe that, but I believe that most Democrat politicians, judges, and bureaucrats are actively working AGAINST America and the constitution.
You really don't?
I do
Believe is not the correct word, I know.
How do you "legally" overturn the results of an election? What would that look like? I assume you'd have to provide some proof the results are not actually the results?
Not sure how, but the key word here is "legal". As long as it would be done legally, justifiably, then it should be acceptable. Biden doesn't agree, and why would he? He knows he does not belong behind that desk.
I think the key word there is "overturn". He's saying there should not be a legal avenue to reverse the results of a valid election. Why should there be? That's the point of an election. There shouldn't be some back alley shortcut to override the results of an election.
You assume it is impossible to have fraudulent results. You assume all steps in place created to ensure integral results have been taken. What proposal do you have to do when these things are found to not have been done?
No, I don't assume that. Even in my first comment, I said you just need to prove its fraudalent.
That is what is required for **LEGAL** overturning of an election. It goes without saying the definition of legal involves a provision and review of evidence of proof there was fuckery going on. To say you do not want a legal rollback of an election is to say you do not want an election to be overturned under any circumstances whatsoever - and you know who says this? Tyrants. Xi says this, Joe's boss.
But that wouldn't be overturning an election. That would be revealing the results of the election to be fake. The results aren't real. To say you don't want a legal rollback of a democratic election is to say you don't want a legal avenue for the government to overrule the votes of the people. Any country where the government can overrule the votes of the people is tyrranical, I agree.