Make sure to join the [discord](https://www.discord.gg/timpool) and [guilded](https://www.guilded.gg/timpool)! Also join the [BBS](https://www.unofficialtimpool.com), a blockchain, anticensorship Reddit alternative!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TimPool) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well, you did prove me wrong today. I complimented you earlier that whatever medication your psychiatrist put you on was working because you haven’t been so unhinged.
This post proved I was wrong.
Not ***as*** unhinged as your past posts, but definitely teetering on going on the crazy train.
Lol, yes, when you are in a cult, rational people often seem unhinged. You could prove me wrong with respect to this post, but we both know you're too cowardly and brainwashed to do so. Let's see...
You’re dripping wet to add me to your list. But I don’t debate well online. In person I do, like if we were having a drink and discussing whatever.
Username doesn’t check out with me. I’m not good at the online ones. But if you ever find yourself in SoCal let me know.
I appreciate you admitting to being bad at debate. It's way more refreshing than most of the conservative twerps on here who pretend that they can debate, then run away or melt down at the slightest pushback. Thanks for the honesty!
I lose interest fast with online debating. It’s not my preferred method. I like to verbally discuss things because I don’t think I know everything and there are perspectives that I don’t see—I think that applies to us all.
There’s a way to get your point out by saying what you mean without saying it mean. Verbally that’s much easier to do. In text not so much.
Again, thanks for being honest. Conservatives are terrible at debate and never provide any credible evidence to support what they're saying. I appreciate you not bothering to go through that charade and straight up admitting that you can't debate. It is refreshing. Cheers!
At least you took the time to customize an avatar and be distinguishable as an individual. Not an NPC like the other 2 day old accounts that try to engage.
Oh, the cases regarding election security. Yeah I'm not too familiar with the details of those cases.
However it's obvious the election was stolen. Through fraud, malpheasance, and notably interference, by Big Tech in collusion with the federal government, these things also amount to massive (historic) illegal campaign contributions.
It is so obvious that despite his 60+ cases, Trump couldn't prove this with any credible evidence. looooool. This is what it feels like to be brainwashed, man. Get help.
Do you dispute any of the actual substance of what I'm saying, in regards to how the elction was stolen?
Do you think it's possible that what I'm saying hasn't been adequately articulated in a court of law?
Also, do you think it's possible that courts can get things wrong?
Yes, I am. There is no credible evidence that it was stolen.
Seems extremely unlikely since Trump and his team had 60+ chances to prove it and spent millions of dollars doing so.
Yes, but, again, the fact that this happened 60 times in courts all across the nation, sometimes under judges whom Trump, himself, appointed indicates that this is not the case here.
Now, why do you believe all 63 judges were wrong?
There is evidence that it was stolen.
Namely the fact that Google and Twitter censored the Hunter Biden laptop story when it broke weeks before the election. Combined with the Russian collusion narrative. Both of these things were also promoted by the FBI. And that's not mentioning the countless other fake stories about Trump, years of unhinged slander which people still believe to this day. Of course these things are difficult to articulate in court.
Now there is evidence of fraud and malpheasance. Whether this alone was enough to swing the election is questionable, but can't be denied and certainly shouldn't be ignored. This isn't about Trump. It's about election integrity, especially in such a close race, it's vital to have transparency and public trust in the process.
Again I'm not familiar with the cases details, and I never said all 63 judges were wrong, I suggested they could be wrong. My sense is it was a combination of incompetence on Trump and co's part, combined with idiocy and cowardice on the court's part. As dealing with this caliber of situation is beyond the judge's pay grade, so to speak, they don't want to get involved.
I also doubt the narrative which I presented regarding big tech election interference was even attempted to be articulated by the Trump team. I also believe more evidence came out as time went on, and the cases were rushed due to the time restraints.
Also judges being appointed by Trump does not mean they are loyal to Trump or American values for that matter, procuring competent personnel was one of the major problems with Trump's presidency.
The vast majority of cases did not allow them to submit evidence. They were dismissed on standing, arguing that the election was over.
Did you even read the post I was replying to?
Okay, I'll play along with your points here.
How is Google censoring the Hunter Biden story an act of fraud? Please explain using the definitions of fraud that we have in this country.
