ADVERTISEMENT

Roger Stone Says Donald Trump Should Seize Power....

astonmartin708

I.T.S. Hall of Famer
Apr 17, 2012
17,669
6,136
113
Under the guise of unsubstantiated voter fraud, the man who Donald Trump effectively pardoned just a few weeks ago is arguing that the President should not peacefully leave office. I know you all make fun of me for comparing things to Nazi's... but this kind of thing is exactly what happens in Totalitarian regimes, they blame their opposition and seize power. This is very dangerous talk and it's coming from a man whom we know has direct and substantial ties to the President of the United States.

I don't care if he's spouting it to a quack like Alex Jones... the fact that someone so connected to the man in the office is saying this publicly should be reason 9,894,293 why Donald Trump shouldn't be elected again.

 
My family members and friends say crazy stuff all the time. That doesn’t mean I listen to every wackadoodle statement they make. The issue that should be addressed for both parties is the process that will be followed when one side wins or looses to challenge the results based on voter fraud. The worm has turned and the left looting and burning America has driven millions of people who weren’t on the Trump bandwagon directly into the arms of Trump. I actually don’t think This election will even be close but no matter what, the results will be challenged. Having a plan in place after the election to quickly resolve inquiries will be key to transition!
 
My family members and friends say crazy stuff all the time. That doesn’t mean I listen to every wackadoodle statement they make. The issue that should be addressed for both parties is the process that will be followed when one side wins or looses to challenge the results based on voter fraud. The worm has turned and the left looting and burning America has driven millions of people who weren’t on the Trump bandwagon directly into the arms of Trump. I actually don’t think This election will even be close but no matter what, the results will be challenged. Having a plan in place after the election to quickly resolve inquiries will be key to transition!
You forget the part that we know Trump DEFINITELY listened to Stone in the last election, and the fact that he pardoned him recently, showing they're still close.

Your contention that millions have been driven to Trump is conjecture and it hasn't been supported by any polling nationally or in swing states.

The peaceful transition of power is actually just as important if not more important than making sure elections are completely secure. This is literally the kind of thing that happens in 3rd world African dictatorships and you're about to support it happening here. You're the kind of person in the family who says crazy scheisse btw.
 
Your understanding of political gamesmanship is limited. Stone is setting a bait trap for those who are plotting! Multi level prodding and creating a narrative that causes the other side to act irrationally before they are ready is common. Edward Bernay has some pretty good books to help elevate your level of understanding. In regards to your comments about the polls, every poll shows a significant tightening of the race. If these Snapshot represent the total population, wouldn’t that include millions of individuals? Re Center yourself so we can debate logically.
 
My family members and friends say crazy stuff all the time. That doesn’t mean I listen to every wackadoodle statement they make. The issue that should be addressed for both parties is the process that will be followed when one side wins or looses to challenge the results based on voter fraud. The worm has turned and the left looting and burning America has driven millions of people who weren’t on the Trump bandwagon directly into the arms of Trump. I actually don’t think This election will even be close but no matter what, the results will be challenged. Having a plan in place after the election to quickly resolve inquiries will be key to transition!
You think Biden will win? I say that because what would the transition be if Trump won. Funny that both you and Aston are pessimistic about your party winning, if so.

And by the way, (and this comment is not pointed at you, you just happen to be the latest) I can't figure out why this common spelling error gets made relatively often. It is not looses, it is loses. You don't spell lose with two o's, so why would you spell loses with two o's. It's not like it exists in three spelling methods their, there, and they're. It isn't absent minded spelling where it just flops out without the person thinking about which spelling it needs to have.(To and too, are other absent minded examples.)

He/She, only 'actively' looses the wild dogs, to spell loose or looses with two o's. When one dog loses a race, it has one o. The other spelling mistake regularities make sense to me, this one dose not. Loose/looses is not a common word used in common language today. It is an arcane spelling/usage rarely seen in anything but novels and the occasional magazine article. Just cannot understand where that error comes from.
 
Last edited:
Hadn't ever thought about it.
I've been wondering if I will have an opportunity to buy football season tickets.
I hope I'm not one of the loyal season ticket holders who looses their season tickets.😀
 
You think Biden will win? I say that because what would the transition be if Trump won. Funny that both you and Aston are pessimistic about your party winning, if so.

And by the way, (and this comment is not pointed at you, you just happen to be the latest) I can't figure out why this common spelling error gets made relatively often. It is not looses, it is loses. You don't spell lose with two o's, so why would you spell loses with two o's. It's not like it exists in three spelling methods their, there, and they're. It isn't absent minded spelling where it just flops out without the person thinking about which spelling it needs to have.(To and too, are other absent minded examples.)

