Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 31

Thread: Rand issues 1/6/21 statement:

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Post Rand issues 1/6/21 statement:

    From a press statement moments ago:

    Dr. Rand Paul: ‘We Simply Cannot Destroy the Constitution, Our Laws, and the Electoral College in the Process’




    WASHINGTON, D.C. – The following is a speech U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) will be giving today from an undisclosed location:

    “I wrote a speech today.

    “I was planning to say I fear the chaos of establishing a precedent that Congress can overturn elections.

    “Boy, was I right.

    “Chaos. Anarchy. It’s wrong and un-American.

    “The vote we are about to cast is important.

    “Now more than ever.

    “The question is:

    “Should Congress override the certified results from the states and nullify the states’ right to conduct elections?

    “The vote today is not a protest; the vote today is literally to overturn the election!

    “Voting to overturn state-certified elections would be the opposite of what states’ rights Republicans have always advocated for.

    “This would doom the electoral college forever.

    “It was never intended by our founders that Congress have the power to overturn state-certified elections.

    “My oath to the Constitution doesn’t allow me to disobey the law. I cannot vote to overturn the verdict of the states.

    “Such a vote would be to overturn everything held dear by those of us who support the rights of states in this great system of federalism bequeathed to us by our founders.

    “The electoral college was created to devolve the power of selecting presidential electors to the states.

    “The electoral college is, without question, an inseparable friend to those who believe that every American across our vast country deserves to be heard.

    “If Congress were given the power to overturn the states’ elections . . . what terrible chaos would ensue.

    “Imagine the furor against the electoral college if Congress becomes a forum to overturn states’ electoral college slates.

    “It is one thing to be angry. It is another to focus one’s anger in a constructive way. That hasn’t happened today, to say the least. We simply cannot destroy the Constitution, our laws, and the electoral college in the process. I hope as the nation’s anger cools, we can channel that energy into essential electoral reforms in every state.

    “America is admired around the world for our free elections. We must, we absolutely must, fix this mess and restore confidence and integrity to our elections.”

    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Come on Rand. Why did you have to tarnish Anarchy's good name by mentioning it there?

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible Man View Post
    Come on Rand. Why did you have to tarnish Anarchy's good name by mentioning it there?
    True.

    But other than that- he's right on.
    There is no spoon.

  5. #4
    This is why Rand failed to take over his father's movement. This is why he is a failed presidential candidate. This is why he will forever be irrelevant in the grand scheme of American politics. A defender of liberty with no teeth. He is useful toady for the Establishment and he will remain that forever.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by familydog View Post
    This is why Rand failed to take over his father's movement. This is why he is a failed presidential candidate. This is why he will forever be irrelevant in the grand scheme of American politics. A defender of liberty with no teeth. He is useful toady for the Establishment and he will remain that forever.
    What part of what he said (aside from throwing the word anarchy in there) do you think Ron wouldn't have said?

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible Man View Post
    What part of what he said (aside from throwing the word anarchy in there) do you think Ron wouldn't have said?
    Perhaps we will find out on the Liberty Report. We don't have to speculate.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by familydog View Post
    Perhaps we will find out on the Liberty Report. We don't have to speculate.
    They agree with Massie.

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    Ron Paul weighs in. Go to 14:00 mark.


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_vfbJ2KyW4
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    They agree with Massie.
    Fair enough. Perhaps lack of fight is why his movement dried up and got replaced with what we see now.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    They agree with Massie.
    Man, almost every time. He sees the world like I do.
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  12. #10
    I don't see anything wrong with that statement. I mean, he's right.

    I guess he could have been stronger at laying the blame at the "mess" and the needed "electoral reforms" and lack of "integrity" of the process that created this anger. But he's correctly calling out Congress's role.
    "And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat

    "It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    I don't see anything wrong with that statement. I mean, he's right.

    I guess he could have been stronger at laying the blame at the "mess" and the needed "electoral reforms" and lack of "integrity" of the process that created this anger. But he's correctly calling out Congress's role.
    He is right, but he has no bite.
    He is a good senator to function in a political system with decent politicians.
    But in this corrupt system of crooks he is to weak and gets run over whilst his opponents kick him in the ribs.

    $#@! the system, $#@! the constitution.
    You had a good 250 year run.
    Time to water the tree or let it burn down along with everything else.

  14. #12
    //
    Last edited by dannno; 01-06-2021 at 05:36 PM.
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  15. #13
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    Leaders need to speak out about how to sort the problem. However, they seem all silent. What are they waiting for?

  17. #15
    Can someone summarize what Rand is saying or has been playing at lately?

