as part of his immigration pivot, instead of building a wall, trump now plans on putting up like 12 of these signs
as part of his immigration pivot, instead of building a wall, trump now plans on putting up like 12 of these signs
pretty brutal new anti-trump ad
Originally Posted by thesidedish
Nailed it again, Dish. Adopting Obama's immigration plan is money for the Republican nominee. Your streak of excellent takes is still alive.
:cruzwasright
:trumpisadem
#NEVERFORGET
8/25/16 Trump becomes a cuck
#MAKETHEREPUBLICANSCUCKSAGAIN
"Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky
"America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs
i sure hope donald doesnt get grafted to an orange tree by an angry white person
If former KKK leader, David Duke was running for president on the exact same platform as Donald Trump. Would any of you Trump supporters vote for Hillary instead?
Last edited by El Gallo; 08-25-2016 at 01:47 PM.
We pray for understanding as we all occasionally request back door action by accident, when we tried to call an electrician. It happens, it simply happens.
In this week's radio show, Druff claimed that Richard Nixon resigned because he did something "unethical". Holy revisionist history, Druff! He resigned because he was convinced by some top GOP senators, including Barry Goldwater, that he would be impeached by the Senate since the Watergate tapes definitively proved that Nixon broke the law by being involved in the cover-up of the Warergate burglaries from the very beginning. That is waaaaaaay worse than the unethical shit the Clinton's did.
In fact, if the Clinton's had been as bad as Nixon, they would have appointed a 'friendly' Democrat as the special prosecutor to investigate the Whitewater scandal instead of a stalwart Republican partisan, Ken Starr. And that Dem special prosecutor would *never* have gone down the rabbit hole of investigating leads regarding Bill's sexual improprieties. And BC would not have been impeached over the matter.
Seriously, Druff. You need to wake up to how Nixon was an order of magnitude worse than the Clintons. (And don't get me started on how LBJ learned how Nixon had committed treason in the 1968 election season by negotiating with the South Vietnamese government to nix their agreeing to the peace deal LBJ had all but in place. And that is a *fact* proven by LBJ's private tapes!)
Last edited by MumblesBadly; 08-25-2016 at 01:39 PM.
_____________________________________________
Please, clearly David Duke isnt neeeeearly as corrupt as Hillary. I know its true because the left is in denial of it.
"Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky
"America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs
Something tells me trump is going to be especially spastic when Anderson Cooper interviews him later tonight.
Robert Byrd was a klan member and Hillarys mentor, and he was a Democrat in congress for years.....sure why not
"Druff would suck his own dick if it were long enough"- Brandon "drexel" Gerson
"ann coulter literally has more common sense than pfa."-Sonatine
"Real grinders supports poker fraud"- Ray Davis
"DRILLED HER GOOD"- HONGKONGER
Byrd was a clan member in the 50's. He renounced the klan and ended up saying it was one of his worst decisions.
Robert Byrd was a klan member and Hillarys mentor, and he was a Democrat in congress for years.....sure why not
Since when has Duke ever renounced the KKK?
Also LOL at comparing Duke to Byrd. You really need to up your research on white supremacists.
Running for President 101:
if you are asked if you disavow david duke and white supremacists, the answer is "yes."
i don't care how many times they ask the question. the answer is always yes. period. if you mess this up, please see above
Can we unban Marty already so he can start posting in this thread again? Trump needs a carrrico comeback.
Aight, maybe not corrupt technically but you could grab many off death row who could claim likewise. Giving
Please, clearly David Duke isnt neeeeearly as corrupt as Hillary. I know its true because the left is in denial of it.
a relative dimwight the keys to the city is a big bet regardless of allegiances.
It's literally the lesser of two evils. Best case, Hilary wins but is wacked in the first week, and # 2 in line is human
Here’s Why the Media is Desperately Trying to Push Anti-Clinton Conspiracies
http://www.forwardprogressives.com/t...itimate-story/
I'll spare dumping all of the text here, but here are some highlights:
I know it’s popular to attack the mainstream media, but I usually give them the benefit of the doubt...
However, there are times where I see the media trying desperately to make something into a story because they need to create drama. Why? Well, quite frankly, because drama sells.
That brings me to the increasing push by practically every major media outlet in this country to make the Clinton Foundation into some “controversy” for Hillary Clinton. The biggest example of this came via the AP, usually a very credible source of information, after it sent out this tweet:
Think about those words for a moment: More than half of those who met with Clinton as Cabinet Secretary gave money to the Clinton Foundation.The Associated Press ✔@AP
BREAKING: AP analysis: More than half those who met Clinton as Cabinet secretary gave money to Clinton Foundation.
2:24 PM - 23 Aug 2016
Based on just those words, if true, that’s an incredibly alarming “fact” that almost certainly “proves” that Hillary Clinton used the foundation as an instrument to take bribes in some sort of pay-for-play scheme while she was Secretary of State.
