Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1809:53 AM
"Gunowners are our own worst enemies, by far. We are really killing it lately."
Tru dat. I've been thinking lately that if gun enthusiasts and 2nd A supporters don't open up to some reasonable restrictions, then we're gonna' get handed a bunch of unreasonable restrictions that don't move us any or much closer to the desired future outcome of fewer firearm fatalities.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1810:21 AM
1. kids die in a school 2. send thoughts and prayers 3. respond to calls to fix the problem by calling the kids "snowflakes", and pithy comments about banning spoons, cars, and apparently bridges now, too 4. offer back that the answer is more guns 5. offend millions of voters with this excellent plan
Yes...for the seemingly few of us gunowners who aren't [Bleeeeep!] imbeciles, it would really be helpful if the rest would just shut up.
You're making it worse, and though you will blame everyone else when we lose rights, it will be your fault. Thanks no thanks.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1811:30 AM
Originally Posted By: Todd
1. kids die in a school 2. send thoughts and prayers 3. respond to calls to fix the problem by calling the kids "snowflakes", and pithy comments about banning spoons, cars, and apparently bridges now, too 4. offer back that the answer is more guns 5. offend millions of voters with this excellent plan
Yes...for the seemingly few of us gunowners who aren't [Bleeeeep!] imbeciles, it would really be helpful if the rest would just shut up.
You're making it worse, and though you will blame everyone else when we lose rights, it will be your fault. Thanks no thanks.
Fish on...
Todd
It pains me to say this, toff is right.
Holy mother of dumshit is my FB news feed now.
I hate most everyone who posts political [Bleeeeep!] these days.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1811:34 AM
I could really care less what you think. I say that with all the lack of give a chit I can muster.
How many kids do you have...............None. Do you make a living off the failing legal system......Yup. Do you believe adding more laws to the books is the answer.......Yup. Do you support the NRA...........Nope.
Harden our schools and the cowards will march right on by to a softer target.
Your opinion and one vote doesn't fix squat.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1811:52 AM
Originally Posted By: WDFW X 1 = 0
Harden our schools and the cowards will march right on by to a softer target
Just kick that can down the road.
I can’t see much of a difference between people being shot at school and people being shot at the mall or some other “softer target.” I can see that nobody has ever accused 2many of thinking too hard.
2many x 1 = 0 doesn’t care what people here think but keeps posting here and even wants you to tell him what his boat is worth, he doesn’t care what you think though. Really he doesn’t, seriously.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1812:11 PM
he said he didnt care what Todd thinks, not "people here"...
Todd may be right....
but in the end, the only people that will be coming for your gun rights, will be Democrats....
Todd, do you think all of those millions of kids that will be voting soon, will vote against gun rights?
how many people do you think didnt vote, that could have the last election? im sure they are going to vote when need be...
the problem with Democrats, is that they will destroy America just to spite Trump, to get him back like the bad little guy he is....
wanna know why people keep getting the boot from the White House? because they have a billionaire as their boss, and they are under performing at their jobs, so they are being replaced, remember, some of these people were already in the mix before he became president, its not like hes had much time to work with anyone.... billionaires dont become billionaires by letting schmucks suck at doing what they are supposed to be doing....
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1812:17 PM
They're getting booted because Trump is somehow surprised that he hired a bunch of his friends, and they turned out to be conmen and hucksters, just like him...but, as usual, that has nothing to do with this topic.
You guys just keep yelling into the echo chamber, and remember to blame Obama when our gun rights get further restricted.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1812:24 PM
Obama and his cronies are the most irresponsible people with firearms access on the planet...
i already posted the video showing they allowed 500k criminals to be deleted from the NICS check system because they "couldnt find them"....
then, there was Fast and Furious... what a cluster fvck that was... they used the guns to shoot down a Mexican helicopter, and a .50 cal rifle, which was one of the guns that was involved in FaF, was found in El Chapo's home in Mexico....
that same stupid mentality, is the same as when they dumped crack into the black neighborhoods in California, yet still had a "war on drugs"... solid work guys... solid work....
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1812:32 PM
Originally Posted By: Evo
how many people do you think didnt vote, that could have the last election?
25 million of the 50 million kids from the age of 18-26 did NOT vote in either the 2012 or the 2016 election.
If all those kids, who walked out of school on Wednesday and say that they want a change in gun laws, get registered and vote in 2020, I'd be one really scared Republican in 2020.
(I am NEITHER a Republican or a Democrat, by the way)
Unfortunately, my guess is that 25 million 18-26 year olds will still NOTE vote in the 2020 election and nothing will really change.
But hey, at least the kids got out of school for a bit on Wednesday, including my two kids who would have gone shooting with Dad in a heartbeat if I had offered to take them.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1801:16 PM
Originally Posted By: parker
Originally Posted By: Evo
how many people do you think didnt vote, that could have the last election?
25 million of the 50 million kids from the age of 18-26 did NOT vote in either the 2012 or the 2016 election.
If all those kids, who walked out of school on Wednesday and say that they want a change in gun laws, get registered and vote in 2020, I'd be one really scared Republican in 2020.
(I am NEITHER a Republican or a Democrat, by the way)
Unfortunately, my guess is that 25 million 18-26 year olds will still NOTE vote in the 2020 election and nothing will really change.
But hey, at least the kids got out of school for a bit on Wednesday, including my two kids who would have gone shooting with Dad in a heartbeat if I had offered to take them.
There may be some irony there.....
i didnt vote either, didnt care to... im talking about those people as well....
whenever someone that thinks they know about firearms, starts talking about how dangerous they are, and this and that, this that and that, i ask them 1 simple question....
What Is the Airspeed Velocity of an Unladen Swallow?
only someone with quick wit, and experience around firearms will know or even attempt to answer that question....
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1801:18 PM
Originally Posted By: Steelspanker
Originally Posted By: Evo
... but in the end, the only people that will be coming for your gun rights, will be Democrats....
Your partisan comments today are so full of stupid that I will only reply with a couple facts you won't hear in your fox news idiot bubble.
The overwhelming majority of Americans, including lots of gun owners and GOPers, want stricter gun control laws. But the NRA-fearing dickheads in congress defy their wishes.
you mean like the woman running for congress that cut the barrel off an AR-15? those type of people?
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1801:47 PM
Originally Posted By: Evo
What Is the Airspeed Velocity of an Unladen Swallow?
only someone with quick wit, and experience will know or even attempt to answer that question....
Although a definitive answer would of course require further measurements, published species-wide averages of wing length and body mass, initial Strouhal estimates based on those averages and cross-species comparisons, the Lund wind tunnel study of birds flying at a range of speeds, and revised Strouhal numbers based on that study all lead me to estimate that the average cruising airspeed velocity of an unladen European or African Swallow is roughly 11 meters per second, or 24 miles an hour.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1801:56 PM
Originally Posted By: parker
Originally Posted By: Evo
What Is the Airspeed Velocity of an Unladen Swallow?
only someone with quick wit, and experience will know or even attempt to answer that question....
Although a definitive answer would of course require further measurements, published species-wide averages of wing length and body mass, initial Strouhal estimates based on those averages and cross-species comparisons, the Lund wind tunnel study of birds flying at a range of speeds, and revised Strouhal numbers based on that study all lead me to estimate that the average cruising airspeed velocity of an unladen European or African Swallow is roughly 11 meters per second, or 24 miles an hour.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1801:57 PM
Originally Posted By: Hankster
The Dems will have to put a muffler on him....
Hank would rather put his muffler IN him.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1801:59 PM
Originally Posted By: Anonymous
i didnt vote either
I’ll generally listen to people whine about politicians, until they say that.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1802:16 PM
Originally Posted By: parker
Originally Posted By: Evo
What Is the Airspeed Velocity of an Unladen Swallow?
only someone with quick wit, and experience will know or even attempt to answer that question....
Although a definitive answer would of course require further measurements, published species-wide averages of wing length and body mass, initial Strouhal estimates based on those averages and cross-species comparisons, the Lund wind tunnel study of birds flying at a range of speeds, and revised Strouhal numbers based on that study all lead me to estimate that the average cruising airspeed velocity of an unladen European or African Swallow is roughly 11 meters per second, or 24 miles an hour.
that is the funniest, and most honest, and correct response anyone has given thus far... thanks Parker... (i used to love watching those movies growing up, maybe ill get a couple again)...
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/16/1807:51 PM
Originally Posted By: parker
Originally Posted By: Evo
how many people do you think didnt vote, that could have the last election?
25 million of the 50 million kids from the age of 18-26 did NOT vote in either the 2012 or the 2016 election.
If all those kids, who walked out of school on Wednesday and say that they want a change in gun laws, get registered and vote in 2020, I'd be one really scared Republican in 2020.
(I am NEITHER a Republican or a Democrat, by the way)
Unfortunately, my guess is that 25 million 18-26 year olds will still NOTE vote in the 2020 election and nothing will really change.
But hey, at least the kids got out of school for a bit on Wednesday, including my two kids who would have gone shooting with Dad in a heartbeat if I had offered to take them.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/23/1806:11 PM
What's fvcking awesome about this whole thing, is that Mr David Hogg, who has been the head of this rat movement, trying to get rid of the second amendment, is now pissed off that the principal, and police, have said after spring break, all student's must wear ID, and use clear backpacks... Says it's violating his constitutional rights as a American citizen...
Just when I think we've reached "peak retarded", some idiots go out and find a taller peak. The market for "retarded" show no signs of slowing down. BUY! BUY! BUY!
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/26/1807:56 AM
I'm going to step into Rich G territory for a second..
Watching the little bull dyke and the pig, those kids seem to be trained speakers. When they're in interviews they act like they've done it before and are articulate. The other little tide pod eaters that went to school with them not so much..
Probably all surrounding circumstantial evidence, its a bit too coincidental.
1. The pigs dad is a retired FBI agent, Coincidentally in Washington DC we have a gutting of the FBI top leadership going on. The FBI which ignored all of the complaints about the shooter. (along with the school everything else)
2. You have a liberal pro gun control sheriff, who has his deputies stand outside while this little fuk shoots up the school instead of engaging the shooter.
3. Bloomberg is behind all of the rallies and is helping the pig and the dyke, which are coincidentally going full on attack in republicans just prior to the mid terms. Watch that little shits speach, it's all political.
It doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to think that someone put this together for the "greater good".
Look at the Las Vegas shooting, there are so many pieces of the puzzle missing there it's scary. Coincidentally though, it happened when the hearing protection act was gaining ground.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/26/1809:45 AM
Originally Posted By: willametteriveroutlaw
I'm going to step into Rich G territory for a second..
Watching the little bull dyke and the pig, those kids seem to be trained speakers. When they're in interviews they act like they've done it before and are articulate. The other little tide pod eaters that went to school with them not so much..
Probably all surrounding circumstantial evidence, its a bit too coincidental.
1. The pigs dad is a retired FBI agent, Coincidentally in Washington DC we have a gutting of the FBI top leadership going on. The FBI which ignored all of the complaints about the shooter. (along with the school everything else)
2. You have a liberal pro gun control sheriff, who has his deputies stand outside while this little fuk shoots up the school instead of engaging the shooter.
3. Bloomberg is behind all of the rallies and is helping the pig and the dyke, which are coincidentally going full on attack in republicans just prior to the mid terms. Watch that little shits speach, it's all political.
It doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to think that someone put this together for the "greater good".
Look at the Las Vegas shooting, there are so many pieces of the puzzle missing there it's scary. Coincidentally though, it happened when the hearing protection act was gaining ground.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/26/1812:05 PM
Originally Posted By: Evo
1 its not the rifle, its the round, and 2, it actually doesnt cause that much damage, thank the Geneva convention for that...
