Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

America Under pResident Biden


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Argus said:

The guy Biden appointed is a former deputy secretary of state with a long career and expertise in foreign relations even before he became Biden's foreign policy adviser years ago.

The guy Trump appointed to negotiate trade deals, solve the pandemic and negotiate with foreign leaders had no experience with anything relevant. His only apparent qualification was banging Trump's daughter when Trump didn't have a need for her.

As old forgetful Joe would say "come on, man". Why don't you really tell us that you are a liberal pretending to be a conservative? There is nothing conservative about you at all. You even and always will attack real and true conservatives like me.

Come on, man spit it out and quit the charade? :D

Edited by taxme
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is really a pot calling kettle black-game; The same people who are now laughing at Trump-supporters and calling them deluded conspiracy-theorists are themselves people who refuse to let go of the

Trumpers already forgot that Burisma didn't do anything wrong, other than be the target of a failed smear campaign against Biden's son, leading to Trump's impeachment? "Burisma" is the new "Bengh

I think this is more significant: 5 Things Trump Did for the Left That They Refused to Thank Him For The details are in the link but here's the list by item. 1. Ending the Trans-Pacific

Posted Images

On 11/24/2020 at 11:06 AM, Boges said:

I'd be down with that if I was Murikcan. 

You are already "down with it". No doubt that you are a leftist liberal who would have no problem having a Canadian copy of Beyonce singing more leftist garbage here in Canada. You probably enjoy listening to foul mouth singing morons like Beyonce. Do you have your own new version of the new Canadian anthem yet? It would probably be very multicultural and very anti-conservative Canadian? Just saying. Lol. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

1 and 5:  You’ve gone from “we never smeared anyone” to “those people deserved to be smeared”

2:  Your ignorance is not an excuse or a rebuttal 

3: Yea Republicans’ constant anti-gay rhetoric is a smear of every gay person 

4: Two points here first your disgusting and false claim that groping women is no big deal is shameful. Second you’re wrong - one of Trumps accusers said he forcefully penetrated her 

1) No, not at all. Telling the truth about someone is not smearing them. 

2) LMAO. You have no clue what you're talking about, as usual. I'm not ignorant of the Sandra Fluke story. It's just not a story. No one has heard of it. It's not even close to being on the level of the Bork/Thoms/Kavanaugh smears. You might as well compare your neighbour Je to Ted Bundy or Clifford Olson.

3) There's no "Republicans’ constant anti-gay rhetoric", you're chasing windmills kid.

4) First, your insistence that groping a woman with her clothes on is as bad as actually raping a woman with v-penetration just proves your atrocious level of understanding of life in general. Are you saying that groper Trudeau is as bad as groper Trump is as bad as groper/user Weinstein is as bad as groper/rapist Clinton is as bad as rapist/pedophile Epstein, etc....? Where do you make a distinction? Is the next level up from groper a rapist/murderer?

Second, this:

Quote

In June 2019, writer E. Jean Carroll alleged in New York magazine that Trump raped her in a department store dressing room in 1995 or 1996. Two friends of Carroll confirmed to the magazine that Carroll had previously confided in them in regard to the incident. Trump denied ever meeting Carroll, although New York had published a photo of Trump and Carroll together in 1987

isn't a credible allegation. It's just a Blasey-Ford allegation (aka farce) when you don't even know what year it happened. 

 

I almost envy you your myopic, infantile understanding of the world. Life would be so much simpler if I just believed everything that I saw on TV, and I never questioned anything or bothered to think for myself. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, taxme said:

 Trump may still keep his presidency. We can only wait and see what happens. ;)

IMO Trump has a 0.01% chance of keeping the Presidency, and even if he did the rioting and adversarial news cycle and rioting would just be worse.

America is screwed for 4 years, it's just a matter of how much damage is done. Hopefully the Demonrats don't win the Senate.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/29/2020 at 7:14 PM, WestCanMan said:

1) No, not at all. Telling the truth about someone is not smearing them. 

2) LMAO. You have no clue what you're talking about, as usual. I'm not ignorant of the Sandra Fluke story. It's just not a story. No one has heard of it. It's not even close to being on the level of the Bork/Thoms/Kavanaugh smears. You might as well compare your neighbour Je to Ted Bundy or Clifford Olson.

