Jump to content

Donald Trump 2019

Francisco 2.0

By Francisco 2.0
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Enfield

Enfield 109

Posted
Posted

If we want to broaden the impact of dirt, fake dirt, to influence an election, just look at what we do here in America. 

Dan Rather takes total made up bullshit documents and legitimizes them to the entire country about a candidates military record. He has an absolute agenda in publishing it. He gets no jail time, no congressional inquiry, nothing. 

People like him are just as dangerous, if not more so, than the Russians are influencing an election.

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 23
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 48.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    2695

  • 4th&Five

    1699

  • jimmyjazz

    1286

  • atomheartbevo

    1219

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

GHOSTUSER
GHOSTUSER

I fucking love this President. My 2 faves during my lifetime are Trump and Nixon. They share a lot of similarities and were besieged by the same groups of assholes. No I’m not trolling. Y’all, the lef

Francisco 2.0
Francisco 2.0
Brisketexan
Brisketexan

This.....is magnificent. The "younger generation" is going to have to work double-time to fund YOUR Social Security, which YOUR generation of elected officials raided the fuck out of.  And which,

Posted Images

JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Enfield said:

I agree. The precedence is to use it convince a court to allow your administration to surveil your opponents campaign. He should take full advantage of that just like Obama administrators did. 

As well, he should do just like what was done to him. Provide the dirt to the FBI but also get it out in the press like the Steele Dossier was.  

 

 

Someone got the talking points memo. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
Just now, Enfield said:

If we want to broaden the impact of dirt, fake dirt, to influence an election, just look at what we do here in America. 

Dan Rather takes total made up bullshit documents and legitimizes them to the entire country about a candidates military record. He has an absolute agenda in publishing it. He gets no jail time, no congressional inquiry, nothing. 

People like him are just as dangerous, if not more so, than the Russians are influencing an election.

But Rather!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 17055

Posted
Posted
Way too much risk in this instance.  

You project misdeeds by your own party onto others. There is indisputable massive evidence of the Presidents failings, corruption and graft. There is no such thing for Hillary. I know you really wish it was so, but you have been brainwashed into believing in the character assassination of Hillary and Bill and really anyone Fox and Rush want to demonize.

You should be smart enough to look into it yourself, but it is really so much more blissful to exist in a fog of ignorance and not exercise one’s brain.



Link to comment
Share on other sites
RomaVicta

RomaVicta 30121

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Enfield said:

If we want to broaden the impact of dirt, fake dirt, to influence an election, just look at what we do here in America. 

Dan Rather takes total made up bullshit documents and legitimizes them to the entire country about a candidates military record. He has an absolute agenda in publishing it. He gets no jail time, no congressional inquiry, nothing. 

People like him are just as dangerous, if not more so, than the Russians are influencing an election.

Negged for lying. The story had substantial evidence other than the documents including witnesses. The White House never denied the truth of the story. There is absolutely no evidence that Rather acted in bad faith. He admits he should have been more thorough about the provenance of the documents you name. Bush did dodge service.

  • Like 3
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105626

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
If we want to broaden the impact of dirt, fake dirt, to influence an election, just look at what we do here in America. 
Dan Rather takes total made up bullshit documents and legitimizes them to the entire country about a candidates military record. He has an absolute agenda in publishing it. He gets no jail time, no congressional inquiry, nothing. 
People like him are just as dangerous, if not more so, than the Russians are influencing an election.

In the wake of that, Dan Rather’s career effectively ended.

In the wake of spewing lies like an open spigot, including being the leader of the birther movement...you decided to reward Donald Trump with the presidency.

You don’t want to play this game.
  • Like 16
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 17055

Posted
Posted
But they mostly did fight. Close to 16 million American men served during WW2 out of a total of 65 million men altogether.  Of that 65 million, there were probably only 20 million that were 18 to 30 years old.  We have never even come close to that participation rate for other wars. 
For comparison, 8.7 million out of 100 million total men served during Vietnam

Vietnam didn’t attack us and our allies nor were they threatening world domination.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Enfield

Enfield 109

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Trump is told? So this would all be based on his word? That and a claim by the Russians?

That's as close to a groundless accusation as you can get. Not cool with it.

Are you saying the Steele Dossier has grounds to stand on? Please share what credibility a paid for opposition research file has, please.

  • Fuck You 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Enfield said:

Ask Christopher Steele what the going rate is.

Steele is a contract investigator for hire.  Steele was hired by DC based Fusion GPS corp as one of many different sources forming oppo research.  Jeb Bush campaign hired Fusion GPS first, and Clinton campaign hired them after Jeb dropped out of the primaries.  No R or D corresponded with Steele or had any idea what Steele knew as Steele did his work that led to the Dossier being forwarded to law enforcement.  

