Is there any depth to which this party won't sink.

On 1/12/2022 9:23 PM, super70s wrote:
> Is there any depth to which this party won't sink.

As I have authoritatively stated, the Republiscums/QAnon only consideration for
the "legitimacy" of an electoral result is who wins. If the Republiscums/QAnon
win an election, then it was "legitimate"; if the Democrats win, then it was
illegitimate, by "definition" [sic]. This is what makes the Republiscums/QAnon
fascists. Only fascists think like that.

super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid> wrote in news:super70s-
9F3307.23233612012022@reader02.eternal-september.org:

> Is there any depth to which this party won't sink.

That was a question. A question should be followed by a '?'.

Aside from that, do you have *any* proof for what you're saying?

In article <XnsAE1EDF67DAAFCRuCanJKnet@5.9.107.187>,
Jonathan Ball <jonboy@jonball.org> wrote:

> super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid> wrote in news:super70s-
> 9F3307.23233612012022@reader02.eternal-september.org:
>
> > Is there any depth to which this party won't sink.
>
> That was a question. A question should be followed by a '?'.

It was a rhetorical question -- obviously there is no depth to which the
Republican party won't sink.

> Aside from that, do you have *any* proof for what you're saying?

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/pro-trump-groups-fake
-letter-national-archives-1281966/

https://people.com/politics/forged-documents-declaring-trump-pence-winner
s-sent-to-national-archives/

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/after-2020-trump-backers-forged-
election-docs-three-states-n1287287

https://news.yahoo.com/swing-state-trumpers-forged-letters-145502210.html

https://www.newsweek.com/pro-trump-groups-forged-election-documents-won-a
rizona-michigan-2020-1667825

On 1/13/2022 12:07 PM, super70s wrote:
> In article <XnsAE1EDF67DAAFCRuCanJKnet@5.9.107.187>,
> Jonathan Ball <jonboy@jonball.org> wrote:
>
>> super70s <super70s@super70s.invalid> wrote in news:super70s-
>> 9F3307.23233612012022@reader02.eternal-september.org:
>>
>>> Is there any depth to which this party won't sink.
>>
>> That was a question. A question should be followed by a '?'.
>
> It was a rhetorical question -- obviously there is no depth to which the
> Republican party won't sink.
>
>> Aside from that, do you have *any* proof for what you're saying?
>
> https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/pro-trump-groups-fake
> -letter-national-archives-1281966/
>
> https://people.com/politics/forged-documents-declaring-trump-pence-winner
> s-sent-to-national-archives/
>
> https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/after-2020-trump-backers-forged-
> election-docs-three-states-n1287287
>
> https://news.yahoo.com/swing-state-trumpers-forged-letters-145502210.html
>
> https://www.newsweek.com/pro-trump-groups-forged-election-documents-won-a
> rizona-michigan-2020-1667825

It really chaps little scooter's drunken ass when I talk about something being
common knowledge, but sometimes, something is so widely publicized and fully
corroborated that it *really is* common knowledge, and there is no more
requirement to "prove" it. That's the case with Trump's faked, or possibly even
forged, election documents.

It is also the case with Trump's pressure on Pence unlawfully to toss out
states' electoral votes, in what would have amounted to a soft coup. Little
scooter keeps demanding "proof," but like all other dishonest trolls, he won't
accept any. And of course, there have been so many people who were involved in
it who have spoken publicly about it that it, too, is now common knowledge.