Donald J. Trump: President of the USA Part III Covfefe

Status
Not open for further replies.

buka001

Executive Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
9,188
I agree with 99% of what you just said, but it doesn't change the fact that in today's reality, people on the far left don't bother to engage in actual debate. All I see is moderates and right wing to far right figures trying to speak to as many people as possible and then I see the left doing nothing to counter this. Couple this with the violence now being espoused by the far left and you have an untenable situation. I doubt many people actually care about being labelled as being right wing. They do care about being called Nazi's though because of an actual fear of being attacked. I will happily acknowledge that there are far right personas who are just as happy to visit this violence on others and I detest them as well, but they aren't the ones who social media and the main stream media are defending.
Violence is espoused by all sides. Right wing terrorists have stormed mosques and synagogues and killed multiple people. Antifa punched a guy.
 

S7wede

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
1,441
From my own anecdotal experience. This is only my opinion and I don't present it as fact. Personally I don't feel like anybody from the left wants my support. I feel constantly under attack because of my skin color, my gender and my sexuality.
 

S7wede

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
1,441
Violence is espoused by all sides. Right wing terrorists have stormed mosques and synagogues and killed multiple people. Antifa punched a guy.
Antifa have done a lot more than just punch a guy. They have caused million of dollars in property damage and assaulted numerous people. Everything you said about the far right is true as well and I think it's completely disgusting.
 

Techne

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
12,851
I wonder why people in general, not just here, take it so badly when they are characterised as right wing?

It does not mean you are a Nazi, in the same way being left does not mean you are Communist/Marxist, soy eating cuck.

Society survives on balance. Moderate views of all sides is essential, it keeps the opposite side in check. People on the left call out the BS on the right, and so people on the right should call out the BS on the left.

Where it all goes wrong is where one side starts blaming everything on the other, takes no responsibility for their own failings and starts to over ride the rights of the others. Like the Nazis did with the left and the Jews and how the Stalinist communists carried out their pogroms.
I think it is becoming common that people don't care if they are labelled "right-wing" because most people see how stupidly wrong the letftards are.

The Nazis were pretty centrist in terms of government (e.g. mixed market economics), they just hated the Jews and part of the reason for that is the Bolsheviks another part was just completely stupid "white nationalism". The pogroms happened before Stalin and the Bolsheviks. After the Bolsheviks the Christians Slavs were mostly the ones being killed in Gulags... Check Genrikh Yagoda and Solzhenitsyn's 200 years together. But you knew this right?
 
Last edited:

Emjay

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 18, 2005
Messages
10,833
From my own anecdotal experience. This is only my opinion and I don't present it as fact. Personally I don't feel like anybody from the left wants my support. I feel constantly under attack because of my skin color, my gender and my sexuality.

I made a post to tease someone, and got told my Alt-Right roots are showing. So, yeah, I resonate with you. This is not a place for jokes or any sort of good faith discussion.

Twitter and MyBB are not real life.
 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
41,790
From my own anecdotal experience. This is only my opinion and I don't present it as fact. Personally I don't feel like anybody from the left wants my support. I feel constantly under attack because of my skin color, my gender and my sexuality.

I guess we have the same colour gender and sexuality? Who's attacking you?
 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
41,790
https://theintercept.com/2019/07/12...rovost-was-a-member-of-secret-facebook-group/

BORDER PATROL CHIEF CARLA PROVOST WAS A MEMBER OF SECRET FACEBOOK GROUP

WHEN NEWS BROKE that thousands of current and former Border Patrol agents were members of a secret Facebook group filled with racist, vulgar, and sexist content, Carla Provost, chief of the agency, was quick to respond. “These posts are completely inappropriate and contrary to the honor and integrity I see — and expect — from our agents day in and day out,” Provost said in a statement. “Any employees found to have violated our standards of conduct will be held accountable.”

For Provost, a veteran of the Border Patrol who was named head of the agency in August 2018, the group’s existence and content should have come as no surprise. Three months after her appointment to chief, Provost herself had posted in the group, then known as “I’m 10-15,” now archived as “America First X 2.” Provost’s comment was innocuous — a friendly clapback against a group member who questioned her rise to the top of the Border Patrol — but her participation in the group, which she has since left, raises serious questions.
 

