Ken Paxon dodges subpoena, showing GOP's love of law and order

You know, ignoring the questions that I asked someone else, and instead regurgitating MSM talking points that presumably refute some point that Im not trying to make in this discussion, isnt really a great debate winner...

But its ur thread, so go right ahead and post article after article of the political establishment investigating itself and finding no wrongdoing in itself as a response to questions that I didn't ask. Then we can discuss 'preaching to the choir' if you think that would be fun...

 

We've found No explanation for the hours and hours of video of clear and blatant election fraud at multiple polling stations across major swing areas, but a 'judicial' system willing to nonetheless decree that there was no fraud.

Totally legit...

 

Cool why weren't they rsaised in court?

Once more

JAN 06, 2021
Fact-Checking the Congressional Debate on Ratifying the Election Results


“I would like to point out that all of the cases that have been thrown out have been thrown out on standing, not the evidence of voter fraud.”
— Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican of Georgia

False
The Trump campaign and its allies have brought 60-some lawsuits challenging various aspects of the voting system and the counting, and have won one. Some cases have been thrown out for procedural reasons including a lack of standing by the plaintiffs to bring the suits. But a New York Times tally found that two-thirds of the lawsuits did not allege voter fraud. In the nearly dozen that did, the claims collapsed under scrutiny. For example, the Trump campaign in Nevada claimed that its experts had found “120,000 unique instances of voter fraud.” A court in Nevada said the campaign presented “no credible or reliable evidence that the 2020 general election in Nevada was affected by fraud” and that its expert testimony “was of little to no value.”

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/01/06/us/fact-check-electoral-certification

 

How's this


“Some objectors claim to merely want a commission to conduct an audit and then let states decide whether to send different electors. First, the situations are not at all analogous.”
— Senator Patrick J. Toomey, Republican of Pennsylvania

True.
Mr. Toomey was referring to members of Congress who invoked “the 1877 precedent” in calling for a 15-member commission to audit the election results.

In the 1876 presidential election, the Democratic candidate, Samuel J. Tilden, won the popular vote, but the Republican candidate, Rutherford B. Hayes, ultimately won the Electoral College in a compromise that ended Reconstruction and that several Republicans have cited as a model for the 2020 election.

An essential difference between the two elections, as Mr. Toomey said, is that in 1876, three states — Louisiana, South Carolina and Florida — sent competing slates of electors to Washington. In such a situation, Congress is explicitly tasked with resolving the dispute and determining which slate to count. This year, there are no competing slates.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/0...tates-decide-whether-to-send-different-electo

NO PAYWALL LINK
https://archive.ph/wip/vOghZ

 

That is just basic mathematics. You do not cherry pick data to prove a point. You have to take the whole sample and then show how the vast majority of those in the sample fit the premise. The whole sample of republicans of voting age is around a hundred million.

You have lost the argument, repeatedly. Give it up.

 

Where is Ken Paxton and why is he running from the law again?

 

LMAOROG, Your inability to not recognize the differnce between political operatives and the general public noted

 

the one hundred million people you continue to refer in this thread all have one thing in common,

they all condone criminal behavior when they vote for these scumbags

 

You are making stuff up. I did not realize the mob that invaded the capitol on January 6th were political operatives. There were people from all walks of life. Very few were politicians.

A physical impossibility for you to know and the probability is infinitesimally small.