₦airaland Forum

Mercisharelove:
Verdict from new world order or from pure justice himself.


You are in support of the corruption going on in the USA 2020 election, the truth is, when there's a political gang up against a candidate, you hardly could survive the onslaught.


Look at the folks lining behind Biden, Wall Street executives, directors of top US bank's, world leaders and the corruption institutions which couldn't siphon money from the system and throw up wars , folks like NATO ASI que.


I don't need to say much, you know the truth.

your second to last paragraph clearly shows you don't even know what you're talking about. Wall Street executives are mostly conservatives. It is a fairly acceptable notion that the working class don't like the Left because of welfare where they are taxed to feed and take care of the homeless and what they "term" Lazy Americans.
NATO is not an American organization, it stands for North Atlantic Treaty Organization which is the coming together of different countries mostly in western Europe for security and economic reasons. It was formed after WWII when Russia was expanding its influence and communist ideology in Eastern Europe. The countries in western Europe then sign a treaty with America to come to their aid both in terms of economy and security to checkmate the Soviet Union and prevent another world War.
So how will countries like Germany and France, England, Spain and then rest be siphoning money from the US system?

Like I earlier said, make insight research, read up and enlighten yourself

Mercisharelove:
Verdict from new world order or from pure justice himself.


You are in support of the corruption going on in the USA 2020 election, the truth is, when there's a political gang up against a candidate, you hardly could survive the onslaught.


Look at the folks lining behind Biden, Wall Street executives, directors of top US bank's, world leaders and the corruption institutions which couldn't siphon money from the system and throw up wars , folks like NATO ASI que.


I don't need to say much, you know the truth.

I'm guessing your precious "Newsmax" has joined the NWO since they are also running the news of Georgia and Pennsylvania certifying Biden as the winner of their state Presidential election
Seriously you're beyond help and reasoning, which one is new world order verdict again in a courtroom case where you present your case and give your own argument and the Judge declares a verdict?
The judge FYI is a Republican like Trump.
Let me help you out,
Trump campaign filed a motion of injunction to stop the state of Pennsylvania from certifying their election results base on the allegation of wide spread fraud and massive rigging. Then they proceeded to the "Court of Public Opinion" a.k.a the media to boast and shout of how the cases they have filed will overturn the results.
Time to present their case in the actual courtroom, they started saying something else, that they heard that observers were not allow to watch the counting, that they want to change the notion of their previous filing, that around 8000 votes didn't have proper identification. Counter argument, the 8000 votes was set aside from the initial count were Biden was leading by 80000+ votes.
Trump campaign then asked the Judge to nullify 8.3million votes because of hearsay and not proper evidence. The Pennsylvania state Supreme Court gave their verdict that because someone is missing an address or some sort of identification on the mail-in-ballot doesn't mean that the vote shouldn't count. It ordered the state for include the votes that was set aside in their final counting thus increasing Biden leads and dismissing Trump campaign case.
This is just one of the many cases that went this way. Lack of substantial evidence is what is dismissing Trump cases not some New World Order verdict that exist in your mind only.

Mercisharelove:
Listen to both sides you advised

Which of you are listening to Donald Trump version, all of you are yawning concede defeat, is it not part of what you are pressurizing us to do?


You don't want to allow the process run out its full course. You all will die hypocrites. One day some some of you will experience cheating and no one will ever care to back you up to fight.


What's wrong in Donald Trump fighting for his right But you all are so quickly to condemned him because Biden is your elder brother.

Bias � ants

Where did I say Trump should concede? or he shouldn't go to court?
All I said was that you should be updated with the news as Georgia had certified Biden as your original post said otherwise.
Then you proceeded to talk about court cases.
Read all my replies again, I Said Trump has lost majority of the lawsuits his team as filed and that's a fact.
I listen to both sides of them media and draw my own reasonable conclusion.
The whole election fraud thing is a theory that exist only in Trump's world. You claim there's fraud but you can't prove beyond reasonable doubt evidence of it for 3 weeks? You file cases base on hearsay and then complain when the judgement doesn't go your way.
The hypocrisy is you thinking that anybody that disagree with you is against you or Trump.

Since you're good at doing independent investigation, look into the court cases you said are pending, read and follow their verdicts. It will help you in the long run to make independent conclusion and not assume that anything the media says is fake or anti-Trump because of one big conspiracy theory out there

Mercisharelove:
If I don't give you media sources would you believe me??

