Donald Trump

[PeterWilton]

Ah, everyone is a fascist again are they?

No. Just fascists, people doing fascism, and their supporters.

[KateR]

I remember that post. I didn't think it was worth responding to because you, for some reason, decided I was blaming Trump for the fires. I try not to reply to people when they make **** up about me. It only encourages them.

you would be far better off not posting at all then because that's what I saw, but don't bother wasting your time replying, I'll just file you along with a few other posters that can't say sorry and admit they might be wrong, enjoy your life Walter.

[Bordeauxclaret]

Walter

[PeterWilton]

you would be far better off not posting at all then because that's what I saw, but don't bother wasting your time replying, I'll just file you along with a few other posters that can't say sorry and admit they might be wrong, enjoy your life Walter.

You are literally just making things up. Quote me. Find the post. I haven't deleted anything. Find the post where I'm blaming trump and quote it.

[gandhisflipflop]

I havent posted or read this thread in a long long time so I just need to ask has he been impeached yet? He wasn't going to last a year in office if I remember rightly? The irony that seems lost on the left is it is their sad desperation to get him out because it wasn't the result they wanted will be the reason why he is voted in for a second term. Where have I heard that before?

Trump 2020

[GodIsADeeJay81]

I'm reading about the Trump Youth thing.

Bit far right if you ask me, which is odd considering he's meant to be an agent of the commies..

[Devils_Advocate]

I havent posted or read this thread in a long long time so I just need to ask has he been impeached yet?

Yes, last year

[gandhisflipflop]

Is he still in office DA? Will he still be in office after the election? Sooner or later the left need to ask themselves why they are so **** poor in elections.

[gandhisflipflop]

I'm reading about the Trump Youth thing.

Bit far right if you ask me, which is odd considering he's meant to be an agent of the commies..

I think a black power salute is a bit far right, which is odd considering they're a communist organisation.

[Devils_Advocate]

Is he still in office DA?

Yes and whilst I could understand you not knowing about him being impeached if you really need to check if he is still in office then you are way behind the times

[KateR]

You are literally just making things up. Quote me. Find the post. I haven't deleted anything. Find the post where I'm blaming trump and quote it.

Walter, take your own advice, find it yourself, but think exploding trees in a list of things you provided that you were sneering at from Trump, plus the statement around Trump being responsible for the agencies and therefore he is responsible for the fires, as applied to your global warning, without mentioning the 30 years of government that came before him. Then think about your failure to respond to when you were given an alternative view from another source, after you were quick to denounce the first thread I gave you and informing me of it's right wing support so was invalid (which, you were quite right in pointing out, I had no idea about).

You have a very limited memory on what you post it seems, just an opinion of course.

[Vegas Claret]

I havent posted or read this thread in a long long time so I just need to ask has he been impeached yet? He wasn't going to last a year in office if I remember rightly? The irony that seems lost on the left is it is their sad desperation to get him out because it wasn't the result they wanted will be the reason why he is voted in for a second term. Where have I heard that before?

Trump 2020

been a minute, still clueless as ****

Trump will forever be impeached

[Vegas Claret]

You are literally just making things up. Quote me. Find the post. I haven't deleted anything. Find the post where I'm blaming trump and quote it.

They are good at that Peter, had the exact same thing happen to me, I asked for a certain poster to show me the post they were quoting me in and surprise surprise I got zero reply because they couldn't.

A bit like Mr FlipFlop above it's been a reasonable while since I came on this thread with any consistency and now I remember why. You won't get a serious debate with a single one of them, they come on to say Trump is great (just an opinion which is fine) but they can't tell you why, what he has done, what his policies are etc etc

And with that, I'll stick to the footy for a while

[PeterWilton]

Walter, take your own advice, find it yourself, but think exploding trees in a list of things you provided that you were sneering at from Trump, plus the statement around Trump being responsible for the agencies and therefore he is responsible for the fires, as applied to your global warning, without mentioning the 30 years of government that came before him. Then think about your failure to respond to when you were given an alternative view from another source, after you were quick to denounce the first thread I gave you and informing me of it's right wing support so was invalid (which, you were quite right in pointing out, I had no idea about).

