Donald Trump said he was unsure if he would accept her victory if she were to win the election, if he elected to do so, could he pull off a coup? Does he have enough support in the military, and at least some support in the three branches of government to make it happen?

He's a mole beholden to Ruski Oligarchs looking to undermine the union through chaos and incitement. American patriots should be wary of such treasonous actors and their followers.

Coup Coup catchoo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Donald Trump said he was unsure if he would accept
> her victory if she were to win the election, if he
> elected to do so, could he pull off a coup? Does
> he have enough support in the military, and at
> least some support in the three branches of
> government to make it happen?

Straight outta the right-wing fever swamp.

Trump-tards!

LoLz!

Trouble is brewing. The dems started it with election fraud schemes and one sided law enforcement .


I see legal but troublesome disobedience on the same moral level as illegal aliens .

Non payment of taxes , barter economy, highway shutdown protests , free gun distribution , strikes by police, wholesale stoppage of work by essential cogs of the economy at intermittent points. Wholesale military volunteerism by right wingers to control the composition of elite troops. Swelling ranks and funding of militias, competing busing, dead people and multiple voting cheating strategies .

Trump can be the catalyst by focusing on wiki leaks democrat cheating strategies

PC retards Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Trouble is brewing. The dems started it with
> election fraud schemes and one sided law
> enforcement .
>
> I see legal but troublesome disobedience on the
> same moral level as illegal aliens .
>
> Non payment of taxes , barter economy, highway
> shutdown protests , free gun distribution ,
> strikes by police, wholesale stoppage of work by
> essential cogs of the economy at intermittent
> points. Wholesale military volunteerism by right
> wingers to control the composition of elite
> troops. Swelling ranks and funding of militias,
> competing busing, dead people and multiple voting
> cheating strategies .
>
> Trump can be the catalyst by focusing on wiki
> leaks democrat cheating strategies

More fever-swamp dreams.

Trump-tards!

LoLz!

Oh wait, the butthurt one still hasn't!

Gore's Concession speech? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh wait, the butthurt one still hasn't!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GyKlcQ_HiD4

Butthurt Gore took it back. Still hasn't conceded 16 years later.

Nice try, libtard.

Heres Gore retracting his concession.


He never had another speech conceding.


Libtards Lolz!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vj3t_8ZKWYM

Libtards forgot about Bush vs. Gore. Can't expect them to remember their name let alone remember past elections.

Libtards.. Lulz!!!

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He's a mole beholden to Ruski Oligarchs looking to
> undermine the union through chaos and incitement.
> American patriots should be wary of such
> treasonous actors and their followers.


Look no further than Hillary Clinton to find the real Russian agent. Who have the Russians 20 percent of our uranium reserves? Why it was Hillary Clinton of course! Who has financial ties to Putin? Hillary's campaign! Who has never met Putin? Yes you got it.. Donald Trump has never met the man.
Attachments:

Gore's Concession speech? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Butthurt Gore took it back. Still hasn't conceded
> 16 years later.
>
> Nice try, libtard.


Here's the transcript of Gore's concession speech. Would you like to see a video of it too? I can provide a link, but I think you ought to be able to find it yourself, you so smart. I realize you were probably 2 years old or so at the time of the speech, so you wouldn't remember it.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/dec/14/uselections2000.usa14

And the butthurt continues for those who forgot that ol Chakra reversed his concession days later.

Gore's Concession speech? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And the butthurt continues for those who forgot
> that ol Chakra reversed his concession days later.


Sigh. No he didn't. You're just factually wrong. Gore conceded on December 14, 2000. He did not reverse his concession at any time thereafter. What can I say, you're just factually, utterly, wrong. Why don't you actually look up what happened instead of just spouting nonsense.

Gore's Concession speech? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And the butthurt continues for those who forgot
> that ol Chakra reversed his concession days later.


And took his challenge to the Supreme Court.

Not to mention libtards themselves not accepting the resulting decision.

Until last night apparently. lmao

Such a disingenuous dishonest bunch of fucktards.

Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gore's Concession speech? Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > And the butthurt continues for those who forgot
> > that ol Chakra reversed his concession days
> later.
>
>
> And took his challenge to the Supreme Court.
>
> Not to mention libtards themselves not accepting
> the resulting decision.
>
> Until last night apparently. lmao
>
> Such a disingenuous dishonest bunch of fucktards.


Sorry, you are wrong, completely. The concession speech was on December 14, 2000, AFTER the Supreme Court issued its final ruling. It was Bush who brought the lawsuit, not Gore. Do you want to say anything else that's factually completely wrong?

Fact is he took back the first concession, butthurt, all the way to the Supremes.
So much for the results.

MwKPL Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Gore's Concession speech? Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > And the butthurt continues for those who
> forgot
> > > that ol Chakra reversed his concession days
> > later.
> >
> >
> > And took his challenge to the Supreme Court.
> >
> > Not to mention libtards themselves not
> accepting
> > the resulting decision.
> >
> > Until last night apparently. lmao
> >
> > Such a disingenuous dishonest bunch of
> fucktards.
>
>
> Sorry, you are wrong, completely. The concession
> speech was on December 14, 2000, AFTER the Supreme
> Court issued its final ruling. It was Bush who
> brought the lawsuit, not Gore. Do you want to say
> anything else that's factually completely wrong?


In response to Gore's challenge

Quote

On November 26, the Florida Elections Canvassing Commission certified the results of the election and declared Governor Bush the winner of Florida’s 25 electoral votes. On November 27, Vice President Gore, pursuant to Florida’s contest provisions, filed a complaint in Leon County Circuit Court contesting the certification. Fla. Stat. §102.168 (2000). He sought relief pursuant to §102.168(3)(c), which provides that “[r]eceipt of a number of illegal votes or rejection of a number of legal votes sufficient to change or place in doubt the result of the election” shall be grounds for a contest. The Circuit Court denied relief, stating that Vice President Gore failed to meet his burden of proof. He appealed to the First District Court of Appeal, which certified the matter to the Florida Supreme Court.

Accepting jurisdiction, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part. Gore v. Harris, ___ So. 2d. ____ (2000). The court held that the Circuit Court had been correct to reject Vice President Gore’s challenge to the results certified in Nassau County and his challenge to the Palm Beach County Canvassing Board’s determination that 3,300 ballots cast in that county were not, in the statutory phrase, “legal votes.”

Are you idiots really trying to dispute that Gore and most all of Libtardia were calling Bush's win and his Presidency illegitmate for years after? lmao!

Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> MwKPL Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Gore's Concession speech? Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > And the butthurt continues for those who
> > forgot
> > > > that ol Chakra reversed his concession days
> > > later.
> > >
> > >
> > > And took his challenge to the Supreme Court.
> > >
> > > Not to mention libtards themselves not
> > accepting
> > > the resulting decision.
> > >
> > > Until last night apparently. lmao
> > >
> > > Such a disingenuous dishonest bunch of
> > fucktards.
> >
> >
> > Sorry, you are wrong, completely. The
> concession
> > speech was on December 14, 2000, AFTER the
> Supreme
> > Court issued its final ruling. It was Bush who
> > brought the lawsuit, not Gore. Do you want to
> say
> > anything else that's factually completely
> wrong?
>
>
> In response to Gore's challenge
>
>

Quote

> On November 26, the Florida Elections Canvassing
> Commission certified the results of the election
> and declared Governor Bush the winner of
> Florida’s 25 electoral votes. On November 27,
> Vice President Gore, pursuant to Florida’s
> contest provisions, filed a complaint in Leon
> County Circuit Court contesting the certification.
> Fla. Stat. §102.168 (2000). He sought relief
> pursuant to §102.168(3)(c), which provides that
> “[r]eceipt of a number of illegal votes or
> rejection of a number of legal votes sufficient to
> change or place in doubt the result of the
> election” shall be grounds for a contest. The
> Circuit Court denied relief, stating that Vice
> President Gore failed to meet his burden of proof.
> He appealed to the First District Court of Appeal,
> which certified the matter to the Florida Supreme
> Court.
>
> Accepting jurisdiction, the Florida Supreme
> Court affirmed in part and reversed in part. Gore
> v. Harris, ___ So. 2d. ____ (2000). The court held
> that the Circuit Court had been correct to reject
> Vice President Gore’s challenge to the results
> certified in Nassau County and his challenge to
> the Palm Beach County Canvassing Board’s
> determination that 3,300 ballots cast in that
> county were not, in the statutory phrase, “legal
> votes.”
>

>
> Are you idiots really trying to dispute that Gore
> and most all of Libtardia were calling Bush's win
> and his Presidency illegitmate for years after?
> lmao!