Here's another top classified info from top constitutional lawyers



BARTIROMO: President Trump’s legal team has just three weeks left to gather enough evidence of fraud to contest the 2020 election results in court, something Sidney Powell, one of the lead attorneys on the case, says she can do.
Here is what she told me this week on “Mornings With Maria” on Friday.

BARTIROMO: Will you be able to present, are you planning to present actual evidence of all that you have said, Dominion voting machines swapping votes from Trump to Biden, as well as an effort to actually change the results of an election? You will be able to prove that in court in the next two weeks?


SIDNEY POWELL, ATTORNEY FOR PRESIDENT TRUMP: Yes, I fully expect we will be able to prove all of it in court within the next two weeks, although the fraud case itself doesn’t have to be done within the two weeks.
But we have more than enough evidence now. We have more evidence now than half the prison population is imprisoned on.

BARTIROMO: Joining me right now, outside legal analysis from constitutional legal scholar Alan Dershowitz. He was also part of President Trump’s impeachment defense team.
Alan, it is good to see you this morning. Thank you so much for being here.


DERSHOWITZ: Thank you.
BARTIROMO: Alan, we want to get your independent opinions here, because we know what Rudy Giuliani and what Sidney Powell has been charging.
Can you tell us if you believe there is a path for victory for President Trump, amidst these charges?



DERSHOWITZ: Well, let me give you my completely objective, not wishful thinking, constitutional analysis.
They have two or three legal constitutional paths. For example, in Pennsylvania, they have two very strong legal arguments, one, that the courts changed what the legislature did about counting ballots after the end of Election Day.
That’s a winning issue in the Supreme Court. I don’t necessarily support it, but it’s a winning issue in the Supreme Court. And Justice Alito has already hinted that’s a winning issue.


They also have a winning issue on the Supreme Court on equal protection, that some counties allowed flawed ballots to be cured, while others didn’t. Bush vs. Gore suggests that an equal protection argument can prevail.



The problem with that argument is, they don’t have the numbers necessarily to support it. If it’s right that Biden is ahead by some 70,000 or 80,000 votes, they have to show enough contested votes, under those two legal theories, to change the outcome.


The other legal theory they had, which is a potentially strong one, is that the computers, either fraudulently or by glitches, changed hundreds of thousands of votes.

There are enough votes to make a difference, but I haven’t seen the evidence to support that.
So, in one case, they don’t have the numbers. In another case, they don’t seem yet to have the evidence. Maybe they do.

I haven’t seen it. But the legal theory is there to support them if they have the numbers and they have the evidence.


BARTIROMO: OK.
And, of course, the media wants to see the evidence now, Alan.



DERSHOWITZ: Right.

BARTIROMO: But Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis continue to say that they aren’t going to litigate this in the public square, in the media space. They are going to drop lawsuits.


Now, I — one of my sources tells me that one of the first suits that they are going to bring is this week in Georgia. Let me show you a list of some of the things that the legal team of President Trump is charging and get your thoughts on this.


DERSHOWITZ: Sure.
BARTIROMO: You just mentioned the computers.
This is — has to do with Smartmatic election software. They say, number one, observers prevented them from seeing the ballots.

Number two, there’s inconsistent laws of curing ballots. Number three, the in-person voters told that they voted already and officials told not to look for defects and to backdate ballots before

November 3.
Also, in terms of the computers and the software, Smartmatic election software was developed, Sidney Powell says, in Venezuela, with porous security and built-in functionality allowing the administrators to override security features.


We haven’t seen this, so we don’t know. But this is the kind of evidence that they say they have. Your reaction?


DERSHOWITZ: Well, evidence is very difficult to bring within two weeks or the three-week period.

You need to have witnesses, experts subject to cross-examination, and findings by a court.


I don’t know what Powell means when she says they have more than two weeks or three weeks to prove fraud. Once the electors are certified, and once they cast their vote, I can’t see any legal route to undoing that, even if they were to find fraud later on.


There’s certainly nothing in the Constitution about that. And so I think they do have to get their evidence in. The public has the right to see it. They don’t have the right to see it before the lawsuits are filed.


But she said that she thinks the lawsuits will be filed by this Friday. We have to see the evidence.


BARTIROMO: That’s right.
DERSHOWITZ: If the evidence is there, then there will be a trial.


Remember also, these have to go to state court first. There’s no such thing as a presidential election. There are 50 state elections.

The Pennsylvania case is already in the Supreme Court. But these other cases have to go first through either the state or the federal trial courts before they get to the Supreme Court.


It doesn’t look like there will be enough time to bring the case to the Supreme Court before the safe harbor provision kicks in, before the Electoral College meets.


