Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
blotsfan

Trump Regime thread.

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, DalaiLama4Ever said:

As the most anti-war candidate in the race, the Clintons and their goons would be taking losses in the tens of millions with a Gabbard presidency. Which is probably why Hillary feels the need to attack her right now. It's good for business. 

Shouldn't be long before Gabbard dies of "suicide".

If she did that Hillary would die. She had too many military followers who are devoted to her. She would get got.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if the military isn't willing to kill trump for getting their men killed in an awful pullout strategy, they aren't going to do jackshit to any politician that's getting them paid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The soldiers aren't getting paid well, and there are veterans who aren't using DFAS anymore. And in the military, for the good ones money won't buy loyalty. Civilians are different.

Edited by Omerta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, RazorStar said:

if the military isn't willing to kill trump for getting their men killed in an awful pullout strategy, they aren't going to do jackshit to any politician that's getting them paid.

Good pullout game is key.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this officially the largest thread in TGP history? We're knocking on the door of 5000 posts.

And just think, the Trump Regime is almost guaranteed to be a 2 term Presidency. This thread has a long way to go. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bunch of whiny bitches lol.

This has just turned into the general politics thread.

Edited by Omerta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing I don't like about Tulsi is her promoting Project Veritas. Veritas is nothing but a bunch of liars who selectively edit their videos to make people seem bad.

James O'Keefe has been caught in these lies over and over again, and yet the right wing people keep promoting his conspiracy theory videos.

Other than that, she's the best candidate out there. Also the idea that a US vet is a Russian asset is fucking hilarious.

Edited by Thanatos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Thanatos said:

The only thing I don't like about Tulsi is her promoting Project Veritas. Veritas is nothing but a bunch of liars who selectively edit their videos to make people seem bad.

James O'Keefe has been caught in these lies over and over again, and yet the right wing people keep promoting his conspiracy theory videos.

Other than that, she's the best candidate out there. Also the idea that a US vet is a Russian asset is fucking hilarious.

You only say that because O'Keefe is "conservative." 

In reality I like the idea. I love the fact that Tulsi will reach across the aisle. She could be extremely successful if elected

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everybody distancing themselves from Tulsi... except the goat . 
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Omerta said:

You only say that because O'Keefe is "conservative." 

In reality I like the idea. I love the fact that Tulsi will reach across the aisle. She could be extremely successful if elected

Going on Fox News is reaching across the aisle. Promoting Project Veritas is promoting literal fake news.

I say that because of stories like this one where he tried to discredit a CNN reporter by literally attempting to seduce her on his ship after giving her an interview. And his ship had fuzzy handcuffs and dildos hanging in it. Not kidding here. (Funny, I will grant you, except that he was going to film the whole thing and not tell her. Planning to do this without her consent and then posting said tape online was so sleazy his own accomplice couldn't stomach it and told the reporter what was about to happen. Note that had this happened, it would have been a felony.) Veritas later settled with the Izzy- the lady who blew the whistle on O'Keefe- out of court to avoid a lawsuit.

How about where he helped to bankrupt ACORN by selectively editing the video to make it seem like a crime was taking place? And then further investigations revealed there was nothing wrong and the videos had been edited to make it seem like something had happened that had not. Not to mention, ACORN had correctly followed protocol and notified police after he left, while avoiding antagonizing someone they thought was involved in illegal prostitution. The New York Times later obtained and released the full videos, where it was revealed that when they had the woman alone, multiple ACORN workers told her she should get legal help and offered to call the police for her. This part was removed in O'Keefe's deceptive editing. He was later sued by one of the ACORN workers in question and agreed to settle for $100k.

He and three of his buddies entered the federal office of Senator Mary Landrieu posing as phone repairmen with the intent to either damage her phone lines or wiretap them. (Their story has changed.) They were all convicted of a crime for this one.

They fraudulently recorded NPR executives and again selectively edited the videos to make it seem like the NPR head guy was agreeing with some of the views their fake organization was putting forward. Once again, O'Keefe was forced to surrender the full video, and once again, viewing of the whole thing made it clear what he had done.

James O'Keefe is just another form of Jacob Wohl, the moron that tried to frame Robert Mueller and left his mom's cell-phone as the primary contact for his phony intelligence agency that supposedly got the scoop on Bob.

His forte is to release a selectively edited video, and then when called on it, to deny everything until legally forced to release the whole video which most times clears the people involved in said video. He's a liar and you cannot trust anything he releases to stand on its own.