3) There's no "Republicans’ constant anti-gay rhetoric", you're chasing windmills kid.

4) First, your insistence that groping a woman with her clothes on is as bad as actually raping a woman with v-penetration just proves your atrocious level of understanding of life in general. Are you saying that groper Trudeau is as bad as groper Trump is as bad as groper/user Weinstein is as bad as groper/rapist Clinton is as bad as rapist/pedophile Epstein, etc....? Where do you make a distinction? Is the next level up from groper a rapist/murderer?

Second, this:

isn't a credible allegation. It's just a Blasey-Ford allegation (aka farce) when you don't even know what year it happened. 

 

I almost envy you your myopic, infantile understanding of the world. Life would be so much simpler if I just believed everything that I saw on TV, and I never questioned anything or bothered to think for myself. 

All this comes down to what you choose to believe. If you believe the allegations are true, it’s not a “smear”.  Otherwise it is. You haven’t no first hand knowledge of which allegations are true or not so just believe whichever ones are convenient for you....fine we all do that to varying degrees I suppose.
 

But what is funny about you and your ilk is the disconnect between the crybaby pearl-clutching whenever someone hurts your feelings or says something you don’t like and the vile character assassination and smears  you hurl at people. You’re not the victim here, you just play one on TV when it’s convenient.  
 

The right wing wanted to legitimize vulgarity and make taking the low road standard political practice so the libs who stay on the high ground appear like aloof elitists who are afraid to get in the trenches with you big strong “real men”. But like all chickenhawk fake tough guys you cry like little bitches whenever someone gets sick of your constant shit and gives you even teeny tiny dose of your own medicine and sends you home with a bloody nose. Sorry, not sorry. 

Edited by BeaverFever
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

All this comes down to what you choose to believe. If you believe the allegations are true, it’s not a “smear”.  Otherwise it is. You haven’t no first hand knowledge of which allegations are true or not so just believe whichever ones are convenient for you....fine we all do that to varying degrees I suppose.

1) What I choose to believe is what has at least the ring of credibility to it. 2) I'm not here defending the party that says things like: "ALL WOMEN MUST BE BELIEVED!!!!! (unless the conniving little whores are talking about Bill Clinton)"

FYI allegations which are so vague that they don't allow the accused a chance to defend themselves aren't worth considering. Dems are famous for accusations such as:

Blasey-Ford: "He almost raped me in like 1985 or '86? I have no clue where it was and I have no witnesses. I've never mentioned it to anyone in my life before. Not the police, not my family, none of my closest friends. You just have to believe me." 49 Senators reply in unison: "WE BELIEVE YOU! ALL WOMEN UST BE BELIEVED!!!!"

Mr Anonymous: "Some other anonymous dudes who were like, in the WhiteHouse, said that Trump said all soldiers are losers. That should be an international headline because there's like, so much evidence of it."

E Jean Caroll: "He raped me in about '95 or '96 at a department store changing room somewhere."

You get completely sucked in by all that ridiculous BS and then belch it like it's gospel truth.

Jaunita Broddrick's story at least has some meat to it. It has an exact location, a date, Clinton was confirmed to be in that town on that date and had nothing on his official schedule at that time of day, there are witnesses to her injuries and her story from the time of the event, etc. It's a specific, serious accusation which has 100x more merit than the stories of BlaseyFord and Jean Caroll put together.

You shouldn't be pontificating, you should be thinking critically, or listening to people who do.

Quote

But what is funny about you and your ilk is the disconnect between the crybaby pearl-clutching whenever someone hurts your feelings or says something you don’t like and  

Libspeak 101: "Don't bother 'fessing-up when you're proven to be 100% wrong, just throw down some sandbox insults and make some broad generalizations which are off-topic."

Quote

the vile character assassination and smears  you hurl at people. You’re not the victim here, you just play one on TV when it’s convenient. 

BWAAAhahahahahaha look at you, suddenly caring about 'vile accusations' lol. If you took all the vile accusations off of CNN and the Dems' speeches over the last 4 years there would have been complete silence.