Gingerbeardman

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
5,472
https://consortiumnews.com/2019/07/12/concord-management-and-the-end-of-russiagate/

Don’t look now, but a federal judge in Washington, D.C., has just shut down half of Robert Mueller’s Russian-interference case.

In February 2018, the special prosecutor indicted a St. Petersburg troll farm called the Internet Research Agency along with two other companies, their owner, Yevgeniy Prigozhin, and 12 employees. The charge: fraud, traveling to the United States under false pretenses, and using social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter to “sow discord” and “interfere in US political and electoral processes without detection of their Russian affiliation.”
The charge was both legally dubious and heavy-handed, a case of using a sledge hammer to swat a fly. But Mueller went even further in his report, an expurgated version of which was made public in April. No longer just a Russian company, the IRA was now an arm of the Russian government. “[T]he Special Counsel’s investigation,” it declared on page one, “established that Russia interfered in the 2016 election principally through two operations. First, a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Second, a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against entities, employees, and volunteers working in the Clinton campaign and then released stolen documents.”

“Prigozhin,” the report added, referring to the IRA owner, “is widely reported to have ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.” A few pages later, it said that the IRA’s efforts “constituted ‘active measures’ … a term that typically refers to operations conducted by Russian security services aimed at influencing the course of international affairs.”

Thus, the IRA played a major role in the vast Kremlin conspiracy to alter the outcome of the 2016 election and install Donald Trump in office. But now Judge Dabney Friedrich has ordered Mueller to stop pushing such stories because they’re unfair to Concord Management and Consulting, another Prigozhin company, which astonished the legal world in May 2018 by hiring an expensive Washington law firm and demanding its day in court.

Silent on IRA-Kremlin Connection
Contrary to internet chatter, Friedrich did not offer an opinion as to whether the IRA-Kremlin connection is true or false. Rather, she told the special prosecutor to keep quiet because such statements go beyond the scope of the original indictment and are therefore prejudicial to the defendant. But it may be a distinction without a difference since the only evidence that Mueller puts forth in the public version of his report is a New York Times article from February 2018 entitled “Yevgeny Prigozhin, Russian Oligarch Indicted by US, Is Known as ‘Putin’s Cook.’

It’s a case of trial by press clip that should have been laughed out of court – and now, more or less, it is. Without the IRA, the only argument left in Mueller’s brief is that Russia stole some 28,000 emails and other electronic documents from Democratic National Committee computers and then passed them along to WikiLeaks, which published them to great fanfare in July 2016.
@AlmightyBender

Is it becoming obvious what a schit sandwich Mueller's Russiagate case is?

Now may I remind you that you still have the issue that Mueller didn't even look at the DNC servers, and merely took Crowdstrike's claims at face value, when they had a business motive to lie for their politically sensitive clients? Mueller did nothing to attempt to establish the facticity of that aspect of the Russiagate narrative. Nothing.

But as Consortium News pointed out the day the Mueller report came out, that’s dubious as well. [See “The ‘Guccifer 2.0’ Gaps in Mueller’s Full Report,” April 18.] The reason: it rests on a timeline that doesn’t make sense:

  • June 12, 2016: WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange announces that “leaks in relation to Hillary Clinton” were on the way.
  • June 15: Guccifer 2.0, allegedly a stand-in for Russian military intelligence, goes on line to claim credit for the hack.
  • June 22: Guccifer and WikiLeaks establish contact.
  • July 14: Guccifer sends WikiLeaks an encrypted file.
  • July 18: WikiLeaks confirms that it’s opened it up.
  • July 22: The group releases a giant email cache indicating that the DNC rigged the nominating process in favor of Hillary Clinton and against Bernie Sanders.

But why would Assange announce the leaked emails on June 12 before hearing from the source on June 22? Was he clairvoyant? Why would he release a massive file just eight days after receiving it and as a little as four days after opening it up? How could that be enough time to review the contents and ensure they were genuine? “If a single one of those emails had been shown to be maliciously altered,” blogger Mark F. McCarty points out, “WikiLeaks’s reputation would have been in tatters.” Quite right. So if Mueller’s chronology doesn’t hold up, then Assange’s original statement that “our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party” still stands – which it plainly does.
Nothing doesn't stand up in court when it is subjected to scrutiny.