BARTIROMO: OK.
DERSHOWITZ: So, if you’re asking me what I think the outcome is going to be, notwithstanding the fact that there are legal paths to potential victory, I don’t think that the election is going to be reversed, based on the numbers that I see at the moment and based on the fact that I haven’t seen the evidence.
Their strongest case, if they have the evidence…



BARTIROMO: Yes.
DERSHOWITZ: … is that computers may have turned hundreds of thousands of votes. That’s a wholesale argument, rather than a retail argument.
BARTIROMO: OK.


DERSHOWITZ: They can’t turn the election around on retail arguments, one observer here, a few votes here.
BARTIROMO: Right.



DERSHOWITZ: They need to make wholesale constitutional arguments.
And for that, they’re going to need overwhelming evidence, and I haven’t seen it.

If you read what you just posted then I sure you'd have noticed where your "top constitutional lawyer" alleged that the outcome of the election is not reversible as things are right because of lack of evidence... you said there are legal battles in the Supreme Court. I just ask you to name them, you can't. Trump has lost more than half of the lawsuits he and his campaign team had filed. His own attorney couldn't even win a case in court.
I'm not quoting any media but I can show the number of cases and their verdict.
Every State in the USA has a State Supreme Court. The over all Supreme Court isn't entertaining any election matter at the moment.
you have evidence of fraud but it's taking you more than 3 weeks to prove it. Next week is the deadline of all elections matter and certification for states..... You have a case where someone asked the Judge to nullify 1.4 millions plus votes because about 250 votes shouldn't be counted, like who in their right mind would even file such a case?
My one cent advice, instead of sitting down and only consuming Pro Trump media and conspiracy theories try to be objective. Listen to both sides and draw reasonable conclusion.

Mercisharelove:
You mean to be more updated than someone living before the news??

When was this out kids, without inner news, only depending on mainstream media report. We dig.


There are still legal battles to be heard in the United states supreme Court.

Please spare me your lazy phone

there's no legal battle is in the Supreme Court?
Except you're referring to Pennsylvania

You dig what exactly? Are you in Georgia city council or Arizona or any of the states. Funny how you use media for your source then turn around and lament that people are listening to the media.
Please digger name the case that's presently in the Supreme Court. What is Trump seeking

Georgia and Arizona have certified Biden as the winner of the Presidential election in their respective states. Try to keep up with the news

Simply read what you post it will go a long way to help you

Castigating other people business just to sell yours is not cool. So the middlemen that made the goods and services ready available to final consumers shouldn't make profit or what?

kjsixtynine:
But you forget one thing, Russia also has nukes all over the world via the submarines and they also have nukes in space too.

Look in the event you just described, both countries will destroy each other and the whole world will follow for sure.

not all submarines carry nuclear weapons. They are specific class for that. They ones that have nuclear weapons don't move aabout, they deep dive and sit on the ocean bed so their whereabouts are unknown. Nobody has nuke in space. They are theorizing how to achieve it, they don't have it yet.

engrchykae:
the US were encroaching in the Philippines,it was the area of influence of the imperial Japan.

The US was invited by the Philippines to help in its defense. They are still allies till now

engrchykae:
I forgot that the debris will remain in space since gravity is zero or non existent in space.
But the truth is that USA creates artificial problems,then give you their own exploitative solution.
Example is when you bomb Japan in ww2,occupy Japan till date,then sign defence pact with Japan to protect Japan from north Korea when it is USA that made Japan defenceless.
Create instability in the middleeast sponsoring terrorists and thus scaring Saudi Arabia into signing treaty with USA.
Create Boko Haram in 2003,then Nigeria must buy weapons from USA to fight something USA created.
They need Kim alive to always keep South Korea and Japan loyal.
I understand the eagle,even though the eagle is beautiful,it's still a beast.

Japan attacked US first to stop them from entering into the war while they expands into the South China Sea and conquer the surrounding nations. They received to concede even after the war was over hence the Atomic bomb.
Saudi Arabia case has more to do with Iran than with USA

kjsixtynine:
Guy abeg mind your self oh.

I am only an enthusiast. In reality shooting a ballistic missile is not so difficult if you can get the missile as it is ascending. Ballistic missiles are more or less dumb missiles, if you jam the GPS or any navigation tech (or destroy the satellites that provide guidance) it relies on, it becomes useless.

