POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
This is a major news organization folks...
It's probably his course, he can drive the damn cart wherever he wants to.
Also, an out of shape 70 year old fatty can't be expected to walk across that big green. Give the guy some slack, CNN.
Exactly, let the man have his two scoops of ice cream while others only get one.
3 dead women found in containers on the Clinton's property in New York.
http://www.usarmy4life.com/breaking...ton-property-contained-parts-3-missing-women/
http://www.usarmy4life.com/breaking...ton-property-contained-parts-3-missing-women/
CNN ain't going to give him anything but grief. Every move and word and sound and handshake will be criticized...
Its a BS story to try to cover up for why team Obama did nothing to stop the so-called Russian hacking.
Three young women. Last seen in Arkansas motel in 1974. Found stuffed in barrels on Clinton property in NY.
Pure coincidence. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Yes and also #impeach
CNN is so in the tank for the dems, not even trying to report real news.
I can't imagine "usarmy4life.com" would ever publish anything that wasn't 100% accurate and verified
Don't know if that story is real, but it is true theres a hell of a lot of dead bodies directly, or indirectly linked to the Clintons. They can't all be random coincidences.
My theory, based on the leaked emails:
Hillary was promised the nomination in 08, till Obama exploded on the scene. In 2008 clinton had damaging info on obama; or was willing to go scorched earth to try and get the nomination she was promised.
To stop this, soros and others, promised hillary a guaranteed nomination after obama, a secretary of state appointment, free reign to sell access via the foundation (along with whatever other crooked schemes they had cooked up), and help from obama on the campaign trail; if she would just withdraw.
Thats how it went down imo. Obamas and clintons hate each other. Hillary would just call him "that man" and they wouldnt even be on the same plane together.
Hillary was promised the nomination in 08, till Obama exploded on the scene. In 2008 clinton had damaging info on obama; or was willing to go scorched earth to try and get the nomination she was promised.
To stop this, soros and others, promised hillary a guaranteed nomination after obama, a secretary of state appointment, free reign to sell access via the foundation (along with whatever other crooked schemes they had cooked up), and help from obama on the campaign trail; if she would just withdraw.
Thats how it went down imo. Obamas and clintons hate each other. Hillary would just call him "that man" and they wouldnt even be on the same plane together.
Last edited:
#inpeach fits his fat orange ass better. I hope he farted in the Chinese PM back swing.
I can't imagine "usarmy4life.com" would ever publish anything that wasn't 100% accurate and verified
I mean, well. Finding 3 dead chicks in containers on their property could be verified.
Mash- I hope it's real
+1
Get this shit outta here. There's a whole GD board for these plebs to dock cocks and fantasize about basketball players. I need muh Trump memes.
the source listed is freedomcrossroads.us and when you click on that you get this
"We believe that there is nothing more precious than the mind of an aging conservative. Here we gather a boatload of bullhonkey, works of pure satirical fiction, to give the fist-shakers of the world a reason to hate. Reality is often in the eye of the beholder. You won’t find any of it here."
Alison Grimes said that Kentucky must change its ways. Horse headed bitch.
PSA:
King of the Hill 24/7 live stream on YouTube. You're welcome.
King of the Hill 24/7 live stream on YouTube. You're welcome.
I love the army and I hate the Clintons, so my survey says it's very real.
An F in English? Bobby, you speak English!
I thought she was supposed to be a moderate Democrat? Was she just faking it, like Jack Offoss was?
They’re Wrong About Everything
Column: More evidence the political class doesn't know what it's talking about
Events are turning me into a radical skeptic. I no longer believe what I read, unless what I am reading is an empirically verifiable account of the past. I no longer have confidence in polls, because it has become impossible to separate the signal from the noise. What I have heard from the media and political class over the last several years has been so spectacularly proven wrong by events, again and again, that I sometimes wonder why I continue to read two newspapers a day before spending time following journalists on Twitter. Habit, I guess. A sense of professional obligation, I suppose. Maybe boredom.