No one is shooting mil-spec, Gen(x) ammo. They are buying the cheapest, or most local crap they can find in their local stores.
I'd argue that this off-the-shelf ammo yaws like a MoFo, and if you were to believe what is in this Wiki article about the round itself, are probably doing CONSIDERABLE damage to a human body shot at a close range.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5.56%C3%9745mm_NATO
Look at some of the survivors of the Las Vegas shooting - the 5.56 bullets ripped them apart and they were not hit in a vital area. Those boolits farked them up, caused SEVERE damage that was only survivable due to modern ER Medice and did not kill them.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/26/1812:52 PM
I thought the idea behind the 5.56 was to cause injury on the battlefield, as it takes 4 guys to haul out one injured soldier, thus taking 5 people out of the fight.
Kill a guy on the battlefield and you don't need to do anything to them, aside from removing the body after the fight. The 4 other guys that would be needed to remove an injured soldier are left to fight.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/26/1801:33 PM
Originally Posted By: parker
I thought the idea behind the 5.56 was to cause injury on the battlefield, as it takes 4 guys to haul out one injured soldier, thus taking 5 people out of the fight.
Kill a guy on the battlefield and you don't need to do anything to them, aside from removing the body after the fight. The 4 other guys that would be needed to remove an injured soldier are left to fight.
Logistics wins wars.
that, and all the people that have to take care of them, need to be paid... especially doctors and nurses and whatnot...
you could destroy a government that doesnt have alot of money, by making them spend all of their money on wounded soldiers, instead of new weapons...
its an interesting way to think about it if its the case... which it seems to be....
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/26/1801:36 PM
you also cant hunt with FMJ ammo, precisely why that article stated... it doesnt cause enough damage to kill, because the bullet doesnt expand like a HP or lead nosed bullet...
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/26/1802:21 PM
the muzzle energy on a .223/5.56 is around 1300 pounds max, the .308 is 2600, hell, even the .22-250 is only 1700 max, which is also why you cant hunt large game with it...
its not effective enough...
and as i said, its not the gun doing the damage, its the round, its fired from a barrel, that happens to be attached to a gun...
a .308 will cause far more damage than a .223 ever will, but that is because of speed and weight, not just speed....
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/26/1805:57 PM
Evo wins the Dark Side again!!! But dont worry losers because its kinda like that old special olympics joke, “What is better than wininning the silver medal in the special olympics?” Evo wins gold in the special olympics every time but at least we arent retarded.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/26/1808:28 PM
Apply today and use the PP Darkside forum as a resume. SF
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/26/1809:47 PM
Sometimes when I'm really stressed out,or depressed ,or pissed off,and I feel like my life is a sh!t show,I come read the dark side,and I see how normal and blessed I truly am.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/27/1807:37 AM
Originally Posted By: Steelspanker
Originally Posted By: Banned User
Tin Foil Dumbfucks ........
No shiit. Amazing how some fools' gun rights biases override any common sense.
willamette dude: "those kids seem to be trained speakers."
Lame! A lot of high schools have Speech classes. They trained us how to give speeches. Pay attention next time you try to graduate from high school.
Watch those 2 versus the rest of the little tide pod eaters when they're being interviewed. It's night and day in presentation, preparation, and rehearsed talking points.
It just came out today that Omar Mateens dad was a FBI informant, seems to be a lot of ties to the fbi and mass shooters using AR15s these days..
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/27/1810:29 AM
Originally Posted By: willametteriveroutlaw
Originally Posted By: Steelspanker
Originally Posted By: Banned User
Tin Foil Dumbfucks ........
No shiit. Amazing how some fools' gun rights biases override any common sense.
willamette dude: "those kids seem to be trained speakers."
Lame! A lot of high schools have Speech classes. They trained us how to give speeches. Pay attention next time you try to graduate from high school.
Watch those 2 versus the rest of the little tide pod eaters when they're being interviewed. It's night and day in presentation, preparation, and rehearsed talking points.
It just came out today that Omar Mateens dad was a FBI informant, seems to be a lot of ties to the fbi and mass shooters using AR15s these days..
It's almost as if some kids are better public speakers than others.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/27/1811:11 AM
I continue to be impressed by gunowners' ability to continually walk around clown stomping their own dicks, and then wondering why they get treated like idiots who go around stomping on their own dicks.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/27/1811:42 AM
its funny when people think that false flag stuff doesnt, didnt, or never happened... like no one has ever thought of it before, ever said "hey, lets do this to get this result"....
Operation Northwoods was a proposed false flag operation against the Cuban government that originated within the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) of the United States government in 1962. The proposals called for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) or other U.S. government operatives to commit acts of terrorism against American civilians and military targets, blaming it on the Cuban government, and using it to justify a war against Cuba. The plans detailed in the document included the possible assassination of Cuban émigrés, sinking boats of Cuban refugees on the high seas, hijacking planes, blowing up a U.S. ship, and orchestrating violent terrorism in U.S. cities.[2] The proposals were rejected by the Kennedy administration.[3]
At the time of the proposal, communists led by Fidel Castro had recently taken power in Cuba. The operation proposed creating public support for a war against Cuba by blaming it for terrorist acts that would actually be perpetrated by the U.S. Government.[4] To this end, Operation Northwoods proposals recommended hijackings and bombings followed by the introduction of phony evidence that would implicate the Cuban government. It stated:
The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere.
Several other proposals were included within Operation Northwoods, including real or simulated actions against various U.S. military and civilian targets. The operation recommended developing a "Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington".
The plan was drafted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, signed by Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer and sent to the Secretary of Defense. Although part of the U.S. government's anti-communist Cuban Project, Operation Northwoods was never officially accepted; it was authorized by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but then rejected by President John F. Kennedy. According to currently released documentation, none of the operations became active under the auspices of the Operation Northwoods proposals.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/27/1811:54 AM
the problem people have with Hogg and the other hogwash, is when he says sh!t like this....
seen it yet?
say it with him...
'On the day of the shooting, i grabbed my camera, i got on my bike, and rode as fast as i could 3 miles from my house to the school, to get as much video, and get as much interviews as i could, cuz i knew, that this could not be another mass shooting"
so if he was at the school during the shooting, he must have left, ran to his house, 3 miles away, grabbed his [Bleeeeep!], rode his bike back 3 miles, got back inside, and started filming.....
or he wasnt even there at all, just like he said in the video....
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/27/1812:19 PM
Originally Posted By: Bent Metal
The stuff you find on your lunch break is great, Redhook. Makes the day go faster
His entire life is a lunch break and all his original thoughts and creativity just comes from other websites. Hes a poster child of everything that is wrong with America. Evo is in a double wide on the internet all day getting high and thinks he has a life. #newgeneration
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/28/1808:52 AM
Originally Posted By: willametteriveroutlaw
Originally Posted By: War-Paint
Originally Posted By: willametteriveroutlaw
Funny, one school has the Obama and JFK of public speaking that coincidentally had a shooting at the kick off to the mid term elections..
Or maybe kids are tired of being shot and killed while trying to learn something at school?
Because that is statistically significant risk and cause of death..
Oh wait, it's not.
Because the statistical probability of a school shooting is low is a reason to ignore them and do nothing?
The statistical probability of a terrorist attack in the U.S. and of airliners being flown into buildings remains impressively low as well. Yet America has totally changed the way we live in the U.S. with increased airport security, and border crossings where we need passports to visit Canada and Mexico. Not that these have made a hill of beans of difference, but the U.S. has made major changes because of events of statistically low probability.
Preventing all school shootings is statistically impossible, but schools could be hardened against unlawful entry, and most school shootings prevented. But since a school shooting is of statistically low probability, I guess you would prefer that nothing be done?
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/28/1808:59 AM
Originally Posted By: willametteriveroutlaw
Originally Posted By: War-Paint
Or maybe kids are tired of being shot and killed while trying to learn something at school?
Because that is statistically significant risk and cause of death..
Oh wait, it's not.
Tell that to the parents who buried their "statistically insignificant" child this past month. Actually, every victim of a school shooting had a right to life that supercedes your right to poke holes in paper, blow up overripe fruit and pleasure yourself with the pow-pow-pow-pow-pow of your AR-15.
That's the opinion of this life long hunter and former NRA member. According to polls, it's the opinion of a majority of Americans, as well.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/28/1812:01 PM
One can make a case and argue that here are some freedoms/liberties that have been severely altered or changed since 9/11:
Freedom of Speech Freedom of Privacy Freedom of Information Right to a Fair Trial Freedom of Association Right to Due Process Freedom of Economic Liberty Equal Protection Under the Law Freedom From Unreasonable Searches
Effective? You be the judge.
Has terrorism gone away?
No.
There are and will be way worse things than a plane flying in to a building and nothing we've done so far to change that.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 03/28/1812:23 PM
Originally Posted By: parker
One can make a case and argue that here are some freedoms/liberties that have been severely altered or changed since 9/11:
Freedom of Speech Freedom of Privacy Freedom of Information Right to a Fair Trial Freedom of Association Right to Due Process Freedom of Economic Liberty Equal Protection Under the Law Freedom From Unreasonable Searches
Effective? You be the judge.
The list is lengthy, but primarily applies to those people who look like they came from a country south of Sweden, or east of Germany. Crusty old white farts pretty much get a pass...probably because they resemble so many of those holding power in our government.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/06/1803:17 PM
Originally Posted By: Todd
Let's make some smart comments about spoons and cars, and then make fun of the millions of kids who are about become voting age, too.
That will help.
Gunowners are our own worst enemies, by far. We are really killing it lately.
Fish on...
Todd
You hit the nail on the head Todd. I've said many times I carry everywhere I go. I have owned plenty of guns but by allowing mentally ill idiots to get guns and especially assault rifles it's just a matter of time before we lose everything. The NRA is cutting it's nose off to spite it's face. But here again and like Trump it's a shoot first then think about it later when it's too late mentality. But sadly there are so many ignorant sheep that just follow each other around and never look up.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/10/1810:47 AM
Originally Posted By: parker
One can make a case and argue that here are some freedoms/liberties that have been severely altered or changed since 9/11:
Freedom of Speech Freedom of Privacy Freedom of Information Right to a Fair Trial Freedom of Association Right to Due Process Freedom of Economic Liberty Equal Protection Under the Law Freedom From Unreasonable Searches
There are and will be way worse things than a plane flying in to a building and nothing we've done so far to change that.
You mean like the same faction of corrupt people in various governmental departments that are attempting to impeach the sitting US President by obtaining a FISA warrant without credible evidence of a crime while simultaneously ignoring constitutional rights?
If a witch hunt can happen to the President of the United States -then it can happen to anybody.
This is a sad time for our democratic system in the United States regardless of political party affiliation.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/10/1810:52 AM
"You mean like the same faction of corrupt people in various governmental departments that are attempting to impeach the sitting US President by obtaining a FISA warrant without credible evidence of a crime while simultaneously ignoring constitutional rights?"
I don't even know where to start on this one. Why don't you go ahead and explain how this makes any sense at all?
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/11/1806:54 AM
Originally Posted By: Todd
"You mean like the same faction of corrupt people in various governmental departments that are attempting to impeach the sitting US President by obtaining a FISA warrant without credible evidence of a crime while simultaneously ignoring constitutional rights?"
I don't even know where to start on this one. Why don't you go ahead and explain how this makes any sense at all?
Fish on...
Todd
Fair enough,
Let’s start from the beginning before moving forward to the Special Counsel.
RE: Steele dossier
Since Sen. Lindsey Graham stated back in December, “I think the Department of Justice owes it to the court to be up-and-up about exactly what this document is about, who paid for it, who's involved, and what their motives might be.”
