Right, but that does not give us leave to sit on our ass and do nothing.

The symposiums purpose was to call attention, and bring focus to evidenced based claims of election fraud.

The military may be the only way, but if you think about it, we are an essential part of the military's game plan?

Before a military action, we often hear our national leaders make speeches to justify the action, and to win the people's support. F. Roosevelt, A day that will live in infamy. (granted the justification for most wars was based deception and lies), George Bush's, speech leading up to launch of Gulf War. For good or bad, truth, lies, whatever, the purpose was to provide a moral justification, and to sell the idea to the America people.

We are part of the military operation, and our job is to awaken people to the evil lies of those that want to control we free people, to show them the true face of the socialist phantom that they now embrace. To help them see that the corruption that pervades our society, is good for neither left or right.

If we use the Toilman model of argumentation, (which G. Bush used to justify his war) we will see the logical path:

Claim: A statement that something is so.

2020 was a fraudulent election

Data: The backing for the claim.

All the stuff presented in symposium

Warrant: The link between the claim and the grounds.

We need to learn the truth by conducting forensic audits of key states, or every state, every county

Backing: Support for the warrant.

I think this is were we come in. For example it is our job to make our state representative follow our will, and conduct audit of state/counties/precincts.

Modality: The degree of certainty employed in offering the argument.

Common sense argument to back up data like bellweather abnormalities ie Trump won 18 or 19, etc.

Rebuttal: Exceptions to the initial claim.

If truth reveals that your guy won fair and square, we will accept that.

Exception would be something like.

We can only prove election fraud, with full forensic audits that are open and transparent, otherwise the audit will be meaningless.

The military may be the only way, but without us playing out part, that way will not long succeed.

Right, but that does not give us leave to sit on our ass and do nothing.

The symposiums purpose was to call attention, and bring focus to evidenced based claims of election fraud.

The military may be the only way, but if you think about it, we are an essential part of the military's game plan?

Before a military action, we often hear our national leaders make speeches to justify the action, and to win the people's support. F. Roosevelt, A day that will live in infamy. (granted the justification for most wars was based deception and lies), George Bush's, speech leading up to launch of Gulf War. For good or bad, truth, lies, whatever, the purpose was to provide a moral justification, and to sell the idea to the America people.

We are part of the military operation, and our job is to awaken people to the evil lies of those that want to control we free people, to show them the true face of the socialist phantom that they now embrace. To help them see that the corruption that pervades our society, is good for neither left or right.

If we use the Toilman model of argumentation, (which G. Bush used to justify his war) we will see the logical path:

Claim: A statement that something is so.

2020 was a fraudulent election

Data: The backing for the claim.

All the stuff presented in symposium

Warrant: The link between the claim and the grounds.

We need to learn the truth by conducting forensic audits of key states, or every state, every county

Backing: Support for the warrant. I think this is were we come in. For example it is our job to make our state representative follow our will, and conduct audit of state/counties/precincts.

Modality: The degree of certainty employed in offering the argument. Common sense argument to back up data like bellweather abnormalities ie Trump won 18 or 19, etc.

Rebuttal: Exceptions to the initial claim,"

If truth reveals that your guy won fair and square, we will accept that.

Exception would be something like. We can only prove election fraud, with full forensic audits that are open and transparent, otherwise the audit will be meaningless.

The military may be the only way, but without us playing out part, that way will not long succeed.

Right, but that does not give us leave to sit on our ass and do nothing.

The symposiums purpose was to call attention, and bring focus to evidenced based claims of election fraud.

The military may be the only way, but if you think about it, we are an essential part of the military's game plan?

Before a military action, we often hear our national leaders make speeches to justify the action, and to win the people's support. F. Roosevelt, A day that will live in infamy. (granted the justification for most wars was based deception and lies), George Bush's, speech leading up to launch of Gulf War. For good or bad, truth, lies, whatever, the purpose was to provide a moral justification, and to sell the idea to the America people.

We are part of the military operation, and our job is to awaken people to the evil lies of those that want to control we free people, to show them the true face of the socialist phantom that they now embrace. To help them see that the corruption that pervades our society, is good for neither left or right.

If we use the Toilman model of argumentation, we will see the logical path:

Claim: A statement that something is so.

2020 was a fraudulent election

Data: The backing for the claim.

All the stuff presented in symposium

Warrant: The link between the claim and the grounds.

We need to learn the truth by conducting forensic audits of key states, or every state, every county

Backing: Support for the warrant. I think this is were we come in. For example it is our job to make our state representative follow our will, and conduct audit of state/counties/precincts.

Modality: The degree of certainty employed in offering the argument. Common sense argument to back up data like bellweather abnormalities ie Trump won 18 or 19, etc.

Rebuttal: Exceptions to the initial claim,"

If truth reveals that your guy won fair and square, we will accept that.

Exception would be something like. We can only prove election fraud, with full forensic audits that are open and transparent, otherwise the audit will be meaningless.

The military may be the only way, but without us playing out part, that way will not long succeed.

Right, but that does not give us leave to sit on our ass and do nothing.

The symposiums purpose was to call attention, and bring focus to evidenced based claims of election fraud.

The military may be the only way, but if you think about it, we are an essential part of the military's game plan?

Before a military action, we often hear our national leaders make speeches to justify the action, and to win the people's support. F. Roosevelt, A day that will live in infamy. (granted the justification for most wars was based deception and lies), George Bush's, speech leading up to launch of Gulf War. For good or bad, truth, lies, whatever, the purpose was provide a moral justification, and to sell the idea to the America people.

We are part of the military operation, and our job is to awaken people to the evil lies of those that want to control we free people, to show them the true face of the socialist phantom that now embrace. To help them see that the corruption that pervades our society, is good for neither left or right.

If we use the Toilman model of argumentation, we will see the logical path:

Claim: A statement that something is so.

2020 was a fraudulent election

Data: The backing for the claim.

All the stuff presented in symposium

Warrant: The link between the claim and the grounds.

We need to learn the truth by conducting forensic audits of key states, or every state, every county

Backing: Support for the warrant. I thing this is were we come in. For example it is our job to make our state representative follow our will, and conduct audit of state/counties/precincts.

Modality: The degree of certainty employed in offering the argument. Common sense argument to back up data like bellweather abnormalities ie Trump won 18 or 19, etc.

Rebuttal: Exceptions to the initial claim,"

Exception would be something like. We can only prove election fraud, with full forensic audits that are open and transparent, otherwise the audit will be meaningless.

The military may be the only way, but without us playing out part, that way will not long succeed.