You have a very limited memory on what you post it seems, just an opinion of course.

Nope. The reason you won't quote me is because you can't, because I didn't say what you're accusing me of saying. The only way for me to disprove you would be if I quoted ever single post I've made in the thread, whereas you can easily prove yourself right by quoting the post where I blamed trump. But you aren't doing that, because you can't. Go on. Prove me wrong. I'll delete my account if you do.

I pointed out that Trump is responsible for the agencies he's blaming for poor forest management. That's not the same as me saying Trump is to blame. I'm pointing out how dumb he is to blame poor forest management when it's his agencies that are responsible for most of that. I'm saying, in case it somehow isn't clear yet, that Trump is blaming Trump.

And yes, I was mocking him blaming exploding trees. That's not the same as blaming him. The man is an absolute moron, that doesn't mean I'm blaming him for forest fires.

This is the part of the discussion where you apologise for accusing me of something I demonstrably didn't do.

[martin_p]

Nope. The reason you won't quote me is because you can't, because I didn't say what you're accusing me of saying. The only way for me to disprove you would be if I quoted ever single post I've made in the thread, whereas you can easily prove yourself right by quoting the post where I blamed trump. But you aren't doing that, because you can't. Go on. Prove me wrong. I'll delete my account if you do.

I pointed out that Trump is responsible for the agencies he's blaming for poor forest management. That's not the same as me saying Trump is to blame. I'm pointing out how dumb he is to blame poor forest management when it's his agencies that are responsible for most of that. I'm saying, in case it somehow isn't clear yet, that Trump is blaming Trump.

And yes, I was mocking him blaming exploding trees. That's not the same as blaming him. The man is an absolute moron, that doesn't mean I'm blaming him for forest fires.

This is the part of the discussion where you apologise for accusing me of something I demonstrably didn't do.

Don’t hold your breath! Has form.

[HahaYeah]

'All we're focused on is to make sure that the progressive left and the corporatists cannot steal the election'.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iZ2JSz7FM0

Steve Bannon gives first interview since his arrest exclusively on 'Tucker'

[KateR]

[PeterWilton]

Trump is so desperate that he's saying Democrats support executing babies. Lol.

[PeterWilton]

Due to Covid we are asking that Trump supporters work from home and slaughter their own families.

[NJ_Claret]

TRUMP 2020

9EF7CAB9-BEB2-443E-B7F9-3933E073CDB8.jpeg (835.71 KiB) Viewed 3915 times

[Bordeauxclaret]

How can a grown man make up lies like other people are trying to kill new born babies?

And how many times can people pretend they don’t see this nonsense?

[PeterWilton]

How can a grown man make up lies like other people are trying to kill new born babies?

And how many times can people pretend they don’t see this nonsense?

Because the truth doesn't matter to his supporters. Just look at his supporters in this thread. Their Only ideology is hatred of the left and of liberals. Anything that angers them is good. Whether its something as mundane as his lies or something as severe as his secret police snatching liberals and leftists off the street, or kids in cages, or women being forced to have hysterectomies, or police beating and gassing protesters so that he can have his photo taken holding a bible upside down in front of a church, or saying that nazis are fine people. None of it matters to them beyond how angry it makes the libs.

This is why people on here who might otherwise be fairly ordinary conservatives are actually supporters of fascism because they're supporting this fascist and hoping he is successful in getting reelected because despite all his crimes against actual human beings none of it is a bad thing if it upsets the people they hate.

The important thing to remember though is that every single one of these people who express support for Trump, no matter their reasoning, are saying that all his crimes, all his racism, sexism, all his corruption, all of it is OK. As long it upsets you and I.

They're sick people. Some of them so sick that they'll even refuse to protect themselves from a deadly virus by wearing a mask because by refusing they endanger others, which upsets the libs.

There is literally no arguing with them, and there is nothing that we can do that will make them happy except be unhappy. It is their single guiding principle.

[Uwe Noble]

How can a grown man make up lies like other people are trying to kill new born babies?

And how many times can people pretend they don’t see this nonsense?

It's called partial birth abortion. Look it up.