These questions and more have since been answered in the vid below and I’ll answer your question in more detail over the next days or weeks as your ball washers allow.
At 17:25 talks about a 99 page opinion from the FISA court regarding illegal FBI activity, illegal contractor activity, and improper disclosure of raw unauthorized intelligence of Americans…
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/12/1809:28 AM
Originally Posted By: gooybob
Originally Posted By: Todd
Let's make some smart comments about spoons and cars, and then make fun of the millions of kids who are about become voting age, too.
That will help.
Gunowners are our own worst enemies, by far. We are really killing it lately.
Fish on...
Todd
You hit the nail on the head Todd. I've said many times I carry everywhere I go. I have owned plenty of guns but by allowing mentally ill idiots to get guns and especially assault rifles it's just a matter of time before we lose everything. The NRA is cutting it's nose off to spite it's face. But here again and like Trump it's a shoot first then think about it later when it's too late mentality. But sadly there are so many ignorant sheep that just follow each other around and never look up.
Then have federal law enforcement do their Fukking job, keep the national background check updated and actually prosecute people who are not allowed to by guns when they attempt to purchase.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/15/1804:31 AM
Originally Posted By: Banned User
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
You mean like the same faction of corrupt people in various governmental departments that are attempting to impeach the sitting US President by obtaining a FISA warrant without credible evidence of a crime while simultaneously ignoring constitutional rights ?
Rich Gee must have used Lackluster Louies login info......
To Todd balls washer #1
KK, I see your MO hasn’t changed over the years by attacking people instead of contributing content.
SHAMEFUL…
KK ALERT--CLIMB AND TUCK YOUR TAILS--HOPEFULLY THE TROLL CAN’T CLIMB
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/16/1809:00 PM
Goat tree LMFAO! I miss the Darkside. I have a couple of goat carcusses in the orchard! I have some big guns and the girls love them. If I wear a long sleeve shirt do I need a Conceal Carry permit? If I wear short sleeves or a tank top can I Open Carry? Of course I'll be wearing the Stars and Stripes and God Loves 'Merica!
Also at 17:25 he talks about a 99 page opinion from the FISA court regarding illegal FBI activity, illegal contractor activity, and improper disclosure of raw unauthorized intelligence of Americans…
We left off with the 99 page FISA court opinion that main stream media (MSM) neglected to report to the American people regarding these illegal activities even though this was released a year ago.
IMO, MSM news journalism in America is dead because if it doesn’t fit their narrative, the American people don’t need to know, so it does not get printed. Other words a one word definition would be propaganda. It seems that the various MSM TV news reports the same political narrative but with different human interest stories.
Along with MSM fake news propaganda, I look for alternate news sources that use verifiable facts from verifiable sources to try and get a fully rounded view to fill in the blanks of what is really happening.
IMO, we should do ourselves a favor and infuse alternative verifiable news daily to help understand the world around us.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/19/1811:26 AM
Freedom of the press is one of the most important things we have. It's pretty sad that you can't believe anything you read or hear. Journalism is dead, or on life support.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/22/1806:24 PM
continuing on...
Interview with Chair Nunes House Intelligence Committee stated that through his committee’s oversight investigation to date, after receiving the electronic communication after long delay, that there was no official intelligence used to start the investigation in Russian collusion... How did this happen, the importance, and much more… Video below.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/23/1812:24 PM
...Beginning to connect the dots between Comey memos and no official intelligence used to start the investigation in alleged Trump-Russian collusion. Video below.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/24/1805:57 AM
I don’t believe that we were born with an innate hatred for Trump and assume most of us don’t know him personally-- so how were our opinions formed of him?? By the same media that manipulates the masses with fake news propaganda?
The playing field was tilted as early as 2013 when laws were changed by Obama administration when the US government unbound the legal regulations against using propaganda against foreign audiences and American citizens. The intention is to sway public opinion by using television, radio, newspapers, and social media targeting the American and foreign people in controlled psy-ops.
It was reported on American Intelligence Media that NDAA used 75% of their $80,000,000 budget for Anti Trump propaganda in 2016 campaign.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/24/1807:27 PM
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
assume most of us don’t know him personally-- so how were our opinions formed of him?? By the same media that manipulates the masses with fake news propaganda?
I formed my opinion by observations. Flaunts his wealth. Trophy skank wives. Combover hair. Overblown ego. The dumb fuckin [Bleeeeep!] that flies out of his mouth. You know....propaganda.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/24/1807:28 PM
So now we have billions of tax dollars being spent telling us how to think and vote.
It is becoming quite apparent the Trump anomaly by winning the president candidacy without strings attached and intent to change the status quo covering many decades of both Democrats and Republicans alike has some very powerful entities running scared.
Powerful but petrified enough to try and overthrow a sitting US president without credible evidence while once again denigrating our rights this time to attorney client privilege with the break into Cohan’s office and private residence even though cooperating by complying with authorities requests.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/25/1809:34 AM
Originally Posted By: vapidangler
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
assume most of us don’t know him personally-- so how were our opinions formed of him?? By the same media that manipulates the masses with fake news propaganda?
I formed my opinion by observations. Flaunts his wealth. Trophy skank wives. Combover hair. Overblown ego. The dumb fuckin [Bleeeeep!] that flies out of his mouth. You know....propaganda.
Exactly. Even if you take away everything the "fake news media" (anybody remember the last world leader to villify and discredit the mainstream media - boy, was he great) is putting out there, it's clear to anyone with a shred of moral character that he is an absolute scumbag. I can't think of another president who has behaved so despicably, before and after taking office. He's a racist, a misogynist, an adulterer, and a bully. Isn't that just about everything Americans DON'T want to be?
Apparently, Trump supporters don't hold common decency in high regard. Makes me think maybe they aren't such great people either, which is unfortunate. Of course, they probably have me pegged as an uber liberal pussy, which in their minds is even worse. The truth lies somewhere in the middle, but we'll probably never find it, because we have no will to look for it anymore. These are dangerous times in America.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/25/1810:51 AM
Originally Posted By: FleaFlickr02
Of course, they probably have me pegged as an uber liberal pussy, which in their minds is even worse.
Journalists and politicians get the rope, communist liberals will be thrown from helicopters. MAGA! Malt Liquor!
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/26/1806:28 AM
The line in the sand for me is the trampling on our constitution/rights afforded by it regardless of party affiliation. The US Constitution is what sets this country apart from other countries and the NWO.
..…So what entities could Trump scare the bejeezus out of with campaign slogans like America first and drain the swamp that have the power to try to remove a sitting president?
The list is long…
Starting with the Deep state and their track record.
Entitled: The Fates Of American Presidents Who Challenged The Deep State
“I believe that a significant shift in the relationship between public and deep state power occurred in the 1960s and 1970s, culminating in the Reagan Revolution of 1980. In this period five presidents sought to curtail the powers of the deep state. And as we shall see, the political careers of all five—Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford and Carter—were cut off in ways that were unusual. One president, Kennedy, was assassinated. Another, Nixon, was forced to resign...”
“In every case, one way or another, tensions between the presidents and the deep state helped terminate the careers of those in the White House...“
There is the Senior Executive Service(SES) part of the shadow government over 9000+strong that do not use the G1-G15 pay scale but pay starts at $144,000-$200,000 with bonus’s and tenure after one year to receive retirement for life. They believe they are above the law and the president as far as that goes since laws protect them from being fired by the president.
Trump had a remedy for that by adding the Holman clause in the latest budget where it now allows him at his discretion to pay $1.00 yearly wage for any employee receiving government wages.
Effectively making the puppeteers pulling the strings---now the puppets.
SES people were not elected and are running all the gov't agencies secretly in the background. They all (9000 approx.) make more money than the president.
“SES has 500 DOJ judges on payroll” and some of the media for instance like “Joe Scarbough is on the SES payroll being paid by taxpayer money while attacking Trump.” And many SES members are in positions that can keep Trump nominees from being appointed ---- and much more exposed
Instability, conflict, and war is big business to the powerful global financial network of bankers/financial institutions etc. Over the years where millions have died, trillions of dollars have been made.
Trump or any president wanting dialog and peace with other countries especially Russia and China is a threat to the status quo in which the shadow government is in place to protect.
The gift that keeps on giving since the 1950’s will decrease substantially if the peace process is accomplished in the Korean region.
SEOUL (Reuters) – “The leaders of North and South Korea signed a declaration on Friday agreeing to work for the “complete denuclearization of the Korean peninsula”. At their first summit in more than a decade, the two sides announced they would seek an agreement to establish “permanent” and “solid” peace on the peninsula. The declaration included promises to pursue military arms reduction, cease “hostile acts,” turn their fortified border into a “peace zone,” and seek multilateral talks with other countries, such as the United States.”
“The role that the Bank for International Settlements was envisioned by the global elite long ago.”
“[T]he powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations.”
“Sadly, the system that Quigley wrote about all the way back in 1975 has fully blossomed today. Every two months, the central bankers of the world travel to Switzerland for “Global Economy Meetings” in Basel.”
“At the table are the chiefs of the world’s biggest central banks, representing countries that annually produce more than $51 trillion of gross domestic product, three-quarters of the world’s economic output.”
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/28/1808:41 AM
The only way to really remove all of the unelected shitheads that are ruining this nation is to shoot them. With real ammunition from a real rifle. You will not take back this country through voting. It's a waste of time, and time is something we have very little of.
So listen here. The plan is that we move as many patriots as we can out to the Pacific Northwest and when we have enough men, we declare ourselves a new nation and take over Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and some of Montana and British Colombia. We will create a new constitutional republic similar to the one founded in 1776. The feds will send in the national guard and other troops, and we will hand them their asses.
We will kill wave after wave of them until they give up or they kill us. There is no better alternative. It's not pleasant, but men from generations past have done this and won. We can do it too. I'm confident that everything they throw at us short of nuclear annihilation can be beaten back by a well armed militia, and they won't nuke their own land.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/29/1806:21 AM
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
… Every two months, the central bankers of the world travel to Switzerland for “Global Economy Meetings” in Basel.”
“At the table are the chiefs of the world’s biggest central banks, representing countries that annually produce more than $51 trillion of gross domestic product, three-quarters of the world’s economic output.”
Usually after a war a central bank is establish in that country for one reason or another… “For example, just look at what has happened to some of the countries that were not considered to be “integrated” into the “global community”…” “In 2001, the United States invaded Afghanistan. In 2003, Da Afghanistan Bank was established by presidential decree. Afghanistan has a modern central bank just like the rest of us.
-In 2003, the United States invaded Iraq. In early 2004, the Central Bank of Iraq was established to manage the Iraqi currency and integrate Iraq into the global financial system.”
“The only major nation on the globe that does not have a central bank is North Korea. Yes, there are some small island countries such as the Federated States of Micronesia that do not have a central bank, but even if you count them, more than 99.9% of the population of the world still lives in a country that has a central bank.”
“Central banks are specifically designed to trap nations in debt spirals from which they can never possibly escape. Today, the debt to GDP ratio for the entire planet is up to an all-time high record of 286 percent. Humanity is being enslaved by a perpetual debt machine, but most people are not even aware that it is happening.” https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-06-10/guess-how-many-nations-world-do-not-have-central-bank
The nagging question for me was if CIA and central bankers were working in concert so was there a common thread between them. I finally stumbled onto this.
This link also goes into detail about banker history and how the assassination of US presidents and war of 1812 are tied to attempting to break the bondage by printing to replace with our own US currency from those in control of the money supply.
Quotes from the link above;
“The great debt that capitalists will see is made out of the war and must be used to control the valve of money.”