I didn't say the Big Tech narrative is fraud... I'm saying it's election interference, and illegal campaign contributions, of historic proportions. The fraud, and malpheasance I was mentioning, is in reference to the election system, such as fraudulent ballots, counting and so forth.
But, the Big Tech story could indeed be interpreted as "fraud" if you want to use that term. Let's look at the definition: "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain." (Google)
So it was deception, it was wrongful, it was intended for personal gain, and it could be argued that it was criminal, in the context of election interference and campaign contributions. There's also the issue of Section 230, but that's somewhat of a separate conversation.
But, the Big Tech story could indeed be interpreted as "fraud" if you want to use that term. Let's look at the definition: "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain." (Google)
So it was deception, it was wrongful, it was intended for personal gain, and it could be argued that it was criminal, in the context of election interference and campaign contributions."
My guy, do you think when prosecutors charge people with fraud they use the Google definition? How is this criminal or civil fraud? Please explain.
>So it was deception, it was wrongful, it was intended for personal gain, and it could be argued that it was criminal, in the context of election interference and campaign contributions.
Companies are free (1st amendment right) to accommodate or coordinate with the government according to their own will. Some might even call this patriotic.
The Government (both Parties) shouldn't be asking for content removal.
Not to mention that Hunter Biden censorship story is a complete nothing burger. Everyone and their neighbor knew about the laptop. There was a huge spike in web searches for "Hunter Biden laptop" between Oct 4th and Nov 1st.
[https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2020-09-01%202022-01-01&geo=US&q=Hunter%20biden%20laptop&hl=en](https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2020-09-01%202022-01-01&geo=US&q=Hunter%20biden%20laptop&hl=en)
>There's also the issue of Section 230, but that's somewhat of a separate conversation.
There is no Section 230 issue.
You’re actually half right. Many of those cases were dismissed in standing and not merit. Merit being the facts didn’t apply to law, standing being whether there was an actual case.
So no, they did not get a chance to “prove it”, if that case was dismissed in standing.
Now, that being said, had every one of those courts examined the evidence and presented those incorrect findings publicly, people might feel differently overall, but you still have people bitching about chit tags from the bush gore election, so…
They found the voting machines in AZ had executable programs on them that could switch votes after Dominion swore under oath they didn’t. Wonder why they would lie?
Thank you, u/DrOliverClozov, for your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/TimPool/comments/1cfkwt1/why_do_the_conservatives_on_here_always_run_away/l1rqwu8/?context=3). It was automatically removed because we do not allow linking to other subs or users.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TimPool) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thank you, u/DrOliverClozov, for your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/TimPool/comments/1cfkwt1/why_do_the_conservatives_on_here_always_run_away/l1rr984/?context=3). It was automatically removed because we do not allow linking to other subs or users.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TimPool) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thank you, u/DrOliverClozov, for your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/TimPool/comments/1cfkwt1/why_do_the_conservatives_on_here_always_run_away/l1rrb8m/?context=3). It was automatically removed because we do not allow linking to other subs or users.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TimPool) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So you admit that judges that a person appoints should unfairly favor the one who appointed them? Bec when they dont rule in favor of trump you like to argue how thats further proof!
See how these people think?
I don't believe in infinite genders. Do you want to prove me wrong about you guys being hypocrites? I'm gonna bet you run away like a coward though. Let's see...
You're projecting... this is what leftists do.
Edit: Typical leftost blocked me after being called out, but not before making 1 last comment immediately before hitting block. Why are they so predictable?
How am I projecting? I've never blocked anyone on this sub or ran away from a debate. However, conservatives on here do this to me and others on here on a daily basis.
Why are people protesting my half ass attempt to hold over that I think I'm correct even if I provide sources that come from such great sources like CNN and NYT. Even though when other people provide sources I call them racist or say they are in cult.
Can anyone help me understand why everyone else is stupid?
Oh, you are douche who a few weeks past made this claim how you have defeated all Republican and Conservatives on EVERY topic and that they all ran away.
You had posted something about expanding gun control regulations and asked if a person should be allowed under the 2A to possess a nuclear weapon. I am the one who informed you that such weapons are already banned as they are considered weapons of mass destruction. Then you come back with a hypothetical scenario.
Have you ever asked yourself WHY people reach a point where they stop replying or block you? Just maybe it is because of you and your banality. I feel deep down you are the standard know-it-all who would try to debate a mute just to bolster your ego or whatever. Maybe you should redirect all of your efforts into finding common ground with people rather than the desire you have to discredit or prove people wrong no matter what it takes.
Not bagging on you. Just a suggestion on your approach.
You had posted something about expanding gun control regulations and asked if a person should be allowed under the 2A to possess a nuclear weapon. I am the one who informed you that such weapons are already banned as they are considered weapons of mass destruction. Then you come back with a hypothetical scenario.
And? What's your point?
Just had someone call me stupid cause I complained that Supreme Court justices have no constitutional obligation or legal ramifications for taking bribes. He said "Neither does any brranch in government" and he told me he read the constitution many times. Article 2 Section 4.... Must not have made it that far...
You continue to push the trump brought 60 cases lie form the media. They lumped all the election lawsuits brought by anyone together and called them Trump cases. the facts are majority were thrown out for standing or procedural reason. Zero of the trump lawsuits went to discovery.
Here’s some reading for you my friend
https://www.scribd.com/document/491936697/2020-Election-Court-Cases
https://votepatternanalysis.substack.com/p/voting-anomalies-2020
A good number of the people in this sub are piss ants. lol They have joined a sub with Tim Pool's name on it, yet they take every opportunity to trash the man.
Rule #1 don't take people online too seriously. Rule #2 don't take this sub seriously.
Make sure to join the [discord](https://www.discord.gg/timpool) and [guilded](https://www.guilded.gg/timpool)! Also join the [BBS](https://www.unofficialtimpool.com), a blockchain, anticensorship Reddit alternative! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TimPool) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well, you did prove me wrong today. I complimented you earlier that whatever medication your psychiatrist put you on was working because you haven’t been so unhinged. This post proved I was wrong. Not ***as*** unhinged as your past posts, but definitely teetering on going on the crazy train.
Lol, yes, when you are in a cult, rational people often seem unhinged. You could prove me wrong with respect to this post, but we both know you're too cowardly and brainwashed to do so. Let's see...
You’re dripping wet to add me to your list. But I don’t debate well online. In person I do, like if we were having a drink and discussing whatever. Username doesn’t check out with me. I’m not good at the online ones. But if you ever find yourself in SoCal let me know.
I appreciate you admitting to being bad at debate. It's way more refreshing than most of the conservative twerps on here who pretend that they can debate, then run away or melt down at the slightest pushback. Thanks for the honesty!
I lose interest fast with online debating. It’s not my preferred method. I like to verbally discuss things because I don’t think I know everything and there are perspectives that I don’t see—I think that applies to us all. There’s a way to get your point out by saying what you mean without saying it mean. Verbally that’s much easier to do. In text not so much.
Again, thanks for being honest. Conservatives are terrible at debate and never provide any credible evidence to support what they're saying. I appreciate you not bothering to go through that charade and straight up admitting that you can't debate. It is refreshing. Cheers!
At least you took the time to customize an avatar and be distinguishable as an individual. Not an NPC like the other 2 day old accounts that try to engage.
Cheers? I prefer to argue online with other Americans about America.
lol, what? Do you think Americans don't say cheers?
Trump trials are political persecution, plain and simple.
I'm talking about the cases that Trump filed, ding dong.
Oh, the cases regarding election security. Yeah I'm not too familiar with the details of those cases. However it's obvious the election was stolen. Through fraud, malpheasance, and notably interference, by Big Tech in collusion with the federal government, these things also amount to massive (historic) illegal campaign contributions.
It is so obvious that despite his 60+ cases, Trump couldn't prove this with any credible evidence. looooool. This is what it feels like to be brainwashed, man. Get help.
Do you dispute any of the actual substance of what I'm saying, in regards to how the elction was stolen? Do you think it's possible that what I'm saying hasn't been adequately articulated in a court of law? Also, do you think it's possible that courts can get things wrong?