    Is he parroting the ol' "we need to use the existing structures in place to make our changes?"

    If so, nah. We're beyond that. One thing I learned this year, and I thank Michael Malice for this, is that the left doesn't play by rules and when we do, we automatically lose. Shoot, it goes beyond just the left. The entire American system is corrupt to the core. And he wants to get huffy puffy towards people who finally had enough and stormed a taxpayer funded building? Same question goes to others of you thinking that way.

    It's time for conservatives, libertarians, and constitutionalists to get mean and angry. What is the alternative?
    Welcome to the R3VOLUTION!

    Join the Mises Caucus and let's get this train rolling: https://lpmisescaucus.com/

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Okie RP fan View Post
    Can someone summarize what Rand is saying or has been playing at lately?

    Is he parroting the ol' "we need to use the existing structures in place to make our changes?"

    If so, nah. We're beyond that. One thing I learned this year, and I thank Michael Malice for this, is that the left doesn't play by rules and when we do, we automatically lose. Shoot, it goes beyond just the left. The entire American system is corrupt to the core. And he wants to get huffy puffy towards people who finally had enough and stormed a taxpayer funded building? Same question goes to others of you thinking that way.

    It's time for conservatives, libertarians, and constitutionalists to get mean and angry. What is the alternative?
    It's difficult to see how the American revolution ever started following such strict construction for sure.

    Congress has a duty to see that these votes were submitted by the State legislature from electors they choose, and the candidates are valid, and are not a two year old i.e. who is ineligible for office (no, States can't submit anyone they choose, and Congress is responsible for checking that).

    People are playing with words here, and possibly to deceive - which means it's malicious. No, States don't choose electors, in the constitution, only state legislatures do. These electors objected to were not chosen directly by the legislatures, or by their direction under law (an extension to the constitution that is thought to be valid, but doesn't have to be). While it may be true states are responsible for investigating their fraud, that isn't what is going on.

    Instead, election officials broke the laws the state legislatures passed, made new ones, bypassed the legislative approval, even preventing them from meeting, and submitted electors on their own accord. Not state legislatures.

    Congress can't rightfully accept any electors, only electors from the state legislature. Since these are not that, Congress should do the right thing and simply send it back to the state legislatures to get their approval.

    Congress also can't rightfully accept any vote - even a state legislature can not submit a vote through their electors for a candidate not eligible to office. (Harris in this example isn't eligible). These are both things Congress is suppose to do.

    What many people in congress are proposing to do right now is election fraud of the same type that we just had occur on the local scale. Not checking that the votes are VALID ballots (of legal candidates instead of legal voters - Harris isn't eligible), and that only legal electors are voting (electors not chosen under state legislature direction are not legal). So Congress wants to count every vote - legal and illegal, just like we just had occur on the individual sale. Total corruption, not even checking if state legislatures are ok with it by vote, or the vote is proposing to vote a legal vote (as opposed to a vote for mickey mouse). "If a state votes for mickey mouse, we must accept it - even though mickey mouse isn't eligible to office".

    I have to guess that the only reason people would not conduct elections in Congress honestly is if they themselves were not honestly elected. What is coming out about black box voting (computerized), and who is running the companies that make them and how the elections are conducted, seems to make that a real possibility. Certainly it has extended beyond this years president's race. Black box voting is a hallmark of communist countries, to have show elections.

    If Congress wants to do the right thing, and I hope and pray they do, they should write back to the legislatures in session, and get their ok (consent) to the electors, and they should research and verify the eligibility of candidates submitted as even being legal votes. I don't know if they are capable of doing the right thing, they just put everyone on a year lockdown, allowed churches to be shut down, allowed mass suppression of free speech --, etc.

    This is not the first wrong thing Congress has thought of doing. It follows a very long list of illegal, illegitimate, and unconstitutional actions, with illegitimate elections being the last - after a whole year of a grab for power that has made ever person feel like they were living under a communist country. Because of that, that I don't want America under permanent lockdown, I pray that they aren't allowed to get away with not doing the right thing.
    Last edited by SpiritOf1776_J4; 01-07-2021 at 02:45 AM.



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Collins View Post
    From a press statement moments ago:
    Hi Matt

  21. #18
    Thanks for the response, spirit.


    One thing that's happening now is there's another huge chunk of people who are now disenfranchised. The GOP could be seeing it's final days and the neocons and big gov GOPers are to blame, not Trump. But even so, what happens now? This very well could have been the entire goal and I can see China as maybe having a helping hand - the Dems (and yes much of the GOP, but the GOP isn't their wagon) are in the bag with China. This was all a well played coup against U.S. institutional systems. Basically, let's screw up the election so much to where a significant chunk of people lose confidence in it and completely bow out. That leaves the good morons/useful idiots ala the Democrats to continue to mop everything else up election after election.