“BIS is the most powerful bank in the world, a global central bank for the Eight Families who control the private central banks of almost all Western and developing nations.”
“Most people living in the USA have no clue that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is a foreign agency. To be more accurate, the IRS is a foreign private corporation of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and is the private “army” of the Federal Reserve (Fed).”
“Virtually unknown to the general public is the fact that the US Federal Reserve is a privately owned company, sitting on its very own patch of land, immune to the US laws.”
Federal Reserve history; Glenn Beck Exposes the Private Fed; Gets Fired by Fox “Ponzi scheme that pays off those first in line but needs ever expanding money supply for the scheme to work.” “Gold in Fort Knox, if still there, belongs to the privately owned federal reserve, not the US Gov’t.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vB5LK-jihgk
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 04/30/1805:23 AM
…New World Order “The shadow forces behind the New World Order (NWO) are following a slow-paced agenda of total control over mankind and our planet's resources. David Icke coined it the "Totalitarian Tip-Toe," because "they" are making very small steps towards our complete and definitive enslavement…”
“As a result, the masses remain relatively unaware of the fact that their liberties are being gradually taken away, while the power of the NWO octopus grows steadily...”
“These 13 Families Rule the World: The Shadow Forces Behind the NWO 1. Rothschild(Bauer or Bower) 2. Bruce 3. Cavendish (Kennedy) 4. De Medici 5. Hanover 6. Hapsburg 7. Krupp 8. Plantagenet 9. Rockefeller 10. Romanov 11. Sinclair (St. Clair) 12. Warburg (del Banco) 13. Windsor (Saxe-Coburg-Gothe)” http://humansarefree.com/2014/10/exposing-shadow-forces-behind-nwo.html
“The creation of the New World Order (NWO) agenda was put in motion by the infamous character, Mayer Amschel Rothschild, the one who decided to control the entire planet by any means necessary…” “Their objectives are as follows: 1) Abolition of all ordered governments 2) Abolition of private property 3) Abolition of inheritance 4) Abolition of patriotism 5) Abolition of the family 6) Abolition of religion 7) Creation of a world government”
“We must war against all prevailing ideas of religion, of the state, of country, of patriotism. The idea of God is the keynote of a perverted civilization. It must be destroyed.”---Trumps actions show he is clearly not in agreement. http://humansarefree.com/2013/10/the-complete-history-of-freemasonry-and.html
Bush Jr., Obama, then add if Hillary won either a 4-8 year term-- all following suit-- just Google. That would be close to 35 yrs. of unimpeded progress of the NWO agenda downgrading our rights and religious freedom essentially complying with NWO objectives. There is no place for US Constitution with NWO.
Lord Jacob Rothschild has boasted that the New World Order will have full control over humanity by the year 2018. An issue of the Rothschild controlled Economist magazine published in 1988 openly told its readers that a world currency would be in place by 2018.
Not only does Trump scare the bejeesus out of war profiteers by promoting peace with restored relationships with countries especially China and Russia but also these ties could progress with the US moving to the emergence of an alternate financial system, replacing crumbing status quo, which would threaten their power enormously.
.—OR-- these Trump ties and possible future alliances could delay or destroy Rothschild’s vision of the NWO being in place by 2018 if at all.
The last thing NWO or Central banks would want is someone messing with the status quo.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/01/1806:10 AM
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
The last thing NWO/Central banks would want is someone messing with the status quo.
Circling back who protects the status quo among other things?--- the shadow government Senior Executive Service.
It is unfathomable that an attempted coup d'état has occurred to overthrow the sitting president of the United States by corrupted government officials obtaining FISA warrants without credible evidence of a crime with the unverified Steele dossier bought and paid for by opponent’s political party.
Link below entitled; A rule of the FISA court bars the deliberate presentation of flawed evidence for a surveillance warrant "Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe may have increased the legal jeopardy he’s facing and that four other top federal law enforcement officials are facing as well — by telling Congress in December 2017 that no surveillance warrants could be sought without using the undocumented Steele dossier. The reason is simple: By the procedural rules governing surveillance warrant requests to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court, federal officials are barred from knowingly using undocumented evidence."
But thanks to the court’s “Woods Procedures,” that’s exactly what was done by McCabe. That’s also what was done by his former boss, then-FBI Director James Comey, former acting Attorney General Sally Yates, former acting Deputy Attorney General Dana Boente, and current Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
Like stated before at 17:25 (link below) the MSM is silent about a 99 page opinion from the FISA court regarding illegal FBI activity, illegal contractor activity, and improper disclosure of raw unauthorized intelligence of Americans… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfHjD6EJ964&feature=youtu.be
This continuing into the Special Counsel Mueller witch hunt looking for and not finding the Trump- Russian collusion because it never existed in the first place.
So instead of stopping there his boss Rosenstein in desperation allowed the expansion of the search concluding with the break into one of trump attorney’s office and house even though the president had stated afterward that Cohan was cooperating by submitting over a million documents. This desperation now has lead to the denigration of the Attorney – Client privilege. ----Shameful https://www.voanews.com/a/fbi-raid-trump-lawyer-michael-cohen-/4339287.html
What isn’t unfathomable is the bought and paid for fake news propaganda, to the tune of over $4 billion per year by various government entities, not using the T word--- treasonous act.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/01/1811:01 AM
There we go---Dan S-- Todd’s ball washer #2. I know it must be a disappointment being a #2 but you just need to try harder or you will always be a #2.
I warned it could take a couple weeks when attempting to answer Todd’s question “ I don't even know where to start on this one. Why don't you go ahead and explain how this makes any sense at all?” regarding "You mean like the same faction of corrupt people in various governmental departments that are attempting to impeach the sitting US President by obtaining a FISA warrant without credible evidence of a crime while simultaneously ignoring constitutional rights?"
I might have ran over a bit but thank God Trump’s campaign pledge to drain the swamp is in progress with much more to come as he attempts to Make America Great Again. I'm not to happy with either party but Hillary wouldn't have done anything to uncover corruption because she was right in the middle of it.
This thread is back to regular programming…
unless you want to go over Trump's record breaking accomplishments for a first year president even with all this Russian collusion garbage hanging over his head. He must not have been to worried about it.
Full disclosure; as with previous administrations—not happy with all of it.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/01/1812:35 PM
Originally Posted By: Dan S.
Get a fuckin hobby, you fruitcake.
Pretty sure this is it, Dan.
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
\unless you want to go over Trump's record breaking accomplishments for a first year president
By all means. Let's hear them. This should be good...especially if you say such "accomplishments" as:
1) Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation to the Supreme Court 2) The Travel Ban 3) The Wall /Immigration 4) Declaring Jerusalem the capital of Israel 5) Withdrawal from Paris climate deal 6) Net Neutrality Repeal 7) ANWR 8) Rising the American Spirit and/or US Economy 9) The Stock Market 10) Twitter
I'm not listing the tax cut deal because all that has done is delay the inevitable for our economy. That still may or may not be an actual good thing. Too early to tell, so he get's a pass on that one.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/01/1802:26 PM
Originally Posted By: parker
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
\unless you want to go over Trump's record breaking accomplishments for a first year president
By all means. Let's hear them. This should be good...especially if you say such "accomplishments" as:
1) Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation to the Supreme Court 2) The Travel Ban 3) The Wall /Immigration 4) Declaring Jerusalem the capital of Israel 5) Withdrawal from Paris climate deal 6) Net Neutrality Repeal 7) ANWR 8) Rising the American Spirit and/or US Economy 9) The Stock Market 10) Twitter
I'm not listing the tax cut deal because all that has done is delay the inevitable for our economy. That still may or may not be an actual good thing. Too early to tell, so he get's a pass on that one.
Fair enough,
In short, I like where the attempt is made to return or expand businesses in the USA instead of decade of shipping out of country. Increasing jobs now with the lowest unemployment for blacks and Hispanics in US history according to Trump in one of his latest speeches. Increasing GDP to almost double projected in the 4th qtr 3.75 GDP of what Obama stated as president 2% is the new norm. I also like Trump cutting purse strings to waste whether waste in countries, business, and organizations around the world and telling countries they are behind on their payments and it is time to pay up. He is putting America first on all negotiations which is a breath of fresh air. North Korea was of all intent and purposes supposed to create a WW3. Didn’t happen and peace is even possible. Syria bombings-- war outbreak didn’t happen—yet... Like stated in last post agree with some-- disagree with others.
You missed a few.
Advocated for practical tertiary education Advocated for skills-based immigration policies American companies now expanding rather than shipping jobs overseas Announced sanctions targeting Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Appointed a Transportation Secretary who is modernizing air traffic control Appointed an Education Secretary who is correcting abuses of Title IX Appointed an EPA administrator who has rescinded over 30 regulations Appointed an FDA director who is facilitating generic drug competition Appointed an Interior Secretary to improve forest management and expand users of public lands Approved the Keystone pipeline Called for international support of Iranian protesters Canceled school lunch program that failed to force children to eat unpopular foods Constructed test models of the border fence Convinced Japan and South Korea to increase defense spending Convinced NATO members to honor minimum financial commitments Decertified Iranian nuclear treaty and sent it to Senate as constitutionally required Designated North Korea as a state-sponsor of terrorism Eliminated prohibition on interstate health insurance sales Ended abuses of the student loan forgiveness program Ended forced provision of contraception by Catholic nunneries Ended requirement for state funding of Planned Parenthood Ended research into Y2K preparedness Ended rule requiring employers to report pay data by gender and race Expanded school-choice efforts FCC has begun to dismantle unnecessary Internet “Neutrality” regulations Foreign firms building plants and creating jobs in the U.S. Improved rules of engagement for military in combat situations Initiated resistance “sue and settle” tactics against EPA Initiated sanctions on Venezuelan dictatorship Introduced regulatory budgeting requiring agencies to rescind two rules to issue a new one ISIS bombing ramped up from about 20 to 500 or more airstrikes per week ISIS ground campaign intensified; Raqqa captured, its fighters surrendering in large numbers Issued a National Security Strategy Kate's Law passed House now pending in Senate Leveraged U.S. contribution to UN budget to force 5 percent budget cut and reduce staffs NLRB reversed rule making indirect employee control sufficient to be “joint employees” Nominated 60 judges, 21 confirmed, none yet denied Nominated a new Fed chief Nominated one Supreme Court judge, who was confirmed Obtained release of Aya Hijazi after three years in Egyptian prison Obtained release of Caitlan Coleman and husband from Haqqani Obtained release of UCLA basketball players from China Raised awareness of Opioid addiction crisis Recognized Jerusalem as Israeli capital and announced plan to move U.S. embassy there Reduced excess size of two national parks in Utah Reduced permanent staff in all Cabinet agencies except VA, HS and Interior Reduced White House staff by 110 Repeal of ACA mandate included in tax change bill Requested increased funding for missile defense in face of North Korean and Iranian threats. Rescinded (temporarily) the Jones Act, facilitating speedier emergency shipments to Puerto Rico Rescinded 2015 Waters of the United States rule Rescinded ban drilling in the Arctic and coastal areas Rescinded coal mining ban on public lands Rescinded criminalization of accidental killing of migratory birds Rescinded Cuban cash give-away Rescinded the “Clean Power Plan” Rescinded the “War on Coal” Rescinded threat to pull funds from schools that prohibit transgenders picking their bathrooms Rescinded Title IX “guidance letter” on sexual harassment Restored policy barring federal funding of abortions overseas Restoring military capability in the face of personnel shortages and equipment failures Revamped U.S. space program, assigning ambitious new objectives Revised rules for screening potential terrorist tourists Sanctioned Venezuela for human rights violations Sanctuary cities legislation passed House pending in Senate Signed 74 legislative bills (13 reversing executive orders) and 23 joint resolutions into law Signed comprehensive tax change bill containing most of the changes he proposed Signed legislation opening Arctic Natural Wildlife Reserve [ANWR] to oil drilling Signed legislation to expedite firing of incompetent VA officials Supreme Court largely upheld ban on selected travelers Taking steps to control the rogue Consumer Finance Protection Agency Targeted MS13 gang members for priority deportation The president’s lawyers announced a framework for restoring the separation of powers:
Congress should cease delegating its legislative power to the executive branch Courts should stop rubber-stamping regulations and orders that lack force of law Executive will end informal “guidance documents” that undermine due process U.S. energy production is on the upswing U.S. sorties and assisted forces reduced ISIS to 2 percent of the area controlled in 2016 Unemployment is at 4.1 percent, a 17-year low Withdrew from Paris Climate Accord Withdrew from UNESCO (a warning to other wasteful, overstaffed UN agencies
“Accomplishments are defined by campaign and post-election promises, not each person’s opinion of what is good and what is bad, a legitimate but different topic. Presidential accomplishments also include actions taken by subordinates that have at least presidential approval. With that in mind, Mr. Trump’s accomplishments through December 2017 include at least the following 82:” 100 percent vote by UN Security Council to sanction North Korea. 41 percent decline in illegal southern border crossings 97,482 illegal immigrant arrests, 70 percent convicted of additional crimes, 52,169 expelled Adopted a resolute policy on Afghanistan
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/01/1808:54 PM
Fawk me...I wish I had that much spare time in a single month to research, copy, paste, and text. I'm glad Dan finally stood up and said something about it.