The fact is that almost the entirety of what one reads in the paper or on the web is speculation. The writer isn't telling you what happened, he is offering an interpretation of what happened, or offering a projection of the future. The best scenario is that these theories are novel, compelling, informed, and based on reporting and research. But that is rarely the case. More often the interpretations of current events, and prophesies of future ones, are merely the products of groupthink or dogma or emotions or wish-casting, memos to friends written by 27-year-olds who, in the words of Ben Rhodes, "literally know nothing." There was a time when newspapers printed astrology columns. They no longer need to. The pseudoscience is on the front page.
Nor are the empty conjectures and worthless hypotheses limited to Donald Trump. Yes, pretty much the entire world, myself included, assumed he would lose to Hillary Clinton. Indeed, a not-insignificant segment of the political class, both Democrat and Republican, thought the Republicans would not only lose the presidency but also the House and Senate. Oops! I remember when, as the clock reached midnight on November 8 and it became clear Trump would be the forty-fifth president, a friend called. "Are we just wrong about everything?" he asked. Perhaps we were. But at least we had the capacity to admit our fallibility.
There are few who can. Conjectures and guesswork continue to dog Trump in the form of "the Russia thing," the belief that the president, his "satellites," or his campaign worked with the Russians to influence the election in his favor. Months after the FBI opened its investigation into whether such collusion occurred, no evidence has been found. The charge itself is based on an unverified and gossipy and over-the-top memo prepared by a former British spy for Democrats.
Compounded by Trump's own mistakes, the Russia story has now traveled so far afield from the original suspicions that we in Washington are no longer all that interested in the underlying charges. What concerns us instead is the possible obstruction of justice in the investigation of a crime that seems not to have taken place. And yet Russia continues to dominate the headlines, command the attention of pundits, generate rumor and insinuations from people who ought to know better.
For weeks prior to Tuesday's special election in Georgia, we were told that Republicans were in trouble, that the polls looked bad for Karen Handel, that a "referendum on Trump" would motivate Democrats in this swing district to support Democrat Jon Ossoff. That evening, cable anchors warned that the night would be long. The race would be close, and winner might not be announced until the following morning. The Real Clear Politics average showed Handel barely ahead, with a margin of two-tenths of one percent. The race was called by the 11 o'clock news. Handel won by 4 points.
What had been billed as a no-confidence vote in Trump's presidency quickly became, after Handel's victory, no biggie. Yes, Ossoff may have doused in gasoline and set alight more than $20 million of Hollywood and Silicon Valley money. And yes, had Ossoff won, this special election would have been covered as a harbinger of the Resistance's coming triumph over the autocrat in the White House. But really, now that the authors of the email bulletins I receive each morning think about it, Republicans shouldn’t be too happy with the result. After all, both Democrats and Republicans have won special elections in the past only to lose their majorities.
True, but Republicans also won special elections in 2001, and expanded their majority the following year. So which is it? We won't know until—and I know this is a radical concept—the actual midterm election takes place. Which won't be for more than a year. And by which time, a seemingly infinite number of things might happen. But come on, who wants to wait? So much more fun to pretend to be in the know, to assert with absolute confidence one's theory about the world, proclaim one's virtue, despite all evidence to the contrary.
"Like a bearded nut in robes on the sidewalk proclaiming the end of the world is near, the media is just doing what makes it feel good, not reporting hard facts," Michael Crichton once said. "We need to start seeing the media as a bearded nut on the sidewalk, shouting out false fears. It's not sensible to listen to it."
As the editor of an online newspaper, I am reluctant to agree with Crichton entirely. There are still news sources, liberal and conservative, even in Washington, that seek to report rather than explain or analyze or decipher the context and implications of facts. Sometimes these publications carry opinions, such as the one you are reading. Sometimes they have a little fun. And that is fine, so long as they are upfront about it, and are "half a step up from Daily Caller."