However, the AP story is complete nonsense.
The article says that Clinton met with 85 of 154 people who were all donors to the foundation.
Now, ponder that for a moment. She was Secretary of State for four years (1472 days) — but only met with 154 people? Using those numbers, that means she only took meetings every 10 days or so. But that can’t be accurate, can it?
No, it can’t, because it’s not.
As Matthew Yglesias at Vox pointed out:
...To generate the 154 figure, the AP excluded from the denominator all employees of any government, whether US or foreign. Then when designing social media collateral, it just left out that part, because the truth is less striking and sharable.
Even so, the number 154 is preposterously low, as Clinton would routinely meet dozens of civil society leaders, journalists, and others on any one of her many foreign trips as secretary of state.
But regardless of that, the AP’s social media claims are simply false — ignoring well over 1,000 official meetings with foreign leaders and an unknown number of meetings with domestic US officials.
Furthermore, the article that triggered the tweet doesn’t produce any actual evidence of any unethical or alarming behavior by Clinton. As Vox‘s Yglesias wrote:
That’s it. With all of AP’s resources — clearly looking for a “big anti-Clinton” story that would make headlines — they dug into the foundation, tracked all these meetings, and they found next to nothing that shows where she used her position as Secretary of State in any sort of pay-for-play scheme linked to her foundation.What kind of shady dealings did the AP’s exhaustive analysis turn up? Aside from an occasional assist with acquiring a visa, or meeting with executives from a cosmetics company to talk about ways to curb gender-based violence in South Africa, not much. If Hillary Clinton was abusing the power of her office by running an international multi-million dollar pay-for-play scheme, she did a lousy job of it.
But they’re not the only ones. Over the last few days, on all the major cable news networks, they’ve been doing their best to make these right-wing conspiracies about the Clinton Foundation into a legitimate “controversy.”
Why? Well, because they need to.
Currently we’re in a bit of a “down time” for the general election. We’re still a few weeks away from the first debate, and there’s really not a whole lot else going on besides the usual campaign stops, rallies and events.
The main reason why the media is desperate to make the Clinton Foundation conspiracies into legitimate news stories is because, like I said earlier, they need the drama.
Over the last few weeks Trump’s campaign has been imploding, causing Clinton to take a commanding lead in practically every national poll — which is really bad for business. Hillary Clinton strolling into November with all polls indicating she’s headed for an easy victory over Donald Trump is the last thing these media outlets want to see happen. They need drama; they want drama; they’re fueled by drama; and they’ll do their best to fabricate it...
Which is exactly what we’re seeing now.
Benghazi didn’t stick, almost nobody cares about her emails, the pro-Bernie backlash against her has almost completely died down and no credible journalist is going to come anywhere near this ridiculous nonsense being pushed by conservatives concerning her health. The only real “thing” the media has right now (other than to discuss her emails for the millionth time) is to try to make the Clinton Foundation into some sort of “controversy” that makes the 2016 general election much more dramatic.
...
All we have is bad optics and media pundits debating how things look as opposed to discussing the actual fact that there’s been no “shocking” controversy linked to her time at the State Department and donations made to the Clinton Foundation, even though millions have been spent trying to find one.
This is nothing more than the media realizing that if they don’t create some sort of drama — and soon — they’re going to lose a whole lot of revenue this election.
_____________________________________________
thank you for actually knowing what the fuck you're talking about.Byrd was a clan member in the 50's. He renounced the klan and ended up saying it was one of his worst decisions.
Since when has Duke ever renounced the KKK?
Also LOL at comparing Duke to Byrd. You really need to up your research on white supremacists.
thank you for actually knowing what the fuck you're talking about.
So Robert byrd can denounce his grand dragon status in the ORIGINAL KKK, YOU KNOW, THE ONES THAT ACTUALLY HUNG n-wordS. So that makes robert byrd a "changed man". But when Donald Trump decides NOT to deport law abiding illegal alliens, THEN HE'S A FLIP FLOPPER?????. Jesus fucking christ, how delusional can you embisils be?
And LOL at the pseudo intellectual garbage on this thread.
Hey fuck face, you didn't even know robert byrd is from the byrd family, which pretty much was here before Virginia was even formed. His grandparents were slave owners and so were his ancestors. You stupid fuck, at least google the racist bastard before you pretend to know like you know what the fuck you're talking about.
"Druff would suck his own dick if it were long enough"- Brandon "drexel" Gerson
"ann coulter literally has more common sense than pfa."-Sonatine
"Real grinders supports poker fraud"- Ray Davis
"DRILLED HER GOOD"- HONGKONGER
There are currently 21 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 21 guests)
Reply With Quote