Honestly, I didn't read one word of that incessant drivel...I don't even know wtf he' talking about, I was just impressed by the sheer quantity of it.
What really got my goat though (no offense KK) was the ball washing rankings. Dan at #2? C'mon, lets be honest here...we all know Dan is not that great at washing Todds balls, and frankly, KK, who he ranked #1, ain't any better.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/02/1807:11 AM
Originally Posted By: Ikissmykiss
Fawk me...I wish I had that much spare time in a single month to research, copy, paste, and text. I'm glad Dan finally stood up and said something about it.
Honestly, I didn't read one word of that incessant drivel...I don't even know wtf he' talking about, I was just impressed by the sheer quantity of it.
What really got my goat though (no offense KK) was the ball washing rankings. Dan at #2? C'mon, lets be honest here...we all know Dan is not that great at washing Todds balls, and frankly, KK, who he ranked #1, ain't any better.
I'm questioning his sources....
Ike
Be careful what you wish for Ike; since my heart attack at the beginning of the year, I had time to burn so I decided to research Trumps claim about Fake news and things sort of snowballed from there.
Hint: The bottom line is this country is under assault by entrenched forces hell bent to destroy America and the cornerstone this country was built on, the constitution, while democrats and republicans alike stand idly by.
Trump just happens to be the person to attempt to combat those forces and by all rights he never should have been elected. A person that isn’t a puppet just isn’t allowed to be nominated let alone win the American presidency and these same dark forces alluded to in the pages you didn’t read are doing everything in their power to control or destroy him as he continues to drain the swamp.
Sorry, current rankings stand --- more than likely will be pointed out why in other threads as it happens.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/02/1811:06 AM
I'm sure reading Russian propaganda about how Trump is saving America from the entrenched people in our government is great therapy for someone recovering from a heart attack.
Smart move.
You should try some rush hour commuting or tight rope walking next.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/02/1811:50 AM
This clown couldn't drain his toilet without help. His Cabinet is the swamp, and he's the one oozing around in the scuzz at the very bottom of the swamp.
since my heart attack at the beginning of the year=
Sorry about your heart attack, but this does bring up a Global Announcement for all Darksiders:
When (not if) you all have your hear attack (or 2nd) and keel over dead, please make sure your next of kin lets the Mods here on PP know your untimely demise. Get that in your Will and stuff!
You'd be doing us all a huge disservice here on the Darkside if any of you were to die and not have us know about it. I mean really, you die and it's your last chance for one last epic thread here on the Darkside in your honor? No deceased Darkside soul wants to miss out on that!
PS. Last Darksider standing, please turn off the server.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/02/1812:28 PM
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/02/1812:29 PM
Originally Posted By: parker
Originally Posted By: Evo
Tack ending the Korean war on that list however...
I didn't realize the Korean War had ended.
I didn't realize it had begun. Who fired the first shot?
My old man is probably rolling around in this grave laughing at Evo's comment having fought in the real Korean war. Rhetoric is pretty mild compared to real bullets. SF
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/02/1801:13 PM
So, assuming Trump deserves credit for what has not yet happened in Korea, what is our basis? Was it the way he publicly insulted "Little Rocket Man?" Was it the impression it made when he tweeted about his bigger, more powerful nuke button? Or did I miss some other heroic action he took that really put us over the top?
Sanctions were nothing new, so it couldn't have been that....
Whatever the verdict, these are interesting times, and I certainly hope we have good reason to be optimistic on Korea.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/02/1802:19 PM
Yes, I've seen the positive news. I watched the meeting of the Korean leaders at the DMZ live, and it was a pretty special moment. I've never witnessed a moment in world history where Korea wasn't in a standoff or at war, and it was cool to watch that meeting. The trouble is that we've been here before, and we've never been shown any reason to trust anything a North Korean leader says.
I also wonder how this is being received by North Korea's general population (put another way, I wonder what the regime's messaging has been, because I doubt they just told them the war was over and now they love America). Every documentary I've seen where North Koreans have been interviewed and asked about the USA, they've answered something to the effect that every American is their sworn enemy. I saw one example of this in one of Anthony Bourdain's shows very recently, and I simply can't imagine generations' worth of prpoaganda and indoctrination suddenly vanishing so quickly. That said, I am cautiously optimistic. Those who have worked in Korea for the State Department all seem to agree this is FAR from over. Let's hope they're wrong.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/02/1806:36 PM
Originally Posted By: stam
Originally Posted By: FleaFlickr02
So, assuming Trump deserves credit for what has not yet happened in Korea, what is our basis? Was it the way he publicly insulted "Little Rocket Man?" Was it the impression it made when he tweeted about his bigger, more powerful nuke button? Or did I miss some other heroic action he took that really put us over the top?
Sanctions were nothing new, so it couldn't have been that....
Whatever the verdict, these are interesting times, and I certainly hope we have good reason to be optimistic on Korea.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1805:45 AM
Originally Posted By: Todd
His Cabinet is the swamp
Fish on..Todd
Sessions is as complicit as Hillary, Obama, Comey, Mueller, and others in the uranium one deal where 20% of US uranium was turned over to the Russians. Many unprosecuted crimes--yet
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1808:10 AM
Ike, There is your example of why KK is Todd balls washer #1. Now the rest of Ripley's cabal will follow and the funny things is Todd really doesn't need their assistance.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1811:23 AM
Clocking in for my shift on Todd's balls....
Does anybody have any idea what Giuliani and Trump are up to? Both men are proven to be slicker than owl $hit on a doorknob, but I can't imagine how Rudy going on national TV and effectively proving that everything Trump has told us about the scandals he's wrapped up in was LIES helps the cause. They MUST be up to something, right?
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1811:58 AM
I might kick Toff in the balls, but that's about it. Everyone is fair game on this board!
Originally Posted By: FleaFlickr02
Does anybody have any idea what Giuliani and Trump are up to?
In my opinion, this was nothing more than a pre-emptive informational strike. Trump and party already know that this repayment stuff will be revealed soon. Now, when all of this information is officially revealed in his investigations, Trump and Crew can just say:
"Yeah, already said or admitted to that. Nothing new here in this "witch hunt of an investigation".
Most of the lawyers I heard talking about this today were not surprised or shocked by any of this.
I'm hoping RichG and Lucky Louie will show up and "enlighten" us sheeople on the "real truth" behind all of this.....
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1812:34 PM
The one Trump "accomplishment" that really made an impact was the tax cuts. There are two qualities most American voters share: Greed and a short memory (these are kind of the same thing, since the greed is what shortens the memory in most cases).
Putting a few more dollars in people's pockets makes them forgive or forget darn near anything. Case in point: Despite his legal woes worsening almost daily in 2018, Trump's opinion numbers have actually improved. When people who have changed their opinion are asked why, the answer is the tax break. I still think Trump is a morally bankrupt fool and a compulsive liar, but I do appreciate the 60 or so bucks the tax cut added to my monthly paychecks. Not ready to vote for him yet, though, because I know today's tax break is tomorrow's recession.
The short memory part is the killer, because smart politicians know that the public will accept anything that nets them more money in their pockets short term, regardless of the long term socio-economic costs.
Every time this trickle-down crap comes back around, people are all too easily lured back into the trap, because in the short term, the savings from the cuts do get shared, at least a little, with everyone. This makes us happy, which makes us forget that there will eventually be consequences for robbing Peter to pay Paul. The bitch of it is that, when the chickens come home to roost, the only way out is to increase taxes. Now that the corporate tax cuts are permanent, the next return to the roost is going to be really hard on the average citizen. But for now, more money for me= I love my president in most voter minds.
I'm not sure anyone believes or trusts Donald Trump, but as long as he can continue to fool voters into thinking they are better off financially, he'll keep the bull$hit coming, and they'll fall right in line. Pathetic and sad, but true.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1802:50 PM
50 MILLION for a parade?
is that as bad as Democrats spending 12 million PER MILE for a total of 900+ MILLION for a fvcking BIKE LANE?
some dickhead Democratic congressman said today, they we need to ban AR style rifles, buy them back, even if it costs 15 billion dollars, because "we can afford it"....
so what was that about 50 million showing pride in our armed forces?
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1802:54 PM
It's not about showing pride in our armed forces, it's an insecure little boy in the White House showing his tinpot despotism, jealous that dictators in North Korea and China get military parades and Pouty-US doesn't.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1803:43 PM
You should hold your breath while waiting.
Yes, none of those parades should take place, the Blue Angels are perhaps the biggest display of money wasted by the Military, right up there with paying the NFL to use them for all their flag waving.
It's just a PR program to make us all feel safe and fuzzy about wasting trillions of dollars on defense every year.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1803:47 PM
or maybe watching jets and sh!t, people find fun and intersting...
just like the Air Expo we have had here at JBLM/McChord, it allows people to get on base, and up close to the jets, pilots, and other service members all while watching some pretty cool performance that you wouldnt see unless you were a turbie twist in a desert...
must suck to constantly be wrong regarding Trump...
hes doing a fine job, Democrats are the ones ruining sh!t....
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1803:48 PM
Go lay on your back in the bushes next to the airport, that way you don't need to spend my tax dollars getting your jollies watching planes fly around.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1804:06 PM
You may be surprised to find that they aren't my idiots.
I will happily tell anyone who thinks my tax dollars should pay for them to get a hard on watching airplanes fly or a military parade go by so they can feel like a big man that they can shove it right up their asses.
What a complete and total waste of my tax dollars. I am guessing that most the dipshits who get woodies watching military planes fly around don't even pay taxes, they probably are sucking off the government teat themselves, either on welfare or with government jobs.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1804:09 PM
You won't have to wait long for my response... Every one of the things you mentioned (even the bike lane) is a far better use of tax (Social Security?) dollars than a wanna be tough guy military parade in the 21st century.