But Cruise missiles or Hypersonic missiles are a different story and are a lot difficult to intercept. Hypersonic missiles in particular travel at faster speeds and change their path of travel before they hit their final target. The US has this but it seems Russia is ahead in his area of technology.

The US cannot attack Iran, China or Russia. That would literally mean the end of the world and they know it.

Theoretically or in hypothetical situation, the US can single-handedly defeat those 2 you mention independently. Obviously not putting Iran in the mix.
The US has a post nuclear war defense strategy.
Russia nukes are all in Russia and their subs so for China. US on the other hand has nukes all over the world, they are even leasing an island from Britain so they can store nuclear weapons close to Asia.
In event that the nuclear war breaks out, satellite gets destroyed, the US still has their Doomsday airplanes that can communicate with their subs and still lunch nukes at the enemies.

The reason Russia and China are developing weapons to take out satellites is because of the US Advanced Battlefield Management System. It's a system that integrates all their weapons and machineries. Say a drone is on a reconnaissance mission and it's spots an enemy force about to launch a nuke, the drone can independently launch a missile from a sub, or destroyer or any aircraft to intercept the missile. Hence the reason why Russia and China are taking the war to space because the only realistic way to stop the system is to stop it from transmitting data links (a.k.a destroying the satellites)

nobilie:
Sorry, China shot a satellite in space from ground earth more than 2 years ago. Do you think their defence system will not take care of Inter Continental Ballistic missile?
The only country US can not challenge whether militarily, economically or by propaganda.

China that relies on Russian S-400 and jet engine is what you're comparing to the US?
Propaganda aside the US is so far ahead of other Nations that no one Nation can single-handedly defeat them as of now.
Why do you think the Chinese are wailing about US helping Taiwan?

Throwback:
To challenge a religious fanatic who thinks elections are decided because he has prayed for his own beloved sinner to win, is like challenging a kid that does not want to accept that Father Christmas did not drop the gifts under the Christmas tree.

That argument cannot be won on logic when one party does not believe in logic.

Elections are decided because people vote who they want, and not because a congregation somewhere is praying for an outcome that will favour them.

There is no God factor in a democratic election, as everyone - both saint and sinner - choose who would meet their earthly needs.

That dude is a lost cause still wallowing in the darkness of ignorance, thinking the era of persecution wrought by a religion that was itself initially persecuted, still has a say in how humans have elected to live free.

I know he's a lost cause. I didn't have a problem with him wailing in his defeat. My problem was him saying that the other guy posted a projection not the reality, then he in turn also posted a projection but called his a reality.
Simple questions, he's running from post to post without any direct or good answer.
The question I usually ask them is if the media is so against Trump and post fake news isn't this the same media that projected Trump as winner in 2016.
If the so called New World Order / Deep state are so powerful how come they couldn't defeat Trump in 2016 when he was a political novice.
They are so powerful that they can't defeat a novice on politics so they had to kill millions of people all over the world (Corona virus) just to remove Trump as president. I mean how do people with a functioning brain actually believe this stuff?

Jeromejnr:
Stop asking silly questions, how can you certify without a certificate?

How can you challenge an election result if there's no winner, that was the question.

How can you certify without a certificate? notary stamp on sworn affidavit doesn't make it a certificate.

Jeromejnr:
Okay now you are just being ridiculous.

Especially when I saw your statement on the media projecting Trump to win in 2016, I just gave up on the discourse.

BTW, your use of "very likely" has already defeated your earlier argument.

I thought Biden was the winner na. Even the states Trump dominated he hasn't been certified winner by the electoral body.

Read up man.

As for your inec comparison, get some knowledge man.

1) You haven't still answered my question?
2) How did Trump get elected in 2016? Did he just got up and got sworn it as the President?
3) So "certify" is now the same thing as certificate?
4) Trump keep tweeting "we won" "the Democrats rigged the election". So if there's no winner, why is Trump using the phrase " we won"?

Is Biden the winner of the US presidential election? Yes, that's a fact. Will he be the 46th president of the United States? that's the future, you can be absolutely certain of the future, what if he dies between now and then or becomes mentally unsuitable to perform the duties of the president? will he still be the President? no. Hence my use of the phrase "very likely". Not that Trump as any chance to overturn the results.

Jeromejnr:
Simple question, who has declared anyone the winner? Is it the media? Where is the certificate?

Is it the media? Yes, same Media that projected Trump to win in 2016 and he was sworn in as the President. Same media that have been doing the same thing for decades

where is the certificate? This is not INEC, the electoral vote for each state usually follows the winner of the popular vote for that state except in few states. So whoever the media project as the winner is very likely the winner.