[Uwe Noble]

Because the truth doesn't matter to his supporters. Just look at his supporters in this thread. Their Only ideology is hatred of the left and of liberals. Anything that angers them is good. Whether its something as mundane as his lies or something as severe as his secret police snatching liberals and leftists off the street, or kids in cages, or women being forced to have hysterectomies, or police beating and gassing protesters so that he can have his photo taken holding a bible upside down in front of a church, or saying that nazis are fine people. None of it matters to them beyond how angry it makes the libs.

This is why people on here who might otherwise be fairly ordinary conservatives are actually supporters of fascism because they're supporting this fascist and hoping he is successful in getting reelected because despite all his crimes against actual human beings none of it is a bad thing if it upsets the people they hate.

The important thing to remember though is that every single one of these people who express support for Trump, no matter their reasoning, are saying that all his crimes, all his racism, sexism, all his corruption, all of it is OK. As long it upsets you and I.

They're sick people. Some of them so sick that they'll even refuse to protect themselves from a deadly virus by wearing a mask because by refusing they endanger others, which upsets the libs.

There is literally no arguing with them, and there is nothing that we can do that will make them happy except be unhappy. It is their single guiding principle.

Take two of these and have a lie down Walter.

[Uwe Noble]

Nope. The reason you won't quote me is because you can't, because I didn't say what you're accusing me of saying. The only way for me to disprove you would be if I quoted ever single post I've made in the thread, whereas you can easily prove yourself right by quoting the post where I blamed trump. But you aren't doing that, because you can't. Go on. Prove me wrong. I'll delete my account if you do.

I pointed out that Trump is responsible for the agencies he's blaming for poor forest management. That's not the same as me saying Trump is to blame. I'm pointing out how dumb he is to blame poor forest management when it's his agencies that are responsible for most of that. I'm saying, in case it somehow isn't clear yet, that Trump is blaming Trump.

And yes, I was mocking him blaming exploding trees. That's not the same as blaming him. The man is an absolute moron, that doesn't mean I'm blaming him for forest fires.

This is the part of the discussion where you apologise for accusing me of something I demonstrably didn't do.

Surely the states are responsible for forest management? Most regulatory authority lies with them.

[HahaYeah]

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Surely the states are responsible for forest management? Most regulatory authority lies with them.

Federal gov own most forested areas.

Problem is management of the land, they aren't clearing it out, leaving dead wood etc.
Regular controlled fires could help.

If I remember rightly they have a controlled fire on the Pennines, or part of it, to clear out the dead vegetation.

[tiger76]

If I could attempt to bring some sanity to this thread, the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg means that Trump might be able to nominate her replacement, either prior to the November election, or even after it, this will of course have to be confirmed by the Senate, and there's already a couple of Republicans who've stated that any such process should be subject to whichever of Biden or Trump wins the presidency.

Conveniently Mitch McConnell has changed his views on whether the appointing of a Supreme Court judge should be decided by the Senate, I'm sure this has nothing to do with the fact that the GOP control both the WH and the senate, unlike back in 2016 when Obama was blocked from filling a SC vacancy for over a year, if the Republicans attempt to nominate a replacement prior to the election, then the Democrats with some justification would scream hypocrisy.

[Uwe Noble]

If I could attempt to bring some sanity to this thread, the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg means that Trump might be able to nominate her replacement, either prior to the November election, or even after it, this will of course have to be confirmed by the Senate, and there's already a couple of Republicans who've stated that any such process should be subject to whichever of Biden or Trump wins the presidency.

Conveniently Mitch McConnell has changed his views on whether the appointing of a Supreme Court judge should be decided by the Senate, I'm sure this has nothing to do with the fact that the GOP control both the WH and the senate, unlike back in 2016 when Obama was blocked from filling a SC vacancy for over a year, if the Republicans attempt to nominate a replacement prior to the election, then the Democrats with some justification would scream hypocrisy.

The difference is that the Republicans control both the Presidency and the Senate. Perfectly justified to nominate and approve a SC justice.