But please, please, please be wary of the supposedly nonpartisan and objective experts who have looked at the DATA and determined which course history will take. In fact, be more than wary. Run in the opposite direction.
Column: More evidence the political class doesn't know what it's talking about
Events are turning me into a radical skeptic. I no longer believe what I read, unless what I am reading is an empirically verifiable account of the past. I no longer have confidence in polls, because it has become impossible to separate the signal from the noise. What I have heard from the media and political class over the last several years has been so spectacularly proven wrong by events, again and again, that I sometimes wonder why I continue to read two newspapers a day before spending time following journalists on Twitter. Habit, I guess. A sense of professional obligation, I suppose. Maybe boredom.
The fact is that almost the entirety of what one reads in the paper or on the web is speculation. The writer isn't telling you what happened, he is offering an interpretation of what happened, or offering a projection of the future. The best scenario is that these theories are novel, compelling, informed, and based on reporting and research. But that is rarely the case. More often the interpretations of current events, and prophesies of future ones, are merely the products of groupthink or dogma or emotions or wish-casting, memos to friends written by 27-year-olds who, in the words of Ben Rhodes, "literally know nothing." There was a time when newspapers printed astrology columns. They no longer need to. The pseudoscience is on the front page.
Nor are the empty conjectures and worthless hypotheses limited to Donald Trump. Yes, pretty much the entire world, myself included, assumed he would lose to Hillary Clinton. Indeed, a not-insignificant segment of the political class, both Democrat and Republican, thought the Republicans would not only lose the presidency but also the House and Senate. Oops! I remember when, as the clock reached midnight on November 8 and it became clear Trump would be the forty-fifth president, a friend called. "Are we just wrong about everything?" he asked. Perhaps we were. But at least we had the capacity to admit our fallibility.
There are few who can. Conjectures and guesswork continue to dog Trump in the form of "the Russia thing," the belief that the president, his "satellites," or his campaign worked with the Russians to influence the election in his favor. Months after the FBI opened its investigation into whether such collusion occurred, no evidence has been found. The charge itself is based on an unverified and gossipy and over-the-top memo prepared by a former British spy for Democrats.
Compounded by Trump's own mistakes, the Russia story has now traveled so far afield from the original suspicions that we in Washington are no longer all that interested in the underlying charges. What concerns us instead is the possible obstruction of justice in the investigation of a crime that seems not to have taken place. And yet Russia continues to dominate the headlines, command the attention of pundits, generate rumor and insinuations from people who ought to know better.
For weeks prior to Tuesday's special election in Georgia, we were told that Republicans were in trouble, that the polls looked bad for Karen Handel, that a "referendum on Trump" would motivate Democrats in this swing district to support Democrat Jon Ossoff. That evening, cable anchors warned that the night would be long. The race would be close, and winner might not be announced until the following morning. The Real Clear Politics average showed Handel barely ahead, with a margin of two-tenths of one percent. The race was called by the 11 o'clock news. Handel won by 4 points.
What had been billed as a no-confidence vote in Trump's presidency quickly became, after Handel's victory, no biggie. Yes, Ossoff may have doused in gasoline and set alight more than $20 million of Hollywood and Silicon Valley money. And yes, had Ossoff won, this special election would have been covered as a harbinger of the Resistance's coming triumph over the autocrat in the White House. But really, now that the authors of the email bulletins I receive each morning think about it, Republicans shouldn’t be too happy with the result. After all, both Democrats and Republicans have won special elections in the past only to lose their majorities.
True, but Republicans also won special elections in 2001, and expanded their majority the following year. So which is it? We won't know until—and I know this is a radical concept—the actual midterm election takes place. Which won't be for more than a year. And by which time, a seemingly infinite number of things might happen. But come on, who wants to wait? So much more fun to pretend to be in the know, to assert with absolute confidence one's theory about the world, proclaim one's virtue, despite all evidence to the contrary.