Now answer my own question. Stop running faster than your shadow

Jeromejnr:
I tire for you ur mata.

You don't call someone the winner and president elect when results haven't been certified and when there are legal disputes. This isn't naira bet.

Same thing they did during Bush before results were overturned at the court.

If the headlines by CNN these days were "Projected winner blabla" e.t.c it would have been acceptable.

But having things like "office of President elect", and Biden breaking the "Logan act" by trying to secure deals as the "president" already without being called out by the same media, is pure hypocrisy.

This is why non biased media have a different result from the biased media.

You don't project and pass it on as truth.

Simple question: how can you file a legal dispute against election results when there's no winner?

Jeromejnr:
Dude, do you know what conservative means?

A scenario:
CNN is posting Man Utd is winning Chelsea 4:0 and passing round that info deluding people. Whereas in reality the match hasn't even started.

And I posted a non biased news chart saying hey, the match hasn't even started why are you posting fake results?

Since Manutd has won, why haven't they giving them the trophy na?

But people will believe what they wanna believe.

Anything that makes you sleep well at night.

The states you claim have no winner have a projected winner which is Joe Biden that Trump is challenging it doesn't change the fact that Biden was the projected winner. How will you challenge a result that has no winner, Using your Match analogy that's like Chelsea going to FA to report that Man Utd didn't win the match and it was cheated when the match hasn't been played.
On the other hand, the reality is Man Utd is leading Chelsea by 4 goals and it's the last minutes of extra time. Most pundits will call the match for Man Utd even if the Referee hasn't blown the final whistle. It doesn't mean Man Utd hasn't won Chelsea because the referee hasn't blown the whistle.
when the vote counting was still in the early stage, the now "fake news" media didn't project anybody to be the winner. The waited till the vote counting was done or the number of votes left to count and the margin of winning of a candidate was insurmountable before they project a winner for that state.
How can you challenge a result that doesn't have a winner??

Jeromejnr:
Oya, let me slowly explain to you.

The argument was on the disputed states especially Georgia.

The news articles he posted already projected wins for the disputed states.

So, I as a Conservative and independent thinker decided to call the crap and show what is called "current reality" of what us happening in those states....

Which is....

A winner is not yet known.

Why?

Lawsuits and recounts.

So, why did I say you were off point?

Cause you focused on the non disputed regions instead of the disputed regions which have no clear winner. Where fake news media have been pushing false narratives concerning those same states.

I hope you understand now sir.

now I think you're intentionally trying to avoid my line of question.
Let me also explain to you what I mean. You post your own "conservative count" where the disbuted states according to you have no winner and Trump has 232 electoral vote which is still a projection as of this moment yet your tell the other guy not to post his own "liberal projection" because to you it's fake news.
You're saying we should believe yours and reject his when both of what you guys posted are projections. if you can post yours why can't he post his?
The recount you keep talking about was triggered long before the "liberal news media" projected it for Biden base on historical facts that most recounts rarely overturn the results.

Jeromejnr:
You have simply gone off point.

Didn't you study how to read charts in school?

You can clearly see that they are markers used even before the election.

You can see the markers for lawsuits are not projected for any candidate.

Smh.

you're posting a projection and telling someone to stop posting a projection. Yet you think yours is the real deal. Do you even know why they call it a projection??

Jeromejnr:
Mr man, stop posting, projections.

There is a difference between projections and current reality.

Its also obvious you are not current. A recount is currently ongoing in Georgia.

The chart I posted, is current reality not fake news projections.

Peace.

You're telling someone to stop posting projections yet the one you posted clearly says "projected win". Isn't that wonderful

the UN and AU cannot never allow that to happen. Obvious Example: Mali.

lol, CIA HOMELAND SECURITY... America agencies are not like their Nigerian counterparts where the Army is doing the work of the police and the police is doing the work of FRSC.
CIA is different from Homeland Security

Brigges:
None of these things you are listing is the reason why he lost, it was spiritual. Joe Biden is a puppet of satanic globalists whose mission is to promote the agenda of the devil on earth and they had to remove Trump because he was against their agenda. Unfortunately for Trump, he is not a spiritually powerful child of God and that's why they were able to prevail over him.

can you point us to the Executive order, or Congress Act, Trump engineered to stop gay marriage or abortion??

Samunosuke:
It’s funny how a person being exploited will brag about that fact. How does Apple ripping you off benefit YOU? Apple is making tons of profit off you and you are happily boasting about it? I really do not understand people. If I am able to get the same utility and durability out of a cheaper item, I should be happy as a consumer and not the other way around.

