Dan Crenshaw...I cant defend him anymore

[WItoTX]

I'm happy to be proven wrong, but I have yet to see anything where he has voted or publically supported red flag laws? Can you provide something? The first time I caught wind of this, I looked all over to find this, and never did. The only thing I saw was him initially stating "he would look into options" AFTER Trump proposed the possibility of red flag laws. Also, after he banned bump stocks. I voted for Trump both times, but lets not forget who brought this up on the right.

August 4, 2020. At 11:58 am. Check his twitter. Google will find it for you.

"Maybe also implement state "red flag" laws..."

We can't do all the work for you. Dan is a turncoat when it comes to politics.

[RattlesnakeDan]

And here is Ted Cruz.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jan/8/ted-cruz-donald-trump-bears-some-responsibility-ca/

[TXHunter12]

If you liked McCain then you will be happy with Crenshaw.
He is a swamp moderate if you haven’t figured it out yet.

[Playa]

You guys just don’t see the big picture here. Crenshaw has his eyes set on the Whitehouse, to get there he’s got to tow the establishment line....


Some might call that a sell out, I’m not sure what others might call it. A spade is a spade

[WItoTX]

And here is Ted Cruz.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...onsibility-ca/

Cruz alienated those who saw him crap the bed after Trump destroyed him. Cruz had Trumpkins rooting for him then.

Now he just shat the bed with Trumpkins. Where is he going now? Beto is ready for a rematch.

[jerp]

I agree with what Crenshaw said today - that some politicians and much of the right wing media whipped millions into a frenzy over something that is flat not true and was never going to happen. That is the idea that January 6th was some kind of "last stand" and a legitimate chance for Congress to overturn electoral votes. Congress has never had the authority to overturn the elections and to say otherwise gave many Trump supporters false hope. ( Personally, I don't think Cruz, Hawley and other Republicans who supported the effort believed it was possible either - they just were playing to their base and making a point) Crenshaw agrees that in many states the elections were held without adhering to their own established laws which left them open to fraud, but constitutionally, that has to be fixed at the state level.

Not to beat the red flag law dead horse but he said the idea should be discussed IF AND ONLY IF ROBUST DUE PROCESS CAN BE PROTECTED. You may not think that is possible - which is a reasonable position to take -but to throw him in with the gun grabbers is ridiculous. If you are actually interested in what he has said about it, read this:

https://crenshaw.house.gov/uploadedfiles/rfqa.pdf

[OldRiverRat]

You guys just don’t see the big picture here. Crenshaw has his eyes set on the Whitehouse, to get there he’s got to tow the establishment line....


Some might call that a sell out, I’m not sure what others might call it. A spade is a spade

Which means he will change with the winds and not stand for anything other than what’s best to get himself in that chair at the Oval Office

He and Cruz will lose next round so really doesn’t matter


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Ironman]

I agree with what Crenshaw said today - that some politicians and much of the right wing media whipped millions into a frenzy over something that is flat not true and was never going to happen. That is the idea that January 6th was some kind of "last stand" and a legitimate chance for Congress to overturn electoral votes. Congress has never had the authority to overturn the elections and to say otherwise gave many Trump supporters false hope. ( Personally, I don't think Cruz, Hawley and other Republicans who supported the effort believed it was possible either - they just were playing to their base and making a point) Crenshaw agrees that in many states the elections were held without adhering to their own established laws which left them open to fraud, but constitutionally, that has to be fixed at the state level.

Not to beat the red flag law dead horse but he said the idea should be discussed IF AND ONLY IF ROBUST DUE PROCESS CAN BE PROTECTED. You may not think that is possible - which is a reasonable position to take -but to throw him in with the gun grabbers is ridiculous. If you are actually interested in what he has said about it, read this:

https://crenshaw.house.gov/uploadedfiles/rfqa.pdf

Yeah. Then go watch his superhero commercial where HE, HIMSELF, said that Georgia absolutely had to be won. It is our last stand. He’s a hypocrite.

[jerp]

Yeah. Then go watch his superhero commercial where HE, HIMSELF, said that Georgia absolutely had to be won. It is our last stand. He’s a hypocrite.

How is that hypocritical? He was 100% right that winning those two seats in Georgia was absolutely crucial to avoid total Democrat control. He was talking though about casting votes in an actual election, not trying to get congress to do something that is outside their constitutional authority. I may be wrong but I think a lot of you guys will come around on him eventually.

[Ironman]

How is that hypocritical? He was 100% right that winning those two seats in Georgia was absolutely crucial to avoid total Democrat control. He was talking though about casting votes in an actual election, not trying to get congress to do something that is outside their constitutional authority. I may be wrong but I think a lot of you guys will come around on him eventually.

I think your wrong on coming around. He talks a good game, but what politician doesn’t?

BTW, how is contesting the electoral vote, when there is evidence of fraud, outside their constitutional authority? ITS NOT!

[RMW]

Crenshaw needs to put that eye patch over his pie hole!

Idiot!

[jerp]

I think your wrong on coming around. He talks a good game, but what politician doesn’t?

BTW, how is contesting the electoral vote, when there is evidence of fraud, outside their constitutional authority? ITS NOT!

Let me preface this by saying I think there was fraud, likely enough to swing the results. But - can you imagine what chaos would ensue if every 4 years all the losing party had to do - if they had a majority - was to invalidate the election based on accusations of fraud? The founders in their wisdom eliminated that possibility. The states elect the president - not the people - so the states is where the fraud lies. I don’t know what the answer is other than getting patriots in those states to get control over the process. Even with a conservative majority Supreme Court has not been inclined to take it as an equal protection case.

[meat>horns]

Crenshaw sided with the Chinese communists, against his base, what a let down. In our nations darkest hour he betrayed us, we will never forget.

[Longue Carabine]

Let me preface this by saying I think there was fraud, likely enough to swing the results. But - can you imagine what chaos would ensue if every 4 years all the losing party had to do - if they had a majority - was to invalidate the election based on accusations of fraud? The founders in their wisdom eliminated that possibility. The states elect the president - not the people - so the states is where the fraud lies. I don’t know what the answer is other than getting patriots in those states to get control over the process. Even with a conservative majority Supreme Court has not been inclined to take it as an equal protection case.

Saying that we should just tolerate fraud because in the future the ability to object to certification could be abused is a horrible argument. The resulting fallout of that mentality is going to be a reversal of every single thing Trump accomplished that they can, irreparable financial damage, further entrenchment of corrupt alliances with other countries and companies, further establishment of socialism in this country, second amendment infringements, general loss of rights, and allowing them to put systems in place that make sure someone like Trump is never able to be elected again. Conversely, if we had Senators that actually had balls, we could have kept the president and then crafted legislation to prevent them from abusing the ability to object to certification in the future just because they have a majority, like you said. In going that route, we could have not only prevented most of the aforementioned coming disasters, but also had the opportunity to revamp the election system to eliminate the possibility of election fraud in the future. Such as by tying each vote to a fingerprint. I'm not Crenshaw's constituent, but I sure as hell wouldn't vote for him.

[Charles]

Spineless Turncoat