But you aren't doing that.

First y'all insist the count be stopped before mail in votes are counted. Then you insist on a recount, then another, then an audit, then another, then when all counts, recounts, and audits go against you, you insist on a purely partisan fake audit done by the actual architects of the "voter fraud" fraud.
It is not a forensic audit, you don't use insanely partisan companies built on the big lie with zero election experience using only dihard Trumpster morons, also with no experience or knowledge of how the process even works, to do any legitimate audit....you do that to create dishonest propaganda with no value...and to destroy those counties abilities to hold elections by invalidating all their election equipment and attempting to gain access to every piece of government held data on every person in the county, voters or not.

It's the exact opposite of looking for the truth, it's blatantly creating falsehoods and false questions to further the lie they created.
Democrats were fine with recounts where it was close, and audits by reputable agencies with bipartisan participation and oversight, they all proved the counts were good and matched the physical records, despite the lies you've been fed by Trump and Giuliani. They don't support the obvious circus of insanity that is the cyberninja "audit", it's stupidity in the extreme to think anyone over 65 IQ would.

Do you have more fake election fraud claims you need to have explained as to why they were tossed out of court, or were 60+ enough to prove there's nothing there, nada, zip, zilch, nunca, nothing burger royal with cheese. There weren't fraudulent / illegal votes in the double digits, and the few there were went for Trump. Litigated, prosecuted, verified. Try again, that lie died in December.
We've had multiple true counts, why can't you accept a true count?

A few Republicans committing fraud that got caught, no Democrats, and not enough votes to change a single district if they were combined. Not a single Republican that won says THEIR election was won due to fraudulent ballots, and they would have to be if the fraud you and Trump claim happened did happen. THAT'S the truth, and I've embraced it since Nov 4th.

Why do you fear the truth, little Bobby? I know you find it all so scawey, but don't fear, adults are here to hold your hand through it. Now tell daddy where the monster is and I'll show you there's nothing there.

Tom Scott vs Irving Finkel: The Royal Game of Ur has been added as a related post - related requested by noims.

You can also watch Irving play Tom Scott here: *related=https://videosift.com/video/Tom-Scott-vs-Irving-Finkel-The-Royal-Game-of-Ur

The ACA was passed on party lines, it was going to be screwed up because of that no matter what. What pisses me off about it is that instead of trying to come up with a better solution, the Democrats rammed that fucker through. I can only assume it is because for a brief period they had control of the legislative and executive branches all at the same time. So rather than take a chance to fix it, they figured if they were going to get anything they might as well get it in place.

Obama inherited the situation in the ME. Bush fucked up royally. Obama just took a bad situation and made it worse. Admittedly, there were other fingers in the pie also, but he is still culpable.

The rules for the drone war were decided by Obama's administration. Regardless of what Bush did before, that lays 100% on Obama and his team. Some good articles to read:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/president-obamas-weak-defense-of-his-record-on-drone-strikes/511454/

https://www.cnn.com/2012/09/05/opinion/bergen-obama-drone/index.html

https://www.propublica.org/series/drones

My guess is the dentist Royal Lee? Patent #1, 630, 394 May 31, 1927?

https://www.seleneriverpress.com/images/pdfs/LEE_BIO_A_Thumbnail_Sketch_of_ROYAL_LEE_by_L_Jewell__ca_1950.pdf

Do I win anything?

Congratulations! Your video, Pizza Royale, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 59 Badge!

Your video, Pizza Royale, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Your video, Juvenile vandalizes sand sculpture at Royal Hawaiian Hotel, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Lol..no.
CCD is barely studied in wild hives because it's not been seen in the wild in statistically meaningful numbers, and it's much more of a problem for commercial hives because they move, making them more prone to weakness and diseases, they are kept together, making them more prone to parasites like nosema and Varroa mites and disease spreading problems like the Israeli virus, and they are constantly in contact with crops sprayed with various pesticides weakening and confusing them. Wild hives don't have these extra deleterious factors, so are far less effected by CCD if at all, and are not noticeably effected by most if not all commercial or hobby beekeeping that targets human agriculture, not native flowers. I kept a hive of bees for years to pollinate my orchard, so I checked on this stuff before jumping in.

Commericalized bee operations (commercial pollinators who's byproducts are honey/bees wax/pollen/royal jelly/bee venom/and bees themselves) don't displace natives. If there were native bees pollinating the crops they are hired to come pollinate, there wouldn't be a commercial bee industry. Honey is mostly a byproduct of the pollination industry, without which America at least would starve. Native bees simply can't pollinate at the industrial scale and timetables required for your vegetables, so without commercial beekeepers we'll all have to eat more meat.

snuff?

3. Please do not post pornography or "snuff" films (which we define as the explicit depiction of loss of human life displayed for entertainment).
*return

(edit) Not that it matters regarding this being snuff, but the only thing i could find regarding the dogs health was this..

"But a spokesman for the Royal Spanish Hunting Federation said the dogs had been treated at the scene before being taken to nearby vets."

Of course rape can occur at any point leading up to and even during the act. If you have penetrated your partner and they say stop, you stop.

However, I would ask what other evidence could there possibly be? Obviously we can't know, but one would assume that a motivated prosecutor would have gathered all possible evidence. We know from the victim's statements that she can't recall much of the night, is unsure she said yay or nay during the sex, but that she didn't think he should have been prosecuted. Her roommates are the ones that reported the 'rape', but they clearly didn't give any evidence the court saw as worth convicting on. If their statements were what USC went by to expel him, that would be available via the court and I'm sure someone would have posted them.

We simply do not know and can only go by the video and the statement of the 'victim'. She seemed to be walking fine and signed her name correctly, so either she is an extremely functional drunk or she was sober enough to make those choices. She said she didn't think he should have been charged with rape. To me, that should exonerate the defendant. It did in a court of law, but not in a closed off Title IX hearing.

I suspect that what happened is what happens in other colleges. The college determines what is going to look worse publicity wise and litigation wise, then expels based on that. The problem is that in the Title IX process, there is no real fairness. You can have an advisor present, but not a lawyer if the school objects. One person decides your fate. There is no appeal process. The burden of proof is not defined as to who it is upon. I am sure that the lady in charge went by some procedure and not merely off personal opinion/belief, but we can't investigate to find that out.

To sum up, are we at the point where we should not have intimate relations if either person has imbibed any type of substance? Should we request that a video camera or audio recorder be present at any sexual liaison? Do we need witnesses like they used to have at the consummation of royal weddings? Perhaps a written contract? It just seems pretty ludicrous to me to have a video and the statement of the person that was supposed to have been raped, yet somehow we still had a punishment given to the individual accused of the raping.

During the harvest season the narrow roads up there are packed with people going to get the tea for themselves, because no one trust stores elsewhere that often repackage other teas as Royal Dragon Tea. Just about anytime of year the place is loaded with hundreds of weddings in and around West Lake. They should really consider freeing White Snake.

Your video, Lola's reaction to not getting invited to the Royal wedding, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

She'll be invited to meet the "Royals" as soon as they see this video. Amirite?

And on the sixth day, God royally fucked up.