The ex-presidents you cited governed in a time when the US needed to showcase its might, because it had not yet been established. Doing so now is a sign of weakness, or a sense that we are falling behind the curve we have dominated since World War II. JFK's thing was at the beginning of the Cold War, which was essentially nothing but 4 decades of chest thumping, but at the time, nuclear war was a popular fear. In short, the world knows we're armed to the teeth. That's why nobody (save for a few terrorists) ever attacks us.
The Blue Angels cost $15M less for a year than Trump's chest thumping would cost for a single day. No question which of those is a better deal in my mind.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1804:14 PM
wut?
the US showcased its might after we cucumber fvcked the British....
then, after we dropped 2 nukes on Japan...
just say it, you are grasping at straws... you will find anything and everything to bitch about what the man has done, because you cant bitch about the good he is doing for the US, and the world....
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1804:35 PM
I'm glad Trump hasn't led us to nuclear war, but seeing as starting a nuclear war is pointless (nobody wins), I don't rate that as much more impressive than his other "accomplishments" to date.
Your boy lied to you and me both a documented 3000+ times in his first year.... I don't associate with pathological liars, and I certainly don't want one representing me before the rest of the world if I can't even believe what he tells me. Why is that okay with you? The rumor is that you don't work, so you can't be blinded by your tax break windfall like most other Trump supporters seem to be....
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1804:41 PM
Anybody ever notice that Evo is never wrong about anything?
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/03/1808:12 PM
I know that it is odd but somehow I can visualize Todd 'playing Jazz flute' surrounded by 'leather bound -----'. And what is that smell, aah, it is the mell of rich 'Mahogany',or could it be,
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/04/1809:27 AM
Turns out Giuliani's interview with Hannity might not have been posturing after all. According to his client, Rudy is new to the job and will have his facts (lies?) straight soon enough. Dumb and Dumber.
Saw Kellyanne Conway interviewed on her way to the $hit House (that's my name for the Trump White House) this morning. She could hardly keep her eyes off the ground. That's not a posture of confidence in one's convictions; it's one of shameful dishonesty.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/04/1811:11 AM
The fact that Kellyanne Conway can't even respond with a straight face should say something...she doesn't like at the clip that Trump and Huckabee Sanders do, but she usually can do it straight into the camera when she does.
The Kool-Aid drinkers are already overcoming overwhelming obstacles to suck off Trumpster Fire, I'm not sure that there is anything that could get them back in the same Universe as the truth, much less the same ball park. This is the biggest instance of intentional imbecility that the world has ever seen.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/04/1812:38 PM
Originally Posted By: Todd
the Blue Angels are perhaps the biggest display of money wasted by the Military
Biggest display of money *wasted* by the military? Not even close.
A little money spent on JP-5 is the cost of doing business to keep the worlds greatest pilots trained and combat ready.
Replace their fleet-scraped old F-18's for shiny new $85,000,000 F-35's (need 7 of them) and now we can talk "biggest display of money wasted by the military".
Probably don't like the 4th of July and Fireworks either. I think you're just angry because you've been huffing too much commercial airline jet fuel from all those planes landing and taking off in your back yard.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/04/1812:49 PM
Blue Angels public relations shows aren't for training fighter pilots...we have that, it's called the armed forces. When fishing on the Sauk last week we were treated to the usual...jets from NSW flying up and down the valley. That's pilot training, and cool t see.
The Blue Angels are a forty million dollar self-flagellation waste of tax dollars so a bunch of drunk idiots floating around on a lake can cheer and fall over in their Coors Light puddles and yell " 'Merica! " at the top of their lungs.
Fourth of July fireworks shows actually celebrate something...and, incidentally, are paid for on a local level, not by my federal tax dollars.
You sound like Evo with your made up arguments. You should stop that.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/04/1812:55 PM
Originally Posted By: Todd
Blue Angels public relations shows aren't for training fighter pilots.
Where do Blue Angel pilots go after they are done serving their term on this demonstration team?
Oh that's right. Back to flying off of a carrier as an active duty combat pilot. Last time I checked, that required constant training and flying.
Training is training and does it really matter if it's in a shiny blue old F-18, or a new F-18 SuperHornet? Flight maneuvers are still the same. Hours logged are hours logged. Since I'm paying for it, might as well get something out of it.
Originally Posted By: Todd
When fishing on the Sauk last week we were treated to the usual...jets from NSW flying up and down the valley. That's pilot training, and cool t see.
NAS Whidbey "Usual Pilot Training".
SUCK IT, Blue Angels!
Maverick and Goose were unavailable for comment, but I do believe they were giving someone "the bird" during this SeaFair flight demo of an NAS Whidbey SuperHornet.
Speaking of waste of taxpayer money......12 million dollar per mile. That's what it is costing Seattle tax payers for some fvcked up bike lanes in the downtown area.
12 million dollars per mile.
How's that one feel for ya, Stam? Glad you're living in West Seattle to help pay for that too. We can share the pain.
Blues ain't got nuthin' on Seattle! Hate to say it, but I think it's time for Dan to burn the city down. Light 'em up, Dan!
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/04/1802:54 PM
oh so they just kept it in the bank...
let it just sit in there and collect interest...
they froze the money because of the shady sh!t Iran does, and continues to do to this day... thats why theres 200 nukes pointed at that sh!thole, right next to them....
PS, when you are in debt 19 trillion dollars, you dont have 2 billion dollars to give to other countries unless you get it from somewhere...
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/04/1803:00 PM
You may be surprised to find that even if you make multiple posts in a row about it...it's still not tax dollars.
Fish on...
Todd
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/04/1803:21 PM
Considering that Evo is one nap away from being a vegetable, he's really impressing me with his understanding of complex and top secret international dealings.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/04/1806:28 PM
Well considering we've been psychoanalyzing you for the past several years like the top men we are, yes. Yes we do.
Chit dawg - I got your chart right here!
Says you have a predilection towards My Little Ponies, ad hominem attacks & hyperbole. Possible latent homosexual & mechanophilia tendencies and a high likelihood of being late on utility payments. Cool. Cool.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/04/1807:58 PM
Originally Posted By: NickD90
Well considering we've been psychoanalyzing you for the past several years like the top men we are, yes. Yes we do.
Chit dawg - I got your chart right here!
Says you have a predilection towards My Little Ponies, ad hominem attacks & hyperbole. Possible latent homosexual & mechanophilia tendencies and a high likelihood of being late on utility payments. Cool. Cool.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/07/1807:30 AM
Back from 4 day weekend, it looks like one of the themes over those past days was waste of money which is exactly what is happening with the Trump witch hunt looking for Russian collusion from an unverified dossier to obtain FISA warrants. Current events even now have US federal Judge Ellis in the Manafort case asking what does this have to do with Russian collusion by asking for the scope of the Muellers investigation and have within two weeks to produce. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/04/donald-trump-russia-paul-manafort-robert-mueller
Pretty ironic that those with the most to lose looking for dirt on Trump are the same involved with the uranium one deal where Russia got 20% of US enriched uranium, cover up of Hillary’s email server where her exoneration was written well in advance of 17 witnesses and Hillary herself being interviewed, and now an apparent coups d'état to spy and try to overthrow a sitting president of the United States with absolutely fake goods.
Those involved to over throw Trump are the same ones looking at crimes and jail time for themselves and now worst yet IMO treason. Those same thugs so desperate to cover their azz’s, that they actually broke into one of the president’s attorney’s office with warrants even though cooperating by turning over 1.2 million documents requested, in turn stomping on attorney client privilege.
Like the judge said to Mueller who gives you the unfettered power that nobody in the US should have or does have?
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/07/1801:45 PM
Originally Posted By: Steelspanker
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
Back from 4 day weekend, it looks like one of the themes over those past days was waste of money which is exactly what is happening with the Trump witch hunt
Maybe you shoulda taken a 5 day weekend.
By all appearances you need some time to get things figured out.
I have stated several times that this is not a party line issue, but it will take both parties to straighten this out.
99.9% of the world is under privately owned central banks with these people having direct links to the New World Order.
“Lord Jacob Rothschild has boasted that the New World Order will have full control over humanity by the year 2018. An issue of the Rothschild controlled Economist magazine published in 1988 openly told its readers that a world currency would be in place by 2018” of which they are now actively promoting a one world digital currency.
Trump being one person can’t straighten this thing out by himself but will need the support of the American people-- those very same people being bombarded by the over $4 billion US gov’t media budget that appears to be orchestrating the fake news media propaganda narrative.
For those with limited time--- links have already been provided pages back in this thread or google and do your own due diligence.
There is no room in the NWO for the US constitution.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/07/1803:02 PM
Originally Posted By: ReefSkunk
Considering that Chumlee is one nap away from being a vegetable, he's really impressing me with his understanding of complex and top secret international dealings.
Somebody that really uses Wikipedia as a reference. Isn’t that an open forum where anybody is encouraged to contribute as an editor? That’s as bad as believing what you hear on or don’t hear on fake news media propaganda.
From WP “There is no need to read any policy or guideline pages to start editing...” “Editors should treat each other respectfully, work together collegially…” You probably watch CNN also?
Both Bush’s (Jr&Sr), Both Clinton’s (Hillary and Bill), and Obama have spoken about NWO (taped speeches.) Trump is the only one opposed to NWO by his talk and actions taken so far.
Link below to French President Macron addressing Congress joint session a couple of weeks ago. 24:00 Macron dream of 21st century NWO. Get ready for a gut punch by congressional response. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JwrRXozCXA
Trump’s nationalism stance is opposed to Macron also in the video.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/07/1805:18 PM
To believe in that particular conspiracy theory is not particularly outlandish...it has enough actual truth woven thru it that it actually makes sense, though the whacky parts are exactly as whacky as they sound.
To believe, however, that Trump is somehow both aware of and believes in this conspiracy, and is the actual champion of overthrowing this NWO, takes being a fuckin moron to its extreme.
He is a greedy, petulant, childish, ignorant, con man...and nothing more. If the idiots who voted for him feel better believing that he believes their lunacy, then more power to them, but it doesn't make them any more right, or make Trump any less of a garden variety shyster.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/07/1808:38 PM
Todd, we both have opinions and a definition of a fuckin moron would be those with the opinion that Trump not being aware of existing external forces against him, especially now, while having a probable rudimentary understanding on his drain the swamp platform. A continual growing list of not only top corrupt FBI officials but also DOJ officials fired or relieved of duty, then fired after being cooperating witnesses—reasons for each individual included. Did these swamp creatures represent the US best interests?--Apparently not with more to come. 2:52 for those continual swamp drainings https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rifM7fnvsvw&feature=youtu.be
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/07/1809:52 PM
No, he was working under Reagan... Also that scandal, didn't just include arms trafficking... They dumped cocaine into the black communities in California....
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/08/1807:54 AM
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
A continual growing list of not only top corrupt FBI officials but also DOJ officials fired or relieved of duty, then fired after being cooperating witnesses—reasons for each individual included. Did these swamp creatures represent the US best interests?--Apparently not 2:52 for those continual swamp drainings https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rifM7fnvsvw&feature=youtu.be
I wonder what Sessions appointed federal prosecutor Huber is doing after about 6 months on the job investigating and evaluating certain issues involving the FBI, the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One?
Huber is quiet as a church mouse as the shake up in the FBI continues, in contrast to Mueller’s vocal day to day soap opera regarding the Trump witch hunt.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/08/1807:57 AM
Originally Posted By: WDFW X 1 = 0
Trump kicks ass, Nugent rocks, and the Dems here are a bunch of homos.
