Politics & News

Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Suspension of the Constitution or Questioning What Remedy For Fraudulent Elections?? (Depends On Who's Narrative)

Trump in his Own Words

So, with the revelation of MASSIVE & WIDESPREAD FRAUD & DECEPTION in working closely with Big Tech Companies, the DNC, & the Democrat Party, do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION? A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution. Our great “Founders” did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!

His follow-up responses to being charged with calling for the suspension of the Constitution

The Fake News is actually trying to convince the American People that I said I wanted to “terminate” the Constitution. This is simply more DISINFORMATION & LIES, just like RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA, and all of their other HOAXES & SCAMS. What I said was that when there is “MASSIVE & WIDESPREAD FRAUD & DECEPTION,” as has been irrefutably proven in the 2020 Presidential Election, steps must be immediately taken to RIGHT THE WRONG. Only FOOLS would disagree with that and accept STOLEN ELECTIONS. MAGA!

SIMPLY PUT, IF AN ELECTION IS IRREFUTABLY FRAUDULENT, IT SHOULD GO TO THE RIGHTFUL WINNER OR, AT A MINIMUM, BE REDONE. WHERE OPEN AND BLATANT FRAUD IS INVOLVED, THERE SHOULD BE NO TIME LIMIT FOR CHANGE!

Top | Newest First | Oldest First

Vin53 · M Best Comment

Totally agree. The very instant irrefutable proof of massive widespread fraud is presented DOJ should doggedly find who the culprits are!

justanothername · 51-55, M

@Vin53 Fortunately it appears that they are doing just that.

trollslayer · 46-50, M

Well, first determine if an election is "irrefutably fraudulent". The 2020 election was not. NOT EVEN CLOSE. Nor was the 2022 election. I am not aware of any major election in the United States over the past 100 years that would even come close to that threshold.

Claims of "fraud" go both ways and encompass many different kinds of claims. Trump does not understand the meaning of "proof". Heck, he does not even understand "evidence".

Take, for example, the claims by Arizona "republicans" (in quotes because they are not actually Republican). If they could find evidence or testimony that printers were deliberately made to malfunction, or that voters were told to leave and not vote, then they have some kind of point. But that is not the case. This is SORE LOSER syndrome.

The 2020 election? They have had two friggen years to find proof. Two years, tons of money, "experts", even in Republican dominated states with favorable legislatures and courts - THEY HAVE FOUND ZERO.

I'm sorry, there is no other narrative here. Trump lost. He is a sore loser. He wants the constitution to be broken in order for his ego to be preserved. He is a treasonous criminal, and if he avoids prison he should count himself lucky.

View 1 more replies »

trollslayer · 46-50, M

@RuyLopez These are solutions in search of a problem. 1) My Identification was checked when I registered to vote. Why require this again? How many instances of someone voting another person's ballot over the past 20 years? Purging voter rolls? For the most part, I agree. But again, this is a very, very minor problem. I agree that there needs to be continual process of cross referencing the database with other records (death, address changes, etc.). Again, how many instances of people voting someone else's ballot over the past 20 years? Non citizens voting? That doesn't actually happen. If it does on a large scale, prove it. Chain of custody? We already have that.

If one side doesn't have faith - that is their problem. We can't solve problems that don't exist. They will NEVER be satisfied. NEVER. It is IMPOSSIBLE to provide "irrefutable evidence" to people who won't believe it anyway.

trollslayer · 46-50, M

@RuyLopez This website https://www.heritage.org/voterfraud (a right-leaning one) documents about 1,400 cases of voter fraud nationwide. I'm not sure what the time frame is, but I see descriptions back to 2009. S0, 1,400 cases over the past ~15 years? That's less than 100 per year, and that is for the whole USA. So roughly two per state per year, or less than half a dozen per state per election. This is not enough to have changed any election outcome.

You might say that these are only the ones who got caught and that there are many more. Well, these folks did get caught, telling me there already is a mechanism for catching cheaters, and it works. I am sure there are more that didn't get caught - but how many more? Twice as many got away with it? So now maybe a dozen per state per election. Still not enough to change results. Keep in mind, the fraud happens from both sides. There is no reason to believe one side commits election fraud more than the other.

RuyLopez · 56-60, M

@trollslayer Well I can't dispute your data because I don't have better. Your points are all valid to me. But there is a reason for the doubt in election integrity. It started before Trump. Trump is just voicing what half the country feels is going on. Somehow both sides have to come together and say this is the way to run elections, this is the established audit trail from the registrar to the the final voter tabulation, apply criminal punish to either negligence or willful malfeasance. If someone steals a government own car it hurts both sides. We should be able to hold off certifying an election until some type of audit process can take place if there are valid accusations of voter fraud or just negligence. All states have a States Auditors Office of some kind. Saying we can't wait or it is wrong or illegal to not just go along and rubber stamp certifications doesn't cut it for me anyway.