"Like a bearded nut in robes on the sidewalk proclaiming the end of the world is near, the media is just doing what makes it feel good, not reporting hard facts," Michael Crichton once said. "We need to start seeing the media as a bearded nut on the sidewalk, shouting out false fears. It's not sensible to listen to it."
As the editor of an online newspaper, I am reluctant to agree with Crichton entirely. There are still news sources, liberal and conservative, even in Washington, that seek to report rather than explain or analyze or decipher the context and implications of facts. Sometimes these publications carry opinions, such as the one you are reading. Sometimes they have a little fun. And that is fine, so long as they are upfront about it, and are "half a step up from Daily Caller."
But please, please, please be wary of the supposedly nonpartisan and objective experts who have looked at the DATA and determined which course history will take. In fact, be more than wary. Run in the opposite direction.
I was killed by the Clinton's.
I got better.
I got better.
It appears the left have actually ratcheted up their crazy political rhetoric, 9 days after the Scalise shooting.
Only a matter of time til another Hodgkinson hears the dog whistles and commits, or at least tries to pull off another domestic terror attack against the GOP, Trump or his supporters.
So much blood will be on their hands.
Only a matter of time til another Hodgkinson hears the dog whistles and commits, or at least tries to pull off another domestic terror attack against the GOP, Trump or his supporters.
So much blood will be on their hands.
CBS Evening NewsVerified account@CBSEveningNews
Nearly 100 patients died waiting for care from the Los Angeles VA, new report finds
Hillary ClintonVerified account@HillaryClinton
Hillary Clinton Retweeted Topher Spiro
Forget death panels. If Republicans pass this bill, they're the death party.
Nearly 100 patients died waiting for care from the Los Angeles VA, new report finds
Hillary ClintonVerified account@HillaryClinton
Hillary Clinton Retweeted Topher Spiro
Forget death panels. If Republicans pass this bill, they're the death party.
CBS Evening NewsVerified account@CBSEveningNews
Nearly 100 patients died waiting for care from the Los Angeles VA, new report finds
Hillary ClintonVerified account@HillaryClinton
Hillary Clinton Retweeted Topher Spiro
Forget death panels. If Republicans pass this bill, they're the death party.
Texas response to the California to Texas state-sponsored travel ban:
"It's most interesting to me that the Attorney General of California supports a travel ban against Texas and yet at the same time he's against keeping terrorists out of the United States via another travel ban," Rylander said.
God blessed Texas. Carry on, Snowflakes!
"It's most interesting to me that the Attorney General of California supports a travel ban against Texas and yet at the same time he's against keeping terrorists out of the United States via another travel ban," Rylander said.
God blessed Texas. Carry on, Snowflakes!
They pretend to be moderates when they try to fool retarded Republicans into voting for them. Then afterward they get back to calling everyone racists, deplorable, alt-right xenophobes.
Last edited:
Gotta love Texas.
And yeah, there's never any consistency from the left. None of their crap makes any sense. They hate conservatives for their beliefs but then want to bring the most extreme ideology here as "refugees." Hates Chick Fil-A but loves Muslims.
Don't expect consistency in anything.
The same group who pushed through a bill without even reading it now want transparency.
The good news is that neither Grimes nor Jerkoff found enough cucks to carry them past the finish line.
It may be theirs should the shit hit fan. Most lefties are not known for their badassery. It's a different world from the day that the Communist proletariat who worked for a living battled the Right in Russia and Germany and Spain, and largely held their own. SJWs will get annihilated if things go from worse to worst.
I won't say that I advocate for such things to happen, but, at the same time, I would shed no tears. To be honest, I HATE them.
Last edited:
A
anon_l8pbkn96tg3j6
Guest
I absolutely love that Trump is calling out the Obama administration for not doing anything over alleged Russian Hacking. If it was real, Obama would have done something, period.
Bevin had a similar response. Not a huge fan of his, but loved the response. 100% accurate
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
I think I’m gonna like this Chandler kid (SIAP)- Latest: docholiday51