On MMO-C we learn that Anti-Fascism is locking arms with corporations, the State Department and agreeing with the CIA, But opposing the CIA and corporate America, and thinking Jews have a right to buy land and can expect tenants to pay rent THAT is ultra-Fash Nazism. Bellingcat is an MI6/CIA cut out. Clyburn Truther.
Like I said, you got outlets like the Media/Social Media who turn something like this into more of an issues than what it is. When you got media outlets/SM making statements that are saying something along the lines that Trump is assaulting Hilary with the golf tweet it is pretty much playing right into Trumps hand. With that said, I was not defending trump making the tweet, but was speaking more to the overreaction to the tweet.
Last edited by jibberbox85; 2017-09-19 at 12:40 AM.
Do you have examples of that? I mean, yeah you'll have an op-ed writer go off the deep end, but for the most part their "outrage" is usually contextualized in the grater scope of the administration/Trump's behavior. That things like this, or the "two scoops", or whatever aren't isolated incidents but rather patterns of behavior.
And given that this is now what, the half-dozenth time he's retweeted questionable content that was originally sourced from accounts that regularly traffic in white supremacist/hateful content since the beginning of the year, it's definitely a pattern.
I've been busy at work, but which outlets are comparing his tweet to actual assault?
Sure.
'"The President of the United States just retweeted a video vignette that imagines him assaulting his political rival. The man is unfit," tweeted Shaub, who joined the ethics office as a staff attorney early during the George W. Bush administration and was appointed as the office's director by President Barack Obama."
http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/17/politi...ton/index.html
Yes...and? The tweet does "imagine" (note that word, it's important!) assaulting Hillary with a golf ball he hit.
I don't see the claim that he's actually assaulting her in that article at all.
Oh, and the kicker is that CNN isn't even writing that. It's a tweet from Walter Shaub, whose background is included in that quote.
So...what's your issue, again?
No fucking shit!!! Where the fuck does that guy get off basically trying to incite a civil war in OUR country!
@ Prince Oberyn Martell - pretty sure you are not even a citizen of the USA. As far as I am concerned, you should keep your fucking nose out our country's business. You don't like Trump? Too fucking bad. A LOT of people - almost 1/2 the country that voted - like him and WANT him to be our President. This is OUR country - not yours.
66 million might have voted for Cankles, but 63 million VOTED FOR TRUMP!
Please explain to me how any average intelligent person can support this man, seeing him as the president of the US really makes me question the future of humanity. Are people really this dumb to support a moron like him? What's he's IQ anyway?
I'm assuming that we can both agree that Trump's tweets are not always the most well thought out public statements. However, the whole notion that somehow the President will look "Not-so-presidential" in front of a group like the United Nations doesn't come from a silly, and over-hyped Hilary tweet. What makes Trump look more "Not-so-presidential" are comments like " just retweeted a video vignette that imagines him assaulting his political rival. The man is unfit," and media outlets like CNN overplaying just how much a tweet like the Hilary one would make Trump look "Not-so-presidential".
In fact, more of this overreaction has been seen from some in the media, and social media for when Trump invited a boy to mow the WH lawn, and when Trump was photographed looking into the sun. In conclusion, the problem mainly has come from those who have overplayed, and over hyped something as silly as what was mentioned in my statment.
Last edited by jibberbox85; 2017-09-19 at 02:02 AM.
It was six boys. And I like Stephen King, but him getting offended over this kind of stuff is a terrible look.
- - - Updated - - -
Because we are a two-party system, and you need your side to occupy the big chair if you want your policies implemented, regardless if he/she is a buffoon.
Agree, but there had to be better candidates than this buffoon. I allways prefered being able to have a president over a King " We have a King where i'm from " but that opinion changed after Trump. Atleast a King has no real power. Seeing a dumbass person with so much power really scares me.
I do? Where have I indicated that?
Because I know they will, they love this middle-school kind of bullshit because many are still psychologically/emotionally children. It doesn't make it any less stupid, beneath the office, and foolish. It doesn't change how it embarasses the US on the eve of Trump's first UN meeting, you know the big boy "adults" club that.
I'm still not "getting" whatever it is you're trying to get at. That a large part of his base is stupid and gullible? Sure. But what relevancy does that have to the damage that Trump is doing to the respect and dignity of the office he holds? To the reputation of the US on the global scene?