Quote

The right wing wanted to legitimize vulgarity and make taking the low road standard political practice so the libs who stay on the high ground appear like aloof elitists who are afraid to get in the trenches with you big strong “real men”.

Lol. Sucked in by Michelle Obama's idiocy much? "When they go low, we go high"? 

FYI if I say "Let's keep our billions in the bank and just keep blending in with the middle class folk" that doesn't make me a billionaire. 

The Libs are not on the high ground, nor have they ever been for at least 10 years now. It's just a story for the Dems' idiotic base to regurgitate when they don't have their emotional support animals with them.

Quote

But like all chickenhawk fake tough guys you cry like little bitches whenever someone gets sick of your constant shit and gives you even teeny tiny dose of your own medicine and sends you home with a bloody nose. Sorry, not sorry. 

Wow, you're using real swear-words beave. Ooooh you must be at least 16.

FYI I'm not the one with the bloody nose, everything I said in my last post still stands unchallenged, and you still look like a fool beave. Maybe now more than ever. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

... the libs who stay on the high ground appear like aloof elitists who are afraid to get in the trenches with you big strong “real men”. 

So have some guts and make fun of veterans, victims of crime and advocate for violence against cops.  That would bring out their non-tough emotional side and moral outrage...

Oh wait.. no.. you're a moral person so you can't do that, I forgot :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

... Sorry, not sorry. 

Or you can make fun of people who live in economic backwaters, whose response to global trends like climate change response or immigration is to erect unreal conspiracies that will make everything rosy again.  You can make fun of unemployed oil workers, farmers and manufacturing employees who are down on their luck and have been fed a rosy lie that tariffs will bring back the mid 20-century glory days of North America and oil dependence.  

But, again, you aren't a cruel and hateful person who centres the universe around themselves so that won't work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

So have some guts and make fun of veterans, victims of crime and advocate for violence against cops.  That would bring out their non-tough emotional side and moral outrage...

Oh wait.. no.. you're a moral person so you can't do that, I forgot :lol:

1) Who has a record of 'making fun of veterans and victims of crime'? I'm not following....

2) I never said that the Dems or CNN advocated for violence against police, they just 1) spread inflammatory disinformation about the events that sparked the anti-police sentiments and the violence & rioting of 2014, 2015, 2016, and the middle months of 2020, 2) they glorified the rioting once it started 3)they pretended that the carnage was minimal/acceptable 4) they pretended that the violence was somehow disconnected from the BLM movement 5) they made no attempts to discourage the violence 5) they withheld evidence that hurt their narrative that 'police were acting violently & inappropriately', 6) they attempted to justify all of the violence/division/murders/property damage after it all happened.

Those things are all bad, and for sure they completed fostered an environment where attacks and murders of the police were inevitable, but at no point did they expressly tell people to attack police and I never said that they did. 

Edited by WestCanMan
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

1) What I choose to believe is what has at least the ring of credibility to it. 2) I'm not here defending the party that says things like: "ALL WOMEN MUST BE BELIEVED!!!!! (unless the conniving little whores are talking about Bill Clinton)"

FYI allegations which are so vague that they don't allow the accused a chance to defend themselves aren't worth considering. Dems are famous for accusations such as:

Blasey-Ford: "He almost raped me in like 1985 or '86? I have no clue where it was and I have no witnesses. I've never mentioned it to anyone in my life before. Not the police, not my family, none of my closest friends. You just have to believe me." 49 Senators reply in unison: "WE BELIEVE YOU! ALL WOMEN UST BE BELIEVED!!!!"

Mr Anonymous: "Some other anonymous dudes who were like, in the WhiteHouse, said that Trump said all soldiers are losers. That should be an international headline because there's like, so much evidence of it."

E Jean Caroll: "He raped me in about '95 or '96 at a department store changing room somewhere."

You get completely sucked in by all that ridiculous BS and then belch it like it's gospel truth.