He/She, only 'actively' looses the wild dogs, to spell loose or looses with two o's. When one dog loses a race, it has one o. The other spelling mistake regularities make sense to me, this one dose not. Loose/looses is not a common word used in common language today. It is an arcane spelling/usage rarely seen in anything but novels and the occasional magazine article. Just cannot understand where that error comes from.
I think Trump will win. The left already said if that happens, they will contest the results. They also simulated a strategy to secede. A plan needs to be in place to address their legit concerns of fraud in some areas but quickly squash any further plans they may have.
 
I think Trump will win. The left already said if that happens, they will contest the results. They also simulated a strategy to secede. A plan needs to be in place to address their legit concerns of fraud in some areas but quickly squash any further plans they may have.
You sound like the crazy uncle at Thanksgiving.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: bluegold70
Yup, so crazy that we cut those people out of the daily intel briefs among other things!
Why are you bragging about keeping congress in the dark on election security, just one election cycle after election security was at issue as admitted to by multiple arms of Trump's own national intelligence agencies?

Are you bragging about how corrupt you can be?
 
Why are you bragging about keeping congress in the dark on election security, just one election cycle after election security was at issue as admitted to by multiple arms of Trump's own national intelligence agencies? I hope I’m able to

Are you bragging about how corrupt you can be?
I’m sooooo glad you asked that question! This was my bait trap for you! Congress hasn’t been restricted in any way from access to this info. The info has always been restricted to only the committee members appointed to protecting election security. Before, staffers and other invited guest of Congress were granted access to an open hearing where the intel report was briefed to everyone. The only change that was made was to cancel the open briefs and send the brief via direct email only to those members on the committee. Shifty Schiff spins the story and acts like Trump is restricting info from Congress. What he is really complaining about is the fact that he can’t use one of his staffers to leak classified intel to the media or use the info to plot another fake impeachment without going to jail. The measure of this trap is the Level of political rhetoric created in objection to the trap. Everyday DC Political gamesmanship at its finest! I hope I’m able to teach you something more than the CNN/MSNBC opinion/fake news you prescribe to!
 
Last edited:
As far as I know, all five members of the election security committee are democrats. So determining who spread it around the party and/or who leaked it to the press won't be a whole lot easier, unless they make a provable faux pas in how they disseminate the info. Yes you have culled your suspects from 232 down to 5. That just means the five will have to be more careful about dissemination methods. So really it was just part of the Washington soap opera, and does nothing to stop leaks.
 
I’m sooooo glad you asked that question! This was my bait trap for you! Congress hasn’t been restricted in any way from access to this info. The info has always been restricted to only the committee members appointed to protecting election security. Before, staffers and other invited guest of Congress were granted access to an open hearing where the intel report was briefed to everyone. The only change that was made was to cancel the open briefs and send the brief via direct email only to those members on the committee. Shifty Schiff spins the story and acts like Trump is restricting info from Congress. What he is really complaining about is the fact that he can’t use one of his staffers to leak classified intel to the media or use the info to plot another fake impeachment without going to jail. The measure of this trap is the Level of political rhetoric created in objection to the trap. Everyday DC Political gamesmanship at its finest! I hope I’m able to teach you something more than the CNN/MSNBC opinion/fake news you prescribe to!
So, I took your word for it that the administration was restricting access to the Democrats.... which makes me a person that falls for what CNN / MSNBC tell me... except you're the person that literally just lied to me. I hadn't even seen or cared about that story prior to you bringing it up nor do I regularly read or watch CNN / MSNBC. I typically look at CNBC, data driven analysis from 538, or linked stories from places like RealClearPolitics which includes biased but researched conservative sources like The National Review, WSJ, etc... If you'd like me to bring up every single story that Fox News or any of the other far right media sources lie about every day we're going to need more storage space on this board's servers.
 
Last edited:
As far as I know, all five members of the election security committee are democrats. So determining who spread it around the party and/or who leaked it to the press won't be a whole lot easier, unless they make a provable faux pas in how they disseminate the info. Yes you have culled your suspects from 232 down to 5. That just means the five will have to be more careful about dissemination methods. So really it was just part of the Washington soap opera, and does nothing to stop leaks.
That number would be incorrect.
 
The point still stands. In fact the point is likely more valid because there are more democrats on the committee. I looked it up, and I was probably remembering a subcommittee task force within the larger committee. Nice to see you holding onto the fact, not wanting to admit that the point is still valid.
 
The briefings go to a 15 members committee comprised of 8 Republicans, 6 Dems, 1 Independent. 5 Dems who are recipients recently voiced their discord. Maybe that’s where you are getting that number from ?
 
The briefings go to a 15 members committee comprised of 8 Republicans, 6 Dems, 1 Independent. 5 Dems who are recipients recently voiced their discord. Maybe that’s where you are getting that number from ?
No, I got it from a 5 member task force on that subcommittee. Of course that 5 person task force probably consisted of those 5 reps.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT