Stealing an election is not the same thing as winning an election

Step away from the Kool Aid. What a world.

 

Nothing was stolen except Bernie Sanders' right to be the nominee...

 

The allegation was made that Trump "stole" the election. What did he do to steal the election? What crime did commit?

No response means the OP is a joke.

 

Oh boy... learnprogress... another "news" site that links back to its own articles as proof of their statements. Give me a break!

We do know who the criminals are now--the information presented to the world in those hacked emails exposed Clinton's and some many other democrat's corruption. Haven't you noticed that not a single person is trying to refute any of that information? They can't, so they've focused on who exposed it instead.

 

Nothing like willful ignorance on the part of Liberals.

Now, there you can make a good argument. I wonder how many on the Left even remember Debbie Wasserman-Schulz resigning as DNC Chair and why she did so.

 

They blocked it out. In their minds it never happened.

 

What corruption by Clinton?

Refute what information? How can you refute information when no information about Clinton's corruption has ever been proven?

 

When you can disprove these voter suppression schemes that stole this election, then, and only then can you present an intelligent debate.

- - - Updated - - -

Step into an intelligent debate by debunking the information I gave, if you can?

 

The Russians supposedly admitted to hacking Hillary;s E-mails.
YOU claimed they hacked the election
For this, you have not provided any evidence whatsoever,

The Russians did not hack the election; not a single vote was fabricated or eliminated by any such effort.
Disagree?
Provide proof that the Russians did either/both of the above.

 

Lol! You folks keep selling the same snake oil. I put myself out there proving the election was hacked and that voter suppression schemes stole this election, and all you people ever do is show just how weak your arguments are. As a matter of fact, I have yet to even be challenged by a counter argument.

 

In my article the Russians themselves admitted to it. That's not enough for you? Why would they own up to something they did, if they didn't do it? That would be incredibly stupid don't you think?

 

Wow, that's your version of a counter argument? More weaklings coming out of the wood work.

 

We'll, based on your non- existent counter argument, it looks like laughing is all you'll be doing.

 

Everyone that wanted to vote, got to vote. Voter suppression disproved. You are evidently not aware how this works.

 

Allow me to repeat myself, since you did not address the point I put to you.

The Russians supposedly admitted to hacking Hillary;s E-mails.
DNC/HRC e-mails are not the election.
YOU claimed they hacked the election.
For this, you have not provided any evidence whatsoever,

The Russians did not hack the election; not a single vote was fabricated or eliminated by any such effort.
Disagree?
Provide proof that the Russians did either/both of the above.

 

This is just some of the examples.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/12/top-10-hillary-clinton-scandals-exposed-wikileaks/

Why not just admit you put up a piece of (*)(*)(*)(*) candidate, and move on?

 

If there was ever a more nonsensical argument, I'm not sure I know where I could find one more ridiculous than this one. <Rule 2/3>

No. 8 said Hillary had a hard time relating to the middle class. Can you show me where the corruption is there? As a matter of fact, in a court of law, can you cite just one of those make believe scandals where and how Clinton was convicted or found guilty of corruption? That's right, you can't. <Rule 3>

 

She needs to be convicted? Why? Some of that (*)(*)(*)(*)'s not illegal, like lying to the public about your political positions, but it's still rotten to the core.

 

Do you even have the foggiest idea of what you are talking about? And what does any of this have to do with Trump stealing the election? Good grief! You are incapable of debating the thread after it was proven that the election was hacked; http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/donald-trump-sidesteps-key-question-russia-scandal, while all you can do is talk about nonexistent corruption by Clinton. This is just pitiful.

 

And it was illegal to hack the DNC. And it is even more illegal to do something illegal to win an election.

This is why Nixon resigned in 1974. The Watergate break in was done to get info to help Nixon win the election. It didn't get any info at all but just knowing about it would have been enough to successfully impeach Nixon, and that was why he resigned.

 

Wow, you're really angry. You're gonna have a long 4 years.

 

But can it be linked back to Trump? Even if you could absolutely prove the Russians did it, you'd still need proof that Trump was in on it. Remember Reagan? He walked away from the Iran-Contra virtually unscathed because no definitely evidence could show he knew about it.

 

If I'm still alive, I'm going to have a long 4 years reminding Republicans about the difference between telling the truth and telling a lie.

 

Your ignorance of what went down in the DNC nomination process is clearly wilful.

 

You okay?