Jaunita Broddrick's story at least has some meat to it. It has an exact location, a date, Clinton was confirmed to be in that town on that date and had nothing on his official schedule at that time of day, there are witnesses to her injuries and her story from the time of the event, etc. It's a specific, serious accusation which has 100x more merit than the stories of BlaseyFord and Jean Caroll put together.

You shouldn't be pontificating, you should be thinking critically, or listening to people who do.

Libspeak 101: "Don't bother 'fessing-up when you're proven to be 100% wrong, just throw down some sandbox insults and make some broad generalizations which are off-topic."

BWAAAhahahahahaha look at you, suddenly caring about 'vile accusations' lol. If you took all the vile accusations off of CNN and the Dems' speeches over the last 4 years there would have been complete silence.

Lol. Sucked in by Michelle Obama's idiocy much? "When they go low, we go high"? 

FYI if I say "Let's keep our billions in the bank and just keep blending in with the middle class folk" that doesn't make me a billionaire. 

The Libs are not on the high ground, nor have they ever been for at least 10 years now. It's just a story for the Dems' idiotic base to regurgitate when they don't have their emotional support animals with them.

Wow, you're using real swear-words beave. Ooooh you must be at least 16.

FYI I'm not the one with the bloody nose, everything I said in my last post still stands unchallenged, and you still look like a fool beave. Maybe now more than ever. 

You haven’t really rebutted anything from my original argument. You choose to  believe whatever is convenient for your ideology and choose to disbelieve anything that isn’t, crying “conspiracy!l”, that magic word that lets you pick whatever reality floats your boat at the moment. 
 

Earlier you mentioned Trudeau groped a women although he’s never been accused of that. Plenty of Trump accusers gave specific dates and times not that that alone makes a difference. You pick and choose.  Whole your peddles baseless conspiracy theories and smears the reputation of everyone who isn’t signing on to the election fraud fraud, conservative heroes like Ezra levant spend millions of their supporters dollars settling defamation/libel suits and getting fined for smears.
 

From the infamous Willie Horton smear against Dukakis to Hunter Biden and now apparently even Bill Bart and hundreds of people in between, smearing anyone and everyone is a cornerstone of Republicanism

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

From the infamous Willie Horton smear against Dukakis to Hunter Biden and now apparently even Bill Bart and hundreds of people in between, smearing anyone and everyone is a cornerstone of Republicanism

 

You are a bit short on American political history (again)....smear campaigns are very American and not exclusive to "Republicanism".

https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/tradition-dirty-politics/

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

You are a bit short on American political history (again)....smear campaigns are very American and not exclusive to "Republicanism".

https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2012/08/tradition-dirty-politics/

You are a bit short on reading comprehension (again) .... I never said it was exclusive to “Republicanism”. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

You haven’t really rebutted anything from my original argument. You choose to  believe whatever is convenient for your ideology and choose to disbelieve anything that isn’t, crying “conspiracy!l”, that magic word that lets you pick whatever reality floats your boat at the moment. 

Your original argument was just completely hypocritical and stupid and that's been proven over and over. 

IE, the GOP aren't 'the party of lying and smears' at all, and not by a long shot. The Dems have committed fake smears of epic proprtions over the last few years which were all completely bogus & groundless.

By contrast, none of the GOP claims were groundless at all. 

Hillary did delete emails after they were subpoenaed, she did store classified information on a private server, her husband had a clandestine meeting on a tarmac with the AG right at the height of the incident to talk about their grandkids (who are Bill's grandkids again?). 

The Bidens told all kinds of lies about Joe's knowledge of Burisma and had to admit that they were busted when the photo with Devon Archer came out, Hunter admitted that he only got on that extremely lucrative board and other boards because of who his father is, Joe brazenly bragged about using the clout of the Vice-Presidency to fire Ukraine's top investigator and now there are emails out indicating that Joe went to Ukraine at the behest of Hunter's business partners. It's a quid pro quo on steroids, with reliable and verified evidence from all sides.

Quote

Earlier you mentioned Trudeau groped a women although he’s never been accused of that.