None of this is hard to find, its all public knowledge.

Edited by Thanatos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can get behind it in principle though. The idea to use undercover reporting to expose corruption is something I love on a lot of levels. It is brilliant strategically as well if all the corrupt people can't trust phone repairmen. They would have to circle the wagons for survival and the will have isolated themselves. 

He is a sleaze, but again the principle I can get behind. Tulsi supporting something like that is not a bad thing necessarily. I will say if that's the only flaw she has, she is far and away the best candidate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Omerta said:

I can get behind it in principle though. The idea to use undercover reporting to expose corruption is something I love on a lot of levels. It is brilliant strategically as well if all the corrupt people can't trust phone repairmen. They would have to circle the wagons for survival and the will have isolated themselves. 

He is a sleaze, but again the principle I can get behind. Tulsi supporting something like that is not a bad thing necessarily. I will say if that's the only flaw she has, she is far and away the best candidate.

Not arguing with you on that one. Just don't like her promoting fake news. I have nothing against the principle at all, in fact I wish more people would try it. But you have to be willing to take what you find, not manufacture something that isn't here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see that, but here is the philosophical question at play here. Given the degradation of the standards in media you should be suspect of all news because they all pretty much suck. 

So if someone suspects someone is doing some shady shit, and maybe leaks a false story, like major news organizations, to get them investigated, how wrongt is it ? If it's true you did a bad thing with net good results. If you don't you retract it, and it's a way, with maybe a slight lean negative. So is it worth it? I don't know, but it's interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, DalaiLama4Ever said:

You should go to prison for this. The longer my wife does this the more discouraging it is. To her patient care is numero uno. There is nothing else, and it's frustrating to me because she will come home crying some days because follow up care is so poor and nurses suck ass. Admittedly she is adorable when she gets fiesty.

That said as a doctor people are entrusting you with their lives or the lives of their loved ones. Any shady dealings like that should get you in the clink. That is why your salary is so high, because the outcomes of your decisions are magnified.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DalaiLama4Ever said:

You know what's more infuriating about this? The Affordable Care Act is the reason we can see such payments. We thought them being public would discourage people from doing so. Lolus.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Omerta said:

I can see that, but here is the philosophical question at play here. Given the degradation of the standards in media you should be suspect of all news because they all pretty much suck. 

So if someone suspects someone is doing some shady shit, and maybe leaks a false story, like major news organizations, to get them investigated, how wrongt is it ? If it's true you did a bad thing with net good results. If you don't you retract it, and it's a way, with maybe a slight lean negative. So is it worth it? I don't know, but it's interesting.

No, its not. The end does not justify the means.

And no, the media as a whole is absolutely nowhere near as bad as Project Veritas. The media has their biases, to be clear. The vast majority of them are not intentionally lying. O'Keefe and his organization are and they've been caught on it multiple times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thanatos said:

No, its not. The end does not justify the means.

And no, the media as a whole is absolutely nowhere near as bad as Project Veritas. The media has their biases, to be clear. The vast majority of them are not intentionally lying. O'Keefe and his organization are and they've been caught on it multiple times.

I think they absolutely lie to us on purpose. I guess we will disagree. On the Joe Rogan Podcast with a dogshit, confused, sack of shit reporter Bary Weiss from the New York Times, she straight admits it. She says she will run.stories she thinks are dubious just to get out there first, and retract it later if there is backlash.

I don't know. I agree an eye for an eye probably isn't productive. Although I would be lying to you if I said I don't get some joy watching someone do to reporters what they do to everyone else. Honestly I would abolish the first amendment at this point before the second. Freedom of the press is all great and all until their in bed with the people who make the rules.

Edited by Omerta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Omerta said:

I think they absolutely lie to us on purpose. I guess we will disagree. On the Joe Rogan Podcast with a dogshit, confused, sack of shit reporter Bary Weiss from the New York Times, she straight admits it. She says she will run.stories she thinks are dubious just to get out there first, and retract it later if there is backlash.

I don't know. I agree an eye for an eye probably isn't productive. Although I would be lying to you if I said I don't get some joy watching someone do to reporters what they do to everyone else. Honestly I would abolish the first amendment at this point before the second. Freedom of the press is all great and all until their in bed with the people who make the rules.

