Thanks a bunch!Yes, of course!
Thanks a bunch!Yes, of course!
But he didn't have to say that at all. He could just present the evidence. But what's needed is evidence indicative of the scale of the fraud. Too many of the anecdotes that Tucker and Hannity are presenting are rather small in scope. Some highly questionable practices by election workers, for example, could translate into many thousands of votes -- but it needs to be stated as such. Hannity never does that. The only person who really got to the larger numbers is Trump's press secretary, who spoke on Hannity. She's very good. As is Sydney Powell (Flynn's lawyer) -- she spoke to Lou Dobbs recently. She talks about Hammer and Scorecard among other issues, but the numbers she's conveying are massive in scale. It's that aspect that needs to be emphasized, or else it just sounds anecdotal, and the kind of voter fraud you might expect to see during any election. What needs to be made clear is that this is of a much larger scale and more complex and systemic. And it's not that there isn't evidence of that. So, it's a matter of what these "presenters" are going to emphasize. To me, by not emphasizing the scale of the operation they are colluding with the status quo at Fox.Actually, I didn't interpret the comment you're referring to by Tucker as "selling out". I think he was just being cautious and strategic since he was broadcasting from Fox. If he would have just brutally fanfared "Election fraud! Trump won!", he would have just given more bullets to the enemy. Or, that's what I think.
If the USA is a new Rome, Washington is a new "city on a hill" then maybe history will repeat itself again.
Sarah Lee at Red State wrote, "The Trump administration’s legal challenge — and his legal team has shown amazing resolve in revealing only little bits here and there — is starting to take shape, and it could put as many as 94 electoral college votes in play by some estimates."
It is clear that stuffing the ballots with illegitimate mail-in votes was not enough to put Biden over the top. Democrats literally own the voting booths. Companies owned by Democrats ran the computer software to count the votes in 28 states.
Do not let the depth and breadth of the Democrat Fraud Machine depress you. This is the ammunition to take the case to the Supreme Court, where five conservative justices will frown on the violations of election law in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, and the 4 AM ballot dumps in Michigan and elsewhere.
I wouldn't trust John McCain Roberts to walk a dog, but five other justices likely will not rubber stamp this fraud.
Enough fraud, enough invalidation. Team Trump must stop certifications in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. That will take federal court action on a scale never seen before.
All I want to hear is the rage, crying, and gnashing of teeth when the Supreme Court kicks the election to the U.S, House.
The romantic fiction books are set in an historical era and culture where public values of marriage, family, and honor were very important, despite hypocrisy and corruption. Perhaps the US today stands in a similar role, where American values can be remembered after the empire has collapsed. What would those American values be? Freedom and hard work?I think the U.S.A. may have fallen short of it's great claim to American exceptionalism. Even Putin asked us at the U.N. to question if our claims to exceptionalism hold up under scrutiny. It may be that those programs instilled in us Americans almost from birth need to be questioned due to the corrupt reality we are now seeing in almost every aspect of our society. Those claims may really be 5D (dead) in reality.
This won't keep me from watching Tucker, although I don't specifically follow him. However, the statement we're discussing was a notable reveal. Antennae up!
Actually, I didn't interpret the comment you're referring to by Tucker as "selling out". I think he was just being cautious and strategic since he was broadcasting from Fox. If he would have just brutally fanfared "Election fraud! Trump won!", he would have just given more bullets to the enemy. Or, that's what I think.
I followed David for awhile on Infowars. I liked him and thought he was the best reporter there. I see he has the same opinion as I have about Pieczenik for the same reason. He may have dismissed the sting possibility because he thought it came from him which is understandable. Thats disappointing about CISA. I like what Thomas Wicktor said about it but maybe he doesn't have all the facts.No, Vote-By-Mail is NOT an Elaborate “Sting” by Trump
Deconstructing Pieczenik’s lie about Trump’s ballot “Sting” (all watermarked to entrap Democrat fraud) and the bigger Intel Community fraud to push electronic voting behind the lie
This is a video of the David Knight Show, published on Nov. 6. Good commentary by Knight IMO, although I'm unfamiliar with him and his work. It's on the Infowars channel, which is probably why. Ironically (or not?), Pieczenik also appeared on Infowars to promote his sting story. Anyhow, the video may be worth a look even if one is an Infowars avoider (like me). No AJ.
No, Vote-By-Mail is NOT an Elaborate “Sting” by Trump
Deconstructing Pieczenik’s lie about Trump’s ballot “Sting” (all watermarked to entrap Democrat fraud) and the bigger Intel Community fraud to push electronic voting behind the lie For viral content, in-depth insights and breaking news be sure to…www.bitchute.com