OMG you live in a Libelar bubble. https://globalnews.ca/news/4318050/justin-trudeau-grope-creston-bc-reporter/

Don't you remember his comments "Women experience things differently" and "If I knew you were reporting for a national paper I wouldn't have been so forward"? https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/why-an-18-year-old-groping-allegation-against-justin-trudeau-is-not-a-metoo-moment

Trudeau IS a groper and he wasn't just 'accused', it's a known incident. By your logic of Trump ==== B Clinton, Trudeau is just as bad as a guy who forces women to have sex with him.  

Quote

Plenty of Trump accusers gave specific dates and times not that that alone makes a difference. You pick and choose.  

Dates and times of groping. Not rape. To the rest of the world there's a huge difference. Only you think that they're the same. 

Quote

conservative heroes like Ezra levant spend millions of their supporters dollars settling defamation/libel suits and getting fined for smears.

I never said that Ezra Levant is a hero, I might have cited him 3 times here in all my posts. But he reports on things that need to be reported on which our lamestream media won't touch, and how many suits against him were successful?

Quote

Whole your peddles baseless conspiracy theories and smears the reputation of everyone who isn’t signing on to the election fraud fraud

What does this even mean? Did you throw your alphabet soup down on the table and just copy what it said verbatim? (I'll admit that's probably not a bad strategy for a Lib.)

Quote

From the infamous Willie Horton smear against Dukakis to Hunter Biden and now apparently even Bill Bart and hundreds of people in between, smearing anyone and everyone is a cornerstone of Republicanism

Willie Horton was part of a group that robbed a gas station, and he stabbed the 17 yr-old kid who was working there 19 times after he had turned over the money. The kid was stuffed in a garbage can and bled to death there. 

Horton got life in prison, but got weekends out of jail because of a Dukakis release program, and Horton didn't return. Instead he [from wiki]:

Quote

 twice raped a woman after pistol-whipping, knifing, binding, and gagging her fiancé. He then stole the car belonging to the man he had assaulted. 

Horton got out because of a Dukakis plan, and Dukakis's idea was atrocious and moronic. 

Drawing attention to the fact that Dukakis is just a total idiot with horrible ideas wasn't a smear, it was a public service announcement. He's supposed to lead an entire country, and no one wants the biggest idiot in the country as their leader unless they're just as dumb as he is. 

The reason that the Horton photo was such a big deal is because the Demonrats knew that photo had sunk their battleship, so they cried "RACISM!!!!!". It's their plan A and their Plan B, they don't even have any other plans and they don't need any other plans because their voters are complete and total idiots.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

You are a bit short on reading comprehension (again) .... I never said it was exclusive to “Republicanism”. 

Dude you don't even know what a smear is.

If you're running for re-election against Hitler and you show some photos of his concentration camps that's not a smear. It's important for people to know the truth [that's a whole different story and I'm not going to explain that to you in this thread].

If you're attacking Donald Trump and you show pictures of kids in cages from when Obama was POTUS, and blame it on Trump, that's a smear. It's also a smear when you act like Trump invented the idea and that he was the only one to ever do it. Smear, smear, smear. It's the demonrat way. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Dude you don't even know what a smear is.

If you're running for re-election against Hitler and you show some photos of his concentration camps that's not a smear. It's important for people to know the truth [that's a whole different story and I'm not going to explain that to you in this thread].

If you're attacking Donald Trump and you show pictures of kids in cages from when Obama was POTUS, and blame it on Trump, that's a smear. It's also a smear when you act like Trump invented the idea and that he was the only one to ever do it. Smear, smear, smear. It's the demonrat way. 

 

No the smear is your false claim that Trump’s  “zero tolerance” policy of systematically separating kids from parents started with Obama. 
 

The Obama administration did not have a policy to deliberately separate children from their parents. While in custody, men and teenage boys were separated from women and children for obvious safety reasons. But Trump’s policy which is well documented as the brain child of Stephen Miller was to snatch kids including infants and toddlers from the arms of their parents and keep them separated and incommunicado for months at a time as a deterrent. And they even tried defending that on TV as a justified deterrent but it didn’t work with the public so they tried a few different versions of their story of which “Obama did it” is only one lie. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

No the smear is your false claim that Trump’s  “zero tolerance” policy of systematically separating kids from parents started with Obama. 