And you don't care.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eskimohorn

Eskimohorn 5657

Posted
Posted
My grandfather Pacific Theater vet died a few years ago.  A few weeks ago, I may have told my father that his father would be rolling over in his grave at his blind support of Trump.  Fun conversation.  


I told you to speak your mind Jack, but Jesus!
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Enfield

Enfield 109

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Negged for lying. The story had substantial evidence other than the documents including witnesses. The White House never denied the truth of the story. There is absolutely no evidence that Rather acted in bad faith. He admits he should have been more thorough about the provenance of the documents you name. Bush did dodge service.

Sure.. no bad faith here. Book deal in return for dirt? Sure! No problem. We will send over a book guarantee ASAP!! While we get this going let me share with the campaign that is going to benefit so they can get ready to maximize!!!

 

Freelance journalist Michael Smith had emailed Mapes, asking, "What if there was a person who might have some information that could possibly change the momentum of an election but we needed to get an ASAP book deal to help get us the information?" Mapes replied, "that looks good, hypothetically speaking of course."[130] The Thornburgh–Boccardi report found that Mapes' contact with Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart was "highly inappropriate", and that it "crossed the line as, at a minimum, it gave the appearance of a political bias and could have been perceived as a news organizations' assisting a campaign as opposed to reporting on a story";[114] however, the Panel did not "find a basis to accuse those who investigated, produced, vetted or aired the Segment of having a political bias".[131] In a later interview with The Washington Post, when asked about the issue of political bias, review panel member Louis Boccardi said "bias is a hard thing to prove".[132] The panel concluded that the problems occurred "primarily because of a rush to air that overwhelmed the proper application of the CBS News Standards"

  • Fuck You 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Enfield

Enfield 109

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Steele is a contract investigator for hire.  Steele was hired by DC based Fusion GPS corp as one of many different sources forming oppo research.  Jeb Bush campaign hired Fusion GPS first, and Clinton campaign hired them after Jeb dropped out of the primaries.  No R or D corresponded with Steele or had any idea what Steele knew as Steele did his work that led to the Dossier being forwarded to law enforcement.  

And you don't care.  

So you don’t really care that Russia is influencing our elections? You only care about how they do it? Ok.

  • Fuck You 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Enfield

Enfield 109

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Enfield, you seem appalled by coziness between a media outlet and a campaign. I share your belief. Thus, I presume that you think that Fox News is hot garbage. Right?

By itself, sure. As it relates to msNBC, CNN, Etc.....  they are just countering the bias from the other side.

  • Fuck You 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuingToGetAMessageBoard?

SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861

Posted
Posted

 

1 minute ago, Enfield said:

So you don’t really care that Russia is influencing our elections? You only care about how they do it? Ok.

My guess is you are smart enough to tell the difference between purposefully taking information the Russian government is feeding us so that we will act in a way that serves the benefit of the Russian government, and hiring a professional English spy to look into information that Russia does not want us to know, and reporting it.

 

I guessed wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuingToGetAMessageBoard?

SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Enfield said:

By itself, sure. As it relates to msNBC, CNN, Etc.....  they are just countering the bias from the other side.

we've heard all the workshopped lines here.  we only lie because the other side lies.  we only suppress votes because the other side cheats at voting.  we only ignore all evidence because the other side makes up evidence.

it's all very cool and very legal, and you can rest assured your clones have already put the talking points out 100 times

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fozzz

Fozzz 152

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Nivek said:


You project misdeeds by your own party onto others. There is indisputable massive evidence of the Presidents failings, corruption and graft. There is no such thing for Hillary. I know you really wish it was so, but you have been brainwashed into believing in the character assassination of Hillary and Bill and really anyone Fox and Rush want to demonize.

You should be smart enough to look into it yourself, but it is really so much more blissful to exist in a fog of ignorance and not exercise one’s brain.


 

What do you suppose is the purpose of the Clinton foundation?  Do you think the millions the KSA and Qatar were pumping into it was out of the kindness of their hearts?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fozzz

Fozzz 152

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

No, but the Soviet Union was and Vietnam was really a proxy war. 

It was a war of imperial domination orchestrated by the US, period.  The Vietnamese wanted elections and we would not allow that to happen time and time again because we knew our puppet would lose.  

Edited by Fozzz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmokeyTheBear

SmokeyTheBear 5569

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

What do you suppose is the purpose of the Clinton foundation?  Do you think the millions the KSA and Qatar were pumping into it was out of the kindness of their hearts?  

Yep, you are right. And it was all done legally. What has Trump done to change these frameworks to make elections more transparent? What has he done to limit Russia and other bad actors influencing our democracy? Whats that.....Nothing? You mean he prefers it this way and is actually looking to make it harder to see what is going on in elections? 