Ryderbike

Then Hillary should be president.

Rick Gates Donald Trump‘s deputy campaign manager pledguilty to conspiracy against the United States and testified to the coordination with Russian intelligence. When you’re sending reports to Russian intelligence you’re sharing internal polling data with Russian intelligence and your strategizing swing states with Russian intelligence what exactly do you call that?

Republican led senate report detailing collusion with russian intelligence by the Trump Campaign . They determined it was a “grave counter intelligence threat”

The senate report is now part of the congressional record.

You don’t have to take my word for it. Here is the senate report. Detailing Donald Trump‘s betrayal of the United States

https://www.documentcloud.Org/documents/7039362-Senate-Intelligence-Committee-Russia.html

Now Manafort has confessed to collusion

View 31 more replies »

RuyLopez · 56-60, M

@Ryderbike I have been through this argument man y times. There isn't one. That interpretation is just wishful thinking for the left. The fact is it was meant for the individual citizens. That's the interpretation of the court. You can argue about how the law is enforced and implemented but the decision has already been render and upheld. You are wrong again. Sorry. I would speak to George but he is busy right now whittling a new set of teeth.

Ryderbike

@RuyLopez "The Greeks and Romans had no standing armies, yet they defended themselves. The Greeks by their laws, and the Romans by the spirit of their people, took care to put into the hands of their rulers no such engine of oppression as a standing army. Their system was to make every man a soldier and oblige him to repair to the standard of his country whenever that was reared. This made them invincible; and the same remedy will make us so." --Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Cooper, 1814. ME 14:184

Ryderbike

@RuyLopez Scalia overturned a few hundred years of interpretation.you know that right?

fanuc2013 · 51-55, F

The hunter laptop info and the twitter files should prove very interesting. Even the leftists should be all for the truth coming out and not suppressing any info because it doesn't fit their narrative. I'm all for the truth coming out, no matter what!

View 3 more replies »

RuyLopez · 56-60, M

@Graylight The point of the Laptop is not Hunter Biden. That is just an overused talking point and willful ignorance if you believe that. It is that his father and business partner who was the former Vice President and who is the current President was the crux of a family criminal business enterprise. There are several findings, that are public information now, the indicate direct ties and coordination between Hunter and his father. But nothing to see here, right? You are so willing to over look the elephant in the room for your side but the smallest gnat is enough to impeach the other side. Fine that is your prerogative just don't pretend that you have any objectivity or willingness to see past your own agenda. You and I are ‘We the People’ if either side is corrupt they are abusing both of us.

Graylight · 51-55, F

@RuyLopez No, I'm merely willing to let the people in charge of investigating this over and over do their job. But everyone's so quick to draw lines of connection when no one even has all the details.

RuyLopez · 56-60, M

@Graylight I can understand that. I feel the same way for the most part. But you can see why the laptop is considered to be important to Joe Biden and that it should be investigated without bias to see if there is any crimes committed by Hunter and if any of those crimes are connected to Joe. The laptop surfaced organically. Because of Hunter's penchant for doing stupid things while on drugs. It was not setup as a dirty trick by the Republicans.

Graylight · 51-55, F

A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution.

No, it's not about narrative. He said it. Then he lied about saying using the same loophole he thinks works for everything - not saying the actual words. If only Bundy had known all he had to do was whisper "I'm not killing you" to be found technically innocent.

He said it. At the moment, he meant it. He'd have absolutely no problem with it and (I promise you) can't recite or name two amendments or the famous first words.

Opinion and narrative do not factor into every story.

View 2 more replies »

RuyLopez · 56-60, M

@Graylight Okay. But what if I agree with your Narrative?

Graylight · 51-55, F

@RuyLopez Okay, mister man, I see where we're headed. You're not going to bait me. You just take the box of shenanigans somewhere else.

RuyLopez · 56-60, M

@Graylight You've caught on to my wily ways.

Pretzel · 61-69, M

I believe he was misquoted...I think he said "we should pour bleach on it"

I could be wrong

RuyLopez · 56-60, M

@Pretzel I think he is saying this more for the benefit of current elections such as AZ Gov and AZ and NV Senate spots. Trump is more complex in his approach then his opponents and his haters give him credit for. Jeb Bush can attest to that I think. Just my thought anyway.