Dude you're just busted for lying again, as usual. No one said anything about 'zero tolerance' under Obama or especially not why that policy started. Don't forget that Obama's administration put children back into the custody of human traffickers, so leaving kids with the people who are pretending to be their family members isn't always the best option.

FYI the situation at the border is massive and extremely difficult/expensive but instead of trying to fix it the Dems just want to politicize it and keep the problem around. 

And back to the heart of the issue, I saw how the story was presented, and I know what the people who only get their opinions spoon-fed to them from CNN understand this topic, and it was a smear campaign just like I said.

The Dems were also saying and doing everything that they could (promoting sanctuary cities and the abolition of ice, etc) to ensure waves of immigrants came to the US and overran the system during Trump's Presidency. The fact that America was suddenly enjoying their best economy ever helped increase the flood of immigrants.

Another smear on the Trump campaign was "Walls are racist!" lol. "Walls don't work. Walls are too expensive. Helicopters and police patrols and dogs and etc will be much cheaper and more effective" lol. The demmies didn't want walls, which means that the crisis at the border will always involve massive amounts of people on American soil for the gov't to sort out and process.

Dude the Demonrats smear 24/7. Their smears don't even have to make sense, or have a shred of evidence for their idiot followers to believe them. They just have to be angry and divisive and their drones are on it like white on rice. 

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

Don't forget that Obama's administration put children back into the custody of human traffickers, so leaving kids with the people who are pretending to be their family members isn't always the best option.

No “the Obama administration” didn’t do that. You’re trying to make it sound like it was Obama’s policy to place oids with trafficking rings and equate it with Trumps policy to deliberately separate kids from their parents. There was 1 situation involving a specific farm in Ohio that “the Obama administration” discovered and prosecuted. And none of those kids were illegal immigrants crossing  the border with adults claiming to be their parents. These were kids who entered the US alone and the farmer who was a legal resident would then falsely claim to be a relative who would sponsor them for resettlement.  Americas shitty chronically underfunded analog bureaucracy couldn’t keep track at first but eventually they caught on and prosecuted. 
 

Meanwhile Stephen Miller’s plan to intentionally traumatize children for months at a time as deterrent is well documented and I’m pretty sure there’s a special place in hell already reserved for him. 
 

And when the story first broke you could flip from channel to channel and see a different Trump spokesperson telling a different version

1) Fake news there are no lids in cages

2)Yea there are kids in cages, Trump is shocked and disgusted, Obama’s put them there and Trump is trying to somehow get them out

3) Damn right there are kids in cages this is the only way Trump can keep us safe from the horde of illegals!

 

Were all used to Republicans changing their story and lies over time but this is the first time Republicans have told multiple conflicting stories and lies in real time

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Michael Flynn's Call for 'Martial Law' Comes Amid Violent Threats Over Trump Election Defeat

The advert cited President Abraham Lincoln's suspension of Habeas Corpus during the Civil War as precedent, adding: "Then, as now, a President with courage and determination was needed to preserve the Union."

WTPC claimed the "threat to our United States by the international and domestic socialist/communist left is much more serious than anything Lincoln or our nation has faced in its history—including the civil war."

https://www.newsweek.com/michael-flynn-call-martial-law-comes-amid-violent-threats-trump-election-defeat-1551769

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, betsy said:

 

Michael Flynn's Call for 'Martial Law' Comes Amid Violent Threats Over Trump Election Defeat

The advert cited President Abraham Lincoln's suspension of Habeas Corpus during the Civil War as precedent, adding: "Then, as now, a President with courage and determination was needed to preserve the Union."

WTPC claimed the "threat to our United States by the international and domestic socialist/communist left is much more serious than anything Lincoln or our nation has faced in its history—including the civil war."

https://www.newsweek.com/michael-flynn-call-martial-law-comes-amid-violent-threats-trump-election-defeat-1551769

 

 

Garde SSWNUT Stainless Steel Wingnut

Edited by bcsapper
Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh, more like agent provocateur, if anything.

It’s also quite clear we are in the age of reality politics. Even our public protests and the ensuing riots are ‘reality’. IE a well-planned spectacle, for your entertainment...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...