    The only recourse at this point is some form(s) of secession. There's no going back, there's no healing wounds (barring some supernatural event), what little trust was left is shattered for tens of millions of Americans - Trump supporters, some conservatives, and since 2012 for a lot of us - libertarians.

    Playing by the rules gets us nothing but so many of us insist on still trying. Why?! It's a losing strategy and has been for decades now. So, what recourse is there at this point?
    Welcome to the R3VOLUTION!

    Join the Mises Caucus and let's get this train rolling: https://lpmisescaucus.com/

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Okie RP fan View Post
    So, what recourse is there at this point?
    With social media merging with the state our options are thin. What we did well in 2007 on Youtube will never happen organically again. It will happen again under the control of their algorithms. If the corporate state controls all content and communications, in addition to a new suite of propaganda tools, what exactly can a heterodox political theory do to compete?

    Personally, I think it's time for a divorce. A peaceful economic and intellectual separation. Libertarians love to talk about markets. Maybe it is time to create our very own. As we are moving into an era where machines are watching and acting then I think we need to start looking there.
    ..Oo.o~ Rights are Divine ~o.oO..

  23. #20
    It wasn't a vote to overturn the election. It was a check and balance to verify the validity of the legislatures choice. Why are we educating politicians?

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by kfarnan View Post
    It wasn't a vote to overturn the election. It was a check and balance to verify the validity of the legislatures choice. Why are we educating politicians?
    Each member of Congress takes an oath to uphold the Constitution. The Constitution does not grant them the check and balance you are talking about.

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by hard@work View Post
    With social media merging with the state our options are thin. What we did well in 2007 on Youtube will never happen organically again. It will happen again under the control of their algorithms. If the corporate state controls all content and communications, in addition to a new suite of propaganda tools, what exactly can a heterodox political theory do to compete?

    Personally, I think it's time for a divorce. A peaceful economic and intellectual separation. Libertarians love to talk about markets. Maybe it is time to create our very own. As we are moving into an era where machines are watching and acting then I think we need to start looking there.
    + rep

  26. #23
    We've read the Federalist papers. We know what they say. Say what you want Rand lost a massive chunk of popular support. So he goes forward without this. We go forward with half the nation having no concern for the constitution. Now, we have another half which no longer believes it has held. So he goes forward as a constitutionalist with this.
    ..Oo.o~ Rights are Divine ~o.oO..

  27. #24
    Thoughts on this article....

    https://uncoverdc.com/2021/01/08/ran...ional-suicide/

    Rand Paul and National Suicide
    By Larry Schweikart

    Rand Paul is noted among conservatives as one of the more Constitutionally-oriented voices in the Senate. He has consistently been a state’s rights advocate. Last night, in a letter and Twitter thread, Paul offered a spirited defense of his vote to accept the electors for Joe Biden sent by Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. The vote, and subsequent certification, of every one of these states, has been challenged (to say the least) as fraudulent at best, totally illegitimate at worst. Paul’s acceptance of what appears to be fraudulently-obtained electors from a Constitutional perspective appears to be worth analysis.

    This is the speech I'll be giving today from an undisclosed location.

    — Senator Rand Paul (@RandPaul) January 6, 2021

    Paul states that “Voting to overturn state-certified elections would be the opposite of what States’ right Republicans have always advocated for.” Here, he is probably correct. It would involve Congress substituting its will for state legislatures, which are strongly empowered in the Constitution. “Our founders never intended that Congress have the power to overturn state-certified elections.” He then argued that his “oath to the Constitution doesn’t allow me to disobey the law.”

    But what does the Constitution say about extenuating circumstances? Does it allow the nation to vote itself into slavery, or to commit national suicide by electing a Hitler or Chavez? For the most part, the phrase in the Declaration of Independence, that “whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends [life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness], it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” However, almost immediately after establishing the Constitution, Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 28 that rebellion endangered all government. Thus the right of rebellion was tossed out the door.

    The 14th Amendment, however, offered a different, Constitutional, scenario: “But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.” Or, if there is a fraudulent election that denies to citizens the right to vote or abridges that right in any way, the state is penalized by a reduction in its representation. That would appear to mean that electors would not be accepted.

    The larger question would be, “Is there a level of fraud that is so obvious and repulsive that it’s a clear violation of the 14th Amendment and would override the will of the states?” If so, what is that line? How much fraud constitutes “enough” for Congress to overturn an election by the states?