Such maturity...ok so Nugent rocks. I have free for all on vinyl. But how about when that POS adopted that teen girl so he could screw her. Then he said in an interview " better that she ended up with uncle teddy." He damaged the [Bleeeeep!] out of his kids with his behavior. And Trump?? He is a complete piece of trash. Look at the kind of incestuous crap he talked about how he would date his own daughter. That's horrible parenting. These guys have zero character. And you are gonna make some blanket statement about Dems being homos. My mom is a Democrat. Call her a homo in my presence and I'd bust you in the mouth. You're a fkn tool.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/08/1807:58 AM
Incidentally both parties are full of horse [Bleeeeep!]
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/08/1808:05 AM
Originally Posted By: vapidangler
Originally Posted By: WDFW X 1 = 0
Trump kicks ass, Nugent rocks, and the Dems here are a bunch of homos.
Such maturity...ok so Nugent rocks. I have free for all on vinyl. But how about when that POS adopted that teen girl so he could screw her. Then he said in an interview " better that she ended up with uncle teddy." He damaged the [Bleeeeep!] out of his kids with his behavior. And Trump?? He is a complete piece of trash. Look at the kind of incestuous crap he talked about how he would date his own daughter. That's horrible parenting. These guys have zero character. And you are gonna make some blanket statement about Dems being homos. My mom is a Democrat. Call her a homo in my presence and I'd bust you in the mouth. You're a fkn tool.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Fake news lives on. Tool? LOL
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/08/1809:16 AM
Originally Posted By: vapidangler
My mom is a Democrat. Call her a homo in my presence and I'd bust you in the mouth. You're a fkn tool.
Your mom is a crystal clear example of why women should not be allowed to vote. Democrats like to spend other people's money. So do women. Democrats like to stick their nose in the lives of their neighbors. So do women. Keep in mind if women weren't allowed to vote, there would have never been a Democrat president. In every country around the world, when women were given the right to vote a huge socialized welfare state followed.
Your mom may not be a homo but she sure is a brainwashed idiot and a traitor to this country. Also, she lives in California, where only crazy people live and she raised a scumbag like you who goes around threatening to punch people over the internet. So fvck the Democrats, fvck you, fvck your momma, MAGA, TRUMP 4EVER and drink MALT LIQUOR, only MALT LIQUOR!
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/08/1811:23 AM
Fists should be outlawed!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/08/1812:26 PM
Originally Posted By: steeleworldwide
Originally Posted By: vapidangler
My mom is a Democrat. Call her a homo in my presence and I'd bust you in the mouth. You're a fkn tool.
Your mom is a crystal clear example of why women should not be allowed to vote. Democrats like to spend other people's money. So do women. Democrats like to stick their nose in the lives of their neighbors. So do women. Keep in mind if women weren't allowed to vote, there would have never been a Democrat president. In every country around the world, when women were given the right to vote a huge socialized welfare state followed.
Your mom may not be a homo but she sure is a brainwashed idiot and a traitor to this country. Also, she lives in California, where only crazy people live and she raised a scumbag like you who goes around threatening to punch people over the internet. So fvck the Democrats, fvck you, fvck your momma, MAGA, TRUMP 4EVER and drink MALT LIQUOR, only MALT LIQUOR!
At least you're entertaining. And I never threatened anyone. I'm just speaking facts. No internet tough guy here. As far as California goes I was born here, and I'm sick of seeing tourists from the PNW asking me how to get to the aquarium. Pasty white jabronis.
Also your taste in beer sucks. Crooked I holmes
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/08/1812:28 PM
Originally Posted By: WDFW X 1 = 0
Originally Posted By: vapidangler
Originally Posted By: WDFW X 1 = 0
Trump kicks ass, Nugent rocks, and the Dems here are a bunch of homos.
Such maturity...ok so Nugent rocks. I have free for all on vinyl. But how about when that POS adopted that teen girl so he could screw her. Then he said in an interview " better that she ended up with uncle teddy." He damaged the [Bleeeeep!] out of his kids with his behavior. And Trump?? He is a complete piece of trash. Look at the kind of incestuous crap he talked about how he would date his own daughter. That's horrible parenting. These guys have zero character. And you are gonna make some blanket statement about Dems being homos. My mom is a Democrat. Call her a homo in my presence and I'd bust you in the mouth. You're a fkn tool.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Fake news lives on. Tool? LOL
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/08/1801:37 PM
Directing people to the aquarium? Do you take the admission tickets at Sea World?
If I was gonna go on vacation to California I would definitely visit there. Might even see Frank wetting a line from the aquarium charter.
Thanks for reading my Bridges thread!!!! Good times.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/08/1802:41 PM
Originally Posted By: vapidangler
As far as California goes I was born here, and I'm sick of seeing tourists from the PNW asking me how to get to the aquarium. Pasty white jabronis.
Also your taste in beer sucks. Crooked I holmes
California sucks. It has the lowest IQ average out of any state, the most homeless people, worst poverty rate, worst pollution, 15th worst for crime, a pathetic middle class, holds the most debt nationwide, is the only state with a NAZI border checkpoint and has the most restrictions on basic constitutional rights to the point where you can spend more time in jail for calling someone the wrong gender than for intentionally infecting someone with HIV. California has the lowest quality of life in America according to a study published in U.S. News & World Report. What a shithole, fvck California. It's damn near a failed state that barely functions, despite having some of the highest tax rates in the country.
Your women are made up of so many non-biodegradable materials, the EPA fines anyone trying to bury them when they die. They are fake as fvck gold digging whores. Your state is trash, your women are plastic inside and out. There is nothing wrong with being born in California, but if you are an adult and too stupid to move, there is something wrong with that. You probably use google and facebook too, you fvcking scumbag.
And those pasty ass mufuggas asking for directions are obviously from Minnesota because anyone from the PNW would use BING MAPS.
How dare you talk sh!t about malt liquor. Fvck your Crooked Eye, drink only Malt Liquor.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/08/1810:24 PM
Let's talk about Washington State for a second before you go talking trash about California,which is mostly farming,rural country,and yes there are some real [Bleeeeep!] hole towns here. Not where I live . But Washington is nice. If you like tweeker meth heads. Aberdeen is a lovely place. Its fuckin gnarly. Great drivers in that state too. Fat women of Forks. Oh yeah know why there are less homeless people there? Because it rains constantly and is freezing. But hey at least the music is good from Seattle,until all the singers die from heroin. And why do they do heroin? Because they wake up one day and say to themselves "[Bleeeeep!] me,I'm in washington" and the boot up a big load of dope and nod off for good.
Plastic gold digging whores? In Enumclaw its goats sheep and horses. I read more bestiality in the news when I lived in the PNW than I could believe. In all honesty I liked Oregon as a whole much better than Washington save for the OP and those SW WA rivers. But Oregonian people are depressed,anti social [Bleeeeep!] who say "crik" instead of creek. There are suicide hotlines on every bridge crossing the willamette due to depressed emos who didn't get their starbucks leaping to their deaths,because,well it rains a lot and its fuckin cold.
The homeless people there dream of being homeless in cali. I was in San Diego not long ago and did some yellowtail fishing in mexico. It was pretty badass actually. Probably hit Tahoe again in june. Take my girl camping in the eastern sierras. Catch a striped bass in the surf behind my house. Roll around my home town where there are great people,great restaurants,and [Bleeeeep!] holes like big sur,oh wait big sur is amazingly gorgeous. Yeah dude you nailed it. I'm so ashamed to live here.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/08/1810:25 PM
Originally Posted By: stam
So...how do I get to the aquarium?
I thought about going down to Cali just to find vapid and ask him where the aquarium is.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/08/1810:26 PM
Originally Posted By: stam
So...how do I get to the aquarium?
In your case drive away from Enumclaw as fast as possible without getting a ticket. Follow the coast,you cant miss us,should be here in about 3 days. Weather has been 71 degrees and sunny.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/08/1810:26 PM
Originally Posted By: Dan S.
Originally Posted By: stam
So...how do I get to the aquarium?
I thought about going down to Cali just to find vapid and ask him where the aquarium is.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1808:39 AM
Originally Posted By: vapidangler
Let's talk about Washington State for a second before you go talking trash about California,which is mostly farming,rural country,and yes there are some real [Bleeeeep!] hole towns here. Not where I live . But Washington is nice. If you like tweeker meth heads. Aberdeen is a lovely place. Its fuckin gnarly. Great drivers in that state too. Fat women of Forks. Oh yeah know why there are less homeless people there? Because it rains constantly and is freezing. But hey at least the music is good from Seattle,until all the singers die from heroin. And why do they do heroin? Because they wake up one day and say to themselves "[Bleeeeep!] me,I'm in washington" and the boot up a big load of dope and nod off for good.
Plastic gold digging whores? In Enumclaw its goats sheep and horses. I read more bestiality in the news when I lived in the PNW than I could believe. In all honesty I liked Oregon as a whole much better than Washington save for the OP and those SW WA rivers. But Oregonian people are depressed,anti social [Bleeeeep!] who say "crik" instead of creek. There are suicide hotlines on every bridge crossing the willamette due to depressed emos who didn't get their starbucks leaping to their deaths,because,well it rains a lot and its fuckin cold.
The homeless people there dream of being homeless in cali. I was in San Diego not long ago and did some yellowtail fishing in mexico. It was pretty badass actually. Probably hit Tahoe again in june. Take my girl camping in the eastern sierras. Catch a striped bass in the surf behind my house. Roll around my home town where there are great people,great restaurants,and [Bleeeeep!] holes like big sur,oh wait big sur is amazingly gorgeous. Yeah dude you nailed it. I'm so ashamed to live here.
sit your ass down too many lol. As a former wa resident current San Mateo resident and future Florida resident he just told the truth.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1809:17 AM
And also btw proud Californian and voted for trump. Maga!
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1810:06 AM
Originally Posted By: dwatkins
Btw if California was its own country it would be the 5th largest economy in the world. Let that sink in while you’re fuking farm animals.
Most of that is due to worthless movies/communist propaganda cranked out by pedophiles in Hollywood and government subsidized surveillance programs such as Google, Facebook and Apple. Let that sink in while you're fvcking little boys. Hollywood is full of pedophiles that deserve to be hung and commie politicians who deserve to be thrown from helicopters.
Originally Posted By: vapidangler
Let's talk about Washington State for a second before you go talking trash about California,which is mostly farming,rural country,and yes there are some real [Bleeeeep!] hole towns here. Not where I live . But Washington is nice. If you like tweeker meth heads. Aberdeen is a lovely place. Its fuckin gnarly. Great drivers in that state too. Fat women of Forks. Oh yeah know why there are less homeless people there? Because it rains constantly and is freezing. But hey at least the music is good from Seattle,until all the singers die from heroin. And why do they do heroin? Because they wake up one day and say to themselves "[Bleeeeep!] me,I'm in washington" and the boot up a big load of dope and nod off for good.
There are plenty of methheads in rural Northern Californian depressed timber towns as well, such as Humboldt County and surrounding areas. As for Heroin, you've got people shooting it up in public. Heroin addicts are absolute scumbags and I hope every last one of them nods off for good.
Originally Posted By: vapidangler
Plastic gold digging whores? In Enumclaw its goats sheep and horses. I read more bestiality in the news when I lived in the PNW than I could believe.
Enough about KK already.
Originally Posted By: vapidangler
In all honesty I liked Oregon as a whole much better than Washington save for the OP and those SW WA rivers. But Oregonian people are depressed,anti social [Bleeeeep!] who say "crik" instead of creek. There are suicide hotlines on every bridge crossing the willamette due to depressed emos who didn't get their starbucks leaping to their deaths,because,well it rains a lot and its fuckin cold.
They say "crick" not "crik," is English your second language, chico? Oregon would be a great place, except for the people living there. Of course the same could be said of California. I fully support the suicide of anyone living in either.