I'm not saying there aren't members of the media who are liars. The media is composed of humans, of course there are bad apples. But ALL of Project Veritas has been involved in lying to our faces multiple times. None of them are worthy of trust.

Running with a dubious story to get it out there is not intentionally lying. Is it bad? Absolutely. It is not the same as knowingly editing videos so they are misleading to the people watching them.

The first is "shock" journalism. It's what many people in this environment thrive on and I hate it. But its not intentionally being deceitful its simply trying to get out in front of a story because that's what happens a lot. If you wait for everything to be confirmed, someone else will have the story first, and that is bad for ratings. It's still not on the same plane as intentionally editing videos to make people appear to be saying things they are not saying.

And its not just the media PV does it to. ACORN was destroyed by his videos, and afterwards they were cleared of all wrong-doing. He intentionally left out parts of the videos where he talked to employees who told the woman to go to the police because it didn't fit his narrative. He's scum and should be in prison. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya ya, I know it's The Hill. But this guy is fucking loopy. He says if he doesn't win the nomination, he is leaving politics... I think that would be best for all parties involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DalaiLama4Ever said:

A little late to the party but nice to see
 

 

I really think that Clinton is doing Tulsi a favor. Clinton is such a vile, loathsome, lying, piece of shit, cunt that so many people hate her they are going to start saying," Hey, I hate Hillary Clinton, this Gabbard lady has rustled her jimmy, she must be doing something right, let me go check it out." I cannot reiterate enough how much I absolutely hate that woman, and I am not alone. Her own party hates her sorry ass. 

I think this really could swing a lot of people to at least listen to Gabbard, if she does not win, then fine, but her message should be heard. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, DalaiLama4Ever said:

Ya ya, I know it's The Hill. But this guy is fucking loopy. He says if he doesn't win the nomination, he is leaving politics... I think that would be best for all parties involved.

Haha look its that one guy with the punchable face who does more pandering to the crowd than any other candidate. He is that atypical beta cuck white guy who is talking about poke balls at a riot, sees a black guy, and starts yelling," BLACK LIVES MATTER, BLACK LIVES MATTER, BLACK LIVES MATTER, BLACK LIVES MATTER" Then as soon as the black guy leaves he runs home and thinks to himself how lucky he is he didnt have to make eye contact because he would have wet himself. 

I love his, we are going door to door speeches. Like, Bitch you aint doing shit. The first guy would smack you out of your boots and you would talk about your oppression in your next basket weaving class with the other women. 

 

This is Robert in his natural habitat:

tumblr_mbd530nmXl1qmary5o1_500.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Omerta said:

I really think that Clinton is doing Tulsi a favor. Clinton is such a vile, loathsome, lying, piece of shit, cunt that so many people hate her they are going to start saying," Hey, I hate Hillary Clinton, this Gabbard lady has rustled her jimmy, she must be doing something right, let me go check it out." I cannot reiterate enough how much I absolutely hate that woman, and I am not alone. Her own party hates her sorry ass. 

I think this really could swing a lot of people to at least listen to Gabbard, if she does not win, then fine, but her message should be heard. 

I hope so. 

Tulsi was very... wordy and... "harsh" in her response. She might pull some (more) moderates... but there is a serious and hardcore Hillary cult (still) on the left. I can't imagine they are taking too kindly to the Hilldog attack. And I say "harsh" in quotes because I literally give no fucks with what she said. She is 100% right and I 100% support her in standing up for herself and against the evil and corrupt cunt known as Hillary, but I genuinely feel a lot of people won't see it that way lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, DalaiLama4Ever said:

I hope so. 

Tulsi was very... wordy and... "harsh" in her response. She might pull some (more) moderates... but there is a serious and hardcore Hillary cult (still) on the left. I can't imagine they are taking too kindly to the Hilldog attack. And I say "harsh" in quotes because I literally give no fucks with what she said. She is 100% right and I 100% support her in standing up for herself and against the evil and corrupt cunt known as Hillary, but I genuinely feel a lot of people won't see it that way lol.

Oh for sure you have people who think she hung the moon. That said the party as a whole is leaving her. Bernie was the real leader, not Biden for the nomination. I personally think he is out now. If he is, he is going to endorse one of two people. Watered or Gabbard. 

Gabbard or Yang is their best shot at pulling moderates. I would say Gabbard because the military service go a long way with the right. If Bernie endorses Gabbard she becomes a powerhouse. As we speak Bernie peeps are looking at her. And policy for policy I think she is the best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×