    We have an answer, and it contradicts Senator Paul. In 1877, three Southern states (Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina) produced results for Samuel Tilden, the Democrat that was obtained by fraud and threats of violence against Republican (mostly black) voters. It was noted that In South Carolina, 101% of all eligible voters had voted. (Shades of several Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin counties). Congress acted because it had “dueling electors,” that is, electoral slates for the Democrats signed by the state attorney general (Florida), the Democratic gubernatorial candidate (Louisiana) or none at all (South Carolina). Congress solved this crisis by passing a law (note: after the fact), forming an “electoral commission” to settle the issue. The key fact—which might be of interest to Senator Paul—is that what triggered the need for this commission was fraud at the state level. It was very clear, therefore, that all elections were not equal, that they must be free and fair so as to not violate the 14th Amendment.

    There is no doubt from any historians that the Founders regarded violations of political and civil rights as a form of slavery, that is, the lack of sovereignty. This argument goes to a far deeper and, to be honest, more cloudy larger debate: do the citizens of a democracy in their personal sovereignty, or in a republic collectively, have the right to sell themselves into slavery? (Slavery is prohibited in the 13th and 14th Amendments). More broadly, do those citizens have the right to commit national suicide by electing a Hitler or Hugo Chavez? In both cases, one of the first acts of these despots was to prohibit or abolish congress or the judiciary (or curtail their powers to make them “un-democratic”). Is this legitimate, Senator Paul?

    Interestingly, no states any longer list suicide as a crime (What are they gonna do, give you the death penalty?); nevertheless, every state had laws making it a felony to aid, advise, or encourage another to suicide. Why? If killing yourself is acceptable, why is it unacceptable for another to urge you to kill yourself? As late as 2018, a Maryland man was convicted of attempted suicide. California medical facilities are required to commit anyone who, in their estimation, is suicidal. Why?

    Because despite all the convolutions of abortion law, life is still more or less held to be sacred, and one cannot take one’s own life because it does not belong to you. This same reasoning is applied to a nation. Because of the act’s finality, a nation may not vote itself into slavery or commit suicide because doing so would violate the fundamental rights of all, including those who did not vote for it. What does this mean for electors and fraudulent elections? It has to mean the same thing: that the fundamental political and civil rights of all are violated by permitting fraudulent votes. So, Senator Paul, can you please explain how you are permitted to violate the 14th Amendment and invalidate the votes of 74 million people because properly labeling the certified elections of fraud as legitimate in five or six states supports “state’s rights?” I await your next defense of the indefensible.
    - ML



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Landon View Post
    Thoughts on this article....

    Paul states that “Voting to overturn state-certified elections would be the opposite of what States’ right Republicans have always advocated for.” Here, he is probably correct. It would involve Congress substituting its will for state legislatures, which are strongly empowered in the Constitution. “Our founders never intended that Congress have the power to overturn state-certified elections.” He then argued that his “oath to the Constitution doesn’t allow me to disobey the law.”

    But what does the Constitution say about extenuating circumstances?

    https://uncoverdc.com/2021/01/08/ran...ional-suicide/



    - ML
    Ugh. “Extenuating circumstances” is exactly how we got to where we are. Allowing Congress to reverse State elections is one Pandora’s Box that we don't want to open. As we well, know Democrats know no boundaries, and would immediately use it.

    “Extenuating circumstances” is another easily abused precedent or standard, and it was abused by Democrats and their GOP allies with the COVID “crisis”. Many States essentially changed election law without any legislation due to the “emergency” of COVID.

    Congress acted because it had “dueling electors,”
    There were no dueling electors this election. And if a state legislature had declared the vote fraudulent, and selected a competing slate of electors, they would have a very solid case. At that point, a Constitutionalist would have to follow the Constitution and give preference to the legislature. But once again, that would be a terrible precedent.

    There are no good options when the government investigates itself, and finds no evidence of wrongdoing (or as the courts mostly did, refused to hear the cases).
    "Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
    "Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
    "Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
    "Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

    Proponent of real science.
    The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Landon View Post
    Thoughts on this article....

    https://uncoverdc.com/2021/01/08/ran...ional-suicide/

    [...]

    But what does the Constitution say about extenuating circumstances? [...]
    - ML
    Ugh. “Extenuating circumstances” is exactly how we got to where we are. Allowing Congress to reverse State elections is one Pandora’s Box that we don't want to open. As we well, know Democrats know no boundaries, and would immediately use it.

    “Extenuating circumstances” is another easily abused precedent or standard, and it was abused by Democrats and their GOP allies with the COVID “crisis”. Many States essentially changed election law without any legislation due to the “emergency” of COVID.
    If patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel, "extenuating circumstances" is often the first.