Originally Posted By: vapidangler
The homeless people there dream of being homeless in cali. I was in San Diego not long ago and did some yellowtail fishing in mexico. It was pretty badass actually. Probably hit Tahoe again in june. Take my girl camping in the eastern sierras. Catch a striped bass in the surf behind my house. Roll around my home town where there are great people,great restaurants,and [Bleeeeep!] holes like big sur,oh wait big sur is amazingly gorgeous. Yeah dude you nailed it. I'm so ashamed to live here.
Yellowtail and striped bass are OK, but can you catch a steelhead in the local crick? Didn't think so, MALT LIQUOR! Fvck your craft brew crooked eye.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1810:52 AM
Originally Posted By: dwatkins
Originally Posted By: vapidangler
Let's talk about Washington State for a second before you go talking trash about California,which is mostly farming,rural country,and yes there are some real [Bleeeeep!] hole towns here. Not where I live . But Washington is nice. If you like tweeker meth heads. Aberdeen is a lovely place. Its fuckin gnarly. Great drivers in that state too. Fat women of Forks. Oh yeah know why there are less homeless people there? Because it rains constantly and is freezing. But hey at least the music is good from Seattle,until all the singers die from heroin. And why do they do heroin? Because they wake up one day and say to themselves "[Bleeeeep!] me,I'm in washington" and the boot up a big load of dope and nod off for good.
Plastic gold digging whores? In Enumclaw its goats sheep and horses. I read more bestiality in the news when I lived in the PNW than I could believe. In all honesty I liked Oregon as a whole much better than Washington save for the OP and those SW WA rivers. But Oregonian people are depressed,anti social [Bleeeeep!] who say "crik" instead of creek. There are suicide hotlines on every bridge crossing the willamette due to depressed emos who didn't get their starbucks leaping to their deaths,because,well it rains a lot and its fuckin cold.
The homeless people there dream of being homeless in cali. I was in San Diego not long ago and did some yellowtail fishing in mexico. It was pretty badass actually. Probably hit Tahoe again in june. Take my girl camping in the eastern sierras. Catch a striped bass in the surf behind my house. Roll around my home town where there are great people,great restaurants,and [Bleeeeep!] holes like big sur,oh wait big sur is amazingly gorgeous. Yeah dude you nailed it. I'm so ashamed to live here.
sit your ass down too many lol. As a former wa resident current San Mateo resident and future Florida resident he just told the truth.
Oh Mustang Sally. You better slow that Mustang down.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1811:35 AM
"California leads the list of states with the highest number of AIDS diagnoses, with an average of 10.2 cases diagnosed per 100,000 people." CBS NEWS Credit
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1811:43 AM
according to the LA Times, AIDS and STD's are skyrocketing in the state, not because they made it legal to fvck anyone you want and not tell them you have AIDS, but because of racism and stigma....
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1811:52 AM
Originally Posted By: dwatkins
“Washington leads the nation in farm animal fvcking and trailer courts.”
-PP news 2018
Why not let the goats in the trailer?
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1811:56 AM
Some parts of Washington totally suck. Take for instance, Evo’s neighborhood. Same goes for California and the other states and countries I’ve visited.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1812:01 PM
you know whats funny, all you fvckin idiots talk sh!t about where i live, but when Fly talks about the bullsh!t he was dealing with, you all sympathize and are nice to him....
me, you laugh...
this place is so sh!tty, that the UFC Flyweight Champion and number 1 pound for pound fighter in the world lives just up the road...
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1812:06 PM
You steal your own mail. That’s pretty sh!tty.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1812:06 PM
Evo, you are totally ignorant. He’s a good friend and I always encouraged him to move. Guess what, he’s out of there and you’re still having your mail stolen.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1812:08 PM
Originally Posted By: dwatkins
California leads the nation in the production of fruits and nuts.
If you are talking about the two legged variety you are absolutely right.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1809:22 PM
Originally Posted By: dwatkins
Originally Posted By: steeleworldwide
Originally Posted By: dwatkins
California leads the nation in the production of fruits and nuts.
If you are talking about the two legged variety you are absolutely right.
Ya’ll would fvck fruits and nuts too if you could.
No.
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1809:25 PM
Originally Posted By: Evo
me, you laugh...
Well,yeah...
Posted by: Anonymous
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/09/1809:32 PM
Originally Posted By: ReefSkunk
Some parts of Washington totally suck. Take for instance, Evo’s neighborhood. Same goes for California and the other states and countries I’ve visited.
California has towns like Needles and Barstow,Fresno,Porterville,and Los Angeles. Complete [Bleeeeep!] holes. And now Frisco is getting worse. Go to Oakland and see how bad it truly is there. Homeless encampments numbering in the thousands ,the bereft of society,dregs. It's sad. In salinas the gangs are as bad as almost anywhere in the united states. I don't get it. I also don't understand all the hatred from one state to another. For as many people that hate on California more people are moving here,and I'm not just talking illegals. Whatever happened to one nation,under God? Now it's us against them. I joke about the PNW I loved it up there. I love it here too. I guess it's perspective. Perhaps the shithole is between your ears. Drink some more Malt Liquor ,that should help. That last bit wasn't directed at you,Reefer Madness....
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/10/1805:34 AM
Continuing still with the ongoing main stream media negative narrative propaganda,
"In an apparent jab at the administration, The Times’ headline said, “At a Key Moment, Trump’s Top Diplomat Is Again Thousands of Miles Away.”
"NY Times Bashes Mike Pompeo For Being MIA: Turns Out He Was Busy Rescuing 3 Americans From N Korea
The Times story noted that Pompeo was expected to return from his trip with the detainees in the caption of a photo accompanying the story, so it’s curious why the headline attempted to paint his trip in a negative light.
The New York Times did not immediately respond to a request for comment."
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/10/1807:39 AM
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
Continuing still with the ongoing main stream media negative narrative propaganda,
"In an apparent jab at the administration, The Times’ headline said, “At a Key Moment, Trump’s Top Diplomat Is Again Thousands of Miles Away.”
"NY Times Bashes Mike Pompeo For Being MIA: Turns Out He Was Busy Rescuing 3 Americans From N Korea
The Times story noted that Pompeo was expected to return from his trip with the detainees in the caption of a photo accompanying the story, so it’s curious why the headline attempted to paint his trip in a negative light.
The New York Times did not immediately respond to a request for comment."
You're the joke. The way you wash Trump's balls reminds me of the Obamabots that sucked his dick no matter what crap he was pulling. You're just their mirror image.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/10/1807:49 AM
Even though the Main Stream Media (MSM) news press is running 90% negative stories regarding Trump according to Fox report, according to CNN poll Trump’s popularity has risen to 44% v 47% a virtual statistical stalemate w/9% unsure.
Apparently the American people aren’t as stupid as the MSM thinks by starting to see through the MSM negative campaign smokescreen against Trump regarding his domestic and foreign policy, Russian collusion witch hunt, and omission of how the swamp is being drained especially at FBI and now overflowing into DOJ.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/10/1808:31 AM
Wrong, nice try, but the negative spin on something perfectly positive about the released hostages is one example of simply toeing the MSM negative campaign that contributes to the 90% negative stories against Trump.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/10/1808:48 AM
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
Wrong, nice try, but the negative spin on something perfectly positive about the released hostages is one example of simply toeing the MSM negative campaign that contributes to the 90% negative stories against Trump.
Are you talking about Trump being the pathological liar he is and claiming Obama couldn't get the three of them released? And forgetting that two of the three were grabbed by NK during Trump's administration?
It's cool if you're such a partisan hack and dishonest person that pathological liars don't bother you. I've seen this lack of character before, so it's not surprising to me any more.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/10/1811:43 AM
Originally Posted By: Dan S.
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
Wrong, nice try, but the negative spin on something perfectly positive about the released hostages is one example of simply toeing the MSM negative campaign that contributes to the 90% negative stories against Trump.
Are you talking about Trump being the pathological liar he is and claiming Obama couldn't get the three of them released? And forgetting that two of the three were grabbed by NK during Trump's administration?
It's cool if you're such a partisan hack and dishonest person that pathological liars don't bother you. I've seen this lack of character before, so it's not surprising to me any more.
I believe if one was to go back into the archives around election time, I’m pretty sure it would be impossible to call me a partisan republican.
Like stated before, I researched Trump’s claim about fake news that now I know is MSM propaganda of which 90% of news regarding Trump is negative as reported, that eventually lead me to the unverified Steele dossier bought and paid for by the Hillary/ party -- leading to the FISA warrants to spy on Trump that lead to the Russian collusion witch-hunt or coup d'état on the sitting president of the United States. Of course, bogus allegations led to no collusion.
Trump’s popularity has risen to 44% because voters can now see through the Fake news smokescreen.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/10/1812:19 PM
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
Like stated before, I researched Trump’s claim about fake news that now I know is MSM propaganda of which 90% of news regarding Trump is negative as reported
Negative news is not fake news, just as positive news is not fake news.
For someone that touts himself as being smart, Trump seems to have a hard time understanding the difference between fake and negative.
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
Trump’s popularity has risen to 44% because voters can now see through the Fake news smokescreen.
You got that wrong. 44% of those that were polled (not all voters, as no one asked me and I voted) are positive about trump. As to whether or not they too can distinguish the difference between negative and fake is debatable. For example you're still using parts of sentence that state "can now see through the Fake news smokescreen."
Seems to me, one probably should have said "can now see through the negative news smokescreen."
Basic Trump math says 56% are still negative about Trump. I don't see that number changing too much.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/14/1808:28 PM
Originally Posted By: parker
Originally Posted By: Lucky Louie
Like stated before, I researched Trump’s claim about fake news that now I know is MSM propaganda of which 90% of news regarding Trump is negative as reported
Negative news is not fake news, just as positive news is not fake news.
For someone that touts himself as being smart, Trump seems to have a hard time understanding the difference between fake and negative.
“Many stories about the investigation into collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia have been wrong, according to a spokesman for the office of Special Counsel Robert Mueller.”
“What I have been telling all reporters is that many stories about our investigation have been inaccurate,” the Mueller spokesperson said, according to Daily Caller and Washington Times. “Be very cautious about any source that claims to have knowledge about our investigation and dig deep into what they claim before reporting on it. If another outlet reports something, don’t run with it unless you have your own sourcing to back it up.”
Even Comey admits MSM is producing fake news
“At the hearing, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) pressed Comey further on the piece from The New York Times, asking, “Would it be fair to characterize that story as almost entirely wrong?”, to which Comey replied, “Yes.”
“Comey went on to discredit other media reports, which have frequently cited unnamed intelligence and government sources to push their narrative that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to influence the election.”
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/16/1808:42 AM
Originally Posted By: Todd
"You mean like the same faction of corrupt people in various governmental departments that are attempting to impeach the sitting US President by obtaining a FISA warrant without credible evidence of a crime while simultaneously ignoring constitutional rights?"
I don't even know where to start on this one. Why don't you go ahead and explain how this makes any sense at all?
Fish on...
Todd
I had no intention to revisit this since answering your question earlier in this thread but since you are being such a dickhead in the other thread I can understand how you could not answer this simple question because main stream media fake news wasn’t covering this purposely because it did not fit their narrative--- propaganda.
Sorry for your disappointment, but it is not easy to find collusion when it never existed by using an unverified source-- the dossier-- to obtain the FISA warrants which was made & paid for by Hillary and gang.
Keep watching fake news to stroke your bias, just do not expect the full picture.
Re: Should we ban bridges now?? - 05/16/1810:01 AM
Back on topic (just for a minute; I prefer the hijack direction for entertainment value), yes, we should ban the Hood Canal Bridge, mass steelhead smolt annihilator that it is.