Posted on 01/28/2021 1:45:51 AM PST by yesthatjallen
Because the Trump administration didn't offer him one.
Why was the typical song played for the arrival of POTUS not played for Biden during his inauguration?
"Hail to the Chief" was not played as Biden entered the platform because he wasn't president. It was played immediately after he was sworn in.
Why wasn’t Biden rendered a 21 gun salute as customary for an incoming president? You know, like Trump received the same day Jan 20th?
Because Trump ordered it and Biden didn't. Biden did get a 21 gun salute later when he laid the wreath at Arlington.
Why was Biden’s inauguration streamed as live in Spain 10 hours before the schedule time?
It wasn't.
Why did Biden remove his hand from a fake bible before his oath was finished?
He didn't.
Why did Biden get sworn in after the “Super Spreader” which is NOT Constitutional?
For the same reason why Pence was sworn in before Trump, and Biden was sworn in before Obama. They scheduled it that way. Nothing in the Constitution mandates the order in which they are sworn in. I'm mildly surprised that you're not trying to make something out of the fact the Biden was actually sworn in a few minutes early and not exactly at noon.
Why did the Military turn their back to Biden as he drove by them rather than face and salute which is an absolute requirement for Military members?
Happens every inauguration. The troops are there to provide security. Some face towards the president, some face away.
Why doesn’t Biden have the Military launch codes near him? You know like the ones pictured near Trump in Florida?
He did, once he was sworn in.
Why is the Pentagon blocking access for members of the Biden regime?
They aren't. Not since the inauguration.
I wondered why they did not have two teams of lawyers - one for the procedural issues, and one for actual theft or fraud. Instead, they went with procedural only, and it did seem like Rudy was spending a lot of time not doing legal work, but instead podcasts etc. People have said for a while, even before the election, that Rudy should have been removed.
Seems to me that’s on Trump, as it’s hard to believe he couldn’t have put together a more capable legal team to press his case of fraud and theft.
No. Sounds like "Q" talking points.
I have wondered for some time that if Trump had had competent legal representation following the election whether he might have won some of his legal challenges? And had he won some of the more significant ones it that would have given the states the cover they needed to seat an alternate slate of electors?
Yes, that is true. However, shouldn’t Trump have known they would try everything, and shouldn’t he have had a great team of lawyers working before the election on the issue?
I read and scanned this and can ping back in the future. It’s an entertaining read and rings true to me.
There are plenty of good things one can say about Rudy. My recollection is that after he became Mayor, the New York homicides fell by more than a thousand a year. Liberals say it had nothing to do with his tough on crime stance.
Plusses notwithstanding, I can well imagine that he was not the man to appreciate analysis of time-stamped precinct election data. Everyone with a positive attribute, has limitations.
The old truism holds true. The Democratic party is the evil party. The Republican party is the stupid part. Romney and McConnell working with Democrats to move on from the steal simply confirms another truism. Sometimes the evil party and the stupid party work together to produce a result that is both evil and stupid. It’s called bi-partisanship.
I wonder if Mediocrity is the lawyer named Boris who was on War Room almost every day.
It all sounds about how I feared it was. A disorganized mess.
“The best lawyers in the world have no chance in a court where the judge or judges refuse to consider the evidence, no matter how reasoned the arguments are, or how persuasive the evidence might be.”
That is true. It also applies to liberals in general. Whether it is election fraud, the use of HCQ, evolution, or anything else, liberals will not listen. I’ve about concluded that being liberal means being close-minded.
How do you explain this?
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-meme-nine-questions-idUSKBN29V2CV
The common theme in this article is that Rudy Guiliani mismanaged the legal challenge and fact-gathering of the “Stop the Steal” legal team.....
The constant reference to his cognitive ability due to age and heavy drinking.....
Some of this may ring true based on observation of how the media presentations were handled and how poorly the suits brought were structured and presented to the courts.
Yes, it was an uphill battle with strong headwinds but I have believed since its inception, it was winnable.....
“If the SCOTUS would have agreed to hear just one case of fraud and allowed the evidence to be shown it would have opened the floodgates that would have led to a Trump victory.”
I find your claim to be plausible. Roberts is as reliable as McConnell.
Yes, the election was indeed stolen. Most sensible people realize that based on the overwhelming amount of evidence - the majority of which was never even evaluated by any court.
What Patrick appears to be doing here is showing why the good guys lost the fight to overturn the fraud due to what seems to be complete and total ineptitude on the part of most involved.
Bookmark to read more thoroughly later..
Sad, and strange.
“IOW ... Knowing that the election was going to be stolen and that there would be widespread and sophisticated fraud, what efforts were taken to prevent the fraud, or at least to gather definitive evidence of the fraud?”
I found 17 acronyms for IOW, including Institute for Occult Warfare. That might fit the bill :).
I think Trump and Republicans were largely unprepared and blindsided. Yes, President Trump did warn that unrestricted mail-in ballots invited fraud. Good words meant to elicit good preventive actions, which never took place.
“There appears to have been nothing, and certainly no plan in place for addressing the fraud when it happened.”
Agreed.
“I have wondered for some time that if Trump had had competent legal representation following the election whether he might have won some of his legal challenges?”
I seem to recall seeing a headline that that Trump’s lawyers had decided not to represent him in any election challenge. So that would leave Rudy as team B.
You can't blame this on Giuliani or Trump running an “amateur-hour operation”.
I remember reading that too, but I have to believe there were other expert attorneys they could have turned to. It was a situation that called for the A Team and not the B Team or worse.
I remember reading that too, but I have to believe there were other expert attorneys they could have turned to. It was a situation that called for the A Team and not the B Team or worse.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.