Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

12-11-2017 , 11:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyebooger
Cliffs?
Treasury finally released thier long discussed report which "hundreds of people" had worked on for months that would show how the tax cuts were great for America.

IT IS ONE PAGE LONG, TOTALS 470 WORDS, AND CONTAINS NO DATA!

Republicans immediatly jump on it as "evidence".

Then Moore's wife not 30 minutes ago says they are not racist cause "one of thier lawyers is a Jew"
12-11-2017 , 11:39 PM
"Bigly growth. MAGA." I wonder what the other 467 words are.
12-11-2017 , 11:40 PM
ARE YOU A BILLIONAIRE NO **** YOU

460 to go
12-11-2017 , 11:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
Treasury finally released thier long discussed report which "hundreds of people" had worked on for months that would show how the tax cuts were great for America.

IT IS ONE PAGE LONG, TOTALS 470 WORDS, AND CONTAINS NO DATA!

Republicans immediatly jump on it as "evidence".

Then Moore's wife not 30 minutes ago says they are not racist cause "one of thier lawyers is a Jew"
It's a bit like putting their cards on the table face up though. Gone is any pretense of objectivity or sophistry to the Republican plan. It's not even substanciated by the one page that they did print. The Republicans are a joke and even they know it.
12-11-2017 , 11:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl
It's a bit like putting their cards on the table face up though. Gone is any pretense of objectivity or sophistry to the Republican plan. It's not even substanciated by the one page that they did print. The Republicans are a joke and even they know it.
So what? It has no implications. A ****ing child molester is about to join Congress. The worse they are the more they win.
12-11-2017 , 11:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl
It's a bit like putting their cards on the table face up though. Gone is any pretense of objectivity or sophistry to the Republican plan. It's not even substanciated by the one page that they did print. The Republicans are a joke and even they know it.
Their cards have been face up this whole. ****ing. Time.
12-11-2017 , 11:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
So what? It has no implications. A ****ing child molester is about to join Congress. The worse they are the more they win.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bware
Their cards have been face up this whole. ****ing. Time.
These.

I used to think "soon there will be a voter backlash against this ****", but I've pretty much given up hope for that.
12-11-2017 , 11:59 PM
I had an unfortunate interaction with a deplorable I unfriended over a year ago on a mutual friend's fb post about the tax plan. He is a cartoon version of a trumpster. "Give back your tax cut then" etc. literally mentioned Obama, pelosi and Hilary three times within two comments. Completely disingenuous. Regardless I was interested to see where he was going to land on the news that his tax cut he has been crowing about is going to be garbage. After the bull**** about how only rich people give you jobs so giving them more money means more jobs for him, he gave a glimpse of the real.

He just can't wait until welfare bums are cut off, and this is the first step. They don't need to lie to him. He knows he isn't getting a cut of the profits but he can't wait until the iPhone minorities are being forced to say merry Christmas at the job they never really wanted to have.
12-12-2017 , 12:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
So what? It has no implications. A ****ing child molester is about to join Congress. The worse they are the more they win.
Neither would a comprehensive Treasury report. As far as who I prefer along for the ride I like a Bond villain contemptuous lazy ahole like Mnuchin than some God of the universe that just so happens to favor bankers like Summers or Paulson. You have to be in the know to not like those guys, one look a Mnuchin and you want to punch him in the face.
12-12-2017 , 12:52 AM
Some random thoughts re: Clovis et al's WAAF posting

I despair being governed by these monsters as well, but I've been trying to keep a level head and put things in perspective. If Jones loses by single digits in a state where the Republican regularly wins statewide elections by an average of 20+ points, then that is a backlash. Virginia curbstomping Ed Gillespie is a backlash. Margins will tell us about our prospects in 2018, not binary results. Expecting a 20 point swing against the trend line is a big ask, even when the other guy is a literal pedophile. Something close to 50 percent of Alabama is white evangelical, and you're just never going to flip those votes, ever, and you probably can't dissuade them from turning out because they are for the most part fanatical by nature. Failing to win them says nothing. What matters is: do we turn out our people and do we depress or even actually flip R-leaning moderates? If yes, then even if we lose, that's a good place to be heading into 2018. That recipe if replicated nationwide wins back the House.
12-12-2017 , 12:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl
Neither would a comprehensive Treasury report. As far as who I prefer along for the ride I like a Bond villain contemptuous lazy ahole like Mnuchin than some God of the universe that just so happens to favor bankers like Summers or Paulson. You have to be in the know to not like those guys, one look a Mnuchin and you want to punch him in the face.
Mnuchin's wet dreams are about killing the New Deal financial regulations like Summers did.
12-12-2017 , 01:25 AM
The biggest flaw of the multipart question is they get to choose the least critical/damaging one and evade it.

There is no history of these questions ever being answered part by part in great detail. It has never worked that way.

They might as well ask “SUP?”
12-12-2017 , 01:38 AM
What is WAAF posting? Bing failed me.
12-12-2017 , 01:55 AM
"We are all f*cked," a common refrain of despair in this forum.
12-12-2017 , 07:33 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iron81
The reason for the multipart questions is each given reporter only has one shot per day to extract information.


How’s that working out for them?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
12-12-2017 , 08:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorKeeed
The press aren't democrats. The press secretary shamelessly lying is news and the press ought to cover it. It's much more newsworthy than more good-faith WH press briefings in the past, which were always PR and propaganda exercises rather than a genuine, sincere attempt at communication.
But they are:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.e7a85d560cea
12-12-2017 , 08:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScreaminAsian
Do you not see how this is a false flag.

The guy was a celebrity and media whore in NYC long before he pushed that narrative.
12-12-2017 , 08:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by raradevils
Shocking that the people that cover what actually happens in the world don't self-identify with a party who lies endlessly and lacks a coherent ideology
12-12-2017 , 08:46 AM

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...54567414091776
12-12-2017 , 08:50 AM
Patience is a virtue.

Drumpf not understanding that his confidants are currently flipping on him is hilarious.
12-12-2017 , 09:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Truant
What is WAAF posting? Bing failed me.
something that spineless, counter-productive, apathetic pussies say
12-12-2017 , 09:08 AM


I hope Gillibrand will reply and call this a sexist attack, which it is. Just go all in on the Trump is an abuser stuff.
12-12-2017 , 09:18 AM
Could that tweet be any more sexist? Jesus ****ing Christ.
12-12-2017 , 09:22 AM
To be fair, he did start by complementing her on her weight.
12-12-2017 , 09:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by raradevils
Do you not see how this is a false flag.

The guy was a celebrity and media whore in NYC long before he pushed that narrative.
I don’t get what you mean. I don’t see how that is a “false flag.” Did Democrats stage Trump’s year-Long brother campaign, including numerous TV appearances and countless tweets?

      
m