[Gordaleman]

If I could attempt to bring some sanity to this thread, the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg means that Trump might be able to nominate her replacement, either prior to the November election, or even after it, this will of course have to be confirmed by the Senate, and there's already a couple of Republicans who've stated that any such process should be subject to whichever of Biden or Trump wins the presidency.

Conveniently Mitch McConnell has changed his views on whether the appointing of a Supreme Court judge should be decided by the Senate, I'm sure this has nothing to do with the fact that the GOP control both the WH and the senate, unlike back in 2016 when Obama was blocked from filling a SC vacancy for over a year, if the Republicans attempt to nominate a replacement prior to the election, then the Democrats with some justification would scream hypocrisy.

Well as Trump is the biggest hypocrite on the planet, we should expect an appointment on Monday then?

[PeterWilton]

For the few non-trump supporters who still doubt he's a fascist, here he is saying it's "a beautiful sight" to see journalists being shot with rubber bullets.

https://mobile.twitter.com/davidgura/st ... 8205425665

[tiger76]

The difference is that the Republicans control both the Presidency and the Senate. Perfectly justified to nominate and approve a SC justice.

Even if they nominate a SC justice, there's no certainty that they'll have the numbers to push it through the Senate, they only have a slim majority, and some of the more moderate Republicans are expressing reservations, this could actually play into Trump's hands if the Democrats aren't careful, and given their own dire track record in picking fights with the president, they'd be advised to tread cautiously on this issue.

[PeterWilton]

Even if they nominate a SC justice, there's no certainty that they'll have the numbers to push it through the Senate, they only have a slim majority, and some of the more moderate Republicans are expressing reservations, this could actually play into Trump's hands if the Democrats aren't careful, and given their own dire track record in picking fights with the president, they'd be advised to tread cautiously on this issue.

I fail to see how this can play into trump's hands. If he nominates someone and they get approval before the election then the Republican senators in toss-up races will all lose. (no accounting for Republican electoral ratfucking, of course)

One GOP senator already said she won't confirm anyone before inauguration day next year. Susan Collins of Maine can vote to confirm someone which will confirm her double -digit defeat for reelection, or she can join Murkowski in refusing to confirm anyone, which will at least give her some hope for reelection.

Romney will probably refuse to to confirm anyone too. Then only one more needs to refuse and suddenly Trump can't confirm anyone. And there are about 5 Republican senators in toss-up races, any one of whom can very easily declare refusal to confirm because if they even waver it'll be huge for their opponent.

I don't think Trump will get anyone appointed unless he's reelected.

[tiger76]

I fail to see how this can play into trump's hands. If he nominates someone and they get approval before the election then the Republican senators in toss-up races will all lose. (no accounting for Republican electoral ratfucking, of course)

One GOP senator already said she won't confirm anyone before inauguration day next year. Susan Collins of Maine can vote to confirm someone which will confirm her double -digit defeat for reelection, or she can join Murkowski in refusing to confirm anyone, which will at least give her some hope for reelection.

Romney will probably refuse to to confirm anyone too. Then only one more needs to refuse and suddenly Trump can't confirm anyone. And there are about 5 Republican senators in toss-up races, any one of whom can very easily declare refusal to confirm because if they even waver it'll be huge for their opponent.

I don't think Trump will get anyone appointed unless he's reelected.

Yes what you say is correct, and I doubt any of the GOP Senators engaged in tight contests will want to endanger their own re-electoral prospects, like most politicians their main priority is their own careers.

The problem is Trump isn't predictable in his responses, so you're never quite sure what he'll do, most sitting presidents would take the common sense approach, and wait until after the election, but with Trump you can't rule anything out, even if it damages his own party, I have noticed a lot of the GOP candidates are attempting to distance their campaigns from his, and that's probably wise, in 2016 a good number got in on Trump's coattails, as he was polling much higher, and he dragged several GOP candidates over the line in close-fought races, the situation is very different in 2020, and many will feel their best chance of success is too disassociate them from his presidency, whether they'll prove to be successful is another matter entirely.

[PeterWilton]

Collins has just confirmed that the winner of the November 3rd election should choose the nominee.

So that's 2. 2 more and Trump won't be selecting any more rapists to the court unless he wins.

[PeterWilton]

Tiger, trump will do what's best for trump, and it will be without nuance. In that sense he is definitely predictable. The Republican party is pretty predictable too on that they will be hypocrites.

[daveisaclaret]

Collins has just confirmed that the winner of the November 3rd election should choose the nominee.

So that's 2. 2 more and Trump won't be selecting any more rapists to the court unless he wins.

Susan Collins has been pretending to be willing to vote against Trump on major issues for nearly four years, I think now is an odd time to start believing her.

[AndrewJB]

If the Democrats win the presidency and gain a majority in the senate, there’s nothing stopping them from increasing the number of Supreme Court justices.

[Uwe Noble]

Collins has just confirmed that the winner of the November 3rd election should choose the nominee.

So that's 2. 2 more and Trump won't be selecting any more rapists to the court unless he wins.

Utterly disgraceful comment.

[Uwe Noble]

The dems just can't help themselves. A repeat of their antics during the Kavanaugh confirmation will hand Trump the election on a plate.

[HahaYeah]

A Trump supporters perspective on the latest events.

-Ginsberg's death and "last wish".
-Democrats threatening more violence.
-Democrats attempting election fraud.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONlnbtDpW7c

[Damo]

Its no wonder Charlie gets through so many accounts

[Elbarad]

It'll be interesting to see what happens in the Senate hearings. The leading candidate's previous hearings for her current position were mainly objections by Dems to her religion. Would they really be wiling to alienate every Catholic in the US? Maybe.

[RingoMcCartney]

American Express is committing $10 million to help Black business owners recover from the pandemic.

https://thehill.com/changing-america/re ... ZlOFd6RrGx

I guess the other businesses can just pay their bills with "privilege" then......


BLM protesters in Milwaukee, Wisc. surround a man’s house. He has a Trump & US flag on the outside. He appears to ready a gun from inside the home. He was reportedly arrested for brandishing the weapon.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1306072075564531713

[Swizzlestick]

American Express is committing $10 million to help Black business owners recover from the pandemic.

https://thehill.com/changing-america/re ... ZlOFd6RrGx

I guess the other businesses can just pay their bills with "privilege" then......


BLM protesters in Milwaukee, Wisc. surround a man’s house. He has a Trump & US flag on the outside. He appears to ready a gun from inside the home. He was reportedly arrested for brandishing the weapon.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1306072075564531713

Needed a change from Stormfront, did you?

[Devils_Advocate]

BLM protesters in Milwaukee, Wisc. surround a man’s house. He has a Trump & US flag on the outside. He appears to ready a gun from inside the home. He was reportedly arrested for brandishing the weapon.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1306072075564531713

No surprise that Ringo 'lower than a snakes belly' is linking far right twitter accounts and misrepresenting them (or possibly not reading them and/or understanding the full story)

Even Ngo has posted a follow up tweet explaing he did not have the full details when he posted the original claim

So the day before all this happened the arrested suspect threatened his neighbour whilst brandishing a chain saw making them fear for their life. The suspect was obviously arrested.

A demonstration was then held outside this mans house (you can probably imagine his attitude to some of the people of the neighbourhood given the circumstances of his first arrest) and the man started brandishing a gun at the window.

The police were monitoring the situation and made contact with the man and on doing so discovered he was completely intoxicated. At this stage the police quite rightly arrested him for "endangering safety by use of a dangerous weapon whilst under the influence of an intoxicant, disorderly conduct while armed and bail jumping" - yes he jumped bail as well

And this my friends is why Ringo's rubbish should be ignored as hateful, misrepresented boll*cks

[daveisaclaret]

I wonder what association made Ringo decide to post anti-black nonsense in the Donald Trump thread.

[4:20]

No surprise that Ringo 'lower than a snakes belly' is linking far right twitter accounts and misrepresenting them (or possibly not reading them and/or understanding the full story)

Andy Ngo is not far right and neither is his Twitter account.

[Damo]

Anyone left of Owen Jones is far right on here

[AndrewJB]

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/cu ... fa-877914/

Andy Ngo as reported on by Rolling Stone.