Gore won in the Florida Supreme Court, but the Florida Supreme Court was overruled by the US Supreme Court.

Note jump/shift from claiming that Gore never conceded and never accepted Bush's election to the claim that "Libtardia were calling Bush's win
> and his Presidency illegitmate for years after?"

8 year old schoolyard argument technique. I give up.

After bringing up Fl court?

You're fired, butthurt.

Gx9T9 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > MwKPL Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98 Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > Gore's Concession speech? Wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > >
> > > > -----
> > > > > And the butthurt continues for those who
> > > forgot
> > > > > that ol Chakra reversed his concession
> days
> > > > later.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > And took his challenge to the Supreme
> Court.
> > > >
> > > > Not to mention libtards themselves not
> > > accepting
> > > > the resulting decision.
> > > >
> > > > Until last night apparently. lmao
> > > >
> > > > Such a disingenuous dishonest bunch of
> > > fucktards.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sorry, you are wrong, completely. The
> > concession
> > > speech was on December 14, 2000, AFTER the
> > Supreme
> > > Court issued its final ruling. It was Bush
> who
> > > brought the lawsuit, not Gore. Do you want
> to
> > say
> > > anything else that's factually completely
> > wrong?
> >
> >
> > In response to Gore's challenge
> >
> >

Quote

> > On November 26, the Florida Elections
> Canvassing
> > Commission certified the results of the
> election
> > and declared Governor Bush the winner of
> > Florida’s 25 electoral votes. On November 27,
> > Vice President Gore, pursuant to Florida’s
> > contest provisions, filed a complaint in Leon
> > County Circuit Court contesting the
> certification.
> > Fla. Stat. §102.168 (2000). He sought relief
> > pursuant to §102.168(3)(c), which provides
> that
> > “[r]eceipt of a number of illegal votes or
> > rejection of a number of legal votes sufficient
> to
> > change or place in doubt the result of the
> > election” shall be grounds for a contest. The
> > Circuit Court denied relief, stating that Vice
> > President Gore failed to meet his burden of
> proof.
> > He appealed to the First District Court of
> Appeal,
> > which certified the matter to the Florida
> Supreme
> > Court.
> >
> > Accepting jurisdiction, the Florida Supreme
> > Court affirmed in part and reversed in part.
> Gore
> > v. Harris, ___ So. 2d. ____ (2000). The court
> held
> > that the Circuit Court had been correct to
> reject
> > Vice President Gore’s challenge to the
> results
> > certified in Nassau County and his challenge to
> > the Palm Beach County Canvassing Board’s
> > determination that 3,300 ballots cast in that
> > county were not, in the statutory phrase,
> “legal
> > votes.”
> >

> >
> > Are you idiots really trying to dispute that
> Gore
> > and most all of Libtardia were calling Bush's
> win
> > and his Presidency illegitmate for years after?
>
> > lmao!
>
> Gore won in the Florida Supreme Court, but the
> Florida Supreme Court was overruled by the US
> Supreme Court.
>


Exactly idiot. That was the reason for the Supreme Court case. And the reason for the state Supreme Court case was Gore's original complaint. i.e., The origin of the case was Gore NOT accepting the result.


> Note jump/shift from claiming that Gore never
> conceded and never accepted Bush's election to the
> claim that "Libtardia were calling Bush's win
> > and his Presidency illegitmate for years
> after?"
>
> 8 year old schoolyard argument technique. I give
> up.


Which you can't argue because you know that it's true. How many thousands of examples would you like which anyone can easily find simply by searching "Bush stole election" or "Bush illegitmate" or similar? lol