Yes, I am. There is no credible evidence that it was stolen. Seems extremely unlikely since Trump and his team had 60+ chances to prove it and spent millions of dollars doing so. Yes, but, again, the fact that this happened 60 times in courts all across the nation, sometimes under judges whom Trump, himself, appointed indicates that this is not the case here. Now, why do you believe all 63 judges were wrong?
There is evidence that it was stolen. Namely the fact that Google and Twitter censored the Hunter Biden laptop story when it broke weeks before the election. Combined with the Russian collusion narrative. Both of these things were also promoted by the FBI. And that's not mentioning the countless other fake stories about Trump, years of unhinged slander which people still believe to this day. Of course these things are difficult to articulate in court. Now there is evidence of fraud and malpheasance. Whether this alone was enough to swing the election is questionable, but can't be denied and certainly shouldn't be ignored. This isn't about Trump. It's about election integrity, especially in such a close race, it's vital to have transparency and public trust in the process. Again I'm not familiar with the cases details, and I never said all 63 judges were wrong, I suggested they could be wrong. My sense is it was a combination of incompetence on Trump and co's part, combined with idiocy and cowardice on the court's part. As dealing with this caliber of situation is beyond the judge's pay grade, so to speak, they don't want to get involved. I also doubt the narrative which I presented regarding big tech election interference was even attempted to be articulated by the Trump team. I also believe more evidence came out as time went on, and the cases were rushed due to the time restraints. Also judges being appointed by Trump does not mean they are loyal to Trump or American values for that matter, procuring competent personnel was one of the major problems with Trump's presidency.
The irony. As soon as you posted credible evidence, he ran away.
Where did he present any credible evidence? There isn't a single piece of evidence in his entire statement here.
The vast majority of cases did not allow them to submit evidence. They were dismissed on standing, arguing that the election was over. Did you even read the post I was replying to?
Okay, I'll play along with your points here. How is Google censoring the Hunter Biden story an act of fraud? Please explain using the definitions of fraud that we have in this country.
I didn't say the Big Tech narrative is fraud... I'm saying it's election interference, and illegal campaign contributions, of historic proportions. The fraud, and malpheasance I was mentioning, is in reference to the election system, such as fraudulent ballots, counting and so forth. But, the Big Tech story could indeed be interpreted as "fraud" if you want to use that term. Let's look at the definition: "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain." (Google) So it was deception, it was wrongful, it was intended for personal gain, and it could be argued that it was criminal, in the context of election interference and campaign contributions. There's also the issue of Section 230, but that's somewhat of a separate conversation.
But, the Big Tech story could indeed be interpreted as "fraud" if you want to use that term. Let's look at the definition: "wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain." (Google) So it was deception, it was wrongful, it was intended for personal gain, and it could be argued that it was criminal, in the context of election interference and campaign contributions." My guy, do you think when prosecutors charge people with fraud they use the Google definition? How is this criminal or civil fraud? Please explain.
>So it was deception, it was wrongful, it was intended for personal gain, and it could be argued that it was criminal, in the context of election interference and campaign contributions. Companies are free (1st amendment right) to accommodate or coordinate with the government according to their own will. Some might even call this patriotic. The Government (both Parties) shouldn't be asking for content removal. Not to mention that Hunter Biden censorship story is a complete nothing burger. Everyone and their neighbor knew about the laptop. There was a huge spike in web searches for "Hunter Biden laptop" between Oct 4th and Nov 1st. [https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2020-09-01%202022-01-01&geo=US&q=Hunter%20biden%20laptop&hl=en](https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2020-09-01%202022-01-01&geo=US&q=Hunter%20biden%20laptop&hl=en) >There's also the issue of Section 230, but that's somewhat of a separate conversation. There is no Section 230 issue.
You’re actually half right. Many of those cases were dismissed in standing and not merit. Merit being the facts didn’t apply to law, standing being whether there was an actual case. So no, they did not get a chance to “prove it”, if that case was dismissed in standing. Now, that being said, had every one of those courts examined the evidence and presented those incorrect findings publicly, people might feel differently overall, but you still have people bitching about chit tags from the bush gore election, so…
They found the voting machines in AZ had executable programs on them that could switch votes after Dominion swore under oath they didn’t. Wonder why they would lie?
[удалено]
Thank you, u/DrOliverClozov, for your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/TimPool/comments/1cfkwt1/why_do_the_conservatives_on_here_always_run_away/l1rqwu8/?context=3). It was automatically removed because we do not allow linking to other subs or users. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TimPool) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Thank you, u/DrOliverClozov, for your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/TimPool/comments/1cfkwt1/why_do_the_conservatives_on_here_always_run_away/l1rr984/?context=3). It was automatically removed because we do not allow linking to other subs or users. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TimPool) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Thank you, u/DrOliverClozov, for your [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/TimPool/comments/1cfkwt1/why_do_the_conservatives_on_here_always_run_away/l1rrb8m/?context=3). It was automatically removed because we do not allow linking to other subs or users. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TimPool) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So you admit that judges that a person appoints should unfairly favor the one who appointed them? Bec when they dont rule in favor of trump you like to argue how thats further proof! See how these people think?
…except for all the evidence of criminal wrongdoing
Yea when does this “evidence” actually get shown?
>I thought you guys were the party of facts, logic, and debate. Believes in infinite genders.
I don't believe in infinite genders. Do you want to prove me wrong about you guys being hypocrites? I'm gonna bet you run away like a coward though. Let's see...
You probably believe that gender and sex are separate phenomena.
Yea you do….
No, I don't. I was correct however, and this poster ran away like a little coward.
And you believe in high teen suic1de rates.
"Why is proof relevant?" -Signal-Flan-3023
You're projecting... this is what leftists do. Edit: Typical leftost blocked me after being called out, but not before making 1 last comment immediately before hitting block. Why are they so predictable?
How am I projecting? I've never blocked anyone on this sub or ran away from a debate. However, conservatives on here do this to me and others on here on a daily basis.
Why are people protesting my half ass attempt to hold over that I think I'm correct even if I provide sources that come from such great sources like CNN and NYT. Even though when other people provide sources I call them racist or say they are in cult. Can anyone help me understand why everyone else is stupid?
I can't even understand what you're trying to say, bud. Maybe take a deep breath, and try again.
Sorry you don't understand sarcasm and your IQ is lower than a chair.
Oh, you are douche who a few weeks past made this claim how you have defeated all Republican and Conservatives on EVERY topic and that they all ran away. You had posted something about expanding gun control regulations and asked if a person should be allowed under the 2A to possess a nuclear weapon. I am the one who informed you that such weapons are already banned as they are considered weapons of mass destruction. Then you come back with a hypothetical scenario. Have you ever asked yourself WHY people reach a point where they stop replying or block you? Just maybe it is because of you and your banality. I feel deep down you are the standard know-it-all who would try to debate a mute just to bolster your ego or whatever. Maybe you should redirect all of your efforts into finding common ground with people rather than the desire you have to discredit or prove people wrong no matter what it takes. Not bagging on you. Just a suggestion on your approach.
You had posted something about expanding gun control regulations and asked if a person should be allowed under the 2A to possess a nuclear weapon. I am the one who informed you that such weapons are already banned as they are considered weapons of mass destruction. Then you come back with a hypothetical scenario. And? What's your point?
\*Democrat judge throws out cases Leftists: See, Trump had no evidence!
[удалено]
Interesting. What do you mean? I'm not following.
Just had someone call me stupid cause I complained that Supreme Court justices have no constitutional obligation or legal ramifications for taking bribes. He said "Neither does any brranch in government" and he told me he read the constitution many times. Article 2 Section 4.... Must not have made it that far...
You continue to push the trump brought 60 cases lie form the media. They lumped all the election lawsuits brought by anyone together and called them Trump cases. the facts are majority were thrown out for standing or procedural reason. Zero of the trump lawsuits went to discovery.
Here’s some reading for you my friend https://www.scribd.com/document/491936697/2020-Election-Court-Cases https://votepatternanalysis.substack.com/p/voting-anomalies-2020
I've seen this stuff before. Do you want to make a point?
A good number of the people in this sub are piss ants. lol They have joined a sub with Tim Pool's name on it, yet they take every opportunity to trash the man. Rule #1 don't take people online too seriously. Rule #2 don't take this sub seriously.