Get ready for at least four years of a dirty, lying, deceptive, felon President -
New Low From Trump
- Thread starter PureX
- Start date
And you just love it
jeffblue101
New member
Ed Henry(Fox News Chief National Correspondent)twitter
@RealBenCarson told me he & @realDonaldTrump talked about more revelations coming: "They have have more things & they will drip them out"
ClimateSanity
New member
Get ready for open borders and gun control by executive order.
Get ready for more partial birth abortions with Clinton/Kaine
https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinio...-support-for-day-of-birth-abortions-shows-bia
jeffblue101
New member
more like welfare abortions.
https://thinkprogress.org/the-abort...lking-about-explained-80cf4f41d4a7#.kyvb7vdjl
jeffblue101
New member
wow Hillary is just unbelievably corrupt.
https://theintercept.com/2016/10/09...ls-clinton-campaigns-cozy-press-relationship/
there is even more evidence of Clinton corruption of the media in the rest of the article. Just look at that list of who Clinton considers and pays to be surrogates.
https://theintercept.com/2016/10/09...ls-clinton-campaigns-cozy-press-relationship/
One January 2015 strategy document – designed to plant stories on Clinton’s decision-making process about whether to run for president – singled out reporter Maggie Haberman, then of Politico, now covering the election for the New York Times, as a “friendly journalist” who has “teed up” stories for them in the past and “never disappointed” them. Nick Merrill, the campaign press secretary, produced the memo, according to the document metadata:
hat strategy document plotted how Clinton aides could induce Haberman to write a story on the thoroughness and profound introspection involved in Clinton’s decision-making process. The following month, when she was then at the Times, Haberman published two stories on Clinton’s vetting process; in this instance, Haberman’s stories were more sophisticated, nuanced and even somewhat more critical than what the Clinton memo envisioned....
Other documents listed those whom the campaign regarded as their most reliable “surrogates” – such as CNN’s Hilary Rosen and Donna Brazile, as well as Center for American Progress President Neera Tanden – but then also listed operatives whom they believed were either good “progressive helpers” or more potentially friendly media figures who might be worth targeting with messaging. The metadata of the surrogate document shows that the file was authored by Jennifer Palmieri, the communications director of the campaign. As The Intercept previously reported, pundits regularly featured on cable news programs were paid by the Clinton campaign without any disclosure when they appeared; several of them are included on this “surrogates” list, including Stephanie Cutter and Maria Cardona:
there is even more evidence of Clinton corruption of the media in the rest of the article. Just look at that list of who Clinton considers and pays to be surrogates.
1Mind1Spirit
Literal lunatic
That Amendment allows abortion funding if the health of the mother is endangered.
As far as the hundreds of dollars for an abortion, I reckon they shoulda took the less expensive route of birth control.
Which is covered by medicaid. :think:
1Mind1Spirit
Literal lunatic
Kaine does disagree with Clinton on repealing the Act.
Seems he has hung on to some Missouri values even though he couldn't push his liberal agenda here and had to move out and seek office elsewhere.
jeffblue101
New member
no he doesn't, it's only a personal disagreement. he would support the overturn of partial birth abortions if that is what Clinton wanted
Two words...
NEVER HILLARY!
I think its laughable that people who support Hillary can open their mouths at all about anything moral, especially when it comes to the way women are treated.
I think it's sad to see so many ordinarily decent people use logical fallacies to avoid having to do what Trump's own VP choice felt compelled to do: refuse to defend or condone the remarks.
So much of what I'm reading from scrambling Trump supporters might as well go, "Yeah, my guy raped a few people, but X killed a few people. We can't have a murderer represent us!"
lain:Would you consider that consciousness empowered Hitler so as to have a particular, precise and limited thing happen then he was dismissed. This being related to Jesus' statement:
Romans: 12 King James Version (KJV)
19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Trump can easily be expedient for transformation of the U.S.A. (according to unfolding consciousness) and not at all for his own agendas/rhetoric.
If this is so no one can stop Trump. He will win like the Brexit vote. Then all the pre-election talk, worry, discussion, etc. will be found to be humans killing their own boredom.
The point being that things happen if consciousness demand it and all that humans can do, is to be present on the ride with awareness, instead of unawareness. The ride and its end being fixed (predetermined) like an indoor Disney attraction.
The Brexit vote must be a reflection of something. It must be a reflection of the will of ruling collective consciousness. And clearly the Brexit vote was in opposition to the ideas of Clinton, Obama and the past ruling status quo.
The traditional expectation, that Trump will not win, seems set to be wrong, i.e. according to new prevailing world wide consciousness as exemplified by the trend of the Brexit vote.
Last edited:
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Says a lot about the Trump base that was already well known. Groping is A-okay, as long as the right person is doing the groping.
By the way, for those who may not know it, AMDG means "for the greater glory of God."
Somehow, I don't think condoning sexual assault is on the list of things that give "greater glory to God."
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
I think it's sad to see so many ordinarily decent people use logical fallacies to avoid having to do what Trump's own VP choice felt compelled to do: refuse to defend or condone the remarks.
So much of what I'm reading from scrambling Trump supporters might as well go, "Yeah, my guy raped a few people, but X killed a few people. We can't have a murderer represent us!"
I agree, except for the "ordinarily decent" part.
That's something that all women universally agree with, even if they don't think so when they are on 'self worship' mode- where when even being looked at is commensurate to rape :chuckle:
Then we disagree. I have great many conservative friends who invested heavily in Trump as change and they're in real denial. They're also good people. I'm watching them peel away from Trump, but it's a painful process.
In Al, a traditional bastion of conservatism, AL.com only just said, "When".
The headline?
"Endorsement: We're with Hillary Clinton. Frankly, Donald Trump's dangerous." link
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Right, which is why I placed that as our point of disagreement. I don't consider all of his supporters decent. Some are decent, some never were. You didn't specify your personal friends specifically, or I would've made the distinction.
"I think it's sad to see so many ordinarily decent people use logical fallacies to avoid having to do what Trump's own VP choice felt compelled to do: refuse to defend or condone the remarks."
"So many" is not "every" or "all" and I even included a nod to Trump's VP within the remark as one rejecting those efforts. As he still supports Trump, it cannot be logically asserted that I meant to speak to every follower or consider any particular number of them decent or otherwise. Instead, I literally meant what I wrote, that I was saddened by seeing so many (a great but unspecified number) struggling to avoid a painful truth.