    (File under "But It's For The Children!!")
    https://i.imgur.com/BwU46s8.png

    Libertarian Party Mises Caucus
    "The libertarian wing of the Libertarian Party."

    Platform · Our Actions

    Mises PAC
    (Libertarian Party membership not required)

    #TakeHumanAction · Donate · Merchandise


    HOME · Facebook · Twitter · YouTube

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    Ugh. “Extenuating circumstances” is exactly how we got to where we are. Allowing Congress to reverse State elections is one Pandora’s Box that we don't want to open. As we well, know Democrats know no boundaries, and would immediately use it.

    “Extenuating circumstances” is another easily abused precedent or standard, and it was abused by Democrats and their GOP allies with the COVID “crisis”. Many States essentially changed election law without any legislation due to the “emergency” of COVID.



    There were no dueling electors this election. And if a state legislature had declared the vote fraudulent, and selected a competing slate of electors, they would have a very solid case. At that point, a Constitutionalist would have to follow the Constitution and give preference to the legislature. But once again, that would be a terrible precedent.

    There are no good options when the government investigates itself, and finds no evidence of wrongdoing (or as the courts mostly did, refused to hear the cases).
    First, there was already a precedent of congress objecting to a (perceived) fairly won election, democrats from several states objected to Trump. So for Rand to object is not precedent setting.

    And how about setting precedent of the state supreme court to circumvent the state legislatures? because that is exactly what they did in several states. fFor PA, the court overrode literal word for word law in Act 77, which stated the law cannot be overridden by the judicial branch, hello?

    And how about setting precedent for election fraud and the cover up that followed?

    Here is the reason I don't blame Rand even though I disagree with him;

    Nobody that was using common sense expected both houses to reject the electoral slates. That in itself was an impossibility. That is not the issue here.

    What was being asked of Pence wasn't to throw out elector slates, his open letter on 1/6 was a distraction. It was for him to put it back to the state legislators due to the state electoral laws not being followed. Prof. Eastman gave the roadmap to the Constitutionality of what was being asked. Pence's team did the safe thing (I don't blame them) for his legacy and gave him cover by making some excuse that he couldn't just throw them out like that. If the legislators decline to de-certify then let that be the final word.

    Doesn't matter now, what happened has happened. By 1/20, if Biden is inaugurated, this election fraud will be sealed and the victor will write the history books. We all knew democrats (and reps, but less) stole elections but this time they did it out in the open and doubled down like it didn't matter. It is what it is.
    Last edited by eleganz; 01-11-2021 at 12:46 AM.
    THE SQUAD of RPF
    1. enhanced_deficit - Paid Troll / John Bolton book promoter
    2. Devil21 - LARPing Wizard, fake magical script reader
    3. Firestarter - Tax Troll; anti-tax = "criminal behavior"
    4. TheCount - Comet Pizza Pedo Denier <-- sick

    @Ehanced_Deficit's real agenda on RPF =troll:

    Who spends this much time copy/pasting the same recycled links, photos/talking points.

    7 yrs/25k posts later RPF'ers still respond to this troll

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by eleganz View Post
    (I don't blame them)
    A thousand years of darkness for convenience and appearance? Going back to the day jobs for four years of hostile assaults on Christians? Race-based identity politics, eugenics, and complete corporate control over the minds of our youth? Yeah, I don't $#@!ing think so. It's time to kick up some dust in this country. It is time to get angry, real angry, and turn the boat around.

    They are liars, thieves, thugs, and cheats.

    Where is Rand's leadership on this? Making PR statements about one loss of life and ignoring the other. That's not leadership and it is definitely not presidential leadership.

    There is more than enough evidence not just of vote fraud but of violent hypocrisy. We need firebrands not passive compliance.
    ..Oo.o~ Rights are Divine ~o.oO..

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Landon View Post
    Thank you. He articulates my position quite well but mine is much shorter ... cowardice.

  34. #30
    Hi, I am Rand Paul, I don't actually believe in freedom and liberty, but I play like I do to help control those who would overthrow the government if nobody listened... Hold on, let me see what the deep state is telling me.... be right back...
    I have seen through it all... the system is against us. ALL OF IT.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Rand issues statement on Barrett nomination:
    By Matt Collins in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 02-23-2021, 11:20 AM
  2. Rand Paul issues a statement regarding the debate.
    By kbs021 in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 01-11-2016, 06:08 PM
  3. Rand Paul for President Issues Debate Statement
    By libertyplz in forum Rand Paul Forum
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 12-13-2015, 09:34 AM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-23-2013, 02:29 PM
  5. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 06-20-2011, 06:24 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •