Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Easy Truth

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Easy Truth last won the day on January 20

Easy Truth had the most liked content!

About Easy Truth

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1713 profile views
  1. He also accepted that Biden is the legitimate president. That is the difference he has with you. He was not duped.
  2. Fake news again Dude. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related_to_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election
  3. So more than 50 courts the United States are like the OJ court. If they were, I would have stormed the Capitol too. There is no Justice in the United States. We can't count on anything. I can get murdered at any time and the guy will get away with it. Careful with this thought process. If we continue on this trajectory, there will be no country left.
  4. One cannot over turn an election by simply shouting "MASSIVE fraud" either. Show us links to the rulings and we can go through them. Can questioning be unlimited? One has to examine: What should stop that process. Why not question ALL previous presidential elections? Why not revisit Gore vs. Bush? I will argue that the questioning happened and ended properly in the courts. As I said before, if you are arguing that it did not work, you are arguing against the efficacy of judicial system (maybe fraud or corruption or a problem in the judicial system). That courts can't do it right
  5. That would mean you are right, there was massive fraud. Massive fraud implying a coordinated, directed effort to commit fraud (steal the vote). The case would have to make that there was "enough" defrauding to change the election. Not the amount that happens typically in all elections. If you can get around the issue that Arizona and Georgia with Republican governors ALSO were part of the fraud, then you would have a credible case. Otherwise, Arizona and Georgia win the presidency for Biden. In other words, if the assumed fraud in Pa was "similar" in Michigan etc. , it still would not cha
  6. It would be massive fraud in Pa and in that case Pa should go to Trump. But ... Biden would still be president because he would still have the electoral votes to make him president. Pa does not matter. If you think it does or did, you were duped.
  7. I've made the case that No massive fraud, especially in the legal sense occurred. She was duped. She simply was on the losing side of an election. There was no need for her to risk her life and to die.
  8. Based on your request, you are not arguing fraud anymore. You simply want a procedural change. This is a major shift. Not an allegation of fraud If so, the question is why was this not fought in court before the election? The possibility of advantage was known. Why is it called fraud when everyone knew about it? That is the fraud that has been perpetrated. "Calling it fraud" That is what got that woman killed The truth is, it was incompetence, mistakes, lack of coordination which causes a loss
  9. Would you agree that you want a change in the "rules of evidence" that courts use in the United States? If so, what is that change? How should courts deal with "non credible" evidence? How should they deal with "lack of standing"? Should next time when Democrats object, a special privilege be given to them in an election? Should Texas have a right to interfere with internal issues within Pennsylvania? "When someone says, I never saw it happen, but it must have happened" should we investigate it?
  10. Out of all the battleground states, if you can convince me that Arizona and Georgia, who have Republican governors at the helm, had massive coordinated fraud to prevent Trump from winning, you will convince me. (They are used because their Governors would have every reason to push the results in Trump's favor) Keep in mind, these two states (Arizona and Georgia) alone (ignoring ALL other battle ground states, as in Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin etc.) gave Biden the Presidency (above 270 electoral votes). Pennsylvania for instance is a moot point if Arizona and Georgia went to Biden
  11. That is a valid concern. The basic push back on it is that fact that Trump or the Republican party had opportunity to address those issues, in court, far before the election. That was their responsibility. In fact, the California republican party did do that successfully and the gained republican seats in communist California. So ultimately, there may perhaps be unfair advantage due to mail in ballots for Democrats, but there was no (massive coordinated) LEGAL fraud. Whatever happened for the most part has been legal. Now moving forward, a discussion about mail in ballots and "who should vote"
  12. You forgot C. Relieved Trump lost and not looking forward to Biden
  13. Too much word salad there. Just sum it up. He was incompetent.
  14. It is easier because there is more than ample evidence. There is no attempt on his part to even hide it.
  15. And maybe Stalin believed in laissez fair capitalism. He saw the folly in respecting individual rights so he just acted like communist. We can both play at arbitrary statements.
  • Create New...