Defending multi-trillion dollar companies that are out to nickel and dime you to increase revenue makes me feel the Reality Distortion Field (RDF) really does exist.

while we're doing comedy nite, isn't it also funny how you can talk about Reality Distortion Field (RDF) and then project your own reality on others and don't see the irony in it.
You buy phone A because it meets your criteria and value assumption doesn't mean everybody has to follow the same path. So people that want the simplicity of the IOS ecosystem, they should abandon their own needs because you buy a cheaper android and it's good for you so everybody should do the same?

"All fingers are not equal", " one man food is another man's poison"
For ages, the idea behind these clauses has been repeated time and time again in so many different words and form yet you that don't understand it is talking about RDF

My Take: Look for a good photo studio to partner with for now. While you work as a freelance photographer. You might learn the ins and outs of managing a photo studio which will be useful in the future

Lstar4real:
Check out Huawei P40 pro & Mate 40 pro & Pro +they all have 3D face recognition and have more functions than Apple..... 3D is good but they should try as much as possible to minimise it.... And make their phone look more pleasant...My wife use iPhone and hate the notch...thats why she keep buying iPhone 8 plus again and again!!!

The Huawei that had it was the mate 20 I guess and it had a notch same with the LG G8 and Pixel 4. They both had notches. Do you know how costly it is to put such tech on a phone? Why isn't the likes of Google, LG and Huawei putting it on their phones again. Do you know how many sensors are hidden in the notch for a secured 3D facial recognition?. The consumers don't know so it's easier to just say it's a 3D facial recognition scanner, Even Samsung markets their phone has having 3D facial recognition. It takes more than just a ToF sensor to make a secured 3D facial scanner.
Your wife hates the notch because she doesn't understand its relevant. I'm probably guessing that to her she thinks it's a design which android phones have moved on from so Apple should too.

Coquinoqui:
That's exactly what am saying apple probably not listening to there customers, using face ID during this corona virus with everyone using mask is a disaster and the customer express their struggle but guess what despite the complait people will still buy it its called brand loyalty, then there's also fast charging, 120hz refresh rate to mention a few. Ipad Pro 2020 has face ID but no notch, the phone can also get faceID without notch but they won't do it. Mnm I really admire Apple but they're not innovative anymore

IPad pro hides its Face ID under the bezel, it was the first product to have a 120Hz refresh rate. The IPhone can do the same but it'll have to have a "large" bezel all round the phone. The notch was a brilliant idea. When it came out, how many android OEM copied the design?
For a phone that'll be around and still running the latest iOS version in 5years, do you know what fast charging will do to its battery??
Apple clearly state in their iphone12 support document that they had to choose between fast refresh rate or 5G seeing that both drained the battery very much.
I'd like to tell you the why and why but I'm too tired to do that seeing that you probably just want an Android device with the Apple logo

Coquinoqui:
Calling 5G in iPhone 12 revolutionary something that other brand are rocking for the last 2 years, bringing back iPhone 5 block design on iPhone 12 and that ugly notch. IPhone engineers are lazy its 2020 they should think bigger not different . Same design year in year out old wine in new wine skin, I used iPhone for 2 weeks damn boring it's just for swag otherwise real smartphone guru knows where to put there money on. Well different strokes for different folks

Revolutionary because it's the first Apple product with 5G and not because other brands didn't have it.
And I just knew you'd mention the notch. Do you even know why iPhone has the notch??
Mention any smartphone that uses 3D facial recognition security that doesn't have a notch??
What Android phones use is face unlock that uses 2D facial recognition which is less secured.
Find the IPhone 11 and iPhone 12, you'll notice the design difference.

NinjaMetahuman:
I tried to enlightened your stupidity. But it seems it's in you like peak.

What kinda brain dead mor0n ask the innovation on android in comparison to iphone.

I expected you to rephrase your question after pointing to you that that android is not a phone. But because you are too stupid to know your left from right, you still went on to ask further stupid question.


How do you ignorant children get access to internet. If you ask a particular android phone brand with innovation, then I will gladly answer you.


Now Bleep off, and stop littering nairaland with stupidity.

I can't come down to your level. you have experience there.

NinjaMetahuman:
google it yourself.

You asked about other os.. I gave it to you.

I can't feed you all the information you need. You have google.

werey dey disguise
you agreed iPhone is not innovative, I asked for the innovation you have seen from other phones running the AndroidOS since their debut . You're shifting goal post