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.

03-25-2017 , 02:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethethe
Haha you're not wrong! I thought I'd look it up, and saw they had a forum.

Top post:

Jod Rogan is good friends with Eddie Bravo. On his 911th podcast episode he had Bravo and Alex Jones both on and it was amazing.

Jones is pretty shook about pizzagate these days because he is afraid he has some liability. Any ways Bravo and jones both off the hook crazy in that podcast.
03-25-2017 , 02:45 PM
You werent kidding:

http://thehill.com/homenews/325761-i...spiracy-theory

wtf

alex jones apologizing for pizzagate reporting
03-25-2017 , 02:50 PM
Speaking of Pizzagate, yesterday Alex Jones apologized ot the owner of Comet Ping Pong because he was about to get sued and lose all the SUPER MALE VITALITY supplement money.

03-25-2017 , 02:52 PM
My pony was abducted.
03-25-2017 , 02:52 PM
"apologizing"... it was more reading a lawyers statement.

Seems he's a bit panicked after Infowars was named in FBI's Russian-influence probe.
03-25-2017 , 02:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DVaut1
Republicans are taking your damn money and giving it to rich people. Democrats are going to take rich people's money and give it back to everyone else. It's that simple. Say that for the next 2 to 4 years.
Except it's not that simple because there are a lot of Democrats who want to give money to rich people too. In fact most of them do. Obama allowed most of the wealth created under his administration to funnel into already rich pockets and Hillary would've done the same. True progressives who want to reduce income inequality are a minority in the party. The difference between Republicans is they're a bit more subtle about it and they'll at least advance social issues and throw a few scraps to the poor and middle class while they're working their agenda.

The news of the DNC chair election got overshadowed pretty quickly, and rightfully so, because 1)covering/resisting Trump is much more important right now, 2)party chair elections are barely newsworthy to begin with, and 3)there isn't going to be a huge practical difference between Perez and Ellison. But it kind of represented a bigger issue. There are two lines of thinking that could both work for the party moving forward. They could realize that progressive policies are popular with voters, and especially good at encouraging turnout, which is the key to winning elections. Or they could gamble on the theory that progressives will get behind establishment candidates this time because it's either that or Trump 2020. I remember someone was quoted after the DNC chair election specifically citing the latter as the reason they elected Perez. If they stick with that line of thinking they can't run on transferring wealth back to the bottom 99% because it will be bull**** and most people will be able to see that.
03-25-2017 , 03:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by thethethe
This guy's here to save everyone! Well all the sheeple on the loosh farm...

I love the fact that he feels the need to hide his identity so his boss and others don't clue in that he's a nut job. Pedo's have similar misdirection strategies.
03-25-2017 , 03:36 PM
Even after googling loosh farm, I still don't understand WTF a loosh farm is.
03-25-2017 , 03:41 PM
Is David Icke still around? No doubt he could explain it.
03-25-2017 , 03:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RV Life
Even after googling loosh farm, I still don't understand WTF a loosh farm is.
You may be suffering from depleted loosh.
03-25-2017 , 03:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rex Ingram
you've been posting here since 2004
lol I've never tried to embed a tweet before. Sue me.
03-25-2017 , 04:05 PM
This should be official anthem for Trump
/of course made by russians/
03-25-2017 , 04:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis Cyphre
They shouldn't use the GOP's rhetoric. Say improve, enhance, augment, upgrade or similar. Messaging is important and the Dems suck at it.

"Even the Democrats admit Obamacare is broken. We need to repeal and replace it."
There is no reason to refuse to acknowledge reality because the GOP does. Dems have been saying for years that the ACA needs to be tweaked but have been met with REPEAL OR DIAF. Who gives a ****? The law isn't perfect, it never will be and will ultimately fail because everything that is Not Single Payer always does, but being more like the GOP damn sure isn't going to do anyone any good.

And you just lost every branch of government, the hour for worrying about optics has long since passed.
03-25-2017 , 04:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic
lol I've never tried to embed a tweet before. Sue me.
It's easy. When you go to Twitter, copy the numbers of the Tweet you want to show here. Paste it.

845726535848005633

Then highlight it and click the Twitter icon.

03-25-2017 , 04:09 PM
BTW- If Flynn flipped, LOLZ times are coming.
03-25-2017 , 04:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
Yo Dom,

Just quote someone who does it right. It's magic!
I am properly chagrined that I did not think of this.
03-25-2017 , 04:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RV Life
lol wow 1 time
03-25-2017 , 04:15 PM
Would probably need to be something to make flipping Flynn worthwhile, right? Like something even more serious than conspiracy to commit international kidnapping.
03-25-2017 , 04:17 PM
Can the President of the Unites States be taken into custody by the FBI? What exactly would happen in the world and the county if they did?
03-25-2017 , 04:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vagine
HastenDan is sincere about his political views.
03-25-2017 , 04:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic
Can the President of the Unites States be taken into custody by the FBI? What exactly would happen in the world and the county if they did?
Both breathe a collective sigh of relief?
03-25-2017 , 04:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d10
Except it's not that simple because there are a lot of Democrats who want to give money to rich people too. In fact most of them do. Obama allowed most of the wealth created under his administration to funnel into already rich pockets and Hillary would've done the same. True progressives who want to reduce income inequality are a minority in the party. The difference between Republicans is they're a bit more subtle about it and they'll at least advance social issues and throw a few scraps to the poor and middle class while they're working their agenda.

The news of the DNC chair election got overshadowed pretty quickly, and rightfully so, because 1)covering/resisting Trump is much more important right now, 2)party chair elections are barely newsworthy to begin with, and 3)there isn't going to be a huge practical difference between Perez and Ellison. But it kind of represented a bigger issue. There are two lines of thinking that could both work for the party moving forward. They could realize that progressive policies are popular with voters, and especially good at encouraging turnout, which is the key to winning elections. Or they could gamble on the theory that progressives will get behind establishment candidates this time because it's either that or Trump 2020. I remember someone was quoted after the DNC chair election specifically citing the latter as the reason they elected Perez. If they stick with that line of thinking they can't run on transferring wealth back to the bottom 99% because it will be bull**** and most people will be able to see that.
This is bull****. What was Obama supposed to do to force wealth redustribution beyond what he did? This false equivilancy is a scam.
03-25-2017 , 04:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic
Can the President of the Unites States be taken into custody by the FBI?
No, only by the Senate Sergeant-at-Arms, I think. Essentially, to bring him to book, the Congress has to impeach him, should they happen to feel like it. And both times that happened it didn't achieve much. (The House impeached but the Senate acquitted, perhaps rightly. Nixon would probably have been convicted, given the make-up of Congress at the time, but he resigned first.) The trouble is that the Constitution is the oldest working republican constitution in the world and the framers simply treated the president as an elected king. That's what he is, and if he turns out to be a crook it's a bit tricky to do anything about it.
03-25-2017 , 04:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominic
Can the President of the Unites States be taken into custody by the FBI? What exactly would happen in the world and the county if they did?
He cannot be arrested while President.

But he can be (temporally) removed as President very quickly; see Amendment 25. And subsequently arrested thereafter.
03-25-2017 , 04:52 PM
Trump went to the Trump National Golf Club or whatever its called for 4 hours of meetings, or rather "meetings"


      
m