So what is your point?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SmokeyTheBear

SmokeyTheBear 5569

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Fozzz said:

Liberalism in a nutshell. 

Lol where did I write that I agreed with it? If you continued reading, you could easily assume that I don't agree with it and think Trump should do something to tear down those mechanisms. Instead, we have his foot soldiers like yourself, defending his every action. Up to and including his none-action. I believe that would be conservatism in a nutshell. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29201

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Enfield said:

By itself, sure. As it relates to msNBC, CNN, Etc.....  they are just countering the bias from the other side.

"but they did it first!" is becoming a little too repetitive as an overall defense from the right.

take responsibility for your actions.  stop pointing fingers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29201

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Fozzz said:

Two more tankers on fire in the Gulf of Oman and yet this silly shit is gonna take precedence in the news today, right?

fozzz, honestly, the tankers are a big story.  but if you want them to "take precedence in the news" then you (the white house) may want to consider holding a press briefing, a pentagon briefing, or any of the other things that used to happen all the time, but under this administration - seem to never ever happen (i don't have the numbers, but they are staggering).

best way to control the news cycle is to set the narrative.  pompeo just made a statement, and i saw it live on cnn.  then i saw a clip of it right after on cnn, while an analyst gave his opinion.  if the press secretary actually ever briefed the press, they would play that, and comment on it.  in fact, you'd probably see it repeated all day. 

but they don't.  and therefore, you let the press decide what is and isn't worthy of covering.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29201

Posted
Posted

can we take a step back real quick and enjoy the irony of this trump interview?

this is a man who lies constantly.  he really just can't help himself.  but it seems in this instance, that he's telling the truth about how he would behave (or how he thinks it's ok to behave).  the one time he decides to break it down and be completely candid, and he advocates breaking federal campaign law and contradicts his own fbi director.

guy spends so much time telling lies he can't tell the difference anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 17055

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

What do you suppose is the purpose of the Clinton foundation?  Do you think the millions the KSA and Qatar were pumping into it was out of the kindness of their hearts?  

The Clinton Foundation, so much different from the  George Bush Foundation, George W. Bush Foundation, The Carter Center, The Reagan Foundation, The Nixon Foundation, The Obama Foundation.... are you seeing a pattern here?  Its about Hillary illegally funneling money!  Those rascally Clintons, won't someone investigate them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, henrygandorf said:

can we take a step back real quick and enjoy the irony of this trump interview?

this is a man who lies constantly.  he really just can't help himself.  but it seems in this instance, that he's telling the truth about how he would behave (or how he thinks it's ok to behave).  the one time he decides to break it down and be completely candid, and he advocates breaking federal campaign law and contradicts his own fbi director.

guy spends so much time telling lies he can't tell the difference anymore.

He's always had this pattern of saying "I didn't do it, but I would do it, and that would be totally fine if I did because everyone does it."  That way he gets to deny while defending what he is denying.  And he mainstreams the idea that it would be OK to do, because he knows the GOP will cover for him, as they are doing right now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nivek

Nivek 17055

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, bolverk said:

In their defense, half the dads of that generation were quietly suffering from PTSD because you didn't talk about such things back then. Lots of dads probably had their evening cocktail after work and just wanted to be left the fuck alone.

Hmm, more things change...

Great, so our next generation of PTSD parents is going to raise Boomers 2: Electric Fuck You with a shittier soundtrack.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 85821

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

He's always had this pattern of saying "I didn't do it, but I would do it, and that would be totally fine if I did because everyone does it."  That way he gets to deny while defending what he is denying.  And he mainstreams the idea that it would be OK to do, because he knows the GOP will cover for him, as they are doing right now. 

I didn't do it.

But if I did do it, it's not illegal.

But if it is illegal, it's okay, everyone does it.

And even if no would do it, I'm the President, I can do what I want. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

can we take a step back real quick and enjoy the irony of this trump interview?

this is a man who lies constantly.  he really just can't help himself.  but it seems in this instance, that he's telling the truth about how he would behave (or how he thinks it's ok to behave).  the one time he decides to break it down and be completely candid, and he advocates breaking federal campaign law and contradicts his own fbi director.

guy spends so much time telling lies he can't tell the difference anymore.

It’s a power play.  It’s the “yeah, I did it, so what?” moment.   It’s the normalization of overt corruption.  

It is the Mussolini move:

“Mussolini, at first taken aback by his loss of public favour, decided to take the offensive. On Jan. 3, 1925, in a speech to the Chamber of Deputies, he took full responsibility for the murder as head of the Fascist party (although whether he gave a direct order for the murder remains uncertain) and dared his critics to prosecute him for the crime, a challenge that never was made since they were too weak to take it up.”

https://www.britannica.com/event/Matteotti-Crisis

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...