Northwest · M

@Pretzel I believe you're wrong. His exact words were "why can't we inject bleach in it?"

RuyLopez · 56-60, M

@Northwest LOL. Good one. But I'm pretty sure that was a quote from Hillary during the server investigation.

Carissimi · F

I did not interpret what he said as wanting to suspend the constitution. The Left always twist his words to put their own negative spin on what he says. In actual fact, the Left has already suspended The Constitution. It’s not official, but they trample on it all the time, and use it when it suits their purpose.

MasterLee · 56-60, M

@Carissimi the left cannot hear english well

4meAndyou · F

Suspending our Constitution is exactly what the radical left would like. Once they got complete power again, they would say, (slyly, hissing like the snakes they are), "Well, Trump set the precedent."

Yes, Trump could fix all of these horrors the left has inflicted on us, but his desire to fix this mess and return our country to sanity can NOT be done by overturning the Constitution.

Worst case scenario, Trump is not re-elected, and another Republican is elected in his place, I think it would be better for Trump to be a constant and unofficial advisor to the next Republican President.

RuyLopez · 56-60, M

@4meAndyou Do a search on Trump Suspending the Constitution. Very disheartening. The list of Headlines are so scary. One narrative only. They scream fire in a theatre but it is just burnt popcorn at the concession stand. No attempt at context or truth. State the narrative in Bold and Caps and fill in the body with whatever.

4meAndyou · F

@RuyLopez Yes...not much truth in it. But Trump isn't doing himself any favors. He has to calm down and realize he will NOT get the 2020 Presidency back. Interference in the election is NOT fraud.

ElwoodBlues · M

Let's take a look at the original quote:

So, with the revelation of MASSIVE & WIDESPREAD FRAUD & DECEPTION in working closely with Big Tech Companies, the DNC, & the Democrat Party, do you throw the Presidential Election Results of 2020 OUT and declare the RIGHTFUL WINNER, or do you have a NEW ELECTION? A Massive Fraud of this type and magnitude allows for the termination of all rules, regulations, and articles, even those found in the Constitution. Our great "Founders" did not want, and would not condone, False & Fraudulent Elections!

Let's simplify that 2nd sentence: "A Massive Fraud of this type ... allows for the termination of all rules ... even those found in the Constitution."

That's the core of the sentence in question. Trump says this type of fraud allows for the termination of all rules including the Constitution. No ambiguity there.

Trump is calling for termination of the Constitution because of his perception of election fraud. BTW, Twitter has always retained the right to enforce its terms of service; there's nothing "fraudulent" about blocking the posting of stolen or hacked data.

RuyLopez · 56-60, M

@Carissimi I did not either. I wish the media could just focus on the central point, the important aspect of the comments, rather than purposely sensationalizing the story to discredit or distract from the core issue being brought up. But they all want to make Trump a pariah. I was researching the story and every MSM Headline was "Trump Calls for Suspension of Constitution". What about doing away with the Electoral College? That was never sensationalized by the MSM as "Calling for the Suspension of the Constitution."

PhluorescentLeech · 41-45, M

The first step and most important is to protect the integrity of our elections to prevent future claims of fraud and restore faith in the election process. Trying to change any previous election results would only hurt us as a country and further the divide the nation. The best course of action would be to leave the past right where its at and take any and all steps necessary to ensure accurate elections.

ElwoodBlues · M

I've got NO PROBLEM with the theory of voter ID, as long as it's free and easy. I DO have a problem with the practice of making it differentially harder for the elderly & working poor. https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/challenge-obtaining-voter-identification "Voter ID laws have been estimated by the U.S. Government Accountability Office to reduce voter turnout by 2-3 percentage points, translating to tens of thousands of votes lost in a single state." https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/block-the-vote-voter-suppression-in-2020/

trollslayer · 46-50, M

@RuyLopez Huge difference here. Nobody suggested the EC be done away with by court action or executive order. The idea has been talked many times in US history, and the discussion is about a constitutional amendment to change the EC. Is Trump suggesting a constitutional amendment (ratified by congress and the states) to suspend the constitution or have a revote if some threshold of election fraud has been crossed? He did not say that. But that is what it would take - either that, a vote by the states to dissolve the constitution, or a government coup. The first two are complete pipe dreams and near impossible to happen. Anyone advocating for a re-vote without a legal mechanism to do so is advocating for option number 3 - a coup. That is what Trump did.

wildbill83 · 41-45, M

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

would be more appropriate to charge all the politicians that have violated the Constitution with treason and hang them... no bias, no favoritism, no deals, no appeals... just find the closest tree and string them up. Would be a good motivator against future infringements...

Add a comment...