Russiagate is nothing but a Democrat perpetrated hoax to divert attention away from the fact that they had an internal leaker who supplied sensitive documents to Wikileaks because they had to spin the narrative in order to contest the election.

And now the roof is about to come crashing down on their heads because they were so sure Hillary was going to win that they never stopped to think about the tracks they'd need to cover when Trump trumped her. :popcorn:
 

S7wede

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
1,441
I guess we have the same colour gender and sexuality? Who's attacking you?
Do you believe that LGBTQ+ people are actively being discriminated by the West as an establishment? Do you believe in White guilt? Do you believe in the male gaze? If you answer yes to any of those, then you can directly see why our views differ.
 

Grant

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 27, 2007
Messages
50,094
Republicans and Democrats vote to restrain Trump on war with Iran


The US House of Representatives has voted to prevent President Donald Trump from going to war with Iran without congressional approval, after more than two dozen Republicans joined Democrats to include the provision in an annual defence authorisation bill.

The move sets up a showdown with the Senate over whether the Iran restriction, which includes an exception for cases of self-defence, will be included in the final bill negotiated between the two chambers.
Friday's final vote, 220 to 197, was a crucial victory for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, after fellow liberal Democrats revolted late last month over being forced to accept a Senate-negotiated border spending bill that omitted their key demands.
Republican leaders had argued the bill communicated to Tehran that the United States was divided, which could complicate Trump's ability to manage escalating tensions. Last month, thePresident authorised, then called off an air strike in response to Iran downing a US surveillance drone.

House members endorsed a repeal of the 2002 authorisation for use of military force that was passed to approve the Iraq invasion, and a statement adopted after the September 11 attacks, that ought to be replaced with a time-limited measure.

They also voted in favour of suspending for one year the sale of air-to-ground munitions to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, one of several efforts in the bill to deny weapons and limit US support for Saudi-led military operations in Yemen's civil war.
The GOP-led Senate voted down a similar effort to include Iran language in its defence bill last month. But in the Democrat-led House, the Iran measure was one of several that were vital to securing support from liberal members, who had warned they might vote against the must-pass legislation.

https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-...n-trump-on-war-with-iran-20190713-p526ux.html
 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
41,790
Do you believe that LGBTQ+ people are actively being discriminated by the West as an establishment? Do you believe in White guilt? Do you believe in the male gaze? If you answer yes to any of those, then you can directly see why our views differ.

How are those issues attacking your gender or race?
 

Unhappy438

Honorary Master
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
20,711
Now just revoke the citizenship of the warmongering neocons or execute them for treason:unsure:

It still has to go to the senate (which it probably wont) and even it it was passed there can still be vetoed by the president requiring a 2/3rds revote. In other words, the war machine keeps rolling on.
 

AlmightyBender

Executive Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
5,425
Russiagate is nothing but a Democrat perpetrated hoax to divert attention away from the fact that they had an internal leaker who supplied sensitive documents to Wikileaks because they had to spin the narrative in order to contest the election.

And now the roof is about to come crashing down on their heads because they were so sure Hillary was going to win that they never stopped to think about the tracks they'd need to cover when Trump trumped her.

I'm terms of your evidence, we'll see. I also grab popcorn as the entire FBI and CIA and department of homeland security staff get fired for incompetence. We'll see mkay.

The part I'm quoting is problematic for a number of reasons.
Firstly you use this position again to ignore the obvious misconduct of the Trump administration and campaign. Even if everything you think it true (which it isn't) that still doesn't make it that these events didn't occur. And you just can't seem to deal with this reality.

Secondly your premises rely on a conspiracy that the democrats somehow managed to gain control of Trump appointed government officials during a time when they held neither the senate or Congress majority. Also they somehow managed to convince vast numbers of career officials to rush their jobs and throw their reputations away to do their bidding and, even some registered republicans. And not manage to get caught or leaked right until now.

The cognitive dissonance is strong here:
Democrats: they are incompetent and ruin everything they touch
Also democrats: manage to pull off an impossibly complex, difficult, expensive and broad deep state operation spanning multiple years

Does not compute.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top