General Discussion

DENVERPOPS

(13,003 posts)

17. Be very very careful Crispy

Thu May 6, 2021, 05:20 PM

May 2021

I said something quite similar a few years back...... I dared, politely, to question the actions of the Democrat Party and one of it's members actions, and was hand slapped/sanctioned by DU......

I dare not say more in agreement with your comment, I hope you understand.......

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

57 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

New: Justice Dept warns GOP-led audit of the 2020 election ballots in Arizona that turning over mate [View all] soothsayer May 2021 OP

Oh. A warning. I feel so much better. CrispyQ May 2021 #1

I know what you mean. Maybe we just aren't hearing about it? soothsayer May 2021 #3

Be very very careful Crispy DENVERPOPS May 2021 #17

It's not the "Democrat Party" HuskyOffset May 2021 #25

Sorry HO DENVERPOPS May 2021 #30

Noun: Democrat. Adjective: Democratic. Mister Ed May 2021 #31

Democrat as a slur goes back to the 19th century, and has been systematically used by Celerity May 2021 #32

Now, I am seriously confused....... DENVERPOPS May 2021 #35

we are Democrats (noun), we belong to the Democratic (adjective) Party Celerity May 2021 #36

I am out of here.............. DENVERPOPS May 2021 #37

I do not understand why you are so upset Celerity May 2021 #38

I am a Democrat. I am a supporter of the Democratic Party. Aristus May 2021 #48

It was started in the 50s The Wizard May 2021 #33

Apologies to you DENVERPOPS HuskyOffset May 2021 #44

I agree. DOJ needs to heed Teddy Roosevelt: 'Speak softly but carry a big stick.' triron May 2021 #41

Why didn't they do the recount in a bar? BlueJac May 2021 #2

How about the bar DENVERPOPS May 2021 #18

Excellent. Between the loaded guns, the alcohol, and potential food poisoning, what could be niyad May 2021 #51

republicans know it is illegal ... . . Lovie777 May 2021 #4

If there are no consequences, then.... triron May 2021 #42

Ummm. Isn't it a little late for that? -(nt)- stopdiggin May 2021 #5

COULD????? WTF? spanone May 2021 #6

Sorry, I repeated what you said... I keep telling myself to read other responses so I don't repeat. Escurumbele May 2021 #15

NO SHIT escu.......NC DENVERPOPS May 2021 #20

Look at it this way.... albacore May 2021 #7

Yeah, hopefully they'll take this as a wake up call to stop the nonsense soothsayer May 2021 #9

Any Sensible Person... Deacon Blue May 2021 #27

The legislators who voted to do this DURHAM D May 2021 #8

AND the AG and governor who let them do this ancianita May 2021 #22

Susan Collins now in charge of the DOJ? Dan May 2021 #10

Actually, you know what I would like to see DENVERPOPS May 2021 #23

The good news is all the Arizona ballots Mr.Bill May 2021 #11

Ooh I like this take soothsayer May 2021 #19

Yep. ancianita May 2021 #24

Ya think?? Rhiannon12866 May 2021 #12

Boom......... turbinetree May 2021 #13

"COULD"??? If they know the law, and they should (Justice Dept), there should be no "COULD" Escurumbele May 2021 #14

Why would this not have surfaced at the very beginning of this travesty? BobTheSubgenius May 2021 #16

The EXACT question I ask DENVERPOPS May 2021 #21

The wheels of justice grind slowly but surely. Elessar Zappa May 2021 #40

I have no answer, just all but useless conjecture. BobTheSubgenius May 2021 #45

Maybe the DOJ has had to get their evidence and argument ducks in a row, ancianita May 2021 #28

That's an excellent thought. BobTheSubgenius May 2021 #46

I hope it means they were setting a trap -- giving them enough rope to hang themselves. n/t pnwmom May 2021 #29

That could certainly be the case. BobTheSubgenius May 2021 #47

The Democrats tried to nip it, but Judge Daniel Martin let it go forward, though the judge ancianita May 2021 #49

His opinion of their privacy procedures isn't enough to issue at least a temporary injunction? BobTheSubgenius May 2021 #55

That's what plaintiffs asked for, but I guess he decided to let it go forward, seeing whether ancianita May 2021 #57

Isn't that obvious? Lettuce Be May 2021 #26

Mr Garland is a VERY bright man, there's a strategy here. NoMoreRepugs May 2021 #34

Kick dalton99a May 2021 #39

I thought that was an odd way to do a recount. Turning ballots over to a partisan private company UCmeNdc May 2021 #43

Republicans got the Sec of State to allow it. Apparently, ancianita May 2021 #50

it is blatantly illegal and I said this over a week ago garybeck May 2021 #52

Will the FULL COST of this bullshit recount ever be known bluestarone May 2021 #53

NPR article: scipan May 2021 #54

A warning was needed for this? I thought it was assumed. LiberatedUSA May 2021 #56