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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hamish McPanji

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 29, 2009
Messages
38,190
Racist Trump and his racist supporters. At least they have come out of the closet to explain to us why it's not racism.

And Trump is actually telling the truth when he says he doesn't have a racist bone in his body. Because "a" means it's a single one
 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
36,581
Racist Trump and his racist supporters. At least they have come out of the closet to explain to us why it's not racism.

And Trump is actually telling the truth when he says he doesn't have a racist bone in his body. Because "a" means it's a single one
But muh economic anxiety
 

surface

Executive Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2006
Messages
6,250
I saw a bit of it this morning and nearly lost my breakfast.
Those are..humans behaving like pond scum?
I must say that after being 9 years on this forum, I am surprised that you are surprised. Search terms like "apartheid" "terrorist" on this forum and see if you can recognize who could form part of that crowd.
 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
36,581
Correct, and...? Not following what your issue is?
You said..

they cut the facts he ranted about leading up to it
But the things he was talking about aren't facts, they're lies.



I don't see why the media should post 10 minutes of lies before getting to the part where the audience starts chanting about throwing a legal citizen out of the country.
 

Unhappy438

Honorary Master
Joined
May 25, 2011
Messages
18,820
Correct, and...? Not following what your issue is? Posting the full video showing trump, as you say, 'riling up the crowd by vilifying Omar with lies' is a problem for you how?
I suppose its about the same as when Malema chants his schit and incites his supporters.
 

Gingerbeardman

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
4,342
If Trump is a Russian asset, why shouldn't he be executed for treason?

Note: I can also play this pathetic game
If Trump is a Russian asset, he should be executed for treason. If Xi Jinping is an American asset, he should also be executed for treason.

But finding evidence that Trump is a Russian asset that doesn't have the taint of Clinton disinfo all over it is rather difficult, so I'm circumspect about the truth of that.

On the other hand, I think there is significant evidence that Omar Ilhan has been willing to deceive regarding her marital relationships to others in the past, so I'm less inclined to dismiss those kinds of claims out of hand.
 

Temujin

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2015
Messages
6,441
You said..

But the things he was talking about aren't facts, they're lies.

I don't see why the media should post 10 minutes of lies before getting to the part where the audience starts chanting about throwing a legal citizen out of the country.
But thats exactly what the media(and you) have done for years now... outrage over everything trump says and does... why is it now different when comes to omar?

And feel free to point out the lies;)
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
21,157
The only 'context' is Trump riling up the crowd by vilifying Omar with lies. It's disgusting to watch.
The context is that there are US elections next year. Trump is simply manipulating the leftist media to make the Democrats unelectable to swing voters.

Trump (and anyone with a brain) knows that it is forbidden in the leftist circles to give one ounce of legitimate criticism to a "protected group", thus he knows that he can plaster that person over the media if he criticises them. If Trump is such a bigot, then surely he would have gone for Yang, Buttigieg or Gabbard as they would also fit within the "protected groups" of the left. But these candidates are relatively moderate. Thus plastering them over the media would help the Democrats, rather than hurt them.

So what does he do?
He goes for the most unlikable and radical members of the Democrat party, and thus the leftist media just cannot resist plastering them over the airwaves. Swing voters who could vote for Trump will eventually get sick of seeing these cretins and not want to vote for anyone who is affiliated with them.

Now the Democrats have to choose between throwing their own party members to the wolves or they have to defend things like this:

Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) speaks at Netroots Nation conference on Saturday: "I don't want to bring a chair to an old table. This is the time to shake the table. This is the time to redefine that table. Because if you're going to come to this table, all of you who have aspirations of running for office. If you’re not prepared to come to that table and represent that voice, don’t come, because we don't need any more brown faces that don't want to be a brown voice. We don’t need black faces that don't want to be a black voice. We don't need Muslims that don’t want to be a Muslim voice. We don’t need queers that don't want to be a queer voice. If you’re worried about being marginalized and stereotyped, please don't even show up because we need you to represent that voice."
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/07/14/rep_ayanna_pressley_we_dont_need_any_more_brown_faces_that_dont_want_to_be_a_brown_voice.html
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
21,157
I don't see why the media should post 10 minutes of lies before getting to the part where the audience starts chanting about throwing a legal citizen out of the country.
Of course not.
We don't want the proles to make up their own mind about what the Trumpenfuherer is saying or not. Trust us. We are the media. We only represent Truth And DIVERSITY.
 

Aquila ka Hecate

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2010
Messages
4,830
I must say that after being 9 years on this forum, I am surprised that you are surprised. Search terms like "apartheid" "terrorist" on this forum and see if you can recognize who could form part of that crowd.
Not surprised.
Unutterably sad for the human race.
 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
36,581
The context is that there are US elections next year. Trump is simply manipulating the leftist media to make the Democrats unelectable to swing voters.

Trump (and anyone with a brain) knows that it is forbidden in the leftist circles to give one ounce of legitimate criticism to a "protected group", thus he knows that he can plaster that person over the media if he criticises them. If Trump is such a bigot, then surely he would have gone for Yang, Buttigieg or Gabbard as they would also fit within the "protected groups" of the left. But these candidates are relatively moderate. Thus plastering them over the media would help the Democrats, rather than hurt them.

So what does he do?
He goes for the most unlikable and radical members of the Democrat party, and thus the leftist media just cannot resist plastering them over the airwaves. Swing voters who could vote for Trump will eventually get sick of seeing these cretins and not want to vote for anyone who is affiliated with them.

Now the Democrats have to choose between throwing their own party members to the wolves or they have to defend things like this:


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/07/14/rep_ayanna_pressley_we_dont_need_any_more_brown_faces_that_dont_want_to_be_a_brown_voice.html
You missed a key part of his strategy: by using overtly racist rhetoric.
 

AlmightyBender

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
3,706
If Trump is a Russian asset, he should be executed for treason. If Xi Jinping is an American asset, he should also be executed for treason.

But finding evidence that Trump is a Russian asset that doesn't have the taint of Clinton disinfo all over it is rather difficult, so I'm circumspect about the truth of that.

On the other hand, I think there is significant evidence that Omar Ilhan has been willing to deceive regarding her marital relationships to others in the past, so I'm less inclined to dismiss those kinds of claims out of hand.
Only in your deluded world does this dichotomy exist. You have abandoned all reason.
1563451341198.png
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
21,157
I must say that after being 9 years on this forum, I am surprised that you are surprised. Search terms like "apartheid" "terrorist" on this forum and see if you can recognize who could form part of that crowd.
What do you call someone who leaves a bomb in a shopping center?
https://www.sahistory.org.za/dated-event/amanzimtoti-blast-kills-five

or throws grenades into a church, then opens fire with assault rifes?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_James_Church_massacre

But I would bet that if a white person walked into a black church in the US and opened fire, you would classify them as a terrorist.
 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
36,581
What do you call someone who leaves a bomb in a shopping center?
https://www.sahistory.org.za/dated-event/amanzimtoti-blast-kills-five

or throws grenades into a church, then opens fire with assault rifes?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_James_Church_massacre

But I would bet that if a white person walked into a black church in the US and opened fire, you would classify them as a terrorist.
Wait what? All 3 of those cases are terrorism. You're going off the racial deep end man.
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
21,157
You missed a key part of his strategy: by using overtly racist rhetoric.
Racist rhetoric without any mention of race whatsover. Thus diluting the platform of racism that the left cannot function without anymore.

Have a look at how that window is shifting:
Voters are closely divided over whether President Trump is a racist, but one-in-three Democrats think it’s racism any time a white politician criticizes a politician of color.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/july_2019/trump_a_racist_32_of_democrats_say_any_white_criticism_of_politicians_of_color_is_racist
 

konfab

Honorary Master
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
21,157
Wait what? All 3 of those cases are terrorism. You're going off the racial deep end man.
Surface was implying that people who regard the ANC as a bunch of terrorists are also racists.
I must say that after being 9 years on this forum, I am surprised that you are surprised. Search terms like "apartheid" "terrorist" on this forum and see if you can recognize who could form part of that crowd.
Therefore since you regard those acts as terrorism you are indeed a racist. You will soon be receiving your brown shirt and riding boots in the mail.

As I have been saying, the term racist is loosing all its meaning, thanks to the hard work by comrades like @surface.
 

Gingerbeardman

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2018
Messages
4,342
Only in your deluded world does this dichotomy exist. You have abandoned all reason.
View attachment 685463
Weissman was Mueller's go-to underling for getting the substance of the legal stuff together. Remember how we've been over what a schitty prosecutor that guy is? He also personally donated thousands of dollars to the Clinton campaign before the election. The whole thing is a ginned up hit-job designed to get Trump impeached, not a serious attempt to actually make Trump face criminal charges. That's why Trump crows so much about "total exoneration". Legally speaking, the Mueller report is nothing but an obstruction of justice allegation, and a flimsy one at that.

I've already given you evidence of how Mueller uses double-talk to give wrongful impressions about what the legal cases he's brought to the court actually accuse defendents of, and thereby misrepresenting what the cases actually mean with respect to the Russiagate hoax. It's really not much of a leap to conclude that this wasn't simply an aberration, but is rather indicative of the entire Russiagate story wrt Mueller. Especially when that perfectly explains all of the weird factual anomalies that have been brought to light with regard to Papadopoulos's arrest and the charges brought against him, and how it was an oh-so-obvious entrapment scheme by the deep state.

But IIRC, according to you there's evidence we haven't seen that Mueller must be relying upon by virtue of the fact that this evidence would be damaging somehow if it became public, right? And yet I'm the one who has abandoned all reason? :sneaky:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top